“UP TO THE GATES OF EKRON” Essays on the Archaeology and History of the Eastern Mediterranean in Honor of Seymour Gitin Editor-in-Chief Sidnie White Crawford Editors Amnon Ben-Tor, J.P. Dessel, William G. Dever, Amihai Mazar, and Joseph Aviram Published by THE W.F. ALBRIGHT INSTITUTE OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH THE ISRAEL EXPLORATION SOCIETY JERUSALEM 2007 EAST GREEK AND ETRUSCAN POTTERY IN A PHOENiciAN CONTEXT MARÍA EUGENIA AUBET Universidad Pompeu Fabra Barcelona, Spain Introduction In this study, I propose alternative suggestions for The mutual ignorance of students of the Phoenician the identification of the “people behind the pots.” world handling archaeological data at either end of the Mediterranean may at times give rise to con- Greek Mercenaries? clusions that are questionable and in many cases are strained, as well as to contradictions in the his- The recent publication of the results of the excava- torical interpretation of similar archaeological evi- tions at the important Middle Bronze Age site of dence. This is what has occurred in the matter of the Tel Kabri in Galilee has highlighted the presence of presence at Phoenician centers in the Mediterranean an Iron Age IIB–C fortress that was occupied dur- of imported Greek pottery dated to the late seventh ing the seven–sixth centuries BC (Lehmann 2002). and early sixth centuries BC, which has been in- Situated in the southwestern corner of the tell (in terpreted from very different historical perspectives Area E), the fortress occupied a strategic position on that in some cases bear witness to a clear ideologi- the southern frontier of the kingdom of Tyre, 7 km cal bias. There is obviously something lacking in from the coast and to the north of the Plain of Acco. the methodological approach when opinions are so The construction is notable chiefly for its solid wall disparate. of casemates, built using a typically Phoenician In general, these interpretations tend to over- technique, which housed a small garrison of sol- value the importance of the imported ceramics, the diers in the service of the king of Tyre. In Phase E2a presence of which in any given context may derive (ca. 600 BC), the fort was abandoned immediately from many causes and is not always linked to for- after a violent destruction that has been linked to the eign ethnic groups (see Liverani 1986). The “pots- conquest of Tyre by Nebuchadnezzar II in 605–603 and-people” dilemma has always been particularly BC (Pastor Borgoñón 1995; Lehmann 2002). apparent in studies of decorated Greek pottery. The An abundance of Phoenician pottery was re- fascination wielded by luxury Greek pottery in non- covered from the destruction levels of the fortress: Greek contexts has fostered a tendency to associ- storage jars, red-slipped fine ware, and local black- ate material of this type with the presence of Greek on-red and bichrome ware. Outstanding among the people; but this does not occur with less glamorous non-Phoenician pottery is a small assemblage of pottery like Phoenician or Archaic Etruscan wares. Greek ceramics, representing only 2% of all the pot- A well-known instance is that of the Levantine cit- tery found in this level. Apart from an Attic “SOS” ies of Al Mina, Ras el Bassit, and Tell Sukas, for amphora, all the Greek pottery consists of vessels which a Greek origin has long been defended, based from eastern Greece, among which “bird bowls,” on the analysis of imported Greek pottery; the re- Ionian cups, amphorae, and cooking pots predomi- sults, however, have been shown to be partial, de- nate (Niemeier 2002b). The imported material also liberately selective, and sometimes manipulated includes an Etruscan oinochoe of bucchero ware. (see Perreault 1993: 68; Waldbaum 1997: 4). The Tel Kabri assemblage of Greek pottery con- 447 448 MARÍA EugENIA AubET sists of Archaic Greek types that are widespread found in the principal cities of Asiatic Ionia, like throughout the eastern Mediterranean between Miletum, Ephesus, and Samos, is also noteworthy the second half of the seventh and the early sixth (Naso 2000: 175–78). This seems to reflect a clear centuries BC. In terms of archaeological context, integration of Etruscan commercial interests in the parallel nearest to Kabri is that of the fortress the international exchange networks of the period, of Mezad Ḥashavyahu to the north of Ashkelon dominated by the Ionian cities. that was under the sovereignty of the Kingdom of A very similar or almost identical phenomenon Judah, where an assemblage of East Greek pottery can be seen in the western Mediterranean, where has also come to light. Based on the Greek cooking the presence of these imported Ionian wares cannot vessel sherds in the two assemblages, Niemeier has be related to the arrival of Greek mercenaries. interpreted them as evidence of the