ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ TRANSPORTȱAMPHORAEȱFROMȱAKANTHOS ȱ ȱ KonstantinosȱFILISȱ ȱ Keywords:ȱAkanthos,ȱenchytrismoi,ȱtransportȱamphorae,ȱlocalȱproducts.ȱ ȱ Summary:ȱAkanthosȱwasȱaȱfamousȱcolonyȱofȱAndros,ȱfoundedȱinȱtheȱmiddleȱofȱ7thȱ centuryȱB.C.ȱTheȱsiteȱoccupiesȱanȱarea,ȱwitchȱhasȱcontributedȱtoȱtheȱdevelopmentȱofȱtheȱ cityȱintoȱaȱveryȱimportantȱharborȱofȱtheȱNorthernȱAegean.ȱInȱthisȱharborȱgoodsȱfromȱallȱ theȱancientȱworldȱmarkets,ȱ especiallyȱEasternȱGreece,ȱwereȱcommerced,ȱalongȱwithȱlocalȱ goods,ȱ amongȱ whichȱ theȱ famousȱ “Akanthianȱ wine”.ȱ Theȱ archaeologicalȱ researchȱ inȱ theȱ ancientȱ settlement,ȱ asȱ opposedȱ toȱ theȱ cemetery,ȱ isȱ quiteȱ limited.ȱ Theȱ majorityȱ ofȱ theȱ burialsȱ areȱ “enchytrismoi”ȱ especiallyȱ inȱ transportȱ amphoraeȱ fromȱ variousȱ productionȱ centres,ȱ amongȱ whichȱ Miletus,ȱ Samos,ȱ Chios,ȱ Klazomenai,ȱ Lesbos,ȱ Thasos,ȱ Corinth,ȱ Corfu,ȱ Athens,ȱ Laconia,ȱ localȱ amphoraeȱ andȱ otherȱ importsȱ ofȱ unknownȱ origin.ȱ Theȱ existenceȱ ofȱ aȱ localȱ workshopȱ isȱ alsoȱ confirmedȱ byȱ theȱ investigationȱ ofȱ sixȱ ceramicȱ kilnsȱ andȱtheȱdiscoveryȱofȱaȱhugeȱamountȱofȱamphorae,ȱdatedȱmainlyȱtoȱtheȱfourthȱcenturyȱB.C.ȱ TheȱstudyȱofȱtheȱimportedȱtransportȱamphoraeȱtoȱAkanthos,ȱalongȱwithȱtheȱlocalȱproducts,ȱ isȱpresented.ȱThisȱvarietyȱofȱamphoraeȱcomprisesȱevidenceȱofȱtheȱexchangesȱinȱtheȱregionȱ ofȱ theȱ Strymonicȱ gulfȱ andȱ ofȱ theȱ vitalityȱ primarilyȱ ofȱ Easternȱ Greekȱ andȱ secondlyȱ ofȱ SouthernȱGreekȱexportsȱduringȱtheȱseventhȱandȱtheȱfourthȱcenturyȱBC.ȱȱ ȱȱ TheȱancientȱcityȱofȱAkanthosȱwasȱfoundedȱinȱtheȱmiddleȱofȱtheȱ7thȱcenturyȱBCȱ byȱ colonistsȱ ofȱ Andros,ȱ accordingȱ toȱ Thucydides1,ȱ orȱ Androsȱ andȱ Chalkis,ȱ accordingȱ toȱ Plutarchus2.ȱ Atȱ theȱ sameȱ timeȱ threeȱ otherȱ knownȱ coloniesȱ wereȱ foundedȱinȱtheȱarea,ȱSaneȱ(modernȱN.ȱRoda),ȱStagiraȱandȱArgilos3.ȱ AkanthosȱisȱsituatedȱonȱtheȱeasternȱedgeȱofȱAcanthusȱGulf,ȱonȱtheȱthreeȱhillsȱ ofȱ Mountȱ Stratonikos,ȱ nearȱ theȱ modernȱ villageȱ ofȱ Ierissosȱ (Fig.ȱ 1Ȭ2).ȱ Theȱ foundationȱ ofȱ theȱ cityȱ inȱ thisȱ privilegedȱ areaȱ isȱ particularlyȱ important,ȱ asȱ itȱ isȱ placedȱbetweenȱtheȱStrymonikosȱandȱtheȱSiggitikosȱBayȱandȱcontrolsȱtheȱentranceȱ toȱ theȱeasternȱpeninsulaȱofȱChalkidiki,ȱtheȱAkte4,ȱfamousȱinȱantiquityȱforȱ timberȱ

ȱAkanthosȱcountsȱasȱproductionȱcenterȱandȱasȱconsumptionȱcenterȱasȱwell.ȱ 1ȱThuc.ȱIVȱ84,ȱ1ȱ 2ȱPlutarch,ȱQuaest.ȱGraec.ȱ30ȱ 3ȱZAHRNTȱ1971,ȱp.ȱ146Ȭ150;ȱRHOMIOPOULOUȱ1999,ȱp.ȱ127Ȭ130.ȱ 4ȱThuc.ȱIVȱ109.ȱDiod.ȱSic.ȱXIIȱ68:ȱ5.ȱSteph.ȱByz.ȱs.v.ȱAkanthos.ȱSeeȱalsoȱZAHRNTȱ1971,ȱȱȱȱ p.ȱ151Ȭ152.ȱ 68ȱ KONSTANTINOSȱFILISȱ ȱ andȱores5.ȱThisȱturnedȱAkanthosȱintoȱanȱimportantȱtradingȱportȱbetweenȱeasternȱ Greece,ȱtheȱinteriorȱofȱChalkidikiȱandȱtheȱMacedonianȱhinterland.ȱ Theȱprosperityȱofȱtheȱcity,ȱasȱaȱresultȱofȱitsȱcommercialȱrelations,ȱisȱevidentȱ throughȱ itsȱ richȱ monetaryȱ productionȱ (Fig.ȱ 3).ȱ Inȱ theȱ lateȱ 6thȱ centuryȱ BCȱ itȱ isȱ amongȱ theȱ firstȱ citiesȱ inȱ Macedoniaȱ withȱ widelyȱ spreadȱ silverȱ coins,ȱ whichȱ canȱ alsoȱbeȱfoundȱinȱhoards,ȱevenȱinȱdistantȱplaces,ȱoutsideȱtheȱAegeanȱareas6.ȱ Theȱ ancientȱ cityȱ isȱ surroundedȱ byȱ strongȱ fortificationȱ walls,ȱ withinȱ whichȱ publicȱ buildingsȱ haveȱ beenȱ identified,ȱ whereasȱ anȱ “ekatompedos”ȱ templeȱ isȱ placedȱ onȱ theȱ hilltop,ȱ probablyȱ dedicatedȱ toȱ theȱ goddessȱ Athena7ȱ (Fig.