[eleni hasaki] ceceramic kilns in ancient greece: technology and organization of ceramic...

8/16/2019 [Eleni Hasaki] CeCeramic Kilns in Ancient Greece: Technology and Organization of Ceramic Workshopsramic Kilns …

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/eleni-hasaki-ceceramic-kilns-in-ancient-greece-technology-and-organization 1/590

UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI

February 28 th , 2002

I, Eleni Hasaki ,hereby submit this as part of the requirements for the degree of:

Doctorate of Philosophy (Ph.D.)in:

ClassicsIt is entitled:

Ceramic Kilns in Ancient Greece:

Technology and Organization of Ceramic Workshops

Approved by:Diane Harris-ClineCharles Brian RoseJack L. DavisBarbara BurrellPanos Valavanis



CERAMIC KILNS IN ANCIENT GREECE:TECHNOLOGY AND

ORGANIZATION OF CERAMIC WORKSHOPS

A dissertation submitted to theDivision of Research and Advanced Studies

of the University of Cincinnati

in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree ofDOCTORATE OF PHILOSOPHY (Ph.D.)

in the Department of Classicsof the College of Arts and Sciences

2002

by

Eleni Hasaki

B.A., University of Athens, Greece, 1992M.A., University of Cincinnati, 1995

Committee Chair: Diane Harris-Cline, Ph.D.Jack L. Davis, Ph.D.C. Brian Rose, Ph.D.Barbara Burrell, Ph.D.

Outside Reader: Panos Valavanis, Ph.D. University of Athens, Greece



i

ABSTRACT

The present study constitutes a literary, iconographical, technological, and typological

analysis of ceramic kilns in ancient Greece. More than four hundred and fifty kilns dating from

Early Bronze Age to the Byzantine times from the modern state of Greece have been surveyed

and categorized.

Kavmino" is the all-encompassing term for any type of pyrotechnological structure,whether it fired pottery or smelted metal, but later lexicographers also usedijpnov", klivbano"

(krivbano"), and fou' rno" (terms connected primarily with bread ovens) as synonyms to

kavmino" . The iconographical reexamination of the representations of kilns on the Archaic

Penteskoufia plaques suggested that their use as test pieces might account for the irregularities in

the structure and execution level of their scenes.

Chapter II presents all the structural parts (fixed and movable) of a standard, two-

chambered, updraft Greek kiln. The firing process and it fuel requirements are estimated using

ethnographic and experimental data. An Excursus on various pyrotechnological structures such

as the baking oven, the metallurgical furnace, or the lime kiln, highlights the similarities and

differences in the construction and performance of these structures. A comparative approach not

only spells away the prolongued confusion about their operative mechanisms, but also

emphasizes the pyrotechnological interdependence of the practicioners of these crafts. Ceramicworkshops tend to develop in industrial quarters along other crafts. Their presence in sanctuaries

is very limited, and their association with cemeteries should be viewed as a coincidence rather

than as a conscious choice.

In the typological chapter (III), the kilns are distinguished according to the shape of the

combustion chamber (circular and rectangular) and into nine subtypes according to the

arrangement of the support of the perforated floor. A central circular or rectangular support of

the perforated floor is the commonest type. Other types are attested mainly, but not exclusively

in certain periods and areas of Greece. The larger rectangular kilns, although fewer, point to

more specialized production, able to afford their costly operation.

The earliest updraft kilns with an intermediate perforated floor appear in the Middle

Bronze Age. Their design remains stable throughout antiquity. In the historical periods, the

comparisons among periods from Geometric to Byzantine are based on typology, size, and



ii

density of types. Overall, there is a slow progression towards more and slightly bigger kilns in

every period within each workshop.

The size of the kiln is also used as a yardstick to estimate the volume of ceramicproduction. Medium workshops with one to two kilns and with a full-time crew of four to six

persons can be reconstructed based on a potter’s daily production and the capacity of a kilnoperating full-time. Such workshops correspond to the “workshop industry” of craft

specialization categories.



Stou ς goneiv" mou,

Mariva kai Tzwnavko,me pollhv agavph...



Ouj mikro;n de; th' " keramiva" ejsti; mevro"hJ o[ pthsi". dei' de; mhvte e[ latton, mhvte plevon,ajlla; memetrhmevnw" to; pu' r uJpobavllein.

The firing is no small part of the potter's craft.Not too little or too much fire should be built under the pots,but just enough.

Geoponica, VI.3.5



iii

© Eleni Hasaki 2002

All rights preserved. No part of this dissertation can be copied withoutthe written permission of the author.



iv

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The completion of a dissertation is an interesting combination of personal dedication

together with communal effort of many people who graciously have contributed to itsformation and have knowingly or unknowingly affected its development.

At the University of Athens,I thank Prof s. A. Lemos, O. Palagia, and E. Simantoni-Bournia for instilling in me the love for archaeology and their dedication to teaching young

students. Later on at the University of Cincinnati, in the Burnam Classics Library (also known

as the Home) my professors A. Christopherson, G. Cohen, K. Gutzwiller, A. Michelini, H. Parker,

and G. Walberg introduced me to many unknown areas and broadened my horizons whichmade the longer stay a definitely beneficial experience. The continuous supportof the Fulbright

Fellowship, the Taft Graduate Fellowshipand the summer grants of C. Boulter and M. Rawson as

well as the University Research Summer Grant enabled me to carry out my research in Greece.

During the years 1998-2000 I had the honor to participate in the ASCSA program as aVirginia Grace and H. A. Thompson Fellow and to conduct my research in the perfect

environment. The Director of the SchoolProf. J. Muhly,Profs. R. Stroud, M. Langdon,

Stephen Tracey, and B. Burke, R. Bridges, M. Pilali, and T. Elemam facilitated immensely

my research through encouragement, scholarly input,and practical advice. While in AthensI had the privilege to develop fruitful discussions with Ian Whitbread, Director of the

Fitch Laboratory of the British School at Athens.Prof. V. Kilikoglou, at the “Demokritos”

Institute was always willing to read the sections onarchaeological sciences and exchange

ideas.In terms of library assistance, one could not hope for a better combination: since my

first year in Cincinnati I was fortunate to work with the extraordinary librarians J.

Wellington and M. Braunlin as well as their equally conscientious assistants. At the ASCSA

N. Winter combined in one person the helpful librarian and the academic mentorregarding production issues of architectural terracottas. A. Ziskowski, M. Raftopoulou, and

P. Kyriakopoulou offered me valuable help when needed.Outside the nurturing environment of academia, and when faced with 500 cases of

kilns, mainly unpublished, I was extremely fortunate to have a wonderful collaboration with



v

the archaeologists of the local ephorates in Greece, who, despite their hectic schedules, still

found time to consult old notebooks and provide generously the information I was interested

in. Many warm thanks to E. Baziotopoulou-Valavani, Kaza-Papageorgiou, K. Preka-Alexandri (G v Ephorate), A. Doulgeri-Intzesiloglou, V. Adrimi-Sismani (ID v Ephorate);M. Petropoulos, L. Papakosta, and M. Sotiropoulou (ST v Ephorate); X. Arapoyianni,

O. Karagiorga (Z v Ephorate); S. Spyropoulos (E v Ephorate); E. Pappa, E. Psarra (D v Ephorate); E. Grammatikaki, A. Lebessi (Herakleion Ephorate) ; Y. Tsakos, Y.

Kourayos (KA v Ephorate); D. Skorda (I v Ephorate); F. Dakoronia, T. Bougia (IG

Ephorate) and E. Sapouna-Sakellaraki (IA' Ephorate); D. Kourkoumelis (Enalion

Ephorate). The following people kindly shared with me unpublished results of their research:

B. Demierre, V. Cracolici, H. Elton, W. Loomis, A. McLoughlin, A. Penttinen, P. Petridis,E. Psarra, D. Skorda, andC. Zerner .

The directors of excavations of the foreign archaeological schools also facilitated my

access to notebooks, photographic material and plans of the kilns. I thankProfs. H. Kyrieleis,U. Sinn and A. Martin (for Olympia); S. Schmidt (for Eretria);G. Rizza (for Prinias);

Prof. J. Jameson for the excavation of the modern kiln at Porto-Cheli by F. Matson.And especially Prof. Stephen Miller for the kilns at Nemea.

I feel deeply obliged to the staff of the Corinth Excavations, Director G. Sandersand Asst. Director N. Bookidis, not only for their warm hospitality, but also for answering

my numerous questions about the Tile Works and other kilns at ancient Corinth. TheEmeritus Director C.K. Williams, II, believed in my project from our first meeting and

has generously offered his comments and advice since then. M. Roebuck and G.S.Merker supplied me with additional information about the Tile Works. The excavation team

at Kommos directed by Profs. J. Shaw and M. Shaw together with the pottery analyst A.Van Den Moortel presented to me the manuscript of the Kommos monograph before its

publication (see now Shaw et al. 2001).Once the material was collected, it fell upon long-standing friends and colleagues to

point out obscure references, accompany me to kilns (some of not so early in date!!) keep myhead off water when I thought I was drowning, go for long coffees where the topic of

conservation was of little importance. It is my honor to return inadequate thanks forvaluable advice tothe following professors and colleagues A. Ajootian, E. Athanassopoulou,

F. Blondé, S. Klinger, O. Kouka, T. Kozelj, E. Landridge, M. Lawall, Y. Lolos, W. Loomis,



vi

V. Machaira, A. Mazarakis-Ainian, J. Papapolymerou, G. Papassavvas, L. Stirling,

B. Tekkök,D. Welle, and N. Zimi.

My fellow students during my stay at the ASCSA took sincere interest in “Eleni’skilns” and made sure that I did not leave out even one example. Special thanks I owe toLeda Costaki for always looking for kilns while gathering her evidence for ancient streets in

Athens; to V. Tsoukala and C. Verfenstein for fruitful exchange of opinions onPenteskoufia plaques; thanks also to N. Dimitrova, M. Richardson, and A. Yassur-

Landau. I cannot be grateful enough for my cherished friendship with Bryan Burns. Heoversaw the completion of this project as a honorary advisor and solved numerous dilemmas,

selflessly dedicating his time and energy.

The following potters shared with me that insightful knowledge and accumulatedexperience that cannot be found in any books: Costas Chrysogelos (Thasos), DimitrisKirkilessis (Ancient Olympia), Dimitris Nastas (Scopelos) and Takis Tranoulis (Rafina).

My long standing relationship with the workshop of Mr. Abdallah Abdelali and with thefamilies of Abderrazak Sandid and Mohammed Bousrih at Moknine, Tunisia, helped me

understand many aspects of the Greek kilns during the ethnoarchaeological project of thetraditional Tunisian kilns.

Back in Cincinnati a large group of archaeologists and non-archaeologists kept ahealthy balance in my life there and enriched me as a person: Jim Newhard grew up to be the

best friend and colleague once can hope for, being there at airports and hospitals with thesame interest with which he would explain Excel databases or surplus theories. My fellow

students M. Dalinghaus and S. Wallrodt commented on earlier drafts and sharpened mythinking. Our computer assistant, John Wallrodt, enlightened us technologicallyand made

the practical rendering of a dissertation a relatively painless experience . Especially Siriol

Davies, Evi Gorogianni, and Sean Lockwood went beyond the call of colleagues and friends

and I thank them dearly.In my early years a vibrant Greek community kept me in touch with the far away

land and have left with me a cherished box of memories: Ioulia Tzonou-Herbst and NasiaLiakopoulou (with whom we shared endless hours in the computer room), T.

Liakopoulos, C. Matsoukas, N. Oikonomides, the honorary Greek of German nationalityM. Schröder and the dear friend J. Franz. The families of Aleksi Du Comb and James Burns

provided the warmth of a home away from home.



vii

In the last semester of completing this study in my new position at the University

of Arizona at Tucson, faculty and staff gave me the necessary support for the last stretch. Special

thanks to “my Head” Prof. Mary Voyatzis for creating an unobstructed environment and forher steadfast belief in me. Profs. D. Killick and F. Romer, Eleni Saltourides and HaleThomas saved the day in critical moments. A vibrant friend, the artist Paulus “Lucky”

Musters, proved to be an excellent host in the new town. His enthusiasm about kilns andfurnaces was always welcome. Kianoosh Haghighi just made everything happen with his

smile and kindness.The long standing friends, Costas Voyatzis and Karam Chatha, have been

treasuries to have during my entire stay in the United States. A discrete thank you to a

valuable friend, V. Tzerpos for his encouragement and support at the very beginning of itall back in 1992-93. An unusual, but highly necessaryeucaristw v, to a team of highlyskilled and devoted medical doctors, V. Georgoulis, Th. Kanaghinis, N. Dovas, and

especially to K. Karlaftis who literally held my hand at many difficult times. They knowwhy.

Finally my warmest thanks to my dissertation committee: my chair, Diane Harris-

Cline; although we were in different states or continents for most of my dissertation, she was

always there with her infallible support, sound advice, and enthusiasm. Her teaching and

scholarly achievements have set a high standard for me and I am so glad that our pathscrossed even for a short period of time. Sincere thanks to Jack Davis, for his great impact on

my graduate careeras a graduate advisor. I thank him for pushing to the limits my thinking in

his seminars; the reassuring sound of his boots walking down the corridor was always a sign

that things will go well. He followed this dissertation with continuous interest and

constructive criticisms. I cannot thank enough Brian Rose with his outstanding lectures and

his inspiring academic and personal talents. He generously provided unlimited help when it

was most needed. Barbara Burrell smoothlysteered this project through the finalbureaucratic Scyllas and I am thankful to her. My gratitude to the outside reader,Prof. Panos

Valavanis who, with his ethics and deep understanding of ceramic workshops, stood by this

dissertation a solid pillar of encouragement and inspiration.



viii

And of course, a wink and a smile to my best friend, Irene Thanassoulia, for her

interest in movies and pupper theaters which kept me sane all these years. She stood by me

as the sister I never had, but I wished I had. Her company in operation rooms, in traditionalkilns, and at noisy brick factories are only a sample of all the times she was there with love,understanding, and support.

This work is dedicated to my parents, Maria and Tzonako, the two people withoutwhom nothing would have happened. Although they will not be able to understand what I

have written, I hope they can understand how much I respect and love them.



ix

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract.............................................................................................................................................i

Acknowledgments .................................... ........................................ .......................................... .....i v

List of Tabl es ..................................... ....................................... .................................... ................... xi

List of Plat es ...................................... ....................................... ...................................... ................. xi ii

Introduction......................................................................................................................................1

Chapter IThe Ceramic Kiln in Ancient Art and Literature ............................. ................................. ....29

Artistic Representations ........................................................................................................31 Uncertain Representations of Kilns......................................................................................51 Literary Terms.......................................................................................................................54

Chapter II

The Ceramic Kiln: Its Architecture and Function.................................................................70

Building a Kiln ......................................................................................................................71 The Structural Parts of a Ceramic Kiln................................................................................77 Firing a Kiln..........................................................................................................................102

Excursus“Alike Yet Different: Ceramic Kilns vs. Other Pyrotechnological Structures ............. 1 12 The Baking Oven...................................................................................................................115

The Lime Kiln........................................................................................................................121

The Bath Furnace..................................................................................................................125 The Glass Furnace................................................................................................................127

The Metallurgical Furnace...................................................................................................129 Minor Firing Structures ........................................................................................................134

Chapter IIITypological Classification of Greek Kilns...............................................................................13 9

Old and New Typologies.......................................................................................................142

Circularand Pear-shaped Kilns .............................................. ..........................................152

Rectangular Kilns ...............................................................................................................165 General Typological Observations ......................................................................................177



x

Chapter IVThe Predecessors of Historical Kilns: Neolithic Ovens to Late Bronze Age Kilns ............ 1 86

Neolithic Ovens .....................................................................................................................189 Early Bronze Age Kilns.........................................................................................................195 Middle Bronze Age Kilns ......................................................................................................199 Late Bronze Age Kilns...........................................................................................................201

Chapter V

The Historical Kilns: Geometric Through Byzantine Periods..............................................2 19 Submycenaean and Geometric Kilns ....................................................................................220 Archaic Kilns.........................................................................................................................225 Classical Kilns ......................................................................................................................230

Hellenistic to Byzantine Kilns...............................................................................................234

Undated Kilns .......................................................................................................................246

General Chronological Survey .............................................................................................24 7 Chapter VI

The Kiln, The Ceramic Workshop, and The Ancient City....................................................2 51 Defining a Workshop ...........................................................................................................252 Identifying a Workshop .........................................................................................................257Categorizing a Workshop: Specialization of Production ....................................................264 The Ceramic Workshop in the Ancient City .........................................................................285

Epilogue ...........................................................................................................................................2 96

Catalogue of Geometric through Classical Kilns..........................................................................3 19

References ....................................... ........................................ ..................................... ..................... 3 62 Appendix I: List of Bronze Age and Hellenistic through Byzantine Kilns................................. 40 8

Appendix II: Concordance to Seifert's (1993) List of Ancient Greek Kilns............................... 42 9

Appendix III: Penteskoufia Plaques depicting Kilns.................................................................... 43 4

Plates ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ......................... 45 3



xi

LIST OF TABLES

Table Intro.1 Parameters of ceramic technology.

Table Intro.2 Firing temperatures for ceramics in Greece.Table I.1 Distribution of iconographical themes on the reverse of the Penteskoufia kiln

plaques.Table II.1 Data for time requirements of kiln construction.

Table II.2 Consumption of fuel at different sites.Table II.3 Ethnographic and experimental data on kiln capacity.

Table Exc.1 Fuel requirements for lime kilns in Greece.Table III.1 Cuomo Di Caprio's types for Italian ceramic kilns.

Table III.2 Attestation of Italian kiln types in major chronological periods.Table III.3 Geographical distribution of Italian kiln types (Data: Cuomo Di Caprio

1971/1972).

Table III.4 Davaras' typology for ceramic kilns in Greece.Table III.5 New typology of Greek kilns.

Table III.6 Distribution of kilns according to regions.

Table III.7 Chronological and geographical distributions of type Ia.Table III.8 Chronological and geographical distributions of type Ib.Table III.9 Chronological and geographical distributions of type Ie.

Table III.10 Chronological and geographical distributions of type If.Table III.11 Chronological and geographical distributions of type Ig.

Table III.12 Chronological and geographical distributions of type IIa.Table III.13 Chronological and geographical distributions of type IIb.

Table III.14 Chronological and geographical distributions of type IIc.

Table III.15 Sizes of kilns according to types.Table IV.1 Distribution of types in the Bronze Age.Table IV.2 Criteria for identification of Minoan pottery workshops. Data from

Michaelidis 1993.Table V.1 Distribution of types of kilns according to periods.



xiii

LIST OF PLATES

Plate I.1 Penteskoufia plaques depicting kilns. Part I. (MNB 2856, F616).

Plate I.2 Penteskoufia plaques depicting kilns. Part II (and possibly painted by thesame artist). (F608, F609, F618, F637+819, F867).

Plate I.3 Penteskoufia plaques depicting kilns. Part III.(F615, F683+757+822+829, F810, F811, F816).

Plate I.4 Penteskoufia plaques depicting kilns. Part IV.(MNB 2858, F632+887, F843, F866+546, F909).

Plate I.5 Penteskoufia plaques depicting kilns. Part V.(F482+627+943, F611, F802, F846, F863+877+879, F865).

Plate 1.6 Penteskoufia plaques possibly painted by the same artist.(F639, F789, F865, F871, F893).

Plate I.7 Penteskoufia plaques with the same orientation of scenes on both sides.(F595, F797, F848, F849, F855, F860, F894, F921).

Plate I.8 Penteskoufia plaques with sketchy compositions. Part I.(F368, F460, F555, F835, F839, F900).

Plate I.9 Penteskoufia plaques with sketchy compositions. Part II.(F489, F722, F769, F873, F899).

Plate I.10 a. Penteskoufia plaques with kilns and inscriptions. (F608, F611);b. An aryballos and a Penteskoufia plaque (F848) signed by Timonidas (afterPayne 1931, cat. no. 1459).

Plate I.11 Representations of kilns.a. Terracotta model from the Potters’ Quarter at ancient Corinth (KN 131);b. Hydria attributed to the Leagros Group (Munich, StaatlicheAntikensammlungen 1717).

Plate I.12 Uncertain representations of kilns.a. Black-figure skyphos from the Robinson collection in Baltimore, by theTheseus Painter; b-c. Gem engravings (now lost).

Plate II.1 Multi-lingual dictionary of the structural parts of the kiln. Drawing of theProtoarchaic kiln at Prinias by F. Tomasello (after Rizza et al. 1992).



xiv

Plate II.2 Different methods for firing pottery a. pit firing (after Rice 1986); b.horizontal kiln firing (after Rye 1981); c-d. so-called horizontal kilns fromancient Palestine (after Wood 1990). Scale applies only to d.

Plate II.3 a. Major parts of a kiln; b. Kiln at Pella (85); c. Schematic representation ofa kiln.

Plate II.4 Hellenistic kiln at Chalkis (349 ). Walls of the combustion chamber linedwith Corinthian-style rooftiles [after ADelt24 (1969), pl. 211b].

Plate II.5 The stoking channel of the kiln. a. Classical kilns at Kerameikos, Athens(40-42); b. Archaic kilns at Lato (28-30 ); c. Roman kiln at Philotas (250 ); d.Kiln with double-stoking channel at Klirou on Cyprus (after Hampe andWinter 1962, figs. 50-51). Scales apply only to a and d.

Plate II.6 Two reconstructions of the Penteskoufia plaque F893 [after Noble 1988, fig.238 (top) and after Jena Painter 1996, fig. 11].

Plate II.7 Ventholes of the perforated floor. a. Fragments of ventholes fromProtoarchaic kilns at Prinias (31-36 ) and their restored diameters; b. Joiningfragments of a venthole from Geometric kilns at Lefkandi (07-09 ).

Plate II.8 Examples of diversity in the arrangement of the ventholes of the perforatedfloors from ceramic kilns in Egypt. a. Burg-el Arab (after El-Ashmawi1998); b. Amphora kiln at Desert Road Alexandria-Cairo, Km 203 (after El-Fattah 1998).

Plate II.9 Supporting system for the perforated floor at Istronas, Crete (385 ).

Plate II.10 Roman kiln at Gortys, Arcadia (337 ) preserving the perforated floor and thesystem of supporting arms.

Plate II.11 Supporting clay arms of the perforated floor. a. Nemea ValleyArchaeological Project (after Wright et al. 1990); b. Berbati, Argos (340 ); c.Mitropoli, Karditsa (353 ); d. Asomatos, Crete (after Hampe and Winter1962, pl. 2). Scales apply only to a and b.

Plate II.12 Different types of stacking supports. Part I. a-b. from the Athenian Agora(after Papadopoulos J. 1992); c. Tripods from ancient Corinth and theAthenian Agora; d-e. Types of supports from ancient Corinth (drawings byauthor). Reconstructions A (after Kalogeropoulou 1970) and B (afterPapanikola-Bakirtzi 1987) of their use inside the kiln.

Plate II.13 Different types of stacking supports. Part II.a. Stacking supports from the Tile Works at ancient Corinth (64-65 ); b.Modern kiln-supports for pitharia at Korone, Messenia (after Blitzer 1990).



xv

Plate II.14 Experimental use of L-shaped stacking supports at ancient Corinth (64-65 ).

Plate II.15 Clay rings from Athenian workshops (after Monaco 2000).

Plate II.16 a. Kiln supports or handle molds from Hellenistic workshop at Paroikia,Paros (228-233 ) (with permission by Y. Kourayos); b. Stacking techniquesof ancient pottery. LM I kernos from Gortyn (after Hägg 1990).

Plate II.17 Tower-stacked cups from the cemetery at Merenda in the Brauron Museum(photo by author).

Plate Exc.1 Models of Neolithic terracotta ovens and reconstructions of their use in aNeolithic settlement (a), b. Neolithic model from Plateia Magoula Zarkou inTrikala; c. Neolithic model from Sitagroi (b-c: after Papathanassopoulos

1996).Plate Exc.2 Experimental reconstruction of a Neolithic hut with an oven in Volos

(photo by author).

Plate Exc.3 Fifth century B.C. model of oven from Boeotia (Berlin, Staatliche Museen31644) (after Sparkes and Talcott 1958).

Plate Exc.4 Archaelogical examples of ovens. a. Neolithic oven from ArhontikoGiannitson (afterPapaeuthimiou-Papanthimou and Pilali-Papasteriou1998 ); b. LBA two-storied oven at Anchialos, Sindos (after Tiverios 1995);c-d. Roman bakery ovens from Pompeii and Ostia (after Bakker 1999).

Plate Exc.5 Comparison of a ceramic kiln and a lime kiln (after Adam 1992).

Plate Exc.6 Coexistence of a ceramic and a lime kiln from Kokkinovrysi at ancientCorinth (343 ). Courtesy of American School of Classical Studies at Athens,Corinth Excavations.

Plate Exc.7 Lime kiln in section from Kokkinovrysi at ancient Corinth (343 ). Courtesy ofAmerican School of Classical Studies at Athens, Corinth Excavations.

Plate Exc.8 a. Glass furnaces at Tell El Amarna, ca. 1400 B.C. (after Jackson et al.1998); b. Late Roman glass workshop in Rome (after Sagui 2000).

Plate Exc.9 a. "Early Helladic metallurgical furnaces" at Steno Arcadias (afterSpyropoulos, 1993); b. Cupellation furnace from Geometric Argos (afterCourbin 1963).

Plate Exc.10 Metallurgical furnace and casting pit from Kladeos foothills at Olympia(after Hampe and Jantzen 1937).



xvi

Plate Exc.11 Representations of metallurgical furnaces on Greek vases (after Oddy andSwaddling 1985).

Plate Exc.12 Plans, pictures, and reconstructions of a casting pit at Kassope (afterSchwandner and Zimmer 1983).

Plate Exc.13 Various types of furnaces. a. Coin foundry at the Agora, Thessaloniki(after Velenis 1996); b. Workshop for preparation of colors on Cos(afterKantzia and Kouzeli1987 ).

Plate Exc.14 Reconstruction of a coin foundry (after Conophagos et al. 1976).

Plate Exc.15 Summary of characteristics of pyrotechnological structures.

Plate III.1 Cuomo Di Caprio's typology (after Cuomo Di Caprio 1978/79).

Plate III.2 Development of pottery-firing structures in Syria and Palestine (afterDelcroix and Huot 1972).

Plate III.3 Typology of circular and rectangular tile kilns in Roman France (after Le Ny1988).

Plate III.4 Typology of Greek circular kilns (drawings by D. Weibel).

Plate III.5 Kilns with a central wall from ancient Syria and Palestine (after Delcroixand Huot 1972).

Plate III.6 Archaic circular kiln at Prinias with two parallel walls (36) (after Rizza et al.1992).

Plate III.7 Circular kilns with benches: Dodona (10), Achladia (146 ), Palaikastro (150 ).

Plate III.8 Typology of Greek rectangular kilns (drawings by D. Weibel).

Plate III.9 Archaic (?) rectangular kiln at Aigion (18).

Plate III.10 Plans and sections of rectangular kilns at Olympia (73, 347, 392 ).

Plate III.11 Roman rectangular kilns at Polymylos, Kozanis (365-367 ) (after Karamitrouet al. 1998).

Plate III.12 Traditional rectangular kilns from Cos (above) and Chios (after Psaropoulou1986).



xvii

Plate III.13 Typology of circular and rectangular kilns in ancient Greece (drawings by D.Weibel).

Plate III.14 Rectangular kilns/ovens from ancient Iran and Mesopotamia (after Delcroixand Huot 1972).

Plate III.15 Typology of Gallo-Roman kilns (after Peacock 1982).

Plate III.16 Comparison of Greek typology of rectangular kilns with otherMediterranean typologies.

Plate III.17 Ceramic kilns in Magna Graecia. a. Classical kilns at Metaponto (after Adamesteanu et al. 1980); b. Classical kilns at Naxos (after Fischer-Hansen2000).

Plate IV.1 Plans and reconstructions of the Neolithic “oven” at Olynthus.Plate IV.2 Early Helladic ovens/kilns. a. Agios Mamas, Chalkidike; b. Polychrono,

Chalkidike (94). The north arrow applies only to b.

Plate IV.3 Middle Helladic kilns: Lerna (96), Sparta (101-102 ), Kirrha (104-106 ). Thescale applies only to the plans.

Plate IV.4 Middle Helladic kiln from Eretria (103 ). Courtesy of Swiss ArchaeologicalSchool.

Plate IV.5 Kiln sites on Crete (with the addition of the later production center,Thrapsano).

Plate IV.6 a. Late Minoan IB channel kiln at Kommos (145 ); b. Reconstruction of theLate Minoan IB channel kiln at Kommos (145 ) (a, b. after Shaw et al. 2001).

Plate IV.7 Plans and sections of the Late Minoan IB kiln at Agia Triadha (143 ).

Plate IV.8 Reconstruction of the rectangular kiln at Agia Triadha (143 ) firing pithoi.

Plate IV.9 Late Minoan IIIA Potters' Quarter at Gouves, Herakleion (after Hatzi-Vallianou 1996).

Plate IV.10 Reconstruction of kiln IV at Gouves, Herakleion (after Hatzi-Vallianou1998).

Plate IV.11 Metallurgical furnace/pottery kiln at Zakros, Crete (123 ).

Plate IV.12 Late Minoan IIIB channel kilns from Knossos (139-141 ).



xvii

Plate IV.13 Sizes of Prehistoric kilns (all in the same scale). a. Agia Triadha (143 ); b.Dimini (116 ); c. Achladia (148 ).

Plate IV.14 Late Minoan IIIB circular kiln at Kavousi, Crete (151 ).

Plate IV.15 Mycenaean kilns: Aigeira (108 ), Berbati (111 ), Dimini (116 ), Pylos (114 ),Thebes (115 ), Velestino (117 ).

Plate IV.16 Ceramic workshop at Kirrha, Delphi (104-106 ).

Plate IV.17 Distribution of Prehistoric kilns.

Plate V.1 Plans of Geometric kilns (all in the same scale): Amorgos (13), Athens (01),Dodona (10), Phaistos (12), Torone (11 ).

Plate V.2 Distribution of Geometric kilns.Plate V.3 Perforated floor of Geometric kiln at Kyme on Euboea (05) (photo by

author).

Plate V.4 Plans of Archaic kilns. Aigion (18), Knossos (27), Lato (28-30 ), Phari (25-26), Prinias (31-36 ).

Plate V.5 Distribution of Archaic kilns.

Plate V.6 Selection of Classical kilns (all in the same scale).

Plate V.7 Distribution of Classical kilns.

Plate V.8 General plan of the sanctuary of Zeus at Nemea (60-62 ) indicating area ofthe kilns (after Miller 1975).

Plate V.9 The sanctuary of Zeus at Nemea. Plan of the kilns area in relationship to theXenon and the Basilica (composite plan by the author on Miller’s 1975 siteplan).

Plate V.10 Rectangular kiln at the sanctuary of Zeus at Nemea (60)(drawings by C.K. Williams).

Plate V.11 Distribution of Hellenistic kilns.

Plate V.12 Hellenistic workshop at Pella (218-223 ) (after Lilimbaki-Akamati 1993).

Plate V.13 Distribution of Roman kilns.

Plate V.14 Athens, Kotzia Square. Late Roman workshops area (274-300 ). (Kilnsindicated with red, basins with blue color) [after ADelt43 (1988), pl. II].



xix

Plate V.15 Rectangular Roman kilns at Kerameikos, Bau Y (260-269 ) (after Kniggerand Rügler 1989).

Plate V.16 Distribution of Late Antique kilns

Plate V.17 Distribution of Byzantine kilns.

Plate V.18 Byzantine kilns at ancient Corinth (After Morgan 1942).

Plate V.19 Byzantine kilns at ancient Corinth (412-413 ) (after Morgan 1942).

Plate VI.1 Protoarchaic ceramic workshop at Prinias, Crete (31-36 )(after Rizza et al. 1992, 155, fig. 35).

Plate VI.2 Site plan of the Tile Works, ancient Corinth (64-65 ). Courtesy of theAmerican School of Classical Studies at Athens, Corinth Excavations.

Plate VI.3 Section plans of the East kiln at the Tile Works, ancient Corinth (64-65 ).Courtesy of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, CorinthExcavations.

Plate VI.4 The East kiln at the Tile Works, ancient Corinth (65). Courtesy of theAmerican School of Classical Studies at Athens, Corinth Excavations.

Plate VI.5 a. Orlandos' reconstruction of the superstructure of the East kiln at the TileWorks at ancient Corinth (65); b. New reconstruction of the East kiln at the

Tile Works at ancient Corinth (65); c. Modern abandoned tile kiln (1968) atancient Elis [ ADelt 23 (1968), fig. 138].

Plate VI.6 Estimations of time requirements for the East kiln at the Tile Works to fireroofs of buildings of various sizes.

Plate VI.7 Workshops with rectangular kilns at ancient Corinth.A. Tile Works (64-65 ), B. West Tile Works (344 ), C. Kokkinovrysi (343 ).Courtesy of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, CorinthExcavations.

Plate VI.8 a. Plan of the Olympia sanctuary with locations of kilns indicated;b. Detailed plan of encircled area in plan a (after Kunze and Schleif 1944, pl.II).

Plate VI.9 The Protoarchaic ceramic workshop at Prinias (31-36 ).

Plate VI.10 Geometric (?) kiln and clay pits at Samos (14).

Plate VI.11 Archaic ceramic workshop at Phari, Thasos (25-26 )



xx

Plate VI.12 Classical ceramic workshop at Lenormant Ave. in Athens (51-53 ).

Plate VI.13 Kerameikos at Figaretto, Corfu operating from Archaic to Hellenistic times(197-209 ).

Plate VI.14 Classical ceramic workshop at Sindos, Macedonia (86-89 ).

Plate VI.15 Hellenistic ceramic workshop at Stamouli-Bolia Plot, Pherai, Velestino(190-192 ).



xxi

The Greek font used to publish this work is available fromLinguist's Software, Inc., PO Box 580, Edmonds, WA 98020-0580

USA, tel (425) 775-1130, www.linguistsoftware.com.

http://www.linguistssoftware.com/

http://www.linguistssoftware.com/



INTRODUCTION_____________________________________________

1

I NTRODUCTION

An ancient Greek ceramic kiln is a partially subterranean structure (circular or

rectangular) with two compartments: the lower one, where the combustion of the fuel takes

place, and the upper, where the pottery is placed. The two compartments are separated by a

perforated floor, which allows the heat to move to the upper compartment. Most students of

classical antiquity are familiar with this standard definition of an ancient pottery kiln of an

updraft type and especially with its representations in the Archaic terracotta plaques from

Penteskoufia in Corinth, but unfortunately the subject has never been systematically

investigated.

Ceramic kilns in Greece, as a subject, lie at the juncture of two well-studied fields inarchaeology: ancient ceramic kilns in general and ceramic production in ancient Greece.

Despite intensive study of ceramic production in all its stages and the ceramic ecology

within which the production is framed (i.e., procurement and choice of raw materials,



INTRODUCTION_____________________________________________

2

forming techniques, decoration, distribution, and consumption), the study of the ceramickilns as structures and as sources of information about ceramic production has managed to

"fall through the cracks."1 The main purpose of this dissertation is to investigate the Greek

ceramic kilns as a group of technological structures and to analyze the technological,

economic, and social aspects of a ceramic kiln and its surrounding workshop.

The present study focuses on the third major stage of ceramic production (following

clay collection and pot-forming), the firing, and its physical center, the ceramic kiln. Not

only is the kiln one of the four major fields of ancient ceramic technology (i.e. raw materials,tools, techniques, facilities), but also all the technological choices made in the other fields

aim at the best performance of the pot inside the kiln during the firing (Table Intro. 1 ).

R AW

M ATERIAL

PRIMARY CLAY SOURCEPREPARING(tempering agents, settling basins)

FUEL

T OOLSFORMING (wheel, general tools)

T ECHNIQUESFORMINGDECORATING (glazes)FIRING

F ACILITIESSETTLING BASINS

K ILNS

Table Intro.1: Parameters of ceramic technology.

1 For ceramic ecology, see Rice (ed.) 1984; for forming a vessel, see Schreiber 1999 withearlier bibliography; Stissi 1999a on issues of production and distribution of Archaic andClassical pottery.



INTRODUCTION_____________________________________________

3

Ceramic kilns" has been chosen deliberately as a term over the more familiar term"pottery kilns" in order to highlight the fact that other types of terracotta objects, such as roof

tiles, bathtubs, water pipes, well rings2, and funeral sarcophagi,also required a kiln to be

fired. These objects tend to be forgotten as the result of the prolonged emphasis by

archaeologists on ancient decorated fine pottery.

This dissertation aims to accomplish three main goals:

a. To provide a detailed description of a ceramic kiln, thekavmino" , as understood

from the iconographical and literary sources (Ch. I: "The Ceramic Kiln in Ancient Artand Literature"), as well as from the archaeological and technological points of view, in

order to explain more clearly the kiln’s function, its economic impact, and the time

requirements for the potting process (Ch. II: "The Ceramic Kiln: Its Architecture and

Function"). An excursus ("Alike, Yet Different: The Ceramic Kiln vs. Other

Pyrotechnological Structures") serves both as a reminder of how often ceramic kilns are

mistaken for other structures and as a guide for correct identification of the

archaeological remains. This shared pyrotechnological knowledge which accounts for

this confusion also highlights the interdependence of the practitioners of such crafts

centered around the use of fire.

b. To produce a comprehensive corpus of kilns as a reference tool for future, more

detailed research with a regional or chronological focus. I have collected more than four

hundred and fifty examples of kilns from the Bronze Age to the Byzantine period, a

range of 4,500 years, within the geographical limits of the modern state of Greece (Ch.

2 For a good example of well-rings, see 46-50, Patreos St. in Patras [ ADelt32 (1977) 89, pl.63c].



INTRODUCTION_____________________________________________

4

IV: "The Predecessors of Historical Kilns: Neolithic Ovens to Late Bronze Age Kilns";Ch. V: "The Historical Kilns: Geometric through Byzantine Periods", Catalogue, and

Appendix I). Moving one step beyond the logical assumption that kilns areeverywhere

in Greece, the present study sets out to substantiate this assumption with specific

examples, to show in which regions of Greece kilns existed, and to single out areas with

strong concentrations of kilns.

Based on this extensive body of material, a typology can be built for the Greek kilns

for the first time on a comprehensive scale, so that the excavation of new kilns can beincorporated into this system of types (Ch. III: "Typological Classification of Greek

Kilns"). Through this typological arrangement certain regional preferences become

noticeable. In addition, coordination of the Greek typology with existing classification

systems from other Mediterranean countries (e.g. France, Italy, Britain), offers the

potential of exploring not only regional, but also cultural preferences in types of kilns.

c. To maximize the range of information that an excavated kiln can provide to an

archaeologist. First, a kiln can be studied as a technological structure. Ceramic

technology, which so far has been studied solely through clay sources, tempering agents,

the pottery wheel, and the chemical composition of glazes (Table Intro.1 ), can now be

further elucidated through observations on kilns. Furthermore, distinct chemical groups,

as defined in previous archaeometric analyses, can be matched to individual kiln sites.3

3 For the potter's wheel, see Rieth 1960; Cuomo Di Caprio 1995; Hadji-Vallianou 1997;Triantaphyllidis 2000a. Brodie (1997, 69) encourages the researchers of chemical claycompositions to improve their results by checking them against geological andarchaeological data.



INTRODUCTION_____________________________________________

5

Finally, archaeologists will be able to compare unprovenanced material with that from asecure local provenance of excavated or detected kilns and to attribute a more reliable

geographical provenance to their pottery assemblages. The degree of similarity or

difference between kilns from various periods and areas of Greece can indicate that

imitations and/or exchange of technological knowledge occurred not only in vessel shape

and decoration, but also in kiln construction.4

Second, the kiln constitutes one of the most secure criteria for identifying a ceramic

workshop and can function as a reliable measurement unit of intensity of production (Ch.VI: "The Kiln, the Workshop, and the Ancient City"). The standard time required for

each firing (ca. 10-12 hours) and cooling-off (one to two days), the kiln's capacity, and

its restricted operational season (during the potting season from April to October) enable

us to estimate the volume of production in an ancient ceramic workshop. Such

estimations set severe limits on the reconstructed sizes for large-scale ancient Greek

pottery workshops that have been previously suggested and point instead to medium size

workshops with one or three kilns. Finally, identification of local pottery through study

of material from kiln sites will enable archaeologists to distinguish it from imported

pottery, assess better the strength of the economy of the ancient Greek cities, and gain a

more realistic understanding of the extent of imports and the presumed trade

relationships.

4 Broekmans et al. (1999) note that wares, which were classified in the art-historical recordas "imitations", were sometimes proved in scientific analyses to require the same, if not moreadvanced, technological skills as those involved in the manufacture of the originals.



INTRODUCTION_____________________________________________

6

OVERVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

The focus of the scholarship on ancient Greek pottery production has developed in a

reverse order compared to the order in the manufacturing process: first on the final products

(the ceramics), on their destinations (trade) and last on the workshops themselves, whereas

during manufacture everything starts from and at the workshops. Greek pottery, especially

the glazed fine wares, has been one of the best-studied fields in Classical archaeology.5 The

standard books by J. Beazley on the Attic black-figure ( ABV ) and red-figure vase-painters

( ARV ) and extensive museum catalogues (Corpus Vasorum Antiquorum-CVA) have

categorized the enormous volume of ancient vases.6 Beazley, merely by looking at pots in

museums, reconstructed a vivid Athenian Kerameikos with many potters, including

"masters" and "followers" who set the trends in pottery production in Attica and acrossancient Greece.7 Attic pottery in turn has been used as the reference criterion for the study

5 This overview highlights only the main trends in the literature of ancient Greek potterystudies. Relevant works (with detailed discussions and extensive bibliography) are cited inthe footnotes in chronological order.

6 Crielaard et al. (1999) dedicated several overview chapters to the history of pottery studiesin the Mediterranean and the remaining unsolved issues. See especially Stissi's contribution(Stissi 1999a) on the Archaic and Classical periods.

7 Robertson (1982) has attempted posthumously to define Beazley's reconstructedrelationships between master painters and followers and the related terms. Kurtz 1985a,1985b, von Bothmer 1987, and Oakley 1999 offer a historical account of the study of vasepainting and a critical assessment of Beazley's contribution. Recently Rouet 2001 discussedthe contribution of Beazley and Pottier to the study of ancient Greek vase-painting.



INTRODUCTION_____________________________________________

7

of the remaining Greek and related pottery from other sites. Theories on the function ofancient pottery workshops, their structure, organization of labor, and volume of production

have been formulated based on these catalogues.8

Studying pottery for its artistic merits dominated the scholarship during most of the

20th century. Scholars looked only to pots to find the answers to all the questions involving

the entire process of pottery production, and generally did not investigate the excavated

physical remains of pottery workshops in their urban contexts. Until the 1980s, even the

term "workshop" referred to a group of ceramic materials that shared common stylisticcharacteristics, overlooking any references to architectural remains of a manufacturing site.

The introductory books on Greek pottery dedicate only a few paragraphs to the

manufacturing technique for ancient vases. Whereas the chemical effects during the

different stages of firing on Athenian glaze have been extensively studied, scholars

continued to rely solely on the evidence from the Penteskoufia plaques in restoring an

ancient Greek kiln, even as recently as 1997.9

Our information on kilns themselves derives from three main sources:

archaeological investigation of ancient kilns, scientific studies conducted on kilns or on

material from kilns, and ethnographic research on modern-day pottery workshops. It was the

conscious detachment from the style-based study of pots that truly advanced our knowledge

of ancient kilns and prompted the excavation of actual workshops, the loci of production.

8 See infra Ch. VI.

9 Noble 1988; Sparkes 1991, 21-6, fig. II.7; Cook 1997, 231-7, fig. 235; Scheibler (1995, fig.93), does, however, include a photograph of an actual ceramic kiln from Classical Olympia.For a discussion on the composition of Athenian black glaze and previous theories, seeNoble 1988, 79-98.



INTRODUCTION_____________________________________________

8

During the late 1970s and 1980s, scientific methods were used increasingly to determine thesources of raw material, qualities of various tempering agents, and firing temperatures.

Scientific and ethnographic research, conducted on the pottery itself for an understanding of

the forming of the pots, triggered this interest in excavating ancient workshops. In the late

1980s the pottery analysts, recovering from the Beazley attribution approach, started

considering issues of personnel, production, and specialization.10 In the past two decades

(1980-2000), all four types of pottery studies (stylistic, scientific, archaeological, and

ethnographic) have been combined in order to achieve a fuller appreciation of ancient potteryproduction.

In the following pages, I will first discuss the ethnographic literature, then the

scientific advancements, and finally the archaeological research, which forms the core of this

dissertation. Since all three fields of investigation largely overlap in their development and

have exercised mutual influences, the adopted way of presentation moves us gradually

backwards in time, from modern times to antiquity.

a. Ethnography-Ethnoarchaeology

The field of ethnoarchaeology, the study of contemporary societies that resemble

ancient ones with a view to answering questions about the latter, was established only in the

10 Gillis 1988; Rudolph 1988.



INTRODUCTION_____________________________________________

9

beginning of the 20th century, as an offshoot of ethnography.11

Yet it did not acquirebranches until the middle of the century, and the works of Hampe and Winter belong to this

revived interest in traditional societies.

Systematic ethnographic work on modern pottery workshops in Greece and on

Cyprus was carried out in the 1960s by R. Hampe and A. Winter (1962, 1965).12 Even then,

researchers only recorded the activities of traditional potters in the form of a traveler’s

journal, without attempting to relate them to ancient ceramic production, or to perform any

quantitative or technological analysis. They were mainly interested in how pots were formedand in family relationships, probably having been influenced by Beazley's reconstruction of

families of potters.

Not until the early 1980s did scholars take an active interest in the few remaining

craftsmen communities in Greece and Cyprus, aware that these craftsmen were threatened

with complete extinction because of the approaching industrialization. Their work

encompassed forming techniques, modes of production, and trade patterns. H. Blitzer (1990)

recorded the production and distribution of pithoi (Koroneika jars) at Messenia in the

southwest Peloponnese, after she had studied, in 1984, the Kentri community in central Crete

in a comparative ethnoarchaeological project exploring the prehistoric East Cretan White-on-

11 London 2000a. Walter Fewkes, who studied the pottery production in the AmericanSouthwest in the early 1900s, is credited (Longacre 1991, 1) as the pioneer in ceramicethnoarchaeology; Skibo 1992.

12 Smaller scale ethnographic research (and of a very general character) was carried out byCasson (1938, 1951) on the Aegean islands (Crete, Euboea, Siphnos, Skyros), on Cyprus,and at Çanakkale in Turkey and by Birmingham (1967) on Amorgos. For a brief overview ofethnographic literature, see Peacock 1982, 12-51, Ch. 3: "The ethnography of potteryproduction in Europe and the Mediterranean area."



INTRODUCTION_____________________________________________

10

Dark Ware.13

The itinerant potters also entered the ethnographic record through the studiesof M. Voyatzoglou on the pithos makers, known as the “bandema” groups, from Thrapsano

in central Crete, and the study of G. London on itinerant potters on Cyprus.14 P. Valavanis

and his team. (1990) documented the workings and spatial arrangement of a modern

workshop at Marousi, in northern Attica from where ancient potters also used to extract their

clay.15 The studies have exceeded in size the length of small articles, and recently an entire

monograph by S. Papadopoulos was dedicated to the study of traditional pottery workshops

on the northern island of Thasos.16 The studies of P. Betancourt on Crete and G. London onCyprus have resulted in the production of two video documentaries on these communities,

whose populations are rapidly dwindling.17

13 Blitzer 1984.

14 Voyatzoglou 1974, 1984; London 1987a, 1987b, 1989a, 1989b, 1991a, 1991b, 2000b. Day(1989) combines ethnographic with petrographic studies for prehistoric ceramics on Crete.Longacre (1991) and London (2000a) advocated for the need that ethnoarchaeologists recordthe activities of the community under study at regular intervals, every five to ten years, toobtain valuable, diachronic, comparative data. Biçken-Tekkök (2000) presented recently anethnographic study on the potting community of Akköy in Turkey, located south of Troy.

15 Kardulias (2000) gives a similar account of a modern potter’s workshop at Ermioni in theArgolid.

16 Papadopoulos S. 1999a, 1999b. On Thasos, see also Giannopoulou 1999; Gratsia 1999;Giannopoulou and Demesticha 1998 on the traditional potters and their workshops onLesbos.

17 Betancourt 1999; London 2000c. The present author (Hasaki 2001) has completed adocumentary on the traditional potting communities at Moknine in Tunisia, where potteryproduction extends back in the Roman period, but which are also threatened with rapiddecline in their number.



INTRODUCTION_____________________________________________

11

In the 1990s the study of traditional contemporary pottery communities acquired amore institutionalized form through the foundation of local ethnographic museums, such as

the Museum for Cretan Ethnology at Voroi, near Herakleion, on Crete, founded by C.

Ballianos; and the Center for the Study of Traditional Pottery (Kevntro Melevth"

Neovterh" Keramikhv" ) in Athens, founded by C. Psaropoulou. They have been instrumental

in recording and preserving the traditional pottery techniques, some of which no longer exist,

from many parts of Greece. As a result of a governmental initiative, a well-known tile

factory at Volos, which belonged to the Tsalapatsa family and was active in the late 19th andearly 20th centuries, has been rescued from complete deterioration and was transformed into

a museum for industrial technology.18

b. Scientific Studies

Archaeometric studies are the other major field where kilns have appearedprominently as data.19 Small-scale archaeometrical tests were applied to Greek pottery in

18 Andreadaki-Chronaki 1999.

19 In this section I mention only works which either are directly relevant to Greek ceramicsor refer to ceramic kilns regardless of geographical area. For brief explanations of thevarious scientific methods applied on ceramics in Greece, see Jones R. 1986a, 15-22, 821-36; Rice 1987, 415-35. A recent account of the contribution of scientific methods to

ceramics can be found in Jones R. 1993. For in-depth provenance studies on sherds andsamples of clay from modern sources in Greece and Cyprus, see Jones R. 1986a. Theliterature on the scientific applications in archaeology is vast and covers all areas of theworld: The journals Archaeometry[1 (1958)-present], the Journal for ArchaeologicalSciences [1 (1974)-present] and the proceedings of the international Symposia onArchaeometry (e.g. Olin and Blackman 1986, Maniatis (ed.) 1989, Archaeometry 1994, Archaeological Science) , present results of the ongoing investigations.



INTRODUCTION_____________________________________________

12

the States in the late 1950s, but for the subsequent decades the epicenter of research waslocated in England with the work of M. Tite at Oxford University.20 In Greece the first

systematic efforts to apply scientific methods to pottery studies must be credited to the

activities of the Fitch Scientific Laboratory at the British School in Athens, under the

directorship of R.E. Jones (1974-1992), I. Whitbread (1992-2001) and E. Kyriatzi (2001-

present).

At the beginning of the 1980s the British projects soon were joined by the newly

established archaeometry laboratory at the National Center for Scientific Research"Demokritos" in Athens, which began its official function in 1986, although a program in

archaeometry was established a decade earlier, in 1975. During the last twenty years, the

researchers from the archaeometry laboratory have conducted analyses on the entire range of

pottery, from Neolithic to Byzantine. Similar archaeometry labs were later established in

Thessaloniki and on Rhodes in association with local universities.21

New scientific methods had been developed and refined in order to extract as much

accurate information as possible from ancient kilns and to concentrate on four major areas:

a. to detect firing (and fired) structures beneath the modern surface;

b. to use the kiln as a dating tool;

c. to determine ancient firing temperatures inside the kiln; and

20 Sayre and Dodson 1957 for neutron activation studies on samples from the Mediterranean(Asia Minor, Greece, and Italy), four of which came from Greece.

21 The Wiener Laboratory at the American School of Classical Studies at Athens wasestablished in 1992 and, in its policy not to replicate research undertaken in other institutesin Greece, concentrated less on ceramics. Exceptions are the work of S. Vaughan onPrehistoric pottery from the Argolid, the Cyclades, and Crete, M. Moore's petrographicanalyses on coarsewares from Epirus, and G. Kakandes' study on clay resources from Attica.



INTRODUCTION_____________________________________________

13

d. to conduct chemical and petrographic analyses on raw clay and pottery(associated or not with kilns) for establishing local control reference groups.

i. Detecting firing (and fired) structures beneath the modern surface

The first two areas of archaeometric research analyze characteristics specific to

kilns. Geophysical prospection techniques are used to detect firing or fired structures in theground. In geophysical prospection kilns are detected easily by magnetometers because the

kilns emit high thermoremnant magnetism, both negative and positive.22 With the proton

magnetometer it is possible to identify a kiln used for glass (higher readings) as opposed to

one used for the production of pottery or the baking of bread (lower readings).23 With

ground-penetrating radar it is possible to detect the presence and general structural features

of intact kiln floors. The floors would appear as "basin-like" reflection patterns on

radargrams.24 Repeated firing affects the density of the fired materials and consequently

22 Quite early, Belsché et al. (1963) sampled forty-two fired structures from Greece (ovens,hearths, kilns, foundries) dating from the Bronze Age through the Byzantine period, andattempted to date them independently from pottery on which they were previously dated. Seealso Archaeometric Studies of Ancient Greek and Cretan Kilns1977 for samples taken fromthe kilns on Crete (Agia Triadha, Kalo Chorio, Phaistos, Stylos, Zakros) and from Thessaly(Dimini, Sesklo). For the geophysical prospection conducted at a workshop site at Vamvouri,Ammoudia, on Thasos (226 ), see Jones R. 1986b. Many excavations of kiln sites wereprompted by magnetic prospection [e.g. the kiln at Phari on Thasos (25)]. For uses of ground

radar survey of kiln sites in Japan, see Goodman et al. 1994.

23 Nicholson 1997, 51.

24 Goodman et al. 1994.



INTRODUCTION_____________________________________________

14

their electromagnetic properties. In other words, an oven for bread used over a long periodof time can give higher readings than the normal readings for an oven and therefore can be

mistaken for a pottery kiln or a metallurgical furnace.

ii. Using the kiln as a dating tool

The kiln itself can be used as a dating tool based on the principle ofarchaeomagnetism.25 When clay structures are fired over 670oC, they lose their original

geological magnetism, and adopt the magnetism of the earth at the time of firing. In other

words, time is imprinted on the walls of the kiln. Samples from kilns which were securely

dated with other criteria have served to establish a magnetic reference curve for different

regions in antiquity.26 One can use this curve in turn to date other kilns which cannot be

dated by pottery or other internal evidence. Conversely, one can learn the provenance of a

pot if its archaeomagnetic measurement (its archaeointensity) is known.27

25 This method was introduced by Thellier and Thellier (1959) and its dating accuracy isquite high, ± 25 years. Thellier (1981) established the Terrestrial Magnetic Field (TMF) forthe last two millennia in France. For archaeomagnetic studies in Greece, see Liritzis andThomas 1980; Thomas 1981; Liritzis 1984; Aitken et al. 1989; Kovacheva et al. 2000;Spatharas et al. 2000; cf. Barbetti and Hein 1989 for similar work conducted in ceramic kilnsin Thailand.

26 Thomas 1981; Evans and Mareschal 1989a, 1989b; Kovacheva 1989 (for Bulgaria).Moving beyond the implications for ceramic studies, with this method one can alsodetermine the position of the magnetic North at various periods in antiquity elucidating thusissues of ancient cartography and maritime travel.

27 Belsché et al. 1963.



INTRODUCTION_____________________________________________

15

Archaeomagnetism can be applied to pottery sherds as well, if one knows their originalorientation. Kilns are preferred to pottery sherds, however, because they are permanent

structures with a fixed orientation.

