An Orientalising and Related Bird Bowls Recently Excavated at the Athenaion at Francavilla Marittima1

by SØREN HANDBERG and JAN KINDBERG JACOBSEN

Figures catalogue List of abbreviations The current article deals with a number of The Athenaion on the Acropolis of the fragmentary bird bowls deriving from several Timpone della Motta votive layers situated against the S/SE wall Today a total of five buildings are known to foundations of Temples Vc and Vd of the have been erected on the summit of the hill Athenaion on the Acropolis of the Timpone Timpone della Motta. In the 1960s the first della Motta at Francavilla Marittima. In total three buildings (building I-III) were excavated seventy-eight fragments dating to the period under supervision of the Dutch archaeologist from the last quarter of the 8th century BC to Maria W. Stoop, who dated the buildings to the end of the 7th century BC can be the late 6th/early 5th centuries BC. The three identified. The fragments, many fitting buildings had wall foundations built of together, belong to two groups, the so-called rounded riverbed cobbles and conglomerate bird kotylai and the Sub-Geometric bird blocks.2 A different interpretation of the bowls. Almost all contexts in this area had three structures was published by the German previously been disturbed by clandestine scholars Dieter Mertens and Helmut digging, which resulted in finds of fragments Schläger.3 Mertens and Schläger interpreted belonging to the same bowl in as many as six the structural remains of building I-III as different excavation contexts, some quite far belonging to two successive building phases, apart. The clandestine excavations of the recognising postholes carved out in the 1970s also account for the fragmentary state conglomerate bedrock as evidence for a of many of the vessels found on the building phase prior to the wall foundations. Acropolis. In this article a chronological Based on the excavated material Mertens and sequence of the bird bowls will be presented Schläger dated the posthole buildings to the and related to the stratigraphical setting in 7th century BC and the buildings with the which they were found. Also, an evaluation of wall foundations to the 6th century BC. A the possible meaning and function of the bird fourth building was excavated at the northern bowls in relation to cult rituals once practised part of the Timpone della Motta in the 1980s in Temples Vc and Vd will be offered. under the supervision of the Soprintendenza

Archeologica della Calabria. Our knowledge of the structure is limited since the results of the excavation are yet to be published. Sadly, a common feature of the four buildings is that only limited stratigraphical information was obtained during excavation, leaving behind a substantial gab in the understanding of the Fig. 1. Fragment of Late Geometric bird kotyle (drawing: Helle B. Thusing). development of the sanctuary. However, in recent years excavations have been conducted building Vb. Temple Vc was rectangular and at the site by a Dutch excavation team from shows obvious similarities with Greek temple the University of Groningen under the plans by the presence of an eastern pronaos supervision of Prof. Dr. Marianne Kleibrink. and a western adyton. The dating indications These excavations have revealed remains of a for the construction of Temple Vc derive fifth building with five chronologically mainly from finds in the lowest stratum in the succeeding phases, erected at the same spot postholes, among which were fibulae of the a on the southern edge of the Acropolis. The staffa lunga and a drago types and local matt- buildings are usually referred to as painted pottery. Inside the temple sherds of Building/Temple Va, Vb, Vc, Vd, and Ve. the Thapsos class excavated just above the The bird bowls examined in this article relate conglomerate bedrock also support this to Temples Vc and Vd. These two temple foundation date. However, the majority of the 4 buildings are described briefly. material relating to Temple Vc was found in Temple Vc. This temple was layers just S/SE of the postholes, where it constructed in the last quarter of the 8th appears to have been placed against the outer century BC replacing an earlier Iron Age wall of the building. The bird bowl sherd timber dwelling (Vb), which showed clear described in cat. no. 1 is related to this traces of ritual use attested by a hearth with building, whereas the remaining bird bowl dedicated bronze objects and a standing loom sherds are related to the subsequent Temple 5 of monumental size. Temple Vc measured Vd. ca. 22 x 7.20 m. and was constructed with the Temple Vd. Just before the middle of use of a native building technique, in which the 7th century BC a new building was wooden posts were placed in large postholes, erected at the site of the former Temple Vc. carved out in the conglomerate, a technique The postholes in the conglomerate bedrock that had already been used for the previous were dismantled and filled with a stratum of