ȱ 4Ȭ5).ȱ Anȱ Ironȱ Ageȱ settlementȱ precededȱ theȱ city,ȱ remainsȱ ofȱ whichȱ areȱ partȱ ofȱ aȱ vaultedȱ buildingȱandȱenclosures.ȱTheseȱremainsȱalongȱwithȱsomeȱcontemporaryȱgravesȱareȱ associatedȱwithȱtheȱlocalȱpopulationsȱwhichȱinhabitedȱtheȱareaȱbeforeȱtheȱarrivalȱ ofȱsettlersȱfromȱAndros8.ȱȱ Ceramicȱ workshopsȱ haveȱbeenȱlocatedȱinȱtheȱareaȱbetweenȱtheȱcityȱandȱ theȱ cemetery.ȱ Inȱ totalȱ eightȱ ceramicȱ kilnsȱ ofȱ theȱ «roundȱ type»ȱ haveȱ beenȱ identified,ȱ mainlyȱ belongingȱ toȱ theȱ 4thȱ centuryȱ BC,ȱ someȱ ofȱ whichȱ areȱ relatedȱ toȱ theȱ productionȱ ofȱ transportȱ amphorae.ȱ Particularȱ attentionȱ wasȱ givenȱ toȱ theȱ constructionȱ ofȱ twoȱ kilns,ȱ whichȱ wereȱ placedȱ onȱ aȱ rectangularȱ stoneȱ structure.ȱ Thisȱworkshopȱcomplexȱalsoȱacquiredȱvariousȱauxiliaryȱareasȱandȱaȱstoa9ȱ(Fig.ȱ6Ȭ9).ȱ Theȱcemeteryȱextendsȱtoȱtheȱcoastalȱzone.ȱTheȱnumberȱofȱgravesȱinvestigatedȱ soȱfarȱexceedsȱtheȱ14,000,ȱwithȱtheȱearlierȱ(belongingȱtoȱlocalȱinhabitants)ȱdatingȱtoȱ theȱ8thȱcenturyȱBCȱandȱtheȱlatterȱtoȱRomanȱimperialȱtimesȱ(midȱ3rdȱcenturyȱAD)10.ȱ Theȱ majorityȱ ofȱ theȱ gravesȱ thoughȱ belongsȱ toȱ theȱ lateȱ Archaicȱ andȱ Classicalȱ period,ȱerasȱduringȱwhichȱtheȱcityȱflourished.ȱAboutȱ40%ȱofȱthemȱareȱenchytrismoiȱ (Fig.ȱ 10)ȱ mainlyȱ inȱ transportȱ amphoraeȱ andȱ secondarilyȱ inȱ hydriae,ȱ pithoi,ȱ jugsȱ andȱ cauldrons.ȱ Inhumationsȱ inȱ amphoraeȱ wereȱ commonlyȱ notȱ accompaniedȱ byȱ offerings,ȱaȱtfactȱtha ȱcomplicatesȱtheirȱchronology,ȱwhichȱcanȱbeȱbasedȱsolelyȱonȱ typologicalȱcriteria.ȱȱ Thisȱ studyȱ concernsȱ theȱ amphorasȱ ofȱ theȱ Archaicȱ andȱ Classicalȱ periods,ȱ recoveredȱinȱtheȱareaȱofȱtheȱcemetery,ȱalongȱwithȱtheȱfindingsȱrelatedȱtoȱtheȱlocalȱ workshopȱ ofȱ theȱ ancientȱ city.ȱ Theȱ preliminaryȱ resultsȱ ofȱ theȱ studyȱ ofȱ anȱ assemblageȱ ofȱ 150ȱ conservedȱ jarsȱ willȱ beȱ discussed11.ȱ Thoughȱ itȱ isȱ onlyȱ aȱ smallȱ amountȱ comparedȱ toȱ theȱ totalȱ ofȱ theȱ recoveredȱ amphorae,ȱ itȱ isȱ representativeȱ ofȱ theȱ provenanceȱ ofȱ theȱ productsȱ thatȱ arrivedȱ atȱ theȱ portȱ ofȱ Acanthus.ȱ Hopefully,ȱ futureȱconservationȱandȱstudyȱofȱtheȱrestȱofȱtheȱamphoraeȱwillȱenable,ȱapartȱfromȱ aȱtypologicalȱanalysisȱofȱtheȱvariousȱamphoraȱproductionȱcentres,ȱaȱmoreȱpreciseȱ quantitativeȱ approach,ȱ whichȱ isȱ particularlyȱ importantȱ forȱ theȱ evaluationȱ ofȱ theȱ commercialȱandȱeconomicȱdataȱofȱtheȱlifeȱofȱtheȱcity,ȱfromȱtheȱearlyȱstagesȱofȱitsȱ foundationȱtoȱitsȱdecline.ȱ

5ȱDAVIESȱ1932,ȱp.ȱ145Ȭ162;ȱKIOURTZOGLOUȱetȱal.ȱ1999,ȱp.ȱ295Ȭ297.ȱ 6ȱTSELEKASȱ1996.ȱ 7ȱTRAKOSOPOULOUȬSALAKIDOUȱ1996,ȱp.ȱ301,ȱfig.ȱ2,ȱpl.ȱ6.ȱ 8ȱTRAKOSOPOULOUȱ1995,ȱp.ȱ482;ȱTRAKOSOPOULOUȬSALAKIDOUȱ2006Ȭ2007,ȱp.ȱ45Ȭ54.ȱ 9ȱTRAKOSOPOULOUȬSALAKIDOUȱ2004b,ȱp.ȱ167Ȭ179.ȱȱ 10ȱTRAKOSOPOULOUȬSALAKIDOUȱ1993,ȱp.ȱ413Ȭ415;ȱRHOMIOPOULOUȱ1999,ȱp.ȱ289.ȱ 11ȱTheȱstudyȱofȱthisȱlargeȱassemblageȱisȱstillȱinȱprogressȱasȱpartȱofȱmyȱPh.ȱD.ȱthesis.ȱ ȱ TRANSPORTȱAMPHORAEȱFROMȱAKANTHOSȱȱ 69 ȱȱȱ ȱ Highlyȱ representativeȱ inȱ theȱ assemblageȱ areȱ theȱ Chianȱ amphorae12.ȱ Theȱ earliestȱamphoraeȱofȱthisȱgroup,ȱdatedȱtoȱtheȱsecondȱhalfȱofȱtheȱ7thȱcenturyȱBC,ȱareȱ quiteȱlargeȱvesselsȱwithȱheavyȱproportions.ȱTheirȱentireȱsurfaceȱisȱcoveredȱwithȱaȱ whitishȱslip,ȱwhileȱtheirȱbandedȱdecorationȱappearsȱtoȱbeȱvariant13.ȱTheȱresultsȱofȱ theȱ chemicalȱ analysisȱ ofȱ theirȱ clayȱ paste,ȱ conductedȱ byȱ theȱ Culturalȱ andȱ Educationalȱ Technologyȱ Instituteȱ atȱ Xanthi,ȱ haveȱ demonstratedȱ thatȱ theseȱ amphoraeȱ belongȱ toȱ theȱ sameȱ chemicalȱ group.