Any type of permanent, undisturbed, and undisplaced fired structures can be tested

by using this method. These include architectural structures such as ovens, furnaces, burnt

houses, fired or burnt floors, furnaces of hypocaust installation, and funeral pyres. Not all

fired structures, however, are equally suitable for an archaeomagnetic study: thermal baths

and low fires are more problematic because they were fired at low temperatures.28 Inaddition, samples should be taken from parts of the kilns which are stillin situ, not from

collapsed walls of the kiln, because the original orientation during the time of the last firing

should be maintained.29 An eloquent proof of the versatility of the archaeomagnetic

intensity is provided by an extensive study of Gallo-Roman kilns and associated rooftiles and

other terracotta building materials: Goulpeau and Langouet (1980) were able not only to date

the tile kilns, but also to establish that the tiles were mostly fired in an upright position, and

prove that the tiles under study were fired in three different kilns.30

28 Nunez et al. 1999.

29 Harold 1960.

30 Valladas (1977) usedthermoluminescence dating on a Medieval kiln for firing stonewareat 1000ºC (or 1300º F). The quartz grain samples taken from the walls and floor of a kiln,when fired, have a different ferromagnetism than the quartz contaminating the structure afterits use. The measurements, thus, refer to thevery last firing inside the kiln.



INTRODUCTION_____________________________________________

16

iii. Determining ancient firing temperatures inside the kiln

To estimate the firing temperatures inside an ancient kiln, scientists use the

technique of refiring with a number of methods:

a. Differential Thermal Expansion (DTA)

b. Thermal Expansion Measurement (TX)

(increase in size correlated with firing time)

c. Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM)31

d. X-ray Diffraction Analysis (XRD)32

(for the clay's mineral composition. It is usually combined withSEM to

verify the results.)

e. Mössbauer Spectroscopy( MS )33

f. Heat balance calculations(to estimate temperatures and feasibility)

The underlying theory in all these methods is that clay undergoes microstructural,mineralogical, and mechanical transformations at certain temperatures, which can be

detected by the methods above.34

31 From fresh cuts examined under the scanning electron microscope, one can establishwhether pots were fired up to initial vitrification (SEM ). The only drawback to this method is

the assumption that the pots were fired until initial vitrification.32 Kardos et al. 1985.

33 Wagner et al. 1986.



INTRODUCTION_____________________________________________

17

PERIOD T EMPERATURE L OCATION BIBLIOGRAPHY

NEOLITHIC 750-800>800 Mandalo, Pella

(northern Greece)

Youni 1996Meroussis and

Ioannidou 1999

BRONZEAGEEBA 850> <1000°C Mandalo, Pella Kesisoglou et al. 1996

Meroussis andIoannidou 1999

>950 Mandalo, Pella Martin-Socas et al. 1989

EM

EMIII-MMIWHITE-ON-DARK WARE

<880°C

1050-1100°C

Myrtos, Crete

Crete

Warren 1972

MacGillivray 1987

MBA 950-1100°C Fabre et al. 1979

IRONAGE >900°C De•irmentepe Türkmeno•lu 1996

GEOMETRIC 850-1100°C Naxos Grimanis et al. 1989

CLASSICAL 900-1000°C Attica Noble 1988

Table Intro.2: Firing temperatures for ceramics in Greece.

34 For example, in the DTA the clay first decreases in size because of the evaporation ofwater, but then it expands as it is heated. The temperature reached when it stops expanding isthe original firing temperature.



INTRODUCTION_____________________________________________

18

The original temperatures can be detected with an accuracy of ± 20°C. The temperature,

however, refers to the maximum temperature in the kiln, even if this was a short-lived peak,

and not to the temperature sustained for the longest period in the kiln while the pots were

fired (Table Intro.2 ).35

iv. Conducting chemical and petrographic analyses on raw clay and pottery

In the past, these two types of analyses had been conducted on pottery sherds alone.

Ultimately, however, these results are of limited use, since measurements on raw clay and on

fired finished products can differ substantially. This discrepancy is the result of the various

alterations that the clay has undergone, either through purification, addition of temper, firing, or

burial.36 Archaeometric studies on fired material from anexcavated kiln provide a much

more reliable indicator of local production. Provenance studies conducted on pottery from a

specific kiln enable the archaeologist to identify and study patterns of diffusion of an

archaeologically defined ware. One should not study only wasters from a kiln or production site

35 For example, the study by Maniatis and Fakorellis (1998) recorded high temperatures(550-660ºC) for the low-firing prehistoric ovens at Arhontiko Giannitson, which are muchhigher than the ones required for cooking (200-400ºC) and they are due probably to theinitial firing of the structure, or to an event unrelated to their function as ovens. See infraExcursus, 111-5.

36 Kilikoglou et al. (1988) showed that the properties of locally manufactured fired tiles didnot match the properties of local raw clays until the latter were purified and fired.



INTRODUCTION_____________________________________________

19

because their overfired condition skews any qualitative and quantitative results regarding the

compositional elements of the clay.

Most of the scientific studies in the past tried to establish local reference pottery

groups. To do this, they employed Mössbauer Spectroscopy (MS), which takes

measurements of the content of iron in clay in different temperatures and under different

conditions, which influences the color. By refiring clay samples, one observes the

qualitative transformations of iron oxide in the clay lattice.

The best-known method for provenance studies is Instrumental Neutron Activation

Analysis (INAA)which has replaced the less accurateOptical Emission Spectroscopy

(OES).37 INAAis a multi-element analysis capable of measuring a large number of elements

with a high degree of accuracy to establish the chemical composition (also known as

composition profile or chemical fingerprint) of pottery fired in a kiln and to establishkiln

site reference groups.Such data collected from production sites can then be used to assign

provenance to ceramics found at a distance from the original production sites.38 This

method of establishing the provenance of a type of pottery is more reliable than the study of

clay beds, because it has been scientifically proven that production centers used a variety of

37 First used to detect the Greek origin of Mycenaean pottery on Cyprus (Jones R. 1986a,49). For another early application of the method on the pottery from Corinth and its colonyCorfu, see Farnsworth et al. 1977. At the same period Attas (1977, 1983) conducted NAA onEarly Bronze Age pottery from the Argolid and the Corinthia.

38 From the available data on Tunisian kilns, Taylor et al. (1992) were able to attribute theamphora cargo of a shipwreck off the coast of Sardinia to specific Tunisian kiln sites withenough probability, while excluding other possibilities with certainty. The kiln (or presumedkiln sites) samples from northern, coastal sites at Tunisia (El Mahrine, Pheradi, Oudna) sharemany similarities while being quite distinct from those of the inland kiln site at El Ala.



INTRODUCTION_____________________________________________

20

clays in the production of their pottery.39 Elemental analysis techniques (e.g. Atomic

Absorption Spectroscopy) combined withThin Section Microscopy can be used for detecting

the mineral composition of the pottery.

Recently research has focused on determining the degree of purification and the

range of specific elements in the clay matrix of a pottery group. The ratio of concentration

of each element in the purified and in the natural clay was measured. Only when these

relationships are established can we hope to obtain an accurate chemical fingerprint of the

local pottery.40 This can lead to further inquiries into time investment, specialization, and

high degrees of organization. The scientific analysis of wasters from kiln sites and of sherds

of vessels used in nearby settlements helps to answer questions about the extent to which

these kilns supplied neighboring communities with pottery.41

A very sensitive technique is thermal extraction, which uses a thermodesorption

systemwith gas chromatograph/mass spectometer (TDS-GC-MS). The chromatograph

spectometer has been used so far in dietetic research for detecting organic remains to

determine eating habits. Through this technique it is possible to identify what type of fuel

was used in the firing because different types of fuel, once burned, affect the chemical

39 Taylor and Robinson 1996.

40 Fabbri 1996.

41 See e.g. the experiments in pottery from the Roman kilns in Mareotis and Alexandria andfrom nearby settlements discussed by Rodziewicz 1998.



INTRODUCTION_____________________________________________

21

fingerprints of the clay vessels.42

Finally, less frequently used methods are DifferentialThermogravimetry (DTG)andThermogravimetry (TG), which are employed to characterize

the thermal properties of raw material and fired pottery.43

c. Archaeological Research

For the larger part of the 20th century, ceramic kilns were mentioned only in passingin short reports in the Archaeologikon Deltion.Even excavators devoted little attention to

their proper excavation and the preservation of kiln sites. In the late 1930s the German

excavators at Olympia summarily recorded six Classical kilns under the South Stoa and kept

very little associated material, architectural or other (67-72 ) (Plate VI.8 ). A welcome

surprise is the excellent preservation of a large tile kiln at the Tile Works at ancient Corinth,

excavated in 1940, which is protected and still visible under a permanent roof (65).

The workshops of craftsmen were previously studied only through their appearancein vase-painting and in literature.44 A few sociological works focused on the social status of

42 Schram and Wolf (1999) used an experimental kiln (built according to medievalprototypes) and fired a brick with Lawson cypress and another one with lime/hazel as fuel.These two fired bricks had completely different chemical fingerprints due to the organicmaterial of the fuel embedded in their clays during the firing.

43 The potential of this method for estimating ancient firing temperatures was first realized inthe early 1960s (cf. Roberts 1963), but began to be used as a method in 1969. See especiallythe table of color changes and Mössbauer spectra in Hess and Perlman 1974.

44 For representations of craftsmen and their workshops, see Burford 1972; Ziomecki 1975;Hadjidimitriou 1997. For craftsmen in ancient literature and inscriptions, see Blümner 1875-77; Philipp 1968; Müller 1974.



INTRODUCTION_____________________________________________

22

craftsmen in ancient society and the payments they received.45

Only recently has there beenincreasing interest in excavating and studying the physical remains of ancient pottery

workshops, although kilns are the most secure criterion for identifying a ceramic workshop

(infra Ch. VI). The beginning of this new scholarly trend can be placed in the early 1980s

when most articles on ceramic workshops were published by scholars who had excavated

ceramic workshops or kiln sites themselves and compiled preliminary lists of kilns in a

relatively comprehensive manner.46 These occasional lists were later replaced by more

systematic collections of kilns, either regionally or throughout Greece. In 1971 thepioneering study of N. Cuomo Di Caprio introduced the shape of the kiln and the type of

support for the perforated floor as deciding criteria for typological classification. Despite its

outdated character and its shortcomings, this work is still a valuable reference study and her

system was adopted widely by later scholars (including the present study).47 More recently,

Cuomo Di Caprio (1993) published an updated catalogue of ceramic kilns in Sicily.

Publications of individual kilns or of regional examples of kilns have also been published for

Italy, England, and France (see below).

Cook in 1961 was the first to collect kiln sites (from the Geometric to the Byzantine

period). Second came the prehistoric kilns: Davaras and Momigliano have presented some

preliminary lists of Bronze Age kilns in Greece and recently Evely (2000) categorized the

45 Lauter 1974; Neesen 1989; Feyel 1998.

46 Despoini 1982 (on the Classical kilns at Sindos) (86-89 ); Papadopoulos J. 1989 (on aGeometric kiln from Torone) (11 ); Baziotopoulou-Valavani 1994 (on Athenian Archaic andClassical workshops) (51-53 ); Niemeier 1997 (on the Prehistoric kilns in Miletus).

47 For a critical review of catalogues of kilns and their typologies, see infra Ch. III.



INTRODUCTION_____________________________________________

23

Minoan kilns.48

This increased attention to ceramic workshops is reflected in a substantialincrease in the number of attested kilns. From the 58 kilns known to Cook in 1961, the list

has increased to over two hundred in the most recent collection of ceramic kilns in Greece

made by Seifert in 1993.49 Seifert stated that even her collection was not exhaustive,

because she catalogued only the kilns reported in certain archaeological journals. Despite

the numerous faulty references, her catalogue represents the first systematic attempt to

gather the vast corpus of these structures. The presentation of kilns in alphabetical order,

however, regardless of geographical location or date (all the Bronze Age kilns covering arange of 2,000 years are presented under a single heading without any further chronological

subdivisions), renders any geographical or chronological analysis virtually impossible.50

With the flourishing of survey archaeology in the 1980s, J.-Y. Empereur and Y.

Garlan worked extensively on identifying production centers of amphoras in the Greek

islands, with an emphasis on the island of Thasos.51 In 1992 F. Blondé and J. Y. Perrault

presented a BCH supplement that consisted mainly of preliminary excavation reports on

ceramic workshops: e.g. the workshop at Phari on Thasos (25-26 ), the workshops at

48 Davaras 1973b, 1980; Momigliano 1986; Michaelidis 1993; Evely 2000; A. Streily’s on-going dissertation on Bronze Age kilns at the Universities of Mannheim and Heidelberg(cited in Niemeier 1997, n. 15).

49 Seifert (1993) included 144 entries in her study with 212 kilns from 132 sites. Twelvesites do not preserve kilns. She also considered ceramic kilns from western Turkey in herstudy, which she does not include in her article. See also other lists in Mingazzini 1954. Across-reference list betweenSeifert's entries and mine is found in Appendix II.

50 The same year McLoughlin (1993) wrote an honors thesis at the University of Sydney onancient Greek kilns.

51 Amphores grecques 1986.



INTRODUCTION_____________________________________________

24

Lenormant Ave. in Athens (51-53 ), and the Kerameikos of Figaretto on Corfu (197-209 ).52

At the same time many individual pottery workshops began to be published

comprehensively; they included sections not only on architecture of the kilns and associated

pottery, but also on scientific analyses of samples from pottery and from the kilns to gain a

better understanding on the date of kilns and the technological characteristics of the pottery

produced.53 The extensive workshop complex with six kilns at Prinias on Crete (31-36 ) was

published as a monograph in 1992 with the kilns themselves.54 The same balance among

archaeological, typological, and archaeometric aspects are also to be found in thepublications of the Geometric kiln at Torone (11 )55 and the kilns at Knossos.56 The

extremely well-preserved Late Minoan IA channel-kiln from Kommos (147 ) appeared as a

Hesperia supplement and includes a technological section on the kiln written by P.V. Day

and V. Kilikoglou.57 C.C. Monaco (2000) recently published a group of ceramic workshops

from Attica, identified on the basis of kilns and pottery deposits.

52 Ateliers de potiers 1992.

53 Cuomo Di Caprio 1979a; 1979b; 1981; 1982. The publication of the Hellenistic kilns atMorgantina by Cuomo Di Caprio (1992b) adopts a similar presentation of the material.

54 Rizza et al. 1992.

55 Whitbread et al. 1997.

56 Tomlinson and Kilikoglou 1998 for the Orientalizing kiln at Knossos (27); Tarling andDowney 1989 for the Late Minoan kilns at Knossos (139-141 ).

57 Buxeda i Garrigos et al. 2001; Shaw et al. 2001.



INTRODUCTION_____________________________________________

25

Catalogues were followed by thematic conferences. The increasing interest incraftsmen and their workshops resulted in the organization of two major conferences. One,

focusing on the Bronze Age, was held in 1996 (TECNH : Craftsmen, Craftswomen and

Craftsmanship in the Aegean Bronze Age). The Minoan ceramic workshops at Kommos

(145 ), Mochlos (148-149 ), and Kato Gouves on Crete (127-137 ) as well as that on Miletus

were presented in this volume. The other was a colloquium on artisans organized by the

Centre National de Recherches Scientifiques (CNRS) at Lyon and held at Lyon (1998) and

Lille (1999).58 The focus of recent conferences on Hellenistic pottery in closed deposits (inorder to attain finely-tuned chronologies and distribution patterns) also directed the scholarly

attention to the analysis of kiln deposits for establishing secure local production groups.59

But even with this auspicious trend in ceramic studies, Greek excavated kilns were

conspicuously absent from the conference,The Prehistory and History of Kilns, organized by

the American Ceramic Society in 1997.60

Richer information on kilns from other regions in the Mediterranean is available to

the archaeologist. There are now numerous articles as well as monographs on Roman kilns

in Great Britain and in France, the Iron Age kilns in Israel, the kilns in eastern Europe, and

58 The proceedings of these two French colloquia were published inTopoi8 (1998) and 9(1999).

59 See articles in the proceedings on Hellenistic pottery:A v EllKer 1989,B v EllKer 1990,G v EllKer 1994,D v EllKer 1997,E v EllKer 2000.

60 Rice (ed.) 1997. Vitelli's article in that volume (Vitelli 1997) on Neolithic kilns was anattempt to reconstruct the appearance of Neolithic kilns (see infra Ch. IV).



INTRODUCTION_____________________________________________

28

kiln at Isthmia using traditional materials to fire a few replicas of composite tiles similar tothose used to roof the Archaic temple of Poseidon.71

The richness of information which may be presented in the publication of an ancient

ceramic workshop should not overshadow the difficulty and time consumption involved in

processing the large quantities of pottery recovered from a production site. In Athens the

excavation of the Classical workshop at Lenormant Ave. (51-53 ) and the twenty-seven

Roman kilns at Kotzia Square in Athens (274-300 ) exemplify in the best way the

overwhelming quantities of pottery. An alternative method for coping with such quantities,

while still being able to investigate an entire workshop area is to conduct a sectional

excavation of a kiln.72

Building and expanding upon the literature presented above, this study places at its

center the ceramic kiln of the ancient Greek workshops. Our approach is carried out on four

levels: the philological, the iconographical, the architectural, and the economic. The fuel of

this dissertation is the geographical and chronological distribution of ceramic kilns in ancient

Greece (within the limits of the modern state of Greece) and their typological classification.

71 In building this kiln (Rostoker and Gebhard 1981) the workers were more concerned withthe efficiency of the structure. Therefore they did not attempt to replicate the structuralcharacteristics of an Archaic kiln, but instead chose a feature of Roman kilns, the arch, as thesafest method to support the perforated floor.

72 For sectional excavations ofsome of the Roman kilns at Leptiminus, see Stone et al. 1998;Stirling and Lazreg 1999. Kiln 3005:∅ 1.85m, 2.10m deep; kiln 4012:∅ 3.20m, 3.50m deep; kiln 9008:∅ 4.50m; kiln 9010:∅ 4.90m.



K ILNS IN ART AND LITERATURE

_____________________________________________29

CHAPTER I

THE CERAMIC K ILN

IN A NCIENT ART AND LITERATURE

In the history of the field of Classical archaeology, knowledge of Greek kilns has

derived mainly from their numerous representations on the Archaic terracotta plaques from

Penteskoufia at Corinth (see infra). As soon as the structures depicted were correctly

identified as ceramic kilns and not as metallurgical furnaces, they became the standard

reference in every study of ancient ceramic production in Greece. Originally these plaqueswere thought to be a votive deposit from a sanctuary dedicated to Poseidon. An alternative

interpretation put forward in this study regards some of the plaques as trial or apprentice




_____________________________________________31

ancient Greeks is paralleled by a similar ambiguity in the correct identification anddistinction of ceramic kilns from other pyrotechnological structures (see infra Excursus).

I. A RTISTIC R EPRESENTATIONS

a. The Penteskoufia Plaques

i. The assemblage

The best-known representations of ancient kilns are those depicted on the

Penteskoufia plaques. About 1600 fragments of votive terracotta plaques were found in

1879 near a ravine at Penteskoufia, two kilometers to the southwest of Acrocorinth.3 Themore complete pieces are now exhibited in Berlin (Staatliche Museen) and in Paris (Louvre

3 The site is not commonly indicated on maps. For the general location, see Wiseman 1978,figs. 1, 39, 105, 107. Fig. 105 is especially informative about the findspot of the plaques.Salmon 1984, 4, fig. 2; Whitbread 1995, figs. 4.28, 5.3, 5.33.




_____________________________________________32

Museum). Some are still at the archaeological museum at ancient Corinth.4

In a three-daysondage conducted by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens in 1904, 350 more

fragments were found in the same spot, as well as few Protocorinthian and Early-Corinthian

pots.5 No architectural remains were recorded, and the mention of some fragmentary

Archaic "terra-cottas" refer most likely to terracotta figurines rather than to architectural

rooftiles.

Many of the plaque fragments join and so far more than 1,000 plaques have been

restored. Three quarters of this group have decoration on only one side; the remainder aredecorated on both sides (I will call them two-sided), usually with a different orientation of

the scene on each side. The most popular iconographical themes of the plaques are Poseidon

alone or with Amphitrite, Poseidon and Amphitrite riding in a cart, horseback riders,

marching hoplites, ships, animals, and potters at work. These themes show Poseidon in his

various aspects, as protector of the sea, the earth, and horses.6 Their sizes, as we can gather

4 For a catalogue of the plaques with kiln representations, see Appendix III. For the primarycatalogue entries, see Furtwängler 1885. Pernice (1897) inventoried more fragments, added joins to the existing ones, and offered correct reinterpretations of the scenes. Forillustrations, Antike Denkmäler I, 1886, pls. 7-8; II, 1893-1894, pls. 23-24; 1895-1898, pls.29-30; 1899-1901, pls. 39-40. The plaques in the Louvre are discussed in Rayet 1880. Alsosee von Raits 1964 and Geagan 1970 (same person) for a discussion of the pieces withmythological themes. For discussion and illustrations, see Richter 1923, 76-8; Ziomecki1958; Boardman 1954, 1956; Marwitz 1960; Duhamel 1978/9; Zimmer 1982; Cuomo DiCaprio 1984 (who was mainly interested in the process of firing, with little emphasis on theplaques themselves); Hadjidimitriou 1997, 60-4, 67-71; for the Penteskoufia plaques ascraftsmen's dedications, see Verfenstein 2001.

5 Washburn 1906. For excerpts from Ancient Corinth Excavation Notebook 18, see von Raits1964, 2-4.

6 Cf. the adjectives in the Homeric poems:gaihvoco" (e.g. Il. 9.183; 13.59, 125, 377),ejnnosiv cqwn ( Il. 8.303), ejnnosivgaio" ( Il. 9.183, 362). For more references, RE and LIMCs.v.Poseidon; von Raits 1964, ch. IV, 26-8.




_____________________________________________33

from the complete examples, can be as small as 0.075m (F619+826) to 0.11m (F76, F414,F867) in width, and as large as 0.14 x 0.20m (F623).7 The presence of Poseidon and

Amphitrite on many of these plaques as well as accompanying dedicatory inscriptions have

prompted archaeologists to interpret this assemblage as a votive deposit of a nearby

sanctuary where Poseidon, probably together with his wife, Amphitrite, were worshipped.8

ii. The plaques with kiln scenes

On seventy of these plaques, kilns are certainly depicted (Appendix III andPlates

I.1-5 ). On thirteen more, depictions of kilns have been suggested, thus bringing the total

number to eighty-three plaques. Sixteen additional fragments borrow their themes from

pottery-making activities, such as digging for clay, throwing vessels on the potter's wheel, or

showing shelves stacked with pottery.9 They are dated stylistically to the last three quarters

7 For other examples which preserve full dimensions: F367 (0.28 x 0.165m), F485 (0.14 x0.208m), F474 (0.078 x 0.068m), F539 (0.093 x 0.136m).

8 In Furtwängler’s (1885) detailed catalogue of the pieces, 240 out of 508 plaques (or 48%)have Poseidon depicted on them. For the inscriptions, see Lorber 1979 and a more recentdiscussion and review of previous literature is provided in Amyx 1988.

9 F638-645, F813, F815, F868-871, F884, F886. Some plaques were wrongly identified askiln scenes: F630+539 (Poseidon shown holding a trident on a two-horse chariot), F621+n.n.(the addition of an extra piece does not leave room for a kiln next to the horseback rider),F828+n.n. (initially thought to be a kiln, it is actually a horse depicted from the front whichturns its head to the right; its lower legs are missing. In front of the horse a man with hisright hand raised faces right). (n.n. refers to not-inventoried fragments).

10 Payne 1931; Jeffery 1990.




_____________________________________________34

of the sixth century B.C., or the Transitional to Late Corinthian II periods in the Corinthianvase-painting chronology.10

Although the structures depicted on the Penteskoufia plaques are undoubtedly

ceramic kilns, in the earliest literature they were interpreted as smelting furnaces.11 The

main arguments identifying them as metallurgical furnaces were as follows:

a. The structures were thought to be too large to be ceramic kilns;

b. The long stick held by a man on many plaques was believed to be more closely

associated with the metallurgical furnace; andc. If these structures were furnaces, then the plaques merely reflected a blooming

metallurgical activity in the Corinthia. The dipintoSODRIS (SADRIS) , interpreted as

SIDHROS on the plaque MNB2858 in the Louvre (Plate I.4 ), was taken to corroborate

epigraphically this connection to the metal industry.

The absence of a large number of excavated and published kilns in the early days of

Classical archaeology enabled these arguments to last longer than they should have. As

recently as 1960, Ziomecki devoted an entire article to dismiss this interpretation. After an

adequate number of kilns had been excavated and published, Ziomecki could easily provide

evidence that many ancient ceramic kilns were large enough to require the use of the stoking

rod, and he was able to refute the first two arguments outlined above. One can also easily

argue that Corinthian pottery industry of the Archaic period was very prominent, whereas

metal-working in a scale that would justify such an iconographical zeal of representations of

"furnaces" is still to be discovered in Corinthia.12 Most important, however, is the fact that

11 Furtwängler 1885; Pernice 1897.

12 Salmon (1984, 128) emphasizes that "There were no mines of any kind in the Corinthia."




_____________________________________________35

smelting furnaces tended not to be larger than 1.00m in diameter in antiquity, especially inthe period of the Penteskoufia plaques.13 The assumption, therefore, that pottery kilns are

smaller than metallurgical furnaces is also proved incorrect.

The composition of the kiln scenes is quite standardized.14 A circular kiln is shown

from the side, and a man, often in the company of others, is depicted either stoking the fire

with a long stick or picking up trial pieces from the top of the kiln to check the firing

progress (e.g. F608, F618) (Plates I.2, I.4 ).15 The entire kiln is depicted above ground,

unlike most archaeological examples which are constructed partly subterranean.16 The firingchamber is depicted with its loading door, usually at a 90o angle from the stoking channel.

Blazing flames come out from the chimney and occasionally from the stoking channel. The

stoking channel varies in length. The large size of the kiln is inferred because the men

always stand on top of the stoking channel to reach the chimney; sometimes even a ladder is

required (F802). F893 stands apart iconographically because it shows a vertical section of

the interior of a kiln with its load consisting of hydriae and other large vessels.17 On

13 See infra Excursus, "The Metallurgical Furnace".

14 Verfenstein (2001) notes that most plaques depict specifically the crucial moment in thetransition from oxidizing to reducing atmospheres during the firing.

15 The long rod made of wood or iron is a standard piece of equipment for kiln workers. OnCyprus (Hampe and Winter 1962, 76) they call the wooden stoking rodto kontavri , and themetal rodto sivdero.

16 Ziomecki (1960, 157) believes that this false depiction is due to artistic conventions andfor a better understanding of the structure.

17 For a detailed discussion of this particular plaque and its misconception in earlierliterature, see infra Ch. II, "Stoking Channel and Stoking Pit".




_____________________________________________36

F482+627+943 a welcome inscription labels the structure asKAMINOS , leaving no doubt asto its identity (Plate I.5 ).18

T HEME N %Poseidon 17 34

Poseidon and Amphitrite 3? 8Amphitrite 3 8

Horseback riders 9 19

Unidentified males 9 15Birds 4 8Workshop related scenes 1 4

Bulls and men 2 4Design 1

TOTAL of two-sided plaques 49 100%

Table I.1: Distribution of iconographical themeson the reverse of the Penteskoufia kiln-depicting plaques.

Dedicatory dipinti on some of the plaques depicting kilns indicate that some plaques

were aimed to be votive dedications to Poseidon.19 On one of them (F511+MNC212), which

18 For the wordkavmino",see infra Ch. I, "kavmino" ".

19 F611:FLEBWN M j ANEQEKEN and F608:POTEDAAN (Plate I.10 ). Verfenstein(2001) compares the dedicatory character of the plaques to the "cletic hymn" as attested inancient Greek literature, in which the dedicant asks the deity to continue supporting him orher as they had in the past.

20 For an illustration of the joint fragments of this plaque, see Geagan 1970, 34, fig. 2. Theplaque depicts Poseidon riding in a chariot. Lorber 1979, nos. 40, 41, 83, 114 lists thesignatures of three painters from Corinth (Charis, Milonidas, and Timonidas).




_____________________________________________37

does not depict a kiln, the dedicator is also the painter of the plaque:MILONIDAS EGRAYEKANEQEKEN.20

In the group of plaques with kiln scenes Poseidon and Amphitrite, either alone or

together, decorate the reverse of almost half (23/49) of those plaques that are painted on both

sides (Table I.1 ). The prominence of Poseidon's cult in the Corinthia and the importance of

maritime trade to the Corinthian potters and craftsmen would explain their devotion to

Poseidon. But Poseidon does not appear elsewhere in Greece as protector of the artisans'

community, as Hephaistos or Athena Ergane generally do. The remaining half carryrepresentations mainly of horseback riders, unidentified males, and birds. Only in two cases

the topics onboth sides of the plaque may be related to ceramic production (F889, F892).

As I have mentioned, from the first moment of their discovery, these plaques as a

whole were thought to belong to a votive deposit from a sanctuary or a shrine to Poseidon

(and Amphitrite) in the vicinity. I would suggest, however, that due to the low quality of the

draftsmanship, the different orientation of the scenes on the plaques that are decorated on

both sides, and the location of the site next to an area where ceramic production is attested in

later periods, it might be more prudent to regardsome of these plaques, including a number

of those which depict kilns, as apprentices' test pieces or trial pieces for the firing. These

suggestions can accommodate, rather than exclude, the existence of a religious site near the

workshop area.

iii. The findspot of the Penteskoufia plaques: near a sanctuary or near a workshop?

Although the ultimate destination of the plaques was votive dedications in a

sanctuary, it cannot be automatically assumed that their find spot was within a sanctuary, or




_____________________________________________38

thatall the plaques were dedications (and those depicting kilns were specifically dedicationsof potters), or that all the plaques (regardless of their theme) were craftsmen’s dedications.21

Although one of them (F511+MNC212) is clearly a vase-painter’s dedication, as the

inscriptionMILONIDAS EGRAYE KANEQEKEN strongly states, it is a considerable leap to

assume that all the plaques with kilns or phases of ceramic production werededications of

potters. It might be better to see them as a ceramic workshop's debris, which included many

apprentices' pieces.22 The few different stylistic “hands” of the Penteskoufia plaques make it

likely that these plaques were painted in one large, or some small-scale, workshops whoseproduction included votive plaques to be dedicated to Poseidon.23

Architectural context:Starting from the find context of these plaques, it should be

emphasized that no architectural remains contemporary with the plaques have come to light

in the area.24 Nor were there any other traces of religious activity nearby, such as a bothros

deposit. Therefore, the alleged sanctuary of Poseidon has never been located

archaeologically.

21 In this section I use evidence from the entire corpus of the plaques, not only the oneswhich depict kilns. I should emphasize that only 20% of the published plaques areillustrated. The final publication of the entire corpus is pending.

22 As early as 1880, the association with a workshop was offered as plausible. Rayet (1880,102-3) lists a series of possible provenances for the plaques: a necropolis, a neighboringtemple, ancient pottery kilns, or the area outside one of the gates of Acrocorinth.Surprisingly enough, Rayet discards the possibility that pottery kilns could have existed nearPenteskoufia without any discussion.

23 In the identification of individual artists or styles, I have used the following as preliminarycriteria: renderings of facial traits, anatomical details of animals, clothing details, depictionof chariot wheels, filling ornament, and use of color.

24 Remains of a later aqueduct are present. See Wiseman 1978, fig. 105.




_____________________________________________39

If there had been a sanctuary to Poseidon in the vicinity, was it short-lived? Theanswer must be "yes"; otherwise one would expect a wider variety of styles, representing not

only individual hands, but also different periods. The consistency of the styles in the

Penteskoufia deposit speak for a narrow range of dates (second to fourth quarter of the sixth

century B.C.). In addition, the Corinthian potters would have continued asking for support

from Poseidon in the following centuries as well. The deposit, although clearly containing

the work of more than one artist, seems to have been formed as the result of a one-time

depositional process, as one can gather from the presence of many joining fragments.Potters and Poseidon:The second assumption stemming from the characterization

of the deposit as votive is that they were dedications of potters and painters to Poseidon. Let

us look more closely at this group of plaques. Eighty-three of about one thousand plaques

show kilns, and these constitute only 8% of the entire assemblage.25 In other words, the

potters chose to depict their profession for which they were asking protection from Poseidon,

only on very few plaques. Second, of these eighty-three kiln-scenes, twenty-six appear on

one-sided plaques (ca. 30%), forty-nine (or 59%) are placed on one side of the plaques with

decoration on both sides, and for the remainingeight plaques (11%) it is unclear if they had

decoration on one side or on both sides. If they were asking for protection from Poseidon,

they cared to depict the god on only twenty plaques out of the eighty-three , (ca. 25%), and in

25 Even the addition of the sixteen plaques which depict various stages of the potteryproduction does not alter the general picture (see supra n. 9).




_____________________________________________40

all cases he is placed on the reverse of two-sided plaques (20/48 or 42%) (Table I.1 ).26

Onewould expect that the invoked god would appear more often.

Stylistic homogeneity:Germane to the question of craftsmen's dedication is the fact

that the kiln-depicting plaques represent very few styles. According to my analysis, most of

the plaques which depict pottery-making phases can be easily attributed to just a few hands,

who were obviously interested in depicting the inner workings of their profession.

Especially for the kiln-depicting plaques, the best example is the hand that painted five

plaques: F356+609, F608, F618, F637+819, and F867 (Plate I.2 ). Therefore this preferencefor kiln depictions was very short-lived.27

If these plaques had been used as votive dedications, it was probably a very local and

personal custom of only a few painters/potters (probably from the same workshop), which

lasted only for a generation or two. It may have been the case that Poseidon, in his capacity

as protector of the earth (gaihvoco", seisiv cqo" ) , was connected with the earth's product, the

clay, which is the raw material for the potters.28 Its restricted local character would then

explain why we find no parallels of such potters' dedications anywhere else at Corinth or in

26 The figure on plaque F846, which has been suggested that Poseidon (or an elderly person,perhaps the owner of the workshop) oversees the fire, is interpreted in this study as theoriginal composition of the painter who later changed his mind and painted a kiln coveringpartially the earlier figure.

27 Between fifty and one hundred years if we accept the wider chronological range suggestedby Payne 1931. For other discernible hands, see the following groups: a. F616, MNB2856(Plate I.1 ), b. F810, F816(Plate I.3 ), c. F632+887, F843, F909, MNB2858(Plate I.4 ), d.F866+546, F889, e. F639, F789, F865, F871, F893 (Plate I.6 ). Even Payne (1931, 112)proposed a single artist for the plaques F349 and F367+372+398+399.

28 von Raits 1964, ch. IV, 26-8.




_____________________________________________41

the Greek world.29

In addition, nothing comparable was uncovered in the excavations ofsanctuaries of Poseidon or of other deities in the Corinthia. And during the same period,

only one crater bears an inscription to Poseidon.30

To corroborate the workshop association, it suffices to say that overall the area to the

west and southwest of Acrocorinth has strong indications for pottery production. In the

Byzantine period, a ceramic workshop was operating in the wider vicinity. The unusually

large number of vitrified wasters still seen on the ground is a reliable indicator of the

presence of this late kiln.31 Finally, the area of Penteskoufia is less than a kilometer awayfrom the Potters' Quarter of ancient Corinth.32

Different orientation of scenes on the two-sided plaques:The different orientation of

scenes on many two-sided plaques (F632+887, F802, F810, F811, F816, F889, F913) may

add supporting evidence for refuting the sanctuary scenario. If we assume that both sides

were visible when they were hung from trees (as the frequently-preserved holes indicate),

29 Other examples of craftsmen's dedications in Rouse 1902. A new study of craftsmen'sdedications is currently being undertaken by C. Verfenstein at the U. of Minnesota.Verfenstein (2001) also notices the unusual character of the Penteskoufia group of votivededications.

30 A crater at Bari from Monte Samnace, Early red-ground style (Payne 1931, no. 1459). Forstatistical considerations, Payne’s list of inscribed vases includes seventy-five examples. Inaddition to this inscribed pot, one oenochoe depicts Poseidon (Louvre A 438; Payne 1931,no. 1124) and possibly one alabastron (Bonn 591; Payne 1931, no. 374).

31 This site has been identified by Dr. G. Sanders and discussed in his dissertation (Sanders1995, 226-33; for its geographical location, see map on p. 234).

32 Stillwell 1948, 1952.




_____________________________________________42

this factor would cause one side to be illegible, because it would have been hung upsidedown.33

The issue of different orientation brings us to the second major consideration

regarding these plaques: the inequality of drawing skills. The two-sided plaques which have

the same orientation are painted mostly by the same hand, and they usually display high

artistic skill (e.g. F521+796+876, F595, F797, F848, F849, F855, F860, F894, F910, F921,

F929) (Plate I.7 ). In cases of different orientation, the scenes on each side can be painted

either by the same artist (F889) or by different artists (F863), usually with unequal skill.34 Inother words, an apprentice would be entrusted to work only on the "back" side of a clay

plaque, which (for whatever reason) could be spared.35

Apprentices’ pieces:Also suggesting that these are workshop pieces rather than

finished votives is the fact that this assemblage includes a large number of apprentices’

pieces (their quick sketches).36 Even Furtwängler (1885) , in his preliminary presentation of this

corpus a century ago, noticed that the style of many plaques was "primitiv." If one interprets

33 It should be noted, however, that such considerations would not have been important tothe gods, if they were the recipients of these tablets.

34 In the cases of two-sided plaques, one should examine whether the plaques were fired attwo different times, or whether there was a single firing. One should prefer one firing,because a double firing would cause the second decoration to adhere less well on the firedclay and to chip off easily.

35 The possibility that these plaques were reused at a later date as votives cannot be sustainedwith the currently available evidence.

36 von Raits (1964, 19) also comments on the poor quality of draftsmanship. Thebibliography on apprentices' pieces or preliminary sketches is quite sparse; for generalinformation, see Richter 1923, 38-9, fig. 44; Noble 1988, 104-7; for preliminary sketches onred-figured vases, see Corbett 1965; Boss 1997.




_____________________________________________43

biva (from the inscription of TimonidasTIMONIDAS EGRAFSEN BIAon the reverse ofF846, whose other side depicts a kiln scene) as "haste" or "rush", the interpretation of the

plaques as hastily drawn pieces is strengthened.37

The carelessness of the scene's composition offers the first clue towards this

interpretation. Strikingly low artistic skill is detected in the wrongly rendered proportions of

body parts (F671, F722), in drawing male figures in outline (F395), in drawings in unusual

scale (F839), and in some other figures painted in a grotesque style (F621). We also have

examples of what should be considered studies of foreshortening, especially difficultpositions of horses or men (F668, F769, F828, F873) (Plate I.9 ).38 The discrepancy of

talents becomes apparent when one contrasts the many, well-drawn instances of Poseidon

with the Poseidon on F357, whose sketchy appearance confirms the presence of less

competent artists in the workshop(s).

Some scenes have no structural composition, but are compilations of figures and

objects with no relationship to each other: for example some plaques have multiple sketches

on one side (F846, F83539, F460, F555, F899). Especially plaques F835, 460, F899, and

F900 are representative examples of the case in which the artist changed his mind about the

37 The other meaning ofbiva is "by force". So, were these painters slaves, or were theysimply forced by the advanced potters to practice intensively in order to improve their skills?It is worth noting that this dipinto is painted in the middle of the scene in a hasty manner,whereas the dedicatory inscription to Poseidon is written orderly on the border of the plaque.

38 Boardman (1954, 191, n. 87) mentions one plaque from the Acropolis, which preserves asketch of Athena on its reverse side; the front side, painted in white ground technique,depicts Athena.

39 Cf. F833.




_____________________________________________44

composition of the scene: F835 preserves the preliminary drawing of the lower legs of a manfacing right, whereas the final composition shows a ship moving to the left; the plaque F899

had been used once for Poseidon (as his trident suggests) and was later turned upside down

and decorated with a striding male. There are also cases with numerous identical

inscriptions on one plaque [F368: the word Poseidon appears twice, once as a dipinto and

again inscribed after the firing (Plate I.8 )].

If we accept that these plaques are mostly trial pieces, then the scenes of kilns or

pottery workshops, otherwise an unusual theme for craftsmen’s dedications and a minorpercentage of the collection (8%), as well as the entire assemblage are open to other

explanations. It might be that the apprentices practiced their skills at freehand draftsmanship

in their free time while watching the pottery being fired.40 They may have sat to the side in

the workshop and painted what they saw. The firing stage is the only time in the pottery-

making process which is less demanding for the workers before the next batch of pottery

starts. Half of the kiln scenes are painted on the reverse of Poseidon plaques, which might

have been rejected in the workshop before being fired.

Although the question might sound redundant, one should ask "why were trial

sketches necessary?" It is conceivable that the apprentices were practicing on such plaques

before they were entrusted with painting vases. The flat surfaces of the plaques would pose

fewer challenges to beginners than the curved surfaces of the vases.TIMONIDAS has

signed both a pinax (F846, which also depicts a kiln on the other side) and a vase with a

Troilos scene (NM 277). The composition and rendering of the scene on the vase parallel

40 Hampe and Winter (1962, 5, fig. 4) illustrated a crude miniature model of a kiln, made bythe children of the potters from one workshop at Thrapsano on Crete.




_____________________________________________45

exactly the style of the plaque (Plate I.10 ).41

The successfully painted plaques could havebeen sold later as votive dedications.

Figural iconography:It is also quite interesting that the plaques depict so many

figures, when figural scenes are strikingly few on the Corinthian pottery of the same period.

Payne had argued that Corinthian potters ceased painting human figural scenes when

Athenian pottery gained dominance of the markets.42 Because figural scenes tend to appear

on larger vases, the painters might have preferred to compose the scene first in another

medium before transferring it to the large vase.43 In addition, since these large craters do not

seem to have been produced massively (and since it was the par excellenceCorinthian

shape), it is highly likely that the potters wanted to make sure that no mistake would occur.44

The size of most plaques coincides with the field available to the potter on a vase: the height

of the plaque corresponds to the decorative panel on a small vase, or one band of the

41 For a drawing of the jug with the Troilos scene, see Lorber 1979, pl. 10 (Pl. I.1 0).

42 Payne 1931; Campbell (1946) points out that there were more instances of figural scenes,although the total was far fewer than for animal friezes.

43 Isocrates’ scorn ( De permut.2) of the makers of terracotta pinakes as opposed to vase-painters is often cited in connection with these plaques (von Raits 1964).

44 For a selection of craters whose themes correspond closely to those depicted on theplaques, see Louvre E 632 and London 1867.8-5.860 by Ophelandrus Painter; Berlin F 1147and Corinth CP 2034 by Memnon Painter; Basel BS 451 and London 1836.2-24.248 byAthana Painter; Toronto 919.5.144 by Hippolytus Painter; and Florence 4198 by SphortosPainter. For relevant bibliography on these craters, see Amyx 1988, 261-9. Amyx (1983)discusses and refutes the possibility that these craters copy contemporary mural paintings.




_____________________________________________46

multibanded larger Corinthian shapes, such as craters. Thus the painters were practicing on

the same scale as on the Corinthian pottery they would paint later in their careers.

Size and quality of the offering:Given the prominence of the Corinthian pottery and

the esteem that the Corinthian potters received from their society as Herodotus informs us

(2.167), it is hardly imaginable that a Corinthian painter/potter would choose such a small

pinax and decorate it so hastily to offer it as a dedication to Poseidon.45 For example, the

plaque F482+627+943+n.n., which preserves theKAMINOS inscription, is no wider than

0.09m and perhaps not much taller than 0.10-0.13m. A well-painted vase of larger

dimensions, or even an offering in a different medium, such as the marble and bronze votives

reliefs by potters on the Athenian Acropolis, would seem more appropriate as a votive

dedication.46 The quality of the draftsmanship (which is inconsistent in the Penteskoufia

plaques) is still more important than the actual size of the pieces, since no one can deny that

some potters might have been too poor to afford a larger dedication, but surely no potter

would wish to offer shabby work for such a purpose.

A counterargument to the use of the plaques as testing pieces is that the Corinthian

apprentices were not practicingmainlyanimal friezes, which they would be expected to paint

for the rest of their careers. Very few plaques represent any animals at all, other than the

horseback rider scenes (e.g. F921-F929). Also, the cases of poor craftsmanship are

45 It is still an open question whether these plaques were dedications by the pottersthemselves or by the workshop owners, if they were different persons.

46 For votive dedications of craftsmen, see Raubitschek 1949; Scheibler 1979. For thePenteskoufia plaquesScheibler believes (p. 17) that they were votives for each firing.




_____________________________________________48

b. Hydria (Munich, Staatliche Antikensammlungen 1717)

A scene from a pottery workshop occupies the shoulder of this black-figure hydria

attributed to the Leagros Group which was active in the last quarter of the sixth century B.C.

(Plate I.11b ).47 From left to right, a man sitting on a stool holds a large amphora. A second,

standing man faces him. A third man, with his back turned to the second one, turns a large

vessel (an amphora or a pithos) on the wheel, while a smaller figure, sitting on a very low

stool, turns the wheel for the potter. Another man, placed in the center of the composition,

carries a similar vase towards the kiln.

A column supporting a roof divides the scene into two parts and implies that part of

the workshop is located in the open-air, perhaps a courtyard. Further to the right an older

man with long white hair holds a scepter and seems to oversee the whole enterprise. In front

of him a large man carries a bulky object on his back (probably a pithos). At the far right-

hand end of the panel a man stokes the fire with a rod. A kiln is summarily depicted with a

very small stoking channel, as seen from profile, and an apotropaic (?) Dionysiac mask is

hung on the upper part of the kiln.48

The identification of the structure as a pottery kiln has been questioned by Oddy and

Swaddling. They interpreted it as a shaft furnace due to its high, narrow dimensions, which

resemble the shaft furnaces depicted on other vases.49 In this case, however, the structure

47 ABV362.36; Beazley 1971, 161; for earlier bibliography, Carpenter 1989, 96; fordepictions of pot-making activities, see Beazley 1946; Ziomecki 1975;Hadjidimitriou 1997.

48 For the interpretation of the Dionysiac mask as an apotropaic device, see infra, 57.

49 The argument for why this is a furnace and not a kiln is presented in Oddy and Swaddling1985, where all the known examples of representations of furnaces on ancient vases (sevensecure and three inferred) are collected (Plate Exc.11 ). Ziomecki 1975; Roebuck (ed.) 1969;Richter 1923;




_____________________________________________49

cannot be a shaft furnace. First, a furnace has no stoking channel; such a channel, albeitshort, is certainly depicted here. Second, the stoking rod, which the figure holds, is

unnecessary in furnaces, where the draft is caused by blow-pipes (tuyères). Third, the

presence of the potter's wheel places the scene securely in a pottery workshop, because

metal workers have no need of a wheel to perform their craft. It would have been absurd for

an ancient artist to paint activities characteristic of a pottery workshop and insert a

metallurgical furnace at the end. The structure at the far right-hand end of the scene is

undoubtedly a pottery kiln, with its stoking channel summarily rendered.The main scene on the body of the hydria is the mythical subject of Aeneas and

Anchises. The placement of the pottery scene on the shoulder of the vase as subsidiary

decoration should be emphasized since it is not immediately apparent in the numerous

illustrations of the scene in studies on ancient pottery.50 By reserving a secondary place for

the depiction of his craft, this potter continues a well-established tradition whereby potters

were reluctant to depict on their product the banausic aspect of their craft; they preferred to

emphasize its artistic aspect. It is no coincidence that the vast majority of potters'

representations on vessels depict a painter while he/she is painting a vase.51

50 Sparkes 1991; Scheibler 1995.

51 For representations of potters, see Burford 1972; Müller 1974; Ziomecki 1975;Hadjidimitriou 1997. For female painters, see the workshop scene on the Caputi hydria,Torno Collection no. 278 in Milan ( ARV 2 571.73) from ca. 460 B.C., attributed to theLeningrad Painter. Discussed by Kehrberg 1982. See also full illustration in Bron andLissarangue 1984, fig. 1.




_____________________________________________51

II. U NCERTAIN R EPRESENTATIONS OF K ILNS

a. Engraved Gems

Two depictions of kilns are preserved on engraved gems, now lost and of dubious

authenticity (Plate I.12b-c ).54 In one, the man is painting the handles of a small amphora

while a jug and a kylix are placed on the top of a small, rounded structure with an opening in

the front. In the second gem, a potter with the aid of two sticks is placing a hydria on top of

a dome-like structure described as a kiln with an opening in the front. The so-called kiln is

extremely small, even considering the artist's freedom regarding correctness of scale. There

are archaeological examples, however, which confirm the existence of such small kilns in a

pottery workshop, often coexisting with large kilns in the same workshop, such as theGeometric kiln at Torone in Chalkidike (0.80m in diameter) (11 ), the Hellenistic kilns at

Paroikia, Paros, with a diameter of 0.75m (232-233 ), or the Hellenistic kiln at Pherai in the

Stamouli-Bolia Plot (192 ) with a diameter of 0.65m.

Such small kilns may also have been used for firing a small order (for example,

small skyphoi or lamps) in cases where the normal production of the workshop might have

54 Richter 1923, 78-9, figs. 81-82.




_____________________________________________52

been larger wares. In such a case, a small kiln fires pots much faster and requiresconsiderably less fuel.55

b. The "Robinson" Skyphos

This black-figure skyphos, dating to ca. 500 B.C, belongs to the Robinson collection

in Baltimore and is attributed stylistically to the Theseus Painter.56

The scenes on both sidesof the kiln are very similar: a group of three men work around a trapezoidal, cross–hatched

structure. The lower part of the man in the center is covered from this structure implying

that this man is either behind or inside this structure. On one side, this man in the center is

carrying a basket on his shoulders. Under each handle a man stands in front of a large

amphora, either working on it, or filling it with products. On each side, one man is shown

standing in front of a herm depicting Dionysos or Hermes. The scenes are bordered on the

top with branches or vines.The cross-hatched trapezoidal areas, one on each side of the skyphos, were

interpreted as kilns because of the other activities that were thought to be associated with the

forming (or decorating) of amphoras (Plate I.12a ). These structures, however, do not

resemble any other kiln representation nor can they be paralleled in the archaeological

55 It is possible that these small kilns were intended to fire pots which would have served assamples of the final desired product, to be reproduced in larger quantities, such as thecompetition samples for the Panathenaic amphoras. For the personnel organization andproduction of Panathenaic amphora workshops, see Valavanis 1997. For small-size kilns seeinfra Ch. III.

56 Robinson D. 1938, 11-12, pl. I. See also Eisman and Turnball 1978 for comparing thisscene with a traditional workshop operating in Maroussi in northern Attica.




_____________________________________________53

record. The characteristic feature of the stoking channel, which always appears on kilnrepresentations, is absent. The structure is very small compared to the figures, whereas all

other scenes show the kilns at a much larger scale than the persons. Their size would not

allow the firing of large amphoras inside it, so the link to the representation of amphoras in

these scenes is very weak. The presence of a basket that the man carries is difficult to

explain if the structure is a kiln. The interpretation of the scene as depicting the construction

of a kiln cannot be sustained because the structural characteristics of a kiln are very different.

The closest parallel to a firing structure would be bonfires. Another suggestion is that thisconical arrangement represents a pile of clay anchoring thus the scene, again, in a ceramic

workshop. Similar tall piles of stored clay can be seen on Crete, Cyprus, and Tunisia.57 On

Crete and Cyprus, however, the clay is stored inside a room in order to keep its moisture,

whereas the scene on the "Robinson" skyphos is clearly placed outdoors.

The activities on the skyphos can also be explained as olive-processing and

transferring of oil into large amphoras.58 The trapezoidal structures, then, probably represent

gathering areas where olives are pressed. By viewing this scene as one that occurs in the

countryside, one could explain the presence of the branches which frame the composition.

Alternatively, one can interpret the scene as wine harvesting, with wine being stored in the

amphoras.

57 In Jena Painter (1996, 18), they are interpreted as scenes of preparation of clay. The way thattraditional potters in Tunisia wedge the clay outdoors is reminiscent of the structures on the"Robinson" skyphos (Hasaki, in preparation).Vallianos and Padouva 1986, 84, fig. 20;London 2000c; E. Gratsia (pers. comm.) also offers a similar interpretation. Otherethnographic practices show, however, that whenever clay is wedged, the pile is quite low(hardly taller than 0.30m) whereas the piles on theskyphos have a considerable height.

58 Scheibler 1986.




_____________________________________________54

III. L ITERARY TERMS

A cursory overview of the ancient terms for kilns, ovens, and furnaces shows two

contradictory attitudes of the ancient Greek authors: on one hand they would use

inconsistently a pool of similar terms to refer to the same structures; on the other hand, very

specific words would differentiate one structure from another, or would distinguish various

versions within one type of structure.

It is a pity that no one in antiquity wrote a manual on how to fire pottery or, more

specifically, how to build a kiln. Such a manual would have preserved much of the

terminology for the kiln, its parts, and perhaps for other tools used in a pottery workshop. In

the ancient Greek sources, the words related to kilns or ovens appear mainly in the texts of

medical authors, who evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of the different types of

food (mainly bread) baked in various structures.

Our familiarization with these words becomes especially important because there is

no consistency in the terminology of ancient kilns used in modern Greek publications where

ceramic kilns are calledkavmino" or klivbano" indistinguishably.59 The term employed in

antiquity for an industrial kiln (that is, not a domestic bread oven) iskavmino" or bau' no".

59 Cf. the following titles of Greek publication where two different terms refer to the sametype of structure: Davaras 1973b:"Minwikhv kerameikhv kavmino" eij" Stuvlon Canivwn ." andKaragiorga 1971: "Kerameikov" klivbano" ejn jHlivdi."




_____________________________________________55

Klivbano", which survived in modern Greek as the standard term for kiln, is reserved in theancient writings only for the domestic oven, where food-preparing activities were performed.

In the fifth century B.C. the words used for a kiln, or a kiln-shaped structure, are

ijpnov", kavmino", klivbano" , andpnigeuv" . The wordijpnov" is the one most frequently used in

pre-Christian times and also the oldest. Its predecessor in Linear B isi-po-no, which appears

on the tablet Kn 233 (the reverse of Uc 160).60 Its early association with fire probably

accounts for its later use in reference to domestic hearths.

Althoughbau' no", kavmino", klivbano", and pnigeuv" are used already in the fifthcentury B.C. with a relatively strict sense, starting in the second century A.D., the

lexicographers blur the boundaries between the meanings of these words, and most of the

terms are used as synonyms for each other.61 Herodian in the second century A.D. lists

60 See Chadwick 1973, 324, 331-4; for an overview of all the suggested translations of theword, see Jorro and Adrados 1985,s.v. From its context it becomes clear thati-po-norefersto a type of vessel translated by modern scholars as "dutch ovens," "cooking bowls," "a

shallow open dish," or "earthenware bowls used for baking on a hearth."

The tablet Kn 233 reads as follows:l.1 ? [l.2 a-pi-po-re-we 3 [ 3 amphorasl.3 i-po-no 14 [ 14 cooking bowlsl.4 [u]-do-ro 17 [ 17 water jars

The reverse side (Uc 160) records wine and other measured commodities.

