Islanders in Athens and the P R E H I S T O Ry O F M E T I C S

HESPERIA 7I (2002) TH E CU LTU RA L PagesI4g-Igg BIOGRAPHY OF A CYC LA D I C G E Ot/\ ET R I C AM P H O RA ISLANDERSIN ATHENS AND THE P RE H I ST O RY OF M ET I CS

ABSTRACT

This articlepresents the life historyof a large,repaired Early Iron Age am- phoraimported to Athens,fragments of whichwere discovered in 1939 in andaround the Hephaisteion.The contextof the vesselsuggests that it was usedin a tomb.Decorated in an aarchaizing"style reminiscent of Protogeo- metric,the amphoracan be datedto the LateGeometric period. It findsits closestparallels on Syros,an islandhitherto little knownfor its post-Early Cycladicantiquities. How the amphoramade its wayto Athensis addressed, anddifferent types of evidencepoint to theexistence of residentaliens (metics) in a periodbefore the reformsof Solonand Kleisthenes.

Amongthe surprisesthat lay beneath the buildingthat has cometo be knownas the Hephaisteion(Fig. 1), fewwere more curious than a huge amphora,Agora P 14819(Fig. 2), assembledduring the 1939excavation season.lVincent Desborough saw the fragmentsat the time,and some

1. The circumstancesleading to the problemsof distinguishingthe fabrics compriseda briefintroduction, a de- appearanceof this article,published a of variousCycladic islands. After her scriptionof the pot,and a sectionon decadeafter the deathof EvelynSmith- untimelydeath in 1992,I cameacross "Excavationand Context." The manu- son,require a wordof explanation.This an unfinishedmanuscript hidden in script,little more than an introductory studygrew out of a conversationbe- one of the manyboxes of hernotes. draft,was among the lastprojects Evelyn tweenEvelyn and myself in the spring Entitled"O AM@OPETE TOf ANA- workedon beforeher death. Enough of 1988,at whichtime the amphora, ^ I^A" Anaxilas'samphora-the survivedin the manuscriptand notes to AgoraP 14819,became the focusof paperwas ln. two sectlons,. amountlng . indicatethe basicstructure of a paper. discussion.Over the nextfew years, to someeleven pages of double-spaced In the presentarticle, much of the Evelynspent quite a bit of timethinking text.In the samefolder were many . ntrocuctlon . anc secton. on excavatlon. aboutP 14819.In hertypical fashion, handwrittennotes, primarily on the andcontext, as well as the basicdescrip- she dissectedthe originaltrench note- phenomenonof an archaizingstyle in tion of the vase,is Evelyn's,with my booksof the Agoraand scoured every laterGeometric, and several photo- addendaand corrigenda, often in those possiblecontext lot in orderto recon- copiesof photographsof potsfrom sectionsmarked by Evelynas requiring structthe contextof the vessel.More- Athensas illustrations.There were, in irther workor elaboration.The Cy- over,she acquaintedherself with the addition,many handwritten notes on cladiccomplexities of the vasefollow EarlyIron Age Cycladesand, despite Naxosand on Cycladicpottery in someof Evelyn'snotes; so too the hermodest assertion that she was only general,as well as the transcriptionof discussionof the pot as a burialurn an "Atticman" (see Papadopoulos 1994a, the inerary inscriptionof Anaxilasof for an infant,and some musings on p. 564),she delvedinto the quagmireof Naxos AthenianKerameikos, inv. I. howit mayhave made its wayto Athens. scientificanalysis and particularly the 388 (seebelow). The manuscriptitself This said,the manuscriptwas very much

American School of Classical Studies at Athens is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve, and extend access to Hesperia ® www.jstor.org _-- *- |-X-* *- *E l 1= I 8i _ 1 | FS j-L a Flgurefront, 1. y The1936. Hephalsteion,Courtesy Agoraeast

I50 JOHN K. PAPADOPOULOS AND EVELYN L. SMITHSON

yearslater suggested, by implication at least, that the pot was an import of EastGreek or islandorigin, and Subprotogeometric in date.2 As an"iso- latedfind" of uncertaindate and without close parallel, it attractedlittle furtherattention, and its ungainlysize, delicateequilibrium, and heavy plasteringrelegated it eventuallyto thevirtual oblivion of theback, south storeroomofthe Stoaof Attalos,wired to thetop shelffor safety's sake. A chanceconversation between the authorsin the springof 1988 recalled the vesselto mindand, following a precariousviewing, it was brought downfrom its loftyposition. Althoughone of the largestEarly Iron Age vesselsfrom the areaof thelater Athenian Agora, P 14819received little attention. A problematic context(see below) meant that it couldbe datedonly on thebasis of style and,because it wasnot clearlyrecognized as LateGeometric, it wasnot includedin Agora VIII. While the pot andits contextdo havesome bear- ing on the useof the areabefore there was ever an agoranearby, particu- larlywith regard to the historyof earlyburials on KolonosAgoraios, the vesselis laterthan any intact grave on the plateauor its westernslopes. Moreover,in theframework of acceleratedscholarly activity and new dis- coveriesin islandand East Greek Geometric over the pastfew decades, AgoraP 14819is a "problempiece" that should be morewidely known to scholars.For these reasons, it seemeddesirable to presentit at this time andin this form,not leastin the hopeof findinga moresecure prove- nienceand date for it. The pieceappears to be Cycladic ratherthan East Greek in ori- gin,perhaps from the islandof Syros,and its date8th centuryB.C., prob- unfinished.I, therefore,have to assume 2. Desborough1952, p. 34:"Curi- is no context."He goeson to compare responsibilityfor anyshortcomings of ouslyenough, fragments of a similar the vesselto an unpublishedamphora the finalresult and, indeed, responsibil- amphora[like those from 8th-century fromMelos that has semicircles on the ity forthe decisionto publishthis paper contextson Thera]of coarsered clay, shoulderand circles on the belly(Des- in its currentform. Evelyn was a per- verymicaceous, appear among the un- borough1952, p. 34, n. 2), with a fectionist,and I hopethe resultdoes not publishedmaterial of the AgoraExca- furthermention on p. 36. falltoo farbelow her high standards. vations(P 14819);unfortunately, there CULTURAL BIOGRAPHY OF A GEOMETRIC AMPHORA I5I

b

ablyno earlierthan the thirdquarter, according to the conventionalchro- Figure2. a) Late Geometricbelly- nology.3As such,the vessel may serve as a pointof departurefor any dis- handledamphora, Athenian Agora cussionof importedpottery to EarlyIron Age Athens.4It alsoprovides a P 14819;b) detailof handle,as pre- clearerfocus on the phenomenonof anEarly Iron Age "archaizing" style, served.Courtesy Agora Excavations thatis, one alluding to theProtogeometric, but produced in theLate Geo- metricperiod. In turningto the particularhistory of this largepot its culturalbiographyS alternative scenarios are discussed, including the movementof commoditiesand people. Beyond this, the vessel provides a potentialglimpse of the prehistoryof a socialphenomenon that was to definehistoric Athens. Various threads of evidenceconverge to suggest the possibilityof residentaliens metoikoias theycame to be knownin historicAthens not onlyin the periodbefore Kleisthenes, but arguably generationsbefore the reforms of Solon,in anera before recorded history.6

3. At the timeof herdeath Evelyn 4. It is fairlyclear that ceramic geometricand Geometric imports; Cold- inclinedtoward the viewthat the importsto EarlyIron Age Athens, streamand Catling 1996, pp.393-409; amphorawas Naxian on the basisof especiallyduring Protogeometric, but alsoColdstream 1990). comparandaavailable at the time;thus alsoduring Early and Middle Geomet- 5. Thereis a growingliterature on the originaltitle of herpaper, "Anax- ric,were exceedingly rare-comparable this subject,much of whichwas either ilas'sAmphora," was appropriate for an to the importof the proverbial"owls to unknownto Smithson,or appearedafter amphorabelieved to comefrom Naxos, Athens."This situationcontrasts with herdeath. Especially important are the the homelandof the latermetic Anax- thatat anynumber of Aegeansites, variouspapers in Appadurai1986, esp. ilas.Now thatthe Naxianprovenience suchas Leflcandiand Knossos, to Kopytoff1986, p.86; cf. Davis1997; seemsless likely, the old title slightly mentiononly two. There, pottery Gosdenand MarshaX 1999, esp.pp. 169- missesthe mark.Although I have imports,although not abundantin 178. changedthe title,the basicthrust of comparisonto the localmaterial, were 6. Foroverviews of metoikoiin Athens, the originaltitle is as immediateand neverthelesscommon occurrences (see see Clerc1893; Gauthier1972, esp.ch. 3; directas when Evelyn penned it. esp.Lefkandi I, pp.347-354, for Proto- Whitehead1977; 1984. I52 JOHN K. PAPADOPOULOS AND EVELYN L. SMITHSON

Figure3. Interiorof the cellaof the Hephaisteionfrom the east, showing late burialsunder the floor. CourtesyAgora Excavations

EXCAVATION AND CONTEXT

Afterspending two yearsclearing the restof KolonosAgoraios to bed- rock,7the Agoraexcavators returned to the so-calledTheseion in Febru- aryof 1939,this time to removethe earthfilling and Christian burials fromwithin that building (Fig. 3) in orderto studyits foundations,con- structionfilling, and any remains that might have survived of an earlier sanctuaryon the site.Work began within the cellaon 20 February,under the supervisionof DorothyBurr Thompson, with the collaborationof HomerA. Thompson.8On the veryfirst day "Protogeometric" material wasobserved in thedisturbed levels immediately beneath the tile flooring of the modern"museum" (Fig. 4).9 Two dayslater more "Protogeomet- ric!"was recorded,including "considerable pieces of a Protogeometric amphora.''l°All of these"Protogeometric" fragments were from Agora P 14819,and in thecourse ofthe nextmonth exploration to bedrockledto the recoveryof 165 piecesof the pot, roughlya thirdof it, the profile complete.So remarkablewas this piece and distinctive its fabricthat not a singlepreserved sherd escaped the excavators' diligence; in 1988reexami- nationof the sherdlots fromthe templeand immediatesurroundings yieldedno additionalfragments.

7. Shear1936, pp. 14-16, 23-24; to theThompsons on pp.3-4. at least1934, for antiquities storage; 1937,pp. 342-352. Limited cleaning 9. Forthe so-calledTheseion as see Papageorgiou-Venetas1994, p.314; wasdone in bothsections KK andIIO the "CentralArchaeological Museum," alsop. 115,fig. 145.See furtherKav- in 1937,the latterreferring to Plateia 1834-1874,see Karouzou1968, vadias1890-1892, pp. 12-15;Kokkou Theseion. pp.ix-xi. The Hephaisteionwas de- 1974,p. 104,n.2; Karo1934, col. 146, 8. The resultswere incorporated creed"CentralPublic Museum for for the "Sammlungim Theseion." intoWilliam Bell Dinsmoor'sthor- Antiquities"on November13, 1834. 10. Referencesin quotationmarks ough(1941) study on the Hephai- The buildingwas first used as an exhi- arefrom the excavationnotebooks. steion,with specialacknowledgment bitionspace, and later, from 1835 until CULTURAL BIOGRAPHY OF A GEOMETRIC AMPHORA I53

Figure4. Interiorof the Hephais- teion, showingthe sculpturecollec- tion of the then NationalMuseum of Athens. Albumenprint, Pascal Sebah,ca. 1870.The Getty Research Institute,acc. no. 92.R.84 (04.13.04). CourtesyGetty Research Institute

Someof the fragmentsof P 14819,all but one of themjoining, were foundin eachof the post-antiquelayers within the cella(Fig. 3), "ingen- eralnear the southdoor," but at leasttwo lay in the looseupper filling of Christiangrave 45.11 A singlesherd clearly derives from the templecon- structionfill (layer IV) thatremained over bedrock beneath Christian grave 34.12It is likelythat some sherds came, as well,from a pocketof heavily burnedred earth (layer Vl) overbedrock in the WestPeristyle beneath Christiangrave 4.13 No fragmentof P 14819is knownto havederived fromthe thin layer of grayearth (layer VII) preserved in foursmall patches overbedrock within the cella.

11. Dinsmoor1941, p. 5, fig. 1. style,Under Grave XLI [= grave4 in beenremoved, and that it wasmore 12. See below.Dorothy Thompson Dinsmoor1941]. Protogeometric-VI piecesof P 14819.At leasttwo other hadsuggested that this mighthave cent.B.C.," andso enteredby HAT in lots listedas containing"Protogeo- beenthe provenanceof the entirepot. the sectionlot-list; it wasthe onlylot metric"now have nothing in them In fact,no cuttingpreserved within of 46 examinedin 1988that lacked a thatcould have been so described. the templeis of suitablesize or con- fieldticket. It containedonly seven One maypresume, then, that in a figurationfor it. smallsherds, none conceivably Proto- finaleffort to recoverall sherdsof 13.This layerhas been related to geometric,two of themblack-glaze, P 14819before missing portions were possiblePersian destruction in the one fromthe handleof a cup,Type C. filledout in plasterto stabilizethe area;see Dinsmoor1941, pp. 126-127. It seemsimpossible that pieces mendedvessel as preserved(1939), This provenancewould seem the most describedby theThompsons as "Proto- a conservatorhad reviewed all KK likelyexplanation of certainanomalies: geometric"would not be readily lots listedas containing"Proto- in 1939section KK, lot 476,was identifiable,for both had had, by 1939, geometric,"and that additional packagedfor permanent storage in a extensiveexperience with EarlyIron pieceswere in factfound in some largesturdy manila envelope, still in- Age wellsand graves. Tiny lots,such of them.Such an interventionmight tactand firmly clasped in 1988.The as this,were regularly stored in smaller alsoaccount for the accidentalloss of envelopewas labeled (DBT/HAT envelopes,of two standardsizes. One the fieldticket, normally securely [= DorothyBurr Thompson and canonly surmise that the "Proto- fastened. HomerA. Thompson])"West Peri- geometric"material they noted had I54 JOHN K. PAPADOPOULOS AND EVELYN L. SMITHSON

The sevenstrata within the templewere divided by theThompsons into threegroups; within each the rangeof sherdsin the largerlots is essentiallythe same: Post-antique(layers I-III): these levels contained pottery that was pre- dominantlyByzantine and Turkish, along with a few Hellenisticand Romanpieces, and a scatteringof Protogeometricthrough Classical sherds. The Christianburials were either dug down into these layers or thelayers hadformed over or wereplaced to coverthe tombs.The burialsthem- selveswere divided by Dinsmoorinto Medieval and Protestant graves.14 Of the former,the greatmajority of tombsbelong to the periodbetween A.D. 1057and 1453.15 Of the latter,the earliestis probablythat of John Tweddell,who died on July 25, 1799,while the useof the areaas a burial groundprobably came to an end immediatelyafter the outbreakof the Warof Independence.16 Templeconstruction f lling (layersIV-V): theselayers contained pre- dominantly6th- andearly-5th-century material, with onlya handfulof piecescertainly later than 480 B.C. Morethan half of thelots contained a few piecesof Protogeometricand Early Geometric; Middle Geometric sherdswere rare, Late Geometric more numerous.This fillingwas dumped withinthe rectangleof the peristyleas the foundationsrose. Foundation trenchesfor cella walls, porches, and internal colonnades were cut through thisfilling, mostly to, ordeeply into, bedrock; the poros underpinning for the templepavement cut throughit to reston bedrockor on the firm burnedcrust of the fewsurviving deposits that predate the temple.17 Depositspredatingthetemple (layers Vl-VII): the red earth of layerVl, oftenpreserving a thick burned crust, contained a fairnumber of burned sherds,some heavily affected by the fire. The softergray earth of layerVII containedno clearlyburned sherds. Apart from these physical differences, whichare significant, the materialrecovered from layers Vl andVII was verysimilar. The majorityof fragmentswere of the 6th centuryB.C., with nothingclearly later than ca. 480 B.C. The earlycomponent is substan- tial in nearlyall the lots, and abouta thirdof one lot was certainly Protogeometric.Two lots fromlayer Vl fromthe westend containeda handfulof LateHelladic IIIC sherds,l8 and one alongthe northperistyle preserveda fine piece of earlyMycenaean.19 The LH IIICmaterial is not surprisingin the contextof nearbygraves of thatdate,20 but this sample is now the earliestpottery recovered from the plateauor the northwest slopesof KolonosAgoraios. All phasesof Geometricare represented, a

14. Dinsmoor1941, pp. 6-30. in Munich(see Koch 1955, p. 161, 18. KKlot 466, SouthPeristyle 15. Dinsmoor1941, p. 15. fig. 2; see alsop. 163, figs.7-8; Bastea undergrave 16, by the southwestanta; 16. Dinsmoor1941, pp. 16-17, 30. 2000, pp. 6-7, fig. 1).As a monument, KKlot 479, northwestcorner Peri- Afterthe Warof Independencethe the buildingitself, along with Plateia style. aTheseion"would have been a very Theseiou,came to occupya prominent 19. KKlot 474, NorthPeristyle, unlikelylocation for a burialground placeboth physically and symbolically in undergrave 29. The fragmentis of a becauseof the importanceit had the newlycreated capital of the nascent verticalstrap handle (W. 0.034 m), assumedat thattime in the creationof Greekstate (Athens became the capital wellburnished, fired light reddish the moderncity of Athens.This is of Greecein 1834, followingearlier brownto lightred 2.5YR 6/4-6; the perhapsmost clearly illustrated in Peter provisionalseats of governmentat Aigina pieceis LH III A:1 at latest. von Hess'spainting entitled Arrival of andNauplia; see Bastea2000, pp. 6-14). 20. Especiallygraves D 6:3 and King Ottoof Greecein Athenson January 17. Dinsmoor1941, pp. 3031, 65, D 7:1,both of whichcan be assigned 12, 1835, nowin the NeuePinakothek 126-127. to FinalMycenaean/Submycenaean. CULTURAL BIOGRAPHY OF A GEOMETRIC AMPHORA I55

fairquantity of Late Geometricand Protoattic,as well as all stagesof black-figure.Many pieces are ambitious and some are of highquality. Noneof theearly material deriving from these deposits is, then,in its originalcontext, and the layers antedating the temple represent filling that hadbeen spread to servea constructionor landscapingproject of the 5th centuryB.C. The source,or sources,of thismaterial is arguable,but some of it camefrom disturbed graves or cemeteryrefuse around them. While earthfill elsewherehas been shownto havesometimes been hauled in froma distance,21rarely is thedistance substantial, and in thiscase a ready sourcemay have lain just to the westand northwest where bedrock falls away,in placesabruptly, from the templearea. Moreover, a numberof graveswere preserved along the westand northwest shoulder of the hill, anddozens of cuttingsfor what were certainly others.22 Surviving burials rangein datefrom the closingstages of LH IIICinto Middle Geometric I,23but scatteredcemetery debris over bedrock around them leaves little doubtthat burial in the areacontinued at least into the late 8th andprob- ablythrough the 7th centuryB.C. The latteris suggestedby a fragmentof a terracottaplastic snake that had surely peeled from a LateGeometric or EarlyProtoattic funerary vase.24 Sherdsin the templefilling are mostly small, joins few, and even re- constitutedfragments small; the sameis generallytrue of the presumed cemeterydebris, reinforcing the impressionthat this is indeedthe source of mostof the sherdsbeneath the Hephaisteion.The sherdsassembled as P 14819are an exception.So muchof thevessel is preserved,all but one smallsherd joining, that it cannothave been moved far, and its survivalon KolonosAgoraios is virtuallyunimaginable outside an original context of a gravedeeply sunk into bedrock.25 A likely sequence of events,therefore, is asfollows:

1.The potwas probably uprooted by builders of the Hephais- teion.26If piecesof it actuallyderive from layer Vl, as seems probable(see above), the grave must have been destroyed at the beginningof the 5th centuryB.C. The vesselmay have

21. A goodbut rather rare example presentedin a forthcomingvolume in the 25. While a wellis alsoa possible of fill havingbeen carried some AthenianAgora series. source,the earliestpre-Archaic well on distanceis thatof the dumpedroad fill 23. The latesttomb, C 8:7 (Middle KolonosAgoraios is D 12:3(Middle of the mid-7thcentury B.C. besidethe GeometricI), is locatedabout 20 m GeometricII/Late Geometric Ia), nearly TholosCemetery. The deposit southwestof the temple. 100 m to the southeast,at the edgeof the containedsherds that joined fragments 24. The fragmentderives from lot easternscarp; see Brann1961, pp. 103- in the ProtoatticVotive deposit on the KK461 (layerIV), underChristian 114,well I; forthe datesee Coldstream Areiopagos,about 100 m to the gravesin the cella.The incidenceof such 1968,p. 22. It is alsoworth adding that southeast:deposit H 17:4,Young 1939, plasticsnakes appears to originatein the potsfound in wells,particularly those p. 10.Another case is thatof sherds LateGeometric IIb workshopof the substantiallypreserved (i.e., period-of- joiningpyre debris in graveH 16:6, PhiladelphiaPainter (see Coldstream use),are normally smaller, and rarely whichwere found in 4th-centuryB.C. 1968,p. 57) andcontinues through the exceeda heightof 0.40 m. dumpedfilling above that deposit, 15 m careerof the AnalatosPainter, that is, a 26. An earlieruprooting of the vessel, to the south;see Smithson1968, pp. chronologicalspan of ca. 725-675 B.C. thoughpossible, seems unlikely, especial- 78-79. In bothcases the distanceis not in the conventionalchronology. The ly sincethe surfacebreaks appear sharp substantial. workof the AnalatosPainter, including andrelatively unworn; reinforcing plaster 22. The preservedgraves and hydriaiwith snake-moldedhandles, is nowcoanng . t ze entlre. lnterlor. . ot t ze numerousgrave cuttings will be fully fullydiscussed by Sheedy1992. vesselprevents closer inspection. I56 JOHN K. PAPADOPOULOS AND EVELYN L. SMITHSON

beenoriginally in oneof the robbedburial pits just outside the foundationsof thewest peristyle (see below).27 2. The amphorawas deliberately broken up intosherds and tossed intoor ontothe early-5th-centuryB.C. fill. 3. The sherdswere dispersed through the Hephaisteionconstruction filling,either entering as a partof the pre-templefill dumped withinthe areaof the rectangleor churnedup fromlevels disturbedby the Hephaisteionbuilders. 4. Christianburials and repairs to the church,to the extentthat they penetratedand displaced construction filling or pre-temple levels,drew some pieces up intopost-antique or modernlevels.