3 yellowish soil, the same soil was used to level few sherds belonging to the phase of Temple the area and subsequently served as the floor Vd were recorded, indicating that some of the new temple. The walls of this temple disturbance of the votive layers occurred probably consisted of mud bricks placed on a when Temple Vc was replaced by Building stone foundation, which was constructed in Vd. foundation trenches, carved out in the The Greek as well as the native pottery from conglomerate bedrock. Once again the best the S/SE votive deposit consists mainly of chronological indications for this Temple drinking cups and pouring jugs. Overall, the were obtained from the postholes; from the Greek pottery in these layers accounts only yellow stratum in and around the postholes a for less than 5 percent of the finds but since it large number of dedicated objects were provides the best dating tool we will focus on excavated. The dedications, in particular finds it. of Protocorinthian pottery, suggest that the The Greek pottery from the votive temple was erected around 660/650 BC.6 As layer relating to Temple Vc consists mainly of had already been the case in the previous sherds of drinking cups, belonging to the Temple Vc, the majority of the archaeological Thapsos and pseudo-Thapsos groups, dating material relating to this temple was found in to the last quarter of the 8th century BC. deposits of votive material located S/SE of Dating to the same period are fragments of Building Vd. East Greek Late Geometric oinochoai, globular pyxides of the Thapsos class, sherds The stratigraphy of the S/SE deposits of votive of Late Geometric II Corinthian kyathoi and material sherds from black glazed kantharoi probably The S/SE layers of votive material were found imported from Achaia (NW Peloponnesos) in the excavation pits AC13, AC16/16A, dating to the late 8th/early 7th century BC.7 AC17/17A, AC21, AC22/22A and Also belonging to this context are sherds of AC23/23A. Due to extensive clandestine early Protocorinthian kotylai and the bird digging much of the original stratigraphy was kotyle sherd described in cat. no. 1. The destroyed, only in AC16/16A had an upper overwhelming majority of jug and cup shapes compact layer of soil protected the lower among the pottery deposited near Temple Vc layers. A deposit layer of votive material point towards the dedication pattern that related to Temple Vc was found in AC16A- became dominant in the subsequent Temple context 26 and 29. Though these contexts had Vd where miniature water jugs (hydriskai) not been disturbed by clandestine digging, a and cups were dedicated in large numbers

4 together with lesser amounts of aryballoi and manufacture dated exclusively to the 8th pyxides. century BC. No 7th century BC material was found at all in context 13. Fig. 2. Fragments of a bird bowl, ca. 650 BC The lower votive layer (AC16A- context 18, AC16-context 20 and AC17A- context 16) again contained extensive groups of pottery vessels - often complete, but also sherds of local and Greek origin. The sherds from the bird bowls described in cat. nos. 4, 8, (drawing: Helle B. Thusing). 9 and 15 were excavated from this lower The votive material relating to Temple layer. Frequent finds of bronze jewellery, Vd was obtained from two vertically bone and amber beads, faience objects and a separated layers: the upper votive layer number of terracotta statuettes also occurred (AC16A-context 9) was 2-3 cm. thick, and the in this layer. Once again the majority of the lower votive layer (AC16A-context 18, pottery dates between 660 and 610 BC with, AC16-context 20 and AC17A-context 16) had as mentioned above, only few sherds of a thickness of ca. 10 cm. In the upper votive earlier date (ca. 680-660 BC) and sporadic layer a large number of sherds of local and finds of late 8th century Greek pottery, Greek origin were excavated along with notably of the Thapsos class, along with Late sporadic finds of bronze jewellery, bone and Geometric East Greek pottery, which fit in amber beads and a number of terracotta with phase Vc of the Late Geometric II timber statuettes. The majority of Greek pottery temple. consists of Corinthian imports, dating The general interpretation of these 7th between ca. 660-610 BC. Likewise a smaller century BC deposit layers is that the objects number of sherds of East Greek origin were (many almost complete) in the lower votive recorded e.g. sherds belonging to the bird layer were not found in any clear pattern, nor bowls described in cat. nos. 3, 5 and 15. did they appear to have been grouped or A fill layer (AC16A-context 13) sorted in any special way. In addition vessels consisting of ca. 30 cm of strong brown loose were often found upside down. All this seems soil forms a clear stratigraphical separation to indicate that the objects were not in the between these upper and lower layers of position of meaningful primary deposits but votive material. This soil contained matt- had been placed, secondarily, south of painted and impasto pottery of local Temple Vd, probably after having originally

5 been used inside the temple or near an altar. is further supported by the close The chronological and morphological correspondence in date between the materials correspondence between the material excavated in these two layers. It therefore excavated inside and outside Temple Vd seems likely that both contexts were the result suggests that towards the end of the 7th/ of the closing of Temple Vd. Subsequently, in beginning of the 6th century BC when the the decades just after 600 BC the entire area temple was levelled, the accumulation of was covered by a layer of gravel several objects ceased. At that time the lower votive meters thick. layer must have been sealed off by the thick layer of brown soil that, because of the The bird bowls complete absence of 7th century material in it, The bird bowls are a group of East Greek must have derived from elsewhere in the cups, sometimes also referred to as bird sanctuary. skyphoi, named after their decoration. In the upper votive layer quite a Basically there are two types: the regular and different pattern appears: a thin but the Orientalising type. The common feature is continuous layer of fragments was excavated the division of the upper part of the bowl into here, but no vessels were found intact as in metopal panels, the central one usually the lower contexts. The fact that fragments carrying a representation of a bird, usually found in a wide area (squares AC10-AC23) with a crosshatched body. The Orientalising can be reconstructed into almost complete type has a far more elaborate decoration with vessels once again indicates that the upper meander trees and Orientalising filling layer material was not found in its original ornaments. The lower part of the body is in position. Moreover, a few sherds have general either dark or carries rays.8 Of the successfully been joined across the upper and seventy-eight sherds recently excavated at lower layers, suggesting that they were Francavilla Marittima fifteen different bowls deposited not long after one another with the of varying quality could be reconstructed. fill of brown soil in between. This observation

Fig. 3. Fragment of a bird bowl, ca. 650 BC (drawing: Helle B. Thusing).