61 Below is a representative list of the lexicographic entries:

Hsch. I 774: ijpnov", kavmino", fou' rno", klivbano"Suda I 550, 552: ijpnov", fou' rno", kavmino"Suda K 1800: bau' no", kavmino", klivbano"Suda K 2414: krivbano", fou' rno"Suda P 1830,F 629 : pnigeuv", fou' rno", krivbano"




_____________________________________________56

ijpnov", fou' rno", andkavmino" as synonyms.62

In the fifth century A.D., the list of synonymsincreases: Hesychios (I 774) usesijpnov", kavmino", fou' rno", andbau' no". In the Suda in the

10th century A.D. almost all the words appear as synonyms in each entry.

a. kavmino"

The ancient Greek word for the ceramic kiln waskavmino" (h J).63 Kavmino" must

have been the generic word for any structure serving as kiln or furnace since it serves as asynonym for all the other terms. Its general character acquires specific meaning depending

on the context or on the accompanying adjectives, such askamineutikh;, ojpthvteira, or

kerameikh; kavmino" for the ceramic kiln.64

The earliest attested occurrence of the wordkavmino"in association with a ceramic

kiln is on the Penteskoufia plaque F482+627+943+n.n., where the inscriptionKAMINOS

The abbreviations for the ancient authors follow S. Hornblower and A. Spawforth (eds.), The

Oxford Classical Dictionary , Oxford 1996 (third edition), xxix-liv; for authors and laterscholiasts not listed in these abbreviations, I followed the LSJ. The relevant passages arelisted in chronological order of their authors, unless otherwise specified.

62 Hdn.Epim.p. 50.

63 Plut.Publ. 13.2 (Etruscan terracotta statue of a quadriga fired in akavmino" ); Septuaginta,Eccles. 27.5; Suda P 3231. A different spelling,kavmeino",appears in the papyri from Egyptfrom the third century B.C. onwards.

64 kavmino" kerameikh;: Dsc. De materia medica 5.75.14 (for herbs baked inside a pot whichis placed inside a kiln) and Orib. 13. P2 (again for myrtle leaves baked inside a pot which isturn is fired inside a kiln); Hsch.aujthv kavmino". ejpi; tw' n ta; paraplhvsia prassov ntwneijrhmevnh. ajpo; ga;r tou' kerameikou' trocou' hJ metaforav. Bricks are also fired in akavmino" in Olymp. In Mete., p. 332 (referring to the pots losing their water content inside the kiln).See also Clem. Rom. Ad Corinthios 8.2; Ath. 1.50; Did. Caecus fr. 185; afournoeidh;"kavmino" is mentioned in Zos. Alch. p. 173B.




_____________________________________________57

identifies the structure shown on the plaque. The Penteskoufia plaques, as discussed earlierin this chapter, are dated to ca. 575-500 B.C.

A century later, in Herodotus, we read about amphoras and bricks being fired in a

kavmino".65 In the fragment of Critias given below (fifth century B.C.), Athens is described

as the birthplace of the pottery wheel and the kiln. This statement interests us not for its

historical accuracy (the author has exaggerated somewhat to account for the high quality of

the Attic pottery), but for the use of the wordkavmino".

To;n de; trocou' gaivh" te kamivnou t j e[ kgonon eu\ ren,kleinovtaton kevramon, crhvsimon oijkonovmon,hJ to; kalo;n Maraqw' ni katasthv sasa trovpaion.

(Critias,ElegiesI, 12-14).

"And she who set up her noble trophy at Marathon inventedthe potter's wheel and the offspring of clay and kiln,highly renowned pottery, that useful steward."

(translated in Humpheys et al. 1998, 9.78)

The poem " KAMINOS "

This poem has a problematic original authorship (attributed to Homer, Hesiod, and

Herodotus) and the date of the surviving version is either Hellenistic (130-80 B.C.) or

Roman (second or third century A.D.). It is an invaluable source of information for the

65 Hdt. 1.179: firing bricks in kilns for building the fortification wall around Babylon; Hdt.4.16: Arcesilaus, the ruler of Cyrene, was given a Delphic oracle: "If you find the kiln full ofamphoras do not fire them, but send them away downwind." The oracle referred to hispolitical opponents, who found refuge inside a tower in the town. Arcesilaus set the tower onfire and burned them. Hdt. 4.164: Arcesilaus realized that he had misunderstood the oracle.




_____________________________________________58

terms used for the kiln and the various names of the kiln demons who personify thecasualties, likely to occur during the firing.66

Homer is approaching a ceramic workshop while a kiln-firing of fine wares was in

progress. The potters asked Homer to recite for them the poem called “Kavmino".” The kiln

is calledkavmino" throughout the poem, which should speak for the prominence of this term

for a ceramic kiln. The firing chamber is calledpuraivqousan , whereas the other areas of the

kiln are summarily described as chambers (dwvmata ).

eij me;n dwvsete misqo;n ajoidh' ", w\ keramh' e",deu' r j a[ g j jAqhnaivh kai; uJpevrscesqe cei' ra kamivnou,eu\ de; melanqei' en kovtuloi kai; pavnta kavnastra,frucqh' naiv te kalw' " kai; timh' " w\ non ajrevsqai,polla; me;n eijn ajgorh' i pwleuvmena polla; d j ajguiai' ",polla; de; kerdh' nai, hJmi' n d j hJdevw" sfin ajei' sai.h]n d j ejp j ajnaideivhn trefqevnte" yeuvde j a[ rhsqe,sugkalevw dh; e[ peita kamivnwn dhlhth' ra"Suvntrib j oJmw' " Smavragovn te kai; [ Asbeton hjde; Sabavkthn jWmovdamovn q j, o}" th' ide tev cnhi kaka; polla; porivzei:stei' be puraivqousan kai; dwvmata:su;n de; kavmino"pa' sa kukhqeivh, keramevwn mevga kwkusavntwn.wJ" gnavqo" iJppeivh bruvkei bruvkoi de; kavmino"pavnt j e[ ntosq j aujth' " keramhvi> a lepta; poou' sa.deu' ro kai; jHelivou quvgater, polufavrmake Kivrkh,a[ gria favrmaka bavlle, kavkou d j aujtouv" te kai; e[ rga:deu' ro de; kai; Ceivrwn ajgevtw poleva" Kentauvrou",oi{ q j JHraklh' o" cei' ra" fuvgon oi{ t j ajpovlontotuvptoien tavde e[ rga kakw' ", pivptoi de; kavmino".aujtoi; d j oijmwvzonte" oJrwviato e[ rga ponhrav.ghqhvsw d j oJrovwn aujtw'n kakodaivmona tev cnhn.o{ " de; c j uJperkuvyhi, periv touvtou pa' n to; provswponflecqeivh, wJ" pavnte" ejpivstwnt j ai[ sima rJevzein.

Pseudo- Herodotus, Life of Homer 32.

66 Suidas quotes it entirely and Poll.Onom.10.85 quotes line 3. For a more recenttranslation, see Humphrey et al. 1998, 372, passage 9.75; A detailed commentary on thepoem can be found in Noble 1988, 186-96; See also Richter 1923, 94-5; von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff 1929, 17-8; Cook 1948; Cook 1951.




_____________________________________________59

If you will pay me for my song, O potters,then come, Athena, and hold your hand above the kiln!may thekotyloiand all the kanastra turn a good black,may they be well fired and fetch the price asked,many being sold in the marketplace and many by the roads,and bring in much money, and may my song be pleasing.But if you (potters) turn shameless and deceitful,then do I summon the ravagers of kilnsbothSyntrips (Smasher) andSmaragos (Crasher) and Asbetos (Unquenchable) too, andSabaktes (Shake-to-Pieces)andOmodamos (Conqueror of the Unbaked), who makesmuch trouble for this craft.Stamp on stoking tunnel and chambers, and may the whole kilnbe thrown into confusion, while the potters loudly wail.As grinds a horse's jaw so may the kiln grindto powder all the pots within it.Come, too, daughter of the Sun, Circe of many spells,cast cruel spells, do evil to them and their handiwork.Here too let Cheiron lead many Centaurs,both those that escaped the hands of Herakles and those that perished.May they hit these pots hard and may the kiln collapse.And may the potters wail as they see the mischief.But I shall rejoice at the sight of their luckless craft.And if anyone bends over to look into the spy-hole, may his whole face

be scorched, so that all may learn to deal justly.(Adapted from M.J. Milne's translation)

As for the namesSuvntriy , Sabavkth" ,67 jWmovdamo" , Smavrago" , and vAsbeto" , it is

noteworthy that the names of the demons are hapax legomena in the Greek literature,

although the destructive actions of these demons were all too familiar to the potters.68

67 Cook (1948) prefers [ Amakto" to Sabavkth" . [ Amakto" would then represent theinsufficiently kneaded clay, which would cause cracks in the final terracotta product.

68 The worddaivmone" does not appear in the defixiones until Roman times. For other namesof demons of metallurgy, see Blakely-Westover 1998.




_____________________________________________60

In their attempt to harness these demons, the ancient potters placed apotropaicfigures on their kilns, usually satyr masks or ithyphallic figures. On the Penteskoufia plaque

F683+757+829+822 the kiln has a small ithyphallic figure in front of it (Plate I.3 ). A

similar device appears on the sixth century B.C. hydria 1717 from the Staatliche

Antikensammlungen in Munich, where a theatrical mask has been hung on the kiln to

express a similar potters' concern (Plate I.11b ).69 In the fill of a kiln excavated in Europos,

Kilkis in northern Greece (363 ), two terracotta figurines with grotesque features were

excavated and interpreted by the excavator as apotropaic devices.70 Aristophanes alsospeaks of abaskavnion ejpikavminon , in the form of a bronze statue of a man.71 Baskavnia

were also placed on metallurgical furnaces for the same reasons.72

It is interesting to note that, despite the fierce competition among potters that Hesiod

(Erga 25-26) warns us about, the competitors did not resort to the use of cursive tablets that

69 Ziomecki 1975; Roebuck (ed.) 1969; Richter 1923; the argument for why this is a furnaceand not a kiln is presented in Oddy and Swaddling 1985, where all the known examples ofrepresentations of furnaces on ancient vases (seven secure and three inferred) are collected(Plate Exc.11 ).

70 See also Forbes R. 1964. A relief depicting a sizeable phallus has been excavated next tothe stoking channel of a Hellenistic kiln at Metapontum at the site Pizzica (Carter 1983).Even the traditional Greek potters make a cross with their fingers on the loading door, whilethe clay is still wet (Hampe and Winter 1962, 23, 114; Blitzer 1990, 697). Fordivine protectorsof fire, see Korres 1971.

71 Ar. fr. 592 R; fr. 39 from play IFF.

72 Poll.Onom. 7.108:Pro; de; tw' n kamivnwn toi' " calkeu' sin e[ qo" h\ n geloi' av tina katarta' n,h[ ejpiplavttein, ejpi; fqovnou ajpotroph' /. ejkalei' to de; baskavnia.




_____________________________________________61

are all too common for metal workshops, but are yet to be found in a ceramic workshopcontext.73

The references of kavmino" to ceramic kilns were comparatively few when contrasted

to the numerous instances of kavmino" , which was used mainly for the description of furnaces

employed for smelting metals, such as bronze, iron, silver, and gold.74 The furnaces in the

Laurion mines were always calledkavminoiin the leases.75 Generally, the furnaces were

under the protection of Hephaistos since he himself operated furnaces, thekavminoi

jHfaivstou . These are attested in Callimachus, Lucian, and Nonnus, in reference to thefurnaces of the god of bronzesmiths, whose birthplace was Lemnos.76 In the medical

treatises,kavminoiare used to prepare medicines.

73 For cursive tablets in workshops and in general "agonistic" contexts, see Faraone 1991. Ametal worker is mentioned in a cursive tablet from the Athenian Agora (Young 1951, 222-3;

new reading of the text of the tablet in Curbera and Jordan 1998); Jordan 2000.

74 General aboutkavmino" : Ar. fr. 39; Arist. fr. 259; Callim. Hymn, 3.60 (bronze, iron);idemfr. 115; (with Hephaistos); Nic.Ther. 924 (iron), Alex. 51 (gold, silver) Diod. Sic. Bibl. Hist.5.27.2; Dsc. 5.75; Gal. 12.185-186 (gold, silver, iron); Lucianus Ddeor. 8.4; DMar.10.2 (thekavminoi of Hephaistos); Clem. Alex.Strom. 2.18.91; Eust. Il. 2.182 (bronze); Anacreonta fr.28 (iron for arrows); Pallas, Anth. Gr. 6.61; 14.50 [a silversmith (ajrguropoiov") is working ata furnace for coins]; Gal. 12.208; Nonnus, Dion. 29.349 (reference to Hephaistos). For gold(usually associated with firing of silver), see Posidonius inFGrH 2a.87.F116; schol. Thuc. Hist.4.100.2; Str. 3.2.8; 5.2.6; 5.4.6.

75 See e.g. IG II2 1370, l. 2750, records the boundaries of the furnace (kavmino" ) and of thegrounds around it. Generally on the leases from Laurion see Crosby 1950, 1957. See also thereference tokavminoiin thepoletaiv records (P5, P20, P28, P38, P43) found in the Agora(Lalonde et al. 1991).

76 Schol. Ar. Lys. 299.




_____________________________________________62

The working of the furnace was a very demanding craft and required trainedpersonnel: we hear of akamineuthv" , a kamineuv", and akamineuvtrian ( or kaminwv ) , a woman

in charge of the furnace, especially that of a bath.77 Two inscriptions recovered from

Laurion from the mid-fourth century B.C. mention Ianibelos, theajrcikamineuthv" , who must

have been employed in the local mines.78 Another inscription, a mortgage boundary stone

from the same area, mentions the salary given to a furnace worker called Simon from

Paeania.

toi' " metav jEpitevlou" ejk Keramevwnkai; ajpevrgastra kamiv nwi th' i Sivmou Paianievwkai; toi' " ejranistai' " toi' " metav Neoptolevmou Melitevw".79

Kavmino" also refers to the hypocausts of baths.80 Different types of rocks, such as

flint (puritovliqo" ), were fired inside akavmino" , which thus became a lime kiln.81 The word

changes slightly toto; kamivnion, (pluraltav kamivnia ), in the Byzantine author Constantinus

77 Kamineuthv" (Luc. De sacrificiis 6.6; Greg. Nyss.Contra Eun. 1.1.38);kamineuv" (Diod.Sic. 20.63.5);kamineuvtria and kaminwv are mentioned as synonyms in H erodian (quoted inEust. 2.165);kaminwv (Apol. Lex. Hom. s.v.).

78 IG II2 11697: jIanivbhle ajrcikamineuta; cai' re andSEG13.207 restored as jIanivbhlo" /ajrcikamin / euthv".

79 SEG 32.236, found at the Asklepiakon mine at Soureza and dated to ca. 350 B.C.

80 Schol. Ar.Plut. 535, 951; Ar. fr. 720; Asterius 3.12.2; Gal. 12.438.

81 Gal. 12.219; Orib. 13.d1, wherepurivth" livqo" (chert) was burnt in a kavmino" ; Aët. 15.15(lime kilns are similar to the bronze-smelting furnaces); Epiph. 1.347 (lime kilns operatingaway from the city).




_____________________________________________63

Porphyrogenitus.82

It is also interchangeable withijpnov" as part of a house,83

or a domesticfireplace.84 Synonyms arebau' no" (Hsch.s.v.) andkrivbano" (Hsch.s.v.).85 Finally, the

kaminivth" bread is baked inside thekavmino" .86

b. ajnqravkion , pnigeuv", skarfwvn , thvgano"

The first three words are minor terms associated with the standard wordkavmino" .

Hesychius (A 5153) usesajnqravkion to refer to any smallkavmino" (kai; pa' sa mikra;

kavmino" ). It is probably a portable oven, much like the ones found in the Athenian Agora (P

14165) or the oven represented in a Boeotian terracotta scene.87 Anqravkion was also a term

used for a cooking stand.88 Herodian offersthvgano" as another synonym forkavmino" , and

skarfwvn is a type of furnace.89

82 Hence the modern Greek wordkamivni.

83 Harp. p. 160, l. 18; Erot. p. 78, l. 1 (Klein).

84 Gal. 6.332; Dsc. 5.75.3.

85 Aspasius, schol.Eth. Nic. 104; Eust. 1.184; Anonymi in Arist. 184; Ael. 3, 2. p. 174;bauvnh (Hsch. s.v.).

86 See schol. Ar.Plut . 543; Ath. 3.113-114.

87 Both examples, among others, are illustrated in Sparkes and Talcott 1958.

88 Hadjidakis 2000, pl. 67b, for a cooking stand from Rheneia and for a vocabulary of termsfor cooking pots.

89 Hdn.Epim.,p. 133; Hsch. S 874. Forthvgano" (tavghnon)as frying pan or saucepan seeEup. 346 and Ar. Eq. 429.




_____________________________________________64

Aristophanes uses extensively the wordpnigeuv" and some derivative adjectives.90

His scholiasts always equatepnigeuv" to kavmino",specifically thekavmino" operating with

charcoal.91 A pnigeuv" was also dedicated as a votive offering in an Athenian sanctuary. 92

c. bau' no"

This word forms the root of the derogatory termbavnausoi. It was used for all

craftsmen (bavnausoi ) who did much of their work in the unpleasant environment of afurnace. Such craftsmen appear in Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics(1107b 17-20; 1122 a 30-

32; 1123 a 19-20) andPolitics(e.g. 1317b 41). It must be one of the oldest words since it is

the constituent part of the wordkrivbano" or klivbano", which is attested already in the fifth

century B.C. In all instances it is linked to the working of metal or to the baking of bread.

In no case do we hear of a ceramicbau' no" . The standard synonym iskavmino" . Other words

close in meaning are cutrovpou", cwneuthvrion , and occasionallyeJstiva .

90 Suda P 1832; schol. Ar. Av. 1001; schol. Ar. Ran. 122; schol. Ar. Nub.96a, c; Sparkes1962.

91 Suda P 1832:pnigei' tw' / crovnw/ to; scoinivon kai; to; qranivon. As a synonym tokrivbanon operating with charcoal, see Suda P 380 and P 629.

92 IG II2 1425, l. 411.




_____________________________________________65

Terms associated with an oven

d. ijpnov"

This term is usually associated with a domestic oven.93 Its earliest occurrence asi-

po-nois found in the Linear B tablets (supra n. 62). Only once in historical times is it

attested with the meaning of a ceramic kiln.94 Aristophanes usesijpnov" to denote a wide

range of meanings all closely related to an oven, an oven-shaped lantern, or the kitchen. In

the last case, the space takes its name from the oven usually placed in it. In the vast majority

of the texts the word appears with its derivative adjectiveijpnivth" and refers to a type of

bread. Only in the lexicographers is the word explained askavmino", klivbano", or fou' rno" .95

The second most frequent use ofijpnov" relates to the kitchen area where food is prepared. It

can be suggested with a fair degree of certainty that none of the examples of kilns presented

here were calledijpnoivby their users in antiquity. The construction of anijpnov" seems to

have been entrusted to a specialist, known asijpnopla;qh" 96 or ijpnovplaqo". 97 The word

93 A selection of archaeological examples of ovens is presented supra Excursus, "The BakingOven".

94 Hdt. 5.92; Hippoc.Epid . 4.20:ajpov tou' keramevou ijpnou' (cf. Hippoc. Morb. 2.47); Antiph.176.4; Archestr. fr. 46. In inscriptions, IG II2 147, l. 287a (spelled asijpnwvn ); Inscr. Cret.4.73.A9 from Gortyna (fifth century B.C.).

95 Erot.s.v. ijpnov" ; Hsch.s.v. ijpnov" (I 774); Suda I 550, I 552.

96 Pl.Tht . 147A.

97 In Lex. Tim. a synonym ofijpnoplavqh" is fournoplavsth" (potter); Poll.Onom. 7.163; cf.koroplavqo" ; Harp.s.v. ijpnov" 101.8; Gal. 5.890.6. See alsoijpnoplavqein, ijpnopoiov" ; LucianProm. Es 21; Them.Or . 21.256d.




_____________________________________________67

kavmino",besides being smaller, had a chimney-like appearance because it was used mostly

for smelting metal. The association with the domestic sphere and cooking is preserved even

in modern Greece: in the vocabulary of the Aegean islands,klivbanon denotes a vessel for

baking pies.103 In the late Roman period in the provinces the furnaces of the imperial baths

in Palestine were referred to asklivbanoi in the inscriptions.104

f. fou' rno"

The earliest use of this word is in the works of Hero in the second century B.C.,

where an oven 2.00m in diameter is given as a starting point for a mathematical problem.105

Its Latin equivalent is furnus.106 Its casual use in an exercise in Hero’s works suggests that it

was already in the Hellenistic period a well-known word. It must have denoted primarily an

oven, since it is the main synonym forijpnov" , but also forpnigeuv", krivbanon ,107 and

103 Psaropoulou 1986, 43.

104 SEG 30.1687 dated to A.D. 662;SEG 32.1502 dated to A.D. 455;SEG 47.1990 dated tothe sixth century A.D. All inscriptions come from the Roman baths at Gadara.

105 HeroStereom.1.76.1 andGeep. 202. For derivatives, see Anon. Alch. 321.9 a, b

(fournevllon for oven, furnace), 367. 15, 17, 19 (fournavkion for a small oven).106 Mau 1910.

107 Cf. supra n. 61 for the interchangeability of words in the entries of the lexicographers.




_____________________________________________68

kavmino" .108 Thefou' rno" also produces its own kind of bread,fournivkio", which has a light

dough likeklibanivkio" .

In the Hippocratean corpus the bread baked in anijpnov", called the ijpnivth", is

compared to other types of bread. The medical authors, starting with Hippocrates and

continuing with Dioscorides (first century A.D.), Galenus (second century A.D.), Oribasius

(fourth century A.D.), and Aëtius (sixth century A.D.), dedicated long discussions to the

various types of bread which are distinguished by their baking method asejgkrufiva",

ijpnivth", kaminivth", klibanivth" (kribanivth"), ojbeliwvn,andfournivkio".109 These types of

bread are ranked differently depending on their qualities; for example,ijpnivth" andkaminivth"

are said to be difficult to digest, but have a balanced mixture. The best bread of all,

regardless of which aspect is judged, is thekribanivth" .110

The medical texts, besides their obvious value for studies of ancient diet, concern us

here because they show also thatijpnov" , kavmino" , andklivbano" are similar enough in

function to bake a loaf of bread. Yet they are different enough to require different names,

and different qualities (or absence thereof) are attributed to the bread baked inside them.111

108 Ath. 3.113-114 for a compilation of references of ancient authors to different types ofbread.

109 Additional types of bread as listed in Blümner 1885-87, 74-5:ajrtoptivko", ejpanqrakiv",ejscarivth", klibanivkio", ojbeliva", ojbelivth", thganivth", fournivth".

110 Ath. 3.115e.

111 Ath. 3.83.22.




_____________________________________________69

The study of the linguistic range of words applying to kilns reveals our human

tendency not to be specific or absolute with terms referring to objects or structures that form

an integral part of our everyday lives. After this survey of the iconographical and

philological evidence about kilns, let us turn now to the archaeological remains.



ARCHITECTURE AND FUNCTION 70______________________________________________

.

CHAPTER II

THE CERAMIC K ILN

ITS ARCHITECTURE AND FUNCTION

This chapter is divided into two parts, as its title indicates. In the first part I examine

the individual parts of a kiln as known from the archaeological examples and from

iconographical sources such as the Penteskoufia plaques (see supra Ch. I). The purpose of

this section is to present the standard form of each part, the range of its variation, its

function, and, wherever possible, to detect any development in the construction techniques.The principal parts of ceramic kilns remained largely unchanged throughout

antiquity. For the parts that are not well represented archaeologically in Classical contexts, I

will use comparative evidence from kilns that date to later times (Hellenistic to Byzantine)




and ethnographical comparanda in modern Greece and elsewhere. Occasionally, when aseemingly odd feature is discussed, I will provide evidence from outside the Greek world in

order to show that potters, regardless of culture, tend to use similar devices and

constructions.

The presentation will start with the lower parts of the kiln and proceed to the upper

parts. I prefer this order because it follows the upward direction of the heat in the vertical

kilns (Plates II.1, 3 ). Moreover, the archaeological information is richer for the lower parts

whereas it becomes incrementally sparser (even non existent) for the upper parts. Thesecond section focuses on the function of a kiln: its firing process, estimation of fuel

consumption, capacity, and associated rate of wasters.

I. B UILDING A K ILN

a. The Greek Kiln: An Updraft Kiln

All the known examples of Greek historical kilns belong to the vertical or updraft

category.1 The term expresses the upward direction of the heat along an imaginary vertical

1 The channel kilns of the Middle Minoan and Late Minoan periods on Crete have beenreconstructed as cross-draft (Shaw et al. 2001). But they bear little resemblance to otherhorizontal kilns from the Mediterranean basin, such as those in Israel (Delcroix and Huot1972; Wood 1990, fig. 10).




axis. The draft that allows the heat to move upward is caused by an opening at the bottom(the stoking channel) and an opening at the top (the chimney).2

The choice of the kiln technology in a specific place is shaped by environmental,

social, and economical factors. A potter’s choice of a vertical kiln within the entire range of

firing structures is based primarily on cultural and technological reasons and less on its

often-cited advantages (high and even temperatures, better control, and lower breakage rate),

which are, after all, shared by the rudimentary bonfire or the pit firing (the permanent

version of a bonfire) (Plate II.2 ).3 The real advantages of a vertical kiln is better heatinsulation, economical consumption of fuel, and larger capacity. Other cultures exhibit

additional types of kilns, the most common being the horizontal kiln (also known as

cross-draft or downdraft). There the heat follows an imaginary horizontal axis across the

firing chamber and it moves downward before it exits through a tall chimney at the end of

the firing chamber, opposite the stoking area.4

The vertical kiln offers a limited range of attainable temperatures (not more than

1100-1150oC); the horizontal kiln can reach temperatures of 1300oC and more, and is ideal

2 A traditional workshop at Phini on Cyprus in 1960 used a kiln in which the burning of thefuel and the firing of the pottery took place in the same chamber (Hampe and Winter 1962,69, figs. 40-41). This isolated example was a hybrid structure (Ø 3.10-3.27m, H. 2.77m)which combined elements of the bonfire (no separation between combustion and firingchambers) and of an updraft kiln (permanent structure, loading/stoking door, and chimney).The pots were arranged around the walls, leaving the central area open. The larger pithoiwere placed at the back of the kiln , and the smaller closer to the entrance.

3 Rice 1987. Bonfires can also reach high temperatures and they have a similarly low wasterrate (5%). Sillar 2000.

4 For a brief discussion of other types of kilns, seeRhodes 1968; Kingery 1997; Rice 1997a.




for the firing of Chinese porcelain. The properties of the Mediterranean clays, which arehighly calcareous and vitrify above a temperature of 1100oC, deterred the Greek potters from

investigating types other than the vertical kiln. The vertical kiln is, therefore, a good example

of the effects and the accompanying limitations that one part of thechaîne operatoire of pot-

making can place on another part.5

b. General Location of a Kiln

The main criteria for selecting a site for a kiln are the same as those used to establish

a ceramic workshop: proximity to clay sources, availability of water, and a favorable

locationvis-à-vis transportation and trade routes.6

Pottery kilns are usually built against the slopes of hills so that the potters can

benefit from the existing slope and avoid digging an entire pit on flat ground. By placing the

kiln on a slope, they can dig a circular pit for the combustion chamber straight through the

hill. Depending on the height of the hill, part of the firing chamber can also be dug directly

into the hillside. In addition, a hill provides better heat insulation and greater stability

against thermal shocks during the firing. It also facilitates the stoking of the fire. Finally,

the fuel for the firing can easily be collected from the surrounding wooded areas.

5 For extensive discussions on the cultural, social, and economic restrictions on the choicesof technological possibilities, see Lemonnier (ed.) 1993.

6 For a list of archaeological criteria for the location of pottery workshops, see infra Ch. VI.Also Peacock 1982.




Very often the kilns are surrounded by walls; since in many other cases this featureis absent, we cannot say that the walls would have been used for structural reasons. It seems

that the kilns, being the most sensitive and crucial of all the equipment of a pottery

workshop, were somehow walled off and difficult to reach, to prevent the uninitiated from

purposefully or incidentally intervening with the firing process.

c. Time Requirements for Building a Kiln and Its Lifetime

The contemporary potting communities and the construction of kilns by

experimental archaeological projects supply us with the only available information on the

time required to build a ceramic kiln. The data from contemporary, ethnographic research is

more reliable since the kilns are constructed by experienced craftsmen, often potters

themselves. On the other hand, in the experimental projects, if required times seem longer,

one must take into account that the participants are either archaeologists or potters, whoeither have no, or very limited, experience in constructing traditional kilns. The results then

can be skewed, and the estimates for the original construction period can be reduced

considerably. Also, success in the construction of a kiln would increase with accumulated

experience.

Below I have gathered data on a new kiln built by construction workers at Isthmia to

fire replicas of Archaic roof tiles, an experimental Roman-type kiln built in Britain (Boston,

Links), and information from my interview of a specialist at constructing kilns in Tunisia,

whose crew had built more than eighty kilns in the greater area of the town of Moknine.

The crew usually consists of three to five persons. In the ancient workshops, the

entire workshop was probably involved with one or more aspects of the construction.




Overall, the construction does not last more than a week, even for large kilns. And mostpotters agree that the most laborious phase is digging out the soil for the subterranean

combustion chamber. In ethnographic examples, when a new kiln is built, it is first fired

empty to solidify the perforated floor and its supporting system. Then pottery is fired inside.

We know even less about the lifetime of a kiln. Generally kilns tend to last longer

than one would have expected, although they exact a heavy toll in the form of frequent repair

work.7 Papousek (1989) in his study of kilns in Mesoamerica estimated that their lifetime

averages 20-30 years.8

SITE DIAMETER CREW TIME COMMENTS BIBLIOGRAPHY

Isthmia 1.50x1.50x2.00m 3 3 weeks local workmen,experimental

local materials

Rostoker andGebhard 1981

Boston,Links-

England4ft 2 3 days Mayes 1961

MoknineTunisia

4 3-7 days Kiln specialistwith threeassistants

Hasaki, inpreparation

Table II.1: Data for time requirements of kiln construction.

7 Hampe and Winter (1962, 21-2) recorded the repair of a kiln at Asomatos on Crete whichlasted only one day and where five persons were involved.

8 The rectangular kiln of K. Chrysogelos on Thasos was used from 1912 to 1970 (Gratsia1999, 360). Blitzer (1990) reports that at Korone, Messenia, a kiln built in 1890 was still inuse in 1975.

9 Dufaÿ et al. 1997.




The range of the pottery from some sites, where newer kilns clearly replaced previous ones,

indicates that kilns could last for a quarter of a century, but for some construction defect they

were either abandoned or completely torn down and rebuilt. Also, careful analysis of the

microstratigraphy of ash layers found inside a kiln can allow one to estimate how many

firings occured, as has been done in the Roman pottery workshop in La Boissière-École in

Gaul.9 It is safe to say that ancient potters (and modern potters as well) would wish to build

kilns to last, since a kiln was a considerable economic investment. In addition, successfulfirings are directly correlated not only with a potter's general experience, but also with the

number of times this potter has fired this particular, specific, kiln. On the other hand, a

defective kiln would cause constant high waste rates and losses of profit; in such a case, the

building of a new kiln would seem to be the most economically viable option.




II. T HE STRUCTURAL PARTS OF A CERAMIC K ILN

a. Combustion Chamber

In the combustion chamber the gases from the fuel are concentrated. It isnot

common to burn the fuel in this chamber. Instead, the fuel is initially burnt at the entrance of

the stoking chamber, and only gradually is it stoked along the stoking chamber towards the

combustion chamber. This is the most commonly preserved part of a kiln. It is usually dug

in bedrock so that the walls of the kiln can withstand the high temperatures without

collapsing. Its shape is oval, circular, or rectangular. Most typological studies rely on the

shape of the combustion chamber as the main criterion for classification (see infra Ch. III on

typology).11

The dimensions of the combustion chamber are slightly larger than those of the main

firing chamber. The walls, which are usually made of stones or slabs [Prinias (31-36 )], are

covered with one or more layers of clay. Another example of additional heat insulation is

the case of the Hellenistic rectangular kiln at Chalkis (349 ), where Corinthian-style pan-tiles

10 For terminology in Italian dialects, see Cuomo Di Caprio 1971/2; for terms in Greek andother languages, see Davaras 1980. A multi-lingual dictionary of the different parts of thekiln is provided inPlates II.1, 3 .

11 Kilns, originally designed as circular, can shrink to a pear shape after the first firing(Mayes 1962).




were used to cover the sidewalls of the combustion chamber (Plate II.4 ).12

In cases whenthe combustion chamber is dug into virgin soil, the walls are omitted and the soil is plastered

with clay.13 The intense heat developed here produces strongly vitrified walls with a

greenish color. The floor of the combustion chamber is simply plastered over with clay

mortar. In later times the floor was made of tiles.14 It usually preserves a thin layer of ash,

but more ash can be found in the stoking channel.

b. Stoking Channel and Stoking Pit

This is a longer or shorter channel projecting from the general circular or rectangular

outline of the kiln where the fuel is placed and fired (Plate II.5 ). Its presence enabled the

potter to reach high temperatures inside the kiln without any harm to him, something which

was not possible with the bonfires, since in the latter case he had to come very close to the

bonfire to supply it with fuel. The Greek kilns have a stoking channel (with one or two

12 Cf. the Roman kiln at Aktaiou-Eptahalkou-and Hephaisteion Sts. (252 ) where the wallswere lined with fired clay plaques.

13 See the Roman kiln at Nea Philadelpheia, near Thessaloniki (370 ).

14 In Roman kilns in France, the tile-covered floors of the combustion chamber also havedrainage to keep moisture away from the kiln so that no fuel is wasted in drying the kilnbefore the actual firing (Le Ny 1988). In contrast to the Gallo-Roman tile kilns, no drainageis preserved in the combustion chamber to drain away any rainwater.

15 In Roman Gaul and Britain some kilns have two stoking channels at two opposite ends. Acomparable example in Katochi (448 ) seems to have resulted from two phases or uses of thekiln and not of a single design.




Some traditional kilns have two stoking entrances, one at each end. Thissymmetrical placement creates a stronger draft.19 An ancient kiln at Katochi (448 ) preserves

two entrances, but the second was a replacement of the first; they were not used

simultaneously.20 Sometimes the stoking channel is destroyed immediately after the

completion of firing in order to save space in the workshop. As I was able to observe at the

traditional pottery center of Margarites near Rethymno on Crete, the kilns presently stand

perfectly preserved, but there is no visible sign of a stoking channel.

The fire was stoked with long rods as depicted on the corpus of the Penteskoufiaplaques.21 At the end of the channel which is farthest away from the kiln, where the kiln

worker usually stands to stoke the fire, a depression is gradually formed, called the stoking

pit. This pit often collects the ash of the burnt fuel. In the few cases of adjacent kilns, a

common stoking pit serves the double purpose of saving space in the workshop and

facilitating the stoking of both kilns at the same time if necessary.22 The kilns retained their

individual stoking chambers.

In early publications the stoking channel, was confused with the long corridors

created by the presence of a dividing wallinside the combustion chamber [e.g. East kiln at

Tile Works, at Corinth (65)]. The myth of such double stoking channels derives from the

Penteskoufia plaque F893 (Plate II.6 ), which was incorrectly oriented in some early

20 For Katochi, see ADelt 29 (1973-74) 536, pl. 358a.

21 See supra Ch. I. One metal stoking rod, measuring 2.00m in length, has survived from a19th century A.D. kiln in Porto Cheli, excavated by F. Matson (Jameson 1969; Halieisexcavation notebook no. 500).

22 See e.g. the kilns at Sindos (86-89 ). For examples outside Greece, see Marzabotto (plan inNijboer 1998, fig. 42), Morgantina, Policoro in Italy, and Colchester in England.




photographs.23

R. Cook based his category of “double-stoking” kilns on these mistakenlyinterpreted corridors.24 The presence of two separate areas inside the combustion chamber

in the rectangular kilns of typeIIb does not indicate necessarily the presence of two stoking

channels.

c. Entrance

The so-called entrance of the kiln is basically the juncture between the stoking

channel and the side of the kiln.

It has been suggested that all Greek kilns had their entrance placed towards the

prevailing winds, but Davaras, examining all the Minoan kilns, rejects this statement.25 The

same conclusion seems to be valid for the historical kilns as well, because no uniformity in

the direction of the entrance can be noted. What the builders did take into consideration

23 The section is certainly a vertical cross-section showing the central support of theperforated floor, the perforated floor, the firing chamber with its load, and the opening at thetop. Wrong interpretations appeared as early as in 1911 (Perrot and Chippiez 1911, 348, fig.185) and persisted as recently as 1978 (Duhamel 1978/9, fig. 1d); Marwitz (1960), byplacing the plaque sideways clockwise, interpreted it as a combination of a horizontal sectionof the pit (the right-hand half) and a vertical section of the firing chamber (the left-hand half)seeing in it a double stoking channel. See also Winter A. 1957, 1959.

24 Cook 1961; cf. Cook 1997 for a different opinion.

25 Cf. Faure 1973, 217 (cited in Davaras 1980); Cook (1961, 65) notes that shelteredsituations are common in the Roman British kilns, and further notes that an open situationmay well be a disadvantage. The orientation of the entrance has been disassociated from thedirection of the wind in the case of the Roman-British kilnsas well (Corder 1957).




when constructing a kiln was the slope of the ground. The entrance usually follows thatslope.26

Two Archaic examples, from Lato and the Kerameikos, further support Davaras'

statement (Plate II.5 a-b ): in Lato, Kiln 1 and Kiln 2 (28-29 ), located only one meter away

from each other and probably contemporary, have different orientations with Kiln 1 facing

to the west and kiln 2 to the north. In the Athenian Kerameikos, two superimposed kilns found

under the museum display exactly the same shape and construction technique, but face in

different directions (40-41 ). In a traditional pottery workshop at Moknine, Tunisia, wherethere are four kilns, only two have an entrance with the same orientation.27

d. The Perforated Intermediate Floor (eschara)

The most distinctive part of an updraft ceramic kiln is the perforated clay floor,

commonly referred to asejscavra , which divides the firing chamber from the combustionchamber.28 No other firing structure has this feature (see infra Excursus). Its primary role is

to separate the pots from immediate contact with fire contributing thus to a much lower

breakage rate. From a technological point of view, a perforated floor allows less heat to

26 For the exception to this rule, see the Prinias kilns (31-36 ), where the axis of some kilns isperpendicular to the axis of the slope.

27 Hasaki, in preparation.

28 Although this solid perforated floor is a standardized feature of most Mediterranean kilns,updraft kilns in other cultures use instead a system of interlocking arms upon which the potsstand (Papousek 1989).




reach the firing chamber, but the permanent or semi-permanent character of the uppercompartment provides a better insulation and preserves the heat efficiently. In firing

structures without a perforated floor and without any walls, as in a pit fire, the heat is easily

lost. Given the resemblance between a honeycomb and this perforated floor, it is likely that

Hesychios refers to the kiln's perforated floor when he names a part of the furnacekuyevlai

or kuyelivde" .29

The eschara is a typical and essential feature of all updraft kilns, and it appears

without exception in all Greek kilns of the historical periods. The earliest excavated kilnswhich preserve their eschara (in situ or in fragments) are the Middle Helladic kiln from

Kirrha, near Delphi (106 ) (Plate IV.16 ), the kilns at the Menelaion at Sparta (101-102 ) and

the kiln at the Kadmeion at Thebes (113 ). Another example can be added if we accept the

Middle Helladic date for the kiln from the Agora at Eretria, now exhibited in the

archaeological museum at Eretria (103 ) (Plate IV.4 ).30

The thickness of the floor ranges from 0.10 to 0.20m. The diameter of the holes

varies between 0.06 and 0.10m;31 usually they are uniformly spread throughout the surface

of the eschara. The Prinias kilns from ca. 700 B.C. (31-36 ) have also provided many

fragments (0.07m thick) from the eschara, and some ventholes measuring 0.03-0.06m in

29 Hsch. K 4757. For a different interpretation, see Sparkes 1975, 134. Perhaps the termmeant the spherical vessel which was placed on top of the metallurgical shaft furnaces(Hadjidimitriou 1997, 127).

30 Eretria Archaeological Museum, inv. no. 19558.

31 Cf. escharai from some kilns at Figaretto, Corfu (197-209 ) Ø of holes: 0.10m, and inClassical Sindos in Macedonia (89 : Ø of holes ca. 0.12m; thickness of the eschara ca.0.10m).




diameter (Plate II.7 ). The distance between the holes is at least 0.10m. In the Kavousi kilnon Crete (151 ), the holes are located only around the perimeter of the eschara.

An average kiln 1.30m in diameter would have a floor perforated with thirty to fifty

ventholes, so about 20-30% of the surface of the floor would have been pierced.32 The

ventholes on the perimeter are normally larger than the average-sized holes in the middle.

The ventholes are arranged in loosely concentric circles in the case of circular kilns and in

rows for the rectangular kilns.33 The uniformity of dimensions of the ventholes in the

perforated floor and the ethnographic parallels, suggest that wooden sticks were used topierce the wet clay of the floor to create the holes.34 This arrangement, although quite

random, reflects cultural preferences; and therefore, Hellenistic kilns in Alexandria look

quite different from a Hellenistic kiln on the Greek mainland (Plate II.8 ).

The perforated floor is rarely foundin situ, but its presence is attested by excavated

blocks of fired clay which bear ventholes.35 A telling example of the confusion that these

32 The same number holds true for traditional kilns: calculations were conducted on atraditional kiln of K. Chrysogelos on Thasos (Gratsia1999) which measures 2.10 x 2.80mand has thirty square ventholes (0.20m each side). Therefore, 1.20m 2/5.88m 2 (or 20%) of thesurface is pierced.

33 It would be interesting to see whether the diameter of the holes in the eschara has anyeffect on the firing, or whether it can offer us indirect clues for the type of pots fired (large orsmall) and how much heat reaches the firing chamber.

34 On Asomatos, Crete the sticks are made of plane trees (Hampe and Winter 1962, 25).

35

In traditional modern Greek pottery workshops at Asomatos the ventholes are calledajfanoiv (Hampe and Winter 1962, 25). Rhomaios (1916), while describing the kiln atThermon (75), provides some interesting ethnographic information about the words referringto the parts of the kiln: the workmen called the supporting wall of the perforated floorpappav", and the ventholes of the perforated floor , ntoufevkia. Around the kiln many smallrectangular clay supports, calledsapouvnia by the local workmen, were found (see also infra"Kiln Furniture").




Other, more complicated systems of supporting the floor of the eschara are adoptedfor rectangular kilns. A central wall is either built or dug inside the bedrock [Corinth, Tile

Works (65)] and from this wall spring arches which rest on the side walls (TypeIIb ). A

different conception is the arrangement of pairs of cross-walls upon which rest the ends of

arches which in turn support the eschara (TypeIIc ).39 Sometimes there is a small ledge (ca.

0.10-0.12m wide), running on the upper part of the combustion chamber, upon which the

eschara would have rested.40 This ledge should not be confused with the wider bench (see

infra) that ran around the interior of the combustion chamber at a lower height and whosefunction is still debatable.

An elaborate system of clay arms would then connect the central pillar to the side

walls and provide the substructure upon which the perforated floor would rest. The Late

Classical kiln at ancient Elis (66), and the Roman kilns at Gortys in Arcadia (335 ), at

Epitalion in Elis (346 ), and at Istrona (Kalo Chorio Mirabellou) on Crete (385 ) (Plates II.10-

11 ) preserve the entire supporting web-like system, or a large part thereof.41 In the majority

of cases, the arms are formed out of clay. In places with abundant stone, however, the arms

are made of long stones shaped appropriately, such as the schist plaques in the Hellenistic

workshops at Paros (228-233 ) and at Vamvouri Ammoudia (226 ).

39 See infra Ch. III, where all the types of supporting the perforated floor are discussed indetail.

40 For a later example of such a ledge, see the Roman kilns at Sihaina in Patras (334-336 ).Unpublished. Information kindly provided by M. Sotiropoulou,ST v Ephorate of Prehistoricand Classical Antiquities in Patras.

41 Misleedingly, Karagiorga (1971) calls these arms "ajeragwgoiv", although they are solid ofbaked clay and they were never intended to convey air.




Archaeological remains of these arms are very rare [e.g. the Classical kilns fromSindos (86-89 )]. They have survived more often in Roman kilns, such as those at Berbati

(340 ), at Metropoli, Karditsa (353 ), and in a Medieval/Byzantine kiln in Nemea (Plate

II.11 ).42 The clay arms at Berbati have a semicircular section, and measure ca. 0.70m (L.) x

0.20m (W.) x 0.11m (H.). Three supporting arms in Metropoli at Karditsa are Y-shaped with

a long stem. The orientation of the support inside the kiln is still unclear. Most of these

arms have rows of fingertip impressions on their underside.

Because of the vital role of the support in the function of the kiln, potters arereluctant to experiment with its construction. Consequently, the kilns tend to be fairly

homogeneous in form, resulting in few types. The enduring chronologically (and to some

extent culturally) character of the supporting system, has often been used to establish

typologies of kilns (see supra Ch. III).

The "bench" in the combustion chamber

Some Prehistoric kilns at Pylos (114- LH I-IIA), Berbati (111- LHIIIA1),

Asine (LH III), Achladia (146 ), and at Palaikastro (150- LM IIIB) preserve a bench

42 Kind communication from E. Sarri,D v Ephorate of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities,for Berbati, plot of D. Dima; from Nemea (wrongly labeled as stacking supports), see Wrightet al. 1990, esp. 609-10, 655-6, pl. 97d (Pl. II.11.a ); in fig. 27 c-h, a selection of fragmentaryring supports are illustrated, as well as clay sticks from the Medieval-Byzantine kiln site 510.They were probably protruding from the walls of the firing chamber and served as shelves.This interpretation, however, still awaits confirmation from other examples, ancient ormodern.

43 Davaras 1980. The bench at Palaikastro measures 0.40m (H.) x 0.34m (W.). OutsideGreece a Minoan kiln with a bench was found at Miletus (Niemeier 1997).




which runs around the walls of the combustion chamber (Plate III.7 ).43 It has been argued

that the function of the perforated floor was partially substituted with this bench. The pots

would have been placed on the bench and would have been in direct contact with the fire.

A number of factors speak against this interpretation.44 The small width of the

bench would accommodate very few pots and of a small size. For example, the Late Minoan

kiln (LM IIIB) at Palaikastro could have only fired between thirty and one hundred cups and

a handful of larger vessels. It is highly unlikely that the potters would have invested the

time-consuming effort needed to build a permanent structure with such a limited firing

capacity. In addition, the effects of the immediate contact of the pots with the fire would

have been as disastrous as if the bench had never existed. In other words, the structure

would have been an elaborate version of a primitive bonfire, while retaining all the

shortcomings of the bonfire.

Because the bench appears on more than one occasion, and cannot be considered the

result of a local and limited experimentation, it must have served a function.45 One case

which is of course unique, but deserves to be mentioned, supports the hypothesis that the

shelf was used to place pottery to be fired. A traditional kiln on Patmos had a shelf built

inside the combustion chamber where the pottersintentionally placed large pithoi and

44 For similar objections, see Rizza et al. 1992.

45 See supra Ch. III, "If. Circular kiln with internal bench" for discussion of the typeIf andlisted examples.The type includes historical kilns as well.




lekanes which required a long firing.46 Since the fire itself and the ashes were drawn

upwards with the draft the large size vessels were not affected. It was unclear by the account

whether the presence of these pithoi (by necessity not more than two or three could fit in the

chamber and still leave space for the fire to burn) would have obstructed the firing of the

fuel. Alternatively, the shelf could have been a support for the arms springing out of a

supporting pillar.47 In such cases, however, it is built much higher in the combustion

chamber, closer to the perforated floor, and it is very narrow.

e. Firing Chamber

Pots and other ceramic objects were placed and fired in this chamber. Very seldom

is the firing chamber preserved in the archaeological record. Usually only the lowest part of

the chamber above the eschara is preserved [Pythagoreion, Samos (14), Pherai-Velestino,

Stamouli-Bolia Plot (192 )]. This lower part is permanently built with bricks or sherds

plastered with clay. Its upper parts, as well as the dome (see infra), had to be rebuilt before

each new firing. Sometimes the potters were reusing pithoi, after removing the narrow lower

part, as walls for the firing chamber [e.g. the Hellenistic workshop at Paros (228-233 )]. The

46 Psaropoulou 1984, 98. The bench was 0.50m high. No information is available about itswidth.

47 See e.g. the late Classical kiln at ancient Elis (66), the Roman kiln at Patras Sihaina (334-336 ).




pithos, having already been fired, was ideal in this place, because of its shape and its

capability to provide heat insulation.

Sometimes the firing chamber has a loading door that facilitates the placing of the

pots to be fired in the lower parts of the kiln. The loading door is closed off with bricks and

plastered over with clay for better retention of heat. The loading door can be omitted in

small circular kilns, which can be loaded directly from the top. The representations of kilns

on the Penteskoufia plaques show that the loading entrance was usually constructed at 90º or

180º angles from the direction of the stoking channel, and understandably on the same level

as the eschara.48 Traditional kilns, as preserved in ethnographic studies, retain the same

arrangement.

The firing chamber of ancient kilns must have had some larger holes (besides the

chimney) in order to vent the fumes and a few smaller holes to allow the potter to

periodically check on the progress of the firing (the so-called peer-holes). Some of these

peer-holes are depicted on the Penteskoufia plaques. At the traditional kilns on Cyprus they

were calledto; mavtin (eye), an additional optical aid to the potter.49

When the firing chamber was large, reaching its top must have required the use of a

ladder, as the Penteskoufia plaques depict (F802). In other cases a stepped access was built.

Fortunately, in a few cases, as at Pherai (190-192 ), remains of steps are still visible.

48 The loading door of the kiln is indicated either with a painted (e.g. plaques F616, F846) orwith an incised outline (F827).

49 Hampe and Winter 1962, 76. Other names that traditional potters use for these peer-holesare fanouvria, afanoiv , movstre".




f. Kiln Furniture

To stabilize the terracotta products inside the kiln, to keep them apart, and to stack

them, a variety of internal kiln supports (known in the literature as kiln props or stilts) were

used (Plates II.12-17 ).50 At least seven different types of vessel separators have been

identified in the archaeological record:

a. teardrop-shaped;b. tripods;

c. trapezoidal;d. L-shaped;e. clay rings or clay cylinders;f. pyramidal (loomweights); andg. any potsherd.

Theteardrop-shaped supports are the most common. These are used primarily in

pottery kilns and are found in abundance at production sites.51 Their earliest appearance is

in the Classical period, but they continued until the Byzantine period. Sometimes they were

even inscribed.52 In early excavation reports they were not immediately recognized as kiln

50 For kiln furniture in Italian kilns of Geometric through late Hellenistic periods, seeCracolici 1998.

51 Kalogeropoulou 1970; Karagiorga 1971; Themelis 1975, 40-1, pl. 18b, for Eretria;Papadopoulos J. 1992. Byzantine ones are published in Papanikola-Bakirtzi 1989 (fullerbibliography in Papadopoulos J. 1992, 208, n. 22). They are also found at the Acropolis atVergina (Faklaris1997) , where there were workshops from the second century B.C. to thefirst century A.D. and at Delphi (Perdrizet 1908, 199, fig. 889). Also from 7-9, Kekropos St. inAthens (258 ) to name a few examples .

52 For a stamped piece of support with the name of a lampmakerPREIMIOU, who alsoappears on a tile stamp from Corinth, see Biers 1971.




0.04, total H: 0.03m), and much more standardized.57

They were mold made and used toseparate the Byzantine glazed vessels, and often their footprints are still seen on the tondos

of the vessels.58

Inside the Tile-Works kilns at Corinth (64-65 ) another type of kiln support has been

found: small, thintrapezoidalones measuring 0.03-0.07 (L.) x 0.035-0.075 (H.) x 0.02m (W.).59

The same site supplied numerous examples of a peculiar form, the L-shaped supports. The

interior corner is not a right, but an obtuse angle. These supports are highly standardized in

size (L: 0.08m, Max. H: 0.06m) which implies the use of a mold in their preparation. Thevitrified long arm of one of these supports suggests that they stood on the horizontal arm of

the “L”. Although their exact position inside the kiln is unclear, it is plausible that they were

placed below the undercuts of the Corinthian pantiles (Plate II.14 ). Their size and their

concentration in a tile-manufacturing area is indicative of their exclusive use for tiles or

other large terracotta objects. A smaller version appears in the Hellenistic period, as in

57 Papanikola-Bakirtzi 1987. Morgan (1942) had expressed the view that the Byzantinetripods had been imported as an idea from China. Given the long tradition of tripods used asvessel separators in the ancient Greek ceramic technology, such a distant loan seemssomewhat far-fetched, unless we assume that the prior technological knowledge had relapsedin Greece for some centuries.

58 For a reconstruction, see Papanikola-Bakirtzi 1987, fig. 1, and the experimentalarrangement in the Cast Museum at the University of Athens, School of Philosophy.

59 See Nemea Archaeological Museum, inv. nos. TC 15, TC 21, TC 23. Cf. the supports fromthe Archaic kilns at Phari, Thasos (25-26 ), AAA18 (1985) figs. 3-4.

60 In Atalante, Lokris this type was found together with examples of the teardrop-shapedvariety and of a peculiar upside down T-shaped type of support. Similar unpublishedexamples from Arkitsa were displayed during the exhibition in the National RoadExcavations in Lamia Archaeological Museum.




Atalante in Lokris (185-186 ) and in Arkitsa.60

Their chronological range so far is limited tothe Classical and Hellenistic periods.

Clay rings were quite numerous, especially in the Athenian workshops. Excavated

examples come from the Classical workshops at the Lenormant Ave. in Athens, from various

contexts in the Athenian Agora, from Sindos (86-89 ) and from the Hellenistic kilns at 37,

Pallinaion St. (160-161 ).61 The rings are wheel-made. The average dimensions of the

examples from Lenormant Ave. are 0.20-23m in exterior diameter, 0.14m in interior

diameter and 0.005m thick. They were produced in standardized diameters apparentlycorresponding to pots of different sizes, like the clay rings of 0.22m in diameter from the

Classical workshops in Lenormant Ave. (Plate II.15 ).62 The clay rings from the Lenormant

Ave. workshops are also inscribed with letters or names.63 The rings are very finely made

and appear only in large production centers for decorated or glazed pottery. Thus they are a

highly specialized type of the movable equipment of a workshop. At their size, they could

not have supported very heavy vessels. In addition, they have a high breakage rate because

of their thinness, which explains their frequent presence in workshop dumps.

61 Forthe Lenormant Ave. workshops , see Baziotopoulou-Valavani 1993 and Monaco 2000(with extensive illustrations); for the Athenian Agora, see Papadopoulos J. 1992.

62 For an example of a clay ring from the Pnyx, see Rotroff 1982, 87, pl. 50. For areconstruction of the stacking system employing these rings, see p. 89, fig. 3; Rotroff et al.1997, 93.

63 Many examples from Lenormant Ave. preserve the letter N , or NAY [… It is not clearwhether they refer to owners of the workshops or to specific potters employed there(Baziotopoulou-Valavani 1993). This may suggest that several potters shared one kiln. Fordetailed catalogue entries of them, see Monaco 2000, 217-31.




Theclay cylinders are a larger and taller version of the more fragile clay rings,discussed above. They resemble necks, but have finished edges on the upper and lower ends

(Plate II.12 ).64 They can easily be misinterpreted for necks if only fragments survive. Their

average dimensions (Diam. 0.15m, H. 0.10-0.15m) make them more suitable to support

heavier pots, such as amphoras inside the kiln or even during the drying period. Their

considerable height is enough to separate the lower level of pots from direct contact with the

perforated floor, thus reducing the breakage rate. The excavations at the Byzantine site of

Mikro Pisto in eastern Macedonia yielded an interesting variety of such cylinders, but in thiscase they were wheelmade and much smaller .65 Their shape resembles a cut-off base of a

cup and bears a central hole.