Ifthe sequenceof eventspresented here is sound,then the relevantcon- textsin andimmediately around the building help to pinpointthe precise dateof the constructionof the Hephaisteion.They supplement the "new evidencefor the datingof the temple"prepared by LucyTalcott and pre- sentedin Dinsmoor'sstudy,28 primarily based on the materialfrom the depositof working chips of Pentelicmarble some 33 m to thesouthwest of thetemple, and suggest a Kimoniandate for the building. Moreover, the locationof Christianburials within the cella(Fig. 3) throwssome doubt onthe restoration, and even the very existence of theinterior colonnades.29 As forthe immediate surroundings of the building, it is worthadding thatthe bedrock in the areaof theHephaisteion was dug into for numer- ousEarly Iron Age graves. A fewof these,such as the "Final Mycenaean/ Submycenaean"tomb D 7:1(Fig. 5), weredug deep into the naturalrock and,being well sealed in somecases, escaped the attention of laterbuilders onthe hill.30It wasvery common, however, to findon KolonosAgoraios largeareas of bedrockwithnumerous destroyed, looted, or damaged burial pitswith a configurationidentical to thebetter-preserved tombs nearby.31 Figure6 illustratesonly a few of thesepits, and it is highlylikely that P14819 derives from such a damagedtomb. Assuming the pot to have comefrom a tomb,as seemsmost likely, one maywell askof whatkind andwhose. Before addressing these questions, it is importantto describe thevessel more fully and to establish,as faras is possible,its date,since chronologyhas a directbearing on thequestion of preferredburial custom inAthens at anygiven time in the EarlyIron Age.

27. As, for example,one on either fromSounion formed part of anunpub- sideof the thirdperistyle column from lishedpaper presented by Frederick the north;graves D 7:1,D 7:6,and D Cooper(1985) at the AmericanSchool 7:7 laywithin a distanceof 4.0 m. of ClassicalStudies on March27, 1985. Otherpits andan intactgrave, D 7:8, I amgrateful to FredCooper for send- dottedthe slopesfurther to thewest ing me a copyof his manuscript. andsouthwest. 30. Forthe lateractivity around the 28. Dinsmoor1941, pp. 128-150. Hephaisteion,including the establish- 29. The lackof an interiorcolon- mentof a landscapedgarden, see nadefor the Hephaisteionand the fact Thompson1937. thatthe statuebase that was restored in 31. Forfull discussion and details, theHephaisteion was movedto Athens see Papadopoulos,forthcoming. CULTURAL BIOGRAPHY OF A GEOMETRIC AMPHORA I57

Figure5. Final Mycenaean/Sub- mycenaeantomb D 7:1, with cover slabpreserved in situ, dug deep into bedrock.Foundations of the Hephaisteionon the north side in background.Courtesy Agora Excavations

Figure6. Emptypits in bedrockin sectorIlE (PlateiaTheseiou), in the areaof the Hephaisteion(Kolonos Agoraios),representing looted or destroyedEarly Iron Age tombs. CourtesyAgora Excavations I58 JOHN K. PAPADOPOULOS AND EVELYN L. SMITHSON

(gerl@ g

Figure7. Agora P 14819. Scaleca. 1:7. DrawingA. Hooton

TH E AMPH O RA AND ITS REPAIR

Althoughnever fillly published, P 14819has been briefly mentioned in morethan one publication.32 It may be describedas follows:

P 14819:Large belly-handled amphora Figs.2, 7 Imported,Cycladic, perhaps from Syros H. 0.730-0.740m; I)iam.(base) 0.155 m; I)iam.(mouth) 0.203 m Reconstructedfrom many joining fragments preserving a substantial partof the amphora,including a portionof the base,much of the body, neck,rim, and parts of bothhandles. About a thirdof the vesselpreserved, the profilecomplete; missing parts restored in plaster,with interiorheavily coatedin plasterto stabilizevessel. Surface very worn in parts,particularly on upperbody. Tallring foot; underside flat. Tall ovoid body, with pointof maximum diameterset high.Vertical neck, offset from body on interiorby a substan- tialthickening, indicating that the neckwas madeseparately from the body andsubsequently attached or thatthe neckwas thrown onto the leather- 32. Dinsmoor1941, p.126; hardbody by attachinga coil to the upperedge of a finishedbody. The Desborough1952, pp.34 and36; cylindricalneck terminates in a plainrim, with the top edgesmoothed to Oakeshott1966, p.121, underaIsland Protogeometric,"wrongly stated as forma roundedlip. The mouthis not originalto the vesselbut hasbeen "AgoraP 14189";Smithson 1968, p.85, repaired(see below). Two horizontal double handles are set on the bodyat underno. 1; Snodgrass1971, p.101, the pointof greatestdiameter. Wheelmarks prominent on neckinterior. n. 43; Papadopoulos1998, p.115, n. 37. CULTURAL BIOGRAPHY OF A GEOMETRIC AMPHORA I59

Non-Athenianclay, filll of inclusions,predominantly white (lime- stoneor quartz?),only a few darkerones, with manyindividual particles eruptingonto the surface.Fabric very micaceous, with micavisible all oversurface and on cleanbreaks. Clay body fired close to reddishyellow 5YR 6/6 andlight red2.5YR 6/6, bestdescribed as "brickred." Reserved surfaceon neckinterior and upper part of the vesselon exteriorfired as the claybody, in placescloser to light reddishbrown 5YR 6/4; reserved surfaceson lowerparts of vesselfired closer to reddishbrown 5YR 5/4, in partsslightly lighter, especially on bellyzone, closer to lightreddish brown5YR 6/4, in partsgray. Upper half of vessellargely oxidized, while lowerpart is reduced. Paintmostly well adheringon lowerwall, in partsmuch worn and peeled,especially on upperbody. Variously fired red through black, in accordancewith the firedcolor of the reservedsurface. Lower exterior edgeof foot reserved;remainder of foot,to juncturewith wall, painted. Lowerwall reserved, except for a singlehorizontal band, quite thick. Threebroad bands near and slightly below point of maximumdiameter, immediatelybelow the handles,define the lowerbelly zone. The belly zone is decorated,on eitherside of the vessel,with setsof mechanically drawnconcentric circles, each set comprisingnine circles, with a very smalldot at center.Alternating between the circlesare two setsof short doublesquiggles, one set hangingpendant from the bandabove, the other lowerdown. On the better-preservedside there are five setsof circles;the bellyzone on the oppositeside of the vaseis largelylost. Eachset is drawn with the samepivoted multiple brush; individual brushes of the imple- mentwere very thin andthe setsof circlesare rather small for the size of the vessel.The left set on the better-preservedside is the onlyone thatshows "flooding."33 Judging by the fine pivotpoint, the circles wereexecuted while the claywas rather dry, probably leather to bone hard. Shoulderdecorated with a broadhorizontal band framed by two thinnerbands below and two above.From the uppermostof these springupright, mechanically drawn, concentric semicircles. The pivot pointfor each,mostly not preservedon accountof wearor damage,is set slightlyabove the lowerband, with the resultthat the semicirclesare not perfecthalf circles of 180°but ratherdefine a slightlygreater arc. They are executedwith the sameimplement used for the circleson the bellyzone, with eachset of semicirclescomprising nine arcs.Only a few sets,or portionsof sets,are preserved on the shoulder,but thesewould have been continuousaround the shoulder.Judging by the partsof threesets preserved aboveone side,the semicircleswere set quitefar apart, and there is space aroundthe shoulderfor at leastseven sets. Thin horizontalband on uppermostshoulder, near juncture with neck.From this bandhang pendant sets of doublesquiggles identical to thoseon the bellyzone. These squiggles, judging by whatis preserved, 33.This is a commonoccurrence on arefor the mostpart located in the areabetween the setsof semicircles, setsof concentriccircles and semicircles paintedwith a pivotedmultiple brush, andtherefore alternate with them,but at a higherlevel. It is possiblethat forwhich see Papadopoulos,Vedder, thereis a secondset of doublesquiggles below, between each set of semi- andSchreiber 1998. circles,but in all casesthe relevantarea of the vaseis eithernot preserved JOHN K. PAPADOPOULOS AND I60 EVELYN L. SMITHSON or extremelyworn. The reservedarea between the semicirclesand the thin horizontalband above is ratherlarge and this maybe whythe semicircles aregreater than 180°. Preserved neck, though much worn, is clearlypainted solid;there is no traceof painton the preservedrim top. Outer faces of handlespainted, as is the connectingrib between each double handle, as shown.The paintextends from the lowerouter handle attachments in a broadsweep, over the threebands below and well downthe wallof the vessel;each ends in a raggedtermination. Preserved neck reserved on . . lntenor.

As notedabove, the neckof thevessel now ends in a plainlip thatis notoriginal. The factthat the mouth is onlypartially preserved and rather worndoes not assistin establishingwhether the repairwas executed be- foreor afterfiring. Nevertheless, a number of factorscombine to suggest thatthe repair was done after firing, and possibly some time well after the vesselreached Athens. The topsurface of therim is unevenand dips down on oneside about 0.005 m, with the resultthat the line of the rimcrosses thoseof thewheelmarks. The troughof a gouge,approximately 0.005 m wide,runs diagonally for a distanceof 0.040-0.045m acrossan areaof intactpaint on the neck;it terminatesabout 0.01 m belowthe top in a rounded"nose," as if madeby a finechisel that slipped. About 0.015 m to theright a chippednotch interrupts the surface,the bottom of whichap- pearsto be whatremains of a possiblemending-hole that shattered the innersurface of thewall and flaked the edges outside. If thechipped notch is indeedpart of a mending-hole,as seemslikely, then it is clearthat the adjustmentsto thevessel occurred after firing. An attemptto clampor tie thesevered neck and rim seems to havesplintered the neckbeyond con- ventionalrepair; the line of thefracture was evened up as much as possible, asthe irregularitiesat andnear the mouthshow, and the resultingedge wassanded smooth to forma lip. Salvagerepairs, beyond the usual rivet- or tie-holes, are known, espe- ciallyon largevessels, though they are also known on smallerpots. The ringfoot of a verylarge neck-handled amphora from the Kerameikos,for example,was chipped off andthe bottom hollowed, evidently after paint- ing,so thatthe vesselwould stand firmly.34 It is not clearfrom the pub- lisheddescription of thevase whether this was done before or afterfiring, thoughit seemslikely that the repairwas executedwhen the claywas ratherhard, perhaps after firing. A classiccase of a salvagerepair made priorto firingcan be seenon a MiddleGeometric I vessel from well L 6:2 inthe area of thelater Athenian Agora, which was originally designed as a largehydria, but subsequently trimmed down to the baseof the shoulder toform a krater.35 Whateverthe life history ofthe amphora P 14819 a historyto which 34. KerameikosI, p. 115,pl. 41, grave mound weshall return in thefinal section of thispaper it is clearthat the vessel T 8, inv.568. wasprized enough to 35.The vesselis fullypublished in warranta repair,which, having failed, necessitated Papadopoulos themore drastic 1998,along with a stepof cuttingoffthe upper part ofthe neckand all of the similarvessel, also of Attic manufac- rim,and sanding down what remained to forma plainround mouth. The ture,from the EarlyIron Age cemetery currentstate of the amphora,with its upperneck and rim gone, gives the atFortetsa, near Knossos, for which appearanceof a proportionatelydysfunctional vessel, one thatdoes not seeBrock 1957, pp. 43 and47, pl. 31, no.454 [13].A numberof lookquite right in anyperiod, a featurethat does not assistthe datingof otherrepairs thevessel. tosmaller vases from the Agoraare also listedin Papadopoulos1998. CULTURAL BIOGRAPHY OF A GEOMETRIC AMPHORA I6I

THE DATE OF THE AMPHORA AND THE PHENOMENON OF ARCHAIZING

In herpublication of the burialurn of the celebratedTomb of the Rich AthenianLady (tomb H 16:6-1 [P 27629]), Smithsonhad occasion to mentionAgora P 14819. In discussingthe solidlyglazed handles on P 27629, she notedthat they were unique in Athens,adding: "They are exactlylikethose on Agora P 14819,an imported belly-handler from some- wherein theCyclades; it might be this late, though it is stillProtogeometric in style."36Although in laternotes Smithson came to considerP 14819 as LateGeometric, she had always essentially viewed the vessel as "Subpro- togeometric"in date,despite its "Protogeometric-looking"style. Stylistically,a number of featurescombine to suggestthat P 14819, althoughfirmlyrooted in Protogeometrictradition, is not of Protogeometric date.Perhaps foremost, the mechanically drawn circles and semicircles are exceptionallyfine and their paint thin. As a result,the circularornament appearsflimsy and is overshadowedby the rathersturdy squiggles and comparativelymassive bands. While the inspirationof the pieceis clear, bothin compositionand execution, it lacksthe balanceand solid texture of genuineProtogeometric decoration. For Smithson, this suggestedan adaptation,whether by meansof survival,revival, or both,detached from an earlierliving tradition and not filllyunderstood. An analogycan be madewith well-trained and skilled modern classicists: however deft their controlover the syntaxand grammar of Greekor Latin,their pronuncia- tionofthe languagesremains a contentiousissue, still practiced but never- thelesssevered from a oncethriving tradition. A fewpoints underscore the relationshipand differences between P 14819 andpieces of Protogeometric date,especially in Athens. AgoraP 14819is largerthan any surviving Protogeometric belly-handled amphora,although a few,both Early and Late Protogeometric, approach it in size.37Such large pots, with a heightabove 0.50 m,particularly when usedas epitymbia,are especially vulnerable to breakage.Fragments, rela- tivelycommon in cemeterydebris from Final Mycenaean into Late Geo- metric,show that they were part of the standardceramic repertoire, even thoughthe normalsize belly-handled amphoras (H. ca.0.40 m) become comparativelyrare after the close of Protogeometric.The largever- sionswere not chancecuriosities but were produced routinely to meetthe ritualneeds and status requirements of wealthierfamilies. The decorative formulasfor very large Protogeometric belly-handled amphoras diXer from thoseof standardsize and are fairly rigid: circles across the belly and semi- circleson the shoulder.38

36. Smithson1968, p. 85, under tionsto the rule.At leastone verylarge two belly-handledamphoras of standard no. l; cf. the solidlypainted handles on belly-handledamphora lacks the circles size havecircles on the bellyzone like P 27629,pl.20 (bottom). on the bellyzone: Athens, National theirlarger counterparts; both are Early 37. An EarlyProtogeometric exam- Museuminv.18113, from Nea Ionia Protogeometric,decorated at a timebe- ple is ErechtheionStreet H-15, Brou- (H.0.572 m), Smithson1961, pl.24, foreconventions were firmly fixed: Ke- skare1980, pl. 4:a(H.0.64 m);for a no.3. The bellyzone of the vaseis left rameikosinv. 8808/09 (= Schlorb-Vier- LateProtogeometric example see Kera- clearand the shoulderheight is dimin- neisel1966, Beil.11,4-5, Gr.hS 101; meikosIV, pl. 9, grave38, inv.1089 ishedby extendingthe paintfrom the H.0.446 m);and Agora P 24240 from (H. 0.69 m). neckand with the additionof three wellJ 14:2,with an estimatedheight a 38. Thereare, as always,a few excep- horizontalbands. Somewhat earlier, littleover 0.40 m (unpublished). I62 JOHN K. PAPADOPOULOS AND EVELYN L. SMITHSON

Sincethe same pivoted multiple brush was regularly used for both filll circlesand semicircles,39the heightof the shoulderzone on genuine Protogeometricvases was reduced to proportionscommensurate with the heightof the semicircles.Two schemes are usual: several bands between theneck and the patterned zone,40 or two, rarely three, superimposed pat- ternedzones; the latter,popular in FinalMycenaean and EarlyPro- togeometric,is abandonedbefore Late Protogeometric. On P 14819,the singlenarrow band, closely set beneaththe neck,does nothing to reduce the zoneheight. The semicirclesfill less thanhalf of the heightand the squigglesdangle high above them. Thesemicircles and circles are very small for the size ofthe pot, smaller, in fact,than is usualon Protogeometricbelly-handled amphoras of stan- dardsize anywhere in Greece.4lThe heavyshoulder-banding, comprising a wideband framed by two thinbands below and two above,is usualon amphorasfound in graves,literally Protogeometric in form,placement, andexecution; the lowerbands are not. A deepbelly zone with an em- phaticrow of filllmechanically dravfn concentric circles is oneof thehall- marksof Protogeometricgrave-amphoras. On trueProtogeometric am- phorasthis bellyzone is defined,below the handleattachments, by a repeatedscheme of a wideband framed by two thinnerbands above and below,or by three narrow bands. In eithercase, the narrow bands are equal in widthand are usually dravfn with the same brush as those on theshoul- derabove, resulting in a balancedeffect. On P 14819the lower bands are placedcomparatively too high,and although they run a littlebelow the baseof theouter handle attachments, the attachments themselves are short andquite unlike the taperedattachments carefillly smoothed against the wallof genuineProtogeometric pieces. Furthermore,the handleson P 14819are too smallfor this pot. The centralrib of the doublehandle rests squarely on the top bandbelow, a crampedand inelegant juxtaposition that negates the decorativeeffect of thedouble handle.42 The firm,even mighty, bands below the handle, three timesthe width of the narrowones on theshoulder, overpower the dainty circlesof the bellyzone. The circles,placed more or lessat the middleof thebelly zone, are approximately 0.06 m abovethe point of greatestdiam- eterof thevessel; although it mayseem a minorpoint, such a positionis virtuallyunthinkable on genuineAthenian Protogeometric. If the semi- circleson the shoulderhave too muchroom, the circleson thebelly have too little.Added to thisis thefact that the entire patterned decoration has beensqueezed up to thetop halfofthe pot. The solitaryband on thelower

39. Contraryto the argumentsof bandabove and below, and a pendant 41. In additionto Athenian Eiteljorg(1980), it is clearthat the zigzagcanopy above the semicircles; amphorasalready mentioned, cf. a decorationof AtticProtogeometric see alsoErechtheion Street, H-15 similardecorative idiom on Proto- andGeometric vessels in the formof (Brouskare1980, p. 23, pl. 4:a),where geometricamphoras, and other closed concentriccircles and semicircles was the painton the neckextends in a broad vessels,from Boiotia, the Corinthia, donewith a pivotedmultiple brush bandon the shoulder,below which are the Cyclades,Thessaly, East Greece, implement;see Papadopoulos,Vedder, two narrowbands and a zigzagcanopy. Crete,and even Macedonia; see, andSchreiber 1998. Bothvessels are Early Protogeometric. generally,Desborough 1952; 1972. 40. See KerameikosI, pl.55, inv.561, Cf. furtherKerameikos inv. 1089, which 42. Forsuch handles generally see with a wideband enclosed by a narrow is laterProtogeometric. Oakeshott1966. CULTURAL BIOGRAPHY OF A GEOMETRIC AMPHORA I63

bodydoes little to counterbalancethe top-heavinessof the decoration, andalthough a subsidiaryband (or bands)on the lowerbodies of very largeProtogeometric closed vessels is notuncommon, the one on P 14819 teamsup with the heavytriple bands below the handlesto detractfrom the patterneddecoration. The mannerin whichthe outerface of thepre- servedhandle is paintedcontrasts with the normalthinner"arches and bows"of Protogeometricvessels, especially belly-handled amphoras, but its prolongationin tailsextending onto the body,below the levelof the bands,is anecho of Protogeometricpractice.43 A comparisonofthe size,shape, and decoration of P 14819with any numberof genuineProtogeometric belly-handled amphoras indicates that thevessel cannot be Protogeometricin date.44 The distinctive features seen in P 14819,particularly the tall ringfoot, the ovoidbody with pointof maximumdiameter set quitehigh, the comparativelybroad neck, along withthe greatsize of thevessel, are all consistent with a LateGeometric date.Such a combinationof featurescan be seenin a numberof regional workshops.In Athenian Geometric these features are standard in avariety of vessels,including very large amphoras, such as the neck-handledam- phorameasuring 1.350 m, nowin Leiden.45In the Cycladeslarge belly- handledamphoras shaped like P 14819,with the characteristicdouble handles,referred to by Noel Oakeshottas "horned-head,"46arefound as earlyas MiddleGeometric. A good exampleis the amphorasaid to be fromMelos, now in Munich,which is almostcertainly Naxian (Fig. 8).47 Standingto a heightof 0.730m, the Munichamphora is of similarpro- portionsto AgoraP 14819(0.73>0.740 m, though originally larger), but is decoratedin the standardpatterned style of the time,with much of the lowerbody covered in black.48A virtuallyidentical amphora, also said to befrom Melos and now in Vienna,was published by Elena Walter-Karydi (Fig.9),49 who went on to list anddiscuss a numberof relatedvessels and fragments,especially from Naxos.50 The stylisticsimilarity between these andother closely related vessels and contemporary pottery from Athens hasbeen most recently discussed by PhoteiniZapheiropoulou, Kenneth