Thirteen of these bowls are of the regular However, whether it was made locally or type, one is probably an imitation of the imported from Populonia is not yet clear. It regular type and another is an extraordinary still remains uncertain where the major 9 specimen of the Orientalising type. The production centre of the bird bowls was individual bowls are described in the situated, but trace element analysis suggests a catalogue at the end of the article. place of origin in the North Ionian area, possibly around Clazomenae or Teos and in The origins and distribution the case of the Orientalising bowls possibly at The place of origin of the bird bowls has been Miletus.12 In Southern Italy and Sicily bird discussed for a long time and the question has bowls have been found at e.g. Gela, Syracuse, still not been answered satisfactorily. At first Megara Hyblaea, Siris, Malta and Sybaris,13 they were all thought to be of Rhodian origin but the high amount of bowls at Francavilla is because they were most numerous on this noteworthy. In fact it seems that no other island and because some of the best pieces single votive deposit in Magna Graecia has were found there. This view has now been produced the same amount of similar bowls as entirely abandoned. Locally produced bowls Francavilla. The Orientalising type of bird have been identified at Chios, in Sparta, bowl is the most elaborately decorated of the 10 Ephesos, Gela and now probably also at bird bowls and they have not been found in Francavilla (cat. no. 14). This new bowl has the same quantity as the regular bird bowls. zigzags in the lateral metopal fields instead of They may not have been as extensively the usual crosshatched lozenge, which is not exported as the regular type, at least not as very common and found only at two other many of them have yet been found and they 11 sites, Populonia and Rhodes. The seem to be centred around Miletus and the craftsmanship on the bowl from Francavilla eastern Mediterranean.14 The Orientalising Marittima suggests that it is an imitation.

bowl from Francavilla seems to be the only body continues as a straight line to form the one of its type found in Magna Graecia. tip of the tail, which is the case on the bowls from Francavilla Marittima. This makes a Typology of the bird bowls from the Timpone date around the middle of the century more Della Motta likely. The bowls with void rays on the lower The sequence of the decorative scheme on the part of the body (cat. nos. 7-13), should all be bird bowls has been fairly well established placed some time after 650 BC17 and before and divided into five stages (Coldstream’s the final phase of development, where the bird-kotyle workshop and Sub-Geometric birds loose their stand line, i.e. somewhere groups I-IV) beginning at the end of the 8th between 650 and 615 BC (Coldstream’s century BC with the bird-kotyle and group III). Another feature supporting this continuing until ca. 600 BC after which the date is the elongated central panels, which bird disappears as a motive, but the form of expand during the 7th century BC. This is the vessel continues.15 The development of best seen on the almost complete bowl (cat. the decoration generally becomes no. 7). The imitation (cat. no. 14) should be progressively more mannered.16 Regarding dated some time after 650 BC, possibly even the dates of the bowls presented here the bird as late as the last quarter of the century. This kotyle (cat. no. 1), should, as it belongs to the bowl has zigzags in the lateral metopal fields bird-kotyle workshop, be dated to the period instead of the usual crosshatched lozenge, 720-690 BC. The bowls with dark paint and a which is quite uncommon and found only at reserved band on their lower part (cat. nos. 2- two other sites, Populonia and Rhodos.18 The 6) are traditionally recognized as earlier than craftsmanship on the bowl from Francavilla those with rays and should be placed before suggests that it is a local imitation. However, 650 BC but after the earlier type that only has whether it was made locally or imported from a band usually with dots or stripes below the Populonia is not clear. The Orientalising bird panels, i.e. between 675 and 650 BC bowl (cat. no. 15) is more difficult to date, (Coldstream’s group II). The manner of mainly because there seems to be no direct drawing, especially the rendering of the tail of parallels for the one found at Francavilla. The the bird, would suggest a date towards 650 rays again imply a date after 650 BC and a BC. Earlier in this stage the body of bird is stylistic comparison with the Wild Goat Style more drop-shaped, later on, before the middle pottery would suggest a date somewhere in of the century the lower outline of the bird’s

the third quarter of the 7th century BC (see completely black, sometimes with a reserved below). tondo or band or white lines on a black The fact that the majority of the vessels were background. The meander tree ornament is broken at the time they were deposited means also seen on other earlier vessels from the that the sherds were scattered over a large Late and Sub-Geometric periods, especially area. Therefore not all the sherds were found on the bird-oinochoai and the bird kotylai. in the undisturbed layers. Sherds from the The meander tree on the Orientalising bird bird bowls cat. nos. 1, 4, 8 and 9 were found bowls may be seen as a revival of this earlier in the lower votive layer and sherds from cat. type of decoration and it also seems likely nos. 3, 5 and 15 were found in the upper that it was inspired by the tapestry-like votive layer both relating to Temple Vd. The decoration of the Wild Goat Style that presence of bird bowls with bands in both the emerged around the middle of the 7th century upper and the lower layers suggests, together in the same area.19 This inspiration from the with other material, that the two layers are Wild Goat Style pottery is further implied by chronologically contemporary. a fine Orientalising bird bowl from Vroulia20 where the corners of the central field, carrying The Orientalising bowl the bird, are decorated with quarter circles To the best of our knowledge the identical to the roundels of the middle Wild Orientalising bird bowl from Francavilla Goat Style, which also appears in the central Marittima cat. no. 15 is unique in its form and field on the one from Francavilla.21 This decoration. It will therefore be treated would place the bowl from Francavilla separately. The form of the body is much somewhere in the period 640-625 BC. An more shallow than the regular bird bowls, important question raised by the date of the although in general they also tend to become Orientalising bowls is that of the vessel shape. more shallow during the 7th century BC. The The shape of the Vroulia bowl is that of the decoration is exquisite with the chain- and earlier type of bird bowls, the bird kotyle, double saw ornaments, as well as the finely with the characteristic nicked rim, which is drawn filling ornaments and the tongues believed not to outlive the Early where the handles join the body. The flower Protocorinthian phase. So either the tondo with the chain ornament on the interior appearance of the Wild Goat roundel of the bowl has never before been observed ornament would have occurred before the on a bird bowl; the common decoration being proper Wild Goat Style or the hemispherical