Besides the more specialized types of pot supports which have been described above,

the potters had access to a large variety of the workshop’s products that could be used as kiln

props either because of some defect or because there were many in stock.Pyramidal

loomweightsbelong to this category. Their use as kiln supports, however, must have been

secondary to their primary use for weaving. In Chalkis, for example, a Hellenistic

rectangular kiln yielded a large quantity of loomweights (349 ). Their presence inside an

abandoned kiln supports their secondary use as kiln supports rather than the interpretation of

64 The supports at the Classical kilns in Sindos (86-89 ) Despoini 1982, 67, fig. 5, pl. 2st. aswell as the examples from the Stamouli-Bolia kiln at ancient Pherai (190-192 ), have piercedwalls.

65 Zikos 1998.

66 For similar rectangular supports, calledntakavkia , used for pithoi in modern Korone, seeBlitzer 1990, 696, pl. 109f. At Thermon in the beginning of the 20th century, the thinrectangular supports were called sapouvnia ( Rhomaios 1916). Identical examples pierced intheir upper part (Laubenheimer et al. 1978/9) were found on the perforated floor of acollapsed Roman kiln in Narbonne, France, leaving no doubt of their function inside the kiln.




the excavator that this was a kiln firing exclusively loomweights (although it is possible thatthe loomweights had been fired in this kiln).66

The final category of kiln supports, completely undistinguishable in the

archaeological record, consists of the sherds that the potter places among the pots so that

their sides do not touch. The ethnographic evidence documents their use mainly in

workshops for coarse pottery.67

Stacking techniques

Virtually nothing is known from antiquity about the techniques that the potters used

for stacking the vessels inside the kiln. It is unfortunate that no ancient kiln was excavated

with its content intact. In 1888 an ancient kiln on Chios was reported to have been found

with its load of hydriae.68

Kavmino" ajrcaiva plhvrh" uJdrivwn wjpthmevnwn schvmasi" ajrcaivou",

ai{ tine" sunetriv bhsan ajf j ejautw' n a{ ma donhqeivsh" th" kamivnou.(G. Zolota and A. Sarrou , JIstoriva th' " Civou, Athens 1923, A. II, 27 ).

The stacking of the pots inside the kiln is crucial to their successful firing. An

unbalanced load of pots would produce many wasters. Other causes for wasters are defects

in the vessel walls resulting from insufficient drying or from faults in the composition of the

67 Hampe and Winter 1962, 1965; Hasaki, in preparation. On Paros in the Skiada Plot (228-233 ) a large number of curved stops have been found. It is unclear at present whether theywere used as props or as devices to help form the handles of large vases (Plate II.16a ).

68 Lemos (1997) identifies a group of Chiotic hydriae found in a cemetery as coming fromthis kiln. The kiln is not visible any longer and nothing further is known about it.




clay and abrupt changes in temperature. In modern times it is generally the mostexperienced potter in the workshop, usually the owner, who loads the lowest, most important,

layers with pots.69

It is likely that each potter used a number of different techniques, according to the

size and the surface treatment of the vessels fired. Glimpses of ancient ways of stacking can

be found in completely unexpected places, or from potters' jokes (or mistakes): a LM I

kernos from Gortyna depicts a number of conical cups stacked on top of a large base and

crowned by the model of a hut (Plate II.16b ). 70 It is only natural to assume that the potterof this plastic vase would have stacked the cups in the same manner as he was accustomed to

stack them inside the kiln. The ethnographic record is less informative, because most of the

traditional workshops produce coarse vessels which the potters stack in a less orderly way.

Another example of stacked pottery is a peculiar synthesis of three small two-

handled cups, which are stacked one on top of the other and were recovered from the

cemetery at Merenda (ancient Myrrhinous) in northeastern Attica (Plate II.17 ). Most of the

69 Hasaki, in preparation: at Moknine, the loading of the large kiln reflects the hierarchy atthe workshop: the oldest potter (and the workshop owner) stacks the first three or four layers;an experienced, but younger person stacks the middle layers; and teenaged, part-timeassistants stack the upper layers. In an experimental firing of a modern kiln in Britain, one-third of the fired pots (62/182) were wasters as a result of bad stacking (Mayes, 1961). Thispercentage, while demonstrating the inexperience of the crew, also indicates the long-termbenefits ofa specialized pottery workshop whose breakage rates would have been muchlower.

70 Hägg 1990. Herakleion Archaeological Museum, inv. no. 60.54.679. More examples ofsimilar kernoi come from the Daedalic temple at Gortyna, built over the LM III settlement(Herakleion Archaeological Museum, inv. nos. 60.54.690, 60.54.680, 60.54.696). They arealso discussed in the study of Minoan kernoi, see Karayianni 1984, pl. 2 where they arepresented as parallels of her type II.4, best exemplified by the kernos at the HerakleionArchaeological Museum, inv. no. 60.54.698.




examples of such stacked towers are minimally decorated with stripes or bands, with the soleexception of an Athenian black-figure cup.71 The interesting feature of the Merenda

example is that the handles of the middle cup are placed at a horizontal, 90º angle, whereas the

top and the bottom cups are placed in the exact same position.

g. Dome

The Penteskoufia terracotta plaques invariably show a domed roof for the kilns.72 It

was probably made of pot sherds joined together with clay mortar. To prevent the kiln from

exploding as a result of the high temperature, there is a chimney-hole on top of the domed

roofs. The ancient term for this opening iskanqov" or kapnodov ch (Hsch.s.v.). The dome

71 Brijder (1997, fig. 6) provides more examples of such superimposed cups fromSubgeometric Samos, dated to 675-650 B.C. On p. 13, n. 4 he lists eight more examples, andhe considers them as forerunners of the Siana cups. The "tower-cups" from the Heraion atSamos come from either west of the South Stoa (three in number, all five-stacked) and thesix-stacked ones come from cisterns inside the sanctuary. The height of a five-stacked toweris 0.145m, and of a six-stacked one 0.245m. The handles of the tower-cups from Samos areall aligned one on top of the other. Even if they were ritual objects [ AM72 (1957) 48], thisdoes not refute the possibility that the inspiration of the stacking must have come from thecommon experience of the potter. The ritual association is further weakened since only oneother example comes from a ritual context, namely from the sanctuary of Zeus on Mt.Hymettos.

72 For a mistaken reconstruction of a chimney, see the Archaic kilns at Lato (28-30 ). Thefragments clearly form a venthole from the perforated floor of the kiln; cf. Duckrey andPicard 1969, 803; Seifert (1993, n.30) accepts this reconstruction.




can also be only a loose arrangement of broken sherds or tiles. A kiln can have either type ofcovering, depending on the kiln load and the pace of production.

On Crete the traditional potters placed broken pieces of pottery or sheets of tin over

large pithoi-firing kilns.73 In the experimental kiln made at Isthmia, archaeologists used

defective tiles as the covering of the kiln; the roof was not completely sealed in order to

allow the kiln to "breathe."74 A similar arrangement can be suggested for the large kilns,

usually for tiles: for example, the East Kiln at the Tile Works at Corinth, which measures

7.50 x 5.00m (65).It still remains to be investigated whether the firing chamber must be of a minimum

height so that the circulation of heat is not impeded during the firing of the pots. One should

also not discount the possibility that there may have been more than one chimney, especially

in the larger kilns, to ensure that the heat reaches equally all parts of the kiln. More than one

chimney would have been welcome at the larger rectangular kilns of typeIIb .75

So far no kiln has provided any traces of a permanent protective roof over the kiln,

like those excavated in the Gallo-Roman kiln at Franche Compte at the workshop of

Offemont.76

73 Hampe and Winter 1962, 25.

74 Rostoker and Gebhard 1981.

75 Multiple openings on theperimeter of the dome, placed at standard intervals, are to be seen on thetraditional kilns at Moknine, Tunisia (Hasaki, in preparation).

76 Le Ny 1988. The necessity for such roofs as well as the presence of drainage facilities,may be explained by the more frequent rains encountered in the French climate.




h. Overall Conception of the Kiln's Design

It is most likely that the dimensions of certain structural components of the kiln had

proportional relationships to each other. The list below details these proportions:

a. The diameter of the combustion chamber and the dimensions of the central support;

b. The height and the width of the combustion chamber;

c. The height of the combustion chamber and the height of the firing chamber;

d. The diameter of the combustion chamber and the length and width of the stoking

channel.

It has been suggested that when just one of the above features is excavated, an

approximate size for the entire kiln can be reconstructed. At Prinias (31-36 ) the excavators,

through careful measurement of all the constituent parts of the kilns, postulated that all the

dimensions used in their construction could be converted into multiples or dividers of two

interrelated units of measurements, unitP (ca. 0.315m) and unit M (ca. 0.5233m).77 TheP

was used for minor structural elements such as the diameter of the columnar support (1P)

and the thickness of the perforated floor (1/3P). On the other hand, the M was used for

larger dimensions, such as the interior dimensions of the combustion chamber. For example,

the combustion chamber of the"North kiln" is 6 M (ca. 3.14m), or the combustion chamber of

Kiln 1 equals 2 M (1.04m). The two units are connected by the formula M =12/3P.

The calculations, however, are too complicated and too numerous to be believable

and/or useful. Correlations such as 42/3

P or 12/3

P could conceivably have been used byarchitects of major public buildings, but it is unlikely that the potters at Prinias had the time,

77 Rizza et al. 1992, 117-34.




the knowledge, or even the desire to make such elaborate calculations for a ceramic kiln.Instead they probably used an intuitive system of building to scale and of recognizing

proportional relationships between parts.

Kilns 3 and 4 at Prinias were left unconsidered by Rizza and his colleagues because

these kilns did not fit their criteria; therefore, the units seem to have been made to fit their

argument. Moreover, two different systems, albeit interconnected, were used for two kilns

which are similar in shape and of approximately the same date. A stronger case for a

standardized unit of measurement could have been made if onlyone unit and a small numberof its basic multiples or fractions had been used for the construction of all kilns. Otherwise,

almost any number can be converted into another, but this speaks more for a haphazard

system of construction than for a well-planned scheme.

I believe that these interrelationships would have been more empirical and more

finely tuned over the years, rather than being minutely calculated, as the excavators of the

Protoarchaic complex at Prinias have attempted, quite attractively, to demonstrate. The

dimensions of some basic structural parts of the kiln probably fell within a narrow range of

proportional possibilities, rather than adhering strictly to a set numerical unit of

measurement.




III. F IRING A K ILN

a. Fuel

The major types of fuel used in ancient Greek kilns were wood, olive pits, and

several types of plants gathered from the countryside, such as vine cuttings, straw, pistachio

shells, almond shells, or prickly shrubs.78 Potters usually combined these types, depending

on the local flora and the season during which they were firing.79

The ancient sources are not very helpful about ancient fuel. From Romanus

Melodus we learn thatpivssa andklimativde" (vine branches) were used as fuel for

furnaces.80 Carbonized remains of olive pits have often been found in excavated kilns and

78 Tsoumis 1999.

79 For general information on fuel, see Rice 1987, 162-3, 174-6; for deforestation inantiquity, see Hughes 1983 (literary references to deforestation); Wertime 1983 (practicalestimations).

80 Romanus Melodus,Cantica, Hymn 8.15-16. Ethnographic comparanda from the pithoipotters at Korone in Blitzer 1990, 696. For an estimate of the quantity of fuel required for theRoman baths and its cost, see Blyth 1999.




It is probable, however, that large-scale firing structures were the providers ofcharcoal rather than the consumers. An elaborate system of producers, intermediaries, and

retailers existed in antiquity to support the consumption of charcoal.83 In contemporary

lime-making and pottery-making centers the fuel is not completely burnt inside the kilns ,

but is taken out to be reused in the households as charcoal.84

In all cultures, potters exploit the local sources of fuel for their firings. Most

Mediterranean countries use olive pits in an effort to maximize the benefits of intensive

oleoculture. Even in these cases, however, there is local variation: most traditional potters inmainland Tunisia use wood and olive pits (called fatura in Arabic) for their firings, but on

the island of Djerba the ubiquitous palm trees (trunks and leaves) replace the rare olive trees

as fuel.85 In South America the dry, hot climate, combined with their agricultural economy

and their technological knowledge, have forced the Andean potters to use animal dung for

their bonfires.86

83

Mayes and Scott (1984, 27) report that the shift to use of coal instead of wood caused theMedieval potters in England to construct kilns with multiple stoking channels for evendistribution of heat, since the flame of the coal is less intense than that of the wood. Forexample, a kiln of 2.13m. in diameter (K12B in their catalogue) had to have four flues builtaround its perimeter.

84 Adam 1994, 62, 69.


86 Sillar 2000.

87 Shram and Wolf (1999) combined a thermodescription system with gaschromatograph/mass spectometer. This method has already been used extensively in the foodindustry.




The firing properties of the local fuel can, therefore, define the pace and range ofdevelopment of the local pottery technology. A method for detecting the fuel used to fire a

terracotta product has now been developed in Switzerland.87 Based on the principle of

thermal extraction, the combustion fuel infiltrates the porous ceramic, thereby leaving a

distinctive chemical fingerprint on the organic composition of the fired object. In other

words, a brick fired with pine will have a different organic composition after its firing, than a

brick fired with cypress. By analyzing ancient terracottas and observing their organic

composition, we will be able to learn what fuel was used for firing as well as what type offiring atmosphere developed.

Access to fuel sources for firing the kilns is a major consideration for potters. Due

to the large quantities of fuel required for the kilns of a full-time workshop, fuel availability

and proximity to fuel sources were among the most important criteria for establishing a

workshop, even more important than their proximity to raw material.88

Quantitative data on the fuel requirements are recorded in the experimental

archaeological and ethnographical corpora.89 One should not expect that the quantity of fuel

consumed will fluctuate considerably since fuel consumption is relevant to the kiln design.

Given the almost stagnant character of kiln's design in antiquity (see infra Ch. III), no

dramatic savings in fuel consumption are to be expected.

For the first hours of firing at low temperatures, the quantities of fuel are smaller. At

the higher temperatures, however, the burning of a large volume of fuel results in a small

increase in the temperature. On average, a cubic meter of firing chamber requires one ton of

88 Rice 1987.

89 For quantitative data on fuel consumption of a lime kiln, see Excursus, Table Exc.1.




wood. The ratio of kiln size to fuel consumption is not directly proportional: a circular kilnof 3.00m consumes less fuel than the fuel burnt by three kilns, each 1.00m in diameter.90 A

traditional circular kiln at Moknine, Tunisia (2.00m in diameter) uses one ton of olive pits, a

quantity which is produced by processing ca. 1300 kg of olives.91 Because an olive tree

provides on average 120 kg of olives, one firing is equal to the crops of ten to twenty olive

trees.92

90

A kiln for producing 1,500 kiln bricks uses less than twice as much fuel as a kiln that firesonly 300 bricks. See Stevens 1992.

91 Quantitative data on maximum and minimum outputs of Roman olive presses are given byMattingly 1988; further elaborated argumentation in Mattingly 1993 (both with earlierbibliography); especially for Greece Forbes H. 1992, 1993; Forbes and Foxhall 1978;Foxhall 1993.

92 The estimated numbers were based on the information provided by Dr. P.Theodoropoulos, Marketing Director, Eliki Extra Virgin Olive Oil Company (pers. comm.Oct. 13, 2001): "….A good assumption is that we can get 120 kg of olives from each tree.Assuming an 18% yield, this should provide roughly 21.6 kg of olive oil. Let's also assume

that the olives contain 5% water by weight, which gives us 6 kg of water. The remainingmass (120 kg minus 21.6 kg minus 6 kg= 92.4 kg) is composed of the pit and the rest of theolive. Let's assume that 50% (this percentage is probably conservative, it may be higher) ofthis mass is due to the pit, which gives us 46.2 kg of pit mass per olive tree. This means thatit will take (1000/46.2 = 21.6) 22 olive trees to produce 1 ton of olive pits. To make thingssimple, and since our assumptions are kind of loose, let's say that it will take 20 trees toproduce one ton of olive pits." Later he lowered his estimates: "I think, that they were usingthe whole mass that remained after the production of olive oil (called " pirina" in Greek) andnot just the pit). If this were the case, then it would take only 10 olive trees to produce oneton of " pirina". I would also think that in ancient times they would not have had the highcapacity presses that we have now and therefore their yield in olive oil would be less. If weconsider therefore all these details, we can safely assume that they were able to produce theone ton mass that you are referring to from 10-15 olive trees." The final estimate can also bearound twenty olive trees since olive trees produce more olives every two years.




At Asomatos on Crete, 350 batches of straw were used for firing of pithoi, whichlasted six to seven hours.93

Contrary to standard expectations, only small amounts of ash were recovered from

the combustion chambers. This is due to the firing behavior of the fuel, which leaves very

little ash, and to the further use of ash as medication and cleanser.

b. Progress of Firing and Test Pieces

The firing phase is subdivided into three equally important stages: prefiring, firing,

and cooling. This cycle is preceded by the loading of the kiln and followed by its

unloading.94

The underlying principle is that the temperature must rise slowly (prefiring),

continue rising steadily until it reaches 900-1000oC, remain there for some hours (firing),

and finally decrease steadily (cooling). Not all the places inside a kiln had the sametemperature at all times and it depends on the skill of the potter to achieve an even

distribution of heat inside the kiln. A slow and steady pace is the best prerequisite for an

uneventful firing. The duration of each phase and its difficulties can be reconstructed by

ethnographic practices and experimental firings. To examine the progress of firing, the

ancient potter was using test pieces: they are usually sherds pierced with a hole that makes it

93 Hampe and Winter 1962, 27.

94 At Kliru, Cyprus (Hampe and Winter 1962, 84) the prefiring lasted six hours as long as thefiring.




a rough idea of the total capacity of their kilns. For ancient kilns, an average capacity can beestimated based on the principle that kiln loads tend to consist of vessels of the same, or

similar, shape. One should not overlook though the common practice of stacking smaller

ceramics (such as lamps, figurines, or miniature pots) inside larger pots.98

SITE DIAMETER n. of pots BIBLIOGRAPHY

Korone, Greece495 pots

(120 large+170medium+205

small)

Blitzer 1990

Cyprus, AgiosDimitrios 2.00 100 pots

(35 large+65 small)

Hampe and Winter1962, 76

Waster rate: 23%(9 out of 39)

Djerba, Tunisia 2.50H. 4.00

160(large olive jars) Peacock 1982, 42

Boston Links 1.20188

mostly jars andsome plant pots Mayes 1961, 1962

France 1.00x1.00x1.00

Echallier and Montagu1985(60-80 kg of clay usedfor pottery and 100kg

for lamps)

Table II.3: Ethnographic and experimental data on kiln capacity.




Pottery workshops usually have a 5-10% failure rate.99

These failures are commonlycalled wasters. Waster is a general term for a vessel which shows some defects that render it

useless and therefore worthless in the market. A pot is characterized as a waster when it is

overfired or melted together with another pot, or when it sustains serious cracks.

The wasters resulting from the firing have the most serious impact on the economy

of the workshop. Many pots show defects during the forming and drying phases, but the

potter can then squash the clay and reuse it for another vessel. The fired waster translates

into a waste of raw material, labor, and fuel. The 10% breakage rate is the maximum limitthat a specialized pottery workshop can afford. Stark (1985) correctly observed that only

such a low breakage rate can qualify a pottery establishment as a specialized unit of

production.100 One should also take into consideration some additional breakage during

post-firing, handling, and transportation.101

99 Blitzer (1990) reports a 3% rate (twelve to fifteen wasters out of five-hundred vessels) inKorone, Greece. Under very unfortunate conditions the rate can be as high as 40%, but thesecircumstances are very rare. The rate of rejects remains the same (8% or 2,400 tons of bricksout of the annual 30,000 brick production) even in highly industrialized brickmaking plants(Stevens 1992).

100 Stark (1985) reports a 10% breakage rate in Mexico and Guatemala, but the rate changesto 20% in Coyotepec, Oaxaca.




ALIKE , Y ET DIFFERENT : K ILNS AND OTHER PYROTECHNOLOGICAL STRUCTURES 112_____________________________________________

EXCURSUS

“ALIKE , Y ET DIFFERENT ”:

CERAMIC K ILNS VS . O THER PYROTECHNOLOGICAL

STRUCTURES

Kavqe kuklikhv kataskeuhv den eivnai kamivni.Kavqe kamivni den eivnai keramikov" klivbano".Allav ouvte kavqe keramikov" klivbano" parhvge efualwmevnh kerameikhv

Papanikola-Bakirtzi 1999

Every round structure is not (necessarily) a furnaceEvery furnace is not (necessarily) a pottery kilnAnd not every pottery kiln produced glazed pottery

Ceramic kilns form only a small group of firing structures, whose evolution depends

on the pyrotechnology available and attainable in each culture and period. In




pyrotechnology the fire is the main element in the structure which transforms the initial

state of the material placed in it. Metals, glass, rocks, and pitch, to name a few, need a firing

structure for their processing. Because the common element in all these procedures is the

transforming power of the fire, these structures tend to leave similar traces in the

archaeological record, namely vitrified clay pieces and layers of ash. A closer examination

of the specifics of each structure individually will make it clear that they are all alike, yet

different.

Becauce pyrotechnology in pre-industrial societies was largely an empirical type of

technology, its evolutionary pace was remarkably slow. As a result only a limited body of

information was handed down each time to the following generation. In contrast to artillery

or irrigation techniques, there are no ancient treatises on how to build successfully a pottery

kiln or a metallurgical furnace. Ancient authors refer only in passing to these humble

structures.1

The term "pyrotechnology" was coined by the Italian Vannocio Biringuccio (1480-

1538) , who compiled an epitome of the pyrotechnological knowledge available in his time,

titledPirotechnia.2 In the same period Georgius Agricola produced his famous book on

metals, De re metallica,first published in Basel in 1556.3 The woodcut illustrations of these

1 HeroStereom.1.76.1 (for an oven); Cato De Agric.38, 44 (for a lime kiln); Pliny NH 34.156-159 (lead furnaces); 36.190-194 (glass furnaces). See also Humphrey et al. 1988,

passages 5.40, 6.14.2 Biringuccio 1977.

3 Agricola 1912.




books served many generations of archaeologists before actual examples of metallurgical ,

glass, or pottery kilns were excavated or recognized as such in the archaeological record.

As a result of this limited physical and literary evidence on pyrotechnological

structures, histories of ancient pyrotechnology tend to follow a linear development.4 The

picture emerging from the archaeological evidence is that the development was

unpredictable, generally slow, or of irregular speed, and not always progressive. Often there

was even regression.

In my presentation I divided the pyrotechnological structures into two major groups:

first, the structures which technologically resemble a ceramic kiln and/or leave similar

archaeological traces (i.e. the baking oven, the lime kiln, the glassfurnace , and the bath

furnace). Second, the group which includes furnaces for the working of metal: either

primary smelting furnaces, or secondary melting and foundry furnaces. Although the

underlying principle of the latter group's function differs radically from that of the former,

they are often confused in excavations.

This paratactical consideration of other pyrotechnological structures in comparison

with the ceramic kiln aims to familiarize the archaeologist with some of the most common of

the artisanal activities which require the presence of a kiln or furnace. By gathering in one

place crafts which are normally examined individually and with no reference to each other,

we bring into relief the distinct characteristics of each structure as well as the extent of the

shared features.

4 See Forbes R. 1972 for the arguments about placing the invention of metallurgical furnacesbefore or after pottery kilns.




These shared features can determine whether or not some structures can fulfill

two functions and what alterations are necessary to fire a different type of material (as in the

case of a pottery kiln and a lime kiln). By gaining a firm grasp on the functional

characteristics, we are better equipped to decipher the possibly complicated history of a

seemingly simple pyrotechnological structure. The linguistic evidence testifies to this

technological affiliation of the structures, as the wordkavmino" is employed to refer to a

ceramic kiln, a metallurgical furnace, or a lime kiln (see supra Ch. I).

This discussion is summarized at the end in a check list of archaeologically

identifiable criteria suitable for correct identification of a structure (Plate Exc.15 ). It should

be emphasized that the primary criteria in any identification process are the general context

and the associated material that accompanies a pyrotechnological structure. Such a list is

needed in cases when it is not possible to excavate a large area of the workshop and when

one is faced with a fired clay structure with little or no associated material, as is commonly

the case with many salvage excavations.

a. The Baking Oven

At the outset of an overview of pyrotechological structures, one should study the

baking oven, an indispensable piece of equipment for every household. Numerous examples

of Neolithic ovens have been excavated in northern Greece, in the settlement of Dikili-Tash




(Philippoi). 5 Better preserved ovens were also excavated in the Neolithic settlement at

Arhontiko Giannitson where they are securely associated with houses ( Plate Exc. 4 ).6

Sizable terracotta models of structures interpreted as ovens were found in Sitagroi at

Neolithic levels. 7 Another Neolithic clay model from Plateia Magoula Zarkou in Trikala,

shows a small oven constructed directly on the ground, with a domed roof, but it has a much

bigger opening than the Sitagroi “oven” models ( Plate Exc.1 ).8 Finally, a completely

different impression of a portable oven is given by the Late Helladic IIIC clay oven from

Kastelli at Chania. Its height is approximately 0.20m, and its diameter is ca. 0.20m.

The scientific analysis of these ovens has demonstrated that temperatures up to 300-

500°C were reached.9 This made them ideal for baking and cooking, but inefficient for a

5 See preliminary reports with rich illustrations of ovens in BCH 116 (1992) 715-9 and BCH 118 (1994) 437-45.

6Papaeuthimiou-Papanthimou and Pilali-Papasteriou 1994, 1995, 1997a, 1997b, 1998.

7 Drama Archaeological Museum, inv. no.D 725 (from Neolithic Sitagroi, square MM27);Renfrew et al. 1986, SF 813, fig. 8.20, pl. 40.2 a-b; the small example [Dim. 0.025 (H.),0.05m (L.)] shows a long oven with its saddle roof and a small opening in the front;Papathanassopoulos 1996, 329, cat. no. 267.

8 Larissa Archaeological Museum, inv. no.ML PMZ 619. [Dim. 0.17 (L.), 0.15 (W.), 0.052(H.)]; Renfrew et al. 1986, 216, fig. 8.20, pl. XL.1a-d; BCH 114 (1990) 780, fig. 110.Papathanassopoulos 1996, 329, cat. no. 266. For a reconstruction of a Neolithic hut and anoven, seePlate Exc.2 .

9 As Maniatis and Fakorellis (1998) note, measuring the temperatures attained in theNeolithic ovens at Arhontiko informs us only of thehighest temperature achieved, 550-650ºC (probably due to external fire) rather than the temperaturesnormally developed insidethese structures while cooking or baking food.

10 Maniatis et al. 1999.




pottery kiln since clay becomes terracotta, only if fired above 450-500°C. Current

archaeometric studies focus on establishing methods to detect firing temperatures in low-

fired clay structures, where temperatures were under 750°C.10

Historical examples of ovens have been excavated on numerous occasions, inside

rooms or in courtyards.11 Ovens were used for processing food as well as for baking. The

following check list for criteria can be divided into two broad categories: context and

structural characteristics. Analytically,

a. General context: Clay structures excavated in a clearly domestic context are more

likely to be ovens than kilns.12

b. Associated finds such as food residues and specialized cookware pottery.13

11 For historical terracotta models of ovens and representations of ovens in Greek vase-paintings, see Sparkes 1962 (Plate Exc.3 ). A few examples of excavated ovens: a sizeableLate Classical (fourth century B.C.) oven in Treis Gremoi on Thasos [ ADelt50 (1995) 622-6]; a Hellenistic ijpno;" at Argos near Classical and later tombs, ADelt 18 (1963), plan 2, pl.73a. Dim. 1.35 x 0.60m. Its floor was made of plinths measuring 0.30 x 0.25m. For apossible bread oven at Messene, see PAE 1988, pl. 35. Another kiln in Hellenistic Rhodes(Gregoriadou 1999).

12 At Dikili-Tash all excavated ovens are at the far side of the room opposite the entrance. AtSitagroi ovens 1 and 2 are found in the so-called kitchen area of the Burnt House surroundedby cooking vessels and a grinding stone. See Renfrew et al. 1986, 190-1. fig. 8.11; [Dim. ofoven 1: 0.90m (max.W.), 0.73m (frontal W.), 1.10m (total L.)]. For various phases of asingle oven, see Dikili-Tash, inPAE 1987, pl. 121. A nice example of an oven from Dikili-Tash is illustrated inPAE 1993, pls. 83a, b. Inside the Neolithic cave of Alepotrypa at Dirosthree clay circular plaques (max. Ø 0.65m) were interpreted asijpnoiv(Papathanassopoulos1971, figs. 6-7).

13 A cup with lentil seeds was found inside an oven in Dikili-Tash (PAE 1989, 235, pl. 162b)confirming its domestic character.




c. Size: Ovens tend to be smaller, usually under one meter in diameter. The

earliest examples of ovens and kilns, however, from the Neolithic and Early Bronze Age, are

very difficult to distinguish from household ovens because they are similar in size and

construction.14 Both can fulfill the same purpose, however, and it is more likely that

household-produced pottery (especially in the Neolithic period) was fired in bread ovens.

Size cannot be used alone to establish a clear-cut distinction because there are quite large

ovens and quite small kilns.15

d. Low temperatures, below 750°, which is the cut-off point for the melting of most

materials.16

These ovens usually consist of only one chamber, where the fuel burns and the food

is placed. Occasionally ovens with two stories, with a separating floor, have been excavated,

such as the Late Bronze Age, horseshoe-shaped oven in Anchialos-Sindos in northern Greece

(Plate Exc.4 ).17

More substantial in size than the household ovens are the ovens of bakeries. Suchovens are not known yet archaeologically in Greece, although they must have existed. On

the other hand, numerous examples have been found in Roman Pompeii and Ostia (Plate

14 Davaras 1980, 124.

15 See e.g. Torone (11 ), Paros (232-233 ), and Pherai (192 ) for examples of small kilns.

16 Maniatis and Fakorellis 1997.

17 Tiverios 1995, 1998. Dated to the 12th-11th centuries B.C. on the basis of pottery.




Exc.4 ).18

Also, although bread baking and supply has been the subject of manyeconomic and social studies of the Roman world, the study of the ovens themselves as

architectural structures lags considerably behind.

The limited available evidence from the Roman side presents a rectangular podium

made of bricks. On top of this rectangular base, a dome is built, in which the fuel is burnt

first and later the bread is placed. This is a single compartment and consequently no

perforated floor to facilitate the circulation of the heat from the lower to the upper level. The

inside diameter of the dome is in the range of 3.50-4.50m.19 The cupola is built out of tufablocks, and the floor of the oven is covered with bricks. Therefore, if an archaeologist finds

fragments of eschara, then he/she deals securely with a ceramic kiln and not with an oven.

The dome has an arched opening in which fuel and bread are inserted. The opening is

blocked with a removable cover, probably made of metal, as may be seen today indomestic

ovens in Greek villages. The structure also had one or more chimneys. The unused fuel can

be stored in a niche in the front part of the podium, below the oven. Such large ovens are to

18 For the most recent treatment of Roman bakeries, see Bakker 1999. In the case of aRoman oven, associated structures such as kneading machines and millstones help with itsidentification as a bakery oven. A sizeable oven is depicted on the funeral monument ofEurysaces in Rome (Rosetto 1973, table 31.2; Frayn 1978; Kleiner 1986; Kleiner 1992, 108-9, fig. 94).

19 Oven at Caseggiato del Balcone Ligneo in Ostia (Bakker 1999, 93). Another oven inCaseggiato della Cisterna, I, XII, 4 measures ca. 4.00m. in diameter. The imperially-regulated oven at the Caseggiato dei Molini has a width of 5.00m. For a list of measurementsof ovens from Ostia, see Bakker 1999, 110-1.




be expected only in very sizable towns, as were Ostia and Pompeii, and not in theordinary small towns in Greece, where people baked their bread in smaller, private ovens.20

The quality of construction is also different between ovens and kilns: ovens are often

crude structures requiring only a small investment of labor, and they are easy to repair,

whereas kilns are constructed with the expectation of functioning for a longer time. If only

the lowest courses of a circular structure are preserved with indications of strong firing, as is

normally the case in the archaeological record, the criteria discussed above can be only of

limited use.21

20 Bakker (1999, 111, 127) estimated that about twenty bakeries served the population of40,000 people at Ostia in the second century A.D.; in Rome, in the fourth-century A.D., 250-275 bakeries served a population of 300,000-350,000 persons.

21 For a close similarity of a hearth construction to a kiln construction, see the example atThermonPAE 1993, pl. 63b. The hearth is located inside the northwestern corner of thesouthern room of the eastern stoa (Ø 1.25m) and is covered with rooftiles.




b. The Lime Kiln

Limited attention has been given to the study of lime kilns in Greece, although they

are a common sight in excavations (Plates Exc. 5-7 ).22 These humble structures were used

to burn stone (and often marble sculptures) to produce lime which was essential in every

domain of ancient life, from plastering walls and floors to waterproofing cisterns. Their

construction technique has remained largely the same in all centuries, and recent lime kilns

on Mt. Hymettus in Attica along the ancient Sphettia road differ little from ancient examples.

22 Demierre (2000) collected twenty-nine examples of ancient lime kilns in Greece in herrecent catalogue. A selection of lime kilnsof various dates from Thasos is presented in Wurch-Kozelj and Kozelj 1995. Other examples: at Dimini, near the tholos tomb away from theacropolis (unpublished; excavated in 1999); lime kilns in Asine in houses O and G with ashelf ca. 0.60m above the floor, Ø 4.50 [for bibliography, see Asine (109-110 )]; Roman lime

kiln of Augustean era in Eretria (fully published in Demierre 2000). A late Roman orByzantine circular lime kiln was excavated in 1961 in the northern tower of the fortificationwall at Agia Irini on Keos [ ADelt 26 (1971) 470], but it is still catalogued as a pottery kiln inSeifert 1993, no. 27. Three late Roman lime kilns were excavated at Neo Panteleimona inPieria (Ø 1.90m, Ø 2.40m, Ø 3.20m). The preserved height in all three structures is 2.50-4.00m from the floor of the kiln. The excavators (Loberdou-Tsigarida et al. 1999) use theterm "eschara" in kiln 1 for a feature that resembles more a bench. Another lime kiln,excavated at Sami on the island of Kephallonia (Ø 3.50m), was reported in ADelt 39 (1984)106-7; a lime kiln of Ottoman date was excavated in Platamona near Thessaloniki(Loberdou-Tsigarida and Messis 1997). Undated lime kilns are found at the sanctuary of theGreat Gods at Samothrace and at Isthmia, southwest of the northeastern gate of the fortress[ ADelt 24 (1969) 118, pl. 102a]. In the Laurion area (seeKarten von Attika) where they aredesignated as Kalkofen (KO). At Nemea at the Tretos pass, lime kilns which resemble tholostombs in their construction; probably a rectangular lime kiln at Xyste of the Gymnasium atDelphi, BCH 110 (1986) 706. For the economics of a late 19th century A.D. lime kiln inAttica and the organization of the work force for it, see Vekris 1998. Coulson and Wilkie1984 on Hellenistic circular lime kilns in Ptolemaic Egypt. For lime kilns in Europe, seeFlach 1981; Dix 1982; Janke 1989.




All securely identified lime kilns in Greece are circular in shape.23 They are

usually quite large, more than 3.00m in diameter, in order to accommodate larger amounts of

stone, and their walls are quite thick. In the interior they are plastered with clay for better

insulation, as are the pottery kilns. There is an interior bench where the stones are piled up,

forming a solid corbelled vault; the larger stones are placed at the bottom and the smaller on

the top. No intermediate perforated floor is used. In the space created underneath this pile

of stones the fuel is placed. Since the firing lasts for many days, lime kilns usually have two

openings on opposite ends in the lower level, for the stokers to stoke the fuel inside the kiln

from the one opening and rake it regularly from the other. The firing lasts four to six days,

to which one should add one or two extra days for the cooling-off period. The limestone has

to undergo a preparation period of 30-45 days before it is ready to be fired.24 The fuel

consumption of a lime kiln, aklarokav mino (a twig-burning kiln) , in Attica at the beginning

of this century together with other ethnographic evidence is presented below (Table

Exc.1 ).25

Lime kilns can easily be confused with pottery kilns because their construction is

quite similar. In addition, some pottery kilns have double entrances, like a typical lime kiln,

and some lime kilns have only one entrance, like a ceramic kiln. It is conceivable that an

23 Rectangular lime kilns do exist outside Greece: e.g. at Montceau-les-Mines, France (LeNy 1988, cat. no. 87).

24 Cato De Agric.38, 44offers instructionsfor the construction and firing of a lime kiln.

25 The design of theklarokav mina (Vekris 1998) was considered to be imported from theisland of Amorgos. For another estimation of 1,000 donkey loads of juniper wood for a limekiln burning, see Koster and Forbes 1983, cited in Wertime 1983, 450.




abandoned pottery kiln, with the perforated floor and its supporting system in ruins, can

be modified later and used as a lime kiln. A low ledge running around what seems to be a

pottery kiln perhaps reflects this change in use.26 Lime is easily dissolved after it is burnt,

leaving very little visual aid to the archaeologist who excavates a lime kiln.

DAYS OF F IRING VOLUME OF

PRODUCTION

FUEL BIBLIOGRAPHY

5-6 days(100-150 hours)

400-500batches of

cuttings

Thebes (Keramopoulos 1909)

4-6 28–39,5 tons(or 500-700 staters)*

2000-2800batches**

Attica (Vekris 1998)[Retail price: 40drs/stater

(total 20,000-28,000 drs)]

6 100,000 kg Ermioni (Kardulias 2000)

*1 stater=44 okades=56kgsThe data on volume of production refers to one month’s production, giventhe lengthy preparation period for such quantities of stones.

**One batch is equivalent to an adult’s arm load.

Table Exc.1: Fuel requirements for lime kilns in Greece.

26 The potters at Camerota, south Italy, burn limestone in their pottery kilns while the potsare being fired (Hampe and Winter 1965, 17); cf. the modern use of kilns in Tunisia (Adam1994, 68, fig. 154) to fire simultaneously limestone in the lower part and bricks in the upperpart; McLoughlin 1993, 5, n. 23.

27 For a critical dismissal of such an arrangement, see Demierre 2000, 33-4.




Most kilns indeed are found without any layer of lime; the attribution is based

on form and on negative evidence which excludes them from being pottery kilns.

In general, however, a circular construction with a bench, two entrances, and no

remains of perforated floor or any other signs of pottery-making activity in the surroundings,

is a strong candidate for being a lime kiln. Larger circular kilns which had proportionately

larger stoking chambers were more likely to have been transformed into lime kilns. The

long-standing confusion about the original interior arrangement of a lime kiln is evident in

the incorrect reconstruction of the interior arrangement of a lime kiln at Pyrgos in Boeotia.27

In order to be used as mortar, the lime is usually mixed with crushed pottery or

bricks (a way of producing a quasi-pozzolanic mortar), which give the lime a stronger

binding capacity. The result is a hydraulic mortar used to waterproof surfaces, e.g. cisterns.

It is not surprising, therefore that at Roman Corinth, in Kokkinovrysi (343 ), a lime kiln was

located near a ceramic kiln. The rejects of the ceramic kiln could potentially be used for

such a purpose, thus minimizing the amount of unused pottery of a kiln load.

In recent scholarship the pyrotechonology relating to lime burning has pushed back

the ancestry of lime kilns. The lime plaster used for the floors in settlements in Anatolia and

the Levant in the ninth millennium B.C., and the technology required to produce it, have

given a leading position to lime kilns as the first pyrotechnological structures, long before

the appearance of pottery kilns or metallurgical furnaces.28

28 Gourdin and Kingery 1975; Garfinkel 1987; Kingery et al. 1988; Moore 1995. For the firstpyrotechnological industries, see Wertime and Wertime 1982.




Lime plaster technology chronologically predated the adoption of advanced

pottery technology, because Neolithic inhabitants used lime for their structures and their

vessels much earlier than they used fired clay. 29 It is uncertain, however, how highly

developed this technology was and to what extent it influenced the inception and evolution

of pottery firing technology.

c. The Bath Furnace

An essential component of ancient baths was the furnace that heated the water,

usually called praefurnium (-a), fornix (-ces), or propnigeum.30 The furnace of a bath has

little in common with a pottery kiln and because it is attached to the easily identifiable

29 For molded vessels made of plaster, see Contenson and Courtois 1979; Moore 1995 withearlier bibliography.

30 For two large examples of furnaces at Messene (each Ø 3.00m), seePAE 1988, pl. 47 andPAE 1990, pl. 44a-b; Corinth, Panagia Field (Sanders 1999); baths at Argos (Yegül 1992,356-95, esp. 368-73). A bath furnace was also excavated at Pella (Chrysostomou 1994,112-3, fig. 8). Its dimensions are 1.15 x 1.00 x 0.50m. Inside it, three bases made of sandstonewere used to support the lebes. Lilimbaki-Akamati (1997) reports on the bath complex atPella and its associated furnace. In Ostia (Robinson O. 1984) there were established guildswhich procured the baths in Rome with the large quantities of wood. Probably the potterssecured some of their wood illegally from the large supplies of bath owners. A regulation inRoman Portugal [CIL II, no. 5181 (= ILS 6891)] states that the "lessee shall not be allowed tosell wood except for branch trimmings unsuited for fuel." Further restrictions were placed onthe lessee to ensure the undisrupted operations of the baths, by requiring that the lessee at alltimes should have on hand a thirty-day supply of wood. More recently, Blyth 1999 on fuelconsumption at baths.

31 Delorme 1961, 37, fig. 64.




structure of a bath, it is rare to confuse a bath furnace with a pottery kiln. Somemisinterpretations, though, have endured in the literature which justify their discussion.

Bath furnaces have been excavated at many places, including Olympia, Corinth, and

Pella. Their dimensions range from 1.00m (Olympia) to 1.50m (Pella). At Pella near the

furnace there is a rectangular cistern for storing the water. A bath furnace never has a

perforated floor. Usually there is a solid floor separating the combustion chamber from the

water that is heated. Therefore the rectangular kiln of late antiquity excavated on Delos

(456 ), which has a well-preserved perforated floor, cannot possibly have been a bath, as wassuggested in the publication.31 On the other hand, it should be noted that its type of

supporting system in the form of rows of pillars made of tiles, is highly reminiscent of the

substructure of baths’ hypocausts and was probably influenced by bath construction. A

temporary misidentification of a bath furnace for a pottery kiln occurred in the excavations

of the Centaur Bath at Corinth.32 The continuation of the excavation in the following year,

however, revealed the bath complex and the real function of the structure as bath furnace.

The vitrification levels on the walls of a bath furnace must be lower than those of a

pottery kiln, because estimated temperatures in ancient baths rarely exceeded 200°C. Only

occasionally in the large thermae would they have reached temperatures of 600°C at the

early stages of firing.33

32 Incorrect identification: Williams and Fischer 1975, 6-7; corrected in Williams andFischer 1975, 1976; Williams 1977. In Seifert’s catalogue (1993, no. 54) it still appears as akiln structure, despite the correction by the excavator.

33 Yegül 1992, 381, 468, n. 73; Kretschmer 1953 for estimations of furnace temperature andfuel consumption (ca. 3kg of charcoal per hour).




d. The Glass Furnace

The earliest examples of glass furnaces in the Mediterranean have recently been

excavated in Tell El Amarna in Egypt and date to the 14th century B.C. (Plate Exc. 8 a).34 In

Greece, definite evidence, but not permanent installations, for glassworking have come to

light in late Classical and Hellenistic Rhodes.35 Evidence for the working of glass has been

found at Delphi, to the southwest of the Roman Agora and in Thessaloniki, at the Dioikitirio

in the area of the Roman Agora and the Roman Baths (ninth century A.D.).36

A medievalglass workshop was excavated in Corinth where a rectangular structure was interpreted (not

very convincingly) as a glass furnace.37

There were two main types of glass furnaces:

I. The tank furnace. These are usually large rectangular structures, where the frit

was melted and shaped into large blocks. Parts of these large blocks were then sent out to

local glassmaking establishments. In few places in the world, mainly in Egypt and Syro-

Palestine, glass is produced by mixing sans, lime, and ash. Most places prepared glass

34 For the most recent synthesis of excavation data and replication process, see Nicholsonand Jackson 1998. Also Jackson et al. 1998.

35 Triantaphyllidis 2000a, 2000b; for glass workshops in the Classical and Hellenistic period,

see Nenna 1998.36 BCH 117 (1993) 823 (at Delphi); Adam-Veleni 1999 for Thessaloniki.

37 Davidson 1943.




vessels from remelting and working on cores of glass acquired from the large

production centers.

II. The reverbatory furnace. Inside them the core of glass was placed into clay

crucibles, which in turn were placed inside a three-tiered furnace. It is conceivable that for

this procedure an altered pottery kiln could have been used, because the underlying

technological principles are the same. The important remaining issue is whether or not such

modification would have been preferred to a newly-built glass kiln.

Below are a few criteria which can be employed in the identification of a glass kiln:

a. No perforated floor (eschara). This is not needed in the process. Even in the

replication process of the glass furnaces at Tell El Amarna the excavators did not reconstruct

a perforated floor, but instead an arrangement of embayments and shelves inside the

furnace.38

b. Stronger walls. In Egypt, at Tell El Amarna, the glass kilns studied by P.

Nicholson had walls which were three bricks' thick, compared with the walls of the local

pottery kilns which were only one brick thick.39 The temperature required for melting glass

is in the range of 1100-1400°C depending on its composition.40

38 Nicholson and Jackson 1998, fig. 2. The entire furnace was ca 1.50m high and most of itwas underground.

39 Charleston 1978 (a theoretical account of glass furnaces as known from paintings, with noexamples of ancient glass furnaces). Nicholson (1997) interpreted the furnaces of the 14thcentury B.C. at Tell El Amarna (Ø 2.00m) as glass kilns by process of elimination since thevitrified material included no remains of metal.

40 Nicholson and Jackson 1998 measured temperatures up to 1150°C inside theirexperimental furnace; Nicholson 1995.




c. The floor of the combustion chamber usually has white pebbles rather than

the clay floor found in ceramic kilns.41

d. Glass furnaces have multiple openings in the dome through which the glassworker

removes and works the hot glass as quickly as possible. This is an important distinction

from the pottery kiln, whose functional principle prohibits multiple openings. This striking

difference is explained by the fact that kiln firing is only one stage of pottery making, albeit

an important one; in glassmaking, however, the furnace itself is used constantly for the

finished product. Its presence is necessary during the entire manufacturing process.

e. Glass furnaces are much later in date in Greece: glassmaking spread widely

throughout Greece only in the second and first centuries B.C.42

e. The Metallurgical Furnace

Although a specialist in metal pyrotechnology would never mistake a metallurgical

furnace for a ceramic kiln, non-metallurgy specialists have often confused them in

publications and have mistakenly identified a metallurgical furnace as a pottery kiln, or vice

41 Glass furnaces are described by Pliny NH 36.10.159-160: small beehive-shaped hearthfurnaces with one or two compartments to place a small crucible and again one or two smallcompartments left empty to place the blown glass objects for cooling or annealing. Also seeForbes R. 1966, 119.

42 The glass objects mentioned in Aristophanes and Plato were probably Egyptian importedmolded vessels (Forbes R. 1966, 164).




versa (Plates Exc. 9-12 ).43

Even what are now the best availablerepresent ations ofceramic kilns, those on the Penteskoufia terracotta plaques (see supra Ch. I), were first

interpreted as metallurgical furnaces.44

Before we present some cases of misinterpretations, we should describe briefly what

a metallurgical furnace is and how it functions. The metal workers dig a pit, construct a

cylindrical furnace of small diameter, place the metal inside a clay crucible, and cover it with

fuel, which they burn to the high temperatures necessary to melt such materials. The melted

material concentrates at the bottom andis channeled to molds for the finished product (Plate

Exc.9 ). In order to attain high temperatures, which in most cases cannot be reached only

with a natural draft, they used blowpipes or bellows (tuyères), to create a forced draft.

Metallurgical furnaces were much needed because metals were necessary not only for

statues, but also for armor, household equipment, ships, and for casting coins (Plates

Exc.13a, 14 ).45

43 Richter 1923; Shwandner and Zimmer 1983. For furnaces in bronze smiths, see Zimmer1990 with extensive bibliography; also a metallurgical furnace on the shore in the place of aneosoikos in Abdera before a cemetery was established in the same area [PAE 1993, pl. 74 p.136 andAEMQ 2 (1989) 471-87]. Its dimensions are not recoverable, probably 0.80 x1.00m. For the tall shaft furnaces in the Laurion area, see Conophagos 1974, 1980. A verygood discussion of the different types of furnaces and their evolution is presented by ForbesR. 1971, 120-32.

44 See supra Ch. I, 32-3.

45 See the four Roman metallurgical furnaces (Velenis 1996).) in the coin foundry in theRoman Forum at Thessaloniki, datingfrom the second to fourth century A.D. The precedure ofcasting coins is described in Conophagos et al. 1976. For the remains of a workshop forcoins at Argos, see Consolaki and Hackens 1980.




The basic type of a smelting furnace is a small pit in the ground, usually 0.70-1.00m.in diameter. The shaft furnaces which are represented on classical vases were quite

common in Greek antiquity (Plate Exc.11 ).46 The metallurgical furnaces had tall circular

clay walls which contained the fuel and the metal. These are quite different in shape or form

from ceramic kilns and were used exclusively for metals. The best surviving remains of

metallurgical furnaces are in the area of Laurion, where the Athenians extracted silver from

the rich silver ores.47 Conophagos restores them at an unusual height. A slightly different

structure is required for cupellation, a method of separating silver from lead ores. So far theonly example of a cupellation furnace has been excavated in Argos (Plate Exc.9b ).48 It is

dated to the Geometric period, much earlier than the first mention of the method in the

sources and the secure archaeological evidence for the practice of cupellation.49 An

interesting group of at least nine cementation furnaces (pear-shaped and rectangular) were

unearthed in Archaic levels at Sardis: the furnaces bear a central separating wall

(corresponding to typeIIb in the new typology).50 Their dimensions are quite small; the

46 Oddy and Swaddling 1985. A shaft furnace is also carved on the north frieze of theSiphnian Treasury at Delphi (Mattusch 1988, 12, fig. 2.2).

47 Conophagos 1980.

48 See Appendix II.

49 Pliny NH 33.105-108 mentions the method. Indisputable archaeological evidence,although indirect (in the form of tubes of lead) has been excavated in a late Hellenisticworkshop in Rhodes (Kakavoyiannis 1984).

50 Ramage and Craddock 2000, 83-91.




largest of the pear-shaped ones are ca. 0-70 x 0.50m. and the rectangular one is 1.00 x1.00m.

Fragmentary metallurgical furnaces have been excavated in the Greek world at least

as early as the Early Minoan period on Crete and the Late Bronze Age on Cyprus.51

Spyropoulos in the early 1980s excavated six impressive structures at the Steno Arcadias.

He dates these to the Early Helladic period, making them the earliest extant Greek furnaces

(Plate Exc.9a ).52 The interpretation of an archaeological feature as a foundry furnace

usually rests on very slim evidence (fragments of a mold probably used to cast a “loaf” ofmetal from which the metal object was hammered). Lumps of vitrified material and the

vitrified walls of the kiln are equally present in ceramic kilns, as the extensive vitrification of

the East kiln at the Tile Works at Corinth (65) attests. Such an extensive workshop complex

at the Steno Arcadias in such an early period is also hardly to be expected. Finally, and most

important, the massive dimensions of these structures (reportedly one kiln is 15m. long)

would have made it impossible to maintain the high temperatures necessary for smelting

metals for a long time in such spaces without using as fuel all the woods of Arcadia. In

addition, the perforated floor is redundant, and even counter-productive, for the functioning

of a metallurgical furnace. Spyropoulos acknowledged encountering such problems in the

interpretation.

51 For prehistoric examples of furnace wall fragments, see Rothenberg 1990. Fragmentswhich may belong to the earliest furnace from the Greek world were excavated atChrysokamino, Crete (Betancourt et al. 1998); for fragments of furnace walls and furnacelinings of the earliest copper-smelting establishment on Cyprus (1600 B.C.), see Knapp et al.1999, 125-46.

52 ADelt37 (1982) 120-1.




Another controversial attribution is the Middle Minoan IIA kiln outside thePalace of Zakros, which had been characterized as a foundry furnace and not a kiln (Plate

IV.11 ).53 The palm shape of the structure led N. Platon to consider all palm shaped kilns on

Crete (see infra Ch. IV) as metallurgical. The imposing size of all these kilns, however,

especially the one at Agia Triadha, for the same reasons as in Arcadia, makes such

interpretations untenable.

Historic examples of furnaces can be found at Skala Oropou, dating from the Late

Geometric and Archaic period and from the Classical fort at Rhamnous. Mazarakis-Ainianreported finding melted metals inside the furnaces at Oropos; the areahas a long tradition of

coexisting ceramic and metal workshops (16-17 ).54 For the furnace at Rhamnous, Petrakos

does not give any further information about the criteria he used to identify the structure as a

furnace rather than as a kiln.55

53 Platon N. 1979, 1980; alsoErgon 1973; 1975;PAE 1973; 1975; for similar confusion inother non-Greek examples: the furnaces in Buhen, southern Sudan were previously presentedas metallurgical furnaces, but Craddock (1995, 131) thinks they are almost certainly potterykilns. The kiln is well constructed of brick, over 1.00m in diameter, and divided into anupper and lower chamber by a radial grid of clay bars supported on a central pillar; probablythe furnace lining found belongs to a different structure, not preserved.

54 See also Demetrias, for the proximity of a casting pit and three ceramic kilns (two carvedin the bedrock and one built). In Kassope an abandoned residence of the third century B.C.housed three different types of firing structures: a furnace, a kiln, and two ovens, seePAE 1981, 72-7.

55 PAE 1991, 23 (a kiln) . Petrakos changed his mind (PAE 1995, 7, pl. 3b) because he foundslag around it and he associated it with production of iron. It is quite large, 2.50 (L.) x 2.00m(W.), in its exterior dimensions, but the interior dimensions are 1.00 x 2.00m. The interiorsupport, though, remains inexplicable, if it is a metallurgical furnace. A terminus post quemfor its date is a funerary stele from the last quarter of fourth century B.C. incorporated in itsconstruction.




Secure identification criteria for a furnace are fragments of the furnace walls or(what is most common) furnace lining, the extensive presence of slag, fragments of bellows

made of clay, clay or stone molds for metal objects, and clay crucibles for the smelting or the

gathering of the metal.

Still to be determined is whether the same structure could be used alternatively as a

ceramic kiln or a metallurgical furnace. It had been suggested that pottery kilns were used

by metallurgists to reduce copper ores.56

f. Minor Firing Structures

i. Furnaces for color preparation

Other workshops represented in the archaeological record needed some kind of

furnace to process their raw material, such as the workshops for the preparation of colors.

On the island of Cos, a Late Hellenistic-Early Roman establishment for the preparation of

colors, especially of Egyptian blue, has been excavated near the agora of the city (Plate

Exc.13b ).57 The furnace is a small circular structure, not more than one meter in diameter.