43. C£ Desborough1952, pls. 4-5; admirablyassembled and discussed pl.XLII:1, referred to as aAttiques,"but Papadopoulos1994b, pls. 109:a-b, by Desborough(1952, pp. 153-163; listedunder Cycladic Middle Geomet- 119:c. 1972,pp.221-224); see alsoCold- ricin Coldstream1968, p.166. 44. ForAttic Protogeometricbelly- stream1968, pp.148-157. In its latest 49. Walter-Karydi1972, p.390, handledamphoras see, among others, phase,Athenian Protogeometric was fig. 4; Zapheiropoulou1983, p.131, KerameikosI, pls.32 (inv.529), 43-45, widelyimitated in variousparts of the fig.28; Vienna,Kunsthistorisches 46 (inv.857), 54-56, 58;Kerameikos IV, Aegean,particularly in the Cyclades. Museuminv. 1879. pls.9-11; Desborough1952, pp. 2s37, 45. LeidenI.1909/1.1, conveniently 50. Walter-Karydi1972, esp. pls.4-5; Desborough1972, pp. 35-36, illustratedand discussed in Coldstream pp.386-390.Foremost of theseis the figs.2-3, pp. 148-149,pl. 27. For 1968,p. SS,pl. ll:a. fragmentaryamphora said to be from amphorasfrom other parts of the 46. Oakeshott1966. Thera,now in the Louvre(inv. A 266), Greekworld, see Desborough1952; 47. Munichinv. 6166, Coldstream Walter-Karydi1972, pp.388,390, 1972.Comparing Cycladic Proto- 1968,p. 167,pl.34:m; Zapheiropoulou n.12, fig.5, anda similarfragmentary geometricamphoras is moredifficult, 1983,p.131, fig.27;Boardman 1998, but smalleramphora from Philoti on giventhe rarityof trueProtogeo- pp.47,59, fig. 88. Naxos(p.388, fig.2), firstpublished metric-especiallyearlier and devel- 48. C£ the relatedfragmentary by Kontoleon(1949, pp. l-3, figs. l-3), opedProtogeometric-pottery in the amphorawith a restoredheight esti- nowfully discussed in Kourou1999a, Cyclades.The existingevidence is matedat 0.810 m, DelosX%, pp. 90-91, pp.183-198,pls.56-59. I64 JOHN K. PAPADOPOULOS AND EVELYN L. SMITHSON

Figure8 (left).Naxian Middle Sheedy,and Nota Kourou.5lThe numberof recognizedAthenian Pro- Geometricbelly-handled amphora, togeometricand Geometric imports to theCyclades has been steadily grow- Glyptothekund Museen antiker ing,thanks to thework of RichardCatling and Sheedy.52 Large Cycladic Kleinkunst,Munich, inv. 6166. amphorashave also been found outside the Cycladesand especially in the H. 0.730 m. CourtesyMuseum; photo variouscemeteries at Knossos.53 C. Koppermann The Munichand Vienna amphoras shown here (Figs. 8-9) areboth assignedto the MiddleGeometric period. Similarly large amphoras are Figure9 (right).Cycladic (Naxian) commonin the Cycladesin LateGeometric, as illustratedby the frag- Middle Geometricbelly-handled mentaryexample from Delos (Fig. 10), which stands to a preservedheight amphora,Antikensammlung, Kunst- of 0.740m.54 Its decorationfollows the morestandard patterning of Late historischesMuseum, Vienna, inv. 1879. H. 0.695 m. Courtesy Geometric.It is worthadding that earlierCycladic amphoras of the Museum (neg. 11179) Protogeometricperiod are never this large. By the EarlyArchaic period, largebelly-handled amphoras in theCyclades became proportionately taller andmore slender, as numerous examples from Delos attest.55 On thebasis of shapealone, Agora P 14819can be reasonablyassigned to theMiddle andLate Geometric period.

51. Zapheiropoulou1983, esp. EarlyGeometric I andKMF 283.91 to aswell as base,not preserved.For large pp. 130-133;Sheedy 1990; Kourou MiddleGeometric I. In additionto the belly-handledamphoras from other 1999a,esp. pp. 90-97, 185-187. importsfrom the NorthCemetery at islands,see, among many, Coldstream 52. Catling1998a, esp. pp. 370-378; Knossos,Coldstream discusses com- 1968,pl. 39:h("Melian," now in Leiden; Sheedy1990. parativematerial from the Fortetsaand H. 0.620m), pl. 58:a(Rhodes; H. 0.560 53. Coldstream1990, pp. 26-27, pl. Tekkecemeteries. m, discussedin moredetail below). 6, nos.1 and3. Of the two amphoras, 54. DelosXV, p. 37, no.2, pl.XVIII: 55. SeeDelos XVII, pls.I-VI Coldstreamassigns Tekke Q 63 to a-b, groupAc (B 4.213);neck and rim, (groupBa). CULTURAL BIOGRAPHY OF A GEOMETRIC AMPHORA I65

Figure10. FragmentaryCycladic Late Geometricbelly-handled amphorafrom Delos, groupAc, no.2.Pres.H.0.740m. CourtesyEcole fran jcaise d'Athenes

Amongthe manylarge amphoras found in the Cyclades,perhaps the closestparallel to AgoraP 14819, especiallyin termsof thepainted deco- ration,is thebelly-handled amphora from Thera first published by Ernst Pfuhlalmost a centuryago (Fig. 11).56 Standing to a heightof 0.815 m, whichwould be not too farfrom the originalheight of P 14819, the am- phorafromThera (inv. 825) is identicalin virtuallyall respects to P 14819. The mostobvious exception is thatit hasa thickband framed by thinner bandsimmediately below its belly zone instead of thethree bands of simi- larthickness found on P 14819.Even the squiggles on P 14819 areechoed in thegroups of shortvertical strokes found between the full circles on the bellyof the amphorafrom Thera. If AgoraP 14819 is restoredwith an upperneck and rim like that of Thera825, thetwo vessels would be very similarto one another,except that the base of P 14819 wouldbe propor- 56. Pfuhl1903, p. 170,Beil. EII:2 tionatelyslightly more narrow, resulting in a lowerbody fractionally more (E 4), fromgrave 29 (72) 6. piriform,and therefore closer to the shapeof amphoraslike thatfrom 57. I tooknotes on Thera825 while visitingthe islandin Septemberof Delosillustrated in Figure10. 1997.Reconstructed from fragments, Despitethese strong similarities, the fabricof the two vesselsis not with missingparts restored in plaster, the same.The clayof Thera825, judgingby its reservedsurfaces, has Thera825 hasno visiblebreaks from prominentdark inclusions and only a light dustingof mica;it is light- whichone couldbetter judge the clay colored,in placesreddish yellow, elsewhere approaching a light red with bodyof the vesseland I wasunable to an almostmaroon-purple tinge.57 In his publicationof Thera825, Pfuhl takea Munsellreading of the surface. The paintis dull,and varies in color listedthe amphoraunder his categoryE "Samischesund Verwandtes," fromred through different shades of andmore specifically under category E II, thatis, relatedto Samian,but reddishbrown to black. notconsidered Samian. Some 50 yearslater, Desborough listed Thera 825 I66 JOHN K. PAPADOPOULOS AND EVELYN L. SMITHSON

b

Figure11. a) Late Geometricbelly- handledamphora from Thera, grave 29(72)6.H.0.815m.b)Detailof handlearea. a) CourtesyDeutsches ArchaologischesInstitut, Athens; a b) photoauthor amonga numberof amphorasfrom Thera and assumed it to be of local manufacture.58Coldstream, however, like Pfuhl,listed Thera 825 as an EastGreek import to the island,and stated:

The survivalof thebelly-handled amphora, still decorated in the PG tradition,is attestedby an examplefound in theburnt layer at Miletus,and by two others exported to Thera[including inv. 825], bothfound in LG contexts.59

As forthe date,there is no questionthat the contextof Thera825- grave29 (72) 6 andof a relatedamphora from grave 89 (109)3 is Late Geometric.60This, together with the Cycladic Middle and Late Geomet- ricvessels discussed above, helps place Agora P 14819broadly within the 58. Desborough1952, pp.31,34, 215. LateGeometric period. Any more precise date would be sheerguesswork, 59. Coldstream1968, p.269, with thougha datein thethird quarter ofthe 8thcentury B.C., accordingto the referenceto Hommel1959-1960, p.39, conventionalchronology, seems more likely (on the basis ofthe overallap- fig. 1;cf. alsothe largefragmentary pearanceof thevessel) than one toward the very end of the century. beUy-handledamphora, p. 54, pl. S3, In consideringsuch a latedate forThera 825, Desborough stated that no. 4, referredto as (proto?)geo- metrischen." "itcomes, therefore, as rathera shockto findthat the contextof thisam- 60. Pfuhl1903, p. 170;Desborough phorais undoubtedlyeighth century.... The onlyconclusion seems to be 1952, pp.34,215; Coldstream1968, thatit is a remarkablecase of thesurvival of anAttic Protogeometric form, p.269. CULTURAL BIOGRAPHY OF A GEOMETRIC AMPHORA I67

Figure12. Subgeometric hydria, AthenianAgora P 4614. CourtesyAgora Excavations

atleast in Thera.''61 In thiscontext Desborough made passing reference to AgoraP 14819:"Curiously enough, fragments of a similaramphora of coarsered-brick clay, very micaceous,appear among the unpublished materialof the Agoraexcavations (P 14819)."62 Vesselslike Agora P 14819andThera 825 raise the issue of archaizing. A numberof scholarslooking at the problemfrom an Athenian perspec- tivehave discussed the incidenceof a Protogeometricstyle in laterGeo- metriccontexts in termsof survivalsand/or revivals, and even as copies.63 In discussingthe phenomenon of specificProtogeometric shapes echoing Mycenaeantradition, Smithson noted that this "may be, like a numberof resurgenttypes, a Mycenaeanrevival, i.e. a 'copy,'slightly modernized, of piecessalvaged from disturbed tombs."64 A similar sentiment is expressed 61. Desborough1952, p. 34. by EvaBrann in herdiscussion of LateGeometric and Early Protoattic 62. Desborough1952, p. 34. shapesand motifs that are strikingly Mycenaean in theirappearance. She 63. See,for example, Smithson states:"The Athenians certainly often came across Mycenaean antiquities, 1961,p. 166,under no. 43;Agora VIII, so therewould have been no lackof models."65In discussing an early-7th- pp.34-35, underno.37. 64. Smithson1961, p. 166,under centuryB.C. hydriafrom the Agora (Fig. 12), together with several related no. 43. vesselsthat echo Protogeometric tradition, Rodney Young wrote: 65.Agora VIII, p. 19;cf. Brann 1961,p. 125,under L 66:six Mycen- The hydriagives a falseimpression that it is Protogeometric;but the aeangoblet stems found in the fill of a paleclay, creamy slip, and general appearance of the fabricare LateGeometric well, and perhaps (re)usedas bobbins. entirelydifferent from true Protogeometric. The body... is seento 66. Young1939, p. 27, under be deeperand more pointed, narrower at thebottom, and with a no.V 1. Younggoes on to cite as close higher,less flaring ring foot. The decorationtoo is notusual for parallelsnos. X 1 (seebelow, n. 67) and Protogeometric;the multiplicationof glazebands on the shoulder, C 148 (p. 186,fig. 137),as well as a the solidglaze on the handlesinstead of the canonicalglaze bands relatedexample from the 7th-century endingin "tails,"and the singlewavy line in the handlezone instead grave10 at Phaleron(Pelekides 1917, p. 31, fig. 20). Amongmany other of the doubleor triplewavy bands always used in trueProtogeo- relatedhydriai see Charitonides1975, metric,are evidence that our hydria belongs to a differentfabric. pl. lO:vr(rM 45, tombXVI). The hydriatoo is comparativelyrare in Protogeometric.66 I68 JOHN K. PAPADOPOULOS AND EVELYN L. SMITHSON

Figure13. Subgeometric hydria, AthenianAgora P 4980,two views. Youngnoted that a relatedSubgeometric hydria from grave X in the CourtesyAgora Excavations Agora(Fig. 13) wasalso very Protogeometric in appearance,but that its fabricis unlikeany true Athenian Protogeometric vase.67 In herdiscussion of the samehydria, together with a numberof relatedexamples, Brann notedthat it wasnot clearwhether the bandedhydriai were "survivals or revivalsof theirProtogeometric prototype."68 Elsewhere, Brann referred to old-fashionedhydriai, of light-groundware, considered "a Mycenaean typerevived in the 8thcentury and found on manyGreek sites, especially easternones."69 As forProtogeometric "models," Brann considered it likely thatpottery of thisperiod was still to be foundas "heirlooms," and con- cluded:"At any rate, there is a wholegroup of LateGeometric pots done in a stylewhich seems like a returnto Protogeometricclay-ground tech- nique."70 The dark-groundtechnique began to takeover from the light-ground duringthe lateststages of the Protogeometricperiod, and is well estab- lishedby Early Geometric I, continuingthrough the end of MiddleGeo- 67. Young1939, pp. 42-43, fig.27. metric.Although this is the casefor many shapes, it is importantto stress 68.Agora VIII, p. 34;Brann also thatfor otherspecific vessel forms there is continuityin both styleand notestwo relatedhydriai from the productiontechnique. This is especiallytrue for pottery traditionally con- Kerameikosdating to the firsthalf of sideredas "utilityware," though many such pots are found in exactlythe the 8th centuryB.C.; KerameikosV.1, pl.SO. samecontexts as moreelaborately decorated ("non-utility") vessels and 69. Brann1961, p. 100. wereoften used for the same function. A goodexample is theplain banded 70. Brann1961, p. 100. neck-handledamphora from the fill of well K 1:5,found together with 71.The threepots illustrated in severalvessels decorated in the standarddark-ground technique of the Fig. 14 wereall found in the period-of- period(Fig. 14).71 Indeed, such plain vessels stand out in comparisonto use fill of thiswell, recently excavated in the areanorth of the Eridanos, theirmore elaborately decorated contemporaries from the samecontext. whichcan be assignedto Early Whereasmany of thelarger and smaller vessels of theAthenian Early GeometricII/Middle Geometric I; see IronAge repertoiredevelop rapidly in termsof the fashionof the day, Camp1999, pp. 266-267. metricuseFigUre* fill I S ofl4@vessels well AtheniIaIn,Mgddlesw-w_ K from1:5, inthe the period-of-area northGeo-- " ; " _5_ tv ! i w - l! ^i_E' t

CULTURAL BIOGRAPHY OF A GEOMETRIC AMPHORA I69

of theEridanos. Courtesy Agora Exca- w vatlons _ _ w i _

othershapes remain remarkablyconservative and consistent. Some of these displaylittle noticeable changeover a periodof severaldecades or even centuries,while others developin termsof nuancesof shape,but retain moretraditional a decorativeidiom. Examples include a numberof metricbanded Geo- hydriaithat date to variousstages of the EarlyIron Similarly,plain Age.72 bandedneck-handled amphoras, ranging in date togeometric fromPro- throughLate Geometric, are commonly found EarlyIron Age discardedin wellsin the areaof the ClassicalAthenian Agora.73 caseof such In the pots,there was never any real break in tradition: survivalor ratherthan revivalthere was continuity. To illustratethis point, I sembleda haveas- representativesample of plainbanded neck-handled in Figure15, amphoras togetherwitha Protogeometric neck-handled amphora ratedwith the deco- canonicalmechanically drawn concentric semicircles theshoulder on (Fig.15:a). Such banded vessels, found throughout IronAge, theEarly not onlywere very common, but theyalso kept tional alivea tradi- light-groundtechnique of decorationthroughout the dle Earlyand Mid- Geometricperiods, when a dark-groundtechnique intothe predominated,and LateGeometric period, characterized by elaborate The patterning. bandedamphoras assembled in Figure15 rangein Developed datefrom Protogeometricthrough Late Geometric I. The geometric two Proto- amphoras(Fig. 15:a-b) were found in the fill of wellA assignedto a 20:5, developedphase of the Protogeometricperiod;74 two (Fig.15:c-d) vessels wereassigned by Coldstream respectively to Early ricII andMiddle Geomet- GeometricI;75 the twoexamples from well L 6:2 (Fig. 15:e-f)are Middle Geometric;76and the two from well I 13:1(Fig. 15:g-h) canbe assignedto a transitionalphase between Middle Geometric II and LateGeometric I.77 The sametype of simplebanded amphora was used 72.These are fully discussedin Papadopoulos, forthcoming. 21; Papadopoulos, Papadopoulos1998. 75. forthcoming. They were found, respectively,in 77. 73.These will be published in full Well I 13:1 is one of several well C 18:6 (EG II) and well B 18:9 inforthcoming volumes Geometric wells in the areaunder the of the (MG I); for the relative AthenianAgora. chronologyof later Middle Stoa; for the more these two deposits, see recently 74.For well A Coldstream discoveredGeometric deposits 20:5 see Young 1968, pp. 13, 16. within 1951b,p. 144; with full details in this area,see Camp 1999, pp. 260-263 76. See Coldstream1968, pp. 16, (well I 13:4 and graveI 13:5). I70 JOHN K. PAPADOPOULOS AND EVELYN L. SMITHSON

a b c

d e f

Figure 15. AthenianAgora, selected bandedneck-handled amphoras: a-b) P 17455, P 17456 (wellA 20:5, PG); c) P 19012 (well C 18:6,EG II); d) P 19037 (wellB 18:9,MG I); e-f) P 6411, P 6410 (well L 6:2, MG); rh) P 27938, P 27939 (well I 13:1,MG II-LG I). g h Scaleca. 1:6.Courtesy Agora Excavations CULTURAL BIOGRAPHY OF A GEOMETRIC AMPHORA I7I

Figure16. Athenian Agora, banded / \ / neck-handledamphoras from \ / \ , EarlyIronAgetombs:a)P6997 \ \ ;/ \ L (tombB 10:1,LPG); b) P 24791 \ / \_ (tombN 16:4,EG I). Scale1:6. DrawingA. Hooton a b

notonly for drawing water from wells, but also could be usedin tombs,as the Late Protogeometricand EarlyGeometric I amphorasillustrated in Figure16 attest.78Related amphoras, often smaller than their predeces- sors,continue into the late 8th centuryand throughout the 7th century B.C. (Fig. 17).79It is worthadding that in the Archaicperiod, as in the Geometric,pots decorated with bands were produced almost everywhere in the Greekworld.80 Preciselythe same range of shapes-hydriai,neck- and belly-handled amphoras-wsthdecoration harking back to a Mycenaeanand Protogeo- metricaesthetic, is commonin the Cycladesduring the LateGeometric period,as numerousexamples from the PurificationTrench on Rheneia andelsewhere attest.8l The pots assembled in Figures12-17 highlight the continuityof a conservativetradition, which was widespread throughout the Greekworld. Such conservatismwas perhapsmost acutein the Cyclades,not onlyduring Late Geometric, but for later periods as well. Indeed,a seriesof cupsin Geometricand even Protogeometric style, with metopepanels and concentric circles, are common in the Cyclades,espe- ciallyon Paros,Naxos, and Delos, some as late as ca. 500 s.c.82Island isolation,to use a cliche,may be one of the contributingcauses. This is wellput by Coldstream, who penned, with specific regard to Thera, a state- mentthat maybe appliedto otherislands: "The potters of this remote islandwere slow to learna LateGeometric style, and slow to forgetit."83 Be thatas it may,a similarphenomenon, albeit at differentscales, is found on the mainland,including centers, like Athens,that havelong been