kotyle shape should be allowed to continue significant role in the cult practice. The into the Wild Goat Style, which seems most function of the bird bowls therefore seems to likely. In case these two Orientalising bird be firmly linked to the general function of the bowls are contemporary the difference in drinking vessels found in the S/SE deposits. shape is noteworthy. The Orientalising bird The key question is how to interpret the bowl from Francavilla could be regarded as presence of these vast amounts of drinking the finest bird bowl that has come to light so vessels (bird bowls included) and locally far, another possible candidate being the produced hydriskai. The main issue being previously mentioned bowl from Vroulia now whether these vessels should be interpreted as in the British Museum.22 actual ex-votos dedicated to the goddess for their own sake or maybe more precisely for The function of the bird bowls from the the sake of their content or whether the Timpone della Motta drinking vessels and hydriskai should be As noted earlier the Timpone della Motta has interpreted as a reflection of a ritual in which produced one of the highest number of bird the dedicators participate, such as communal bowls from any single context from Magna dining and drinking. Concerning the pottery Graecia. Thus it would be tempting to associated with Temple Vd, it seems likely suppose that these bird-decorated drinking that the possibility of ritual dining can be vessels had a special meaning in the cult ruled out, since no cooking vessels nor plates, practised in the sanctuary. However, in order which are normally considered an indication to assess the possible special significance of for such activities, have been found.23 Thus it the bird bowls, one has to take into account appears that the pottery reflects a drinking the total amount and variation of pottery ritual. As described above the objects from excavated from the successive Temples Vc the S/SE deposits were not found in their and Vd and in the S/SE deposits. When original place of deposition, which makes it viewed in this overall perspective the bird difficult to determine the combinations in bowls only account for a small fraction of the which they were used or dedicated. The find total amount of pottery. In comparison, more contexts from the interior and partly from the than 3000 fragments of Protocorinthian immediate exterior of Temple Vd on the other kotylai and skyphoi were found in the S/SE hand bring some valuable information on the deposits, which effectively rules out that the nature of this drinking ritual. Inside Temple bird bowl itself should have played any Vd isolated assemblages containing a couple

of drinking cups and hydriai together with a normally function as water containers few aryballoi and pyxides were often found indicates that the adorants were offering the on the yellow temple floor, indicating that goddess Athena a drink of water. As we have they had been placed there as an intentional recently argued,27 the only literary link set.24 Similar assemblages were occasionally between Athena and water seems to occur in found outside the walls of the building (not to the legend of Epeios, who received help from be confused with the S/SE deposits). Among Athena because among heroes he was those was the bird bowl cat. no. 7, which was regarded as a kind of underdog with the duty found together with a hydriskos. The cups and to carry water to the heroes of the house of hydriskai in these assemblages rather point Atreus.28 According to literary sources, towards an interpretation as votive sets Epeios was the maker of the Trojan horse. dedicated to the goddess (or her statue) rather Strabo informs us that after the Trojan War than remains of adorants engaged in ritual Epeios founded the city of Lagaria and drinking.25 In the Greek cultural sphere the dedicated his tools in a famous Athena hydria is normally associated with water sanctuary nearby.29 Through time the city of (drinking?) and in fact only very little Lagaria has been placed by scholars at a evidence for wine drinking is present at the number of different locations among those Timpone della Motta, since only very few Metapontion and Amendolara, these places, fragments of craters have been recovered. The however, are missing a vital element in favour vast amounts of drinking vessels and hydriai of such an identification: That of an early found in the sanctuary throughout the years Athena sanctuary! In the light of the presence indicate that the dedication of these sets had a of a well-attested sanctuary at the Motta central position in the cult practise. Support dedicated to Athena, it seems more probable for this interpretation derives from a locally to attest a possible identification of Lagaria to produced pyxis dated around 700 BC which in this place than to any other. The vast amounts all probability came from the S/SE deposits.26 of dedicated hydriai and drinking vessels, The central scene on the pyxis depicts a among those also the bird bowls, reflect, as procession of female adorants approaching an mentioned above, the most central dedication enthroned goddess. The leading adorant is ritual practised in the sanctuary in the 7th offering the goddess a drinking cup with one century BC. The ritual of offering water to hand, while holding a jug in the other. The Athena, as depicted on the Ticino pyxis, is, at fact that the dedicated pouring vessels the same time, related to both Athena and