ȱ Theseȱ areȱ theȱ firstȱ transportȱ amphoraeȱthatȱarrivedȱinȱAcanthusȱshortlyȱafterȱitsȱfoundationȱandȱareȱdatedȱtoȱ theȱthirdȱandȱtheȱlastȱquarterȱofȱtheȱ7thȱcenturyȱBCȱ(Fig.ȱ11a).ȱ Earlyȱ Chianȱ amphoraeȱ fromȱ theȱ northernȱ Aegeanȱ haveȱ alsoȱ beenȱ foundȱ inȱ Abdera,ȱThasos,ȱOisymi,ȱMende,ȱSindos,ȱKarabournakiȱandȱLeibithra14,ȱindicatingȱ aȱparticularlyȱactiveȱChianȱtradeȱnotȱonlyȱalongȱtheȱMacedonianȱcoastȱbutȱalsoȱinȱ theȱhinterland.ȱȱ Duringȱ theȱ firstȱ halfȱ ofȱ theȱ 6thȱ centuryȱ BC,ȱ amphoraeȱ withȱ whitishȱ slipȱ becomeȱ moreȱ delicateȱ inȱ shape15.ȱ Toȱ thisȱ latterȱ phaseȱ belongȱ twoȱ almostȱ intactȱ examples.ȱTheȱoneȱofȱthemȱhasȱaȱmoreȱovalȱbody,ȱwhichȱallowsȱitsȱdatingȱtoȱtheȱ secondȱ quarterȱ ofȱ theȱ 6thȱ century,ȱ whileȱ theȱ otherȱ becomesȱ spindleshapeȱ withȱ moreȱ slenderȱ proportions,ȱ clearlyȱ aȱ moreȱ developedȱ shapeȱ classifiedȱ inȱ theȱ lastȱ examplesȱofȱtheȱseriesȱofȱamphoraeȱwithȱ«whiteȱslip»,ȱdatedȱtoȱtheȱthirdȱquarterȱofȱ theȱ6thȱcenturyȱBC.ȱ Theȱ amphoraeȱ ofȱ theȱ «funnel»ȱ neckȱ typeȱ appearȱ inȱ theȱ middleȱ ofȱ theȱ 6thȱ centuryȱ BC,ȱ beforeȱ theȱ productionȱ ofȱ amphoraeȱ withȱ whitishȱ slipȱ ceases16ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ (Fig.ȱ 11b).ȱ Sixȱ examplesȱ fromȱ Akanthosȱ bearȱ tracesȱ ofȱ thinȱ whitishȱ slipȱ andȱ decorationȱ withȱ veryȱ thinȱ stripes.ȱ Theyȱ belongȱ toȱ Lambrinoȱ A1ȱ typeȱ andȱ dateȱ fromȱtheȱsecondȱhalfȱofȱtheȱ6thȱcentury.ȱȱ Regardingȱ theȱ swollenȬneckedȱ jars,ȱ accordingȱ toȱ theȱ classificationȱ ofȱ Knigge17,ȱtwoȱbelongȱtoȱtheȱC/1ȱtype,ȱwithȱpaintedȱrim,ȱandȱdateȱfromȱc.ȱ500ȱBCȱȱȱ (Fig.ȱ11c),ȱtwoȱtoȱtheȱC/2ȱtypeȱofȱtheȱsecondȱquarterȱofȱtheȱ5thȱcenturyȱ(c.ȱ450ȱBC)ȱ andȱoneȱtoȱtheȱC/3ȱtypeȱfromȱtheȱthirdȱquarterȱofȱtheȱ5thȱcenturyȱBC.ȱȱ

12ȱSeeȱgeneralȱDUPONTȱ2003,ȱp.ȱ146Ȭ148;ȱMONACHOVȱ2003a,ȱp.ȱ11Ȭ24.ȱ 13ȱRegardingȱtheȱpossibilityȱthatȱChianȱvesselsȱwereȱmanufacturedȱinȱotherȱworkshopsȱ offȱ theȱ island,ȱ e.g.ȱ inȱ Maroneia,ȱ Abdera,ȱ Klazomenaiȱ orȱ theȱ areaȱ ofȱ Erythres,ȱ seeȱ LEMOSȱ 1986,ȱp.ȱ157Ȭ173;ȱSKARLATIDOUȱ2000,ȱp.ȱ287Ȭ288;ȱDO

18ȱDUPONTȱ2003,ȱp.ȱ152Ȭ154,ȱfig.ȱ23.3aȬd.ȱ 19ȱZEESTȱ1960,ȱp.ȱ72Ȭ74,ȱpl.ȱ̌̌ȱno.ȱ7Ȭ8.ȱCLINKENBEARDȱ1986,ȱp.ȱ354.ȱ 20ȱPELAGATTIȱ1976Ȭ1977,ȱtav.ȱLXXVIȱno.ȱ13.ȱBÎRZESCUȱ2005,ȱp.ȱ50Ȭ52,ȱabb.ȱ1ȱno.ȱ3.ȱ 21ȱDUPONTȱ2010b,ȱp.ȱ37Ȭ47.ȱ 22ȱCLINKENBEARDȱ1982,ȱp.ȱ258Ȭ259,ȱpl.ȱ69aȬd.ȱ 23ȱLAWALLȱ1995,ȱp.ȱ177Ȭ181.ȱ 24ȱDUPONTȱ2003,ȱp.ȱ168Ȭ169,ȱfig.ȱ23.9bȬc.ȱ ȱ TRANSPORTȱAMPHORAEȱFROMȱAKANTHOSȱȱ 71 ȱȱȱ centuryȱ BC.ȱ Fourȱ additionalȱ jarsȱ couldȱ beȱ includedȱ inȱ theȱ sameȱ group,ȱ datedȱ possiblyȱ toȱ theȱ lateȱ 6thȱ century.ȱ Accordingȱ toȱ theȱ latestȱ data,ȱ theȱ originȱ ofȱ theseȱ amphoraeȱcouldȱbeȱdetectedȱinȱN.ȱAegeanȱ(probablyȱinȱtheȱareaȱofȱAbdera)25.ȱ TheȱconservedȱamphoraeȱderivingȱfromȱThasosȱareȱquiteȱlimitedȱ(Fig.ȱ13aȬb).ȱ TheyȱbelongȱtoȱtheȱdoubleȬbandedȱrimȱtypeȱ(lateȱ6thȱȬȱearlyȱ5thȱcenturyȱBC)26,ȱtoȱtheȱ ȈpithoidȱThasianȈȱtypeȱ(midȱ5thȱcentury)27,ȱwhileȱoneȱexampleȱisȱofȱtheȱȈunstampedȱ ThasianȈȱtypeȱofȱtheȱlateȱ5thȱcentury28.ȱȱ Theȱ examplesȱ fromȱ Mendeȱ areȱ manyȱ andȱ areȱ characterizedȱ byȱ aȱ short,ȱ evertedȱrim,ȱsetȱoffȱbyȱoneȱorȱmoreȱgroovesȱaroundȱtheȱneck,ȱbroadȱflatȱhandlesȱ punctuatedȱ byȱ aȱ thumbprintȱ atȱ theȱ lowerȱ attachment,ȱ andȱ aȱ flaringȱ toeȱ withȱ shallowȱ depressionȱ onȱ theȱ undersideȱ (Fig.