78.The Late Protogeometric pl.6, grave28, inv. 910. generally,Coldstream 1968, pp. 164- amphoraP 6997 comes from the 79.The vessels shown in Fig.17 are 195.See further Young 1939, pp. 27- disturbedatomb" B 10:1,and the fullydiscussed in Sgora VIII, p. 34, pl. 3, 28;Sheedy 1985, pp. 153-159, esp. EarlyGeometric I amphora P 24791 nos.29, 31-36. p. 156,n. 18. wasfound in tombN 16:4.See also 80.See Cook and Dupont 1998, 82.Morris 1997, pp. 6849, with othersimilar plain banded amphoras p. 132. fig.4. fromthe tombs in KerameikosI, pl. 42, 81.Delos XV, pls. II-E, XV,no. 27; 83.Coldstream 1977, p. 216. T 12-13,inv. 602403; Kerameikos IV, cf. TheraII, p. 229, fig. 427; and, more I72 JOHN K. PAPADOPOULOS AND EVELYN L. SMITHSON

a b c d e

Figure17. Athenian Agora, banded amphorasof thelate 8th through 7thcenturies B.C.: a) P 21578 (secondhalf of the8th century); b-e) P 12444,P 12445,P 20731, P 26242(late 8th century); f) P 23465(third quarter of the 7thcentury); g) P 3469(last quarter of the 7thcentury). Courtesy Agora Excavations f g consideredas "trend-setters."84 In addition to theCyclades, Protogeometric survivalsin the Geometricperiod are well knownin Thessaly,Boiotia, Skyros,Euboia, and elsewhere, as Coldstreamhas established,85 and the sameis truefor much of thePeloponnese and western Greece generally, as 84. Fora long-livedSubgeometric wellas Macedonia and other northern regions.86 styleof potteryin Athenssee, most recently,Papadopoulos, forthcoming, andin the Cyclades,Morris 1997, p. 68. THE ORIGIN OF THE AMPHORA 85. Coldstream1968, pp.148-157, 196-211. AlthoughAgora P 14819was never previously published in detail,those 86. Forthe Protogeometricand who haveexamined it havecome to acceptit as an importto Athensof Subprotogeometricpottery of Troy, Cycladicor East Greek origin.87 Indeed, the uncertainty about the precise especiallythe neck-handledamphoras, originof thevessel is to a largemeasure the result of the closeaffinity be- with discussionof comparativematerial fromother north Aegean sites, see tweenthe two regions (Fig. 18), especially between individual centers such Catling1998b; also Lenz, Ruppenstein, asNaxos and Rhodes in the EarlyIron Age, a relationshipeffectively ex- Baumann,and Catling 1998. ploredby Zapheiropoulou.88In the caseof bothregions, assigning indi- 87. See above,n.32. vidualpieces, or even stylistic groups, to a particularisland workshop is far 88. Zapheiropoulou1994. fromstraightforward.89 89. See esp.Jones 1986, pp.643- 673. Note alsothe fabricdescriptions of Althoughmuch East Greek pottery (including the finer wares) in the someof the regionalvarieties of Geometricand Early Archaic period is relativelycoarse, I havenot come chevronskyphoi given in Descoeudres acrossan East Greekvessel with a fabricsufficiently similar to thatof andKearsley 1983. 0 I * §

CULTURAL BIOGRAPHY OF A GEOMETRIC AMPHORA I73

MACEDONIA

o Sardis. <

KARIA

G«

ooto

RHODES CRETA N SEA

° 100 StatuteMiles O 100 Kilometers

Figure18. Map of theAegean showingthe Cycladesin relation AgoraP 14819to providea compellingvisual match.90 The distinctive to the Greekmainland, the fabricsof Chiosand Klazomenai can be ruledout,9l as can"Rhodian,"92 Dodecanese,and East Greece alongwith the distinctivesandy texture and light brown color of"Ionian" generally.R. Finnerty cups,many of whichare local to Samos.93The generallycoarse and gritty fabricof the "WildGoat" and 'Fikellura" styles, much of whichcan now be assignedto Miletosthanks to the workof PierreDupont,94 is a little

90. Fora usefuloverview of East Archaicpottery, Boardman 1967 is nantlywhite impurities, but onlya Greekpottery, see Cookand Dupont fundamental;see alsoBoardman 1998, relativelysmall quantity of silverymica. 1998;for the Geometricperiod, pp.144-146;and further Tocra I, 93. Cf.Jones 1986, p. 665; Coldstream1968, pp. 262-301, remains pp.57-63; TocraII, pp.24-28. For Boardman1998, pp. 146-147. For fundamental.For the fabricof various Klazomeniansee Cookand Dupont potteryfrom Samos, see further EastGreek wares, particularly of the 1998,pp. 95-107, 121-128 (withfull Technau1929, esp.pp. 6-37; Eilmann Archaicperiod, see TocraI, pp.41-66; references);Boardman 1998, pp. 148- 1933. Jones1986, pp. 66s673. I hastento 149. 94. Dupont1986. See furtherCook stressthat the followingfabric deter- 92. By"Rhodian"I essentially mean andDupont 1998, pp. 32-70, 77-91; minationsare made on the basisof the "Bird-KotyleWorkshop" as defined Boardman1998, pp. 147-148. A1- visualcriteria; the problemsinherent by Coldstream1968, pp. 277-279; see thoughthe homeof Fikellurais with the scientificdeterminations of alsoBoardman 1998, pp.51-52; Tocra Miletos,the Wild GoatStyle is pro- the claysof the Cycladesand East I, pp.41-57; TocraII, pp. 16-20.This ducedat variouscenters, including Greece,including Ionia and the distinctivefabric is characteristically Miletos.The earlierstudies of theWild Dodecanese,are well laidout in Jones brown varyingfrom dark orange to GoatStyle by Kardara(1963) and 1986. coffeebrown according to Coldstream Schiering(1957) arestill important, 91. ForChian Late Geometric and 1968,p.279 andcontains predomi- especiallyfor shapeand style. I74 JOHN K. PAPADOPOULOS AND EVELYN L. SMITHSON

closerto the generalappearance of the fabricof P 14819,particularly in thefact that the fired color of theclay can vary considerably from a sandy brownthrough pink and red. Nevertheless, the color of theclay and range of impurities,especially the micacontent, of the fabricof P 14819are differentfrom those of anypottery that can be assignedwith confidence to Ionia.There are a numberof fairlylarge belly-handled amphoras, espe- ciallythree examples from Kameiros and Ialysos on Rhodesthat are as- signedby Coldstream on stylisticgrounds to EarlyGeometric,95 of which one is illustratedhere (Fig. 19). None of theseRhodian amphoras, how- ever,has the sameshape and decoration as P 14819;they are all smaller thanP 14819and their decoration closer to trueProtogeometric, despite theirSubprotogeometric date. ByEast GreekMiddle Geometric, the belly- handledamphora is exceedinglyrare, and indeed one of thefew examples is Thera825 (Fig.11), which Coldstream assigned to EastGreece (see above).We haveseen, however, that the fabricof AgoraP 14819is very differentfrom that of Thera825, as is thatof the Rhodianamphoras as- sembledby Coldstream. As forthe Cyclades(Fig.20), a numberof islandscan also be quick- ly ruledout. The fabricof P 14819is not the sameas thatwhich can be confidentlyassigned to Paros,Melos, Thera, or Siphnos.96The ex- cavationsdirected by Lila Marangou at Minoa on Amorgoshave brought to lightan impressive array of Geometric,Archaic, and later material, but thereis nothingfrom that island that I haveseen that is similarto P 14819.97 Thepottery found, to date,onTenos includes a numberof vesselsmade of a claynot unlikethat of P 14819,but there is nothingthat I knowfrom thatisland that provides a satisfactorymatch.98 The Geometricsettlement siteat Zagoraon the islandof Androshas yielded a wealthof Geometric pottery,which awaits proper publication.99 The material from Zagora high-

95. Coldstream1968, pp.265- discussionabove; see alsoKontoleon 97. Annualpreliminary reports 266, pl.58:a(Ialysos);Jacopi 1933, 1958,esp. pp. 127-137.For Siphnian appearin Ergonand Prakt; most pp. 119-120,figs. 133-134; pp. 204- Geometricand Archaic pottery, in- recently,see Marangou 1996; 1997; 205, figs.244-245; two of these cludingimported fabrics, see Brock 1998 (whichprovides a usefulhistorical amphorasare also illustrated and andMackworth Young 1949, pp. 33- introductionto the site,with references discussedin Zapheiropoulou1994, 53; TocraI, pp.73-78; TocraII, pp.34 to earlierreports); and Marangou, in p.248,fig. 17,p.250,fig. 19. 38;Jones 1986, p. 644. Foruseful notes prep.For the publicationof two Proto- 96. Forthe fabricof Parianand on the ceramicfabric from Melos, geometricvases from Amorgos, see Melian,seeJones 1986, pp. 643-660; Kimolos,Paros, Mykonos, Naxos, CatlingandJones 1989. see alsoColdstream 1968, esp. pp. 176- Siphnos,as well as thatfrom Thasos, 98. ForTenianGeometric, see the 185;Zapheiropoulou 1985; Sheedy seeVillard 1993; Gautier 1993. I have overnewin Coldstream1968, p.166 1985,the latterimportant in helpingto not comeacross sufficient Geometric (withreferences); Mso Len 1925-1926; clarifythe confusionin the literature andEarly Archaic pottery from the Desborough1952, pp.158-161. I am betweenpottery variously assigned as northwestCyclades (i.e., Kea, Kythnos, gratefulto Nota Kouroufor discussing "Melian"or "Parian," much of which andSeriphos) to commenton the TenianGeometric pottery with me in wasfound in the PurificationTrench productsof theseislands; for a recent theTenos Museum, and for showing on Rheneia.Note alsothe potteryfrom overviewof Keaand Kythnos, see the me herrecent finds from Exombourgo. Paroikia(Rubensohn 1917, esp. pp. 73- variouspapers in Mendoniand Maza- Forthe excavationsat Exombourgo 88) andthe Delionpublished in Ru- rakisAinian 1998. For a generalover- (also ^ il),uTcoutoyo),see Kourou 1996; bensohn1962, pp. 83-129. For the viewof Cycladicpottery, the seminal l999b. highlydistinctive clay of Thera,which studyby Dugas(1925), though out of 99. In the meantime,see Zagora1; containsno mica,see Coldstream1968, date,is stilluseful in a numberof Zagora2; MsoCambitoglou, Peirce, pp. 185-189;1977, pp.216-217, and importantrespects, as is Buschor1929. Segal,and Papadopoulos 1981. CULTURAL BIOGRAPHY OF A GEOMETRIC AMPHORA I75

Figure19. EarlyGeometric belly-handledamphora, Rhodes, inv. 15533, from Ialysos,grave 43 (H. 0.560 m). CourtesyKB Ephoreia of Prehistoricand Classical Antiquities, Rhodes

lights one of the fundamentalproblems facing the studyof Cycladic Geometricpottery, namely the incidence and great range of importedfab- rics.While the comparativelynumerous Athenian, Euboian, Naxian, and Parianproducts can be distinguishedwith relative ease, there remains an abundanceof fabricsboth of localmanufacture and imported from other islandsand the mainland.Among this wealthof Geometricmaterial, a localAndrian fabric can be distinguished,especially for a seriesof smaller vesselssuch as cups,which share a brown,micaceous fabric.100 This ap- pearsto be similarto muchof the LateGeometric and Archaic pottery fromthe site of Ypsili( Y+NAN,also known as Aprovatou)on the west coastof Andros,north of Zagora,recently excavated by ChristinaTele- vantou.10lThe fabricthat I referto asAndrian is, however, not the same as thatof AgoraP 14819. Naxos,the largest of the Cycladicislands, is knownto haveproduced a significantand well-defined Geometric style, and several Middle Geo- metricNaxian amphoras have already been discussed for the similarityof theirshape to thatof P 14819(Figs. 8-9).1°2 The attemptto definewith claritythe fabric of Naxoshas led to somecontroversy in thepast, particu- larlywithregard to theCesnola krater in NewYorkanda number of closely

100.I hadoccasion to studymuch of the studyof the Zagorapottery, as well I amgrateful to ChristinaTelevantou the potteryfrom Zagora during the as KenSheedy for discussingwith me for showingme the findsfrom Ypsili preparationof the guidebookfor the site the complexitiesof the localand andfor discussing with me a varietyof (Cambitoglou,Peirce, Segal, and Papa- importedpottery from Zagora. Cycladicproblems. dopoulos1981). I am especiallygrateful 101.For the excavationsat Ypsili, 102. See Coldstream1968, pp. 164- to Dick Green,who is responsiblefor seeTelevantou1993;1996; 1999. 195. I76 JOHN K. PAPADOPOULOS AND EVELYN L. SMITHSON

:x|- :,YIAROS

tYRO tS NOS

Galessav Cros RHENEItF= 411t vYTHNOS Poseidonia,?

g t SERIPHOPOULO

eCRIPHOS DONOUSA

ERIMOMELOS .KIMOLOS

n Hellenikal.; ; 9 POLIVOS

SIKINOS.. MELOS }..;' . r tANHYDROS PHOI LEGANDROS.

THERASI S APHE ' 9.

Ak ess 0 25 StatuteMiles

I0 25 Kilometers tHRISTIANA

Figure20. Map of the Cyclades showingsome ofthe sites mentioned in the text. R. Finnerty CULTURAL BlOGRAPHY OF A GEOMETR1C AMPHORA I77

relatedpieces.l03 Following Nikolaos Kontoleon, Coldstream originally assignedthe Cesnolakrater to Naxos,but laterchanged his opinionin favorof Euboia.104This reassignmentdid not meetwith universal favor, andWalter-Karydi reaffirmed the claimof Naxos.105Other scholars, pri- marilyJohnBoardman, maintained a Euboian origin, but noted that"one has to deal almostwith a 'koine'of decoration Boiotia,Euboia, the Cyclades-whichhas links which are yet to be properlyexplored.''l06 The originof theCesnola krater must be Euboia,and this is stronglysupport- ed byrecent scientific analysis.107 Moreover, our understanding of Naxian Geometricpottery is now on a muchmore secure basis, thanks to the recentcontributions of Zapheiropoulou,Lambrinoudakis, and Kourou.108 Itwas,indeed, the characteristic"brick-red," micaceous fabric of Naxos thatled Smithsonto suspectthat Agora P 14819was a Naxianimport to Athens,and underlay, in part,her designationof the pot as "Anaxilas's amphora."Despite the closeaffinities, particularly in shapeand, to a cer- tainextent, fabric, between Naxian pottery and P 14819,the latteris un- likelyto be Naxian.Its fabricis coarserthan normal Naxian fabrics, and noneofthe potterypublished from the island matches the style of P 14819 in allrespects. On thenearby small island of Donousa,an important Early Iron Age settlementhas been excavated on thewest coast by Zapheiropoulou.The definitivereport on theexcavations has not yet appeared, but the excavator hasprovided a numberof importantsummaries.l09 Located east of Naxos, Donousalies abouthalfway between Euboia and the Dodecanese.The Geometricsettlement, dating to the thirdquarter of the 9th centuryB.C., wasbuilt on a secureanchorage and has yielded material displaying influ- encesfrom other Cycladic islands, especially Naxos, but also Kos and Rhodes.l10Among the pottery recovered from the excavations on Donousa, a numberof largeGeometric amphoras have been illustrated in prelimi- narypublications and several are on displayin the Naxos(Chora) Mu- seum.Two belly-handled amphoras in particularare close to the Rhodian exampleillustrated above (Fig. 19), and both have double handles similar to thoseof P 14819.They are decorated with two registers: the respective shoulderregisters have mechanically drawn concentric semicircles, while theirbelly zones have filll concentric circles. One of these,inv. 4804 (Fig. 21),11lhas crosshatched panels in the centerof thebelly zone, with much

103.Kontoleon 1949, p. 12, fig.4; (Kourou,personal communication). Lambrinoudakis1983a; 1983b; cf. Lam- Coldstream1968, pp. 172-174,where 107.Jones 1986, p. 659.For brinoudakis1988; Kourou 1984; 1992; a numberof otherpieces, including EuboianEarly Iron Age potterysee 1994;1997; l999a. DelosXV, pl. 44, Bc 8, aregrouped Boardman1957; 1969; and, generally, 109. See Zapheiropoulou1970; aroundthe sameUpainter" See also LefkundiI, pp.27-79 (forEuboian 1971;1973a; 1973b; 1975. discussionin LefkandiI, pp. 74-76. PG-LG potteryfrom the settlement) 110.Zapheiropoulou 1994, p.231. 104. Coldstream1971. andpp.281-354 (forthe potteryfrom See furtherthe preliminaryreports in 105.Walter-Karydi 1972, esp. the cemetery);Coldstream 1977, ArchDelt,beginning in 1967,and n.109 pp.402-409. pp.192-195.It sufficesto statethat above. 106.Boardman 1969, p. 112;a num- AgoraP 14819cannot be Euboian. 111.Zapheiropoulou 1975, pl.473:y; berof scholarsstill subscribe to thisview 108.Zapheiropoulou 1983; 1994; 1994,p.249, fig.18. I78 JOHN K. PAPADOPOULOS AND EVELYN L. SMITHSON

Figure21 (left). EarlyGeometric belly-handledamphora, Donousa, of thelower body painted, whereas the other, inv.4538 (Fig.22), has short inv.4804. Courtesy Ph. Zapheiropoulou zigzags,or squiggles,alternating with the circleson thebelly zone.l12 The squigglesare similar but not identicalto thoseon P 14819.The more Figure22 (right).Early Geometric roundedform of Donousa4804 and 4538, together with their more elabo- belly-handledamphora, Donousa, ratedecoration, indicates that the vessels are earlier than Agora P 14819, inv.4538. Courtesy Ph. Zapheiropoulou probablycloser to the dateof Rhodes15533. Although the evidencefor the dateof thesevessels has not yet beenfully presented, the information providedin preliminaryreports indicates a 9th-centuryB.C. datefor these amphoras,and more specifically the thirdquarter of thatcentury.l13 The fabricof Donousa4804, as faras I couldjudge in the lightof the Naxos Museum,is palerthan that of AgoraP 14819,and contains less mica, whereasthe clay color of Donousa4538 varies from a palebrown through red.Parts ofthe lattermore closely resemble the fabric of AgoraP 14819, but the matchis not perfect;the sameis trueof otherpots from the is- .114

112.Zapheiropoulou 1970, pl. these(inv. 7905) is of a redfabric, the 401:a;1994, p.247, fig. lb. otherwith a morepale fired clay. Of 113.See Zapheiropoulou1994, similarfabric to the latteris a hydria p.231. (inv.4788, see Zapheiropoulou1973a, 114.A numberof relatedlarger pl. 367:a-d)and a shoulder-handled vesselsfrom Donousa are on displayin amphora(inv. 4543, see Zapheiro- the NaxosMuseum. These include two poulou1970, pl. 402:y),the latter largeneck-handled amphoras (inv. essentiallydark-ground, except for 7905 and4796) decorated with bands the concentricsemicircles on the not unlikesome of the Athenian shoulder. amphorasdepicted in Fig.15;one of _ a! S ' S i , If4>.ill_R S , S r

CULTURAL BIOGRAPHY OF A GEOMETRIC AMPHORA I79

t fS 7;rth -:L-ai t f X w- lF : ;9...-a=sam: i S k S m Ii ^ 1Sll r

S SE, . S l _ Figure23. Geometricbelly-handled amphora,probably from Syros; Athens, NationalMuseum, inv. 53. Scaleca. 1:6.Courtesy Museum

Amongthe vesselsthat I haveexamined, perhaps the closestin fa- bricto thatof AgoraP 14819is a solitaryamphora, now in the National Museumin Athens(inv. 53), whichis saidto be "probablyfrom Syros" (Fig.23). Originallypublished by SamWide,l15 the vesselwas fully de- scribedby Desborough,whose description of the vaseis worthciting in filll:

The clayis lightbrown and the paintchocolate-brown to red- brown.The bodyis slender-ovoidin shape,with the point of greatestdiameter set high;the footis low conical,coming away sharplyfrom the body; the neckis highand slim, rises abruptly 115.Wide 1897,p.245, fig. 16; Collignonand Couve 1902, p.26, andalmost vertically from the neck,and widens out at the top sectionVIII, no. 137,inv.2201 (53), intoan everted lip of theusual Class I typewith a flatrim. Over statedas beingfrom "Syra?" This was thisrim there are stripes; the neckis paintedover; the shoulder one of severalvases, said to be perhaps hassets of fullcircles (eight circles to eachset), and dividing them, fromSyros, including some Mycenaean exceptin onecase, groups of threevertical wiggly lines. Below the (seepp.26-27, nos. 136-138,142- 143). shoulder,one thin band, one very thick, and one thin; the same 116.Desborough 1952, pp.32-33; systembelow the belly; on thebelly, three sets of fullcircles between see alsop.212, whereDesborough the single-loophandles; these are connected by similargroups of reiteratesthat it "iscertainly later than wigglylines, now set horizontally;the usualpaint splashes go over anyAttic Protogeometric." It was the the handlesand down the lower body, which is left freeof paint. onlyvessel from Syros known to The heightis 0.572m. The contextof thevase is unknown;it is Desborough.Although the fabricof the amphorais describedby Desboroughas obviouslya laterdevelopment of a vasesuch as [Kerameikos]1089 "lightbrown," its firedcolor is not fromTomb 38, butit is not so veryfar from it in shape;the whole consistent(see below). schemeof decorationis Protogeometricin spirit.1l6 I80 JOHN K. PAPADOPOULOS AND EVELYN L. SMITHSON

Dl DY Ml

_, STRONGYLO

Figure24. Map of Syrosshowing some of the principalarchaeological sites. R. Finnerty