Epeios. The adorants carrying water to the chronology of the bird bowls is the fact that sanctuary could, as a reflection of the legend the only group missing is Coldstream’s I of Epeios, have regarded themselves as group, which he dated to 690-675 BC. This hydrophoroi having the duty of carrying absence corresponds well with the general water to the heroes, and in the act on doing chronological sequence of the Greek pottery so, hoping to receive the same favours from found both inside Temples Vc/Vd and in the Athena as Epeios did. S/SE deposits, where a clear lack of pottery from this period is evident. The bird kotylai Conclusion together with at least three Late Geometric In addition to the bird bowls published here, bird oinochoai are the earliest imports from other sherds were found by Maria W. Stoop the East Greek area, and it seems plausible during the campaigns 1963-1969 in the area that they were imported as sets consisting of a of Building III, belonging to either one or kotyle and an oinochoai, which probably possibly two bird kotylai.30 In total at least came via Sybaris, where similar bird bowls sixteen bird bowls have so far been published and bird oinochoai have been found.31 The from the Acropolis at Francavilla Marittima. Orientalising bird bowl is clearly the vessel in As mentioned before, this high number does this group that draws the most attention, not not reflect a special relation of the bird bowl only because of its artistic expression, but with the sanctuary, but is rather the result of a also because of the fact that it is the only one dedication ritual that was focused on offering found in Magna Graecia. Perhaps this bowl sets of hydriskai and drinking vessels. The accompanied one of the few contemporary result was that over the years a huge amount Wild Goat oinochoai, which are also present of these vessels accumulated at the site. The at Francavilla Marittima striking phenomenon in respect to the

CATALOGUE 32 The only preserved decoration consists of the No. 1 (Fig. 1): One rim fragment of a bird lower part of one bird, one foot of another and kotyle, FMAC 16-20/303. a small part of the dark paint with a broad The upper part of the fragment has the reserved band on the lower part. The characteristic inset rim. The decoration distinctive feature here is the fact that only consists of two panels framed on all sides by one line is used as division between the upper two lines. The left panel contains a and lower part of the bowl and between the crosshatched lozenge, the right panel has a panels. threefold hourglass ornament, which is also Diameter: Not determinable. Clay: Munsell 5 crosshatched. YR 6/2 pinkish grey. Paint: Munsell 5 YR 3/2 Diameter: 10 cm. Clay: Munsell 5 YR 6/6 dark reddish brown. brownish yellow. Paint: Munsell 5YR 4/6 yellowish red No. 4 (Fig. 4): One body fragment, FMAC 16A-18/204. No. 2 (Fig. 2): Two rim fragments and three Preserved are parts of a lozenge, three vertical body fragments, FMAC 13-15/r136, FMAC and three horizontal lines, small part of dark 13-4/313, 2812/s.17. paint on lower part of the fragment and the Part of bird with crosshatched body and a tail of a bird. A noticeable feature on this panel with crosshatched lozenge preserved. fragment is the rendering of the bird’s tail. The lower part of the bowl is covered with The lines of the body overlap so as to form a dark paint except for a reserved band. y-shape, which is found on this fragment This bowl is distinct because it is thick-walled only. and the drawn lines are quite thickly applied Diameter: Not determinable. Clay: Munsell and especially the lozenge in the panel is big 2.5 YR 7/1 reddish grey. Paint: Munsell 5 YR and crudely drawn. 4/4 reddish brown. Diameter: 13 cm. Clay: Munsell 7.5 YR 6/6 reddish yellow. Paint: Munsell 10 YR 2/1 No. 5 (Fig. 5): Four body fragments, FMAC black. 16A-9/260, FMAC 13-6/2, FMAC 13-4/115, FMAC 16-12/1130. No. 3 (Fig. 3): Four body fragments, FMAC The feet of a bird standing on one horizontal 21-3/4, FMAC 16A-22/13, FMAC 16A-9/4, line are preserved on two of the fragments. FMAC 13-4/900.

Part of the lower half of the bowl with a three horizontal lines. The lower part carries reserved band is also preserved. five void rays and ends in a low ring foot. The Diameter: Not determinable. Clay: Munsell 5 interior of the bowl is covered with dark YR 6/2 pinkish grey. Paint: Munsell 5 YR 3/2 paint. dark reddish brown. Diameter: 12.9 cm. Clay: Munsell 5 YR 6/2 pinkish grey. Paint: Munsell 5 YR 5/6 dark No. 6 (Fig. 6): One body fragment, FMAC reddish brown. 23-1/20. The preserved decoration is similar to the No. 8 (Fig. 8): Four rim fragments and one previous bowl (no. 5), but the hind part of a body fragment, all adjoining, FMAC 17A- bird is preserved on this fragment. 12/507, FMAC 16-20/313,315, FMAC 17A- Diameter: Not determinable. Clay: Munsell cl./1, 18A-cl/101. 7.5 YR 7/4 pink. Paint: Munsell 7.5 YR 5/6 The decoration scheme is identical with the strong brown. previous bowl, except that two lines separate the panels and the upper and lower parts of No. 7 (Fig. 7): An almost completely the bowl. Furthermore, this bowl is smaller, in preserved bird bowl consisting of nine sherds, fact it is the smallest of all the bowls. The eight of which adjoin, FMAC 21-2/5, FMAC decoration is not as well preserved and it 17A-21/102. seems to be secondarily burnt. The interior It has the typical decoration of the regular has a central reserved tondo with three type of bird bowl with three metopal panels concentric circles. on either side. The two panels next to the Diameter: 9.5 cm. Clay: Munsell 2.5 YR 6/3 handles have an outlined crosshatched light yellowish brown. Paint: Munsell 5 YR lozenge. The broader central panel comprises 2.5/1 black. a bird with a crosshatched body and a small circle in front. Also in front of the bird is a No. 9 (Fig. 9): Three rim fragments and two fringe ornament in the shape of a half circle body fragments, FMAC 16-17/800, FMAC with a line and behind the bird is a pendant 16-12/1070, FMAC 18A-1/2, FMAC17A- crosshatched triangle. Three vertical lines 16/56, FMAC 17A-16/57. divide the panels and the handles have one Part of metopal panel with crosshatched vertical line on either side. The panel zone is lozenge and part of central field with a separated from the lower part of the bowl by pendant ornament and a circle preserved on