ȱ 13cȬd).ȱ Someȱ ofȱ themȱ haveȱ aȱ reddishȱ horizontalȱ bandȱ onȱ theȱ lowerȱ partȱ ofȱ theȱ bodyȱ andȱ anȱ impressedȱ cycleȱ onȱ theȱ neck.ȱ Theȱ clayȱ fabricȱ isȱ coarseȱ andȱ micaceous,ȱ lightȱ toȱ reddishȱ brownȱ inȱ colour,ȱ withȱ moderateȱ inȱ sizeȱ inclusions,ȱ includingȱ oftenȱ quartz.ȱ Theyȱ belongȱ mainlyȱ toȱ theȱearlyȱandȱmiddleȱvariant,ȱwithȱglobularȱbodyȱandȱslopingȱshoulders,ȱandȱdateȱ fromȱtheȱsecondȱandȱthirdȱquarterȱofȱtheȱ5thȱcentury29.ȱ Aȱ setȱ ofȱ amphoraeȱ derivesȱ fromȱ Northernȱ Aegeanȱ workshops,ȱ whichȱ exactȱ locationsȱareȱstillȱuncertainȱ(Fig.ȱ13eȬg).ȱTheyȱareȱquiteȱoftenȱreferredȱasȱamphoraeȱ ofȱtheȱ«Thasianȱcircle»30.ȱTheirȱclayȱfabricȱisȱreddishȱtoȱredȬbrownȱinȱcolour,ȱwithȱ manyȱinclusions,ȱmainlyȱmicaceousȱones.ȱTheyȱareȱcharacterizedȱbyȱtheȱsphericalȱ body,ȱ theȱ ringȱ baseȱ andȱ theȱ short,ȱ solid,ȱ ovalȱ inȱ crossȱ section,ȱ handlesȱ withȱ thumbprintsȱ onȱ theirȱ base.ȱ Variationsȱ occurȱ inȱ theȱ formationȱ ofȱ theȱ rim.ȱ Theirȱ morphologicalȱattributesȱallowȱtheirȱdatingȱtoȱtheȱearlyȱ5thȱcenturyȱBC.ȱ OnlyȱoneȱfragmentedȱexampleȱfromȱtheȱcemeteryȱofȱAkanthosȱbelongsȱtoȱtheȱ AtticȱSOSȱamphoraȱ(Fig.ȱ14a).ȱOnȱtheȱbasisȱofȱtheȱdecorationȱonȱtheȱneckȱitȱcanȱbeȱ attributedȱbetweenȱtypesȱS,ȱO,ȱSȱandȱS,ȱOa,ȱS,ȱaccordingȱtoȱJohnstonȱandȱJonesȱandȱ datesȱfromȱlateȱ7thȱcentury31.ȱTypicalȱexamplesȱofȱtheȱàȱlaȱbrosseȱamphoraeȱgroupȱ areȱ eightȱ jarsȱ datingȱ fromȱ theȱ secondȱ halfȱ ofȱ theȱ 6thȱ andȱ earlyȱ 5thȱ century32ȱ (Fig.ȱ 14bȬc).ȱȱ Thereȱ areȱ threeȱ examplesȱ ofȱ Laconianȱ amphoraeȱ inȱ theȱ cemeteryȱ ofȱ Akanthos33.ȱTheȱfirstȱbelongsȱtoȱStibbe’sȱgroupȱGȱ(orȱPelagatti’sȱtypeȱ1),ȱdatedȱtoȱ theȱmidȱ6thȱcentury,ȱtheȱsecondȱtoȱStibbe’sȱgroupȱIȱ(orȱPelagatti’sȱtypeȱ2),ȱdatedȱtoȱ theȱendȱofȱtheȱ6thȱcenturyȱ(Fig.ȱ14d).ȱTheȱthirdȱcouldȱalsoȱbeȱincludedȱinȱStibbe’sȱ groupȱ Iȱ (orȱ Pelagatti’sȱ typeȱ 2)ȱ butȱ showsȱ someȱ peculiaritiesȱ thatȱ occurȱ inȱ earlyȱ Laconianȱ «table»ȱ amphoraeȱ ofȱ Stibbe’sȱ Groupȱ Aȱ andȱ mainlyȱ inȱ 7thȱ centuryȱ Atticȱ SOSȱamphorae,ȱaȱfactȱwhichȱmakesȱPelagatti’sȱassumptionȱthatȱLaconicȱamphoraeȱ

25ȱDUPONTȱ2010a,ȱp.ȱ3Ȭ11.ȱ 26ȱJOHNSTONȱ1991,ȱp.ȱ363Ȭ365;ȱGRANDJEANȱ1992,ȱfigs.ȱ1Ȭ5,ȱ9ȱnos.ȱ2,ȱ7,ȱ10,ȱ16Ȭ18,ȱ26Ȭ 28,ȱ34,ȱ61Ȭ63.ȱ 27ȱBRAŠINSKIJȱ1980,ȱp.ȱ19;ȱGARLANȱ1988,ȱp.ȱ13Ȭ14ȱfig.ȱ11.ȱ 28ȱZEESTȱ1960,ȱp.ȱ80Ȭ81,ȱpl.ȱVIȱno.ȱ16;ȱGRANDJEANȱ1992,ȱp.ȱ563Ȭ565,ȱfig.ȱ11ȱnos.ȱ71Ȭ75.ȱ 29ȱLAWALLȱ1995,ȱp.ȱ120Ȭ124,ȱfigs.ȱ37Ȭ41.ȱ 30ȱDUPONTȱ2003,ȱp.ȱ186Ȭ190;ȱLAWALLȱ1997,ȱp.ȱ113Ȭ130.ȱ 31ȱJOHNSTONȱ–ȱJONESȱ1978,ȱp.ȱ135Ȭ136,ȱfig.ȱ8aȬb.ȱ 32ȱLAWALLȱ1995,ȱp.ȱ34Ȭ42,ȱfigs.ȱ1Ȭ5.ȱ 33ȱPELAGATTIȱ–ȱSTIBBEȱ1992,ȱp.ȱ123Ȭ247;ȱSTIBBEȱ2000,ȱp.ȱ70Ȭ72.ȱ 72ȱ KONSTANTINOSȱFILISȱ ȱ deriveȱ fromȱ themȱ quiteȱ plausible.ȱ Theȱ latterȱ jarȱ datesȱ fromȱ lateȱ 7thȱ centuryȱ BC,ȱ accordingȱtoȱitsȱmorphologicalȱattributes.ȱȱ Threeȱexamplesȱofȱamphoraeȱcomeȱfromȱ Corinth.ȱ Theyȱ belongȱtoȱtypeȱAȱofȱ theȱlastȱquarterȱofȱtheȱ6thȱcentury34,ȱtoȱtypeȱA’ȱofȱearlyȱ5thȱcentury35,ȱandȱtypeȱBȱofȱ CorinthianȱȬȱCorcyrianȱamphoraeȱ(TypeȱB/3)ȱofȱmidȬ5thȱcentury36ȱ(Fig.ȱ14e).ȱ ȱ Theȱlocalȱworkshopȱproductsȱȱ Althoughȱ theȱ lateȱ 4thȱ centuryȱ amphoraeȱ bearingȱ wheelȱ stampsȱ canȱ beȱ definitelyȱattributedȱtoȱtheȱlocalȱworkshopȱofȱAkanthos,ȱespeciallyȱsinceȱtheyȱhaveȱ beenȱrecoveredȱinȱtheȱareaȱofȱtheȱceramicȱkilns,ȱitȱisȱstillȱuncertainȱwhetherȱlocalȱ productionȱ beginsȱ earlyȱ inȱ theȱ lateȱ 6thȱ orȱ earlyȱ 5thȱ century.