AlthoughAthens NM 53 is clearlySubprotogeometric, assigning a firmdate is farfrom straightforward. It is similarin bothshape and style to the two belly-handledamphoras from Donousa, especially inv. 4538, andits resemblanceto these,as well as Rhodes15533 and a numberof otheramphoras from Naxos, suggests a 9th-centuryB.C. date,more likely in the secondhalf of the century.Whatever its precisedate, its fabricis virtuallyidentical to thatof P 14819,particularly in the rangeand quan- tityof visibleimpurities and mica content. Its reservedsurfaces have fired colorsranging from red through a dullgray-brown, and the color and range ofthe dullpaint is alsosimilar. Smaller than P 14819,Athens NM 53 will befilllypublished byKourou in a forthcomingfascicle ofthe Corpus Vasorum Antiquorum.ll7A solitaryamphora supposedly from Syros would by itself be inadequateto establishthe island as the provenience of AgoraP 14819; recently,however, additional material has been discovered at Galessas(see below),which strengthens the attribution. Of allthe larger Cycladic islands, Syros (Fig. 24) is perhapsthe least 117.I amgrateful to Nota Kourou knownin termsof its Geometric,Archaic, and Classical history, despite fordiscussing this amphorawith me. thefact that the early prehistory of theisland is wellknown, thanks to the 118.Tsountas 1898; 1899. See also pioneeringwork of ChristosTsountas.1l8 The islandappears in Homer Bosanquet1895-1896; Bossert 1967; Hekrnan1994; and esp. Marthari 1998 briefly.In Odyssey15.403-414, for example, Homer has Eumaios, the swine- (withfurther references). The most herdof Ithake,describe his home as lying above Ortygia (Delos); an island recentoverview of the earlyCyclades is good for cattleand sheep, full of vineyardsand wheat raising. Eumaios by Broodbank(2000). CULTURAL BIOGRAPHY OF A GEOMETRIC AMPHORA I8I

mentionstwo cities,but theseare not named,and this has led to some speculationas to theirlocation.1l9 Whateverthe names and locations ofthe two cities ruled by Eumaios's father,Ktesios, the sitethat has to dateyielded the mostcopious evidence forhabitation during the Geometric period is Galessas(raRavag) on the westcoast of the island.l20Antiquities, primarily surface pottery ranging in datefrom the Geometricthrough Roman periods, were reported by AntonisManthos from the hilloverlooking the Bayof Galessas,near the smallchapel of AghiaPakou.l21 Among the mostnotable of the surface sherdswas one inscribed )ov@rpaso(v)-o(s-, in whatis clearlyearly epichoric.l22Systematic excavations at Galessas,especially in theotxowrAo KcxXta,since 1995 have been directed by the current Ephor of Prehistoric andClassical Antiquities of the Cyclades,Mariza Marthari.123 These ex- cavationshave uncovered a thrivingsettlement dating at leastfrom the Geometricperiod through the Classicalera and later. A largequantity of potteryhas been recovered from the site,much of whichis stratified.A localfabric used for the wheelmade and painted Geometric pottery is vir- tuallyidentical to the fabricof AgoraP 14819and Athens NM 53.124 Thereare even a numberof fragmentsof largehorizontal handles, un- doubtedlyfrom belly-handled amphoras or hydriai,of a size,shape, and decorationvery similar to thoseof P 14819.125 In additionto the wheelmadeand painted pottery, the site yielded largequantities of locallymade Geometric coarseware pottery, including pithoi,some of whichwere decorated. The quantityand quality of the importedpottery is not unlikethat of Zagoraon Andros.Among the

119. See discussionin RE IV,A, 2, further,ATL1,1939, p.553, s.v. appearsto be the neckand rim of a 1932,cols. 1789-1794, s.v. Syros Siuplol. Geometricoinochoe. (W. Zschietzschmann).The two cities 120.The nameGalessas as an 123.I amgrateful to Mariza aremost often equated with the ethnicis knownepigraphically; see Marthari,who waskind enough to modernSyros (Hermoupolis) on the RE IV,A,2, s.v.Syros (W. Zschietz- allowme to viewthe materialfrom the eastcoast and Poseidonia alsoknown schmann)and RE VII,1,1910, col. excavationsby the Ephoreiaof by its popularname Dellagrazia 601, s.v.Galessioi (oi ranOOlOl) Antiquitiesat Galessasin the Syros (immortalizedby MarkosVamvakaris's (L. Burchner).In IG II2,814a,lines 18- (Hermoupolis)Museum. songFrankosyriani)-on the southwest 19, thereis nameda certainIltolavrog 124.It is characterizedby a fired coast.There is alsothe moderntown of UplOt raBnoolos; note alsoHpmvrog colorof the claythat varies from red Phoinikas(@oivlxag) about a mile(less UplOt in IG II2,815.See further througha palelight brown. It contains than2 km)from Poseidonia, and Fraserand Matthews 1987, p.387, numerousinclusions of variouscolors, sharingthe sameharbor; Phoinikas and s.v.Iltomvrog (377-359 B.C.). withwhite predominating, and a great Poseidoniahave yielded traces of 121.Manthos 1979. The small dealof mica.The paintcan fire ancientsettlement. For the coinageof chapelof'Ayha Ilaxou fromIlavayla differentshades from red through Syros,dating from the 3rdto the 1st =' axourl is illustratedin Manthos black,with a reddishbrown being centuriesB.C. andlater, with the ethnic 1979,p.40,fig.1. standard.On someof the smaller (Y^,EY^P, EY^PI, or STPIQN, as weHas 122.The inscribedsherd is vessels,especially cups, the visible ZEQN KABEIPQN STPIQN), see illustratedin Manthos1979, p.46, impuritiesare fewer, but the mica Head 1911,pp. 491-492; for discussion fig.11. A photographof the inscription contentremains the same. of the locationof the "Kabeirion," wasshown to HenryImmerwahr, then 125.One of thesecomes from the see Manthos1979, pp. 42-45. Forthe Directorof the AmericanSchool of Kikiliaplot, trench VI, pass10, level 4. inscriptionsfrom the island,see IGXII, ClassicalStudies at Athens,who read Anotherfragment from the bodyof an 5, nos.652-713, with addendaon it as: )on,son of Therapontos. amphora,also from the Geometriclevel p. 335, testimoniaand notes on pp.xi- Accordingto my notestaken in the in trenchVI, musthave been from a xxii,and map on p. xxxi;IGXII, SyrosMuseum, the letterswere largeclosed vessel very similar to Supplementum,pp. 117-118.See inscribedon a fragmentof what P 14819. JOHN K. PAPADOPOULOS AND I82 EVELYN L. SMITHSON easilyidentified imports were Athenian, Corinthian, Euboian, and East Greek(including Rhodian) vessels; a varietyof islandfabrics, including severalpieces not easilyassigned to anyparticular workshop, were also found.The site alsoyielded smaller quantities of bronze,iron, and bone artifacts,as well as obsidian tools.l26 Of theEarly Iron Age materialthat I inspected,the majority is LateGeometric, though a numberof piecesshould be earlier,including Middle Geometric. Further details will be provided by the excavator,but what is crucialto stresshere is thatGalessas is an important,hitherto unknown, Geometric settlement. Moreover, it is a Geometricsettlement on anisland little known for its post-Early Cycladic antiquities.Located more or less in thegeographical center ofthe Cyclades, andwell situated with regard to communicationwith the Greek mainland, especiallyAttika,aswell as the islands ofthe archipelago,Syros must have playeda moreimportant role in the earlyhistory of the Cycladesthan is currentlyconceded. According to Homer(Od. 15.415-416), the island once ruledby Eumaios'sfather was alsofrequented by Phoenicians:"famous seafarers,gnawersatother men's goods.''l27The importance ofthis passage liesin thefact that it suggeststhe possibility that commodities including people fromthe Cyclades,and Syros in particular,may have been car- riedby middlemen,such as the Phoenicians. It shouldtherefore come as no surprisethat a largeamphora found slightlyto the northwestof the historiccenter of EarlyIron Age Athens derivesfrom the islandof Syros.This said,it is importantto stress,as aword of warning,that the identificationof AgoraP 14819 as beingof 126. "Syrian"manufacture must remain tentative. Future finds in one or other Forthe incidenceand use of of the less well knownislands of the obsidiantools in EarlyIron Age Aegean,or reanalysisof material contextsat Zagora, longknown, may well add see Runnels1988; newevidence to the storyof this remarkable forthe moregeneral use of flaked-stone amphora.l28 artifactsin Greecein historical contexts,see Runnels1982. 127.For a criticallook at Homer's ISLANDERS IN EARLY ATHENS: TOWARD A Phoenicians,see Winter 1995. PREHISTORY OF 128.Had I not comeacross the METICS amphorafrom Syros now in the NationalMuseum, or hadI finished Inthe foregoing discussion I suggested that Agora P 14819 camefrom the thisarticle several years ago, I probably Cyclades,probably Syros, that its date is LateGeometric, and that it served wouldhave been content to assign atone time as a funeraryvase. Against this backdrop, it is temptingto ask, AgoraP 14819to eitherNaxos followingSmithson or,more firstof all,about the nature ofthe tomb.Thecontext ofthe vase,or rather likely, ofits fragmentsas Donousa. found,suggests that it wasdisturbed by the builders of 129.Domestic and industrial theHephaisteion fromits not-so-ultimateresting place in a tomb.This depositsprior to the 8th centuryB.C. in impressionis supported by the veryshape of the vessel,since the belly- Athensare known largely from well or handledamphora in Athensappears to be exclusivelyfunerary or, at least, pitdeposits. The few fragmentsof belly-handled thisis the casewith thoseexamples that are complete.l29 The verylarge amphorasfrom such versionof the contextscome from dumped filling that belly-handledamphora, with a heightof ca.0.50 m,while included,in occasionally additionto industrial usedas a cineraryurn, especially in EarlyProtogeometric and debrissuch as potters'waste, cemetery againin EarlyGeometric II andMiddle Geometric I, seemsmore com- refuse,which is plentifulin mostparts monlyto havestood over the graveas a marker,or elsewas used in other ofthe areaof the laterAthenian Agora; aspectsof funeraryritual. By LateGeometric the shapehad disappeared seePapadopoulos 1996; Papadopoulos, fromthe Attic repertory, apart from the giant "Dipylon forthcoming. amphoras,"which 130. See Coldstream1968, pp.29- wouldthemselves be goneby LateGeometric II.130 The possibilitythat 90. CULTURAL BIOGRAPHY OF A GEOMETRIC AMPHORA I83

P 14819once served as a funerarymarker cannot be dismissed.The fact, however,that so muchof the amphorawas found indicates that its useas a markeris lesslikely.13l The use of P 14819as a cineraryurn also seems problematic,since the rite of cremationdropped from favor after the close of MiddleGeometric I andwas relatively rare in LateGeometric, when metalurns seem to havebeen preferred by those who could afford them.132 It is unlikely,therefore, that P 14819,though of a once-popularurn type, wouldhave been so usedby anyAthenian still practicing cremation. Afterreviewing Cycladic island burial ritual, Smithson concluded a decadeago thatP 14819was similarlyunlikely to havebeen used as a cremationurn by an Aegean islander residing in Athens.133She noted that althoughthe practiceof cremationstill continued, the normalcustom in manyof the Cycladicislands, and specifically Naxos, was not to parcelup humanremains and personal valuables in anurn in quitethe sameway as inAthens. She therefore leaned toward the beliefthat itwould seem equally improbablethat a Cycladicvisitor or immigrantto Athenswould have turnedto a riteunfamiliar in his or herhomeland, and to one no longer practicedin Athens. It hasto be stressed,however, that Cycladic island funerary ritual is extremelydiverse.134This is often the case even on individualislands, such asNaxos, where the standard inhumation tombs of coastalNaxia (Chora)135 cannoteasily be reconciledwith the idiosyncratic burial customs at Tsika- larioin theinterior ofthe island,which accord with Macedonian tradition morethan centralor southernGreek traditions.136 Elsewhere in the Cyclades,where cremation was practiced, the rite was rarely performed in the sameway as in Athens.For example, Theran cremations were usually in familytombs, where several urns would be placedin a chambertomb; a similarpractice was followed in otherDorian islands, including Crete and Kimolos.137In the IonianCyclades, particularly in the northernCycladic islandssuch as Tenos, Andros, Rheneia, and parts of Naxos,inhumation appearsto havebeen generally preferred.l38 On theislet of Donousathere aretwo large pyre deposits, one over7.0 m long,presumably with multi- plecremations, if human bodies were indeed cremated there.139 At Paroi- kiaon ParosZapheiropoulou has recently excavated two remarkable large masstombs, referred to aspolyandreia, in whichnumerous amphoras- primarily,if not exclusively, neck-handled amphoras eachcontained the

131.The possibilitythat the 133.Unpublished notes. 137.Coldstream 1968, p. 186;Kurtz amphorastood as a gravemarker more 134. See,for example,Kurtz and andBoardman 1971, pp. 177-178.For or lessundisturbed on the Kolonos Boardman1971, pp. 177-179. Kimolossee Mustakas 1954-1955; Agoraiosuntil the timeof the construc- 135. See,most recently, Kourou's Courbin1954, p. 146,figs. 41-44 for tion of the Hephaisteion-aperiod of meticulousreview of burialcustoms in the cemeteryat Limni(Hellenika); see over250 years seemsremote. the SouthCemetery of Naxos:Kourou alsoColdstream 1977, p. 91. 132.For a usefuloverview of 1999a,pp. 141-182. 138. See Kurtzand Boardman 1971, AthenianEarly Iron Age burial 136.For the cemeteryat Tsikalario, p. 179;Snodgrass 1971, p. 159.For customs,see Wiesner 1938; Snodgrass see Doumas1965; Papadopoulou- goodillustrations of inhumationcist 1971,pp. 140-212;Kurtz and Zapheiropoulou1968. See alsothe tombson Tenos,see Levi 1925-1926. Boardman1971, pp. 21-67; overviewsin Kurtzand Boardman 139. See especiallyColdstream Desborough1972, pp. 268-277; 1971,p. 179;Snodgrass 1971, pp. 156- 1977,pp. 91-92; see further Coldstream1977, passim; Krause 1975; 157, 195;Coldstream 1977, pp. 92, Zapheiropoulou1970;1973a; 1975. Morris1987. 375. I84 JOHN K. PAPADOPOULOS AND EVELYN L. SMITHSON crematedremains of anindividual.l40 Elsewhere at Paroikia both inhuma- tionand cremation tombs are found,14l and at Melosthe plunderedcem- eteryat Trypiti appears to havecontained cremation tombs.142 The recent excavationsat the site of Minoaon Amorgosby Marangouhave uncov- eredcremation pyres, in additionto a solitarypot inhumation,ironically in a largebanded neck-handled amphora.143 In the lightof the morere- centevidence for Cycladic Early Iron Age graves, and in viewof ourlack of knowledgeof burial customs in manyindividual islands, including Syros, it wouldbe hazardousto venturegeneralizations or to speculateon the basisof negativeevidence. Be thatas it may,P 14819does seem an unusu- alvessel for a cremationurn in thecontext of LateGeometric Athens and alternativepossibilities are worth exploring, especially the common occur- renceof LateGeometric pot-inhumation. 'Encvxps,uog,pot-burial of unburnedbodies, first appears in post- BronzeAge timesin Attikain LateProtogeometric. It is limitedto in- fants,as opposed to children,and appears to bethe primary archaeologically visiblerite attestedfor themat the time.144The commoncooking am- phora,with an averageheight of about0.40 m, oftenfire-stained from presumablydomestic use, is the standardcontainer. The few skeletalre- mainsthat have been analyzed from such burials are from premature or newbornbabies. Although no infant burialshave been reported from the earlierphases of Geometric,145Late Geometric examples are numerous.146 A totalof 39 pot burialsfrom the Agora,the Kerameikos,and the cemeteryon theAcropolis South Slope near the Odeion inspire a number of interestingobservations.147 There is diversityin the shapeand size of thecontainer, and while newborns or premature babies predominate, there area few olderinfants and perhaps even a youngchild or two.148The distinctionbetween "infant" and "young child" is, of course,a grayarea,

140. Theseawait publication. I am 1974,p. 373. Childgraves through the Agora,there is an individualaged gratefulto YannosKourayos for bring- EarlyIron Age arediscussed more fully sixteenmonths at death,another aged ing theseremarkable tombs to my in Haentjens'dissertation (in prep.). eighteenmonths, and a thirdaged three attention. 146. See Haentjens1999. Various yearsand nine months. The relevant 141. See Snodgrass1971, p.157. interpretationshave been suggested for gravesare Agora B 21:10,Areiopagos 142. Smith1895-1896, esp.pp. 70- thisincrease. For drought, famine, ValleyCemetery grave 1 (Young1951a, 71; Coldstream1977, pp.91,210. disease,and infant mortality, see Camp pp.82-83: Late Geometric IIb); and 143. Marangou1993, esp.p. 207, 1979,pp. 399-401; for alternative G 12:14,Tholos Cemetery grave IX fig. 7:a-, pl.125:p, forthe banded interpretations,see Morris1987; also (Young1939, pp. 36-41: LateGeomet- amphora;the burialcustoms of Minoa Papadopoulos1993. ricIIb), which contained a newborn arediscussed in detailin Marangou, 147.This figureis basedon a andthe infantor young child. The in prep.I amgrateful to Professor minimumnumber of fairlycertain burialcontainer of the latteris a large Marangoufor giving me a copyof her childgraves. The Agoragraves will be pithos,with a heightof 0.80 m, but still

. . . . manuscnptprlor to pu) lcatlon. discussedmore fully in a forthcoming smallerthan the largestsuch vessel used 144. Forthe distinctionbetween volumein theAthenian Agora series; in anAttic tomb, which is probably infantsand children, which is an see alsoCamp 1979, p. 400, n. 10;the thatfrom Odeion Cemetery grave VIII importantone, see Papadopoulos2000, Kerameikostombs include Kerameikos (H. 1.035m). It shouldbe addedthat p. 111.For an ongoingstudy of child V.l,graves46,51-53,64-68,85,97, a numberof EarlyIron Age pithoi graves,especially in EarlyIron Age 100.For the cemeteryon the Acropolis fromdomestic contexts elsewhere in Athens,see Haentjens1999, though SouthSlope near the Odeion,hence- the Greekworld are considerably someof the assumptionsconcerning forththe "OdeionCemetery," see larger:one fromTorone was, in its the sexingof childgraves on the basis Charitonides1975. originalstate, probably over 2.0 m high; of kterismataare questionable. 148.Of the relevantskeletal remains see Cambitoglouand Papadopoulos 145. See the discussionin Smithson thathave been analyzed from the 1994,pl. 21, no. 5. CULTURAL BIOGRAPHY OF A GEOMETRIC AMPHORA I85

thoughin the case of ClassicalAthens it is a distinctionthat maybe reasonablyset at the ageof threeyears.l49 Be thatas it may,smaller burial containerswere broken to admitthe body, and the same appears to be the casefor many,if not most,of the largercontainers.150 A clear preference existedfor the latter: 22 ofthe 39 containersare over 0.50 m tall,and 13 of themare over 0.65 m. The mostcommon shape was the neck-handled amphora,accounting for 23 ofthe 39 containers.Its popularity, in alllike- lihood,was due to its beingone of the commonAthenian shapes (apart fromthe bully coarsepithos) that tended during the secondhalf of the 8thcentury to bevery large, providing ample room for the body of thede- ceasedand any accompanying kterismata. Particularly favored in theOdeion Cemeterywere large transport jars, the antecedentsand close relatives of the SOSamphoras that became common in Subgeometrictimes.15l Againstsuch a backdrop, Agora P 14819fits well in thecluster of very largeburial containers. Even though its shapeis exoticin Athensat this time,its size recommendsit. Whateverthe shortcomingsof its decora- tion,it wasmore elaborately decorated than the contemporary pithoi used asburial pots, and its deformedmouth (see above) would not have greatly mattered.152Its fragmentarystate preserves no clearevidence of inten- tionalbreakage for the purposeof burial,but even without such breakage the mouthof the amphorawould have been wide enough (0.203 m) to admitthe skulland body of aninfant and any of the morecommon burial gifts.l53 The evidencefor Agora P 14819presented above is largelycircum- stantial.We havea largefragmentary amphora, best assigned to the Late Geometricperiod, which seems to havebeen used in a tomb,perhaps, thoughnot conclusively,for the inhumationof an infant.What remains beyonddoubt is thatthe vessel was imported to Athens,with the island of Syrosproviding, at present, the strongest case for its origin.Against such a backdrop,it is importantto stressthat Cycladic imports to Athensin the EarlyIron Age areexceedingly rare. As Brannnoted: "Roughly speaking, in the 8thcentury the Athenians exported pottery, in the7th century they imported.''154Buteven in the7th century B.C., Cycladicimports to Athens aremost unusual.155 For the Protogeometric and Geometric periods, Emil Kunzebriefly mentioned a numberof exportsof CycladicGeometric pot- tery,including examples exported to Athens,and the quantity ofthese was