the upper half of the bowl. On the lower half difference in the colour of the paint, which is is preserved part of a void ray. These five clearly distinct from that of the other bowls fragments can all be ascribed to one and the with the same decoration scheme, especially same bowl due to the fact that three lines are the dusky red colour of the ray. used as dividing lines for both panels and the Diameter: Not determinable. Clay: Munsell 5 horizontal division between the upper and YR 6/2 pinkish grey. Paint: Munsell 2.5 YR lower parts of the bowl in combination with 4/3 dusky red. the void rays. Diameter: 13 cm. Clay: Munsell 7.5 YR 6/6 No. 12 (Fig. 12): One rim fragment and three reddish yellow. Paint: Munsell 2.5 YR 6/6 body fragments, FMAC 23-2/2, FMAC 16A- reddish yellow. cl/219, FMAC 22-3/13. Part of central field with part of feet of a bird No. 10 (Fig. 10): Four rim fragments and one is preserved on the upper part of the bowl. body fragment, FMAC 21-3/3 and FMAC The lower part has an incompletely preserved 18A-1/3, FMAC 21-3/2 and FMAC 18-4/53. void ray. Part of a handle is preserved on the The preserved decoration consists of part of rim fragment. metopal panels with crosshatched lozenges, Diameter: Not determinable. Clay: Munsell the central field with a bird with crosshatched 10 YR 6/4 yellowish brown. Paint: Munsell body and part of a void ray. Only two lines 10 YR 2/1 black – 10 YR 3/2 very dark are used here as dividing lines and in front of brown. the bird the fringe ornament takes the shape of a quarter circle bordering the vertical line No. 13 (Fig. 13): Two body fragments, instead of the usual half circle with a line. FMAC 18A-cl/102. Diameter: 11 cm. Clay: Munsell 2.5 YR 7/4 Parts of void rays and horizontal lines are pale red. Paint: Munsell 10 YR 3/2 very dark preserved. Due to the very different colour of greyish brown. the paint used on the bowl cat. no. 10, these two fragments are ascribed to a separate bowl. No. 11 (Fig. 11): One body fragment, FMAC Diameter: Not determinable. Clay: Munsell 13-7/807. 10 YR 6/4 yellowish brown. Paint: Munsell 5 The only preserved decoration is three YR 4/4 reddish brown. horizontal lines and part of a void ray. The No. 14 (Fig. 14): Three rim fragments, FMAC fragment belongs to a specific bowl due to the 18A-2/2, FMAC 18A-2/1, FMAC 16-2/121.

This is probably an imitation of an East Greek one place. A general idea of the decoration bird bowl. It has a slip on the exterior and the can therefore be obtained. It had a light slip interior is covered with dark paint. The form all over. The interior has a central tondo with of the decoration is taken directly from the two concentric circles. Around this tondo runs regular bird bowl consisting of a broad dark an outlined tongue ornament, followed by two band on the handle, which is framed on either lines and a band with a chain ornament, the side by a vertical line. Two dividing lines rest of the interior to the rim is covered with separate the upper from the lower part of the dark paint. On the exterior each side of the bowl and the panels. No bird is preserved, but handles is divided into five panels, the central part of the central panel bears a fringe one contains the bird. A fragment with a bird ornament in the shape of a triangle. The side has recently been found (October 2004). One panels have vertical zigzag lines. The top part of the side panels has an outlined of one ray is also preserved on one of the crosshatched lozenge, the other an outlined fragment. The quality of drawing is not good; crosshatched meander tree. This decoration the lines are thick and have blurry and unclear seems to have been repeated on both sides of edges. the central bird panel. Four lines divide the Diameter: 11 cm. Clay: Munsell 10 YR 6/4 panels. Beneath the panels runs a band with light yellowish brown. Paint: Munsell 5 YR an alternating chain and double saw 3/3 dark reddish brown. ornament, which is framed above and below by four horizontal lines. The lower part of the No. 15 (Figs. 15a-15c): Thirty-one fragments bowl has void rays and again four lines, the are ascribed to a single bird bowl of the foot is dark with another four reserved lines. Orientalising type. Due to the fragmentary The bottom of the foot has a central tondo state of the bowl and the small size of many with solid rays radiating to four lines at the of the fragments, numbering of the individual edge. Fill ornaments comprise dot crosses, sherds was abandoned. The sherds were found swastikas, stylised quatrefoils, elaborate in six different contexts; FMAC 13-15, fringe ornaments and four dots connected FMAC 16-1, FMAC 16-10, FMAC 16-20, with lines as forming a cross. The handles FMAC 16A-9 and FMAC 18A-2, with a have a floral ornament at the junction with the distance more than four meters apart. body Diameter: 14 cm. Clay: Munsell 2.5 YR Although the bowl is incomplete and very 6/3 light yellowish brown. Paint: Munsell 5 fragmentary, the whole section is preserved in YR 2.5/1 black.