ȱ Theȱ majorityȱ ofȱ amphoraeȱ usedȱ forȱ enchytrismoiȱ belongȱ toȱ aȱ typeȱ whichȱ couldȱ beȱ producedȱ inȱ Akanthos.ȱTheȱsimilaritiesȱwithȱtheȱlateȱfifthȬcenturyȱMendeanȱamphoraeȱandȱtheȱ topȬshapedȱ Thasianȱ typeȱ onesȱ areȱ obvious,ȱ aȱ factȱ thatȱ ledȱ manyȱ researchersȱ toȱ ascribeȱ themȱ toȱ theȱ oneȱ orȱ toȱ theȱ otherȱ productionȱ centre37ȱ orȱ toȱ supportȱ moreȱ generallyȱtheȱviewȱofȱtheȱexistenceȱofȱaȱregionalȱstyleȱ–ȱtheȱNorthȱGreekȱkoineȱȬȱofȱ amphoraȱ production,ȱ commonȱ betweenȱ Mendeȱ andȱ Thasos38.ȱ Neverthelessȱ thereȱ areȱ obviousȱ differencesȱ inȱ theȱ clayȱ fabricȱ andȱ mainlyȱ inȱ theȱ vesselȱ shape.ȱ Specifically,ȱ theȱ Akanthianȱ fabricȱ isȱ reddishȱ inȱ colour39ȱ occasionallyȱ withȱ aȱ grayȱ coreȱandȱcontainsȱaȱsufficientȱamountȱofȱmicaeousȱandȱlimestoneȱfragments.ȱTheirȱ surfaceȱ isȱ relativelyȱ smoothȱ coveredȱ withȱ aȱ thinȱ slip,ȱ lightȱ inȱ colour40.ȱ Theȱ preliminaryȱresultsȱofȱtheȱchemicalȱanalysisȱofȱtheȱclayȱpasteȱappearsȱtoȱconfirmȱ theȱrelationȱofȱthisȱgroupȱwithȱtheȱamphoraeȱbearingȱwheelȱstamps.ȱRegardingȱtheȱ morphologicalȱ characteristics,ȱ theȱ rimȱ isȱ plainȱ andȱ slightlyȱ projecting,ȱ usuallyȱ separatedȱ fromȱ theȱ neckȱ withȱ aȱ horizontalȱ grooveȱ (intenseȱ orȱ less).ȱ Theȱ bodyȱ shapeȱisȱovalȱinȱtheȱbeginning,ȱwithȱtheȱmaximumȱdiameterȱinȱtheȱupperȱhalfȱorȱinȱ theȱmiddle,ȱandȱlaterȱdevelopsȱintoȱconicalȱshape.ȱTheȱneckȱisȱveryȱshortȱandȱtheȱ diskȱshapeȱbaseȱisȱlowȱandȱnarrowȱwithȱaȱsmallȱundersideȱcircularȱdepression,ȱinȱ someȱcasesȱbearingȱaȱlowȱnippleȱprojectionȱinȱtheȱcentre41.ȱTheȱhandlesȱareȱquiteȱ short,ȱ ovalȱ inȱ crossȱ section,ȱ whileȱ theirȱ upperȱ jointȱ occupiesȱ almostȱ theȱ wholeȱ heightȱ ofȱ theȱ neck,ȱ whileȱ theyȱ haveȱ thumbprintsȱ onȱ theȱ shoulder.ȱ Oneȱ exampleȱ bearsȱ aȱ circularȱ stampȱ withȱ anȱ A42ȱ (Fig.ȱ 15a).ȱ Importantȱ evidenceȱ suggestingȱ theȱ attributionȱofȱthisȱgroupȱtoȱtheȱlocalȱworkshopȱisȱthatȱsomeȱexamplesȱhaveȱstrongȱ manufacturingȱ defects,ȱ dueȱ toȱ theȱ firingȱ process.ȱ Theseȱ examples,ȱ basedȱ exclusivelyȱ onȱ theirȱ morphologicalȱ attributes,ȱ dateȱ fromȱ theȱ beginningȱ toȱ theȱ secondȱquarterȱofȱtheȱ5thȱcentury.ȱ

34ȱKOEHLERȱ1978a,ȱp.ȱ98Ȭ99ȱno.ȱ22,ȱpl.ȱ4;ȱVASSALLOȱ2003,ȱp.ȱ333,ȱ335ȱfig.ȱ2ȱno.ȱ7.ȱ 35ȱKOEHLERȱ1978a,ȱp.ȱ16Ȭ17,ȱ106ȱno.ȱ39,ȱpls.ȱ6ȱandȱ15.ȱ 36ȱKOEHLERȱ1978a,ȱplsȱ30,ȱ39ȱno.ȱ229.ȱ 37ȱROBERTSȱ1986,ȱnos.ȱ426Ȭ428.ȱȱ 38ȱLAWALLȱ1995,ȱp.ȱ156Ȭ175;ȱLAWALLȱ1997,ȱp.ȱ113Ȭ130.ȱ 39ȱMunsellȱSoilȱColorȱ2.5ȱYRȱ5/6.ȱ 40ȱMunsellȱSoilȱColorȱ10ȱYRȱ8/2.ȱ 41ȱTheȱshapeȱofȱtheȱbaseȱisȱsimilarȱwithȱLawall’sȱ“FGȱ1ȱdiscȬbase”,ȱseeȱLAWALLȱ1997,ȱȱȱȱ p.ȱ116Ȭ117,ȱfigȱ3.ȱ 42ȱRHOMIOPOULOUȱ1986,ȱp.ȱ480Ȭ481,ȱfigs.ȱ2,ȱ6ȱno.ȱ1.ȱ ȱ TRANSPORTȱAMPHORAEȱFROMȱAKANTHOSȱȱ 73 ȱȱȱ Theȱlocalȱworkshopsȱbecomeȱmoreȱactiveȱinȱtheȱ4thȱcentury.ȱTheȱ4thȱcenturyȱ examplesȱderivingȱfromȱtheȱworkshopȱareaȱbearȱslightȱvariationsȱinȱtheȱshapeȱofȱ theȱrim.ȱItȱisȱgenerallyȱtriangularȱinȱsectionȱwithȱflatȱorȱslightlyȱslopingȱtheȱupperȱ surfaceȱandȱhaveȱaȱslightlyȱhorizontalȱgrooveȱonȱtheȱjointȱwithȱtheȱneck.ȱTheȱneckȱ isȱsharplyȱconicalȱandȱoftenȱbearsȱaȱhorizontalȱgrooveȱonȱtheȱbase.ȱTheȱtall,ȱovalȱinȱ crossȱsection,ȱhandlesȱadjustȱjustȱbelowȱtheȱrim,ȱriseȱslightlyȱandȱverticallyȱreachȱ theȱ shoulder,ȱ whereȱ thumbprintsȱ areȱ set.