149.Papadopoulos 2000, p. 111. 151.For these, see Johnston and diameterof the neckof P 14819. 150.In somecases the breakwas Jones1978; Docter 1991; Papadopoulos 154.Agora VIII, p. 27; forthe neatlyexecuted so thatthe broken andPaspalas 1999. exportof Athenianpottery in the 8th segmentcould be easilyreplaced (e.g., 152. Smithsonliked to referto century,see alsoKerameikos V.1, TholosCemetery grave X, Young1939, the decorationof AgoraP 14819as pp.283-298. pp.42-44), butin othercases such ahomely." 155.Apart from P 14819,there is neatnesswas either avoided or not 153.In orderto test thatthe onlyone fragmentof a wheelmadeand achieved.The widermouth of coarse diameterof the neckof the amphora paintedvessel from the Agorathat is pithoimade fracture unnecessary (e.g., wassufficient to accommodatethe skull perhapsCycladic (Agora VIII, p. 106, Agoragraves B 21:10and G 12:14). of an infant,Smithson took a seriesof pl. 41, no. 658, datingto the late7th Priordamage to a vesselmay well have measurementsof the craniumof Carl centuryB.C.; the fragmentmay be East favoredits selectionas a burial Mauzyat variousstages throughout his Greek)and two possible,but uncertain, container;on this aspect,see further firstyear of life in 1988.All of these decoratedpithos fragments (Agora VIII, Papadopoulos1998, pp. 115-116. measurementswere well below the p. 101,pl. 40, nos.605-606). I86 JOHN K. PAPADOPOULOS AND EVELYN L. SMITHSON

slightlyswelled by HumfryPayne on the basisof unpublishedfragments fromthe Athenian Acropolis.156 Apart from these examples, few imports fromthe Cycladesto Athensare known. It is, therefore,all the moresur- prisingto findsuch a massiveamphora as P 14819in Athens.How did thisamphora make its wayto Athensin the LateGeometric period? Anynumber of possibilitiescan be entertained.Of the many,the two that mostoften appear in the literatureare trade and gift-exchange. In discussingthe presence of large Athenian amphoras at Knossos,Coldstream notedthat these were not likely"tohave been hawked overseas by casual traders.''157Indeed, Agora P 14819does not appearto be partof anypar- ticularconsignment. It is, forexample, not partof anycoordinated set of drinkingor banquet crockery, such as drinking cups and other vessels, eas- ily stackedand transported.158 The Athenianimported pottery in one of theKnossian tombs,Tekke tombJ, consisted of a"dinnerset" of 26 vases.159 In a similarvein, it is not a standardcommodity container, such as the northAegean neck-handled amphora found in quantityat Troy and ex- portedas far af1eld as Bassit-Posidaion in North Syria.160 Had it servedas a commoditycontainer for Cycladic oil orwine, one would expect to find moresuch vessels on the Greekmainland. Moreover, as a "one-off" a hapaxin EarlyIron Age Athens, P 14819is difficultto placewithin the frameworkof the broadereconomic processes at workin the Mediterra- neanin the earlyfirst millennium B.C., whichhave been effectively ex- ploredby Andrew and Susan Sherratt, as well as Ian Morris.l61 Perhapsthe explanationof exchangemechanisms in the EarlyIron Age Mediterraneanthat has loomed largest in recentstudies is gift-ex- change.This topic, particularly gift-relations between elites, has been well exploredby a numberof scholars.l62Alternative scenarios stress ceremo- nialexchange involving sanctuaries, whether commodities were dedicated

156.Kunze 1931, p.262, n.58, semicircleskyphos, is moreat home 160.For these amphoras, see mentions:aTheraische Scherbe von der elsewhere,particularly in Euboiaand Catling1998b; Lenz, Ruppenstein, Akropolis"(= Graefand Langlotz the Cyclades,the two examplesfrom Baumann,and Catling 1998; Courbin 1925,p.31, no.312;Gauss and the Kerameikosdo not appearto be 1993,for fragments of suchamphoras Ruppenstein1998, p.34, pl. 7, no.2). imported.Desborough (1952, p. 118, at Bassit;for the lattersite, see further In his reviewof Kunze1931, Payne pl. 12) notednothing unusual about Courbin1990. (1933,p. 123)noted: aExport of them,and assumed them to be Attic. 161.Sherratt and Sherratt 1993; Cycladicgeometric pottery: there are Of the two,I hadoccasion to inspect alsoSherratt and Sherratt 1991; Morris otherTheran,and some Siphnian, one in the storeroomsof the 1986.For the BronzeAge, Knappand geometricor probablygeometric sherds KerameikosMuseum, and there is Cherry1994 is particularlyuseful. fromthe Acropolis(unpublished), and nothingin my notesto indicatea 162.See, e.g., Coldstream 1983; Theranand other Cycladic from provenienceother than Athens. For the cf. Coldstream1986; 1989; 1994; Perachora."See furtherGauss and pendantsemicircle plate, see also 1995;Morris 1986; Rupp 1988; 1989; Ruppenstein1998, p.34, pl. 7, nos.1- Gjerstad,Calvet, Yon, Karageorghis, Colonna1995. More recently, Crielaard 2, who discussand illustrate both the andThalman1977, p.25, nos.18-27, (1993,p. 145)has argued that virtually Theranfragments from the Athenian pl. II:2-12;Popham 1994, p.27, fig. allof the GreekEarly Iron Age pottery Acropolisand the fragmentof a Cretan 2.12. foundon Cyprusand in the coastal "pithos."Here it is alsoworth mention- 157.Coldstream 1995, p. 401;also Levantcan be explainedthrough gift- ing twopendant semicircle plates Coldstream1990. relationsbetween Euboian and local publishedin KerameikosI, pl.52, T 29, 158.C£ the existenceof such elites,an argumentthat has been taken inv.590;Kerameikos IV, pl.34, inv. Athenianpottery sets at Knossos; to extremes;see Papadopoulos1997a, 1265.Although the shape,which is Coldstream1995, p. 400. p.l99. normallyassociated with the pendant 159.Coldstream 1995, p. 400. CULTURAL BIOGRAPHY OF A GEOMETRIC AMPHORA I87

as diplomaticgifts or prizes accumulated by wandering heroes, as well as "gift-exchange"betweenrulers and deities or even the importation of ritual equipmentspecifically for cult purposes.l63 In all of theseexplanations in- volvingtrade orgift-exchange, it is usuallythecommodityitselfthat moves. Humanagency is relegatedto thebackground, or elseseen as indirect. For example,in dealingwith the largeamphoras imported to Knossosfrom Athensand the Cyclades,already noted, Coldstream concluded that they makemore sense as giftsbetween guest friends in Athens,Knossos, and the Cyclades.164Once the giftswere exchanged or the votivededicated, the socialactors involved withdrew. It wouldbe wrong,however, to identifyP 14819too quicklyas a gift exchangedbetween an Athenian and Cycladic family. Its contextis such thatit is difficultto picturethe vessel- or,for that matter, any pot- in the contextof gift-exchangesbetween elites or guestfriends. If the evidence of Homercan be trusted,gift-exchange in theLate Bronze and Early Iron Age Mediterraneaninvolved items of realvalue: gold, silver and bronze vessels,jewelry, objects of ivory,precious stone and faience, as well as live- stock,such as horsesor cattle,and human slaves.165 The arichAthenian lady"of the Areiopagoswas rich not becauseof the manypots that were buriedwith her, but because of hergold and bronze jewelry, her necklace madeof faienceand glass beads, as well as theivory stamp seals and disk amongother exotic kterismata.166 Moreover, if P 14819was used to con- tainan infantinhumation, it is importantto rememberthat such burials were,more often than not, madein usedcooking pots, in transportor 163.The bibliographyon this subjectis growing;see de Polignac storagevessels, not in containersof intrinsicvalue. Furthermore, the con- 1984;1992; 1994; Langdon 1987; textof P 14819would argue against ceremonial exchange involving sanc- Zaccagnini1987; Kyrieleis and Rollig tuaries,though such an explanationmight contribute toward an under- 1988;Muscarella 1989; Str0m 1992; standingof the Cycladicimports found on theAthenian Acropolis.167 Catling1995, pp.127-128; In herattempt to makesense of P 14819,Smithson leaned toward an Papadopoulos1997a, esp. p. l99. 164.Coldstream 1990, p.30; 1993; interpretationthat took into accountall aspectsof the life historyof the 1995,p.401. amphora,its culturalbiography.l68 This was, after all, a massivedamaged 165.E.g., Od. 17.441-444;see andrepaired pot thatwas finallyused in a burial,far from its placeof furtherPapadopoulos 1997a, pp. l99- origin.It appearsto haveserved various functions and to havebeen, to a 200. certainextent, or at certaintimes, prized. In the sameway that Smithson 166. See Smithson1968, esp. pls. personalizedthe wealthy tomb on theAreiopagos as thatof a richAthe- 30-33;Morris and Papadopoulos, forthcoming. nianlady-the daughter,conceivably, of apentakosiomedimnos, perhaps even 167.Gauss and Ruppenstein 1998, an archon'swife, the yovN 'Atotoxxptoovos of theAthenian aking list"l69- so p.34. toodid she attempt to personalizeP 14819. She saw a person-awoman- 168. See above,n.5. accompanyingthe amphora,or, rather the amphoraaccompanying the 169.Smithson 1968, p. 83. woman.Smithson favored the ideaof a marriage,not at theafrontiersn of 170.Cf. Coldstream1993. 171.S ee furtherBurkert 1984; the earlyGreek world,170 but in the veryheart of Greece.The amphora Purcell1990; Morris 1992a; Morris wasseen as partof a dowryof a youngCycladic woman, or partof the 1992b,pp. xvii-xviii; Sherratt and domesticchattels, the objetsmobiliers of a Cycladicmetic family a large Sherratt1993; Papadopoulos 1997a, potperhaps ultimately used to holdthe remains of a deceasedoffspring. In p.207. so doing,Smithson visualized a realitOrwith fluid boundaries, one which 172.For "involuntary colonization" allowednot onlyfor the movementof goodsand people see Fernandez-Armesto1995, p.269; ideas,but of as fortrade diasporas, see Cohen1969; well.l71She envisioned people moving with goods, not aspart of anypre- 1971.See filrtherLyons and determinedcolonizing enterprise, whether voluntary or involuntary,nor, Papadopoulos2002. necessarily,as partof anygreater trade or otherdiaspora.172 I88 JOHN K. PAPADOPOULOS AND EVELYN L. SMITHSON

Immigrantcommunities were a realityof the Classicalpolis, and one of the factorsthat contributed to the successof variousGreek cities, in- cludingCorinth and Athens.173 Several -oikos words are attested for such immigrants,with metoikosthe mostcommon. As DavidWhitehead has argued,wlth the reformsof Solonhaving created only indirect incentives to immigration,Athenian metic status probably owes its formalorigins to Kleisthenes.l74The canonicalview of meticsin Athenson the basisof literarysources is mostsuccinctly stated by Helen Pope in her1935 disser- tation:

. . . the meticswere a partof theglory that was Athens. Solon gave thefranchise to xots7taV£C=tOLt'A0NVa4£ £X06Xt40F£VOLt £zt T£XVn (Plutarch,Solon 24), Kleisthenes7r0XA0vs £9V£X£VO£ i£VOVt zax aOVXOVt £X06X0Vt (Aristotle,Politics 1275B 36), and rumor has it thatThemistokles granted immunity from taxation to metics (DiodorosM.43.3). Xenophon advocated methods to attractthem (Revenues2.1), Isokrates hoped that olo,urOa 8£ mV ZOLV . . .

\ ffi\ o X o \ w o \ o - £V O£ rtpO£VNV £F=0t0ZV zat t£V@V zat £X06XXV, XV VVV £t0N! Xa0£X£V (On Peace21), andthe mostfamous of A metics, Lysias,said of themov xaxaxo 7rt00cn7xov £aVT065 £t0N0NAaV TZ 8N (AgainstPhilon 20).175

One of the earliest,and certainly most vivid, monuments in Athens relatingto a metoikos-specificaSlyonefrom the Cyclades-isthe inscrip- tion blockfrom the gravemonument of Anaxilasof Naxos(Fig. 25).176 Foundin thesouth tower of theDipylon Gate, and dating to ca.510 B.C., the blockis roughlycontemporary with the reformsof Kleisthenes.Its Cycladichonorand, however, must have resided in Athensfor some years before.The inscription,as originallypublished, reads:

aaXtOVO£V ZOXV=£V0£5 AvaxoxBa £8 oXovivavov Baxov £UOT£Xa fV£a XaTa906F£lVO: NaXOLooM Tt£aX0V A0£VatOt £X£0CXOV £XlOOXa OO9tOOOVV£5 £V£X£V £8 atO£X£5: 173.Whitehead 1984, esp. p.59. Forforeigners in Rome,see nowNoy T0t ,U' £7rt TC,ulo,uaxog y£oatoov xT£oat ota Oavovxt 2000. 0£X£V AltoLoMo5 wax8x xatoL4o£votl77 174.Whitehead 1977; 1984; see alsoWhitehead's lucid summary in Here I stand, fraught with grief, sorrow, and lamentation, the OCD3,p.969, s.v.metics. See alsoClerc monument of the deceased Anaxilas, the Naxian immigrant whom 1893;Gauthier 1972. Athenians esteemed outstandingly for his prudence and virtue. 175.Pope 1935, p. 46. 176.Willemsen 1963; SEG XXII, Timomachos erected this majestic funerary gift (y£oatoov z£oag) as 79;IG I3,1357;Baba 1984; Bakewell a kindness to the son of Ariston, who had died.l78 1997,p. 221. 177.Athenian Kerameikos, inv. In this inscription, the critical word, £X£06X0V, has been variously I.388: Willemsen1963, pp.141-145, interpreted and requires some explanation. Whitehead, following Wil- Beil.72,2 and73,3, fromthe south towerof the DipylonGate. lemsen's original reading, was dubious of the historical value of private 178.The Englishtranslation is my tombstones as evidence for metic studies, and he concluded that the term own. was descriptive and that itwas used in a "non-technical"way.l79 Keiji Baba, 179.Whitehead 1977, p.64, n. 44; however, established that the reading meteoikoswas wrong, and that the Bakewell1997, p. 221. CULTURAL BIOGRAPHY OF A GEOMETRIC AMPHORA I89

Figure25. Funeraryinscription from the monumentof Anaxilasof Naxos, stonecutterengraved Athenian at first 1lzzoocov,but latercorrected it Kerameikos,inv. I. 388. 1lzTaoocov.l80 to read CourtesyDeutsches Babawent on to statethat immigrants were Archaologisches butwere calledmetaoikoi, Institut,Athens onlydefacto inhabitants of Atheniansociety, and grant that"an immi- enjoyedthere no better legal position than xenoi in recently, general.''l8lMore GeoffreyBakewell, in dealingwith the metoikia in the Aiskhylos,noted Supplicesof thatthe use of theterm in thecase of Anaxilas hadmore to do with probably his burialplace than with his statusin life.And concluded:"In the he Ceramicushe will lie amongthe Atheniansforever; onlyin thissense has he shiftedresidence.''l82 In all of theseanalyses, the focushas been, narrowly, onestablishing the first incontrovertible evidence ofmetoikia to mean, technically,a '

An oldergeneration, accustomed to seeingPhoenicians everywhere, regardedthem as thebearers of Orientalculture to Greece.For them,Melikertes, the herowhose tomb was shown at theIsthmus, wasMelkarth; the cultof Aphrodite,with its sacredprostitutes, was of Phoenicianorigin; Medea also and the cultof HeraAkraia, with its humansacrifice implied in the slaughterof Medea'schildren, werePhoenician. Athena was worshipped at Corinthwith the title Phoinike[Schol. Lyc. 658; Steph. Byz. s.v. <>otvtxatov], for what thatis worth;and there was a monthPhoinikaios at Corinthand in Corinthiancolonies. These Oriental elements, more strongly concentratedat Corinththan elsewhere in the Greekworld, must havebeen introduced now, in the secondhalf of the eighthcentury, whenCorinth's commerce expands and orientalizing influences appearin herart. Whether they imply that men from Phoenicia or Syriasettled at Corinthmay be debated.l94

The evidencein ourliterary sources for resident aliens, including the veryarticulation of wordssuch as metoikos,is mostabundant and clear for ClassicalAthens. It is, therefore,no surpriseto findgrowing evidence for metics asin immigrantsin thepre-Classical city. In his publicationof a Corinthianizingbowl made in Athens,Dunbabin cogently argued that thevessel was made by a Corinthianpotter who emigratedto Athens.l95 Dunbabinplaced the bowlat the headof a Corinthianizingcurrent that

187. Coldstream1995, p. 401. mos,see especiallythe SteleShrine, 194.Dunbabin 1948, p. 66. 188.Popham and Lemos 1995. publishedin Shaw1989. 195.Dunbabin 1950. The bowl 189.Coldstream 1988, p.30; 191.Hoffman 1997, esp. pp.153- is madeof Athenianclay and was Hoffman(1997, pp. 191-245)discus- 189,252-260. decoratedby a pottertrained in the ses the identityof the occupantof this 192.Morris and Papadopoulos workshopof the CorinthianSphinx tombin somedetail. Cf. Burkert1983. 1998. Painter;see Dunbabin1950, p. 194 190.For Eleutherna, see especially 193.Morris and Papadopoulos (the attributionwas originally made Stampolides1990a; 1990b. For Kom- 1998,p.257. byPayne). CULTURAL BIOGRAPHY OF A GEOMETRIC AMPHORA I9I

reachedits heightin the secondquarter of the 6th centuryB.C. Following Plutarch(Sol. 24), Dunbabinwent on to placethe bowland its maker againstthe backdropof Solon'soffer of Atheniancitizenship to immi- grantswho came to practicea trade.l96Here was straightfonvard evidence, not for the movementof pots,but for the relocationof the peoplewho madethe pots. More recently,further evidence has come to light for Corinthianpottery production, by way of a kilndating to thelater 8th and 7thcentury B.C., in theheart ofthe EarlyIronAge Athenian Kerameikos, inthe area that was to becomethe Classical Agora of thecity.l97 Corinthians, however,were not the onlyemigre potters in Athens.Brann commented on severalProtoattic potters, and considered them either as foreignersor, at least,well traveled. She wrote:

The RamJug Painter shows some signs of havinglearned abroad aboutsuch things as Cycladicoutline protomes and the useof brownpaint, but one likes to thinkof himas anAthenian, albeit a traveler.The PolyphemosPainter, on the otherhand, was an Aeginetan,or at leasthe workedin Aegina.l98

In discussingthe strong Cycladic influence on Protoattic pottery, Brann wenton to notethe generalabsence of contemporaryCycladic pottery in Athensand concluded that "the explanation must be thatthe pottersand notthe pottery traveled.''l99 Indeed, there is a longlist of potterswho mi- gratedboth to andfrom Athens, particularly during the Archaic and Clas- sicalperiods.200 The mobilityof potters,and other artisans, can be traced backat least as early as the Late Bronze Age on theevidence of theLinear B tablets.20lIf the RamJug Painter was a meticor xenos in Athenshe was, perhaps,not the firstto boasta Cycladicancestry. Kenneth Sheedy has cogentlyargued that the Parian Ad Painterworked in Athensat the end of the8th century s.c.202 More specifically, Sheedy suggests that the Ad Painter learnedto decoratevases in theWorkshop of theWurzburg Group, and thathe wasalso aware of the workof the AnalatosPainter.203 The latter, one of the greatpioneers of the Protoatticstyle, may have spent the later partof hisworking career producing pottery at the settlement at Incoronata in the choraof the latercity of Metapontionin SouthItaly, according to the penetratinganalysis of MartineDenoyelle.204 The evidenceof emigrepotters to EarlyIron Age Athens may repre- sentthe tip of a largeiceberg, given the tenacityof potteryto survivein abundancein mostarchaeological contexts. Moreover, it is importantto stressthat not all residentaliens were craftspersons, let alonepotters. In

196.Dunbabin 1950, pp. 196,200. Aiginetanorigin of muchof the aPro- trainedin the AthenianKerameikos. 197.Papadopoulos 1996; toattic"Black and White stylehas been 200. Fulldetails in Papadopoulos, Papadopoulos,forthcoming. mostfully argued by SarahMorris forthcoming. 198.Agora VIII, p. 24. Indeed,the (1984),though several scholars continue 201. Papadopoulos1997b. RamJug, the name-vaseof the RamJug to believethat this potterlived and 202. Sheedy1985, pp. 170,173, 189- Painter,was assumed to be Aiginetan workedin Athens;see especiallyWalter- 190. whenit firstappeared, and scholars such Karydi1997; Kyrkou 1997, esp. p. 432. 203. Sheedy1985, pp. 189-190. as Pfuhl,Payne, Beazley, and Dunbabin 199.Agora VIII, p. 28. Brannalso 204. Denoyelle1996. See alsothe doubtedwhether it wasAttic (seeMor- citedSchweitzer's (1955, p. 105)view caseof the laterPisticci Painter, one of ris 1984,p. ix,with pl. 10 forthe Ram thatthe painterof the Aristonothos the pioneersof the Lucanianred- Jug [AiginaMuseum 566]). The kraterwas a travelingAttic potter,once figurestyle (Denoyelle 1997). I92 JOHN K. PAPADOPOULOS AND EVELYN L. SMITHSON

Peace296-298, Aristophanes calls upon a wholeslew of foreignersand tradesmen:

aBA', Ct)yzct)oyot xaywotoat xat rxxovzS xat 8N,utoutoyotxat ,urxotxotxat ,zvot

\ R 1, R / o xat vatcoxat, 8zoto x, 6 wavrg Arx

Youfarmers and merchants and carpenters andcraftsmen and immigrants and foreigners andislanders, come here, all you people, as quickas you can.205

Someof theseforeigners, like Anaxilas, were highly esteemed for their prudenceand virtue; in latertimes, such a deservingmetic could become an isSteles.206 The funerarymonument of Anaxilasfurther establishes that theword metoikos-or more accurately metaoikos-does not first appear in the secondquarter of the5th centuryB.C., ashas been suggested in earlier studies,207but can be tracedback at least to thelate 6th century B.C. More to the point,the veryquantity of foreignersliving and dying in historic Athensand the Piraeusthat can be tracedarchaeologically, through the evidenceof funeraryinscriptions and iconography, as well as ourliterary sources,is staggering.208Ktesikles' figures for the timeduring the ascen- dancyofDemetriosof Phaleronin thelate 4th century B.C. include21,000 Atheniansand 10,000 metoikoi.209 For the construction ofthe Erechtheion a centuryearlier, metic workrnen outnumbered the citizenworkrnen and civicof ficials by a ratioof almost2:1, if theErechtheion building accounts areaccurate.2l0 Although the evidence for the size of themetic population in Athensin earliertimes is meagerand controversial,2llthe surviving literatureon residentaliens alone attests their importance in thesocial and economicfabric of the city.