presence of a small contingent of Greek mercenaries stationed at Greek Colonists? the two forts (2001: 15–16; 2002a: 328–30). The written Assyrian and Greek sources could be seen In the 1980s, an important assemblage of Ionian as support for this hypothesis; they mention Carian pottery was found in the warehouses of the ancient and Ionian mercenaries in the service of the kings Tartessian port city of Huelva. Situated in the en- of Lydia and Egypt in the time of Psammeticus I virons of the Phoenician port of Gadir, this center (Herodotus Histories II: 152–154 [Aguilera 1960]). had from the eighth century BC been the main In the Niemeier’s opinion, Ezekiel, too, could al- point of trans-shipment for silver from the mines lude to Ionian mercenaries in the Kingdom of Tyre, of the hinterland—Riotinto and Aznalcollar—a although the prophet is less explicit on this point source of wealth that had brought huge profits to the (2001: 19–20). Phoenician colonial world and to the native elites of In fact, the chief difference between Kabri and the interior. other Levantine centers that have also yielded East The presence of Ionian potttery from the end of Greek ceramics from the Archaic period, like Al the seventh century BC in the Phoenician colonial Mina, which are used to support the hypothesis of world and its sphere of influence marked a signifi- the Greek mercenaries, lies in the fact that the latter cant change in preferences in terms of the demand have yielded no Greek cooking pots, thus ruling out for Greek merchandise in the markets of the West. the presence of Greeks (Niemeier 2001: 14–15). In Until then, and from the second half of the eighth the case of Al Mina, it would have been trade rather century BC, it had been the extremely rare and spo- than the military element that was responsible for radic imports of Attic pyxides, Proto-Corinthian ko- the presence of these manufactured articles, al- tylai, Attic and Corinthian amphorae, Euboean bird though the conditions under which the excavations skyphoi, Euboean imitations of Proto-Corinthian were carried out in this port city do not in my opin- kotylai, and cups from Thapsos that had predominat- ion allow for confirming or denying the presence of ed in the Phoenician colonies of southern Spain and foreign domestic pottery at the site at the end of the Carthage. The context of these finds would suggest seventh century BC (see Waldbaum 1997: 12). a limited circulation of Greek merchandise forming It is surprising how little interest was shown part of Phoenician colonial trade, rather than Greek in the presence of Etruscan bucchero ware in the trade as such. Indeed, a few luxury Greek ves- analysis of imports at Kabri. Although it is of mini- sels had given rise to Phoenician imitations made mal proportions—only one vessel—the fact that in in western workshops (Briese and Docter 1991). the eastern Mediterranean, Etruscan pottery (cups, Generally, it was a matter of very choice imports, kantharoi, oinochoai, and amphorae, mostly from found in the Phoenician colonies of Gadir-Doña workshops in the south of Etruria) almost always Blanca, Carthage, Sulcis, Cerro del Villar, Toscanos, appears in association with East Greek ceram- Almuñecar, Fonteta, and in their indigenous sphere ics, for example, at Ras el Bassit and Kition (see of influence (Huelva, Carambolo). Naso 2000), warrants attention. In this context, the The new finds from Huelva demonstrate high proportion of Etruscan bucchero ware vessels changed trends in the range of Greek imports in EAST GREEK AND ETRUSCAN POTTERY IN A PHOENiciAN CONTEXT 449 the Phoenician colonies of southern Iberia and a Arganthonios; he ruled Tartessos for eighty restructuring of the international exchange net- years and lived a hundred and twenty. The works around the years 620–600 BC. This change Phoceans so won this man’s friendship that is reflected in the considerable increase in Greek he first entreated them to leave Ionia and ceramics at Huelva, the bay of Gadir, Toscanos, settle in his country where they would; and and Cerro del Villar, representing homogeneous then, when he could not persuade them to assemblages of East Greek pottery, among which that, and learnt from them how the Median amphorae from Samos and from Chios, Ionian A2 power was increasing, he gave them money cups, “bird bowls” from Northern Ionia, and cups to build a wall round their city therewith, for and hydrias from Samos predominate. At Huelva, the circuit of the wall is of many furlongs East Greek imports, together with a few black-fig- and all this is made of great stones well fit- ured Attic pieces, represent 10% of all the pottery ted together. found in this indigenous city, and their importation In another passage, Herodotus relates (Histories IV: ceased abruptly around 540 BC (Fernández Jurado 152): 1984; Niemeyer 1988–90: 283).