ȱ Usuallyȱ theȱ backȱ ofȱ theȱ handlesȱ carryȱ stampsȱinȱtheȱformȱofȱaȱthreeȬorȱfourȬspokedȱwheel,ȱoftenȱwithȱlettersȱbetweenȱtheȱ spokes,ȱincludingȱtheȱlettersȱAKANȱ(Fig.ȱ15b).ȱForȱtheȱinterpretationȱofȱtheseȱsealsȱ theȱ contributionȱ ofȱ Y.ȱ Garlanȱ isȱ ofȱ greatȱ importance43.ȱ Anȱ intactȱ exampleȱ ofȱ theȱ typeȱwithȱconicalȱneckȱhasȱnotȱyetȱbeenȱfoundȱinȱtheȱworkshopȱarea.ȱHowever,ȱanȱ almostȱintactȱexampleȱderivingȱfromȱtheȱcemeteryȱareaȱgivesȱusȱtheȱoverallȱshape.ȱ (Fig.ȱ15c)ȱTheȱflaringȱoutwardȱshoulderȱcurvesȱtoȱformȱaȱconicalȱbodyȱthatȱinȱtheȱ lowerȱ partȱ endsȱ inȱ aȱ stemȱ toeȱ withȱ aȱ smallȱ undersideȱ depression.ȱ Thereȱ areȱ notȱ anyȱ stampsȱ onȱ theȱ handles.ȱ Theȱ clayȱ fabricȱ isȱ reddishȱ toȱ brownȱ inȱ colour44ȱ dependingȱ onȱ firingȱ conditions,ȱ usuallyȱ havingȱ aȱ grayȱ core.ȱ Itsȱ hardnessȱ isȱ moderateȱ andȱ containsȱ aȱ sufficientȱ amountȱ ofȱ sand,ȱ micaeousȱ andȱ limestoneȱ fragmentsȱ ofȱ differentȱ sizesȱ (someȱ coarseȱ grainedȱ quartzȱ fragmentsȱ canȱ beȱ identified).ȱ Theȱ outerȱ surfaceȱ isȱ usuallyȱ coveredȱ byȱ aȱ thinȱ slipȱ lightȱ inȱ colour45.ȱ Thisȱparticularȱjarȱshouldȱbeȱdatedȱtoȱtheȱfirstȱhalfȱofȱtheȱ4thȱcenturyȱBC.ȱ Anotherȱtypeȱofȱamphoraȱassociatedȱwithȱtheȱlocalȱproductionȱwasȱfoundȱnotȱ onlyȱ inȱ theȱ kilnsȱ complexȱ (inȱ theȱ exteriorȱ ofȱ kilnȱ 5)ȱ (Fig.ȱ 15d)ȱ butȱ alsoȱ inȱ largeȱ quantitiesȱ(aroundȱ250),ȱinȱanȱareaȱofȱaboutȱ100ȱmetersȱfromȱthemȱ(Fig.ȱ16).ȱTheyȱ wereȱplacedȱinȱorderȱunderȱaȱroofedȱstoa,ȱnextȱtoȱaȱpartiallyȱpreservedȱcomplex,ȱ alsoȱ relatedȱ toȱ theȱ industrialȱ zoneȱ ofȱ theȱ city.ȱ Accordingȱ toȱ theȱ excavatorȱ E.ȱ Trakosopoulou,ȱ theyȱ dateȱ fromȱ theȱ 4thȱ century,ȱ basedȱ onȱ theȱ numismaticȱ andȱ otherȱceramicȱevidence46.ȱTheyȱpresentȱtheȱfollowingȱmorphologicalȱfeatures:ȱveryȱ boldȱ lip,ȱ broad,ȱ triangularȱ inȱ crossȱ section,ȱ withȱ aȱ flatȱ upperȱ surfaceȱ separatedȱ fromȱ theȱ neckȱ byȱ aȱ horizontalȱ groove;ȱ tallȱ neck,ȱ cylindricalȱ atȱ theȱ upperȱ part,ȱ flaringȱtoȱtheȱbroadȱhorizontalȱshoulderȱthatȱbendsȱsharplyȱtoȱformȱaȱconicalȱbodyȱ shape.ȱAtȱtheȱbottom,ȱaȱcylindricalȱstemȱisȱformedȱwithȱaȱwideȱknobȱtoe,ȱangularȱ inȱprofileȱwithȱaȱconicalȱundersideȱdepression.ȱTheȱhandlesȱareȱtall,ȱovalȱinȱcrossȱ section,ȱ andȱ alwaysȱ bearȱ thumbprintsȱ onȱ theirȱ base.ȱ Aȱ secondȱ typeȱ ofȱ amphora,ȱ smallerȱinȱsizeȱ(capacityȱaprxȱ9ȱlt.),ȱwithȱspindleȬshapedȱbodyȱandȱaȱsimilarȱrimȱ shape,ȱwasȱfoundȱinȱsmallerȱquantitiesȱinȱtheȱsameȱareaȱ(Fig.ȱ15e).ȱSomeȱofȱthemȱ areȱ characterisedȱ byȱ aȱ clayȱ fabricȱ orangeȬredȱ inȱ colour,ȱ whileȱ othersȱ byȱ darkȱ brownȱ withȱ aȱ grayȱ core.ȱ Theirȱ compositionȱ isȱ sandyȱ withȱ sufficientȱ amountsȱ ofȱ micaȱandȱlimestoneȱfragmentsȱofȱvariousȱsizes.ȱItsȱhardnessȱisȱmoderateȱandȱitȱisȱ quiteȱ brittleȱ inȱ overall.ȱ Inȱ someȱ casesȱ theȱ surfaceȱ isȱ coveredȱ byȱ aȱ thinȱ whitishȱ slip47.ȱ Theseȱ specificȱ typesȱ ofȱ amphoraeȱ areȱ quiteȱ similarȱ toȱ examplesȱ fromȱ