205. J. Henderson,trans., Loeb the Erechtheion,three sculptors, 17 p. 204, table3) addsPhyla and Sema- edition(1998). workmen,and three civic officials, as chidai(the largest concentration of 206. Forthe isotelesand isoteleia, see opposedto 38 metics,four of whom metics,12, livedin Melite).For the in- Whitehead1977, pp. 11-13. weresculptors. The meticswere scriptionsassociated with the construc- 207. SeeWhitehead 1977, p. 7. distributedacross several of the demes, tion of the Erechtheion,see Stevens 208. Forbibliography on the literary includingMelite, Alopeke, andPaton 1927, pp. 277-422 (textand sources,see Whitehead 1977; 1984. Skambonidai,Agryle, Kollytos, Koile, commentaryby L. D. Caskey);Ran- Forforeigners buried in Athens,see Salta andKydathenaion. One of the 38 dall1953 (withreferences); also Scran- 1991, pp. 161-239. Fora recentoverview meticswas a woman,Satyra. For the ton's(1960) generalaccount. In the of Thraciansand Skythians buried in distributionof meticsin demes,see also recentwork along the SouthSlope of Athens,see Babler1998; notealso Clerc1893, pp.450-456; Gomme the AthenianAcropolis in 2001 as part Thraciansin Athenianiconography, 1933, pp.39-40. Forfurther comments of the "Unificationof Athens"project, a assembledand discussed in Tsiafakis on meticsin Attika,see Wilamowitz- largenumber of the employed 1998 and,generally, Papadopoulos Mollendorff1887. In Randall'slater workmenappeared to be resident 2000. Forthe meticin Atheniancourts study,among the totalrecorded work- aliens,citizens born outside Greece, or of justice,see Patterson2000. menand specialists inscribed on the nativespeakers of languagesother than 209. SeeWhitehead 1977, p. 97, with Erechtheionaccounts, the breakdownis Greek.Of the languagesspoken, full discussion,including comments on as follows:24 citizens,42 metics,20 Albanian,Pontic Greek, and perhaps the veracityof thesefigures. slaves,21 unknown(107 total);see alsoSerbo-Croatian and Russian were 210. On the basisof IG I2 373, 374, RandaX1953, p.201, table1. To the morecommonly heard than modern andIG II2 1654, Pope(1935, pp. 52-53) list of demes,mentioned above, where Greek. calculated,among the citizensworking on meticswere domiciled, Randall (1953, 211. Whitehead1977, pp. 97-98. CULTURAL BIOGRAPHY OF A GEOMETRIC AMPHORA I93

Potterslike the ParianAd Painterand the RamJug Painter, among others,provide a potentialglimpse of Cycladicimmigrants working in Athensgenerations before the reformsof Solon.Whether we callthem "metoikoi"or"foreigners" (Ervo) or even,simply, "islanders" (vatct)Xrg) doesnot reallymatter.2l2 They, together with Corinthiansand other for- eigners craftspersons,traders, and others whowere to becomenumer- ous in Athensin the courseof the 7th and6th centuriess.c.,2l3 demon- stratethat resident aliens enjoyed a venerableprehistory in the city.They furthersuggest, through direct human agency, the manner in which a large amphoralike P 14819,with its idiosyncraticlife history,may have made its wayto LateGeometric Athens: a Cycladicamphora accompanying a Cycladicimmigrant.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Manyfriendsand colleagues have assisted in thepreparation ofthis article andto allI extendmy warmest thanks. Within the Agora, I amespecially gratefulto JohnCamp for his unfailingencouragement and support, to CraigMauzy for his help with many of theillustrations used in thisstudy, to AnnieHooton for her fine drawings,and to JanJordan and Sylvie Dumontfor all sortsof assistance.Numerous colleagues in the Cyclades havegraciously shown me anddiscussed material in theircare, including muchthat is unpublished.I am particularly grateful to the Ephorof the Cyclades,Mariza Marthari, for her constant assistance, as well as to the following:ChristinaTelevantou, DickGreen, and Alexander Cambitoglou (Andros);Nota Kourou(Tenos); Yannos Kourayos and RobertKoehl (Paros);Vassileios Lambrinoudakis and KonstantinosZachos (Naxos); PhoteiniZapheiropoulou (Donousa); Mariza Marthari and Maria Katri (Syros);Christos Doumas (Thera); Lila Marangou (Amorgos); and Rich- ardCatling, Irene Lemos, and Petros Themelis (Euboia). I havebenefited from discussions both in the pastand more recently withfour colleagues in particular,who have taught me a greatdeal about the islandsof the archipelago:Lila Marangou,Nota Kourou,Richard Catling,and Kenneth Sheedy. For discussing a rangeof ceramicproblems in EastGreece I amindebted to LelaWalter-Karydi and Despoina Tsia- fakis.Thanks are due to FredCooper for sharing with me his thoughts on theHephaisteion. I am also grateful to SarahMorris and Stavros Paspalas forall they have done and continue to doon mybehalf, to HansRupprecht Goetteand Raimund Wuensche for assistancewith illustrations, Robert Finnertyfor preparingthe maps,and the anonymousHesperia referees, 212. Forthese terms, and other who havedone much to improvethis study.Throughout Evelyn's notes typesof foreignerswho mightbe andcorrespondence onAnailas's amphora, the following individuals' names residentin Athens,includingproxenoi, standout: Nicolas Coldstream, Nota Kourou,Ken Sheedy, and the late seeWhitehead 1977, pp. 6-20. VincentDesborough, all of whom offered help and sage advice. I am gratefi 213. Forthe variouscategories of to all of the aboveand also to Eve Harrisonand Susan Rotrof£ Finally, non-Atheniansin Atticinscriptions, withoutthe see Pope1935. See alsothe evidence this studywould not havebeen possible in its presentform assembledin Papadopoulos,forthcom- excavationnotebooks of thelate Dorothy Burr and Homer A. Thompson: ing, ch. 3. theywere the excavatorsof Anaxilas'samphora. I94 JOHN K. PAPADOPOULOS AND EVELYN L. SMITHSON

REFERENCES

AgoraVIII = E. T. H. Brann,Late Burkert,W. 1983."Itinerant Diviners Clerc,M. 1893. Les me'tequesathe'nians: Geometricand ProtoatticPottery, andMagicians: A NeglectedEle- Etudesur la conditionle'gale, la situ- Mid 8th to Late 7th CenturyB.C., mentin CulturalContacts," in The ation moraleet le rolesocial et e'cono- Princeton1962. GreekRenaissance of theEighth Cen- miquedes e'trangers domicilie's a Appadurai,A., ed. 1986.The SocialLife turyB.C.: Traditionand Innovation. Athenes,Paris. of Things,Cambridge. Proceedingsof the SecondInternation- Cohen,A. 1969. Customand Politicsin Baba,K. 1984."0n KerameikosInv. al Symposiumat the SwedishInstitute UrbanAfrica:A Study of Hausa I 388 (SEGXXlI, 79):A Note on in Athens,1-S June 1981, R. Hagg, Migrantsin YorubaTowns, Berkeley. the Formationof the Athenian ed., Stockholm,pp. 115-119. . 1971."Cultural Strategies in Metic-Status,"BSA 79, pp. 1-5. . 1984.Die orientalisierende the Organizationof TradingDias- Babler,B. 1998.Fleissige Thrakerinnen Epochein dergriechischenReligion poras,"in TheDevelopment of Indig- und wehrhafteSkythen: Nichtgriechen undLiteratur, Heidelberg. enousTrade and Marketsin West im klassischenAthen und ibre Buschor,E. 1929."Kykladisches," Africa,C. Meillassoux,ed., London, archaologischeHinterlassenschaft, AM 54, pp. 142-163. pp.266-281. Stuttgart. Cambitoglou,A., S. Peirce,O. Segal, Coldstream,J.N. 1968.Greek Geometric Bakewell,G. W. 1997."MrTotxia in the andJ. K.Papadopoulos. 1981. Pottery:ASurvey of TenLocal Styles Supplicesof Aeschylus,"ClAnt 16, ArchaeologicalMuseum of Andros: and TheirChronology, London. pp.209-228. Guideto the Findsfromthe Excava- . 1971."The Cesnola Painter: Bastea,E. 2000. The Creationof Modern tionsof the GeometricTown at A Changeof Address,"BICS 18, Athens:Planning the Myth, Cam- Zagora,Athens. pp.l-15. bridge. Cambitoglou,A., andJ. K. Papadopou- .1977. GeometricGreece, Boardman,J.1957. "Early Euboian los. 1994."ExcavationsatTorone, London. Potteryand History," BSA 52, 1990,"MeditArch 7, pp. 141-163. . 1983."Gift Exchange in the pp. 1-29. Camp,J.McK., II. 1979."A Drought EighthCentury B.C.," in The Greek . 1967.Excavations in Chios, in the LateEighth Century B.C.," Renaissanceof theEighth CenturyB.C.: 1952-1955: GreekEmporio Hesperia48, pp.397-411. Traditionand Innovation.Proceed- (BSA Suppl.6), London. . 1999."Excavationsin the ingsof the SecondInternational Sym- . 1969."Euboean Pottery in AthenianAgora, 1996 and 1997," posiumat the SwedishInstitute in Westand East," DialArch 3, Hesperia68, pp.255-283. Athens,1-SJune 1981, R. Hagg,ed., pp. 102-114. Catling,H. W. 1995."Heroes Re- Stockholm,pp. 210-207. . 1998.Early GreekVase turned?Subminoan Burials from . 1986."Kition and Amathus: Painting,London. Crete,"in TheAgesof Homer: SomeReflections on TheirWest- Bosanquet,R. C. 1895-1896."Prehis- A Tributeto Emily TownsendVer- wardLinks during the EarlyIron toricGraves in Syra,"BSA 2, meule,J. B. Carterand S. P.Morris, Age,"in Actsof theInternational pp. 141-144. eds.,Austin, pp. 123-136. ArchaeologicalSymposium "Cyprus Bossert,E.-M. 1967."Kastri auf Syros: Catling,R. W. V. 1998a."Exports of betweenthe Orientand the Occi- Vorberichtuber eine Untersuchung Attic ProtogeometricPottery and dent,"Nicosia, 8-14 September1985, derprahistorischen Siedlung," TheirIdentification by Non- V. Karageorghis,ed., Nicosia, ArchDelt22, A',pp. 53-76. AnalyticalMeans," BSA 93, pp.321-329. Brann,E. T. H. 1961."Late Geometric pp.365-378. . 1988.aSome Minoan WellGroups from the Athenian . 1998b."The Typology of the Reflectionsin CretanGeometric Agora,"Hesperia 30, pp.93- Protogeometricand Subproto- Art,"in Studiesin Honourof 146. geometricPottery from Troia and 17B. L. Webster2, J. H. Betts, Brock,J.K. 1957.Fortetsa: Early Greek Its AegeanContext," Studia Troica J.T. Hooker,and J. R. Green,eds., Tombsnear Knossos (BSA Suppl.2), 8, pp. 151-187. Bristol,pp. 23-32. Cambridge. Catling,R. W. V., andR. E. Jones. . 1989."Early Greek Visitors to Brock,J. K., andG. MackworthYoung. 1989."Protogeometric Vases from Cyprusand the EasternMediterra- 1949."Excavationsin Siphnos," Amorgosin the Museumof the nean,"in Cyprusand theEast BSA 44, pp. 1-92. BritishSchool," BSA 84, pp. 177- Mediterraneanin theIron Afge: Broodbank,C. 2000.An Island 185. Proceedingsof the SeventhBritish Archaeologyof theEarly Cyclades, Charitonides,S. I. 1975.''EopnIlaTa MuseumColloquium, AMpril l 988, Cambridge. wpcoToyrco,urpLxt xai yrco,urpLxt V.Tatton-Brown, ed., London, Brouskare,M. S. 1980."A Dark Age rsoXr g rqg avaaxaxpg vocog rqg pp.90-95. Cemeteryin ErechtheionStreet, 'Axposokrcog,1955-1959,"3rchDelt . 1990.aCycladic and Euboean Athens,"BSA 75, pp. 13-31. 28, 1973,A' [1975], pp. 1-63. Importsin the NorthCemetery of CULTURAL BIOGRAPHY OF A GEOMETRIC AMPHORA t95

Knossos,"in ErMOf EIA:Ceramic Crielaard,J. P. 1993."The Social Or- Dugas,C. 1925. La ceramiquedes and IconographicStudies in Honour ganizationof EuboeanTrade with Cyclades,Paris. ofAlexander Cambitoglou (MeditAfrch the EasternMediterranean during Dunbabin,T. J. 1948."The Early Suppl.1),J.-P. Descoeudres, ed., the 10thto 8th CenturiesB.C.," Historyof Corinth,"JHS68, Sydney,pp. 25-30. Pharos1, pp. 139-146. pp.59-69. . 1993."Mixed Marriages at Dalongeville,R., andG. Rougemont, . 1950.aAn Attic Bowl," BSA the Frontiersof the EarlyGreek eds. 1993.Recherches dans les Cycla- 45, pp. 193-202. World,"OJA 12, pp.89-107. des:Re'sultats des travaux de la RCP Dupont,P. 1986."Naturwissen- . 1994."Pithekoussai,Cyprus, 583, Lyon. schaftlicheBestimmung der andthe CesnolaPainter," in Davis,R. H. 1997.Lives of Indian archaischenKeramik Milets," AMPOIKIA.Ipiu antichiinsediamenti Images,Princeton. in Milet 1899-1980: Ergebnisser Greciin Occidente:Funzioni e modi DelosXV = C. Dugasand C. Rhomaios, Probleme,und Perspektiveneiner dell'organizzazionepolitica e sociale. Les vasespre'helle'niques etge'ome'- Ausgrabung.KolloquEum Frankfurt Scrittiin onoredi GiorgioBuchner triques,Paris 1934. am Main 1980 (IstMitt-BH31), (AION.AMntHrchStorAMnt n.s. 1), DelosXVII = C. Dugas,Les vasesorien- W. Muller-Wiener,ed., Tubingen, B. d'Agostinoand D. Ridgway,eds., talisantsde stylenon me'lien,Paris pp.57-71. Naples,pp. 77-86. 1935. Eilmann,R. 1933."Fruhegriechische . 1995."The Rich Lady of Denoyelle,M. 1996."Le peintre Keramikim samischenHeraion," the Areiopagosand Her Contem- d'Analatos:Essai de syntheseet AM58, pp.47-145. poraries:A Tributein Memoryof perspectivesnouvelles," AntK 39, Eiteljorg,H., II. 1980."The Fast EvelynLord Smithson," Hesperia pp.71-87. Wheel,the Multiple-BrushCom- 64, pp.391-403. . 1997."Attic or non-Attic? pass,and Athens as Home of the Coldstream,J.N., andH. W. Catling, The Caseof the PisticciPainter," ProtogeometricStyle,"AJA 84, eds.1996. Knossos North Cemetery: in Oakley,Coulson, and Palagia pp.449-452. Early GreekTombs (BSAM Suppl. 28), 1997,pp. 395-405. Fernandez-Armesto,F. 1995. Millen- London. de Polignac,F. 1984.La naissancede nium:AHistory of theLast Thousand Collignon,M., andL. Couve.1902. la cite'gresque:Cultes, espace et societe' Years,NewYork. Cataloguedes vases peints du Muse'e FIIIesiecles avantJ. C., Paris. Fraser,P. M., andE. Matthews.1987. National d 'Athenes,Paris. . 1992."Influenceexterieure A Lexiconof GreekPersonal Names 1: Colonna,G. 1995."Etruschia Pitecusa ou evolutionintern e? L'innovation TheAegeanIslands, Cyprus, Cyre- nell'orientalizzanteantico," in culturelleen Grecegeometrique naicarOxford. L'incidenzadell'antico: Studi in me- et archaique,"in Kopckeand Toku- Gauss,W.,and F. Ruppenstein.1998. moriadi EttoreLepore 1, A. Storchi maru1992, pp. 112-127. "DieAthener Akropolis in der Marino,ed., Naples, pp. 325-342. . 1994."Mediation,Compe- fruhenEisenzeit," AM 113,pp. 1- Cook,R. M., andP. Dupont. 1998. tition,and Sovereignty: The Evo- 60. East GreekPottery, London. lutionof RuralSanctuaries in Gauthier,P. 1972.Symbola: Les etrangers Cooper,F. A. 1985."Three Years in GeometricGreece," in Placingthe et lajustice dans les citesgresques, Athens:A New Lookat Old Build- Gods:Sanctuaries and SacredSpace in Nancy. ings,"unpublished manuscript of a AncientGreece, S. E. Alcockand Gautier,J.1993."Les cyclades antiques: lecturedelivered at the American R. Osborne,eds., Oxford, pp. 3-18. Caracterisationde centresde pro- Schoolof ClassicalStudies at Desborough,V. R. d'A.1952. Proto- ductionsceramiques par micro- Athens,27 March1985. geometricPottery, Oxford. scopieoptique," in Dalongeville Courbin,P. 1954."Chronique des . 1972.The GreekDarkAges, andRougemont 1993, pp. 167-204. fouilleset decouvertesarcheo- London. Gjerstad,E., Y. Calvet,M. Yon, logiqueen Greceen 1953:Premiere Descoeudres,J.-P.,and R. Kearsley. V. Karageorghis,and J. P.Thalman. partie,"BCH 78, pp.95-157. 1983."Greek Pottery at Veii: 1977.Greek Geometric and Archaic . 1990."Bassit-Posidaionin the AnotherLook," BSA 78, pp.9-53. PotteryFound in Cyprus,Stock- EarlyIron Age," in GreekColonists Dinsmoor,W. B. 1941.Observations on holm. and Native Populations:Proceedings theHephaisteion (Hesperia Suppl. 5), Gomme,A. W. 1933.The Population of the FirstAustralianCongress of Princeton. ofAthens in theFifth and Fourth ClassicalArchaeologyHeld in Honour Docter,R. F. 1991."Athena vs. Dio- Centuriess.c.,Oxford. of EmeritusProfessorAM. D. Trendall, nysos:Reconsidering the Contents Gosden,C., andY. Marshall,eds. Sydney,9-14 July 1985, J.-P. Des- of SOS Amphorae,"BABesch 66, 1999.The CulturalBiography of coeudres,ed., Oxford,pp. 503-509. pp.45-49. Objects( WorldWrch31.2), London. . 1993.Fragmentsd'amphores Doumas,C. 1965.aKuxBa8rc,: St' Graef,B., andE. Langlotz.1925. Die protogeometriquesgrecques a Bassit 'AAcovaxla,"ArchDelt 18, 1963,B' 2 antikenVasen von derAkropoliszu (Syrie),"Hesperia 62, pp.95-113. [1965],pp. 279-280. AthenI, Berlin. \ - \ v \ \