In its ruined state it preserves walls made of clay bricks, and its floor is made of clay

plaques. In its interior it shows traces of intense heating and small quantities of red, yellow,

brown, purple, and pink colors. According to ancient sources, Egyptian blue was produced

56 Forbes R. 1972.

57 Kantzia and Kouzeli 1987; ADelt 42 (1987) 638-40, plan 14; BCH 118 (1994) 795, figs.118-9; BCH 116 (1992) 932. The production of lead to be used for the preparation of colorsis attested from the presence of many tubes of lead-rich silver. For dye-works in the Romanworld, see Uscatescu 1994.




by mixing salt, soda, lime, and scoriae of copper, burnt in a furnace.58

Three largecircular furnaces (average Ø 2.10m) of the typeIa for the processing of porphyry have come

to light in a Late Hellenistic-Roman workshop on Rhodes.59

Another furnace, for the production of hematite pigment from iron hydroxide ores,

was unearthed in the Makriyianni barracks during the excavations for the Metro in Athens.60

The shape of the furnace was rectangular, 1.50m long with an interior width of 0.50m. Its

walls were quite thick and had an intensely red color. The hematite pigment was used in

antiquity for wall plastering. Scientific analysis showed that comparatively lowtemperatures, ca. 700o C, were reached inside this kiln.61

Such furnaces had closer ties with metallurgical furnaces because metals are a basic

component of their final products. Colors or metallic glazes were also used on ceramic

vessels; thus it is not surprising that many late antique and medieval pottery workshops in

the Black Sea contained color-processing furnaces usually adjacent to a pottery kiln.62

58 Vitr. De archit . 7.11.

59 Marketou 1999.

60 Parlama and Stampolidis 2000, 34, fig. 4; Cherry et al. 1991 for miltos production; Foranalysis of the miltos (iron oxide) from the island of Kea, see Hall et al. 1997.

61 Maniatis and Bassiakos 2000.

62 Ivaschekno 1997. Dsc. De materia medica 5.75 reports how a furnace for producing pompholuxworked (translated by Humphrey et al. 1998, passage 6.30). They postulate that pompholuxwas probably a zinc oxide.




ii. Furnaces for pitchPitch (pivssa, pivtta ) was widely used in antiquity for plastering walls, for glazing the

interior of wine-carrying vessels, for varnishing ships, and for cleaning and casting bronze

statues, among many other purposes.63 It was already known to Herodotus, and it appears

even more often in later authors.64 Pitch is produced by burning tree trunks. The term

pissokavmino" appears in a sixth-century A.D. papyrus.65 Hellenistic pitch furnaces operated

in Kimitiri and Lithosouri.66 In addition to pitch production, the excavators found evidence

for the production of charcoal (carbon) and remains of an older kiln which was reused for anunknown purpose. Structures identified as pitch furnaces have also been recorded on

Thasos. Their construction technique is highly reminiscent of lime kilns, but in the cases of

pitch furnaces a small basin is constructed near the furnace where the pitch is gathered.67

63 Farnsworth 1963; André 1964; De Caro 1985; Connan et al. 1998.

64 Hdt. 4.195; pissourgeia (Str. 5.1.12). For Latin sources, see Pliny NH 16.53 for pitch burntin alveior furni.

65 PMasp. 110.38.

66 Recently the Macquarie University of Sydney [ BCH 122 (1998) 669-70] has beenconducting technological analysis on metallurgical furnaces, charcoal, and pitch productionin the places Kimitiri and Lithosouri on Cyprus in order to determine the ecological impactof such activities on the forests of Adelphi.

67 Wurch-Kozelj and Kozelj 1995. Although the preserne of a basin indeed requiresexplanation, the suggestion that these structures are pitch furnaces still needs additionalreasons.




To summarize the observations made above: the archaeologist can address thefollowing issues once a pyrotechnological structure has come to light (Plate Exc.15 ).

a. shape: The mostindistinguishable shape is circular because it can beany

pyrotechnological structure. The rectangular version limits the choices mainly to a ceramic

kiln.

b. size: A general rule of thumb is that the larger the structure, the more specialized

its character; hence, it is easier to decipher its function. A small, circular construction

without any distinguishing individual features may lead the archaeologist to an impass.c. individual features: The perforated floor is essential only for a ceramic kiln. A

bench in the combustion chamber points to a lime kiln operation, but its use in a ceramic kiln

has been attested in a few cases. Finally, the strong walls of a structure indicate that very

high temperatures were reached (as in lime kilns and glass furnaces).

d. vitrification level:Although the vitrification level observed on the walls of the

structure can be one indication of the range of temperatures reached inside this structure, it

can also be misleading, since repeated firings of low temperatures can create superimposed

layers of vitrification which can be misinterpreted as the result of high temperatures.68

From this brief overview of the pyrotechnological structures, one can begin to

understand that ancient artisanal communities shared a large part of the collective traditional

knowledge for building and firing their kilns. Artisans depended on each other not only for

practical reasons such as procurement of raw material and fuel, but also for artistic

borrowings. On the practical side, the metal workers needed terracotta molds fired in a

ceramic kiln to produce their works. Lime burners could use the rejects of ceramic

68 A good example is the Late Classical kiln (East Kiln) in the Corinthian Tile Works (65).




workshops for binding additions to the lime. Seen through this light, the long-standingacademic argument over whether pottery was the cheaper imitation of metal vessels loses its

intensity.69 The interdependence between the two media must be reestablished on more even

levels.70

69 For a fuller discussion, see infra Ch. VI.

70 Vickers and Gill 1994 for major advocates of this theory.



TYPOLOGICAL CLASSIFICATION OF GREEK K ILNS 139_____________________________________________

CHAPTER III

TYPOLOGICAL CLASSIFICATION

OF GREEK K ILNS

Pottery kilns are normally divided into categories according to shape, construction,

and direction of the heat.1 In Ch. II, I reviewed the variations of the pottery kilns in regard

to the direction of the heat. The Greek kilns belong to the category of the updraft type. This

updraft type is popular in the Mediterranean basin, appearing at least as early as the third

millennium B.C.2 Some isolated examples of the type of channel kilns from Minoan-period

1 Rice 1987; id. 1997.

2 For historical development of kilns see Rhodes 1968;Delcroix and Huot 1972; Drews1978/9; Duhamel 1978/9.




Crete have been reconstructed by scholars as cross-draft, but no universally convincing casehas been made yet about their original appearance.3 In this chapter I will examine the basic

shapes that are encountered in kiln-construction, and their variations.

As to shape, ceramic kilns can be circular, pear-shaped, or rectangular as far as their

general outside plan is concerned. This schematic, clear division becomes more complex,

however, once the supporting system of the perforated floor is taken into consideration.

Some combinations of general plan and specific support system seem to have a strong

chronological and/or geographical association; others, such as the circular kiln with thecentral columnar support, cannot be used as indicators of a specific period or region because

they are common to all.

The discovery of a large number of kilns dating to the Roman period in Italy and in

the Roman provinces created the necessary corpus of material which could be subjected to a

typological arrangement. The first scholar to approach the ceramic kilns systematically and

arrange them typologically was N. Cuomo Di Caprio in 1971, who distinguished eight types

of updraft kilns based on the shape of the support for the perforated floor and the shape of

the combustion chamber (Plate III.1 ). Delcroix and Huot (1972) confined their discussion

to Prehistoric examples of kilns from the Near East and they were more interested in the

historical development of the firing structures (Plate s III.2 , 5, 14 ).4 Duhamel (1978/9)

3 For the latest attempt for the reconstruction of a cross-draft Late Minoan IA from Kommos,see Kommos (145 ).

4 See infra Epilogue, "Types and Meanings".




designed more detailed typologies for the Roman kilns in France (Plate III.15 ).5

The easilyexpandable system established by Cuomo Di Caprio (Ia, Ib...; IIa, IIb...) allowed later

scholars to add new types attested in their specific areas. Le Ny (1988) in her detailed study

on Gallo-Roman tile kilns was able to expand Cuomo’s system of categorization by adding

type III (Plate III.3 ).

Before presenting my typology of the Greek kilns gathered in the catalogue, I will

discuss the basic typology of Cuomo Di Caprio. Davaras' preliminary attempt to classify the

Greek kilns by employing structural criteria will follow. At the end of the chapter I will bothexplore the potential of such typologies as indicators of cultural and regional preferences and

address their limitations as chronological criteria.

5 A more refined proposal of classification of the Gallo-Roman kilns based on the typologyof Duhamel is put forward by Dufaÿ 1996. Although they take into consideration theseparation or not of the combustion and the firing chambers, the number of stoking channels,and the form of the perforated floor (besides the shape of the kiln, and the type of thesupports of the perforated floor), these additional criteria are not applicable to Greek kilns.




I. O LD AND NEW TYPOLOGIES

a. Cuomo Di Caprio's Typology

Cuomo Di Caprio, in her seminal article "Proposta di classificazione delle fornaci

per ceramica e laterizi nell'area italiana, dalla preistoria a tutta l'epoca romana," was the firstto classify the kilns in Italy from the Prehistoric to the Roman periods (Plate III.1 ).6 She

was able to gather 192 kilns from fourteen geographical areas in Italy. The strongest

concentrations of kilns are noticed in Sicily (46), Emilia (28), and Pugia (18). Only in 110

examples (57% of the total catalogue) had the kiln been preserved fully enough to have a

distinct shape. On the basis of these 110 examples, Cuomo Di Caprio established two major

groups of kilns (circular and rectangular) with four variations each, depending on the type of

support of the eschara (Table III.1 ).

The group of the circular kilns with its four subtypes includes 77 examples. They

account for 40% of the collected examples (77/192) and for 70% of the identifiable cases

(77/110).

6 Cuomo Di Caprio 1971/72; translated in an abbreviated form in Cuomo Di Caprio1978/1979;id., 1985, 136-42.




CIRCULAR (I ) RECTANGULAR (II )

Ia central pedestal(s)(a pilastro centrale)

IIa central wall(a muro assiale)

Ib radial pilasters/tongue-shaped pilasters(a muretti radiali)

or with a central wall(a muretto assiale)

IIb central corridor with cross-walls andcross-flues(a corridio centrale)

Ic arches(ad archi)

IIc double corridor with cross-walls andcross flues(a doppio corridoio)

Id central corridor with cross-walls andcross-flues(a corridoio centrale)

IId double praefurnium and doublecorridor(a doppio corridoio e doppio prefurnio)

Table III.1: Cuomo Di Caprio's types for Italian ceramic kilns.

The date range of most types extends from the Prehistoric period to Hellenistic

times. The only examples which continue into Roman times are the universally common

types with the central columnar support,Ia andId . TheIb type seems to be limited to the

Classical period;Ic is mainly Hellenistic and geographically centered around the area of

Morgantina.

The second group of the rectangular kilns consists of 33 examples, accounting for

17% of the total (33/192) and for 30% of the identifiable cases (33/110). These kilns, as a




rule, are encountered in the later periods.IIa andIId appear as early as the Classical period;

IIb andIIc are clearly the favorites in the Roman period.

Geographical preferences are not easily detectable in the catalogue, although there is

a strong regional preference for specific types (typeIc ) at sites such as Morgantina (Tables

III.2-3 ).

PERIOD TYPES

Ia Ib Ic Id IIa IIb IIc IId

Bronze Age X - - - - - - -

Geometric - - - - - - - -

Archaic X X

Arch/Class X X X

Classical X X X X X X

Hellenistic X X

Imperial X X X X

Roman X X X X X

Table III.2: Attestation of Italian kiln types in major chronological periods.

Only typeIa , which is the universally common kiln type, and typeIb of the Roman

typology apply to the Greek kilns. The rectangular examples of typesIIa , IIc and rare

examples ofIId have counterparts in the Greek world. TypeIIb is absent from the currently

known examples.




b. Davaras' Typology

In 1980 Davaras, after having excavated a number of ceramic kilns on Crete himself,

proposed a different typology of ceramic kilns (Table III.4 ).7 His main criteria were: a. the

presence or absence of two different chambers, one for fuel and one for pottery, and b. the

type of support for the perforated floor. He did not differentiate on the basis of the shapes of

the combustion chamber of the kiln.

TYPE A TYPE B

No. ofchambers

One-chamber structures Two-chamber structuresseparated by a perforated floor

Type ofsupport

-No perforated floorbetween combustionand firing chamber

-An interior shelf in thecombustion chamber

B1: Floor supported by short parallel walls

B2: Central pier support (circular or rectangular

Table III.4: Davaras' typology for ceramic kilns in Greece.

7 Interestingly enough, Davaras does not take Cuomo Di Caprio’s research into considerationin his references.




Type A derives from the domestic type of oven and does not differentiate betweenthe combustion and the firing chambers. A later variation in Minoan times features a round

or oval-shaped structure with a narrow shelf running around the interior side, on which the

pots might have been placed (cf. new typeIg in the new typology,Plate III.4 ). The pots

come into direct contact with the fire because there is no eschara separating the firing

chamber from the kiln chamber. The kilns at Achladia (146 ) and Palaikastro (150 ) are the

only examples that Davaras attributes to this type.

This type of one-chamber structure was short-lived. The fact that it was discardedcan perhaps be attributed to its low capacity, if one accepts that the shelf was used to hold

pots.8 It remains to be proved whether such structures were primarily ovens and were never

intended to fire pottery on a regular basis. If this was the case, people were using structures

familiar and available to them until the strong need arose for constructing a kiln used

exclusively for firing ceramics.

Davaras' type B refers to the standard ceramic kiln as described in Ch. II, in which a

perforated floor divides two chambers: the lower one was used for the combustion of fuel

and the upper one for placing and firing pottery. Within type B, Davaras reconstructs an

8 Cf. supra Ch. II, "The 'bench' in the combustion chamber"; Momigliano (1986) alsocomments on the narrowness of the shelf, the low capacity of the kiln, the small size of anyvessel fired in such kilns, and the disproportionate consumption of fuel for firing so fewvases.

9

Davaras records no prehistoric example of Type B2 from Crete, but mentions that the typeis known on the mainland from the Middle Helladic period onwards. Evely's typology forMinoan kilns (2000) differentiates mainly between round and rectangular kilns, and presenceor absence of specific features: a. Type I (subdivided into i. hemispherical/horseshoe in plan;no stoking channel; ii. hemispherical/horseshoe in plan, with stoking tunnels; iii. circular inplan, with stoking channel and grate); b. Type 2 (with long, multiple flues); c. with squarishfeatures.




evolutionary improvement of the supporting system, from the more rudimentary method ofbuilding multiple "short, parallel" walls to support the perforated floor (I call this type B1,

corresponding to the typeIe in the new typology) to the more evolved system of using only

one circular or rectangular free-standing pillar to support the perforated floor (which I call

type B2, corresponding to typeIa in the new typology).9 As an example of his type B1, he

refers to the kiln at Stylos in Chania (with two long parallel walls), but he does not make any

reference to channel kilns from Crete, which should have been included as well. Although

usually cautious about reaching definite conclusions, Davaras ventures to say that type B"must be in general later than Type A."10

This very brief and schematic typological classification by Davaras presents many

shortcomings, primarily because he does not take into account the entire corpus of excavated

Greek kilns; this is a major obstacle to establishing correct chronological differentiations.11

His idea that the ceramic kiln evolved from a domestic oven structure is not to be dismissed

easily, and it is likely that a loan in this direction may have indeed taken place.12 But his

treatment of such structures as a distinct type of kiln requires serious reexamination and in

light of the following catalogue it must be abandoned (see infra Ch. IV).

As for the evaluation of the single central support as an improvement, Davaras'

argument is not supported sufficiently by the evidence. Also, if one keeps in mind that the

10 Davaras 1980, 125.

11 Davaras (1980, 126) acknowledges the preliminary character of this classification: "Butwe must reserve judgement about a more accurate dating of the types until new examples arefound."

12 See supra Excursus, "The Baking Oven".




central circular wall appears early, remains in use throughout antiquity, and is used eventoday, it is difficult, if not impossible, to prove that any development process resulted in the

adoption of this type.

c. A New Typology for Greek Kilns

First, the typology proposed in this study differentiates kilns according to theirshape. There are two predominant shapes: (I) circular or pear-shaped ones, lumped together

in one group for easier reference, and (II) rectangular (Plates III.4, 8, 15 ). I must emphasize

again that these distinctions do not imply any technological differentiation, since all

historical Greek ceramic kilns are of the updraft type.

Second, each group is subdivided further according to the type and number of the

internal support(s) upon which the perforated floor rests (designated with letters a, b, c, etc.).

I use this criterion only because it helps the excavator. Most likely, no ancient potter wouldhave used this criterion to differentiate among different kilns, or at least would not have used

onlythis criterion. It is more plausible that they distinguished kilns according to what they

fired (pottery kilns vs. tile kilns), or what type of fuel they used, or their regional affiliation,

if the type was imported into the area. For examples, the lime kilns in Attica in the

beginning of the 19th century were calledklarokav mina (kilns that burn twigs).13 The

rectangular kilns in the Aegean islands during the same period were known asanatolivtika ,

because the tradition of building rectangular kilns had been forgotten in Greece and was

13 Vekris 1998.




reintroduced by way of Turkey in the East.14

This term is also known for the rectangularkilns in modern Marousi.15

In my typology (Table III.5 ) I also use the type of the support for the perforated

floor as the second major criterion, after the shape of the combustion chamber, to distinguish

the various types. I adopt the system established by N. Cuomo Di Caprio by differentiating

between circular or pear-shaped kilns (I) and rectangular kilns (II ). Cuomo Di Caprio

herself suggested that her system allows for expansion according to local variations.

Therefore, I employ the same letters as Cuomo Di Caprio (a, b, c) when Greece shows thesame examples, and start the new types with e, the first available letter. This classification

will enable newly excavated kilns to be assigned easily to a category, either one that already

exists in the Graeco-Roman world (types a-d) or a new Greek category.

Adopting a previously existing typology facilitates the distinction between types

which have been universally adopted since all potting cultures have certain basic needs (such

as typesIa, Ib, IIa, IIb ), and types that are unique or have a stronger presence in some

cultures (IId for Italy), or in some regions of one culture (IIc for northern Greece). In a

longer-term project, the typologies of all ceramic kilns from the Mediterranean could be

organized according to one typology. Such an endeavor, although far beyond the scope of

the present study, is likely to show the degree to which ceramic technology is specific in

each culture, the degree of regional influences on the type of the kiln, and finally, the number

14 Giannopoulou and Demesticha 1998.

15 Ioannou n.d.

16 For circular Neolithic ovens, see Ch. IV.




and nature of types imported into a culture and the mechanisms that allowed this import totake place (e.g. colonization or adoption).

Table IV.5: New typology of Greek kilns.




II. C IRCULAR AND PEAR -SHAPED K ILNS

Circular kilns are more common than rectangular ones. With 229 secure examples

out of 459, they account for 50% of the kilns. Since it is rather difficult to misinterpet

rectangular kilns, due to their distinct shape and their larger size, it is highly likely that the75 examples of kilns with unrecorded (or unrecoverable) shape must have been in their

majority circular (or pear-shaped) increasing thus the total possible percentage to 66%. They

appear as early as in the Early Bronze Age period and continue throughout antiquity.16 This

type of kiln shares many affinities with domestic ovens, a relationship also reflected in the

terms used interchangeably for kiln and for oven, as was discussed in Ch. I.

This group can be subdivided further into smaller categories, depending on the type

of internal support of the eschara. The shape comes in a variety of sizes with the average

diameter of the circular kilns ranging from 1.20-1.50m. On the one hand, one can find

extremely small kiln of a diameter of 0.65-0.80 (with most of them in the Hellenistic period

and in large workshops which are also equipped with larger kilns). But we also find very

large ones measuring up to 4.50m. Larger sizes appear with more frequency

in Hellenistic and later times, with only isolated examples encountered in Archaic [Prinias

(36), Phari on Thasos (25)] and Classical [Kerameikos, Chabrias Area (43-45 )] periods.

In addition to the archaeological evidence about the size of ancient kilns, there is

also an indirect piece of information from Hero of Alexandria, an author who wrote about

mechanics in the second century B.C. In hisStereometrica(1.76.1) , in an exercise on

calculating the area of an oven (fou' rno" ), he uses 10 feet as a diameter, an equivalent of




3.00m. This is definitely a large kiln for the early periods, but in the Hellenistic andespecially in Roman times these sizes are no longer surprising.

REGION Unknown I II Grand Total

Attica 19 34 62 115

Peloponnese 22 58 28 108

Central 9 35 23 67

Western 3 17 3 23

Northern 6 24 23 53

Aegean 16 61 16 93

Grand Total 75 229 155 459

Table III.6: Distribution of kilns according to regions.

Very rarely are circular kilns exactly circular. Even kilns originally constructed as

circular eventually lose their shape after multiple firings and become pear-shaped kilns.

They are sometimes described by the excavators as horseshoe-shaped, elliptical, or oval.

Circular and pear-shaped kilns tend to have similar supports, although the pear-shaped ones

show a slight preference for long walls (typeIb ) rather than central columnar supports for

the perforated floor. In addition, their stoking chamber, the praefurnium, tends to be longer

than that of the circular kilns.

Lato (28-30 ) and Phari on Thasos (25-26 ) preserve Archaic examples of pear-shaped

kilns, and the Athenian Kerameikos (40-42 ) has Classical examples. It is noteworthy that all

these sites have more than one kiln, and that all the kilns are of the same pear-like shape. At

this time it is not clear whether this shape required any specific technical knowledge which

was not widely shared in other areas.




a. Circular Kiln with Central (Circular or Square) Pillar (Type Ia)

This type can easily be considered the most popular, not only in Greece, but in all

Mediterranean potting cultures (Plate III.16 ). It combines simplicity in design with

maximum efficiency in firing, since only a very small place in the combustion chamber,

which the support occupies, is left “cold.” Most of its characteristics coincide with the

description of a standard type which was presented in Ch. II regarding the range of sizes for

the central support. It was adopted in 73 kilns (ca. 16% of the total number of kilns). It

outnumbers all other types of circular kilns examined either individually or collectively (73

vs. 43 examples of all other circular types).17

Its geographical and chronological distribution does not present any unusual peaks

either in Greece or in other Mediterranean areas. The type begins in the Bronze Age, with

examples in Kirrha (104-105 ) and in Eretria (103 ), and continues throughout the historical

periods and in every geographical region (Table III.7 ).18 Its simplicity made it a favorite in

western Greece and in the Aegean, where there is normally a low frequency of kilns and an

overall lag in the technological and typological developments. The kilns adopting this type

range in size from 1.00 to 3.00m in diameter, and the circular support increases

proportionally.

17 The arrangement in the French kilns of multiple small piers as supports is not attested forGreek kilns (Dufaÿ 1996).

18 Obviously the statement by Cook (1984, 64) that earliest kilns with a central support dateto the sixth century B.C., with the Penteskoufia plaque F893 being the earliest example, iswrong.




The central support can have a roughly circular or rectangular shape. It is usuallymade of a combination of clay mortar, stones, broken sherds, and tiles.19 Its slender

diameter (ca. 0.30m) and its long exposure after a kiln is abandoned explain why it is usually

obliterated from the archaeological record. In kilns of this type, the central support averages

about one third of the total interior diameter of the combustion chamber.

Most examples preserve their dimensions: it is easy to distinguish four main groups

of dimensions: a. the small ones (Ø below 1.00m), b. the average ones (Ø 1.00-1.59m), c. the

larger ones (Ø 1.60-3.00) and d. the exceptionally large ones (Ø over 4.00m). The first twogroups of sizes are the most numerous.20 The larger examples are encountered in the later

periods (Hellenistic and Roman) with the exception of Archaic Prinias (35-36 ) and Thasos,

Phari A (25).

Because of the vulnerability of the central support to abandonment, and because of

the slow process of identifying a kiln during excavation, it is very likely that many of the

kilns which preserve no support originally belonged to this type, but that the support has not

left any traces.

19 For more details on this structural feature, see Ch. II, "The 'bench' in the combustionchamber".

20 The same predilection of sizes is also evident in the kilns of the same type in Roman Gaul(Dufaÿ 1996).




c. Circular Kiln with Parallel Walls on the Long Axis (Type Ie)

An elaborate version of typeIb is TypeIe with more than one wall running parallel

to the axis of the stoking channel (Table III.9 ). The normal number of walls is two. It does

not appear often in the archaeological record, although its counterpart in the rectangular

kilns,IIe , is more prominent. Both in its circular and rectangular variants this type is absent

from Cuomo Di Caprio’s typology. There are only eight examples of typeIe (2% of the

total number of the kilns, and 4% of all circular kilns): the examples are mainly Prehistoric,

and the remainder are dispersed in antiquity. Interestingly enough, each of the two

prehistoric examples that are in central Greece, in Dimini (116 ) and Kirrha (106 ), has three

parallel walls. Both kilns are quite large in diameter: Dimini is 3.95m and Kirrha is 2.30m.

In Dimini, the central supporting wall is the longest (ca. 2.00m), whereas the other

two walls on each side of the long wall are shorter. Of the historical ones, especially

noteworthy is the"South Kiln" at Prinias (36) (Int. Ø 2.98. Ext. Ø 4.10 ) (Plate III.6 ).

On average, the kilns of this type are larger than 2.00 in diameter. Overall the Aegean and

central Greece preserve the most examples of the type.

It has been suggested in this study that these kilns might be variants of the channel

kilns from the Minoan period on Crete.22 Three walls are probably the maximum number

that a circular kiln can accommodate, given the restricted range that its diameter can attain.

The type has more occurrences in Hellenistic Istria, in western Turkey, and in western

Europe, but in different time ranges.23

22 infra, Ch. IV, "The Minoan Channel Kilns".

23 For Histria, see Coja 1974.




d. Circular Kiln with no Central Support (Type If)

Eight examples, of medium size, and mainly from the Aegean, have not preserved

any central support (Table III.10 ). Although it is more likely that they once possessed a

central support that has not survived, I categorized them separately because it is conceivable

that they did not originally have a central support. Most of them (five) come from the

Aegean and their chronological peak is in the Bronze Age, a period of general

experimentation.

e. Circular Kiln with Internal Bench (Type Ig)

Type Ig corresponds to type A in Davaras’ typology. He considered it to be a small

improvement over a domestic oven, but without potential for further development (Table

III.11) The problems associated with placing pots to be fired on this bench, namely the low

capacity of the kiln and the dangers of direct contact with the fire, have been discussed

above.24 The type has seven examples (2% of all kilns and 4% of all circular kilns). Most of

them appear in the Aegean and are thinly distributed throughout antiquity. The sizes range

from 1.00-3.00m withone exception to over 3.00m.

The early examples are the Minoan kilns at Palaikastro (150 ) and Achladia (146 ).

The Geometric kiln at Dodone (10) is the next example chronologically. The bench can be

added at a later stage of the kiln's lifetime when its function is modified: for example, a

24 See supra Ch. II, "The 'bench' in the combustion chamber".




bench was apparently added to the Hellenistic kiln at Evangelismos in Athens (157 ) when itwas converted for use as a lime kiln.25 This kiln has the largest dimension in the group.

The longer association of a bench with a lime kiln has led scholars to question whether

any of the kilns belonging to this category ever fired pottery.26

25 A kiln (typeIf ) at Patras (7, Nikita and Karatza Sts.) (244 ) also preserves a bench 0.60mwide and .035m high.

26 Demierre 2000 prefers to see the Palaikastro example(150 ) as a lime kiln.

27 Rectangular lime kilns are very rare. For glass, only the tank furnaces are rectangular.




Table III.8: Chronological and geographical distributions of type Ib.

Geographical Distribution of Type Ib

34

76

0

5

10

A e g e a n A t t i c a

C e n t r a l

N o r t h e r

n

P e l o p o

n n e s e

W e s t e r

n

n=20

Chronological Distribution of Type Ib

11

1

4 4

0

5

10

15

B r o n z e

A g e

G e o m e

t r i c A r c

h a i c

C l a s s i c a l

H e l l e n i

s t i c

H e l l e n - R o m

a n R o m

a n

L a t e A

n t i q u e

B y z a n t

i n e

U n d a t

e d

n=20




Table III.10: Chronological and geographical distributions of type If.

Geographical Distribution of Type If

5

1 1 1

0

1

2

3

4

5


C e n t r a l

N o r t h e r

n

P e l o p o n n e

s e W e

s t e r n

n=8

Chronological Distribution of Type If

3

1 1 1 1 1

0

1

2

3

4

5

B r o n z e

A g e

G e o m e

t r i c A r c

h a i c

C l a s s i c a l

H e l l e n i s t i c

H e l l e n - R o m

a n R o m

a n

L a t e A

n t i q u e

B y z a n t

i n e

U n d a t

e d

n=8




Table III.11: Chronological and geographical distributions of type Ig.

Chronological Distribution of Type Ig

2

1

2 2

0

1

2

3

4

5

B r o n z e

A g e

G e o m e

t r i c A r c

h a i c

C l a s s i c a l

H e l l e n i

s t i c

H e l l e n - R o m

a n R o m

a n

L a t e A

n t i q u e

B y z a n t

i n e

U n d a t

e d

n=7

Geographical Distribution of Type Ig

2

1

3

1

0

1

2

3

4

5


C e n t r a l

N o r t h e r

n

P e l o p o n

n e s e

W e s t e r

n

n=7




III. R ECTANGULAR K ILNS

Ceramic kilns of rectangular size are easily identifiable and have been recovered in

many excavations. In the catalogue there are 155 examples, or 34%, of the total number of

kilns (Plate III.8 ). Their larger size and more sturdy construction usually result in more

complete preservation. Therefore the percentage rate of the preserved rectangular kilns may

be somewhat higher than the actual ratio of circular and rectangular kilns that operated in

any period of Greek antiquity. They are also the only types that cannot be mistaken for other

pyrotechnological structures such as lime kilns, glass kilns, or furnaces.27 They tend to

appear in technologically advanced production centers, since they constitute a "risk-taking"

shape.28

Rectangular kilns already appear in the Bronze Age, but in those cases they have

rounded edges. All the examples belong to the peculiar, exclusively Prehistoric typeIIe , the

channel kilns, whose function remains an issue of debate (see infra Ch. IV). The beginning

of the rectangular kilns is hard to establish since both the kiln at the Giannopoulou Lot at

Samos (14) (Plate VI.10 ) and the Aigion kiln (18) (Plate III.9 ) are only tentatively dated to

the Archaic period, and their material remains largely unpublished.

It is only late in the Classical period that examples of rectangular kilns multiply.

They include the East Kiln at the Corinthian Tile Works (65) [a much larger (7.50 x 5.00m)

28 For the adoption of rectangular-shaped kilns by the more enterprising members of thepotters' community in Los Pueblos, see Papousek 1989.




replica of the earlier West kiln (64)], and the more modest kilns at Nemea (60-62 ) and atOlympia (73) of the late fourth century B.C. The Nemea and Olympia kilns measure in

average ca. 4.00m square. Despite their impressive dimensions, they constitute only a small

group of the total number of preserved kilns. Nevertheless, they become popular in the

Roman period, as revealed by the excavations of the Plateia Kotzia with its twenty-seven

rectangular kilns (274-300 ).29

There has been a long-standing argument as to whether the rectangular kilns were

used exclusively, or at least primarily, for firing tiles.30 The most commonly cited examplesare the kilns at the Corinthian Tile Works (64-65 ), the kiln at the sanctuary of Zeus at Nemea

(60), and the fourth century A.D. kiln at Olympia (392 ). It is argued that the rectangular kiln

could accommodate more tiles, which were also rectangular, than could a circular kiln. The

presence of rectangular kilns for tiles in other parts of Europe corroborates this

assumption.31

Such lines of argument take into consideration only the peculiarities of the

Corinthian-type tiles in antiquity which indeed were rectangular. The other major tile type

was concave and was known as the Laconian type.32 The Laconian and Corinthian types

require different arrangements inside a kiln since their shapes differ considerably. Laconian

29 Karagiorga-Stathakopoulou 1988.

30 Martin 1965, 78-81; Orlandos 1966, 92.

31 Le Ny (1988) in her study of tile kilns in Roman France demonstrates that 81% of theidentified tile kilns (64/79) are indeed rectangular, but a considerable proportion, 19%(15/79), are circular.

32 Winter N. 1993.




tiles were commonly fired in circular kilns, because according to the same argument ofcompatibility of shape, concave items can be fired more easily in circular kilns.33 The

Archaic kilns at Phari (25-26 ) have shown evidence of firing of tiles as have the workshops

with circular kilns at Figaretto on Corfu (197-209 ) and at Nemea (62).34 In addition,

ethnographic examples from Italy and modern Ermioni in the Argolid corroborate this

practice of firing Laconian-type tiles in circular kilns.35

Once built, the rectangular kilns were used for firing other types of pottery as well:

in Eretria, a Roman rectangular kiln (352 ) produced coarse ware pottery (cooking pots, jugs,and amphoras) in addition to rooftiles. The initial impetus for constructing rectangular kilns,

however, is the widespread use of rooftiles. Thus, it is not surpring that in historical periods

where we have little evidence for roofing structures with tiles (as in the Dark Ages), we also

have little or no evidence for rectangular kilns. In such sizable kilns ancient potters could

33 See comments of C.K. Williams in Perrault 1990, n. 13. Circular kilns for firing tiles werepreferred in Roman Italy, whereas Britain used exclusively rectangular tile kilns. RomanGaul, situated geographically between these traditions, exhibits examples of both types, witha clear preference for rectangular tile kilns (Le Ny 1988).

34 Perrault 1990 on the production of tiles at the workshop at Phari. Blegen 1937, 180-1interpreted a circular structure (Ø 2.40) in the dromos of a tomb as a tile factory because ofthe large quantity of Greek tiles that he found scattered. The thick layer of lime plaster, thethick walls (0.50m), and its large size, however, argue more in favor of a lime kiln.

35 For Italy, Hampe and Winter 1965; Kardulias 2000 for Ermioni. In southern France roundkilns were also used to fire rooftiles (Le Ny 1988).




also fire terracotta bathtubs36

, water pipes, large-scale architectural sculpture, such as theZeus and Ganymede akroterion at Olympia, or large ritual basins (perirrhanteria).37

Rectangular kilns have also survived in traditional Greek pottery workshops of the 18th and

19th century A.D., but their structure, both in terms of plan and materials used, is quite

different (Plate III.12 ).38

a. Rectangular Kiln with Central (Circular or Square) Pillar (Type IIa)

Type IIa shares the same internal arrangement as its circular counterpartIa . The

kilns of this type are usually of small size, a characteristic common to typesIa andIIa . It is

36 A Late Geometric bath tub from Kalabaktepe ( Milet I, 8,30, fig. 22). For fragments of alouter in a Classical house at Vari, Patriarchou Gregoriou E St. [ ADelt44 (1989) 62]; louterin a Late Hellenistic house at Aegion, Lysiou St. [ ADelt31 (1976) 97]; complete loutercomparable to the one at Isthmia at Pella [ ADelt16 (1960) 82, pl. 88]; clay larnakes at Voula[ ADelt20 (1965) 111-2, pl. 73]; at the Athenian Kerameikos [ ADelt 16 (1960) 21, pl. 17]; inKephallenia, Same [15, Metaxa St. and Anonymous, ADelt42 (1987) 165]. A children’s claylarnax was excavated at Autantzes Karioton, Leukada [ ADelt26 (1971) 480, pl. 338st ]measuring 0.83 x 0.45m, which preserves its rectangular cover measuring 0.83 x 0.45 x0.18m.

37 The only example of a kiln which had been associated with the firing of water pipes is theLate Minoan IIIA kiln at Kato Gouves in Herakleion (Kiln A) (127 ) where many fragmentsof water pipes are preserved. For terracotta large scale sculpture, Bookidis 2000; terracottastatues were fired at hight temperatures, above 1100°C , see Gaugler and Anderson 1980.

38 Psaropoulou 1986; Giannopoulou and Demesticha 1998. Most of them are two-storied inorder to produce the glazed wares. The walls of the combustion and firing chambers arethick and built primarily of stone. Their size, however, is in the same range as the ancientkilns, that is between 2.00 and 3.00m. For their nickname asanatolivtika (Easterners) , seeinfra.




not clear whether the potters used the rectangular shape as a conscious choice, or whether itsimply developed from the circular, pear-shaped type (Table III.12 ). There are twenty-two

examples of this type (5% of the entire corpus and 14% of all rectangular kilns). The earliest

example is the Geometric kiln at Phaistos (12), and it barely appears in the Archaic,

Classical, and Hellenistic times [Herakleidon St. (15), Sindos (89), Kerameikos (260-269 ),

respectively]. It becomes much more common in the Roman period, especially in Athens.

When the large Kerameikos in the Kotzia Square (274-300 ) is fully published, more

examples will be added to this type, making it the favorite type of Athenian potters in theRoman period. Generally, however, the type never became very popular because rectangular

kilns usually attain a large size, and a central circular support would make any system of

supporting arches very long and consequently very weak. The average size for this type of

kiln is ca. 2.00 x 2.00m.39

b. Rectangular Kiln with Central Wall(s) (Type IIb)

A central oblong wall running in the same direction as the stoking channel is the

earliest support of the rectangular kilns (Table III.13 ). The entire design of this type largely

resembles domestic architecture, with thin walls used to separate spaces. The same

arrangement is adopted for pyrotechnological structures other than ceramic kilns, such as the

Archaic furnace for processing gold at Sardis.40

39 Of ten kilns of this type with recorded measurements, the distribution is: formeasurements 1.00-1.49m (2), 1.50-1.99 (4), 2.00-2.99 (4). Much smaller is the Geometrickiln at Phaistos(12 ) (1.25x1.60) while the Classical kiln at Sindos(89 ) (4.25x1.85) is biggerthan normal.

40 Ramage and Craddock 2000 and supra Excursus, "The Metallurgical Furnace".




It is also worth noting that in the cases of multiple kilns in one workshop, potterstend to duplicate the same type for their other kilns, such as at Krannon (181-182 ), or the

Tile Works at ancient Corinth (64-65 ) where both kilns of the workshop are of typeIIb .

The length of the wall is proportional to the length of the combustion chamber and

tends to be a little shorter than the combustion chamber. Its width varies from 0.50 to

1.00m. The wider walls are more common in Athens (37-38 ) and in ancient Elis (172 ). Most

of the walls of this type touch the back wall across from the stoking chamber.

A small subgroup of this type is the one with more than one wall, on the same axisas the stoking channel. Five excavated kilns, from Velestino (189 ), Olympia (392 ), Berbati

(340 ), Delos (456 ), and Kato Kastelliana on Crete (384 ) form this type. The walls are

usually short and wide, with dimensions ranging from 0.30 to 0.50m. The type appears only

in the Hellenistic and Roman periods. The average size for kilns of this subgroup is

2.00x2.00m. In some examples the two separate walls are close to each other, and halfway

up their height they are consolidated into one support with the help of arches [ancient

Olympia (392 ), Kokkinovrysi (343 )].

An even less frequent variant has the walls made of pairs of pillars which bear strong

resemblance to the hypocausts of baths. The proximity of pottery workshops and baths is

noteworthy (see supra Ch. VI). So far, the only known examples are a Byzantine kiln at

Lefkadia, itself near a bath (423 ), and an undated kiln at Delos (456 ).

This type is also attested in the Etruscan workshops of the fourth and third centuries

B.C. (e.g. Marzabotto), whereas it is absent from Cuomo Di Caprio’s typology (1971/72) for

the Roman kilns.41

41 Nijboer 1998; Ewell 2000.




c. Rectangular Kiln with Multiple Pairs of Cross-walls (Type IIc)

Seventeen examples belong to this type, constituting 4% of the entire corpus of kilns

and 12% of all rectangular ones (Table III.14 ). It is limited only to rectangular kilns.42 The

cross-walls constitute a different approach to the construction of the support: in the types

described above, the supports run parallel to the length of the combustion chamber, whereas

these walls run across the chamber at short intervals. The walls usually measure 0.30-0.50m,

and the intervening spaces are about the same width. In reality the walls that touch the two

long sides of the combustion chamber form the lower parts of arches, which span the

combustion chamber and support the perforated floor.

The advantage of this type is that the number of cross walls can be as great as the

size of the kiln requires. In Greece the number of the pairs of cross-walls usually is from

three to five. On the other hand, the disadvantage is that these walls create many "cold

pockets" and cause an uneven distribution of heat in the firing chamber. The average

dimensions for a kiln of this type are 3.00 x 3.00m. Anything larger would have caused

problems with the stoking of fuel and with the even distribution of heat.43

The type first appeared in the Hellenistic period and immediately became a favorite

in northern Greece, where it remained popular until the Byzantine period. Notable examples

are in Pella, with two Hellenistic kilns of this type (214, 223 ), in Thessaloniki, at Nea

Philadelphia (370 ), at Philotas in Florina (249-250 ) (Plate II.5 ), and at Europos in Evros

42 It is also adopted by circular kilns in Britain and France in the Roman period (Dufaÿ 1996who questions their efficiency).

43 Le Ny 1988 mentions this as a possible factor for the standardization of dimensions.




(363 ). In other areas of Greece rectangular kilns with cross-walls generally date to theRoman period, e.g. at Olympia (347 ).

It seems that this arrangement was the most appropriate for a rectangular-shaped kiln

as is shown from the majority of Roman tile kilns in France (44/79, or 65%), which are of

the type with cross-walls, but in France they are more evenly distributed than in Greece

where they are clustered regionally.44

d. Rectangular Kiln with Channels (Type IIe)

The type appears only in the Minoan sphere of influence from the Middle Minoan to

the Late Minoan periods with eight representatives. Its function is still undetermined (infra ,

Ch.IV), but it is unlikely that they were metallurgical furnaces. All eight examples come

from Crete.

44 The average dimensions of this type are (Le Ny 1988): combustion chamber, L. 3.00m(±0.87m), W. 2.70m (±1.00m); firing chamber: L. 2.79m (±0.86m), W. 2.39m (±1.00m).




Table III.12: Chronological and geographical distributions of type IIa.

Geographical Distribution of Type IIa

2

17

1 2

0

5

10

15

20


C e n t r a l

N o r t h e r

n

P e l o p o n n

e s e

W e s t e

r n

n=22

Chronological Distribution of Type IIa

1 1

18

1 102468

101214161820

B r o n z e

A g e

G e o m e

t r i c A r c

h a i c

C l a s s i c a l


H e l l e n - R o m

a n R o m

a n

L a t e A

n t i q u e

B y z a n t

i n e U n

d a t e d

n=22




Table III.13: Chronological and geographical distributions of type IIb.

Geographical Distribution of Type IIb

4 57

4

13

10

5

10

15


C e n t r a l

N o r t h e r

n

P e l o p o

n n e s e

W e s t e r

n

n=34

Chronological Distribution of Type IIb

13

8 9 8

31 1

02468

10

B r o n z e A

g e

G e o m e t r i c A r c h

a i c

C l a s s i c a l


H e l l e n - R o m

a n R o m

a n

L a t e A n t i q

u e

B y z a n t i n e U n d a

t e d

n=34




Table III.14: Chronological and geographical distributions of type IIc.

Geographical Distribution of Type IIc

1

14

2

0

5

10

1520

A e g e a n A t t

i c a C e n

t r a l

N o r t h e r

n

P e l o p o n n e

s e W e

s t e r n

n=17

Chronological Distribution of Type IIc

2 2 2

7

4

0

2

4

6

8

10

B r o n z e

A g e G e

o m e t r i c

A r c h a i c

C l a s s i c a l


H e l l e n - R o

m a n R o m

a n

L a t e A

n t i q u e B y z

a n t i n e U n

d a t e d

n=17




although slightly larger than the Hellenistic examples, still fall short of fully exploiting thistechnique.45

Such uniformity in shape and size contrasts strongly with the variety of pottery types

that potters produced in the course of about 5,000 years, both in shape and especially in

decoration. The kiln belongs to the technical equipment of a ceramic workshop, along with

the potter’s wheel and the various tools for forming and decorating a vessel. As such it is

less prone to change than are the aesthetic aspects of potmaking.46 In ethnographic

literature, potters in many parts of the world are more willing to change the decoration orshapes of their vessels to meet new demands imposed by the tourist market, but are reluctant

to accept kerosene-fired kilns or electrically-powered wheels.47 The cumulative and long-

tested efficiency of kilns made the potters reluctant to change the technology in this aspect.

45 Arched types may cost more than simpler constructions. (cf. Papousek 1989 where an archkiln costs three times a tube kiln in Los Pueblos).

46 The potter will either create new decoration and/or shapes, but continue using traditionaltechniques of producing and firing, or he will use modern equipment but retain thetraditional shapes and patterns in some kind of connection with tradition; in any case, acomplete break with tradition is avoided. Arnold (1985, 229-30) also points out thattechnical innovations originate from low-status potters, whereas new artistic trends are set byhigh-status potters. The driving force for the first group is survival; for the second, luxury.

47 "Within limits […] a Tonaltecan potter will make any clay object which can be made bythe moulding methods he is accustomed to and by using his kind of kiln." (Diaz 1966, 17 and138 cited in Nicklin 1971). In the Japanese village of Tamba they rejected the new kilns asinferior to their traditional ones. "This was not merely conservatism, for they know that theirpots derive much of their vitality from contact with fire, wood, and ash." (Janet Leach 1957,13-14, cited in Nicklin 1971, 26).




Equally striking is the consistency of the shape of kiln furniture, especially the clay rings andthe tripods, which were used widely across areas and periods.48

When multiple examples of kilns exist at one site, we find instances where all are of

the same shape, as in the workshops at Lato (28-30 ), Prinias (31-36 ), and Figaretto, Corfu

(197-209 ). Elsewhere both circular and rectangular kilns are built, as in Lenormant Ave. in

Athens (51-53 ), at Nemea (60-62 ), and in the Hellenistic workshop at Pella (218-223 ).

Such a resistance to technical innovation persists despite economic and market

stimuli to adopt new types of equipment. A seemingly non-economical type of kiln (or theuse of any old-fashioned technology) will prove to be energy- and time-saving as well as

profitable, because the learning curve is very high for new technology in the ceramics

industry. Old, familiar kilns will produce consistent results, whereas experimental types will

cost a potter much loss of time and profit until he becomes familiar with it and fully explores

its potentialities and restrictions.

A strong tradition, especially at the local level, can also be attributed to the family

relationships that apply in the case of most of the potters. Some brothers might decide to go

to another village and build a kiln, using the knowledge they have acquired in their

birthplace. Nor does the sedentary character of potters contribute to interaction or exchange

of knowledge with potters from remote places. Even among itinerant potters in Greece and

Cyprus the potters used their own kilns and their own techniques in the places that they

48 At Nicobars, the Chowrans use ahi-wat , a ring of unfired clay placed on top of the pot toprevent firebrands from touching the sides of the vessels in a bonfire (Man 1894, 25 cited inNicklin 1971, 25). Notice that in this case the clay rings are placed on top and notunder thepots. For the kiln furniture in detail, see supra Ch. II,"Kiln Furniture".




visited.49

These places, after all, did not have a strong tradition in pottery, hence theirdependence on specialists.

Moreover, what we would perceive nowadays as technological advancement might

differ considerably from what an ancient or even a modern potter considers as such. If a

type of kiln works well, the potter may decide simply to build more of the type and size with

which he is familiar. He might not attempt to build a larger version of the older kiln,

however, lest the breakage rate increase exponentially. In other words, it was safer to fire

pots in smaller batches rather than in large firings, in the equivalent of not "putting all one'seggs in one basket." Alternatively, progress in kiln firing can be determined by better

control of the firing cycle, which would result in a lower breakage rate as well as in a more

economical use of fuel. After all, one should not forget that many of the different techniques

of decoration (such as black-glaze in Classical Greece) are the result of firing atmospheres,

not of a peculiar construction of the kiln itself.

Sometimes the practice of a specific technique forms part of a larger body of habits,

ideas, and customs which differ from those of other potters who do not use this specific

technological device or method.50 In these cases the unwillingness is a conscious reaction,

49 Voyatzoglou 1984; Vallianos and Padouva 1986.

50 Some potters' groups in northern and western India (Nicklin 1971, 29) are separated intotwo types: those who use the wheel and those who do not. "Certain features of potterytechnology act together with features of dress, food habits, and customs as differentiatingcriteria" (Saraswati 1967 cited in Nicklin 1971). Also, within the same region, one can seedifferent preferences (cited from Behura 1967a, 35); in southern India , the Pandyan-Velarspractise open firing whereas the Cholar Velars prefer kiln firing (Nicklin 1971, 30). Forcultural-psychological reasons for adhering to one type of technology, seeibid. 30, citedfrom Behure 1967b, 123: the Pandyan Velar potters of Madras do not fire in a reducingatmosphere "because their customers consider black pots inauspicious."




deriving from an equally strong desire for cultural differentiation. Papousek (1989) went asfar as to consider changes brought to the kiln size and construction of a community a type of

"social rebellion."

Finally, the kiln should always be examined in relation to other technical equipment

in the workshop. Because no major innovations took place in the design and function of the

wheel, nor in the degree of market demand, there was no exterior stimulus to increase the

size of the ceramic kilns; hence the standardization of sizes in ceramic kilns. Such an

interdependence is bound to cause a chain reaction when an element of technology changes:for example, the introduction of a faster kick-wheel increased the number of vases produced.

This change was destined to affect the other end of the production cycle, the kiln, and led to

the abandonment of open firings, which cannot accommodate many pots at each firing.

Moreover, a continuous production of the same types of vessel poses no challenges to a

potter seeking to explore other designs for constructing his kilns.51

Innovation in firing does not need to involve only a different design for a kiln, but

could apply to the use of different types of fuel. This innovative aspect is more elusive

archaeologically.

51 Papousek 1989, where the correct stacking of plates made the potters build a stronger gridinside the kiln.




b. Correlation of Vessel Shape and Kiln Type

Aside from a weak correlation between large terracotta rooftiles and rectangular

kilns, as discussed above, the available corpus of kilns does not provide any pattern whereby

specific types of kilns are used for firing specific vessels. The only generalization, and the

most obvious one, is that small vessels (such as terracotta figurines and lamps) were fired in

smaller kilns and that larger kilns were usually reserved for larger vessels. Small quantities

of figurines and lamps could also be fired in larger kilns, however, if they were placed inside

larger vessels, like craters or amphoras, as is a common practice in the traditional workshops

in Moknine, Tunisia.52 For an illustrative example, the large number of 1,000 aryballoi

recovered from the Plot of I. Gotsi at ancient Corinth (19) could have been placed inside

twenty or thirty large Corinthian craters, and could have been fired in two or three firings,

thus within a month of work.

In the Hellenistic Acropolis at Pella, a workshop for figurines was identified, and in

Patras, Petropoulos excavated two small kilns which fired lamps.53 One would expect that

the amphora workshops, which normally produced only amphoras, would have shown an

affinity for a particular type of kiln, but no evidence can support such an assumption for the

moment. Overall, though, amphora producers tend to specialize, and many ceramic

52 Hasaki, in preparation. The larger vessels could either be newly-formed vessels orrecycled, previously fired defective ones. These pots are commonly placed in the bottom ofthe kiln, and the fired vessel acting like a shell offers strong protection to the sensitive smallpieces from the higher temperatures that develop near the perforated floor.

53 For a late Hellenistic kiln in Pella (first century B.C.), located at the northeast corner ofthe eastern wing of the Agora, found filled with figurines, see Akamatis 1993, 159, 320; forthe Roman lamp workshops in Patras, see Petropoulos 1999.




workshops (on the islands, especially on Crete, Chios and Thasos) had been labeled as“amphora” workshops.54

c. Comparison with Other Typologies

The typology of Greek kilns shares many types with the typologies established in

other parts of the Mediterranean (Plates III.15-17 ).55 Overall, it does not display any odd

types, but only a strong geographical and chronological preference for some types. The best

example is typeIIc for Hellenistic northern Greece.

Yet none of the examples ofIId that Cuomo Di Caprio isolated as a type in Italy are

attested in the Greek archaeological record. The same holds true for typesId , Ie , If, IIf,

IIf' from Le Ny's typology of Gallo-Roman tile kilns. The Romano-British kilns present the

most irregularities, perhaps because of the isolation of the British Isles; there is very little

overlap between the British types and the types found in mainland Europe.

Overall, however, each culture chooses its types from a specific typology. Even

within the commonest types, each culture places its own imprint on the construction of

minor details, such as the location chosen for the kiln, the general proportions of the

different parts of the kiln, the type of support for the perforated floor, and even the shape and

arrangement of the ventholes.56 By paying attention to these secondary aspects, one can

54 For the frequent proximity of amphora workshops to wineries, see infra Ch. VI.

55 The average size for a circular kiln in Roman Gaul is 2.00m (Le Ny 1988).

56 See supra Ch. II,"The Perforated Floor . For kilns in ancient Palestine, see also Wood 1990.




detect any diffusion or isolation of technological advances among ancient cultures. Such an

exchange of technological knowledge becomes extremely important when one examines

intraregional or interregional relationships. Any cross-cultural comparison should also take

into consideration that the same internal arrangement does not always mean technological

exchange since some designs are universally practical and therefore they are independently

adopted.



THE PREHISTORIC K ILNS

_____________________________________________186

CHAPTER IV

THE PREDECESSORS OF HISTORICAL

K ILNS

(Neolithic Ovens to Late Bronze Age Kilns)

During the first millennia of ceramics in Greece, kilns are absent from the

archaeological record. Their absence can be explained in two ways: either they did not exist

(as was probably the case for the Neolithic period), or they have not yet been excavated

(which is probably true for the Early Bronze Age). By the Middle Bronze Age (2000-1600

B.C.), ceramic kilns appear fully developed in their standard form (two separate chambers

divided by a perforated floor). Finally, in the Late Bronze Age, both on the Greek mainlandand in the Aegean, existing kilns display a variety of shapes and sizes comparable to the rich

corpus of later, historical kilns.




_____________________________________________187

When compiling a catalogue of Prehistoric kilns, one must exclude many exampleserroneously identified in the past as ceramic kilns (mostly the Neolithic examples, which

were domestic ovens), but one must include other ceramic kilns previously misinterpreted as

metallurgical furnaces (the channel kilns from Minoan Crete). The following overview of

the prehistoric periods focuses solely on the evidence of kilns: their number, typology, and

geographical and chronological distribution in mainland Greece and the islands. Issues

about pottery production in general will be discussed only when they are pertinent to kilns.

A detailed study of the ceramic industry in prehistoric Greece is outside the scope of thisdissertation.1 So far sixty-one examples of Prehistoric kilns have been unearthed with the

vast majority dating to the Late Bronze Age (Plate IV.17) . They represent five types of

circular kilns and one type of rectangular kilns, the controversial channel type (IIe ).

In Ch. IV and V I will synthesize in chronological order my observations on the

kilns included in the main catalogue and in Appendix I. By adopting this approach I will be

able to analyze the ceramic production in various periods in Greek prehistory (Ch. IV) and

history (Ch. V), and compare characteristics of each period with those of preceding and

following periods. The historical kilns will be investigated in detail in Chapter V. In the

prehistoric phases, I first discuss developments in the Greek mainland (the Helladic sphere),

then the technological developments on Crete and the Aegean islands (the Minoan sphere) to

return to the Mycenaean world at the end.

1 A dissertation on this topic, including petrographic analyses from prehistoric ceramics, iscurrently being written by M. Dalinghaus at the University of Cincinnati. For earlierscientific studies, see Maniatis and Tite 1978, 1981.




_____________________________________________188

Table IV.1: Distribution of types of kilns in the Bronze Age.

45

11

0

10

20

30

40

50

Circular Rectangular

Distribution of Types in the Bronze Age

5

18

7

11

4 3 2 3

8

0

5

10

15

20

U n k n o

w n I / ? I / a I / b I / e I / f I / g I I / ? I I / e

61




_____________________________________________189

a. Neolithic Ovens

So far no firmly identifiable kiln used exclusively for ceramics and resembling the

later type of a two-chambered kiln has been excavated in Neolithic layers.2 Most fired clay

structures that have been identified as kilns should best be considered as ovens. Incomplete

knowledge of the structural and functional characteristics of a ceramic kiln has led

archaeologists to make incorrect interpretations of such features.

The fired clay structure that Mylonas excavated at Olynthus in northern Greece isreported in the literature to be the earliest Greek pottery kiln (Plate IV.1 ).3 A closer

examination of his description of the remains and his reconstruction, however, renders such

an interpretation impossible. First, the reconstruction with three underground firing channels

has no precedent and makes little sense from either an architectural or technological point of

view. Second, the presence ofonly one hole of 0.07m in a rectangular area measuring 0.50 x

0.75m. would have allowed only a very small amount of heat to reach the chamber, where

the pots would be placed. Even the lower temperatures required for Neolithic pots would nothave been reached inside the firing chamber.4 The function of this hole still remains unclear.