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

BABesch = Bulletin antieke beschaving. Annual Papers on Classical Archaeology BSR = Papers of the British School at Rome IstMitt = Istanbuler Mitteilungen JHS = Journal of Hellenic Studies NSc = Notizie degli scavi di antichità ÖJh = Jahreshefte des Österreichischen Archäologischen Institutes in Wien PMGF = Poetarum Melicorum Graecorum Fragmenta, 1. Alcman, Stesichorus, Ibycus (ed. M. Davis, Oxford, 1991)

CAPTIONS

Fig. 1. Fragment of Late Geometric bird Fig. 15b. Fragment of an Orientalising bird kotyle (drawing: Helle B. Thusing). bowl with bird (photo: Jan K. Jacobsen 2004).

Fig. 2. Fragments of a bird bowl, ca. 650 BC Fig. 15c. Orientalising bird bowl, ca. 640-625 (drawing: Helle B. Thusing). BC (drawing: Helle B. Thusing)

Fig. 3. Fragment of a bird bowl, ca. 650 BC (drawing: Helle B. Thusing).

Fig. 4. Fragment of a bird bowl, ca. 650 BC (drawing: Helle B. Thusing).

Fig. 5. Fragment of a bird bowl, ca. 650 BC (drawing: Helle B. Thusing).

Fig. 6. Fragment of a bird bowl, ca. 650 BC (drawing: Helle B. Thusing).

Fig. 7. Bird bowl, 650-615 BC (drawing: Helle B. Thusing).

Fig. 8. Fragments of a bird bowl, 650-615 BC (drawing: Helle B. Thusing).

Fig. 9. Fragments of a bird bowl, 650-615 BC (drawing: Helle B. Thusing).

Fig. 10. Fragments of a bird bowl, 650-615 BC (drawing: Helle B. Thusing).

Fig. 11. Fragment of a bird bowl, 650-615 BC (drawing: Helle B. Thusing).

Fig. 12. Fragments of a bird bowl, 650-615 BC (drawing: Helle B. Thusing).

Fig. 13. Fragments of a bird bowl, 650-615 BC (drawing: Helle B. Thusing).

Fig. 14. Fragments of an imitation of a bird bowl, second half of 7th century BC (drawing: Helle B. Thusing).

Fig. 15a. Orientalising bird bowl, ca. 640-625 BC (photo: Marianne Kleibrink 2004).

Notes: Achei d’occidente, Tekmeria 3 (Paestum, 2002), 1 The material study, on which this article is 331-355. based, was made possible by generous financial support provided by the Ny Carlsberg Foundation. 8 J.N. Coldstream, Greek Geometric Pottery (London, 2 M.W. Stoop, “Note sugli scavi nel santuario di 1968), 277-279; R.M. Cook & P. Dupont, East Greek Atena sul Timpone della Motta (Francavilla Pottery (Oxford, 1998), 26-28. Marittima – Calabria) 4”, BABesch 58 (1983): 16- 52. 9 M. Kerschner, “Neutron Activision Analysis of Bird Bowls and Related Archaic Ceramics from Miletus”, 3 D. Mertens & H. Schläger, “Die Bauten auf der Archaeometry 35 (1993): 197-210. Motta”, Atti e Memorie della Società Magna

Grecia 21-23 (1981-83): 143-171. 10 J. Boardman, Excavations in Chios 1952-1955, Greek Emporio (Athens, 1967), 134; J.P. Droop in 4 For a detailed description, see M. Kleibrink, The Sanctuary of Athemis Orthia at Sparta, ed. R. Oinotrians and Greeks on the Timpone della M. Dawkins (London, 1929), 115; M. Kerschner Motta, Accordia Publications, forthcoming. et al., “Ephesos in archaischer und klassischer Zeit. Die Ausgrabungen in der Siedlung Smyrna” in Akten des Symposions, Die Ägäis und das 5 E.g. M. Kleibrink, “Early cults in the Athenaion westliche Mittelmeer, Beziehungen und at Francavilla Marittima as evidence for a pre- Wechselwirkungen 8. bis 5. Jh. v. Chr., (ed.) F. colonial circulation of nostoi stories” in Akten des Krinzinger (Wien, 2000), 47-48; E. De Miro, Symposion, Die Ägäis und das westliche “Gela proto-arcaica”, Annuario della Scuola Mittelmeer, Beziehungen und Wechselwirkungen Archeologica di Atene e delle Missioni Italiane in 8. bis 5. Jh. v. Chr, ed. F. Krinzinger (Wien, Oriente 61 (1984): 92. 2000), 165-185; M. Kleibrink, Dalla Lana all’Acqua, culto e identitá nell’Athenaion di Francavilla Marittima (Rossano, 2003). 11 M.M. Cristofani, “La ceramica greco-orientale in Etruria” in Les Cerámiques de la Grèce de l’est et leur diffusion en occident, Centre Jean Bérard 6 Kleibrink, Oinotrians and Greeks. (Naples, 1978), 150-212 ; G. Jacobi, Esplorazione archeologica di Camiro I. Scavi nelle necropoli 7 For the kantharoi from Francavilla Marittima, Camiresi 1929-1930, Clara Rhodos IV (Rhodos, see L. Tomay, “Ceramica di tradizione achea della 1931), 274. Sibaritide” in Gli Achei e l’identità etnica degli