I96 JOHN K. PAPADOPOULOS AND EVELYN L. SMITHSON

Haentjens,A. M. E. 1999.aAttic Geo- Koch,H. 1955.Studien zum r ygCd,UETpGX)7lTEpt'O8O. "EpEvlJw metricChildgraves: More than Theseustempelin Afthen,Berlin. TcowsTcolv 1931-1939, Athens. Bonesin Pots,"in ClassicalArchaeol- Kokkou,A. 1974."To xLovoxpavov Tou . l999b."Ta apXaLa rLtr Toi) ogytowards the ThirdMillennium: vaourqg SouvLaAoc, 'Af9rlvac, E. M. --llsoupyou,"'Erorepst'or Trll>oorxcolv Reflectionsand Perspectives.Proceed- 4478 xal N Su)ioyn TouKavTaxou- MsAsTcow2, pp. 93-114. ingsof theXVth International 4Nvou,"AfrchEph 1974, pp. 102-112. Krause,G. 1975. Untersuchungenzu Congresson ClassicalArchaeology, Kontoleon,N. M. 1949."rrxllrpLxog denaltesten Nekropolen am Eridanos Amsterdam,July 12-17, 1998, aoprijc, rx NaE,ou,"AfrchEph inAfthen,2 vols.(HBAM Suppl. 3), R. F.Docter and E. M. Moormann, 1945-1947[1949], pp. 1-21. Hamburg. eds.,Amsterdam, pp. 182-183. . 1958."Theraisches,"SM73, Kunze,E. 1931.Kretische Bronzereliefs, Head,B. V. 1911.Historia Numorum: pp. 117-139. Stuttgart. A Manual of GreekNumismatics, 2nd Kopcke,G., andI. Tokumaru,eds. Kurtz,D. C., andJ.Boardman. ed., Oxford. 1992.Greece between East and West: 1971.Greek Burial Customs,Ithaca, Hekman,J.J. 1994.aChalandriani on 10th-8th CenturiesB.C.: Papersof the N.Y. Syros:An EarlyBronze Age Cem- Meetingat theInstitute of FineAfrts, Kyrieleis,H., andW. Rollig.1988. eteryin the Cyclades,"ArchEph New YorkUniversity, March 15- "Einaltorientalischer Pferdschmuck 1994,pp. 47-74. 16th, 1990, Mainz. ausdem Heraion von Samos,"SM Hoffman,G. L. 1997.Imports and Kopytoff,I. 1986."The Cultural Bio- 103,pp. 27-75. Immigrants:NearEasternContacts graphyof Things:Commodization Kyrkou,M. 1997."H wpoarcLxri with IronAge Crete,Ann Arbor. as Process,"in Appadurai1986, 1lp0xcrq: Nrrc, xrpaxrc, FapTl)- Hommel,P. 1959-1960."Die Ausgra- pp. 64-91. prg,"in Oakley,Coulson, and bungbeim Athena-Tempel in Milet, Kourou,N. 1984."Local Naxian Palagia1997, pp. 423-434. 1957:II. Der Abschnittostlich des Workshopsand the Import-Export Lambrinoudakis,B. K. 1983a."Nra Athenatempels,"IstMitt 9-10, PotteryTradeof the Islandin the sToLXrGa yLa rn yvxcnnXTr c, NaE:L-

pp.31-62. GeometricPeriod," in AMncientGreek axNc, yXyTpCxNc, xaL wpULyNC, Jacopi,G. 1933.Esplorazione archeo- and RelatedPottery: Proceedings of the apXaLxg xpayCxNc,," ASAtene61 logicadi CamiroII (ClRhVI-VII), InternationalVase Symposium in (n.s.45), pp. 109-119. Bergamo. AMmsterdam,12-15AMpril l 984, . 1983b."Lesateliers de Johnston,A. W., andR. E.Jones.1978. H. A. G. Brijder,ed., Amsterdam, ceramiquegeometrique et orienta- "The'SOS' Amphora," BSA 73, pp. 107-112. lisantede Naxos:Perspectives pour pp. 103-141. . 1992."A propos d'un atelier l'analysearcheometrique," in Les Jones,R. E.1986. Greekand Cypriot geometriquenaxien," in Les ateliers Cyclades:Mate'riaux pour une e'tude Pottery:AReview of Scientific depotiers dans le mondegrec aux dege'ographiehistorique, G. Rouge- Studies,Athens. epoquesgeometrique,archaique, et mont,ed., Paris, pp. 165-175. Kardara,C. P. 1963.'Po&=xrl aWt° classique(BCHSuppl. 23), F.Blonde . 1988.aVeneration of An- ypore'=,Athens. andJ. Y. Perreault,eds., Paris, cestorsin GeometricNaxos," in Karo,G. 1934."ArchaologischeFunde pp. 131-143. Early GreekCult Practice: Proceed- vomJuli1933 bis Juli 1934," . 1994."'H vaE,caxN wapousLa ingsof theFfth InternationalSym- J 1934 (JdI49), cols.123-254. cco atyato xat rr rooyrLo xaTa rn posiumat the SwedishInstitute at Karouzou,S. 1968.NationalArchaeo- yrx,urtpLxN rsoXr, in Ilpaxnxa Athens,26-29 June 1986, R. Hagg, logicalMuseum: Collection of rov A' ron>sMril>eovavl>sApe'ov ,us N. Marinatos,and G. C. Nord- Sculpture,Athens. 0s,ua tj Noriof de'or,usaov Tcolv quist,eds., Goteborg, pp. 235- Kawadias,P. 1890-1892.ERv,;ra rov aIcowcow,"¢eRov, 3-6 3sz zg,u,Spe'ov 246. 'E0vexovMovast'ov, Athens. 1992,I. K.Promponas and Langdon,S. 1987.aGift Exchange KerameikosI = W. Kraikerand S. E. Psarras,eds., Athens, pp. 263- in GeometricSanctuaries," in Gifts K. Kubler,Die Nekropolendes 12. 311. to the Gods:Proceedings of the Uppsala bis 10. Jahrhunderts,Berlin 1939. . 1996."Avaaxasprc, sTo Symposium,1985, T. Lindersand KerameikosIV = K. Kubler,Neufunde -,usoupyo TNvou(1995-1996)," G. Nordquist,eds., Uppsala, aus derNekropole des 11. und l O. Prakt 1996,pp. 261-270. pp. 107-113. Jahrhunderts,Berlin 1943. . 1997."A New Geometric LefkandiI = M. R. Popham, KerameikosV.1 = K. Kubler,Die Amphorain the BenakiMuseum: L. H. Sackett,and P. G. Themelis, Nekropoledes 10. bis 8. Jahrhunderts, The InternalDynamics of an Attic eds.,Lefkandi I: TheIron Age (BSA Berlin1954. Style,"in GreekOf erings:Essays on Suppl.11), Oxford 1979-1980. Knapp,A. B., andJ.F. Cherry.1994. GreekAfrtin Honourof John Board- Lenz,D., F. Ruppenstein,M. Bau- ProvenienceStudies and Bronze man, O. Palagia,ed., Oxford, mann,and R. W. V. Catling. AfgeCyprus: Production, Exchange, pp.43-53. 1998.aProtogeometric Pottery at and Politico-EconomicChange, . l999a. Avaaxavsf Noriov: To Troia,"Studia Troica 8, pp. 189- Madison. wovo wgxporasoo i>7sNoriov xorror 222. CULTURAL BIOGRAPHY OF A GEOMETRIC AMPHORA I97

Levi,D. 1925-1926."La necropoli . 1992b."Introduction.Greece .1997a.PhantomEuboians," geometricadi KardianiaTinos," beyondEast and West: Perspectives JMA10, pp. l91-219. ASAtene8-9, pp.203-234. andProspects," in Kopckeand .1997b.aInnovations, Imita- Lyons,C. L., andJ.K. Papadopoulos. Tokumaru1992, pp. xiii-xviii. tions,and Ceramic Style: Modes 2002."Archaeology and Colonial- . 1997."Greek and Near East- of Productionand Modes of ism,"in TheArchaeologyof Colonial- ernArt in the Age of Homer,"in Dissemination,"in TEXNH: ism,C. L. Lyonsand J. K. Papado- NewLight on a DarkAge: Exploring Craftsmen,Craftswomen, and poulos,eds., Los Angeles,pp. 1-23. theCulture of GeometricGreece, Craftsmanshipin theAegean Bronze Manthos,A. D. 1979."EDOY1y0tT0G S. Langdon,ed., Columbia,pp. 56- Age.The 6th International Conference £stV£tt s0 TOV rAAaOA t 71. Organizedby the University of Si)pou,"AAA 12, pp.39-46. Morris,S. P.,andJ. K. Papadopoulos. Liegeand Temple University, Marangou,L. 1993."'Avotcxxo, AVOX?Ng, - JoachimJungius-Gesellschaft der OtherName, and an Athenian Mtvxog'Apopyou,"Prakt 1996, WissenschaftenHamburg 87), Strangerin EarlyIron Age Crete," pp.277-301. R. Rolle,K. Schmidt,and R. F. Hesperia67, pp. 109-123. . 1997. Epyat£5 o *£o£@q Docter,eds., Hamburg, pp. 251- .2000. aSkeletonsin Wells: C7l)qNt, Xt \ p£A£qg>, AVOX?Ng, 263. Towardsan Archaeologyof Social Mtvxog'Apopyou," Prakt 1997, . Forthcoming."Of Granaries Exclusionin the AncientGreek pp.183-189. andGames: An EgyptianStowaway World,"in Madness,Disability, and . 1998."The Acropolis Sanc- in an AthenianChest," in Xtxpes: SocialExclusion: The Archaeology and tuaryof Minoaon Amorgos:Cult Essaysin Honorof SaraA. Immer- AnthropologyofD ffierence,J. Hubert, Practicefrom the 8th CenturyB.C. wahr(Hesperia Suppl.), A. P.Cha- ed., London,pp.96-118. to the 3rdCentury A.D.," in Ancient pin,ed., Princeton. . Forthcoming.Ceramicus Redi- GreekCult Practicefrom the Archaeo- Muscarella,O. W. 1989."King Midas vivus:The Early Iron Age Potters' logicalEvidence: Proceedings ofthe of Phrygiaand the Greeks,"in Fieldin theAreaof the Classical FourthInternational Seminar on Anatoliaand theAncient Near East: AthenianAgora(Hesperia Suppl.31), . AncientGreek Cult, Organized by the Studiesin Honorof TahsinOzguc,. Princeton. SwedishInstitute atAthens, 22-24 K. Emreet al.,eds., Ankara, Papadopoulos,J.K., and S. A. Paspalas. October1993, R. Hagg,ed., Stock- pp.333-344. l999.Mendaian as Chalkidian holm,pp. 9-26. Mustakas,C. 1954-1955."Kimolos," Wine,"Hesperia 68, pp.161-188. . In prep." O To

, * * f , \ =p@tp@V to xOpCXXV mOV@V V Noy,D. 2000.Foreigners at Rome: andT.Schreiber.1998."Drawing Mtvxot'Apopyou." Citizensand Strangers, London. Circles:Experimental Archaeology Marthari,M.1998. Syros,Chalandriani, Oakeshott,N. R. 1966."Horned-Head andthe PivotedMultiple Brush," Kastri:From the Investigations and VaseHandles,"JHS 86, pp. 114- AJA102, pp.507-529. Protectionto thePresentation ofan 132. Papadopoutou-Zapheiropoulou,Ph. ArchaeologicalSite, Athens. Oakley,J. H., W. D. E. Coulson,and 1968.AKUXA8£g: NaZot,"ArchDelt Mendoni,L. G., andA. Mazarakis O. Palagia.1997. AthenianPotters 20,1965, B'3 [1968],pp. 515- Ainian,eds. 1998. Kea-Kythnos: andPainters: The Conference 522. HistoryandArchaeology. Proceedings Proceedings,Oxford. Papageorgiou-Venetas,A.1994. Athens: ofan International Symposium, Kea- Papadopoulos,J.K. 1993."To Kill a TheAncientHeritage and the Historic Kythnos,22-25 June1994 (Melete- Cemetery:The AthenianKera- Cityscapein a ModernMetropolis, mata27), Athens. meikosand the EarlyIron Age Athens. Morris,I. 1986."Gift and Commodity in the Aegean,"JMA6, pp. 175- Patterson,C.2000. "TheHospitality in ArchaicGreece," Man 21, pp. l- 206. of AthenianJustice: The Meticin 17. . 1994a."Evelyn Lord Smith- Court,"in Lawand Social Status .1987. Burialand Ancient son, 1923-1992,"AJA98, pp.563- in ClassicalAthens,V. Hunter and Society:The Rise of the Greek City- 564. J. Edmondson,eds., Oxford, pp. 93- State,Cambridge. . 1994b."Early Iron Age Pot- 112. Morris,S. P. 1984.The Black and ters'Marks in the Aegean,"Hesperia Payne,H. G. G.1933. Reviewof WhiteStyle:Athens and Aigina in 63, pp.437-507. Kunze1931, inJHS 53, pp. 121- theOrientalizing Period, New .1996."TheOriginal Kera- 123. Haven. meikosof Athensand the Siting Pelekides,S.1917.'AV0CC7X0t(PY1 OoX- .1992a.Daidalos and the Origins of the ClassicalAgora," GRBS 37, rlpou,"ArchDelt2,1916[1917], of GreekArt,Princeton. pp. 107-128. pp.13-64. I98 JOHN K. PAPADOPOULOS AND EVELYN L. SMITHSON

Pfuhl,E. 1903."Der archaische Fried- derheiligen Strasse: I. Graberund Snodgrass,A. M. 1971.The DarkAge hof am Stadtbergevon Thera," OpferstellenhS1-204,"AM81, of Greece:AnArchaeologicalSurvey AM28, pp. 1-288. pp. 1-111. ofthe Eleventh to theEighth Cen- Pope,H. 1935.Non-Athenians inAttic Schweitzer,B. 1955."Zum Krater des turiess.c.,Edinburgh. Inscriptions,New York. Aristonothos,"RAf 62, pp. 78-106. Stampolides,N. 1990a."Eleutherna Popham,M. R. 1994."Precolonization: Scranton,R. L. 1960."Greek Architec- on Crete:An InterimReport on EarlyGreek Contact with the East," turalInscriptions as Documents," the Geometric-ArchaicCemetery," in TheArchaeologyof GreekColoniza- HarvardLibrary Bulletin 14, BSA85, pp.375-403. tion:Essays Dedicated to SirJohn pp. 159-182. . 1990b."A Funerary Cippus at Boardman,G. R.Tsetskhladze and Shaw,J.W. 1989."Phoenicians in Eleutherna:Evidence of Phoenician F.De Angelis,eds., Oxford, pp. 11- SouthernCrete,"AJA 93, pp. 165- Presence?"BICS 37, pp.99-106. 34. 183. Stevens,G. P.,and J. M. Paton.1927. Popham,M. R., andI. S. Lemos.1995. Shear,T.L. 1936."The American TheErechtheum (with contributions "AEuboean Warrior Trader," Excavationsin the AthenianAgora, by L. D. Caskeyand H. N. Fowler), OJA14, pp. 151-157. NinthReport: The Campaignof Cambridge,Mass. Purcell,N. 1990."Mobility and the 1935,"Hesperia 5, pp. 1-42. Str0m,I. 1992."Evidence from the Polis,"in The GreekCityfrom Homer . 1937."The American Sanctuaries,"in Kopcke and Toku- toAlexander,O. Murrayand Excavationsin the AthenianAgora, maru1992, pp. 46-60. S. Price,eds., Oxford, pp. 29-58. TwelfthReport: The Campaignof Technau,W. 1929."Griechische Randall,R. H.,Jr.1953."The Erech- 1936,"Hesperia 6, pp.333-381. Keramikim samischenHeraion," theumWorkmen,"AJA 57, pp. 199- Sheedy,K. A. 1985."Three Vase- AM 54, pp.6-64. 210. Groupsfrom the Purification Televantou,C. A. 1993.""Av8pog: Rubensohn,O. 1917."Die prahistor- Trenchon Rheneiaand the Evi- O y£(l)p£TpCXOt OtXtOpOt qg ischenund fruhgriechischen Funde dencefor a ParianPottery Tradi- r+YlxYlg,'AvApetxxex Xpowexex 21, aufdem Burghugel von Paros," tion,"BSA 80, pp. 151-190. pp. 187-208. AM42, pp. 1-96. . 1990."Attic and Atticizing . 1996."Andros:Antico insedia- . 1962.Das Delion von Paros, Potteryin the Cycladesduring mentodi Ipsili,"in Le cicladied il Wiesbaden. the EighthCentury B.C.," in mondoegeo, E. Lanzillottaand Runnels,C. N. 1982."Flaked-Stone ErMOrEIA:Ceramic and Icono- D. Schilardi,eds., Rome, pp. 79- Artifactsin Greeceduring the graphicStudies in Honourof Alex- 100. HistoricalPeriod,"JFA 9, pp.363- anderCambitoglou (MeditArch . 1999.""Av8pog: To t£p0 t 373. Suppl.1),J.-P. Descoeudres, ed., rrlxYlg,^^in QZ KrKAASIKON: . 1988."The Flaked Obsidian Sydney,pp.31-40. M>riUrlNexoRorov ZTX?£PO2TOVROV, Artifacts,"in Zagora2, pp.245- . 1992."TheLate Geometric Athens,pp. 132-139. 249. Hydriaand the Adventof the Pro- TheraII = H. Dragendorff,ed., Thera. Rupp,D. W. 1988."The 'Royal Tombs' toatticStyle," AM 107,pp. 11-28. Untersuchungen,Vermessungen, und of Salamis(Cyprus): Ideological Sherratt,A., andS. Sherratt.1991. Ausgrabungenin den Jahren 1895- Messagesof Powerand Authority," "FromLuxuries to Commodities: 1902II: TheraeischeGraeber, Berlin JMdd1, pp. 111-139. The Natureof Mediterranean 1903. . 1989."Puttin' on the Ritz: BronzeAge TradingSystems," in Thompson,D. B. 1937."The Garden Manifestationsof High Statusin BronzeAgeTrade in theMediterra- of Hephaistos,"Hesperia 6, pp.396- IronAge Cyprus,"in Early Society nean,N. H. Gale,ed.,Jonsered, 425. in Cyprus,E. Peltenburg,ed., pp.351-386. TocraI =J. Boardmanand J. Hayes, Edinburgh,pp. 336-362. . 1993."The Growth of the Excavationsat Tocra,1963-1965: Salta,M. 1991."Attische Grabstelen MediterraneanEconomy in the TheArchaicDeposits I (BSASuppl. mit Inschriften:Beitrage zur EarlyFirst Millennium B.C.," 4), Oxford1966. Topographieund Prosopographie WorldArch24, pp.361-378. TocraII =J. Boardmanand J. Hayes, derNekropolen von Athen, Attika, Smith,C. 1895-1896."Excavationson Excavationsat Tocra,1963-1965: und Salamisvom Peloponnesischen Melos,"BSA 2, pp.63-76. TheArchaicDeposits II andLater Kriegbis zurMitte des 4. Jhs.v. Smithson,E. L. 1961."TheProto- Deposits(BSA Suppl. 10), Oxford Chr."(diss. Eberhard-Karls- geometricCemetery at Nea Ionia, 1973. UniversitatTubingen). 1949,"Hesperia 30, pp. 147-178. Tsiafakis,D. 1998.H Epexx71aqv Schiering,W. 1957. Werkstattenorien- . 1968."The Tomb of a Rich exTrexr £eXOVOypaga TOV SOV talisierenderKeramik aus Rhodos, AthenianLady, ca. 850 B.C.," tX@>= =.X.: gpO£yyff£g5 g5 Berlin. Hesperia37, pp. 77-116. (7X£CJ£g5A06v=5X= op=X65 Schlorb-Vierneisel,B. 1966. "Eridanos- . 1974."A Geometric Cemetery Komotini. Nekropole.Berichte uber die on the Areopagus:1897,1932, Tsountas,C. 1898."KuxXo8txot," Grabungen1964 und 1965sudlich 1947,"Hesperia 43, pp.325-390. ArchEph1898, pp. 137-212. CULTURAL BIOGRAPHY OF A GEOMETRIC AMPHORA I99

.1899."KuxXo8exot,II," . 1951b."An Industrial District ArchEph1899, pp. 73-134. of AncientAthens," Hesperia 20, Villard,F.1993. "La localisation des pp. 135-288. atelierscycladiques de ceramique Zaccagnini,C.1987. "Aspectsof Cere- geometriqueet orientalisante,"in monialExchange in the NearEast Dalongevilleand Rougemont 1993, duringthe SecondMillennium pp.143-165. B.C.," in Centreand Periphery in Walter-Karydi,E. 1972."Geometrische theAncientWorld, M. Rowlands, Keramikaus Naxos,"S 1972 M. T. Larsen,and K. Kristiansen, (JdI87), pp. 386-421. eds.,Cambridge, pp.57-65. . 1997."Aigina versus Athens? Zagora1 = A. Cambitoglou,J.J. Coul- The Caseof the ProtoatticPottery ton,J. Birmingham,and J. R. Green, on Aigina,"in Oakley,Coulson, and Zagora1: Excavation Season 1967: Palagia1997, pp.385-394. StudySeason 1968-9, Sydney1971. Whitehead,D.1977. TheIdeology of Zagora2 = A. Cambitoglou,A. Birch- theAthenian Metic, Cambridge. all,J.J. Coulton,and J. R. Green, . 1984."ImmigrantCommuni- Zagora2: Excavationof a Geometric ties in the ClassicalPolis: Some Townon the Island of Andros. Exca- Principlesfor a SynopticTreat- vationSeason 1969: Study Season ment,"AntCl1984, pp.47-59. 1969-1970,Athens 1988. Wide, S. 1897."Nachleben myke- Zapheiropoulou,Ph. 1970."KuxXo8£g: nischerOrnamente,"JdI22, hovouceot,"ArchDelt 24, 1969,B 2 pp.233-258. [1970],pp.390-393. Wiesner,J.1938.Grab undJenseits: . 1971. r£Xp£Tp6XYl0Xu@<76t Untersuchungenimagd ischen Raum £tt KUXA8£G, AM 4, pp.21>216. zurBronzezeit undfruXen Eisenzeit, . 1973a."KuxXo8£g: hovouceot," Berlin. ArchDelt25,1970, B 2 [1973], Wilamowitz-Mollendorff,U. von.1887. pp.426-428. "Demotikader attischen Metoeken," . 1973b. Aso Tovy£Xp£Xptxov Hermes22, pp. 107-128,211-259. ceovotxtcepovri2ghovoi)c,,"AAA 6, Willemsen,F.1963. "Archaische Grab- pp.256-259. malbasenaus der athener Stadt- .1975. "KuxXo8£g:hovouceot," mauer,"AM 78, pp. 104-153. ArchDelt26,1971, B 2 [1975], Winter,I. J. 1995."Homer's Phoeni- pp.465-467. cians:History, Ethnography, or . 1983. r£Xp£Xptxototyy£ot oso LiteraryTrope?[A Perspectiveon ri Noio,"ASAtene 61 (n.s.45), EarlyOrientalism]," in TheAgesof pp.121-136. Homer:ATribute to Emily Town- . 1985.[IpOpi68=TA q5 sendVermeule, J. B. Carterand ,?oe£z6vGOV AV>£8pG0V 8£ 0£8= Gravesand a SeventhCentury Well 71Nexpos detx H£a0V T(DV =g@v@>, in theAgora(Hesperia Suppl.2), 4>OTG, 3-6 3£z£8ppG0V 1992, Princeton1939. I. K. Promponasand S. E. Psarras, . 1951a."Sepulturaeintra eds.,Athens, pp.229-261. urbem,"Hesperia 20, pp.67-134.

JohnK. Papadopoulosand Ezvelyn Lord Smithsont UNIVERSITYOF CALIFORNIA,LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENTOF CLASSICSAND THE COTSENINSTITUTE OF ARCHAEOLOGY A2IO FOWLER LOSANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90095-I5IO [email protected]