2 For the most recent account of Neolithic pottery technology, see Kalogirou 1997; Vitelli1994, 1997. These ovens are often called saggars in the literature.

3 Mylonas 1929, 12-8, figs. 10-18; Cook 1961, 65, A1; Davaras 1980, 124, n. 54; Seifert1993, no. 2.

4 See Introduction,Table Intro.2 , for a list of temperatures measured in sherds of variousperiods.




_____________________________________________190

Mylonas’ hypothetical reconstruction combines elements of a village bread oven, abonfire for pots, and a potter’s kiln. In bonfires, fuel is placed directly under and/or above

the pottery, not in a separate place, and nowhere has such an elaborate substructure of

channels been attested. The large quantity of burnt grain seeds and fragments of bases of

cooking pots found in the area of this so-called kiln point more securely to a domestic oven.

Mylonas desperately wanted this structure to be a potter’s kiln, although he himself

sometimes calls it an oven comparable to contemporary bread ovens he had seen in the

nearby villages. The archaeological comparanda provided (rectangular bothroi in Eutresis,Korakou, and Orchomenos) were used for heating rooms, preparing food, or baking bread,

but not for firing pottery.5 Mylonas’ understanding of a potter’s kiln is that it is a more

elaborate version of a domestic oven, rather than a structure used for a special function

enabled by a special design. Since the fireplace and the elaborate system of channels are

incompatible with a modest oven, in his view, the next most likely candidate must be a

potter’s kiln. His strict categorization obliges him to overlook the absence of any other

traces of potting activities in the area, and even leads him to false interpretations: a hole near

the oven, 0.80m in diameter and 0.60m deep, full of ashes, sherds, and carbonized matter, is

presented as a clay-settling basin!

Another Neolithic structure identified as a kiln was excavated in 1976 at the

Neolithic site of Dimini.6 The structure under consideration is a much stronger candidate for

a firing pit than the Olynthian so-called kiln. Close to the first enclosure wall at the site, it is

5 See Goldman 1931, 43, fig. 47 for a compilation of examples of clay bins and ovens fromEutresis.

6 Chourmouziades 1977.




_____________________________________________191

a circular structure made of baked clay, rough tiles, and flat limestone slabs. The floor of thekiln has been preserved and is made of compact, baked clay. The structure was originally

closed off with a small clay parapet wall (0.30-0.40m in height), preserved now only at the

eastern half. The structure was definitely exposed repeatedly to firing activity as

demonstrated by the large amount of ash and chunks of burnt clay. Chourmouziades

reconstructed it as an enclosed space made of clay, where pots were placed and fire was lit

above the pots. He interpreted the remains of the clay wall not as part of a dome, but as a

low wall which bordered the area and served as a retaining wall to confine fire within anarea.

More complete ovens have been excavated in the Neolithic sites at Dikili-Tash

(Philippoi) and at Arhontiko Giannitson in Macedonia. Scientific analyses conducted

recently by the French excavators at Dikili-Tash showed that low temperatures (200-400°C)

were developed inside these structures reaffirming their interpretation as ovens for cooking

and baking.7 These ovens are generally oval in shape. A thick clay floor rests directly over

the contemporary surface. Their dimensions are usually 0.60 x 0.70m and their

reconstructed height would not surpass 0.80-1.00m.

Given the absence of physical remains, it is the pottery that supplies us with

information about the technology employed by the Neolithic people. First, did the Neolithic

people need to fire pottery? And second, where did they fire their pottery? The first,

seemingly naive question finds its answer in the archaeological observations that a large

7 See also supra Excursus, "The Baking Oven",Plates Exc.1, 4 , for archaeological remainsand for terracotta models of ovens. Deshayes 1974; Tréuil 1992, 42. For technologicalanalysis, see Youni et al. 1994.




_____________________________________________192

amount of Neolithic pottery (especially figurines) was only sun-dried. This explains the lack

of kilns in the archaeological record and perhaps the delay in the appearance of a specialized

firing installation.8 This method of sun-drying continued even later into the Early Helladic

period, when many pots near or inside the Early Helladic II graves at the settlement of Agios

Kosmas at Attica “were never fired but left in a leather-dry condition”.9

According to the available evidence, there are no compelling reasons to assume that

Neolithic people used a specialized ceramic kiln to fire their pottery. Undoubtedly they had

the basic knowledge needed to construct a baked clay structure, as the large fired clay

structures attest, but the production rate of the Neolithic people was so low that it did not

require a specialized structure. It has been argued that the Neolithic potters were mainly

women and they probably could have used their household equipment to fire their pots,

which did not surpass ten or twelve in number annually.10 Technological analysis of

Neolithic pottery does not indicate high temperatures, although it has been demonstrated that

the Neolithic potters had developed good control of the firing atmospheres. For example, the

Middle Neolithic (5500-5000 B.C.) “Urfirnis” ware includes calcium carbonates, which

8 Vitelli 1999.

9 Mylonas 1929, 150. But pottery which is underfired also displays similar characteristics, sothe recovered pottery from Agios Kosmas might have been underfired rather than unfired.

10 For discussions on Neolithic pottery, rate of production, and the status of the potters, seeVitelli 1995. The same scholar (1997) proposed that perhaps the Neolithic people had aportable bell-shaped kiln which could fire a small number of pots, which must have beenplaced one inside the other as the "ghosts" on the decoration show.




_____________________________________________194

kiln firing to men, no data about women building a kiln has survived from either past or

traditional potting societies.13

All these examples are one-chamber structures, where the fuel and the items to be

fired were placed in the same chamber. Domestic ovens, however, were not always built

directly over the floor. There were two-floor structures such as a Late Bronze Age two-story

oven from Dipli Trapeza Sindou (Plate Exc.4 ) where there is even evidence that a central

small column supported the second floor. In other cases, the small oven is built on a

podium, which rests on the floor of the yard and has an opening for storing wood. The

Neolithic house that has been reconstructed at Volos also features a similar oven (Plate

Exc.2 ).

This picture of kiln technology from Neolithic Greece is poor when compared with

the ceramic kilns in mid- and southeastern Europe. Petrasch’s survey of Neolithic excavated

ovens and terracotta models of ovens from these areas distinguishes primarily between one-

chamber and multi-chambered ovens.14 Some of the multi-chambered ovens even had an

interior perforated floor.

The preserved range of types of ovens shows that the addition of advanced features

to simple, basic structures was a long process. Consequently the development of what later

became the standard ceramic kiln (a two-chambered circular structure with a supporting

column in the lower chamber and a perforated floor to allow heat to pass to the upper

13 Wright 1991 generally on women potters; Nordquist 1995, 1997 for Middle Helladicpotting personnel.

14 Petrasch 1986.




_____________________________________________195

chamber) was probably a slow process. Most likely the ceramic kiln was a larger, moretechnologically advanced version of the small household structure, the oven.

b. Early Bronze Age Kilns

The pithos and the ceramic kiln : The Early Bronze Age (EBA) should be considered an

incubation period for the development of ceramic firing technology. Moving away from the

self-sustaining, small communities of the Neolithic period, when household needs for

ceramics consisted mainly of small pots that could be fired in an oven (below 750oC), we are

faced with the larger communities of the EBA, which accumulated agricultural surplus and

needed larger storage vessels.15 The skill required for the production of such large vessels

must have resulted from a lengthier and more intense occupation with ceramic manufacture.

By the Final Neolithic, larger pots of ca. 0.60m in height found at Megalo Nisi Galanis,

demonstrate that the size was not an issue for concern.16 Analyses of the clay paste of large

vessels such as pithoi have shown that only calcareous clays had consistently been used for

their production.17 A storage vessel, due to its large size and its requirements for high

15 Clay storage vessels certainly existed in Neolithic times and were used both in funeraryand domestic contexts. None of these vessels, even the pithoi, surpassed 0.70m in height andtherefore they could conceivably have been fired in a rudimentary kiln. For an example of alarge Neolithic pithos, see Papathanassopoulos 1996, 274, fig. 140: pithos from Sphakovouniin Arcadia (Tripoli Archaeological Museum, inv. no. 5347. H. 0.625m). Even the tall

Neolithic amphoras are slightly over 0.50m.16 Kalogirou 1997.

17 Non-calcareous clays can be fired in a neutral atmosphere at temperatures below 750ºC.




_____________________________________________196

temperatures during firing, could only have been fired in a sizable kiln, and not in thesmaller Neolithic ovens. Because the appearance and the use of the pithos encapsulate the

social and economic processes which led to the accumulation of surplus, one might say that

the advancement of the pottery technology (including the kiln) owes much to the pithos and

to the general need for larger containers.18 On the other hand, the introduction of the

potter’s wheel is not thesine qua non prerequisitive for the development of a kiln; large

vessels such as pithoi were made, after all, in the coil-technique.19

The Early Bronze Age is as cryptic about its kiln equipment as is the precedingNeolithic period.20 The Neolithic silence, however, probably reflects a real absence of kilns,

while the absence of kilns from the Early Bronze Age should be considered coincidental.

One region in mainland Greece contributes information for EBA pottery technology:

northern Greece, (Plate IV.2 ), where one structure so far can be qualified as a ceramic kiln.

A large pit (diam. 1.60-1.70m) with clay-coated walls dug into the ground, from Polychrono

resembles a standard ceramic kiln with a well-defined lower chamber (94). Because there

are no traces of a perforated floor, it is not yet clear whether the fuel was separated from the

pots, or whether these structures consisted of only one chamber. Its preserved height,

however, speaks in favor of a horizontal separation into two chambers. The stoking channel,

which is probably the most significant step in the development of kiln design aside from the

perforated floor, starts to make its modest appearance.

18 Wiencke 1970; Tournavitou 1992; Whitbread 1995.19 For the history of the development of the potter’s wheel, see Rieth 1960.

20 Wiencke 1989; Rutter 1993.




_____________________________________________197

The structure from Agios Mamas, which is often cited as an example of an earlykiln, is still in the tradition of the Neolithic ovens (Plate IV.2 ).21 The reconstruction shows

a permanent one-chamber structure, ca. 0.90m high. Had the five vessels not been foundin

situ inside this oven, it still would have been debatable whether that structure was a kiln or

an oven.

Despite the handmade nature of EBA pottery, chemical and petrographic analysis of

twenty-eight Early Helladic sherds from Sindos, Agios Mamas showed that they were fired

consistently at temperatures between 850oC and 950oC.22 The firing technology of the EBAalso could have been restricted to one-chambered ovens/kilns or to a rudimentary kiln, but

regional surveys in the Argolid show that the EH houses were roofed with tiles. The

question arises: "Where were those tiles fired?” Temporary firing equipment might have

been adequate for the occasional firing of household pottery, but the large quantities of

rooftiles would have required a more permanent establishment.23 Unfortunately, the Argolid

is still devoid of excavated examples of kiln structures in the EBA. The magnetometer

investigations in Perachora, where kiln wasters were found, failed to detect any kilns beneath

the surface.

Recent petrographic and stylistic studies of Early Minoan (EM) pottery have

ascertained the existence of specialization in ceramic production as early as this period.

Careful mixing of different clays according to the shape and function of the vessel,

21 Heurtley and Radford 1927-28; Heurtley 1939, 5-7, figs.31, 33.

22 Kesisoglou et al. 1985. The highest temperatures recorded from the fired clay ovens atArhontiko Giannitson are 650°C (see supra Excursus, "The Baking Oven").

23 Wiencke (1989, 506) also emphasizes the skill and time required for "massive tile-firing."




_____________________________________________198

morphological and stylistic standardization, and consistent firing techniques depending onthe type of vessel are solid indicators that ceramic production in EM times had moved

beyond simple household production in which pottery was fired only for the restricted needs

of one household.24 Such a level of specialization would have resulted in the construction of

permanent ceramic kilns, where temperatures and atmospheres could be controlled.

Although direct evidence is not available, the quality of the indirect evidence is such that one

should envision kilns operating in EM Crete.

The investment of labor and time to supply “potter’s disks” to the EM workshop atFournou Korifi implies that this workshop had a sizable and steady output, which would

necessitate the existence of an equally sizable kiln.25 Given the interdependence of all

sectors of pottery processing, specialization in one sector results from and generates

specialization in the other sectors. EM Crete has been reconstructed by modern scholars as

having few centers of production with large enough output to satisfy the local needs and to

be traded to other areas. This quantity of pottery and tiles, implied both by the presence of

the wheel (which accelerated the production rate) and by its occurrence away from its

production centers, would have required well-established workshops with all the necessary

equipment, such as settling basins and/or kilns.

24 For detailed discussion of degrees of specialization in pottery workshops, see infra, Ch.VI.

25 Warren 1972; Wilson et al. 1994.




_____________________________________________199

c. Middle Bronze Age Kilns

By the Middle Bronze Age (MBA), the ceramic kiln appears in its standard form:

distinct combustion and firing chambers with a separating perforated floor.26 The well-

formed combustion chamber with a central wall and the stoking channel, as attested in the

examples at Lerna (96-99 ), incorporates all the major elements that characterize Greek kilns

in the following millennia. This advancement and standardization of pottery technology

works in tandem with the observations from scholars of prehistoric pottery that by the

Middle Helladic (MH) period, pottery had become a craft practiced by specialists. Zerner,

using a combination of archaeological, technological, and archaeometrical approaches, has

established the existence of eight distinct ceramic production areas in Greece, which were

producing as many as forty-four distinctive wares during the MH and early Late Helladic

period.27

The number of kilns had increased considerably by the MBA period and they were

distributed more widely throughout Greece (Plates IV.3-4 ). Thirteen securely identified

kilns are known from seven MH sites [Attica (95), Eretria(?) (103 ), Kirrha (104-106 ), Lerna

(96-99 ), Mycenae (100 ), Sparta (101-102 ), Zarkos, Trikala (107 )]. Even in such an early

period we see an emerging dichotomy between sites with only one kiln and more established

production centers, such as Lerna and Kirrha with four and three kilns respectively.

All the kilns of this period are circular or oval of an average size 1.00-1.50m. Their

size is modest in the individual sites, but at Kirrha (106 ) we find the largest kiln of this

26 For the Middle Minoan period, see infra.

27 Zerner 1993.




_____________________________________________200

period, 2.30m in diameter. One of the best-preserved kilns, at Eretria (103 ), is also dated tothis period.28 The perfect state of preservation of the combustion chamber, with the stoking

entrance, the entire perforated floor, as well as its interior columnar support, offer a rare

glimpse showing how an ancient kiln would have appeared.

Three different types of supporting systems are attested in this period:

a. Type Ia : central columnar support [Eretria (103 )],

b. TypeIb: central wall [Lerna (96-99 )]

c. TypeIe : multiple parallel walls [Kirrha (106 )]

In regard to workshop arrangement, the only evidence for an established workshop

comes from Kirrha and Lerna. At Kirrha three kilns have been excavated near each other.

Next to the very large kiln of 2.30m in diameter (see above) there were two kilns of more

modest dimensions (1.30m and 1.00m in diameter respectively).29 At Lerna at least four

kilns of similar size and construction testify to a flourishing ceramic production. The MH

material from Lerna is not published; therefore it is not possible to say what type of pottery

was produced there nor to determine the range of distribution of this pottery in immediate

and most distant areas.30

28 The Middle Helladic date of the Eretria kiln is still preliminary. Although the kiln wasfound below the Classical levels at the Agora, it might have been dug into those levels.Given its very common shape and size, it is impossible to date the kiln on typologicalcriteria.

29 A. Skorda, Ephor of the Delphi Ephorate (pers. comm.), whose on-going dissertationfocuses on the prehistoric kilns from this area.

30 The excavator's report (kindly supplied to me by Dr. C. Zerner) mentions an array ofmaterial from different periods, making the dating a difficult enterprise.




_____________________________________________201

d. Late Bronze Age Kilns

i. Minoan kilns (MM-LM periods)

Crete presents a large number of kilns, but the great majority date to the last phase of

the Minoan civilization, Late Minoan I-III (Plate IV.5 ).31 A few kilns are tentatively dated

to MMIII-LMI. Most of these kilns [Vathypetro (124 ), Knossos (139-141 ), Phaistos (122 )]

have been dated on the basis of pottery found in connection with the kiln. In most cases

these pots ideally provide only aterminus post quem, but they do not inform us precisely of

the period when the kiln was used. Only the kiln at Kommos (145 ) and the material from its

interior have been studied in an exemplary manner, supplying information on the range of

vessels fired in the kiln, the firing atmospheres developed inside it, and the placement of

various shapes inside the kiln (Plate IV.6 ).32 A long article on the kiln and its ceramic

material at Agia Triadha (143 ) is less informative because very little pottery was found

inside the kiln.33 Its importance lies in the authors' dismissal of the idea that the palm-

shaped(or channel) kilns were used as metallurgical furnaces.

This chronological concentration must be viewed as a coincidence of the foci of

archaeological investigation, rather than as a reliable reflection of ceramic production and

technology in the earlier phases of the Minoan civilization.

31 Myers et al. 1992. For the most updated list of Minoan ceramic kilns, see Evely 2000.

Although he supplies thirty-one examples, only eighteen of them are certainly kilns.32 Shaw et al. 2001.

33 Levi and Laviosa 1978/80.




_____________________________________________202

With the exception of the complex of three kilns at Knossos (141-143 ) and thepotters’ quarter at Kato Gouves (127-137 ), all other kiln sites listed in the catalogue are

represented by only one kiln. There are seven examples of rectangular kilns and twenty-one

of circular kilns. Only at Gouves do we see both types coexisting.34 No geographical region

shows any preference for either of these two types. The kilns and the workshops to which

they belonged appear in various settings: at palace sites (Phaistos, Knossos, Zakros), at large

settlements [Mochlos (148-149 ], at isolated farms [Zou (125 )] or unconnected with any other

habitation sites [Vathypetro (124 )]. It is worth noticing that the kilns at Mochlos andGouves lie close to the modern shore (within 100m) and probably were even closer to the

shore in antiquity.

Only at Gouves are the kilns part of an archaeologically detectable workshop. No

other equipment for pottery manufacture has been excavated at any of the other kiln sites. In

Evely’s comprehensive article on potters' disks on Crete, only three out of the twenty-six

sites where pottery disks were found also preserved a kiln (at Zakros, Phaistos, and

Knossos), but kilns and disks were not found close to each other.35

Typology of Minoan kilns

Eighteen kilns from the MMII-LMIIIC have been excavated on Crete, representing

four types of circular kilns and one type of rectangular kiln regarding their interior

arrangement:

34 A third kiln at Knossos, of circular shape, is thought to have been used as a lime kiln.

35 Evely 1988.




_____________________________________________204

kiln has been unearthed is in Miletus, where it was associated with the Minoan level ofoccupation of the site.37

The channel kilns come only in larger sizes, ranging from 3.00 x 2.00 to 5.00 x

5.00m (the kiln at Agia Triadha, which far surpasses its counterparts in size) (Plate IV.7 ).

The complete structure at Vathypetro, if it is a kiln, would have been comparable in size to

the kiln at Agia Triadha, or even larger.38

The firing chamber consists of a number of channels, which are formed by tall

separating walls parallel to the long sides of the kilns. The channels probably facilitated asteady temperature for the horizontal draft inside the kiln, as P. Warren speculated for the

Knossos examples (139-140 ) (Plate IV.12 ). In the comparable channel kiln in Miletus,

however, the channels are perpendicular to the long axis of the kiln.

The number of channels varies according to the overall dimensions of the kilns; thus

the smaller kilns at Knossos and at Gouves have two or three channels, whereas the larger

ones at Zakros, Kommos, and Agia Triadha have as many as four. The walls are placed at

regular distances from each other. In front of the channels there is an ovoid space, where the

fuel was probably burned. No fragments of a perforated floor, if there had been any, have

been recovered from any of the sites with rectangular kilns. Therefore, it has been suggested

either that the vases were fired inside the channels or that slabs were placed on top of the

37 For a prelimininary study of distribution of Bronze Age kilns and for the Miletus kiln, seeNiemeier 1997. The kiln measures 4.00 x 2.50m and dates to the MMIII/LMIA-LMIB periodThe most comprehensive list of ceramic workshops on Prehistoric Crete is in Evely 2000,298-312.

38 The fragmentary condition of the kiln combined with the absence of any other evidence ofpottery production make the interpretation of the structure as ceramic kiln highly dubious.




_____________________________________________205

separating walls which bridged the gap and provided a surface for the stacking of the pots.The most complete example of this category is at Kommos, where the kiln is preserved

almost in its entirety. Elsewhere parts of the channels were destroyed by later building

activities at the sites.

The peculiar shape of the kilns attracted the attention of the scholars. The presence

of many channels is their common characteristic, but the surrounding frame may be elliptical

(Kommos) or rectangular (Agia Triadha). The intermediate phase of such construction can

perhaps be seen in the kilns at Phaistos and at Stylos near Chania. An elliptical shape couldbe maintained and accommodate as many as three walls (at Kommos, Knossos, and Zakros).

The elliptical kilns resemble circular ones but can offer larger capacity. When the number of

channels increases, it leads naturally to the adoption of a rectangular frame (Agia Triadha,

Miletus). In other cases the rectangular shape is dictated by the preexisting walls, which

surrounded the kiln as in the examples at Gouves.

Occasionally, the channel kilns have been reconstructed as downdraft (also known as

horizontal or cross-draft), which would make them the only downdraft kilns in the Greek

world.39 This reconstruction is highly problematic due to the incomplete nature of the

evidence. Downdraft kilns tend to develop very high temperatures, over 1300°C, but the

Greek calcareous clays vitrify if fired at temperatures over 1000°C. Therefore it is not

immediately apparent why the Greek potters would invest in another technology, which

would have been detrimental to their products. The excavators of the kilns at Agia Triadha

39 Cf. the reconstruction of the kiln at Miletus in Niemeier 1997 and Shaw et al. 2001 for thekiln at Kommos (145 ).




_____________________________________________206

(143 ) and Kommos (145 ) have reconstructed their kilns as horizontal, but still of an updraftversion.

The exact function of channel kilns has long been hotly debated in the

archaeological community.40 N. Platon, upon excavating a similar example at Zakros (123 ),

challenged their initial identification as pottery kilns and argued that they were metallurgical

furnaces (Plate IV.11 ).41 Subsequent discoveries of the Agia Triadha kiln and the kiln at

Kommos reestablished their function as ceramic kilns. No metal-processing residues have

been excavated in association with any of these kilns, and their size would not have allowedthe achievement of very high temperatures throughout the structure (ca. 1200°C), which are

required for metal processing.42 Although the walls of the kiln at Agia Triadha are heavily

vitrified, it is impossible to imagine how such high temperatures could be maintained inside

the entire firing chamber of a kiln measuring 5.00 x 5.00m. It is useful to mention again that

even the shaft furnaces at Laurion in Classical times, when silver production was at its

highest point, did not exceed one meter in diameter.43

The excavation of three small rectangular kilns at the production center at Gouves

sheds new light on this discussion (Plates IV.9-10 ). Their presence in a secure potting

establishment proves that this was an acceptable typological alternative to the circular kiln

40 A large-scale program of taking samples from all the kilns excavated by the ItalianArchaeological School is in progress (1999-2000 University of Catania, pers. comm.). Theresults of this study will clarify many functional issues of these kilns.

41 Platon N. 1979, 1980.42 See supra Excursus, "The Metallurgical Furnace".

43 Conophagos (1974) restores shaft furnaces with a diameter of 1.00m and as high as 3.00m.




_____________________________________________207

for the Cretan potters. What remains to be explained is not so much their unusual shape, butrather their imposing size. The connection mentioned above, between large kilns and major

centers (palatial or nonpalatial), should be kept in mind.

A few comments on the kiln at Agia Triadha are required since its reconstruction by

V. Varoufakis presents many problems. His flawed argument that “the necessary air

combustion would have been supplied most probably by means of one or more bellows

through holes of the front wall” has no parallel in traditional kiln technology.44 The draft in

all pottery kilns is created with the aid of the chimney(s), which are placed either on thedome of updraft kilns or at the backside of downdraft kilns. Any holes in that wall would

have caused the heat to take a very short circuit and would have prevented it from reaching

the entire length of the firing chamber.

This peculiar form of these rectangular kilns was designed to increase the kiln’s size

and capacity. Since the larger kilns are situated near major palatial centers, one can

hypothesize that the construction and operation of these spacious kilns could only be

afforded in areas which could produce or were required to produce considerable quantities of

ceramics. Therefore, their unusual shape is intriguing not only in terms of function, but also,

and more importantly, in terms of capacity and scale of ceramic production in the relevant

areas.

No one has attempted yet to explain the presence or origins of these kilns. The

isolated appearance of channel kilns both chronologically (only in the LM period) and

geographically (on Crete and at settlements with strong Minoan influences, such as Miletus)

renders their nature even more problematic. If they were used as metallurgical furnaces, it

44 Appendix in Levi and Laviosa 1978/80.




_____________________________________________208

does not seem to have been an imported phenomenon because Cyprus, the center formetallurgy in antiquity, has no examples of such kilns. It might have been an indigenous,

experimental enterprise undertaken by a potter or a group of potters who traveled to Crete

and built their kiln on the sites. It is not clear whether this very short-lived phase can be

attributed to the defective function of these kilns, or whether it coincided with the lifetime of

their inventor(s). The shape of these kilns probably did not offer more advantages than the

traditional circular kiln, and therefore did not justify the extra labor, time, and fuel spent on

its construction and use. This expensive type of kiln probably could be maintained only bythe connection with a palatial administration, and the fall of the Minoan palaces brought on

the end of the large rectangular kilns.

It remains to be stressed that perhaps the structure at Zakros which initiated this

controversy might well not have been a pottery kiln. The channels are arranged quite

distinctly with large dividing walls between them and with an obvious attempt on the part of

the builder to have straight walls within each channel. The clay lining of the walls seems to

protrude above the dividing walls and therefore it is difficult to reconstruct how a perforated

floor could have existed on top of these channels. Finally their height is much smaller than

all the other channel kilns. A metallurgical function cannot be excluded, but this

interpretation cannot unquestionably be applied to all other channel kilns.

A possible use of the larger kilns which I propose here is the firing of large vessels,

such as large pithoi and burial larnakes (Plate IV.8 ).45 Tsipopoulou and Vagnetti (1997)

have demonstrated that the same decorative motifs were used both on pithoi and larnakes,

45 For larnakes, see Mavriyannaki 1972; Morris 1995. The kilns could also have been usedoccasionally for asaminthoi, bathtubs.




_____________________________________________209

suggesting that the same workshop might have produced both types of objects. The palatialcenters with their constant demand for pithoi, as their storerooms testify, would have

encouraged the production of such heavy items close to their destination, thus minimizing

any risks of breakage during transportation. The large kiln at Agia Triadha could have fired

twenty to forty pithoi.46 One should not expect to find wasters of such large vessels in the

vicinity of the kilns, however, because pithoi have a low waster rate and any wasters can be

used as burial pithoi. Larnakes also require a sizable chamber. The cost of production, due

to the amount of clay used and the decoration, would have made the larnakes available onlyto the upper strata of Minoan society. Workshops for larnakes, therefore, conceivably could

be controlled by the palace administrators who were their primary customers.47 An

objection to such use of the rectangular channel kilns is the material recovered and studied

from the Kommos kiln on Crete (145 ) where all the pottery belongs to cups or small storage

vessels. But as a rule a high failure rate is less likely with such large objects, and because of

their large size the potters would have quickly removed any wasters from the immediate area

around the kiln.

46 For this reconstruction I used an average Minoan pithos measuring 1.15m in height and0.80m. in diameter. See, for example, Betancourt 1985, pl. 16E (a MMIII-LMI pithos fromKnossos, H. 1.15m).

47 For evidence of an unpublished workshop of larnakes near the LM I cemetery at Armenoi,see Tzedakis cited in Evely 2000, 298.




_____________________________________________210

Minoan circular kilns

Seven sites on Crete have provided eleven circular kilns: at Gouves (five kilns),

Achladia (146 ), Mochlos (148-149 ), Phaistos (142 ), Palaikastro (150 ), Stylos near Chania

(126 ), and Kavousi (151 ). They date from LM IA to LMIB (Mochlos) to LMIII (Achladia,

Gouves Kiln A, Kavousi). Except for the examples at Gouves, all the circular kilns appear

individually. Except for the kiln at the palatial site at Phaistos, the established workshop at

Gouves, and the ones associated with a settlement (Mochlos, Kavousi), the remaining ones

are found in isolation.

In terms of size, these kilns can be grouped into two categories: smaller (diam. ca.

1.00-1.30m) and larger (diam. over 2m) (Plate IV.13 ). The first group numbers seven

examples [Gouves (5), Achladia, Mochlos]; the second group consists of four examples

(Phaistos, Kavousi, Palaikastro, and Stylos). All the LMIII examples from Gouves, for

example, are of the smaller type. The Achladia and Mochlos kilns are small, in the width

both of the combustion chamber and of the stoking channel. Larger examples are

encountered in a period extending from MMIIB (Phaistos) to LM III (Kavousi).Because of the small size of the sample of Minoan kilns, it is not possible to detect

any chronological implications for any of these categories, nor any evolution from circular to

rectangular, since the LM III site at Gouves preserves three types: two circular kilns (one

with and one without central support) and one rectangular.

The arrangement of the combustion chamber has implications regarding the presence

of a perforated floor in these early kilns. It has been suggested, for example, that the bench

in the kilns of the second category had served as a surface on which to place the pots.48

48 For a more detailed discussion of this issue, see supra Ch. II, "The 'bench' in thecombustion chamber".




_____________________________________________212

Minoan pottery workshopsThe subject of Minoan ceramic workshops has been previously addressed, but in an

indirect manner. P. Michaelidis, in his overview of Minoan pottery workshops, discusses

eight sites which contain physical evidence of potters’ workshops.51 In his discussion, which

does not have a clearly articulated methodological framework, it is difficult to understand the

order of importance of his criteria for identifying a workshop.52 The presence of clay disks

and architectural elements (such as benches) seems to have been his main criterion. Only at

Zou does he mention the kiln; it is difficult to understand why he offers no discussion ofother kiln sites, or of kilns at the sites that he includes in his list, such as Phaistos and

Knossos.

Although Michaelidis examines all other types of evidence, such as potter’s marks,

clay disks, representations of potters on seals (despite their highly doubtful interpretation),

and even their clothing, the corpus of excavated Minoan kilns is curiously overlooked. In

the article, the kilns are mentioned occasionally as a criterion for identification, but the

Minoan kilns as a source of information per se are not explored. Michaelidis draws heavily

upon the principles of ceramic ecology (proximity to clay, water and fuel sources) in regard

to the Minoan potters' workshops. Below is a list of the workshops examined by Michaelidis

and his criteria for their identification as workshops.

51 Michaelidis 1993; See also on a more theoretical level, MacGillivray 1987.

52 See supra Ch. VI for an extensive discussion of archaeological criteria for identifying aceramic workshop. See infra Ch. VI n. 23 for criteria used for palatial workshops by L.Platon (1993).




_____________________________________________213

SITE DATE CRITERIA KILN DISCUSSED

Myrtos EM IIA disks no no

Mallia MM II disks, clay jars no no

Phaistos MM III architecture,(bench)

yes no

Zou MMIIIB-LM IA basin yes yes

Vathypetro LM IA benches, smoothingpebbles?, disks

yes yes

Zominthos LMIA disks, potter’swheel, benches,

clay basin

no no

Gournia LM I disks no no

Knossos LM IIIB basin?,architecture-

yes no

Table IV.2: Criteria for identification of Minoan pottery workshops.

(Data: Michaelidis 1993).

Only two sites have provided kilns from the Prehistoric islands: Naxos (118-119 ) and

Cos (120-121 ), both circular and of small sizes. This scarcity must be considered a coincidence,

because the stylistic analysis of Cycladic pottery has shown that the Cyclades had developed

their own decorative repertoire, distinguishable from that on Crete. This implies that they had

established ceramic workshops with their own kilns on the islands.53

53 Papagiannopoulou 1991.




_____________________________________________215

to the interior walls of the kiln. The kiln from Aigeira (108 ) with the central, circular,unattached support is the only example of any type other than the standard.

Most Mycenaean kilns were found in isolation from any other artisanal installation.

At Berbati and at Dimini, potters’ dumps with by-products of the ceramic production have

been found. No clay-setting basins or clay disks like the Minoan potter's disks, or areas

labeled “workshops,” have been identified.

The “palatial” focus of archaeological research in the first half of the twentieth

century, when most of these kilns were excavated, resulted in minimal and mostly superficialrecording of these structures. It is not surprising, then, that little can be said about the

pottery produced in these kilns.55 Even the detailed publication of the impressive kiln at

Dimini included few pottery fragments recovered from the kiln. The kiln fired both smaller

and larger (from kylikes to pithoi), plain and decorated pots but most of the sherds belonged

to plain wares.

The evidence from the Mycenaean kilns offers us one more testing ground for

reassessing our notions about Mycenaen pottery production, which were previously based on

the study of potters described on Linear B tablets and on the pottery itself.56 The Argive

area, which had been considered the main pottery export center on the basis of petrographic

analyses, has provided few examples of kilns [Asine (109-110 ), Berbati (113 ), Tiryns (112-

113 )]. The large size of the Berbati kiln (second only to the Dimini kiln (116 ) probably

55 Schallin (1997) based on information from notebooks, coupled with materialdocumentation of the two "kilns" at Asine, epitomizes the problem most clearly.

56 For references to potters and other craftsmen in Linear B tablets, see Bech-Gregersen1997.




_____________________________________________216

reflects the degree of intensification of pottery production, as modeled by pottery analysts.The Mycenaean craftsmen have been studied only in their relationship to the palatial

organization and in the degree to which their workshops functioned under the control of the

palaces or independently.57 Other investigations have examined workshops within the realm

of religious administration.58 By concentrating on such social associations, investigators

have neglected the workshops themselves. For example, the key location of the Berbati

pottery workshop near a major Mycenaean road is hardly discussed in later literature about

Mycenaean pottery workshops. One should keep in mind, of course, that most of the palatialsites which have been extensively excavated provide us with examples of kilns.

With a larger sample of Mycenaean kilns and a wider regional distribution of kilns,

one could test whether the standardization observed in the typology of LHIIIA pottery is

followed by an increased standardization of kiln construction. The kilns and/or other traces

of pottery workshops provide the physical indicators of the fluctuating notion of

“regionalism” which has been advocated for the LHIII pottery.59 The location of physical

remains of pottery workshops either would become the permanent foundation for existing

theories on pottery production and distribution, or, alternatively, would be used as boulders

to smash these theories.

57 Galaty 1999.58 Lupack 1999.

59 Sherratt 1980, 1982.




_____________________________________________217

While studying the Greek prehistoric kilns, one is faced with a large amount ofnegative evidence and deeply-rooted misinterpretations. Bound by dearth of evidence, we

are unable at the present to draw a clear picture about the early stages of the ceramic kilns in

Greece. The extant remains provide hints, but no concluding evidence. The minimal

contribution of kilns from the Greek islands (besides Crete) empedes us from tracing the

typology of kilns in this area which lies at the intersection of two powerful potting traditions

of the Minoans and the Mycenaeans.

Despite the comparatively small number of kilns recovered from Prehistoric Greece,two types pose interesting and still largely unresolved questions: first, the channel Minoan

kilns (TypeIIe ). The eagerly-awaited scientific analysis of the kilns themselves would

elucidate many aspects, but I hope to have demonstrated the difficulty to develop high

temperatures for working metal inside such large structures. Second, a less controversial

type, the circular kiln with parallel walls of unequal length (TypeIe ) deserves special

consideration for its technological advantages (if any). The similarity between the

rectangular channel kilns on Crete and the circular kilns with multiple walls as support (e.g.

Kirrha, Dimini) on the mainland might constitute one instance in which a Minoan idea was

adopted and modified by the Mycenaeans. In spite of the broad range of interactions

between the late phases of the Minoan and Mycenaean civilizations, the kilns of each culture

display some distinctive characteristics: for example, Mycenaean kilns prefer the central

wall arrangement (TypeIb ). The size of the Prehistoric kilns is also noteworthy. Out of

thirty examples of measured kilns (less than half of the available prehistoric kilns) most of

the circular kilns fall within the range of 0.90-2.20 with an equal distribution.60 The channel

60 Analytically for the thirty prehistoric kilns whose measurements are recorded: 0.50-0.99m(2 kilns), 1.00-1.49m (6 kilns), 1.50-1.99m (7 kilns), 2.00-2.99m (11 kilns), 3.00-3.99m (2




_____________________________________________218

kilns belong to the larger group of measurements. There are no small kilns (below 0.90m)which become more common in the later periods (see infra Ch. V).

kilns), 4.00m+ (2 kilns).



GEOMETRIC THROUGH BYZANTINE K ILNS 219_____________________________________________

CHAPTER V

THE HISTORICAL K ILNSGEOMETRIC THROUGH BYZANTINE PERIODS

This chapter, like the preceding one, is based on the catalogue and Appendix I. A

comprehensive approach is adopted so that the future researcher can obtain a panoramic

view of the evidence for kilns in each period. For each period I will provide the total number

of kilns, their geographical distribution, the range of sizes, and construction details, as well

as discussing the production of these ceramic workshops.1 The sites within each period are

1 In this section, the sites with kilns are presented alphabetically within each period, foreasier reference. Since the catalogue entries are arranged geographically, the readers canchoose whichever arrangement best fits their scholarly interests.




5. Dodona (Plate III.7 ) (10)6. Eretria (04)

7. Kyme A-B (Plate V.3 ) (05-06 )

8. Phaistos-1 12)

9. Samos (Plate VI.10 ) (14)

10. Torone (11 )

We also have fragments from the structures of kilns at Lefkandi (07-09 ) (Plate

II.7b ). All five major geographical areas of Greece are represented, but slightly larger

concentrations are detected in Attica, the Aegean, and central Greece (Euboea in particular)

predominate, with eight kilns. Individual examples occur in northern Greece (Torone),

Peloponnese (Argos), and western Greece (Dodona).

The average size of a Geometric kiln is 1.00-1.50m, when calculated from the

dimensions of twelve kilns.2 At either side of this normal size are the small kiln at Torone,

0.80m, and the kiln under the Classical Tholos in the Athenian Agora, with a diameter of

1.33m. A larger kiln in Argos, 2.20m, reminds us that ceramic production already had

assumed considerable importance in the Geometric period.3 The small size of the majority

of kilns barely qualifies them as pottery-firing structures. In many cases, as at Dodona and

Torone, their identification as kilns would have been controversial had not enough pottery

been preservedin situ to rule out their identification as ovens.

2 Analytically: for dimensions 0.50-0.99m (4 kilns), 1.00-1.49m (4 kilns), 1.50-1.99m (1kiln), 2.00-2.99m (3 kilns).

3 The kiln at Samos measures 2.00x2.00m, but its date is still problematic; equally uncertainis the Geometric or Archaic kiln at Eretria measuring 2.10x1.80m.




Almost all the securely dated Geometric kilns are circular or ovoid. Only in threesites (at Samos, Kyme, and Lefkandi) do we have evidence for a rectangular structure.

Unfortunately the early date of the kiln at Samos is still under consideration. In regard to

construction, most kilns in this period are partly subterranean structures with the combustion

chamber dug into the ground. In only one case [Amorgos (227 )] is the kiln dug into the

bedrock. In thefive cases where the supports of the perforated floor have survived, they are

of the simple type with a central column or wall (e.g. the Athenian Agora, Amorgos , Phaistos, Samos).

In the remaining kilns no central column has survived (TypeIf ) (e.g. Torone, Dodona, Amorgos,

Eretria); or, as in Athens-Makriyianni and Kyme, the excavation of the kilns did not proceedfar enough to indicate the type of the supporting system. For the former group, where no

support has been found, it is very likely that no support existed at the first place, given the

small dimensions of the kiln (0.80m for Torone and ca. 1.00m for Amorgos and Dodona).

TYPES n Percentage

s

Grouped Types

I ? 4 29%

I a 2 14%

I b 1 7%

I f 1 7%

I g 1 7%

Circular

9

II ? 3 21&

II a 1 7%

II b 1 7%

Rectangular

5

Geometric Total 14 ca. 100% 14




As for the intermediate perforated floor, one intact floor has been preservedin situ at Samos.Likewise fragmentary floors are foundin situ at the two rectangular kilns in Kyme on

Euboea. The excavations of the Protogeometric levels at Lefkandi have provided more

fragments from both a rectangular and a circular floor (Plate II.7b ) At Dodona one not-

perforated clay plaque has been found in association with the oven/kiln; it is quite small, ca.

0.50m in diameter (Plate III.7 ). Since all kiln floors must be perforated to perform, this

plaque must be dissociated from kilns.

Although the production of the Geometric ceramic workshops is well illustrated inthe overviews of Greek painted pottery, the picture cannot be enhanced further by

archaeological remains of workshops. In most cases the kilns were found either empty of

pots or with very few sherds, whose major contribution is to assist with a general dating of

the kilns. The kiln at Torone, which apparently collapsed with most of the contents of a

single firing, informs us that kiln loads consisted mainly of vessels of comparable size.

Mostly sherds from cups have survived in the kilns at the Athenian Agora and Argos.

Estimated kiln capacity

A rough estimation of the capacity of an average Geometric kiln of 1.00m in

diameter, like the one in the Athenian Agora (01), is 300 Late Geometric cups, allowing for

very careful stacking inside the kiln. The same kiln could fire as many as sixty oenochoae,

but no more than ten large amphoras.4

4 As sample vessels, I used the two-handled cup from Agora P15030 (0.08m high, rim Ø0.11m, including handles 0.15m), the oenochoe Agora P 15122 (0.215m high, max. Ø.0.17m, and the Early Geometric amphora P 20177 (0.52m high, max. diam. 0.30m). For asample oenochoe, I used all the measurements taken from Coldstream 1968.




The monumental funerary vessels of the Dipylon 809 Painter or of the HirschfeldPainter would barely have fit individually in an average ceramic kiln of the period.5 It is

unknown whether special kilns were constructed for firing these vessels. The old

interpretation, that they adorned the graves of aristocrats, is further supported by the high

price that they must have commanded, if each one needed to be fired individually.6 Probably

the firing of such an elaborate vessel could have occurred only once a year; and therefore the

limited number of vases, between sixteen and twenty, attributed to the Dipylon Master in a

period of twenty years, might be closer to the original number of vases he actually producedthan previously thought, spanning the mature years of an experienced potter.

Only one Geometric kiln was found with what seems to have been its final load. At

Torone in Chalkidike (11 ) a small kiln measuring 0.80m in diameter contained fourteen

vessels, mainly jugs. In a reconstruction of the kiln load, the vases do not seem all to fit

inside the kiln. One may safely say, however, that this small kiln could probably fire twelve

large vessels.

As for the location of the Geometric kilns, three examples (at Argos, the Athenian

Agora, and Torone) have been excavated in cemeteries. The products of the pottery

workshops, however, were not necessarily purchased by families of the deceased as funerary

dedications. Scientific analyses conducted on the pots from the kiln at Torone and the

5 The name vase of the Dipylon Painter, Athens 804, measures 1.55m in height and has anEst.max.Ø 0.75m. The name vase of the Hirschfeld Painter, Athens 990, measures 1.23m inheight with an Est.max.Ø 0.80m.

6 Coldstream 1968, 350.




pottery offerings in the tombs of the cemetery indicated that they were completely differentin their composition.7

Of the ten Geometric local style areas as established by Coldstream --Attic,

Corinthian, Argive, Thessalian, Cycladic and Euboean, Boeotian, Laconian, West Greek,

Cretan, and East Greek-- the only ones that havenot provided an excavated example of a

workshop arefour: Corinth, Thessaly, Boeotia, and Laconia.8 The absence in Thessaly is

particularly noticeable (and almost certainly coincidental) since Thessalian kilns feature

prominently in our records from Prehistoric times. Coldstream’s regionally-based stylisticanalysis of the Geometric styles, implicitly suggests that pottery was produced in all areas of

Greece, probably operating on a low level and fulfilling local needs. A high degree of self-

sufficiency in pottery production led to artistic isolation which fostered the development of

distinct decoration styles.

b. Archaic Kilns ( cat. nos. 15-36 )

Areas Sites TOTAL

11 11 22

7 The association of kilns and pottery workshops with necropoleis may be explained on thegrounds that both were relegated to the outskirts of the cities.

8 Cf. "Workshop" has been applied to assemblages that might be the work of a single artistnot cohesive enough to justify that assumption." (Benson 1989, 10). The presence of kilns inWest Greece has not been examined in this study.




Twenty-two kilns from fifteen sites date to the Orientalizing and Archaic period

(Plates V.4-5 ). Alphabetically the sites are:

1. Athens-3: Herakleidon St. (15)

2. Aigion-1 (Plates III.9, V.4 ) (18)

3. Corinth-1: Gotsi Plot (19)4. Eretria-2: Tamvaka Plo (21-22 )

5. Knossos (Plate V.4 ) (27)

6. Lato (Plates II.5, V.4 ) (28-30 )

7. Phari, Thasos (Plates V.4, VI.11 ) (25-26 )

8. Pherai-1: Tsoumbekou Plot (23-24 )

9. Prinias (Plates II.7, III. 6, V. 4, VI.1, 9 ) (31-36 )

10. Skala Oropou-1 (16-17 )

11. Sparta-1 (20)

Only specific geographical areas are represented: Attica (Athens and Skala Oropou),

the Peloponnese (Aigion, ancient Corinth, and Sparta), central Greece (Eretria, Pherai),

northern Greece (Thasos) and the Aegean (Knossos, Lato, and Prinias on Crete).

Except for the sites in Attica and the Peloponnese and at Knossos on Crete, all other

sites preserve more than one kiln at each site; this is a new phenomenon which we did not

encounter during the preceding Geometric period. Eretria, Skala Oropou, Pherai, and Thasos

have two kilns each. Lato has three, and Prinias preserves six.




Of the twenty-two kilns only seventeen preserve complete dimensions and onlyeighteen a recognizable shape. Thirteen are circular, two are elliptical, and three are

rectangular. The absolute size of the seventeen kilns ranges from 0.65m (Knossos) to 4.50 x

3.90 (Aigion).9 Generally, the circular kilns are the smallest, with an average diameter of

1.40m: the smallest is the Knossian example and the largest a kiln at Prinias at 2.98m). This

size averages approximately one half meter larger than the Geometric kilns. The elliptical

and rectangular kilns are quite large, as a rule. Except for Aigion, all other large kilns (of

more than 2m in diameter) belong to established workshops with two or more kilns,suggesting that only full-time workshops could undertake the construction, repair, and

loading of a large kiln. The other kilns in those same workshops, however, tend to conform

to the average sizes of the period. Multiple kilns in a workshop may reflect multiple sizes of

products, since we have seen that similarly-sized pots tend to be fired together.

Another interesting structural feature is that some kilns, such as the large example on

Thasos (Ø 2.60m), are supported by a rectangular stone structure. This can be explained as

an additional support required by the large size of the kiln. Y. Garlan interpreted a

comparable structure at a kiln site at Vamvouri, Ammoudia as an insulating device to limit

loss of heat.10 In Prinias, or in later examples (Paroikia, Pherai), the kilns abut on previously

built walls on one or more sides, but they are not surrounded by a permanent stone structure,

as is the Thasos example.

9 Analytically: for dimensions 0.50-0.99m (3 kilns), 1.00-1.49m (7 kilns), 1.50-1.99m (2kilns), 2.00-2.99m (3), 3.00-3.99m (1 kiln), 4.00+m (1 kiln).

10 Garlan 1986.




An intriguing example regarding dimensions is the Archaic Thasian ceramicworkshop at Phari. That site contains two circular kilns, one measuring 1.60m in diameter

and the other 2.60m. The excavators assigned an earlier date to the smaller example merely

because of its size, clearly an unreliable way of dating a kiln. Worth mentioning, however,

is the ability of the Thasian potter to build a bigger kiln to fit his needs. Even in Geometric

times the potters already had the ability to build larger kilns; therefore one should look for

reasons other than technical knowledge to explain the modest size of the great majority of

Greek kilns such as a constant preoccupation for fuel efficiency.11 Prinias' southern kiln (36)measures 2.98m in diameter as well.

In the workshops with multiple kilns, the shapes of the kilns are uniform: no site

contains both a circular and a rectangular kiln. Variety of types of the interior supports for

the perforated floor is limited. The central supports are normally circular, except for the case

at Knossos, Monastiraki, where the supports are tongue-shaped.

Types: In this period we see the first example of a rectangular kiln at Aigion. The

kiln is quite sizable, 4.50 x 3.95m wide (on the exterior). There are almost equal numbers of

circular and pear-shaped kilns.

11 Small kilns were more economical of fuel: a potter might want to build a kiln whichwould hold his pots, but would be as small as possible.




Number: It would be interesting to know whether the multiple kilns at the Archaic sites

were used simultanesouly. In cases, such as Lato, the situation is not clear-cut: we cannot

say whether the kilns were used simultaneously or sequentially. The fact that the walls of

kilns 1 and 2 bond speaks for the presence (if not for the use as well) of kiln 1 while kiln 2

was being constructed. The material recovered from the Prinias workshop is homogeneous

enough to suggest that all six kilns operated within a brief period of time.

TYPES n Percentages Grouped Types

Unknown 1 5% 1

I ? 9 41%

I a 6 27%

I e 1 5%

I f 1 5%

Circular

17

II a 1 5%

II b 3 17%

Rectangular

4

Archaic Total 22 ca. 100% 22




c. Classical Kilns ( cat. nos. 37-93 )

Areas Sites TOTAL

20 32 57

The Classical kilns are more numerous: fifty-seven examples are preserved, and

more than half of these are located in Athens, or Attica (Plates V.6-7 ). Alphabetically, the

sites with Classical kilns are as follows:

1. Amphipoli-1 (84)

2. Ancient Corinth-1: Tile Works (Plates II.13-14 ,VI.2 ) (64-65 )

3. Ancient Elis-1 (66)

4. Ancient Olympia-1: South Stoa (Plate VI.8 ) (67-72 )

5. Ancient Olympia-2: Byzantine Church (Plates III.10, VI.8 ) (73)6. Ancient Olympia-3: Peristyle House V (Plate VI.8 ) (74)

7. Ano Kyme (76)

8. Arta-1: Karassoula Plot (83)

9. Athens-4: Apellou St. (37-39 )

10. Athens-5: Kerameikos (Chabrias Area) (43-45 )

11. Athens-6: Kerameikos (Round Bath) (46-49 )

12. Athens-7: Kerameikos (Under Museum) (Plate II.5 ) (40-42 )13. Athens-8: Kerameikos (50)

14. Athens-9: Lenormant Ave. (Plate VI.12 ) (51-53 )

15. Athens-10: 31, Monasteriou and Nafpliou Sts. (54)




16. Athens-11: Monasteriou and Phaiakon Sts. (55)17. Athens-12: Vouliagmenis Ave. (56)

18. Attica: Voula (57)

19. Berbati-1 (58-59 )

20. Chania-1 (91)

21. Demetriada (79)

22. Karditsa, Orfana—Palaiomazi (78)

23. Karystos (77)24. Knossos-2: Kephali Monastery (92-93 )

25. Kynouria (63)

26. Nemea (Plates 8-10 ) (60-62 )

27. Pella-1 (Plate II.3 ) (85)

28. Pherai-2: Dodou Plot (82)

29. Pherai-3: Kogouli Plot (80-81 )

30. Sindos (Plate VI.14 ) (86-89 )

31. Thasos-2: Keramidi (90)

32. Thermon (75)

Four of the fifty-seven kilns are not sufficiently preserved to allow us to determine their

shape, whether circular or rectangular. Of the remaining fifty-three the circular and elliptical kilns

are slightly in the majority (37 /57), but the rectangular kilns now have a strong presence

(16 /57) and will continue in the later periods to constitute a considerable proportion of the

kilns. The rectangular kilns tend to appear often in sets of two or three in the Classical

workshops.




As for size, the circular kilns cover a broader range of diameters, from 0.70m (Demetriada)

to the imposing Athenian example at Lenormant Ave. (2.30m). Three distinct size groups

now can be distinguished:

a. Small kilns, with a diameter smaller than 1.00m

Examples: Demetriada and Olympia-Greek Bathsb. Average kilns, 1.00-1.49m in diameterExamples: Olympia, Sindos, Nemea, Arta

c. Larger kilns, from 1.60-3.00Examples: Athens-Vouliagmeni, Lenormant, Kynouria, Sindos.12

The larger examples tend to appear in established workshops which have more than

one kiln, such as in Athens and in Sindos. Medium-sized kilns with a diameter from 1.40 to

1.80m. are absent. This gap, however, is filled by the group of kilns of elliptical shape,

12 Analytically the measurements for thirty-one Classical kilns are distributed as follows: forthe dimensions 0.50-0.99m (2); 1.00-1.49m (5), 1.50-1.99m (4), 2.00-.2.99m (10), 3.00-3.99m (2), 4.00m+ (8). At the same time an amphora workshop in the active port ofMarseilles in southern France operated a kiln 8.00m in exterior diameter (Hesnard et al.1999, 91-3).


Unknown 4 7% 4

I ? 20 35%

I a 12 21%

I b 4 7%

I e 1 3%

Circular

37

II ? 8 14%

II b 8 14% Rectangular

16Classical Total 57 100% 57




whose sizes fall exactly within these limits (Kerameikos kilns, Velestino, Demetriada,Sindos). The rectangular kilns, as noted above, have a more focused distribution and they

appear repetitively in the same sites: Nemea, Olympia, Corinth, or Athens. Five sites have

only one kiln, four sites have two and three sites have three rectangular kilns.

Number: In the Classical period the workshops develop a more permanent

character. Although a large number of sites (20) still have only one kiln excavated, a large

number (12) have multiple kilns at the site: four sites with two kilns, four sites with three

kilns, and two with more than three. This phenomenon shows that the workshops functionedfull-time rather than being seasonal occupations. A long-term commitment explains

investing in building these kilns, and more importantly, implies that the volume of

production was such to fill these kilns. Even if at these sites with multiple kilns, only one

kiln functioned at a time, the continuous construction of new kilns indicates that the potters

enjoyed a steady demand for their production and that these medium-size workshops were

viable. For example, at the Kerameikos in particular, the two kilns under the modern

museum (40, 42 ) are identical in shape and they replaced each other exactly, their only

difference being the different orientation.