43ȱGARLANȱ2004c,ȱp.ȱ181Ȭ190;ȱGARLANȱ2006,ȱp.ȱ263Ȭ291.ȱ 44ȱMunsellȱSoilȱColorȱ2.5ȱYRȱ5/8.ȱ 45ȱMunsellȱSoilȱColorȱ10YRȱ7/4.ȱ 46ȱTRAKOSOPOULOUȬSALAKIDOUȱ2004a,ȱp.ȱ157Ȭ166.ȱ 47ȱMunsellȱSoilȱColorȱ7.5YRȱ7ȱ/ȱ4ȱ(pink)ȱ 74ȱ KONSTANTINOSȱFILISȱ ȱ Thasos48,ȱ supportingȱ theȱ viewȱ ofȱ theȱ existenceȱ ofȱ aȱ regionalȱ style,ȱ orȱ koine,ȱ ofȱ amphoraȱproduction,ȱcommonȱbetweenȱMendeȱandȱThasosȱduringȱtheȱ4thȱcenturyȱ BC.ȱOnȱtheseȱjarsȱstampsȱareȱrelativelyȱrare,ȱwhileȱtheȱfewȱexamplesȱ(onlyȱthreeȱ amphorae)ȱ haveȱ mainlyȱ rectangularȱ stampsȱ withȱ symbolsȱ suchȱ asȱ theȱ dolphinȱ withȱ lettersȱ ̘Ȭ̌ȱ orȱ KȬAȱ andȱ voluteȱ craterȱ withȱ lettersȱ AȬ̔49.ȱ Theȱ studyȱ ofȱ thisȱ assemblage,ȱalongȱwithȱtheȱstampsȱfromȱtheȱworkshopȱareaȱisȱstillȱinȱprogress.ȱȱ ȱ Toȱ summarize,ȱ theȱ assemblageȱ ofȱ amphoraeȱ presentedȱ demonstratesȱ theȱ vigorousȱimportsȱofȱcommercialȱamphoraeȱfromȱtheȱEastȱAegeanȱareaȱinȱtheȱearlyȱ periodȱofȱtheȱfoundationȱofȱtheȱcolonyȱofȱAndros,ȱprimarilyȱfromȱChios,ȱandȱthenȱ fromȱ Lesbos,ȱ Klazomenai,ȱ Miletusȱ andȱ Samos50.ȱ Theseȱ specialȱ relationsȱ withȱ theȱ Easternȱ Aegeanȱ areaȱ andȱ Asiaȱ Minorȱ coastȱ haveȱ beenȱ alsoȱ evidentȱ throughȱ theȱ introductionȱ ofȱ otherȱ ceramicȱ productsȱ (suchȱ asȱ cups,ȱ amphoriskoi,ȱ singleȬ handledȱ cups,ȱ feedingȱ bottles,ȱ kanastraȱ etc.,ȱ whichȱ theȱ localȱ pottersȱ imitate),ȱ aȱ phenomenonȱ alsoȱ observedȱ notȱ onlyȱ throughoutȱ theȱ Chalkidiki,ȱ butȱ alsoȱ inȱ Thasos,ȱThasiakiȱPereaȱandȱtheȱcoastȱofȱThrace,ȱAbderaȱandȱMesembria.ȱThisȱdoesȱ notȱ necessarilyȱ implyȱ Acanthus’ȱ directȱ contactȱ withȱ theseȱ areas.ȱ Moreȱ likelyȱ theȱ commoditiesȱwereȱimportedȱthroughȱotherȱtradersȱ(e.g.ȱRhodians)51ȱwhoȱcrossedȱ theȱAegeanȱatȱthisȱtime.ȱȱ Theȱ introductionȱ ofȱ Corinthianȱ amphorae,ȱ unlikeȱ otherȱ productsȱ ofȱ Corinthianȱpottery,ȱthatȱȱareȱcommonȱfromȱmidȬ7thȱcentury,ȱbeginsȱinȱtheȱlateȱ6thȱ centuryȱ (examplesȱ ofȱ Corinthianȱ typeȱ Aȱ amphorae,ȱ thoughȱ notȱ conserved,ȱ alsoȱ existȱandȱbelongȱtoȱtheȱlateȱ6thȱcentury),ȱwhileȱrareȱareȱtheȱexamplesȱofȱAtticȱSOSȱ amphoraeȱfromȱtheȱ7thȱcentury.ȱFewȱareȱalsoȱtheȱexamplesȱofȱLaconianȱamphorae.ȱ Theȱ àȱ laȱ brosseȱ amphorae,ȱ whichȱ wereȱ probablyȱ manufacturedȱ inȱ Atticȱ workshops,ȱ areȱ commonȱ especiallyȱ fromȱ theȱ lateȱ 6thȱ centuryȱ andȱ theȱ earlyȱ 5thȱ century.ȱ Also,ȱ despiteȱ theȱ hostileȱ relationsȱ withȱ Thasos,ȱ whichȱ dateȱ backȱ toȱ theȱ oldȱcontroversyȱofȱParosȱandȱAndrosȱforȱcontrollingȱtheȱregion,ȱimportantȱisȱtheȱ presenceȱofȱThasianȱȈdoubleȬbandedȱrimȈȱtypeȱamphoraeȱfromȱtheȱlateȱ6thȱcenturyȱ (althoughȱ preciseȱ quantitativeȱ dataȱ doȱ notȱ exist)52.ȱ Thisȱ leadsȱ usȱ toȱ stressȱ onceȱ againȱthatȱtheȱtradeȱofȱamphoraeȱfollowsȱitsȱownȱrulesȱandȱtheirȱintroductionȱtoȱ Akanthosȱ isȱ relatedȱ toȱ theȱ needs,ȱ requestsȱ andȱ theȱ reputationȱ ofȱ productsȱ fromȱ differentȱcentresȱofȱtheȱancientȱworld.ȱFromȱtheȱlateȱ6thȱcenturyȱandȱtheȱbeginningȱ ofȱtheȱ5thȱcentury,ȱwhenȱtheȱlocalȱworkshopȱisȱactive,ȱimportsȱofȱamphoraeȱfromȱ otherȱ centresȱ doȱ notȱ stop,ȱ butȱ areȱ reducedȱ significantlyȱ (mainlyȱ theȱ productsȱ ofȱ Chiosȱ andȱ Samos/Miletus).ȱ Atȱ thatȱ time,ȱ theȱ neighbouringȱ Mendeȱ amphoraeȱ appear,ȱ alongȱ withȱ otherȱ fromȱ unidentifiedȱ northernȱ Greeceȱ workshops.ȱ Theȱ