12 Kerschner, “Neutron Activision Analysis”; 1963”, IstMitt 23/24 (1973/74): 63-115; V. v. Kerschner et al., “Ephesos”. Graeve, “Milet. Vorläufiger Bericht über die Grabung im Südschnitt an der hellenistischen

13 P. Orlandini & D. Adamesteanu, “Gela, Stadtmauer 1966”, IstMitt 25 (1975): 35-59; M. l’acropoli di Gela”, NSc 87 (1962): 340-408;P. Heinz, “Katalog ausgewählter Funde im Milet Pelagatti, “Siracusa: Le Ultime Ricerche in 1989”, IstMitt 40 (1990): 56-61; M. Robertson, Ortigia”, Annuario della Scuola Archeologica di “The excavations at Al-Mina Sueidia 4, The Early Atene e delle Missioni Italiane in Oriente 60, Greek Vases”, JHS 40 (1940): 2-21; M.D. (1982): 117-163; G. Vallet and F. Villard, Megara Robinson, Vases found in 1934 and 1938. Hyblaea II. La céramique archaique (Roma, Excavations at Olynthus vol. 13 (Baltimore, 1964); B. Hänsel, “Scavi eseguiti nell’area 1950); D.R. Barnett,“Ancient Oriental Influences dell’acropoli di Eraclea negli anni 1965-1967”, on Archaic Greece” in The Aegean and the Near NSc 98 (1973): 400-494; C. Sabbione, “Reggio e East. Studies presented to Hetty Goldman on the Metauros nell’VII e VII sec. A.C.”, Annuario occasion of her seventy-fifth birthday, ed. S.S. della Scuola Archeologica di Atene e delle Weinberg (New York, 1956), 212-238; R. Missioni Italiane in Oriente 59 (1981): 275-289; Wolfgang, “Die frühsten Wehrmaurn von T.J. Dunbabin, “Rock tomb at Ghajn Qajjet, near Pergamon und die zugehörigen Keramikfunde”, Rabat, Malta”, BSR 21 (1953): 32-41; P. Guzzo et IstMitt 42 (1992):163-234; J.N. Coldstream & al., “Descrizione dei Materiali. Sibari III, H.W. Catling, Knossos North Cemetery, Early Rapporto preliminare della campagna di scavo”, Greek Tombs. BSA Supplementary vol. 28 (1996): NSc suppl. 97 (1972): 48-146. For a wider tomb 56. distribution, see M. Kerschner, “Die bemalte ostgriechische Keramik auf Sizilien und ihr 15 Coldstream, Greek Geometric Pottery. Zeugniswert für den archaischen Handel” in Akten des Symposions, Die Ägäis und das westliche 16 Cook & Dupont, East Greek Pottery; Mittelmeer, Beziehungen und Wechselwirkungen Coldstream, Greek Geometric Pottery. 8. bis 5. Jh. v. Chr., ed. F. Krinzinger (Wien, 2000), 487-91; F. Brommer, “Ein ostgriechischer 17 J. Boardman, “Tarsus, Al-Mina and Greek Skyphos” in Studies in honour of Arthur Dale Chronology”, JHS 85 (1965): 6-7. Trendall, ed. A. Cambitoglou (Sydney, 1979), 39- 45. 18 Cristofani, “La ceramica greco-orientale”; Jacobi, Scavi, 274 14 V. v. Graeve, “Milet. Bericht über die Arbeiten im Südschnitt an der hellenistischen Stadtmauer

19 Cook & Dupont, East Greek Pottery, 26 30 Stoop, “Note sugli scavi”.

20 K.F. Kinch, Fouilles de Vroulia, Rhodes 31 A. Bedini, Parco del Cavallo. Sibari scavi al (Berlin, 1914), 166-67. Parco del Cavallo (1960-1962,1969-1970 ) e agli stombi (1969-1970), NSc 95 suppl. III (1970):

21 See H. Goldman, Excavations at Gövlü Kule, 173-74; Guzzo et al., “Descrizione dei Materiali”. Tarsus, vol. III, The Iron Age (Princeton University Press, 1963), no. 1442. 32 All drawings are made by Helle Bjærre Thussing.

22 Barnett, “Ancient Oriental Influences”.

23 N. Bookidis, “Ritual dining at Corinth” in Greek Sanctuaries: new approaches, eds. N. Marinatos & R. Hägg (London & New York, 1993), 45-61.

24 Kleibrink et al., “Ephesos”; Kleibrink, Dalla Lana all’Acqua.

25 For the interpretation of the aryballoi and pyxides, see Kleibrink, Oinotrian and Greeks.

26 Kleibrink, Dalla Lana all’Acqua, 77-78, 91.

27 M. Kleibrink et al., “Water for Athena: votive gifts at Lagaria”, World Archaeology 36/1 (2004): 60.

28 Stesichoros frag. 200 in PMGF; cf. also Plato, Ion, 533b.

29 Strabo 6.1.14.