As for production, it is difficult to paint a representative picture. The Athenian

workshops are largely unpublished or little information was retained at the time of their

excavation. A few other workshops had a brief operation time and were used for the firing

of architectural terracottas (e.g. Corinth, Nemea). One of the most disappointing situations

are the kilns at Olympia (67-72 ) excavated in the early decades of the 20th century of our era;

the material kept is minimal and its main function was to date the structures. The Sindos

workshop in northern Greece (86-89 ) which has been well-published produced a variety of

coarse-wares and a few black-glazed types of pots. A more intense study of the Athenian

workshops would corrobate the initial impression that potters specialized in either




coarsewares (and perhaps glazed wares) or decorated fine wares, but no example so farprovides evidence for production of both types of pottery. Each area probably had its own

specialized production in coarseware, especially for cookware where there is a stronger

specialization since it requires the use of clays with specific thermal qualities.13

d. Hellenistic to Byzantine Kilns

The periods from Hellenistic to Byzantine appear under a single heading since they

are treated in the current study only for the sake of a comprehensive overview, and to

establish preliminary comparisons with the preceding and following periods.

i. Hellenistic Kilns [ cat. nos. 155-241 (250) ]

Areas Sites TOTAL

29 52 87

From Hellenistic period fifty-two sites with eighty-seven kilns have been excavated

in twenty-nine areas (Plates V.11-12 ).14 The Hellenistic ceramic production sites seem to

13 For the specialization in cooking wares, see Peña 1992.

14 At eight sites the excavators have given a wide date to the nine kilns ranging fromHellenistic to Roman. I included the counts in the typology statistics, but they are excludedin this discussion. Their small number does not affect in any way the general observations.The sites are: 1. Akraifnio (246 ), 2. Argos, Hypostyle Hall (245 ), 3. Athens, Argyroupoli,




have clustered in major centers: Athens in Attica, Pherai-Velestino in central Greece, andPella in northern Greece, to mention some examples. Although the production was quite

decentralized from Athens, it can be argued that each region had only a few centers

specializing in pottery and supplying the neighboring areas. Alphabetically the sites with

kilns are:

1. Amorgos-2 (227 )

2. Amphipoli-2 (224 )3. Ancient Elis-2A-C (172-174 )

4. Argos-2: Agros Piteros (168 )5. Argos-3: Archaias Voulis St. (169 )

6. Argos-4: N. Kourou St. (170 )7. Argos-5: Paliopyrgos, N. and B. Blogiari Plot (171 )

8. Arta-2: Sklivanitis Plot (196 )9. Atalante-1: Karagiozi Rema A-B (183-184 )

10. Atalante-2: Kioulafa Plot (185 )11. Atalante-3: Kolomvrezos Plot A-B (186-187 )

12. Athens-13: Evangelismos A-C (155-157 )13. Athens-14: Kerameikos-5 (158 )

14. Athens-15: Makriyianni (159 )15. Athens-16: 37, Pallinaion St. Serefoglou Plot A-B (160-161 )

16-20. Attica: Spata 1-5 (162-166 )21. Corfu Figaretto, Mikalef Plot A-M (197-209 )

22. Dion A-B (212-213 )23. Elateia (175 )

Marathonomachon St., Vouliagmeni Ave., and Alimou Ave. (242 ), 4. Attica Voula (243 ), 5.Aulis (247 ), 6. Chalkis, Papadimitriou Plot (248 ), 7. Patras-2: 7, Nikita and Karatza Sts.(244 ), 8. Philotas-Ancient Eordaia A-B (249-250 ) (Plate II.5b0 . See infra "Roman Kilns".




24. Eleutherna (241 )

25. Eretria-5: SE sector of the city (177 )26. Karystos-2: Site no. 57 (178 )

27. Kassope, House 5 (193 )28. Knossos-5: Kephali Monastery (240 )

29. Krannon A-B (181-182 )30-32. Lemnos-1-3: Hephaisteia sanctuary (235-237)

33. Metropoli-1: Kotoula Plot (179 )34. Metropoli-2: Papadouli Plot (180 )

35. Papadates: Ftelobryso/Deka Plot A-B (194-195 )36. Paros, Skiada Plot A-F (Plate II.16 ) (228-233 )

37. Patras-1: Germanou and K. Palaiologou St. (167 )38. Pella-2: South of Area I (214 )

39. Pella-3: South of Area I (215 )40. Pella-4: Area I (216 )

41. Pella-5: Sanctuary of the Mother of Gods (217 )42. Pella-6: Tsagarli Plot A-F (Plate V.12 ) (218-223 )

43. Pherai-5: Agrokosta Plot (Avlagadia Area) (188 )44. Pherai-6: Merminga Plot (189 )

45. Pherai-7: Stamouli-Bolia Plot A-C (Plate VI.15 ) (190-192 )46. Polymylos-1A-B (210-211 )

47. Pyrgaki/Palaiomazi (176 )48. Rhodes-2: Aphantou (238 )

49. Rhodes-3: Charaki (239 )50. Tenos (234 )

51. Thasos-3: Gounophia (225 )52. Thasos-4: Vamvouri Ammoudia (226 )

Many workshops in the Hellenistic period are full-time establishments, usually with

two or three kilns functioning at each site [e.g., Pherai-Velestino (190-192 ), Pella (218-




223 )]. The workshops excavated mainly produced coarseware pottery and molded items(e.g. Eretria, Pherai-Stamouli-Bolia plot, Corfu-Figaretto).

* The numbers in the parentheses represent the total when the kilns dated asHellenistic or Roman are added.

Besides the excavated kilns, the presence of a large number of workshops had been

assumed on the basis of homogeneous deposits containing molds or misfired items. In

Athens, especially, Rotroff has identified no fewer than four workshops associated with

deposits on the Areopagus.15 The intensive production of the Hellenistic and Roman

ceramic workshops generated considerable debris; hence the more frequent presence of

"orphan" Hellenistic deposits.

Types: The circular kilns are almost three times as common as the rectangular ones(53/20 in number respectively). Average sizes for Hellenistic circular kilns fall into two

15 Rotroff 1984.


Unknown 15 (18)* 17% (19) 15 (18)I ? 14 (15) 16% (16)I a 31 36%) (32I b 4 5% (4)I f 1 (2) 1% (2)I g 2 2%

Circular52 (54)

II ? 9 (11) 10% (11)II b 9 10% (9)II c 2 (4) 2% (4)

Rectangular20 (24)

Hellenistic TOTAL 87 (96) ca. 100% 87 (96)




In the Roman period, despite our expectations that the ceramic production wouldhave exploded, the archaeological evidence from kilns suggests that the degree of production

remained about the same. One hundred and thirty-five kilns are documented for this period,

excavated in eithgty-three sites and representing forty cities/towns in Greece (Plate V.13 ):17

1. Aigeira (313 )

2. Aigio 2: 4, Messinezzi St. (314 )3. Aigion-3: 8, Polychroniadou St. (315 )

4. Ancient Corinth-3 (342 )5. Ancient Corinth-4: Kokkinovrysi (Plates Exc.6, VI.7) (343 )

6. Ancient Corinth-5: West Tile Works (Plate VI.7 ) (344 )7. Ancient Corinth-6: Theater Area (345 )

8. Ancient Olympia-4: South of Palestra (Plate III.10, VI.8 ) (347 )9. Argos-7: Agiou Dimitriou and Kapodistriou Sts. (338 )

10. Argos-8: Karmoyiannis Plot (339 )11. Athens-17: Aktaiou-Eptahalkou-Ephestion Sts (251 )

12. Athens-18: 6-8, Aktaiou-Eptahalkou Sts. (252 )13. Athens-19: Amalias St. (253 )

14. Athens-20: Asomaton Square (254 )15. Athens-21: 16-18, Athanassiou Diakou St. (255 )

16. Athens-22: 5, Demophon-Ifantidou Plot A-B (256-257 )17. Athens-23: 7-9 Kekropos St. (258 )

17 At eight sites the excavators have given a wide date to the nine kilns ranging fromHellenistic to Roman. I included the counts in the typology statistics, but the main discussionthey are excluded. Their small number does not affect in any way the general observations.The sites are: 1. Akraifnio (246 ), 2. Argos, Hypostyle Hall (245 ), 3. Athens, Argyroupoli,Marathonomachon St., Vouliagmeni Ave., and Alimou Ave. (242 ), 4. Attica Voula (243 ), 5.Aulis (247 ), 6. Chalkis, Papadimitriou Plot (248 ), 7. Patras-2: 7, Nikita and Karatza Sts.(244 ), 8. Philotas-Ancient Eordaia A-B (249-250 ) (Plate II.5 ). See also supra the discussionof the Hellenistic kilns.




18. Athens-24: Kerameikos-6 (259 )

19. Athens-25: Kerameikos-7A-J -Bau Y (Plate V.15 ) (260-269 )20. Athens-26: Kerameikos-8 Pompeion (270 )

21. Athens-27: Kerameikos- 9 Propylon of the Pompeion A-B (271-272 )22. Athens-28: Kerameikos-10 West of Sacred Gate (273 )

23. Athens-29: Kotzia Square 1-27 (Plate V.14 ) (274-300 )24. Attica: Glyfada, Ion. Metaxa St. (301 )

25-28. Attica, Marathon-2- 5, National Road, 34th km (302-305 )29. Berbati-3: Dima Plot (340 )

30. Chalkis-3: Alatsata (349 )31. Chalkis-4: Lilantion St. (350 )

32. Chalkis-5: Pneumatikos Plot (Plate II.4 ) (351 )33. Chios-3: Ancient City-Choremi Plot (371 )

34. Chios-4: Christou Plot (372 )35. Chios-5: Spartounda (373)

36. Corfu, Anemomylos (356 )37. Eleusis, Perikleous St. (306 )

38. Epitalion (346 )39. Eretria-5: Stoa in the Agora (352 )

40. Europos (363 )41. Gitani, Thesprotia (357 )

42. Gortys, Arcadia (Plate II.10 ) (337 )43. Istronas-Kalo Chorio Mirabellou (Plate II.9 ) (385 )

44. Kallithea, Patra (316 )45. Kastelli-1A-B (379-380 )

46. Kastelli-2: Theodosaki Plot (381 )47. Kastelli-3: Verdiou Plot (382 )

48. Kato Kastelliana, Gerokolympos (384 )49. Lerna-2 (341 )

50. Megara-1: 42, K. Palaiologou St. (307 )51. Megara-2: 28th Octobriou St. (308 )




52. Megara-3: Sahtouri St. (309 )

53. Megara-4 (310 )54. Messene (348 )

55. Methone, Pieria (368 )56. Metropoli-3: Goutzamani Plot (Plate II.11 ) (353 )

57. Nea Philadelepheia, Thessaloniki (370 )58. Nea Roda-Tripiti, Chalkidiki (360 )

59. Paliouri-Kassandras A-B (361-362 )60. Patras-3: 105, Agiou Dimitriou St. (317 )

61. Patras-4: Danielidos St. (318 )62. Patras-5: 160-162, Gounari St. (319 )

63. Patras-6: Ileias St. (320 )64. Patras-7: 32, Ipirou and Hellenos Stratiotou Sts. (321 )

65. Patras-8: 212, Karaiskaki and Kalamogdarti Sts. A-D (322-325 )66. Patras-9: 148-150, Londou St. (326 )

67. Patras-10: 87-89, Patreos and A. Ipsilantou Sts. (327 )68. Patras-11: 209-211, Trion Nauarhon and Maizonos Sts. (328 )

69. Patras-12: 60, Votsi St. A-D (329-332 )70. Pharai:Vasiliko (333 )

71. Philia, Xana Bros Plot A-B (354-355 )72. Polymylos-2A-C (365-367 )

73-77. Rhodes-1-5: New Cemetery 1-5 (374-378 )78. Sihaina, Patras A-C (334-336 )

79. Skala Oropou-2: 28th Octobriou and Meg. Alexandrou Sts. –Plot Barsos-A-B (311-312 )

80. Stratoni A-B (358-359 )81. Thessaloniki-1: 18, K. Palaiologou St. (369 )

82. Topolia, Chania (383 )83. Veria: Aliakmon (364 )




The Hellenistic phenomenon of concentrated production in specific centers

continues into the Roman period. Athens remains a major center, but Patras and Delphi (the

latter especially in the Late Antique period) enter the group. The workshops are still well-

equipped with more than one kiln.

Types: In the Roman Period, rectangular kilns significantly outnumber the

circular ones (67:38). Their absolute number, however, is highly skewed because

the site of the Kotzia Square in Athens (274-300 ) added twenty-seven rectangularkilns to the Roman corpus.

* The numbers in the parentheses represent the total when the kilns dated asHellenistic or Roman are added.

They were used not only for firing architectural ceramics, but also for coarsewares and lamps.

The Roman rectangular kilns measure in average 2.00 x 2.00m. Their circular counterparts


Unknown 30 (33)* 22% (23) 30 (33)

I ? 24 (25) 18% (17)

I a 10 7%

I e 1 1%

I f 1 (2) 1% (2)I g 2 2%

Circular

38 (40)

II ? 34 (36) 25%

II a 18 13%

II b 8 6%

II c 7 (9) 5% (6)

Rectangular

67 (71)

Roman Total 135 (144) ca. 100% 135 (144)




remain as large as the Hellenistic ones.18 The fact that a Roman kiln most would probably be

rectangular and of considerable size makes the visibility of Roman kilns quite striking in the

archaeological record. In other words, a Roman kiln is hard to miss.

iii. Late Antique and Byzantine Kilns ( cat. nos. 386-403 )

Areas Sites TOTAL

10 17 20

Most of the Late Antique kilns are clustered at Delphi where a very active

community of potters was established (Plates V.16-19 ).

1. Ancient Olympia-5: Northwest of Palestra ( Plate III.10 ) (392 )

2. Athens-29:Areos St. ( 386 )

3. Athens-30: Makriyianni ( 387 )

4. Delphi-1: Gymnasium, Xyste ( 394 )

5-10. Delphi 2-7: Northeastern Villa ( 395-400 )

11. Kato Vassiliki-Keramidario ( 402 )

18 Analytically the measurements for forty Roman kilns are distributed as follows: for thedimensions 0.50-0.99m (3); 1.00-1.49m (7), 1.50-1.99m (5), 2.00-.2.99m (15), 3.00-3.99m(5), 4.00m+ (5).




12. Kirrha-2-Desfina, Seimeni Plot ( 401 )

13. Knossos-5-Venizeleio Hospital ( 403 )

14. Patras-13 Karaiskaki, Ermou and Ipsilantou Sts. A-B ( 390-391 )

15. Skala Oropou-3A-B ( 388-389 )

16. Sparta-4: Christou Lot (393 )

Twice as many kilns are rectangular than circular (11:5). At Delphi the potters had a

peculiar tendency to construct arches using cylinders (the excavator calls them amphora

necks). The Kerameikos quarter was mainly near the southeastern Villa. The workshops

were producing primarily coarsewares for everyday needs.19

Byzantine ceramic production is known primarily from the distinguishing

characteristics of each ware rather than from extensive study of centers of production.

Twenty-three kilns are dated to this period and have been excavated in thirteen areas. Most

of them are quite large, especially in northern Greece, which speaks for a high degree ofspecialization and centralization. The kilns in Corinth are smaller, although it is not

19 Petridis 1997, 1998.

TYPES n

Unknown 2I ? 5II ? 7II a 1II b 3

Late Antique Total 18




absolutely certain that they were pottery kilns (Plates V.18-19 ). The rectangular shape ispredominant for the larger kilns, preparing the ground for the widespread adoption of the

shape in post-Byzantine and the modern periods.

1. Ambrakia, Tzavela and Philellinon Sts. Sklivanitis Plot (418 )

2. Ancient Corinth 7: Agora N.E. 1936 (Plates V.18-19 ) (412 )

3. Ancient Corinth-8: Agora S.C. 1936 (Plates V.18-19 ) (413 )

4. Ancient Corinth-9: St. John Theologos Church (Plate V.18 ) (414 )5. Argos-9: 6, Diomedous St.-Dimopoulou Plot (411 )

6-9. Athens-32-35: Areopagus 1-4 (404-407 )

10. Athens-36: Hadrian's Library (408 )

11. Athens-37: Roman Agora (409 )

12. Chora Trifyllias (415 )

13. Didymoteicho, 3. Karaiskaki St. A-B (421-422 )

14. Gortyna-1 Crete (425 )

15. Gortyna-2, Crete (426 )

16. Lefkadia, Naoussa (423 )

17. Patras-14: 39-41 Korai St. (410 )

18. Pydna, Plot 568 (424 )

19. Thebes-2: Fassoulopoulou Plot (416 )

20. Trikala, 50, Stournara St.-Zacharaki Plot (417 )

21. Veria Neon Syllaton, Chalkidiki A-B (419-420 )




e. Undated Kilns

For the following thirty-three kilns not enough information survives to assign

confidently a date, mainly because they are the result of salvage excavations:

1. Agia Marina (453 ) 14. Narthakio (446 )2. Aigeira (429 ) 15. Patras-15: 206, Antheias

St. A-B(430-431 )

3. Amphissa (447 ) 16. Patras-16: 90-92Boukaouri St.

(432 )

4. Athens-38:DionysiacTheater

(427 ) 17. Patras-17: 142, KanakariSt.

(433 )

5. Attica, Eleusis (428 ) 18. Patras-18: 217 KanakariSt. A-B

(434-435 )

6. Axos,Rethymno

(455 ) 19. Patras-19, 184 Kanakariand Gounari Sts. A-B

(436-437 )

7. Delos (456 ) 20. Patras-20: 48-52, KanariSt.

(438 )

8. Ierapetra (454 ) 21. Patras-21: 3-5, KaterinisSt.

(439 )

TYPES n Percentages GroupedTypes

Unknown 6 26% 6I ? 6 26%I a 4 17%I e 1 4%

Circular 11

II ? 1 4%II b 1 4%II c 4 17%

Rectangular6

Byzantine Total 23 Ca. 100% 23




9. Kassandra-Sarti

(449 ) 22. Patras-22: 100-102Londou St. A-B

(440-441 )

10. Kastritsi (443 ) 23. Pella-7: West of theAgora

(450 )

11. Kato AchaiaA-B

(444-445 )

24. Rhodes-5: 2, Kennedyand Diagoridon Sts. A-B

(457-458 )

12. Katochi,Vonitsa

(448 ) 25. Rhodes-6: Archangelos (459 )

13. Kleitor,Katarrachi

(442 ) 26. Thessaloniki-2:Koloniari and GalinaSts. A-B

(451-452 )

f. General Chronological Survey

After this chronological survey we can venture some general observations on the

presence of kilns in Greece. At the outset for a comparatively small number of kilns (33)

there is insufficient information to assign a date to them. Of dated kilns, by far the most

kilns come from the Roman period, which also displays the most diversified range of typesemployed by potters (Table V.1 ). The next positions are held by Hellenistic, the Bronze

Age and the Classical periods. The unequal duration of these periods renders, of course, any

comparison somewhat arbitrary. Nevertherless, solid knowledge of the total corpus of



GEOMETRIC THROUGH BYZANTINE K ILNS 248 _____________________________________________

Table V.1: Distribution of types of kilns according to periods.

–




known kilns validates to some degree our observations about the type distribution andpreference within each period.20 We have the dimensions preserved of almost half of the

catalogued examples and recorded (Table V.2 ).

DIMENSIONS

PERIOD 0.50-0.99 1.00-1.49

1.50-1.99

2.00-2.99

3.00-3.99

4.00+ Grand Total

Bronze Age 2 6 7 11 2 2 30

Geometric 4 4 1 3 12

Archaic 3 7 2 3 1 1 17

Classical 2 5 4 10 2 8 31

Hellenistic 8 14 6 9 13 6 56

Hellen-roman

1 2 3

Roman 3 7 5 15 5 5 40

LateAntique

2 1 3 1 2 9

Byzantine 1 2 1 4

Undated 5 1 1 1 8

Grand Total 24 48 28 58 27 25 210

Table V.2: Sizes of kilns according to periods.

20 For a chronological distribution of kiln types, see supra Ch. III.




The largest groups are the ones between 1.00-1.49m and 2.00-2.99m. If one adds to theformer group some kilns which measure exactly 1.50m and have been grouped with the next

group, then the two groups are almost equal in numbers.

Combined the groups of dimensions between 1.00-3.00m account for almost two

thirds of the total number of kilns. Within periods some general trends are detected from the

Classical period onwards (Classical, Hellenistic, and Roman) where the larger sizes (over

2.00m) appear more regularly. An interesting phenomenon is the distribution of the smallest

kilns (0.59-0.99m). Although in the Geometric period this size is characteristic, in theHellenistic where we have the largest concentration of small kilns, they usually coexist with

much larger kilns within the same workshop [e.g. Pella (218-223 ), Paros (228-233 )]. In a

specialized workshop which wanted to produce fast and economically a small batch of pots,

the smaller kiln must have been time and fuel-efficient. Caution about the trends of sizes is

highly recommended since we only have recorded dimensions for 39 out of 140 Roman

kilns.



CH. V I: T HE K ILN, T HE WORKSHOP , A ND THE CITY

_____________________________________________251

CHAPTER VI

THE K ILN , THE CERAMIC WORKSHOP ,

AND THE A NCIENT CITY

After having studied the kiln in semi-isolation, as an architectural structure in its

construction and typology, it is time to reinstate the kiln in its natural setting, the ceramic

workshop. In this chapter I will discuss the kiln as one of the major criteria for identifying a

ceramic workshop and as a marker of intensity of pottery production. The various modes of

craft specialization from household production to industrial establishment will be examined

through the evidence of kilns in each workshop. Then I will discuss the topographical




_____________________________________________251

CHAPTER VI

THE K ILN , THE CERAMIC WORKSHOP ,

AND THE A NCIENT CITY

After having studied the kiln in semi-isolation, as an architectural structure in its

construction and typology, it is time to reinstate the kiln in its natural setting, the ceramic

workshop. In this chapter I will discuss the kiln as one of the major criteria for identifying a

ceramic workshop and as a marker of intensity of pottery production. The various modes of

craft specialization from household production to industrial establishment will be examined

through the evidence of kilns in each workshop. Then I will discuss the topographical




_____________________________________________252

relationship of the ceramic workshop with other workshops in the artisanal quarters whichshare a similar pyrotechnology and generally its location in an ancient city.

a. Defining a Workshop

A workshop is "a room, apartment, or building in which manual or industrial work is

carried on."1 This definition has two major components:

a) the structure itself (size is not important, but the areas must be well

defined and closed off architecturally)

b) the activity conducted inside this structure

Semantically, the word "workshop" is not to be confused with "working area" or an

"activity area"2, which suggests low-scale, probably part-time production. In contrast,

"workshop" implies some level of regularity and organization. Regularity and/or

organization suffice to denote a workshop. The term "workshop" should be reserved only

for sites which have a specific locale, and not for a group of material sharing stylistic

similarities, as is common in Classical archaeology.3 For the latter, Rudolph recommends

the use of the termsschool, studio, ormanufacture.4

1 OED(The Complete Edition of the Oxford English Dictionary) vol. II, p. 3821. Also citedin Tournavitou 1986, 447.

2 Torrence 1986, 151.

3 See supra Introduction and infra for a discussion of Beazley's "workshops" defined onstylistic criteria.




_____________________________________________253

The ancient testimonia preserve the generic termsejrgasthvrion, oi[ khma , andsunoikiva to refer to a workshop.5 jErgasthvrion can denote any of the workshops that one

encounters in an artisanal area, such as that of a sculptor6, or a metal worker,7 a perfume

shop,8 and even promiscuous places (i.e. brothels) which are often located near artisanal

quarters in many cultures. Horoi recordejrgasthvria andoijkivai either in leases9 or in dowry

transactions.10 Sometimes the lease of anejrgasthvrion also includes the lease of the

4 Rudolph 1988.

5 LSJ s.v. Other sources forejrgasthvrion : Hdt. 4.14; Lys. 12.8; D 37.4; Isae. 3.22; a butcher'sshop in Ar.Eq. 744. In Ptolemaic Egypt in the third and second centuries B.C.ejrgasthvrionacquired the more specific meaning of granary (Duttenhöfer 1993).

6 For sculptors' workshops, see Paus. V.15.1 (where Pheidias worked on thechryselephantine statue of Zeus at Olympia); IG I3 436 (dated to 437-432 B.C.) mentionsejrgasthvria where stone (presumably marble) was transported from the Penteli quarries(liqolkiva" ); in IG I3 445, 446, 447ejrgasthvria appear in a context, where payments ofsculptors (ajgalmatopoioiv) are mentioned. Forejrgasthvria associated with the undertakingof important architectural projects, as in Olympia, Epidaurus and the Acropolis, see forexample IG IV2 1, 102, ll. 35, 38-39, 44-45, 222 [from Epidaurus]; Thiersch 1939; Roux1961, 86-9; Martin 1965, 172.

7 For the proliferance of this term in the mining leases from Laurion, see Crosby 1950, 1957;e.g. IG II2 1582; 1583.

8 Hyp. Ath. 6.

9 IG II2 1370, 2746, 2752; only anejrgasthvrion is mentioned in IG II2 1370.2760; foranother one with a garden and a fountain, see IG II2 1370, 2759. Forejrgasthvria on Delos,see ID 2.406, 3.1416.

10 IG II2 1370, 2677.




_____________________________________________254

workforce, namely slaves.11

The location of a workshop in relationship to the fortificationwalls of the city is often mentioned in such leases and must have played an important role.12

Another generic word, less specific thanejrgasthvrion , is oi[ khma . The workshop of

Praxiteles, where all his famous works were stored, is calledoi[ khma in Pausanias (I.20.1). It

is not easy to infer from these references whether the termoi[ khma refers to a domestic or a

nondomestic workshop. The working area can either be a room or a separate building

nearby, but within the boundaries of the house.13

If the whole house is subdivided into smaller units used by craftsmen, it is no longeran oi[ khma, but asunoikiva , a tenement or lodging house. Sunoikivai are often associated

with crafts, either manufacturing goods or selling them.14 Thelocus classicusis the passage

in which Aeschines states that many different artisans (a doctor, a smith, a fuller and a

carpenter) had in succession rented part of thesunoikiva. 15 Twosunoikivai are mentioned in

texts that describe the Athenian Kerameikos.16 Although potters are not mentioned as

11 IG II2 1370, 2747, 2748, 2749;SEG 32.236 (see supra Ch. 1, "kavmino" "); Fine 1951, nos.23, 32.

12 IG II2 1370, 2752.

13 For a distinction between permanent and domestic workshops, see Tournavitou 1986, 447.

14 In the orators' speeches,sunoikiva means tenement house, whereas in the Platonic works( Leg. 2.664a, 3.679b, 3.681b, 5.746a; Rep.2.369c), it takes on a more general meaning ofpeople living together in a city or a community.

15 Aeschin. 1.124.

16 Isae. 5.26-27: Dicaeogenes gave to his sister's husband, Protarchides, asunoikiva , insteadof the promised dowry of fortymnae; see also Isae. 6.20 for asunoikiva owned by Euktemonand run by the prostitute Alce.




_____________________________________________255

tenants in these specific passages, it is hard to believe that in realitysunoikivai did not houseany potters. On the other hand, the sources are very clear that prostitutes occupied these

places, and foreigners, who could not own land.17 In other casessunoikivai are located in

close proximity to commercial centers (e.g. at Colonus in Athens, in Piraeus).18 Euktemon,

apparently a wealthy property owner in Classical Athens, had at least twosunoikivai one at

Kerameikos and one at Piraeus.19

Regarding ceramic workshops in particular, Blümner's collection of relevant terms is

a good starting point.20 The terms are usually encountered in Aristophanic comedies and inthe orators' speeches. The number of terms multiplies and they are more specifically defined

in the work of the later lexicographers.Keramei' on is the generic term for ceramic

17 Foreigners: Aeschin. 1.43; prostitutes: Isae. 6.19; Aeschin. 1.124.

18 Aeschin. 1.125 (sunoikiva at Colonus); Isae. 6.19 (sunoikiva in Peiraeus owned byEuktemon).

19 Isae. 6.19-20. Three prices are mentioned in connection with thesunoikiva : a sunoikiva atKerameikos was given as a dowry instead of 40 mnae (2400 drs), a mortgage price of 16mnae(960drs) [Dem. 53.13], and asunoikiva worth 100mnae left to Archippe by herdeceased husband Pasio [Dem. 45.28]. An average ancient house covered an area of 225square meters, at least in planned cities (Höpfner and Schwandner 1994). It was moreprofitable to owners of centrally located plots to subdivide them into smaller units and torent them to people most interested in being very close to the Agora, namely the tradesmenand the craftsmen. For example, houses in Olynthus of the fourth century B.C. were graduallytransformed into four stores, of symmetrical and equal size. [Olynth AVI 8, AVII 8, A IV 9in Höpfner and Schwandner 1994, 68-113, fig. 89]. I thank W.T. Loomis for his generoushelp on prices relating to housing. For prices in antiquity in general, see Loomis 1998.

20 Blümner 1885-87.




_____________________________________________256

workshop.21

Plasthv rion is presumably where large quantities of clay are processed, andperhaps a ceramic workshop was also included. Theplinqei' on / plinqourgei' on (brickworks)

and the cutropwlei' on / cutropwvlion (workshop for cooking pots) refer to ceramic

workshops of a more specialized nature.A comparable vocabulary exists for the craftsmen

involved in these specialized production. 22

21 For a representative presentation of terms of ceramic retail and/or manufacture shops:keramopwlei' on (Din. fr. 89.18);keramei' on (Aesch. 3.119; IG II2 1635, 143;SEG 33.624,from Delos, dated to the fourth century B.C.); plasthvrion (Hsch.s.v.); plinqei' on (Ar. fr .283; Lys. fr. 1615.EM 677.28, Poll.Onom.10.185ou| mevntoi oiJ keramei' " ta;" plivnqou"e[ platton, plinqei' on kalei' to;n tovpon ejn Dravmasin h[ Niovbh/ jAristofav nh " CIG2860; Harp.ll. in Lys. Ag. Lysitheos; Phot. 434. 12; Sudas.v.); plinqivon (SIG 633.82 from Delphi);plinqourgei' on (EM 677.28; Lexica SeguerianaP 295.8); plinqourgivon (PLondon 1166.12); cutropwlei' on-cutropwvlion (Poll.Onom.7.163; schol. Ar. Av. 13).

22 kerameuv" ( Il. 18.601; Hom. Epigr. 14.1; Hes.Op. 25; Arist.Ph. 1381b 16;EN 1155a, 35);kadopoiov" (Schol. Arist.Pax 1202);kwqwnopoiov" (Din. fr. 89.19);lhkuqopoiov" (Strab.15.1.67; Poll.Onom.7.182);lucnopoioiv ( Ar. Pax 690; Philetaer. 4;Cat.Cod.Astr. 8 (4).215;Ath. 11.474D; Poll.Onom. 7.178; Dio Chrys. or. 15 p. 241M); cutreuv" (Plat. R 4.421d;Tht .147a; Sudas.v. cutreva . Eustr.in Apo 158.13); cutroplav qo" (Poll.Onom. 7.163; Phryn. PSp. 125B; B.A. 72.10); cutropwvlh" (Critias 70D).

23 Tournavitou (1986, 448) classifies the crafts into group A, where no built-in facilities arerequired, and group B, where built-in facilities are required. The latter group is more visiblein the archaeological record. Platon L. (1993) has suggested a similar list of criteria for overtwenty Minoan palatial workshops: unworked, raw material, unfinished objects, wasters,tools, equipment, and finished products.




_____________________________________________257

b. Identifying a Workshop

How can one identify a workshop archaeologically? Tournavitou (1986), in an

article about the criteria for identifying of a workshop in the prehistoric period, singles out

six major criteria which can contribute to the secure identification of a workplace:

a. Architectureb. Potteryc. Facilities23

d. Toolse. Material worked

(raw material, half-worked pieces, waste, finished objects)f. Connection with central administration (Linear B tablets)

Tournavitou then applies each criterion and its parameters to places which have

already been identified as workshops, and evaluates the weight of each criterion and its

contribution to the identification. Her general conclusion is that most of them, like finished

objects, can confirm, but cannot prove independently the character of a space. Tools and

material worked are considered most important; architecture is completely irrelevant. For

the remaining three criteria, pottery, connection with central administration, and facilities,

the picture is very vague. It is worth noting that architecture ranks low in the identification

process, whereas it is a major component of the definition. The weakness of her study is the

sample size: six secure workshops and two possible ones, a total of only eight, upon which

Tournavitou has based her conclusions. Also, she confines herself only to permanent,




_____________________________________________258

palatial workshops.24 Therefore, the correlation between workshop and connection with

palatial administration, which is her last criterion, would have beena priori very strong and

her criteria were not tested in cases of non-palatial workshops.

Regarding ceramic workshops in particular, their identification by students of

prehistory poses serious problems: too much attention is drawn to secondary elements which

can possibly appear in a workshop, such as a bench or a drainage system, but these factors

alone are very weak for the secure identification of a ceramic workshop.25 Michaelides, in

his overview of Minoan ceramic workshops, places more importance on clay disks (which

are movable objects) and benches than on the reliable presence of kilns.26 It is undeniable

that in most traditional ceramic workshops there is a bench next to the potter's wheel, where

the potter's assistant or the potter himself works the clay before it is placed on the wheel.

Considered therefore within its relevant context, a bench can be a feature of a ceramic

workshop.27 Given the multifunctional role of a bench, however, it is highly risky to identify

a ceramic workshop solely on the presence of a bench.

24 Tournavitou 1986, 448.

25 See Lupack 1999 for her discussion on the Berbati workshop (111 ).26 For a detailed discussion of his analysis, see supra Ch. IV, "Minoan Pottery Workshops".

27 Blitzer 1990; Hasaki, in preparation.




_____________________________________________259

A new list of criteria

In this study I propose a new list of criteria. Some are adapted from Tournavitou's

list, and others are added because they are more pertinent to ceramic assemblages.28 The

criteria can be divided first into two groups: the movable objects and the permanent features

(Tables VI.1-2 ).

The permanent features include mainly architectural structures necessary for

processing clay (clay-settling basins29), forming (in situ installation of a potter's

wheel), and firing vessels (the kilns).30 The movable objects refer to large quantities

of raw material (clay), the pottery itself (the homogeneous deposits in pits or wells,

and deposits which contain a high percentage of wasters), and technical equipment:

potter's wheel, potter's jars (containing a mixture of water and clay which potters use

to wet their hands and add a final clay slip on the vessel before it is removed from

the wheel), molds, forming tools, and kiln props. These movable criteria have a

28 Stark (1985), in a more succinct fashion, identifies the following criteria as evidence forloci of production: raw materials, tools of production, products, and by-products. In a criticalreappraisal of these criteria she notices their limited use to identify "household" production.

29 For some examples of settling basins excavated within workshops, see Phari on Thasos(25-26 ), eighteen settling basins at the Roman Kerameikos at Kotzia Square in Athens (274-300 ). Often associated with settling basins are systems of canalizations [e.g. Papadates (194-195 ), Philotas (249-250 ), Chalkis (350 )].

30 For thein situ stone of a potter's wheel in the Minoan workshop at Gouves see Hadji-Vallianou 1995; also in the Roman workshop at Chalkis (350 ).

31 See Nijboer (1998, 118) who, I believe, is incorrect in not differentiating between thelocation of a workshop and its degree of activity: "the presence of a kiln does not necessarilyindicate the presence of a workshop: it can indicate household industry or a semi-permanentworkshop."




_____________________________________________260

more elusive character and they are likely to create some "archaeological noise" forthe identification of a ceramic workshop.

Most of the workshops studied in archaeological reports usually consist of cases

identified on the basis of large quantities of pottery (e.g. amphoras), and the presence of

molds. It needs to be emphasized that large deposits of pottery are helpful as criteria to

qualify ceramic establishments as "workshop industry" in the categories of specialization

(see infra), since everything below this category has a low visibility in the archaeological

record. The value of some criteria differs when considered individually than whenconsidered collectively (Table VI.2 ). Also, the quantitative aspect (the presence of many

PERMANENTFEATURES MOVABLEOBJECTS

Clay-settling Basins Raw Material

In situ installationsfor potter's wheel

Potteryhomogeneous deposits

wasters

Kiln Technical Equipmentpotter' s wheelpotter's jarsmoldsforming toolskiln props

Table VI.1: Archaeological criteria for identifying a ceramic workshop.




_____________________________________________261

wasters, for example) may give each criterion a higher value. Collectively, the value of thecriteria available to an archaeologist could indicate a workshop, or point to the presence of a

workshop in the vicinity, or help to locate a ceramic workshop more precisely.

In principle, each criterion among the permanent features suffices in itself to locate a

workshop physically. Among the moveable objects, each criterion can be an indication of a

workshop. When many criteria of this group coexist in one case, or if one criterion is

represented in large quantities, we can say safely that a workshop is present in the vicinity.

By evaluating their data against this framework, the archaeologists may confidently identifya ceramic workshop and better understand the dynamics of an industrial or potters' quarter

within their site.

Finally, identification of an area as a workshop is only the first step in the longer

process of understanding its perplexing character: its operation schedule (part-time or full-

time, the nature of products manufactured, its degree of specialization, and the variety of

activity areas within the workshop. In other words, full-time and part-time workshops might

have used the same types of archaeologically detectable elements (e.g. a kiln or a settling

basin).31 Even large quantities of debris should be carefully examined before one concludes

that they come from a full-time operating workshop because they can very easily represent

the gradual accumulation of debris from part-time work.32

32 Torrence 1986, 146.




_____________________________________________262

Table VI.2 Flowchart of archaeological criteria for identifying a ceramic workshop.




_____________________________________________263

In addition, the excavation of a kiln alone cannot show conclusively whether it hadbeen used by sedentary or by itinerant potters. Lastly, one kiln should not automatically

point toonly one workshop. Although communal firing is less common in ceramic

workshops which use kilns compared to the workshops which fire pots in open pits, the

possibility of firing one's pots at someone else's kiln, and thus "two workshops" sharing

"one" technical facility, should not be dismissed without consideration.33 In the last two

cases (itinerant potters and communal firing), the archaeologist is faced with two skewed

results: eitherthere are more kilns than potters (as with the itinerant potters who would builda kiln in many different places) orthere are fewer kilns than potters(as in the cases of

communal firing).

Even the identification of a workshop is a "frozen" recognition: we know its activity

only from thelatest findsin situ, and there is no possible way (except by the presence of

tools obviously designed for a different craft) to restore its entire range of activities. Besides

the aforementioned example of a tenement house occupied successively by various types of

craftsmen (Aeschin. 1.124), we also have a few ceramic workshops that housed other crafts

as well.

These multiple functions of ancient workshops are a direct result of the versatility of

ancient craftsmen. Numerous instances of craftsmen working with various materials are

mentioned in the ancient literature: Daedalus34, Endoios, Theodoros of Samos, Kanachos of

33 Scheibler (1984) postulates a similar sharing of technical facilities in his "Werkstattkreis"category (see infra Table VI.3). In Yucatan, Mexico (Stark 1985) a kiln-owner buys unfiredpottery from potters who do not own a kiln. Alternatively, potters without a kiln may decideto rent a kiln for a communal firing.

34 Lapatin 1997, 663-4, n.3-6; Burford 1969, 144.




_____________________________________________264

Sikyon were known masters not only in one material, but in many, such as wood, ivory,marble, and bronze. Rhoikos of Samos was a bronze caster and architect; Theodoros worked

in metal, cut gems, invented mechanical devices, and advised on temple building;

Mandrokles bridged the Hellespont for Darius and then dedicated a painting of the project in

the Samian Heraion; Douris made and painted pottery. In Argos, Polykleitos worked on both

marble and bronze; the sculptors Eupolemos, Pheidias, and Skopas were all concerned with

architectural design; Hectoridas, a sculptor, provided patterns for the painted decoration on

the sima of the Asklepios temple. Euphranor was both a sculptor and a painter.35

c. Categorizing a Workshop: Specialization of Production

“But kiln-evidence does not tell us much about the primary processes ofmanufacture, and almost nothing about the organizations requisite for makingand selling” (Casson 1938, 465)

Contrary to Casson's statement, I believe that the kiln can reveal many of the

economic secrets of the ceramic workshop. I will attempt in this section to correlate the

evidence of kilns with the degrees of craft specialization that have been proposed in the past .

Scholarship on the economic anthropology of craft specialization has become increasingly

concerned with the role of workshops. Although the main focus of the scholars' inquiries is

35 Quint. Inst. Orat. XII.10.b: "Euphranor, on the other hand, was admired on the groundthat, while he ranked with the most eminent masters of other arts, he at the same timeachieved marvellous skill in the arts of sculpture and painting."




_____________________________________________265

the specialized mode of production, inevitably they also deal with the space where thisproduction takes place, namely the workshop.

Categorization of craft specialization has proliferated, ranging from the general to

the specific.36 The following table (Table VI.3 ) shows the categorization of workshops

according to the level of production, from the lowest to the highest output. Since machinery

is excluded in these studies, low production also reflects a small crew, while industrial-level

production assumes the employment of many workmen.

Van der Leeuw developed his categories based on ethnographic data on potterycommunities conducting primarily pit-firing. Peacock's degrees were a result of his study of

Roman pottery which had achieved a larger scale of production and therefore his degrees

(especially the factory and up) reflect settings much closer to the industrialized production.37

Scheibler's degrees are the only ones which addressed issues specific to Greek antiquity, and

especially pottery workshops. Finally Costin's framework originates from her work in the

New world and encompasses a larger number of crafts besides pottery.

The 459 kilns examined in this study represent at least 296 workshops. Speaking in

numerical terms 227 sites (or 77%) with ceramic workshops have only one kiln (or one kiln

has been excavated). Workshops with more intensive production (as shown by the presence

of more kilns) do exist, but there again we still deal with a level of production that could

perhaps have supported two to three families. There are only forty-two sites (or 14%) with

36 See also Clark 1995.

37 Peacock’s (1979) early version of his categories, as they apply to tile and brick works: a.household production, b. rural brickyard, c. nucleated brickyard complex, d. estatebrickworks, f. municipal brickworks.




_____________________________________________266

two kilns and only thirteen where three kilns were used (or 4%), not necessarilysimultaneously. The number of workshops with four kilns is six (or 2%) and there are four

workshops with six kilns. In rare cases, “forests” of kilns as in Figaretto in Corfu (197-209 ),

in the Building Y in the Athenian Kerameikos (264-273 ) and in the Kotzia Square in Athens

(274-300 ) have been excavated, but it is highly unlikely that they all belonged to only one

workshop. The instances of workshops with more than four kilns represent merely a 3% of

the known pottery workshops.

At least two-thirds of the ancient Greek workshops fall into the categories of Costin's"individual workshops," Scheibler's "Familien Betrieb", van der Leeuw's "workshop

industry," and Peacock’s “individual workshops.” Cases of ceramic manufacture at the

household production andhousehold industry levels must have existed at a limited scale, but

do not have a major effect on our appreciation of the ancient ceramics industry. The vast

majority of the kiln sites have one or two kilns (a combined 91% of the workshops examined

in this study) and could easily have been run by the potter's immediate family, or members

of his extended family. Potters’ quarters fall under Costin's "nucleated workshops,"

Scheibler's "Werkstattkreis", and van der Leeuw's "Workshop Industry" categories of craft

specialization. In order to identify a site as a Potters' Quarter the following points should be

kept in mind.

First, the most important requirement is the presence of many workshops. They

have to be securely identified through kilns or other strong criteria; they have to be some

distance from each other in order to exclude common ownership, but close enough to be

called a quarter. Second, if retail and manufacturing places coexist, they could provide a

more complete picture of craftsmen's quarter. And finally, adjacent residential areas may or

may not be necessary.




_____________________________________________267

VAN DER LEEUW

(1977)

PEACOCK

(1982)

SCHEIBLER

(1984)

COSTIN

(1991)

household production household production individualspecialization

household industry household industry communalspecialization

individual industry ein-Mann Betrieb

(one-man workshop)

individualspecialization

workshop industry individual workshops Familien-Betrieb

(Family Business)

Meister Betrieb

(Workshop of aMaster)

dispersedworkshop

village industry nucleated workshops Werkstattkreis

(Workshops’ Quarter)

nucleatedworkshops

large-scale industry the manufactory Grossbetriebe

(Large-scale Factory)

the factory

estate production

military and otherofficial production

nucleated corvée

retainer workshop

dispersed corvée

individual retainers

Table VI.3: Concordance of degrees of craft specialization proposed by various scholars.The categories in bold letters are encountered in ancient Greek workshops.




_____________________________________________268

i. Sizes of workshop personnel in ancient Greece

By the late 1960s J.D. Beazley had given flesh to over 1,000 artists in the Athenian

Kerameikos and had reconstructed various "stylistic workshops" where a number of painters

were working for a specific potter. These crowded stylistic workshops had recently received

attacks by scholars who try to understand the economics and workings of such large

establishments in ancient Athens.

Scheibler (1984) denies the existence of such large-scale production that the

specialists of vase-painting conjectured on the basis of an elaborate network of affiliations

among the vase painters and the potters they worked for. His test case was the workshop of

Nikosthenes: following another avenue of speculation, Scheibler multiplied by ten all the

vases of the painters who were associated with Nikosthenes, and assumed that the activity

period of a painter was ten years, which is far from realistic estimations.38 Since for many of

them we have only one example surviving, Scheibler multiplied by 100 (based on the 1%

survival rate of ancient pottery) to estimate the total number of vases that a painter

decorated.

With a ten-year career each painter would have decorated ten pots per year. We are

thus compelled to lump together some of the “hands” isolated by Beazley. Hannestad, using

ethnographic data from Spain, believes that the annual production of potters of non-

38 The number of painters associated with the Nikosthenes workshop and that of Pamphaios(with which the Nicosthenic workshop shares many similarities) is close to forty. Itsflourishing period is 540-510 B.C. Schreiber estimated that ten painters probably worked forNicosthenes for each decade, rather than all forty being employed during the entire period ofthirty years.




_____________________________________________269

decorated pottery was much higher than the 100 decorated vases per year estimated byScheibler and she proposes ca. “570 pots per vase-painter per annum.”39

Valavanis (1994) has argued that as many as ten painters could be employed by

some Athenian workshops that received many commissions, such as those responsible for

Panathenaic amphoras. Valavanis’ suggestions are very carefully expressed, and he

concludes that perhaps only one or two workshops in each period had personnel that

exceeded twenty persons, whereas the majority of the workshops were of a much smaller

size.All previous attempts have based their calculations on number of pots produced by a

potter, the span of his artistic career, and a gross estimation of all the pots that have survived

from antiquity. In every criterion, the range is very wide, and the final outcome can be

skewed multifold. What the evidence from the number and size of kilns attested in an

average workshop of the period can offer is the firing capacity of the kilns, which will show

that most of these estimations are still quite low. In other words, the combined annual output

of all ten painters that were working for Nikosthenes for 530-520B.C. would have been ca.

1000 vases which could have easily been fired in a circular kiln of 2.00m in size in two or

three months of firings (and even in less time if the workshop had two kilns).40 To rephrase

Scheibler's question, what did the kiln(s) of Nikosthenes' workshop fire for the remaining

39 Hannestad 1988. A nebulous area in all such reconstructions is whether we estimate thepots that the potter has produced, or the pots that the vase-painter has decorated. Hannestadalso assumes, rather incorrectly, that the same workshop produced both decorated and coarsepottery, an assumption not substantiated by the evidence of Athenian workshops at least.

40 For estimating an average dimension, see for example the dimensions of the ClassicalAthenian kilns at Lenormant Ave. (51-53 ).




_____________________________________________270

months of the year?41

Perhaps the Greek pottery production was much higher than what wehad postulated,not because there were many potters/painters, but because they were

producing on a full-time basis and their kilns could fire this continuous production. To look

at the problem from another perspective, having ten potters producing at their "normal" rate

full-time for ten years, the size of the kilns, their number, and the general space of the

attested workshops does not allow us to believe how those workshops could absorb such a

level of production.

Large-scale workshops, which could even qualify as factories (Scheibler's " Meister Betrieb" and Peacock's "Workshop Industry") are mentioned occasionally in the orators'

speeches. They frequently speak of factories, such as those of the couch makers and the

sword makers, staffed by twenty slaves and thirty-three slaves respectively, with full-time,

regular production.42 But the archaeological record does not provide evidence for such large

ceramic factories.43

41 Scheibler 1984, 133.

42 Dem. Ag. Aphobus 9 and 21 for theklinopoiei' on andmacairopoiei' on ; Dem. Ag. Aphobus31, where fifty slaves are mentioned in connection with two factories. The shield factory ofLysias (Lys. 12.19) employed no fewer than 120 slaves.

43 Only the pottery factories which used machinery in 18th century England could employten to twenty employees (Peacock 1982, 45).




_____________________________________________271

ii. Number of kilns in each workshop

Connected to issues of scale of production is the presence of multiple kilns in one

location, either replacing each other on the same spot or coexisting close together. This

phenomenon becomes more common in the Archaic period (although there are examples

from the prehistoric period as well, e.g. in Kirrha and in Knossos). Workshops with

continuous production prefer having two smaller kilns rather than a single larger one,

because they can let one cool down while they are loading the second one. The potters were

either replacing older kilns [e.g. in Kerameikos (40-42 )] by constructing new ones or were

trying to patch old kilns, as in Knossos on Crete (92-93 ). The following three erroneous

assumptions are commonly made, when we are confronted with multiple kilns:

a. They were all used simultaneously;

b. They belong to different workshops;

c. They reflect a larger scale of production.

In Ballas, in modern Upper Egypt, a single workshop of the traditional type used at least

twenty kilns in one or two generations' time. The kilns are located near the establishments of

the workshop.44 Had we made the above assumptions, we would have estimated several

workshops of long duration and a large production center.

44 Lacovara 1985.




_____________________________________________273

A household industry can have a kiln that is occasionally used and the same holds

true for theindividual industry. The workshop level and the kiln are almost

synonymous.

There can be various sizes of workshops and therefore a variable number of

kilns. The village industry presupposes the presence of many workshops and

subsequently of many kilns. Finally, large-scale industry relies heavily on

simultaneous use of many and large kilns for voluminous and timely production.

The last scenario is not attested in Greek antiquity as it has been mentioned above.

iv. Sizes of workshop

Most of the kilns presented in this study have come to light in the course of rescue

excavations, offering us minimal information about the workshop that was centered around

them; but a few ceramic workshops have been excavated over a larger area. We are able,

therefore, to speculate at least the minimum area covered by an ancient workshop (Table

VI.5 ).45

45 As comparanda we can use data from more recent workshops estimated from site plans(Peacock 1982, 30, fig. 11; 45, fig. 15) for examples a, b, g.a. Workshop at Orei, Euboea, in Greece : ca. 175m2

b. Workshop at Istiaea, Euboea ca. 324m2

c. Workshop at Tsikalario, Kentri (Blitzer 1984): ca. 300m2

d. Workshops at Messene (Blitzer 1990):1. For large pithoi and water jugs ca. 600 m2

2. For water jugs ca. 140 m2

e. Workshop at Marousi (Valavanis 1990): ca. 625m2




_____________________________________________274

The following table presents the data in chronological order. From the data belowone sees that the larger workshops with two or more kilns cover a minimum area of 300-

400m2.

SITE Dimensions Minimum area covered

(in m 2)

1. Kirrha (104-106 ) 10 x 10 100+ (Plate IV.16)

2. Gouves (127-137 ) Area C 30 x 25 750+ (Plate IV.9 )

3. Prinias (31-36 ) 20 x 15 300+ (Plates VI.1, 9)

4. Phari, Thasos (25-26) 31 x 13 403+ (Plate VI.11 )

5. Ancient Corinth (64-65 ) 26 x 16 416+ (Plate VI.2 )

6. Lenormant (51-53 ) 10 x 3 30+ (Plate VI.12 )

7. Paros (228-233 ) 10x12 120+

8. Krannon (181-182 ) 12 x 12 144+

9. Sindos (86-89 ) 9 x 4 36+

10. Pherai, Stamouli-Bolia Plot (190-192 ) 6.50 x 6.50 42+ (Plate VI.15 )

11. Pella, Tsagarli Plot (218-223 ) 19 x 23 437+(Plate V.12 )

12. Corfu (200-212 ) 11 x 16 176+ (Plate VI.13 )

13. Atalante (188-189 ) 18 x 9 162+

14. Patra, 212 Karaiskaki andKalamodgarti Sts.(322-326 )

8 x 12 96+

Table VI.5: Measurements of area occupied by ceramic workshops.

f. Etruscan workshop at Marzabotto (Nijboer 1998, 179, fig. 42) ca. 540 m2

g. Nantgarw Pottery in South Wales: ca. 1125m2




_____________________________________________275

Smaller workshops extend over 200m2

. An interesting case is Corfu, where a dozenkilns are enclosed within a very small space of 172m2, a further indication that, most

probably, not all of these kilns operated at the same time. As for the last group, whose areas

range between 42 and 100 m2 one can safely say that we have found only part of the

workshop. Surfaces for processing the clay and for drying the unfired vessels and even for

fuel storage are quintessential for potters of large size vessel, especially for those of pithoi or

architectural terracottas. This need of potters for extensive space contrasts sharply with the

needs of bronze-casters, whose casting pits cover a much smaller area and are usually of atemporary nature.46

Preliminary estimates of the average size of different types of workshops can assist

surveyors and excavators in determining the total size of a workshop, and in mapping their

trenches so that they can recover the most information from the “workshop site.” It would

also be interesting to study the distances of deposits coming from excavated workshops to

establish a range of distance between the places of production and the places of deposition of

rejected pieces.

v. Production as a correlate of transport options

Pursuing the wider implications of the size of a kiln, one should regard the kiln as

the physical attestation of the entire system of demand, transportation, and trade of pottery.

Ethnographic studies of pottery manufacture and distribution in Spain have shown that the

46 Zimmer 1990.




_____________________________________________276

standard unit of measurement for quantifying the output of a ceramics workshop is a donkey-load, that is, the amount one donkey can carry at one time. The output of a single firing was

equal to 20 donkey-loads.47

In the early 20th century the Messenian potters would load a donkey with 203 sacks

of vessels (comparatively small vessels since each sack contained ten pots) and transport

them to distances of 26-30 hours toTripolis or Olympia. 48 The donkey-load had almost

become a type of currency in itself: middlemen would purchase pottery in terms of donkey-

loads, and the hired potters would be paid according to how many donkey loads of potterythey produced daily.

In a system where potters had to depend on transportation to sell their pottery, it is

no surprise that the efficiency and availability of means of transportation would

predetermine the level of productivity. In ancient Greece, the situation was similar, and the

size of the workshop belongs to a wider system of demand. Building larger kilns would have

been easy, but who would have bought these pots, and how long would it be before the

unsold pots occupied the entire storage capacity of an ancient workshop? In addition to the

donkey-load, one can think for example of akaiki's(small boat) load and its capacity to

transport amphoras, and then correlate this to the size of an average amphora kiln (see infra

Epilogue).49

47 Vossen 1984.

48 Blitzer 1990. She also records that one donkey could carry within one to two days all theclay necessary for 500 small pots and 4-6 large pithoi.

49 Peacock(1982) emphasizes the beneficial impact of the introduction of railways on themore centralized organization and long-distance trade of English brick-making.




_____________________________________________277

vi. Test case: the Tile Works at ancient Corinth

The well-preserved East kiln in the Tile Works in Corinth (65) is ideal for estimating

the capacity of large rooftile kilns, as well as for reconstructing achaîne-opératoire in the

workshop, from the phase of procuring the clay to the final stage of unloading the kiln (Plate

VI.2 ).50

In this hypothetical firing, both pan and cover tiles as well as simas and antefixes of

the Corinthian type will be fired for this roof. The requirements for unobstructed circulation

of heat, coupled with the need to leave the decorated sides of tiles uncovered, pose

limitations on how one can place the tiles inside the kiln.

Two rows of pan tiles topped with simas and antefixes is a reasonable load, because

the total height, as restored, is both sustainable for the lower row of tiles and easy for the

workers to handle. With two superimposed rows of pan tiles, and an additional row of

lighter tiles, one can assume that the kiln supported at least 1,000 kg of products at each

square meter.51 I have calculated a crew of five or six persons for this tile-workshop. This

crew size is recurrent in the ethnographic record for medium-size workshops.52 Given the

size of the kiln, some auxiliary help cannot be ruled out, perhaps bringing the crew size up to

ten.

50 Experimental attempts to replicate ancient rooftile production (especially of the Archaicand Hellenistic periods) were undertaken at Isthmia (Rostoker and Gerbard 1981), at Sardis(Hostetter 1994) and at Gordion (Henrickson and Blackman 1999). For comparing timerequirements in the tile plants using clamp kilns in Spanish California, see Costello 1997.

Generally on the pottery production at Corinth, see Arafat and Morgan 1989.51 Le Ny (1988, 34) estimated that a rectangular kiln can support as much as 2,112 kg/m2.

52 e.g. Voyatzoglou 1984.