48ȱMONACHOVȱ2003a,ȱtab.ȱ44.ȱ 49ȱGARLANȱ1989,ȱ480,ȱfig.ȱ1m.ȱ 50ȱEspeciallyȱSamosȱisȱconsideredȱtoȱhaveȱusedȱtheȱdeclineȱofȱtheȱotherȱIonianȱcitiesȱtoȱ developȱ commercially,ȱ sinceȱ itȱ wasȱ leftȱ unpunishedȱ byȱ theȱ Persiansȱ afterȱ itsȱ withdrawalȱ afterȱtheȱbattleȱofȱLadis.ȱMoreover,ȱinȱtheȱ7thȱcenturyȱSamosȱandȱErythresȱactedȱasȱrefereesȱ forȱgivingȱAcanthosȱtoȱChalkisȱorȱAndros.ȱȱ 51ȱTIVERIOSȱ1993,ȱp.ȱ1487Ȭ1493.ȱ 52ȱTheȱcloseȱrelationsȱtoȱThasosȱareȱalsoȱobservedȱthroughȱtheȱimportsȱofȱotherȱceramicȱ vessels,ȱsuchȱasȱfootlessȱkylixȱandȱskyphoiȱwithȱsubȬgeometricȱdecoration,ȱseeȱPANTIȱ2008,ȱ p.ȱ44ȱff.ȱ ȱ TRANSPORTȱAMPHORAEȱFROMȱAKANTHOSȱȱ 75 ȱȱȱ presenceȱ ofȱ earlyȱ Akanthianȱ amphoraeȱ (datedȱ toȱ theȱ 5thȱ century)ȱ inȱ foreignȱ marketsȱ isȱ notȱ veryȱ frequent,ȱ butȱ byȱ theȱ midȱ 4thȱ centuryȱ «wheel»ȱ stampedȱ amphoraeȱareȱaȱkeyȱexportȱproductȱofȱtheȱregionȱandȱtheyȱareȱcommonlyȱfoundȱinȱ theȱmarketsȱofȱtheȱNorthȱAegeanȱandȱtheȱBlackȱSea.ȱ Hopefully,ȱtheȱcompletionȱofȱtheȱstudyȱofȱtheȱlargerȱamountȱofȱtheȱnumerousȱ amphorae,ȱbothȱfromȱtheȱcemeteryȱandȱtheȱworkshopȱarea,ȱwillȱenableȱtoȱanswerȱ questionsȱregardingȱnotȱonlyȱtheȱextentȱandȱdensityȱofȱtheȱknownȱorȱlessȱknownȱ typesȱ ofȱ importedȱ amphoraeȱ inȱ Akanthosȱ fromȱ theȱ middleȱ ofȱ theȱ 7thȱ toȱ theȱ 4thȱ century,ȱ butȱ alsoȱ theȱ moreȱ preciseȱ classification,ȱ typologicalȱ developmentȱ andȱ chronologyȱofȱtheȱlocalȱproducts.ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ 76ȱ KONSTANTINOSȱFILISȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Fig.ȱ1ȱ–ȱAkanthos:ȱsiteȱofȱtheȱancientȱcityȱ(Tiveriosȱ2008).ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Fig.ȱ2ȱ–ȱGeneralȱtopographicȱplanȱofȱtheȱancientȱcityȱ ȱ(TrakosopoulouȬSalakidouȱ2006Ȭ2007).ȱ ȱ TRANSPORTȱAMPHORAEȱFROMȱAKANTHOSȱȱ 77 ȱȱȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Fig.ȱ3ȱ–ȱSilverȱcoinsȱofȱAkanthosȱ(Kaltsasȱ1998).ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Fig.ȱ4ȱ–ȱPublicȱbuildingȱ(Trakosopoulouȱ–ȱSalakidouȱ1996).ȱ ȱ 78ȱ KONSTANTINOSȱFILISȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Fig.ȱ5ȱ–ȱTheȱ“ekatompedos”ȱtempleȱ(TrakosopoulouȱȬȱSalakidouȱ1996).ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ TRANSPORTȱAMPHORAEȱFROMȱAKANTHOSȱȱ 79 ȱȱȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Fig.ȱ6ȱ–ȱPlanȱofȱtheȱkilnsȱcomplexȱ(TrakosopoulouȬȱSalakidouȱ2004).ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Fig.ȱ7ȱ–ȱCeramicȱKilnsȱ(TrakosopoulouȬȱSalakidouȱ2004).ȱ ȱ 80ȱ KONSTANTINOSȱFILISȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Fig.ȱ8ȱ–ȱTheȱamphoraeȱkilnȱ(TrakosopoulouȬȱSalakidouȱ2004).ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ TRANSPORTȱAMPHORAEȱFROMȱAKANTHOSȱȱ 81 ȱȱȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Fig.ȱ9ȱ–ȱViewȱofȱtheȱstoaȱbuildingȱinȱtheȱceramicȱworkshopȱarea.ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Fig.ȱ10ȱ–ȱViewȱofȱtheȱancientȱcemeteryȱwithȱtheȱ“enchytrismoi”ȱ(Kaltsasȱ1998).ȱ ȱ 82ȱ KONSTANTINOSȱFILISȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Fig.ȱ11ȱ–ȱChian,ȱKlazomenian,ȱLesbianȱandȱ“Lesbian”ȱtypeȱamphorae.ȱ ȱ TRANSPORTȱAMPHORAEȱFROMȱAKANTHOSȱȱ 83 ȱȱȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Fig.ȱ12ȱ–ȱSamos–MiletosȱtypeȱandȱZeest’sȱ«Samian»ȱtypeȱamphorae.ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ 84ȱ KONSTANTINOSȱFILISȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Fig.ȱ13ȱ–ȱThasian,ȱMendeanȱandȱNorthȱAegeanȱamphorae.ȱ

ȱ TRANSPORTȱAMPHORAEȱFROMȱAKANTHOSȱȱ 85 ȱȱȱ

Fig.ȱ14ȱ–ȱAttic,ȱLaconianȱandȱCorinthianȱamphorae.ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ 86ȱ KONSTANTINOSȱFILISȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Fig.ȱ15ȱ–ȱAkanthianȱamphorae.ȱ ȱ ȱ TRANSPORTȱAMPHORAEȱFROMȱAKANTHOSȱȱ 87 ȱȱȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Fig.ȱ16ȱ–ȱAkanthianȱamphorae.