_____________________________________________278

The optimal potting season, at least in the dry climates in the Mediterranean, haslong been thought to last from March-April to September-October. This period is apparently

the best in other climates as well: an unexpected confirmation of this widely-held opinion is

to be found in a decree issued in England by Edward IV in 1477, which specifies that

although clay can be collected as early as November, tiles should be formed no earlier than

the following March to ensure high quality.53

FIRED END OF DRYING FORMING RAW MATERIALS

75:25 ratio22% shrinkage 13% shrinkage CLAY

(kg)WATER

(lt)

Pan tile 18 23 26 20 6

Cover tile 8 10 13 10 3

Sima 40 50 60 45 15

Antefix 3 4 4.5 3.5 1

Table VI.6. Calculations of raw material required for Corinthian rooftiles.

53 Cited in Mayes and Scott 1984, 6.




_____________________________________________279

This kiln, with a restored size of 7.50 x 5.50 x 2.00m, could easily fire ca. 900 tiles, enoughto cover the ridged roof of a treasury building measuring 10 x 4m.54 Even for the collection

of the raw material, the numbers already become daunting. Given that a Corinthian tile

weighs 18 kg after its firing, its original weight while drying must be 23 kg with a 20%

weight loss rate.55 While drying, the water of the unfired rooftile evaporates. Before

forming the tile then, a potter would need 20 kg of clay and 6lt of water.56 Thus, for a total

of 880 tiles, 19-20 tons of clay would be required.57

54 A treasury similar to the Sikyonian treasury at Olympia, although the Sikyonian treasuryis earlier in date than our kiln. Although the roof only needs about 790 tiles, I also estimateda loss percentage of 10% of wasters from one firing. Wertime (1983, 452) estimated that theLate Classical kiln at Nemea (60) would have produced at most 140 tiles (a very lowestimate in my opinion ), but he does not venture to estimate the quantity of fuel required.

55 For average percentages of water added to clay, see Echallier and Montagu 1985; Rice1987, 631-3. The water content is lower for coarser clays, which are used for tiles, than forpottery clay. In terms of volume, a pot consists of 55% clay and 45% water; in terms ofweight, the ratio of clay to water is 75:25. After drying, the percentage of water in the truevolume of a vessel is 10-26%. The percentage of loss of weight after drying is ca. 20-22%.See Vallianos and Padouva (1986, 117-35) with useful tabulated data on dimensions ofvessels before and after firing.

56 The calculations are based on the evaporation and shrinkage rates reported in Vallianosand Padouva 1986, 117-35.

57 With the waster percentage of 10%, the number of each type of tile before firing iscalculated as follows: pan tiles: 421; cover tiles: 330; simas: 35; antefixes: 55; ridge tiles: 29.Henrickson and Blackman (1999) had estimated 10m3 for 1000 pan tiles and cover tiles for aHellenistic roof at Gordion. An outcrop of clayey soil, still visible today, lies directly to thesouth of this complex in Corinth. Although analysis of the clay from this deposit has shownit as unsuitable for potting (Sanders 2000 pers. comm.;Whitbread 2000 pers. comm.), theconstruction ofanother large tile kiln in Roman times in this area (344 ) makes us wonderwhether the standards of suitability among the ancient tile makers were different from ourassumptions.




_____________________________________________280

Table VI.7: Time schedule to prepare and fire the roof of a treasury buildingat the East kiln at the Corinthian Tile Works (65).




_____________________________________________281

Similar calculations are conducted to estimate the original content of clay and water for a

cover tile, a sima, and an antefix (Table VI.6 ).

Since no clay-settling facilities were found in the excavations of the workshop, we

cannot estimate how long it would take to purify this massive amount of clay. On the other

hand, the clay composition for rooftiles is intentionally quite coarse, and perhaps the

purification was conducted very summarily.

The time needed to form the tiles can be quite short if the entire crew is involved,

but the drying period must have been very long (over two weeks), given the large size of the

tiles. Any necessary decoration on simas and antefixes can be done in a week while the

other tiles are drying. On average, I have calculated three weeks for forming the tiles and

drying them. By the end of this period the tiles have lost 20% of their water content. The

tiles will have dried under sheds, for which a large drying area must be reserved.58 The

large areas to the north of the kilns, which were covered with a heavy layer of clay, could

have been used for the drying sheds of the workshop.59

Archaeometric studies have not yetbeen conducted on Greek rectangular kilns to estimate the range of temperatures attained.

The notion that that rectangular kilns would have operated only at lower temperatures if they

58 In their experiments, Rostoker and Gebhard (1981) concluded that for combination tiles(which are comparable to Corinthian-style tiles) the upright position is best for avoidingcracks during drying. For smaller terracottas, such as bricks, the tile makers placed themsuccessively on all sides to ensure uniform drying. In the Archaic tile workshop at Murlo, thetiles bear animal footprints, which could mean that they were lying on the ground when theanimals stepped on them. The alternative explanation, that the animals caused the tiles tofall, is less convincing because the tiles preserve the entire footprint of the animal, not only apart of it.

59 The drying shed at the Archaic workshop of architectural terracottas at Pioggio Civitate inEtruria measures 42m long x 12m wide (a total of 504m2) (Nijboer 1998).




_____________________________________________282

were firing rooftiles does not hold true, since analyses on Hellenistic rooftiles from Pellahave shown that Corinthian-style rooftiles were fired at temperatures over 1000ºC.60 The

loading of the kiln, lasting an estimated two to three normal working days, must have been

quite an enterprise in itself, as a result of the sheer quantity and weight of the tiles. The fuel

required for such a large kiln could easily surpass four to five tons of wood. Younger,

inexperienced assistants could have gathered this fuel while the tiles were drying. The firing

itself would have lasted about five to seven days, and the important cooling-down period as

long as a week. The entire firing process from loading the kiln to unloading the fired tilescould have lasted about 10-15 days.61

Once the kiln is unloaded, the total enterprise for making the roof tiles for a treasury

building would have lasted one month (Table VI.7 ).62 On a much larger scale, the roof of an

average temple (for example, the temple of Athena Alea at Tegea, with 6x14 columns,

60 Kilikoglou et al. 1988.

61 In contemporary rooftile workshops in France (Le Ny 1988), the tiles are first fired at lowtemperatures for two days and then at high temperatures for three days. A cooling period ofone week is essential.

62 A fragmentary yet informative document for the time schedule of a tile workshop hassurvived at Montenach (Moselle) ( Archéologue 49, Aug-Sept. 2000). In translation it reads

Having worked with Anaillus [. .].dayswith Tertius 1 day3 days to transport concave tiles(to transport) 6 batches of clay to a kneading machine 3 days.

1 day to transport flat tilesto the field of Rassuraand1 day (to transport tiles) to the field of Paterclus

63 Measurements of the stoa, estimations of roof slope, and measurements of excavatedrooftiles taken from Broneer 1954, 86-8, plans X, XIII.




_____________________________________________283

measuring 19.19 x 47.55m) would have been produced during a single potting season; andthe extraordinarily large roof of the South stoa at ancient Corinth, whose dimensions at

foundation level are 164.38 x 24.38m would have not been ready in less than four to five

years (Plate VI.6 ).63 These calculations rest on the assumption that the tile workers have

only one kiln available.64 Then again, the tile makers could have worked along with the

builders of these buildings, because the rough measurements of the roof would have been

available to them before the project was begun.65 This tile workshop (which must have

attracted a large commission, because of the size of its kiln) is flankedon theEast by anumber of limestone quarries used extensively in antiquity, such as the Examilia Quarries.66

The architects, or building contractors, could have made the original negotiations with this

tile-workshop (or with others still unexcavated) on their way to and from the quarries.

Although we can approximate the production period of an average roof for a treasury

building, we are on less firm ground in estimating its total cost. Prices of tiles have survived

from antiquity but only for partial orders of rooftiles, usually for repairs of a roof, and most

64 These estimates can be considered quite modest for an annual production rate compared toethnographic data: Peacock(1979) records that the municipal brickworks in Mölln (Germany)produced annually 40,000 bricks and 10,000 roof tiles; Peacock (1982) mentions a tilery atCivry-la-Fôret (France) with an annual output of 1,500,000 tiles.

65 For similar estimates of marble required for the construction of the large temples inMagna Grecia and the costs, see Martin 1973.

66 For the use of the limestone quarries at Examilia and Mauro Spilies, to the east of AncientCorinth, and the estimated total volume of stone extracted, see Hayward 1995.




_____________________________________________284

tiles mentioned are of the simpler Laconian style.67

Using one drachma as the lowest pricethat a cover and pan tile pair could have cost in the late fourth century B.C., the roof of a

fourth century B.C. treasury building would have cost ca. 1,290 drachmae.68 Transportation

costs would raise the price even higher (± 35-40 additional drachmae), so a total of ca. 1,330

drachmae (the equivalent of a four-year salary for an architect of the Erechtheion). The cost

would have risen even more if the tiles received any extra treatment on site (e.g. covered

with pitch).This pricedoes not include the wages of the craftsmen who would tile the building.

67 Prices for tiles and bricks are collected in Orlandos 1955, 109-19; Martin 1965, 82-3. Thishypothetical cost is quite low. I estimated that a sima and a ridge tile would cost 1dr. eachand the antefix 1/2 dr. For transportation, I used the price of 6dr. 4 ob. for 200 tiles(mentioned in IG II2 1672, lines. 71-72) for tiles transported from Corinth to Eleusis.Generally on prices in antiquity, see Loomis 1998.

68 The Epidaurian building account for the Asclepios temple ( IG IV21.102) supplies us withinformation on wages of the craftsmen responsible for tiling the roof, rather than the pricesof tiles themselves (Burford 1969, 212-20: the translations are taken from her work); forprices of tiles for the Epidoteion at Epidaurus, seeibidem, 182.

ll. 46-47 Eukleon took up the contract to tile the temple for 235dr. and 3ob.ll. 52-53 Mnasikleidas took up the contract for tiles, for 799 dr.ll. 78-79 Ikadion took up the contract to provide tiles for 313 dr. and 3 ob.l. 80 to Euphraios for tiles, 140 dr.ll. 97-99 __ took up the contract for the tiles on the raking cornice of the pediment,

the antefixes and the base for the akroteria, for +320dr.

ll. 170-180 to Agakles for laying tiles and supplying them, 5dr. and 5 ob.to Ma—for tiles, 30 dr.ll. 200 for squaring up tiles, to __ , 3 dr.l. 230 to Timasitheos, for treating the tiles with pitch, 60 dr. and 5½ ob.ll. 280-290 Aristaios took up the contract to tile the rest of the tiles tiling, 45 dr.

to Aristaios, for tiling the temple, 60 dr.




_____________________________________________285

d. The Ceramic Workshop in the Ancient City

i. Artisanal quarters

ga;r ajnagkai' on ei\ nai (pa' sa ga;r dei' tai povli" tecnitw' n), kai; duvnantaidiagivgnesqai kaqavper ejn tai' " a[ llai" pov lesin aj po; th' " tev cnh" .

(Arist.Pol. 1268a 30)

because it is necessary (since every city needs craftsmen)for the craftsmen to live from their crafts, as it is done in other cities.

The next step, after locating a workshop and analyzing its personnel and its

production rate, is to examine its position in relation to the rest of the civic plan. In the cities

planned according to the Hippodameian system, as Aristotle describes, zones of the city were

reserved for industrial and/or commercial activity.69 In Piraeus, for example, this zone

encompasses the port of Kantharos, whereas in Miletus the industrial quarters are located in

the northwestern part.70 It is worth noticing that in both these cases the

commercial/industrial quarter is located near the best-located and best-protected port from

which trade can be conducted unhindered.

69 Arist.Pol. 1267b 30, 1268a 15.

70 For maps showing the zoning of these cities (commercial, administrative/religious, andmilitary) see Martin 1987, 97, fig. 1 (Piraeus) and 98, fig. 2 (Miletus). The location ofartisanal quarters in newly-founded cities is discussed in Schwandner 1988.




_____________________________________________286

Because of the unpleasant fumes, ceramic workshops tend to form potters' quarters(Kerameikoi) in ancient cities.71 In terms of craft specialization, the potters’ quarter is

equivalent to the "nucleated workshops" category (see supra). Some quarters were formed

due to the central location of the site, close to markets and road systems, such as the

Athenian Kerameikos, and other quarters developed near raw clay sources, such as the

Corinthian Kerameikos. Besides the Athenian Kerameikos, ancient sources also mention the

Kolias area, near modern Agios Kosmas on the southwest coast of Attica, where the clay as

well as the pottery production were of high quality.72 Notable cases of ancientkerameikoican also be found at Pherai (24, 80-82, 188-192 ), and at Figaretto on Corfu (197-209 ).

Very often in these quarters we find other craftsmen as well, such as bronze casters,

sculptors, and shoemakers, to mention only a few. At the Archaic site at Skala Oropou (16-

17), metal workers worked side by side with potters. Near the Athenian Kerameikos, the

Classical bronze casters were creating their statues in casting pits.73 To the southeast of the

Agora, figurine makers worked in the same neighborhood with sculptors, or rented places

71 Keramos was a hero, son of Dionysos and Ariadne (Paus. I.3.1, who assigns the naming ofthe Athenian Kerameikos to this hero). In Athens there was a deme calledKerameis, whichconsisted of many artisans, not all necessarily potters (Whitehead 1986; Vickers and Gill1994, 93-5; Sparkes 1996, 110), who worshipped the hero Keramos (Harp.s.v.). For otherunpleasant industries, see schol. Ar. Ach. 724 where tanneries, also unwelcome within thecity, were situated in an area outside the city, called the equally unpleasant name,Leprov" .

72 Suda s.v. Kwliavdo" keramh' e"< Kwliav", tovpo" th' " jAttikh' ", e[ nqa skeuvh plavttontai.levgei ou\ n o{ ti o{ sai ejpi; trocouv" fevrontai (troco; n de; to;n skeuoplastiko; n levgei), tou' t je[ stin, o}sai pro; " skeuoplasiv an ejpithvdeiai, pasw' n hJ Kwliavdo" kreivsswn w{ ste kai; bavptesqai uJpo; th' " mivltou ; see also Pliny NH 35.152.

73 Mattusch 1975, 1977; Zimmer 1990. For coexistence of various crafts, see also Chalkis-Ergatikes Katoikies (248 ). Hellenistic sculptors and potters also worked side by side inPolymylos, Kozanis (210-211, 365-367 ).




_____________________________________________287

that previously belonged to sculptors.74

The painter of the Berlin Foundry cup displays anintimate knowledge of the organization and equipment of a bronze sculptor’s workshop,

which might have been located near the painter’s workshop.75 In Hellenistic Pella, potters

and metal workers had a strong presence, as is proved by the presence of numerous kilns and

by the clay molds for metal objects.76 This phenomenon continues throughout antiquity: a

ceramic workshop in Byzantine Corinth shares a wall with the adjacent glass workshop.77

Carpenters' shops like theklinopoiei' on in Demosthenes would also be welcome neighbors

of potters since the latter can use the former's cuttings as fuel, as is done today in Moknine,Tunisia.78

The physical proximity of all these types of workshops should not be considered a

coincidence, but a choice. All of these crafts, pottery, bronzecasting, sculpture, figurines,

and glassmaking, overlap in many respects and are interdependent: the sculptors must

possess skills similar to those of potters to make their wax and clay models, or they must hire

potters to make their models. Bronzecasters must use terracotta molds fired in a ceramic

74 Young 1951.

75 Berlin, Staatliche Museen F 2294 from Vulci ( ARV 2 400.1 attributed to the FoundryPainter) Mattusch 1980 for a detailed description of the iconography.

76 Lilimbaki-Akamati 1993; cf. the coexistence of Hellenistic coroplastic workshops withmetal workshops in Petres, Florina (Adam-Veleni1998). In Imperial Chalkis ( 350-352 ) the

artisanal quarter included potters, metal workers, fullers, and sculptors.

77 Davidson 1943.





_____________________________________________288

kiln for their statues and the same is true for the glassmakers.79

Bronze sculptors also had toto be familiar with controlling temperatures for ceramic objects, since they had to fire the

clay investments of their wax models so that the wax could be evacuated. Potters need

access to leadworkers for the lead joints used to restore vessels.80 Therefore, it is no

surprise, that their pyrotechnological structures --themetallurgical furnace, the ceramic kiln,

and the glass furnace-- display so many similarities, since exchange of technical knowledge and

simultaneous development must have been inevitable.81

On the artistic level, thekoineof these workshops is reflected in the similarity in theshapes of vessels produced in different materials. Also, although scholarly discussion

traditionally had been limited to establishing whether clay vessels had been the prototypes

for metal vessels or vice versa, this dual approach needs now to be expanded to

accommodate the Hellenistic glass vessels used as tomb offerings in Pydna in Macedonia,

which are direct copies of their terracotta or metal counterparts.82 This evidence

corroborates the theory that an active artistic exchange relationship existed among all the

artisans, rather than a static, one-way, process between the original and its imitation .

In other cases, the ceramic workshops were located very close to the product for

which the pots would have been used. Potters in the Late Antique period at Palaios Oropos

79 Zimmer (1990, 159-60) emphasizes the need of bronze smiths for accessibility to largequantities of clay for their clay models.

80 See Faklaris 1997 for a vast quantity of lead joints from the Acropolis at Vergina.81 Cf. supra Excursus.

82 Ignatiadou 2000. Vickers and Gill 1994.




_____________________________________________289

(388-389 ) had their workshops near olive-pressing installations. A pottery workshopoccupied an area with two wine presses in Veria Neon Syllaton in the middle Byzantine

period (419-420 ).83 In other words, the ceramic workshops do not choose their location only

according to the rules of ceramic ecology (clay, water, and fuel resources); they also follow

the necessities of the "economic" or "market" ecology.

ii. Ceramic workshops and sanctuaries

In sanctuaries we might expect to find very good customers for ceramic products for

consumption and dedications, but curiously the sanctuaries have not provided many

workshops. It is even more surprising that the great Panhellenic sanctuaries did not house

any grand-scale ceramic production. On the other hand, the presence of a kiln within the

boundaries of a sanctuary does not automatically mean that the workshop and the sanctuary

were contemporaneous.

The Olympia (347, 392 ) and Nemea (60-62 ) kilns were mainly producing tiles and

bricks to serve the practical, immediate needs of the maintenance of the sanctuaries rather

than the religious needs of their visitors.84 The same holds true for a Roman rectangular kiln

in Dion, near Demeter's precinct. Olympia, in particular, had an extensive Classical ceramic

83 The phenomenon is well-observed in Hellenistic Alexandria with many amphoraworkshops near wineries (Empereur 1993). See also contracts between amphora makers andwine makers:POxy 3596, 3597; cf. Cockle 1981.

84 A similar function was proposed for the Archaic kiln excavated in Aphrodite's sanctuaryin Lokroi Epizephyrioi (Fischer-Hansen 2000; Costamagna and Sabbione 1990).




_____________________________________________290

workshop in the area of the South Stoa, where at least six kilns have survived (67-72 ), butunfortunately the excavation of the kilns in the 1940s was conducted very summarily in this

area. Misfired tiles recovered from the sanctuary at Kalydon in Aitolia also indicated the

presence of a kiln.85 Of all the kilns surveyed in the present study, twenty-six kilns from

eight sites were excavated near sanctuaries (Table VI.8 ). Of these, only six workshop areas

(in four different sites) are encountered in the periods between Geometric and Classical, and

four for the periods before and after.

GEOMETRIC

ARCHAIC

CLASSICAL HELLENISTIC ROMAN

PELOPONNESE Nemea ( 60-62 )

Olympia

(67-74 )

Olympia

(347, 392 )

CENTRAL Aulis ( 247 ) Philia

(354-355 )NORTHERN

Dion ( 212-213 )AEGEAN Amorgos ( 13 )

Prinias ( 31-36 )

Amorgos ( 227 )

Table VI.8: Sites with kilns in association with sanctuaries.

No sanctuary seems to have housed a pottery workshop before the Archaic period.

At Prinias, however, in the early seventh century B.C., the large workshop with six kilns (31-

85 Dyggve and Poulsen 1948, 201; Mertens-Horn 1978, esp. 54, n. 134; Antonetti 1992, 253.




_____________________________________________291

36) produced pottery that was used as votive cups in the sanctuary located on the oppositeacropolis. In Lato (28-30 ), during the Archaic period, the kilns are intersected by the later

construction of the temple, so any contemporaneity and relationship between the two is

excluded (Plate II.5 ).

In a few other cases there are only indications for pottery production on site: for

example, at the Mycenaean remains of the Apollo Maleatas sanctuary at Epidaurus, materials

belonging to a ceramic kiln were discovered.86

This absence of pottery workshops stands in vivid contrast to the relatively frequentdiscovery of metal workshops close to or inside sanctuaries. Twenty-three out of the forty

metal workshops published by Zimmer are located inside sanctuaries.87 The weight of the

final product and the high risk involved in its transportation may account for their proximity

to the final place of display.

86 Lambrinoudakis 1988.

87 Data taken from Zimmer 1990: at Olympia, on the slopes of the Athenian Acropolis, atNemea, six in the Athenian Agora, and six workshops in other parts of a city. See Huber1991, 1997 for a metal worker’s workshop near the temple of Apollo Daphnephoros at Eretriawith rich bibliography about other similar cases.




_____________________________________________292

iii. Ceramic workshops and cemeteries

For a long time there was a lingering, unfounded assumption that crafts associated

with a high risk of fire and of air or water pollution were placed near or replaced cemeteries

on the outskirts of cities.88

PERIOD SITE

Bronze Age Kavousi (151 )Zarkos (107 )

GeometricAthens, Makriyianni (02)Argos (03)Torone (11 )

Archaic Skala Oropou (16-17 )

Classical

Athens, Eupolidos St. (37-39 )Athens, Kerameikos (40-50 )Athens, Lenormant Ave. (51-53 )

Athens, Monastiriou St. (54)Sindos (86-89 )

Hellenistic

Athens, Evangelismos (155-157 )Chalkis (248 )Elateia (175 )Eretria (17)Metropoli Karditsas (353 )

Byzantine Thebes (416 )

Table VI.9: Sites with kilns in association with cemeteries.

88 See especially Papadopoulos J. 1989, 1996 for a discussion of workshops near cemeteries.




_____________________________________________293

The Athenian Kerameikos encapsulated this notion in the best way in that the

potters' workshops and a cemetery were in close proximity to each other. Although it is

undeniable that many kilns have been excavated in areas that were used at one time or

another as cemeteries, this association should not be overestimated. The archaeological

record contains many workshops associated with cemeteries, for the simple fact that

cemeteries had received more attention by excavators and were investigated more

thoroughly. Once habitation quarters were also excavated, then cemeteries ceased to havethe monopoly on being neighbors of workshops. With the amount of evidence available

now, it cannot be argued that cemeteries were preferred over other areas of a city for potters'

workshops.

For statistical reasons I supply some examples of kilns excavated near or inside the

area of a cemetery (Table VI.9 ). This phenomenon is witnessed in different areas and

periods.89 Three reasons can be suggested for this coexistence: first, a workshop near a

cemetery could conveniently supply offerings for relatives to use when visiting the graves of

the deceased. Second, the unpleasant by-products of ceramic production (heat, smoke, dust)

would be least offensive if the workshop was located in the necropolis, and vice versa.

Third, the confines of the city walls might have restricted the potters’ access to their raw

materials (clay, water, fire wood), and they probably preferred the more open area outside

the city limits. Finally, a less likely reason might be that the potters had more leeway to

dispose of their unsuccessful products inside a cemetery. Each of these suggestions applies

89 There are also some cases of kilns found in association with dispersed or individualburials: Skala Oropou (16-17 ), Nea Philadelpheia in Thessaloniki (370 ), Europos (363 ).




_____________________________________________294

only if the stratigraphical relationship between cemetery and workshop is fully understood ateach site.

iv. Ceramic workshops in the agoras and along roads

Pottery workshops, despite their fumes and debris, did appear near market centers

(ajgoraiv) or major roads. More unpleasant industries such as foundries were also commonoccupants of central places in a city.90 Many Athenian workshops are located along roads

leading outside the city or toward the ports.91 Amphora-makers in Phari Thasos (25-26 ), and

Figaretto, Corfu (197-209 ) preferred to locate their workshops within a short distance (ca. 2

miles) of ports.

Some other features, such as frequent location of the shops along the main roads,

seem to hold true throughout the periods, and pertain more to the meaning of the workshops.

In the case of the roads one has to take into consideration the archaeological bias of

excavating major streets in order to retrieve the city plan and the interrelationship of major

buildings to each other.

It should not be overlooked that quite often the clay-workers would establish their

workshops next to a major building project, just as had been done by the masons, sculptors,

or metalworkers. Clay in large quantities, if not as heavy as stone, is still not easily

transportable. In many cases, therefore, the ceramic workshops followed the projects, and

90 Mattusch 1975, 1977; Zimmer 1990, 19. Their studies show that these concerns are aproduct of our modern insurance-based way of thinking.

91 Young 1951; Baziotopoulou-Valavani 1992.




_____________________________________________295

were set up to fire the rooftiles of a major building (e.g. Nemea (60-61 ), or the hypocaustcolumns, floors, and heating system of baths (e.g. Olympia (73), Chania (91). It is therefore

not surprising that kilns are often found next to baths. The ceramic establishments were

removed after the completion of the project.



EPILOGUE_____________________________________________

296

EPILOGUE

The aim of this study was to define, analyze, and explain a very important structure

of a ceramic workshop, the kiln. Although ceramics in ancient Greece could have been fired

in a limited quantity in other firing structures (such as bonfires or even inside ovens), the

percentage of pottery thus produced is negligible. In this study only the two-chambered

kilns (with combustion and firing chambers) that could attain temperatures above 750°C

have been considered. In the preceding chapters the ceramic kiln has been the focus of our

investigations in isolation (Chs. I-II), in comparison with similar technological structures

(Excursus), in its chronological and typological parameters (Chs. III-V); and finally it was

reinstated in its natural setting, the ceramic workshop (Ch. VI) where it was used to

address issues of craft specialization, size of workshop area and personnel.

In this final part of my discussion I would like to draw a synoptic picture as offered

by the evidence of kilns and the chronological and geographical distribution of their types.

High priority should be given to the systematic excavation of the physical remains of



EPILOGUE_____________________________________________

297

ceramic workshops and their kilns. After presenting what we have been able to gain from

the kilns, and what our limitations are due to lack of evidence, I will offercertain future

directions in which this study can engage us.

i. Towards a meaningful excavation, recording and dating of a kiln site

Despite the high number of catalogued kilns in our survey (459), we should notunderestimate the fact that many entries are incomplete, in regard to shape, date, or

dimension. It should not be overlooked that out of 459 known examples of kilns, for as

many as in 75 (one sixth of the total) there is no information about their shape. For an

additional 187 kilns (113 circular kilns and 74 rectangular), corresponding to over 40% of

the entire corpus, the internal arrangment is not available either because the excavation was

not completed out of fear that the perforated floor would collapse, or due to constraints of

time. When combined, these numbers indicate that 262 kilns out of 459 (or 57%) of the

entire corpus suffer from incomplete documentation. It is likely that most of the kilns of

unknown type must have been circular, with a circular support that has left no traces either as

a result of post-depositional actions in antiquity or due to modern excavation techniques.

Such cases, although of minimal help for typological purposes, are still quite valuable

regarding the location of workshops.

The correct excavation and identification of a kiln is the first and most essential step

in any interpretative process. The lowly character of a production site does not inspire

archaeologists to develop meticulous techniques of excavation and recording. Swan, in his



EPILOGUE_____________________________________________

298

study of the kilns of Roman Britain outlines clearly the best methodology of a detailed

recording of excavated kilns in order to retrieve as much information as available.1 The

French archaeologists, led by Dufaÿ, emphasize the importance of the study of stratigraphy

of the ash layers inside a kiln in order to calculate the minimum number of firings conducted

in a kiln.2

A detailed description and measurements of the structural parts of a kiln

(combustion chamber, stoking channel, interior support of the perforated floor) should be

offered. Special awareness should be recruited for the identification of fragments of

perforated floor, whose shapes are usually deceptive and elusive (supra Ch. 2,Plate II.7 ).

The type of support and its dimensions (recoverable even from a sectional excavation of a

kiln) must be mentioned in the publication of the kiln, since, as it is argued in this work, it

helps in detecting local and/or regional traditions. A closer analysis of fuel remains inside

kilns can elucidate whether certain types of fuel prevailed at certain times and/or areas,

although it is most likely that ancient potters generally utilized as fuel what was seasonally

and regionally available.

Given the preliminary typology offered in this study, it will be feasible for

excavators to compare the newly-found kilns against a typology and examine the similarities

and peculiarities of their case. Once identification and recording have taken place, the next

challenge is to assign a date to the kiln. Because the methods for dating kilns affect any

1 Swan 1984, ch. 9, 127-31.

2 Dufaÿ 1996; Dufaÿ et al. 1997.



EPILOGUE_____________________________________________

299

chronological observations, it is necessary to survey the ways in which kilns are dated. The

process of digging through earlier layers to construct the combustion chamber makes

stratigraphical observations frequently confusing and unreliable.3 The dates assigned to the

ceramic kilns depend largely on the dating of the pottery found inside, or in association with

them. Yet various other formation processes can account for the presence of pottery inside a

kiln. First, abandoned kilns without a dome attract intruding sherds from later periods.

Therefore, even pottery found “on the floor of the combustion chamber” of a kiln should be

treated with caution when one tries to establish the date of the activity for a kiln. Second, the

workmen who build a kiln dig through earlier levels, thus contaminating later strata with

earlier pottery. Finally, random sherds that happen to be readily available can be used for

the construction of the kiln; therefore, they should not be treated as examples of the products

fired inside the kiln. Only a homogeneous body of pottery (or of wasters) can represent what

the kiln originally produced. Generally speaking, pottery dates can indicate the century of

the kiln's operation, but for any closer dating, one should rigorously scrutinize the associated

pottery. Kilns, as ethnographic data informs us, have a lifetime of two to three generations

(supra Ch. II). The construction of kilns of average size requires only a modest investment

of time and labor, and (as is true with any type of technological equipment or installation),

after some decades have passed, it is more economical to replace them than to try to repair

them. Therefore, one should face broad dates assigned to kilns with scepticism since it is not

3 The Middle Helladic kiln in Eretria (103 ) (Courbin 1963, 82) has been found in theClassical Agora of the town, but has been dated earlier because its elevation is below theClassical horizon at the site.



EPILOGUE_____________________________________________

300

likely that they operated over many centuries, such as the Figaretto Kerameikos on Corfu

(197-209 ) or the Geometric kiln on Amorgos (13), which, according to the excavators'

interpretation, would have fired pottery from Geometric to Hellenistic times.

ii. The Greek ceramic updraft kiln: a stable technological feature

The Greek ceramic kiln as a pyrotechnological structure will remain largelyunchanged throughout antiquity and until the late Byzantine period. But the early stages of

Greek ceramic pyrotechnology are not well documented. Although Neolithic ceramics had

been fired in high temperatures, no two-chambered kiln with an intermediate floor has been

unearthed yet in Neolithic layers. Secure examples of ceramic kilns where fuel and pots are

placed in different chambers appear first in the Middle Helladic period and are of circular

shape. The rectangular shape for ceramic kilns was adopted in a very restricted fashion on

Crete during the Late Minoan period. It was used for a specific, and still technologically

undeciphered, type of kiln with multiple channels (TypeIIe ) (Ch. IV), which has also been

described tentatively as a horizontal, cross-draft kiln. For later periods, changes in

preference of types and sizes are related to regional preferences and the degree of

specialization within each workshop (Chs. III, V).

Only in recent times, with the introduction of glazed ceramics, did the kilns acquire

a second compartment in the firing chamber, while nevertheless retaining the basic structure

of an updraft kiln. The two most problematic parts to which future excavators must pay

closer attention are the stoking channel and the dome of the firing chamber. These parts



EPILOGUE_____________________________________________

301

which create the draft in these updraft kilns, if recovered, contain valuable information about

controlling firing temperatures.

This stability in the construction of the kiln forces us to reconsider skeptically the

evolutionary patterns that have usually been proposed regarding the development of the

ceramic kiln. The usual evolutionary scheme from open bonfire, to pit-firing, and, finally, to

the various arrangements for separating the fuel from the pottery might fit a scenario of

technological progression, but it does not necessarily reflect the order of steps that specific

cultures took in their adoption of a ceramic kiln.4 The general consensus is that cultures only

reluctantly change their firing structures if those satisfactorily fulfil their needs (Ch. III).

Not all cultures will go through the above-mentioned stages. Some skip stages, and some

never “evolve” if other economic, social, or technical factors do not compel them to do so.

This diachronic study reinforces a theoretical reconstruction where pottery

technology does not follow a linear development, but occurs in cycles (not at regular

intervals) of appearance, development, and disappearance. When pottery technology

reappears in an area or a period, we cannot predict whether it will start from the same point it

left off; whether it will begin from a later point of the previous development process; or

whether it will develop along a completely different route.

4 For a discussion of such evolutionary diagrams, see Delcroix and Huot 1972 (whoemphasize that more evolved kilns can appear earlier at some Near Eastern sites, whereasless evolved kilns continue into later periods at others. Cf. Rhodes 1968, 3-27); Rice 1997b(equally skeptical).



EPILOGUE_____________________________________________

302

iii. Shared pyrotechnology and vocabulary

A parallel problem is the correct identification of a firing structure. Fired clay walls

lined with clay plaster that is vitrified to a smaller or larger extent should not be

automatically interpreted as a ceramic kiln. A variety of industrial activities, from bronze-

casting to glass forming and color production, could have caused such a result. The

Excursus presented the most common pyrotechnological structures, such as the domestic

baking oven, the furnaces in bath complexes, in bronze and glass workshops, and the

consistently misinterpreted lime kilns. This review demonstrated the similarities of all such

structures and should enable the archaeologist to notice subtle differences that provide

sufficient clues for the correct identification or, at least, for the elimination of some options.

Ultimately the correct interpretation of a structure relies on a careful examination of

a number of factors, but one can single out the peculiar function of the perforated floor as

almost exclusively associated with a ceramic kiln. Other characteristics, such as double

stoking channels on opposite ends or the presence of a stone bench for lime kilns are

common, but not restricted to lime kilns. It is absolutely crucial to view all these structures

as sharing a group of fundamental pyrotechnological rules (e.g. lining the walls with clay for

best heat insulation or proportional relationships in the sizes of the composite parts of the kiln).

Their builders, whose workshops often were near each other (Ch. VI), all had a basic

pyrotechnological knowledge.

To rephrase Bakirtzi's quote from the beginning of the Excursus that "Not every

round structure is a [ceramic] kiln,” I would say that “not all vitrified walls belong to a

ceramic kiln.” Walls covered with clay, often vitrified, and slag are ubiquitous in many

structures. A survey of the interior of various structures in which high temperatures were



EPILOGUE_____________________________________________

303

developed alerts the archaeologist to consider many options before identifying a circular

structure with vitrified walls as a ceramic kiln. The requirements that a metallurgical

furnace, a lime kiln or an oven had to fulfill in order to function, and the identification traits

that would have survived, display an array of similarities and differences that relate these

structures to each other. Multiple uses of a single structure may also complicate the picture.

In the end, it is the context and logic that will cast the die.

Intrinstically related to the issue of shared pyrotechnology is the shared meaning of

many ancient words that described these structures (Ch. I):kavmino" is an all-encompassing

term for any type of pyrotechnological structure, whether it fired pottery or smelted metal.

The main occurrence of a word relating to a ceramic kiln is on the Penteskoufia plaque

F482+627+943, where next to the depiction of a kiln there is the dipintoKAMINOS. The

problematic (in authorship and date) poem about demons that can destroy the load of a

ceramic kiln is also entitled KAMINOS. jIpnov", klivbano" (krivbano"), and fou' rno"

primarily meant a baking oven (usually for bread), but later, all these words were treated as

synonyms tokavmino" by the lexicographers.

iv. Misinterpretations and the Penteskoufia plaques

Inadequate experience with excavated examples of kilns also accounts for the

incorrect interpretations of the depiction of kilns on the Archaic terracotta plaques from

Penteskoufia at ancient Corinth, which were long thought to represent metallurgical

furnaces. In the present study the group of eighty-three plaques with certain or likely



EPILOGUE_____________________________________________

304

representations of kilns has been revisited with the aim of better examining their

iconography (which is largely standardized) and their context.

The scenes of the kilns were decorated by a small number of painters, which

explains their shared iconography and their short life-span. Most of the kiln scenes cover

one side of plaques that are decorated on both sides, and only one quarter of these plaques

have Poseidon depicted on them. It is therefore unlikely that these are votive dedications to

Poseidon to secure a successful firing. Certain oddities were observed, not only in the

plaques depicting kilns, but also in the entire corpus of the plaques. The final two scenarios

that are likely to apply to these plaques are:

a. If they are dedications foundin situinside or nearby a sanctuary to Poseidon, this

religious expression was very limited both chronologically (mid-sixth century B.C.) and

geographically (ancient Corinth), and adopted by a small group of potters, probably the

successive owners of a single workshop (or a few workshops) at ancient Corinth. There is

also the possibility that these plaques were placed inside the kiln to test the progress of the

firing while, at the same time, the potters addressed their requests to Poseidon and later

dedicated these plaques to him.

b. If these votive plaques were not found in a religious context, then one should

place more weight on the absence (so far) of any other sacred architecture and/or deposits,

the sketchy careless drawings on some of them, the changes in the choice of decoration,

indications that they were done in haste, their small size (the largest being 0.12x0.20m), andthat in most of them both sides were decorated, often with a different orientation on each

side. Considering all of these issues, it seems possible that they are products rejected by a

nearby pottery workshop which produced, among other items, votive plaques for a sanctuary



EPILOGUE_____________________________________________

306

This typology was developed with the archaeologists in mind, and was intended tofacilitate their attempts to incorporate even a partially excavated kiln into a general

typological framework. It is not likely that technological efficiency varied considerably

among all these types.

More than one sixth of the kilns (75/459 or 16%) cannot be attributed even to a

general shape, and a combined 40% (187/459) lack a specific subtype. A disheartening 56%

of the kilns, therefore, do not have complete documentation. This again underscores the

need for detailed excavation and recording of kilns, even in cases when they are backfilled.Of the remaining 197 examples whose types can clearly be identified, the majority of

kilns of both circular and rectangular shape have adopted the central column/pillar (Ia, IIa )

or the central wall (Ib, IIb ) system of support. It is more than likely that a large number of

the I? andII? can also be assigned to these types. Despite the large corpus of known kilns,

their overall uniformity makes spatial, and temporal trends in development difficult to

detect. The only strong correlation of type and place is the rectangular channel type of

Minoan kiln, which is limited to Crete (IIe ), as well as the rectangular subtype with pairs of

cross-walls, which is characteristic of northern Greece (IIc ). Because of the popularity of

these types, it is impossible to use them as chronological or geographical indicators,

although a distinctive preference forIIa by the Roman Athenian potters, and ofIIb by the

Peloponnesian potters, is discernible. The typesIIc (with three to five pairs of cross-walls)

and IIe (with parallel channels) have a limited geographical and chronological distribution:

IIc in Hellenistic and Roman northern Greece, andIIe in Minoan Crete. The less popular

ones (e.g.If : no central support orIg : with an internal bench) are anomalous, and they have

no further impact on the general development of Greek kilns.

The aim of building a typology for the Greek kilns is two-fold: first, to establish the

range and the frequency of types favored by potters in Greece in different regions and



EPILOGUE_____________________________________________

307

periods, and second, to compare it with other typologies across the Mediterranean basin. Itis easily seen that even with a comparatively simple structure such as the ceramic kiln, each

culture had a predilection for specific types. Although it is more likely that each culture

developed similar types independently, it is worthwhile pursuing in the future a systematic

study of the kiln types of Greek colonies (e.g. in Magna Graecia5 and the Black Sea6, or

even within Greece, such as the Parian colony at Thasos) to detect whether the immigrant

potters from mainland Greece brought with them not only the shapes and favorite themes,

but also their technological preferences (Plate III.17 ).

The significance of rectangular kilns: As a result of this study, we can go beyond the

common observation that rectangular kilns fired primarily rooftiles. 7 In many instances

rectangular kilns are not associated with other permanent structures in workshops, such as

clay-settling basins. We cannot always attribute this dearth of evidence to excavation

techniques, because even in the cases where extended areas around the kilns have been

investigated, they sometimes provide no signs of permanent workshop installations.

5 McDonald 1981 for the immigration of Classical Athenian potters to Magna Graecia. Thekilns at Basilicata in Metaponto, for example, (Adamesteanu et al. 1980) have an unusuallylong stoking channel when compared with Greek kilns from the metropolitan areas. Fordistribution of kilns in major Italian colonies, see Cuomo Di Caprio 1992a.

6 E.g. Coja 1974, in her study of the kilns in Istria, notes Archaic kilns of type If (Ø 1.05m),Classical kilns of type Ia (Ø 1.00-1.05m), and a strong preference in the Hellenistic periodfor kilns of type Ib (with two parallel walls) and of large dimensions (Ø 2.60 and 3.60). Allof the kilns presented were circular in shape.

7 Hasaki 2001.



EPILOGUE_____________________________________________

308

This isolation of rectangular kilns suggests that they were probably constructed onlyto serve short-term and project-specific needs by a workshop that had its headquarters

somewhere else in the area. They are often located in sanctuaries with a bustling

construction activity (e.g. Nemea, Olympia). They are also to be found near baths whose

construction requires large amounts of tiles for the hypocausts (e.g. Olympia).

Aside from the single instances of isolated rectangular kilns, we have two more

situations involving a larger group of kilns:

1. two or more rectangular kilns placed together or in proximity [Olympia (347,

392 ), Corinth (64-65 ), Nemea (60-62 ), Krannon (181-182 ), Delphi (395-400 )]. All of these

sites have a strong ceramic workshop tradition, and the rectangular kilns should be seen as a

clear indicator of a high-level specialization in the ceramic industry.

2. a single rectangular kiln as part of a large established workshop[(e.g. Lenormant

(51-53 ), Pella (218-223 ), Sindos (86-89 )]. Here we notice a smaller-scale specialization

inside a workshop, which, despite its primary production line requiring a circular kiln, also

invests in a specialized rectangular kiln for firing commissions of larger ceramic products.

vi. Numbers and meanings

The attached catalogue and Appendix I at the end of this study are, of course, not the

final ones. Ceramic kilns appear daily in rescue excavations, and now they are actually

better recorded. My aim has been to establish a substantial reference group for each period,

stressing major types and characteristics. Trends, not absolute numbers, are what I was after.

The newly excavated examples can then be compared to what isnow thought to be the norm.



EPILOGUE_____________________________________________

309

And it is equally possible, as with any numerical statistics, that what seems now to be thenorm can soon become the exception with the addition of new material.

PERIOD TOTALBronze Age (BA) 61Geometric 14Archaic 22Classical 57

Hellenistic 87 (96)*Roman 135 (144)*Late Antique 18Byzantine 23Undated 33Grand Total 459

* with the addition of the kilns dated as Hellenistic-Roman

Table Epil.2: Chronological distribution of Greek kilns.

For example, the Hellenistic pottery workshops at Mesogaia in Attica feature kilns of a

variety of sizes and shapes, compared to the remaining kilns from Attica of that period.

From the table above one can make some interesting observations: only thirty-three of the

459 kilns cannot be dated. This does not mean automatically that the remaining 426 have

specific (or reliable) dates, since most of them are dated only within a general period.

Particularly problematic are the kilns that fall in transitional phases, such as the fourth

century B.C. (grouped as Classical in this study), and the transition from Hellenistic to

Roman (9 kilns). The numbers of each period cannot automatically be compared to each

other without taking into account the length of periods that they cover: for example, the

sixty-one kilns of the Bronze Age span a period of 2000 years, whereas the fifty-seven kilns

of Classical Greece correspond to less than two centuries.



EPILOGUE_____________________________________________

310

vii. Locations and meanings

Athens, as a large and well-excavated site, ranks at the top of the list, followed closely

by the Peloponnese with her long history.

TYPESREGION Unknown I II TotalAttica 19 34 62 115Peloponnese 25 57 27 109Central 9 35 23 67Western 3 17 3 23Northern 6 24 23 53Aegean 16 61 16 93Grand Total 75 229 155 459

Table Epil.3: Distribution of general types according to regions.

But despite Athens’ prominent place in the history of ceramics, no early kilns prior

to the Late Geometric period [Athenian Agora (01)] appear there. The Peloponnese has

more circular kilns than rectangular, but the latter have a strong presence. In Attica the

twenty-seven rectangular kilns of the Kotzia Square (274-300 ) skew the picture, and it is

more probable that the circular kilns were in the majority in Attica as well, but not by much.

The Aegean ranks third due to Crete, with 63/96 or two thirds of the kilns, although it is

interesting that most large islands (e.g. Chios, Samos, Paros, Rhodes) had their own

production of coarse ware, which made them self-reliant in terms of pottery-production.



EPILOGUE_____________________________________________

311

1. Attica2. Achaia3. Herakleiou4. Argolis5. Lasithiou

11548282623

6. Euboea7. Elis8. Ionian Islands9. Dodekanese10. Magnesia11. Pella12. Cyclades13. Phocis14. Chalkidiki15. Corinthia16. Chania

181514131313121210108

17. Thessaloniki18. Boeotia19. Kavala20. Karditsa21. Arta22. Kozanis23. Locris

24. Arcadia25. Chios26. Ioannina26. Messenia27. Rethymno

8776555

43333*

*Cos, Evros, Florina, Laconia, Larissa, Trikala have two entires and

Aetolia, Amphissa, Emathisas, Kilkis, Samos, Thresprotia, Veria have only example

Table Epil. 4: Distribution of kilns according to prefectures.

Within Crete, the prefectures of Herakleiou and Lasithiou provide most of the

examples. There are comparatively fewer rectangular kilns there than in the Peloponnese.

Fifteen of them are found on Crete and the remaining two on Samos and on Delos, indicating

that the rectangular shape was an unpopular choice among Aegean potters.



EPILOGUE_____________________________________________

312

Central Greece has a long history of potting beginning in the Middle Helladic period[at Kirrha (104-106 )]; this continues in the community in Magnesia [Mycenaean Dimini

(116 ) to Hellenistic Pherai (Velestino) (188-192 )], and finishes in the active Late Antique

ceramic production at Delphi (394-400 ). Northern Greece has an almost equal distribution

of circular and rectangular kilns, and in this case this pattern should be considered closer to

reality than was the case in Attica. We cannot yet determine the motivation for the

development of the indigenous typeIIc . Western Greece is the least technologically

advanced area with the fewest kilns, and a very narrow range of types. In such ageographical survey, the negative results (i.e. the absence of kilns from a specific period, or

during a specific period) deserve equal attention as positive results and further study.

After identifying the locations of ceramic workshops, the next step in a future study

is to examine their commercial relationships and the “pockets” of isolated production.

Secondly, the plotting of the locations of production can also be correlated to the sources of

raw materials as they are detected through petrographic analyses of the clays. A richer data

set of the distances of workshops from raw materials can be established to substantiate or

refute the ceramic ecologists’ view that most raw material sources lay five to ten kilometers

from the workshop.

viii. The kiln as a yardstick of ceramic production (or size does matter)

The Kiln and the Potter:Systematic recording of the sizes of the ancient Greek kilns

permits us to attempt certain calculations regarding the production potential of an ancient

workshop, since our assumption is that the potters built their kilns in sizes that would allow

production at a satisfactory pace. The overview of Greek kilns and the workshops that



EPILOGUE_____________________________________________

313

housed them indicates that the average ceramic workshops of most of Greek antiquity wereequipped with one or two kilns (Ch. VI). These establishments could have functioned with a

workforce of four to six people with one master potter. The larger workshops with three and

more kilns could have accommodated perhaps two master potters. Recently the analysis of

fingerprints on a Classical deposit in Metaponto also indicated a comparably structured

workforce: four different persons were identified who participated in distinct phases of pot-

making, such as forming the vessels, dipping them in glaze,and adding details to them.8

The sizes of the kilns, and the reconstructed minimum sizes of the surface area covered by aworkshop (Ch. VI), point towards smaller workshops far away from the imaginary factories

of Classical fine wares (Ch. VI).9 Even in Athens where one would expect larger workshops,

the difference is in the number of workshops present and not in their sizes. Earlier attempts

by Scheibler (1984) to disperse these “ghosts” of ceramic factories took into account the

number of pots that a potter could produce per year, and argued strongly that the

Nikosthenes workshopcould not possiblyhave employed almost forty painters unless they

were each producingten pots per year,an impossibly low number. Scheibler assigns most

workshops to a “family-business” category with two to five employees, midway between a

one-person business and a larger workshop of five to ten employees. Hannestad (1988) has

also calculated that a vase painter could have decorated at least 570 undecorated pots per

year. Such a rhythm combined with the average size of the kilns is consistent with a small-

scale workshop that employs one master potter surrounded by three to five assistants.

8 Wade 2001: craftsman A did the oenochoae; craftsmen B and C dipped vessels; craftsmanD retouched vessels. The fingerprints of craftsmen B, C, and D often appear together in thesame vessel. Gender could not be identified.

9 See Beazley’ s ABV and ARV catalogues (see supra Introduction).



EPILOGUE_____________________________________________

314

A workshop with four to six persons working full-time and using two kilns is a safecandidate for an average workshop in ancient Greece. The importance of such a

reconstruction lies in the full-time occupation of its workforce rather than its size. The total

volume of production of Greek pottery may still have been considerable, but it was not the

result of “ceramic factories” operating in the Kerameikoi of different cities. It may be closer

to reality to reconstructmany, medium-scaleworkshops that produced comprehensively

large amounts of pottery. And perhaps we should also turn our focus to middlemen, the

distributors of the produced pottery, who probably were not potters themselves.10

The Kiln and the Kaiki (boat): While the construction of a ceramic kiln is a

technological choice, its size is an indicator of volume and frequency of production. We

have estimated that a small Geometric kiln 1.00m in diameter could fire 300 small conical

cups, or sixty oenochoae, or ten large amphoras, and most probably it fired combinations of

these numbers. Similarly, one thousand Archaic miniature aryballoi could have been

produced in a month and fired inside other larger pots in two to three firings. The degree of

production is determined not only by the sizes of the kilns, but also by the transport capacity

of the major means of transportation available in ancient times, especially the boats in a sea

country such as Greece. Based on the excavation of ancient Mediterranean shipwrecks of

the fifth and fourth centuries B.C., it has been estimated that an ancient boat could carry

between 1,500 and 4,200 amphoras depending on its size, or as few as 400 amphoras (e.g.

the Kyrenia shipmeasuring only 14.00m in length).11 A Classical kiln 1.50 in diameter could

10 The importance of middlemen is also emphasized by Hannestad 1988.

11 Hadjidaki 1996.



EPILOGUE_____________________________________________

315

hypothetically fire sixty to eighty amphoras of Coan type, and the 400 amphoras couldtherefore have been produced and fired in almost two months in a single workshop with only

one kiln. The larger cargos of 1,500 or more amphoras could have been the product of a

normal workshop with two kilns over the summer, or of a combination of two to four

average amphora workshops on an island. It is evident, then, that a medium-size island like

Thasos or Cos could produce and distribute its merchandise with its own means. For larger

sea journeys, tradesmen in larger centers like Athens may have rented a bigger boat where

pots from different areas were gathered. After all, the period of intense productivity (April-October) coincided nicely with the optimal navigation period in the Mediterranean.

An overview of the sizes of ancient kilns shows a solid consistency of sizes between

1.30-3.00m., and only some examples of rectangular kilns (most likely tile kilns) attained

larger dimensions of more than 4.00 on each side. The extreme diameter of 7.00m in a kiln

on Rhodes (377) is still puzzling, but the recent excavation of a large circular kiln in the

Attic countryside shows us that we should not be surprised by such unusual sizes. A

cautionary point, of course, is that size alone cannot determine the output, which is a

correlate of specialization, intensity, and demand. Even the rectangular kilns for Arretine

wares (first century B.C to first century A.D.) were not much different in size from the Greek

norm, but unlike the Greek examples, they could fire 10.000 vessels each time.12

The Ceramic Workshop: Whether we discuss the output of a potter or the capacity of

an ancient boat, we ultimately refer to the degree of specialization and production of the

12 About five to ten workshops of Arretine ware were capable of firings of 25,000-30,000pots each time. Their capacity owed much to their higher firing chambers (Fülle 1997).



EPILOGUE_____________________________________________

316

ceramic workshops in ancient Greece. It has been ascertained above that most workshopsbelong to the category of “workshop-industry,” and few are more elaborate versions of that

category. But nowhere in the archaeological record have we encountered a workshop that

can be called a factory.

The frequent dearth of sherds in the excavated kilns and their surroundings provides

us with little information about the degree of specialization on specific shapes in each locale.

But it is safe to say that the specialization of a workshop focused first on ware (coarse or

fine) and secondly on the size of the pots (large or small). The Athenian workshops(especially those at Lenormant Ave. (51-53 ) seem to have produced only decorated (and

perhaps glazed) pottery. Rooftiles, amphoras, and large coarse ware vessels tended to be

produced in the same workshop.13 The Roman workshops in Kotzia Square in Athens (274-

300 ) housed manufacturers of rooftiles and lamps.

If such a characterization seems disappointing to the student who expected a much

more industrialized society, I hasten to emphasize that these workshops could have

supported a year-round period of operation. Residential areas are conspicuously absent

within workshop sites and many of them are quite removed from houses. So even in

architectural terms we can no longer speak of household production. The investment to

build a workshop on a separate piece of land and equip it with settling basins and kilns

betrays a year-round, full-time commitment on the part of the potters, and not a part-time

activity in which land cultivators engaged when their agricultural obligations allowed them

to do so.

13 This emerging picture is validated not only by excavated workshops [Eretria [350 )], butalso by the extensive survey of amphora workshops in western Crete by Empereur et al.1991, where evidence of this diversity in production was attested.



EPILOGUE_____________________________________________

317

ix. What percentage of ancient kilns have survived?

With almost five hundred kilns recorded in this survey, one may wonder what

percentage of ancient kilns have survived. The kilns were excavated in more than 120 cities

or towns, with Argos, Athens, Corinth, Patras, Pella, and Pherai having the most

occurrences; almost ninety places are represented by only one workshop (with one or more

kilns).

Although a firm number is hard to determine, it may be illuminating to turn again tothe ethnographic record to see the distribution of ceramic workshops in an area in recent

years. The test case is Crete, where within a generation’s time (1900-1930) in four sites a

total of 184 kilns operating in 170 workshops have been recorded.14 At the same time, only

sixty-two kiln sites have survived from antiquity on Crete; if we are aiming at the broader

picture, since in thirty years 190 kilns have survived, then within a total of 4,500 years (3000

B.C–1500A.D.) one should have recovered ca. 28,500 kilns on Crete alone. For more

conservative estimates, since a kiln can easily last and function for two generations (see Ch.

II, 71), then the optimum number is 14,250 kilns. Thesixty-two kilns that have been

identified may thus constitute more or less 0.2-0.4% of the kilns functioning in antiquity on

Crete. Any attempt of this kind should always consider fluctuations in demography or shifts

in settlement patterns.

14 Psaropoulou 1996.



EPILOGUE_____________________________________________

318

x. Integrated approaches to ceramic technology and production

In the end one has to admit that only the physical remains (primarily the kiln) of a

ceramic workshop should be called a "workshop" in its fullest sense. Petrographic analyses

of clay sources can certainly point to the suitability of a place for developing a ceramic

industry and help in detecting intraregional differences or chronological preferences. They

cannot, however, inform us conclusively about the extent of such an industry. It is common,

after all, for one workshop to use more than one type of clay, and one should not convert the

number of clay types in an area into number of workshops operating in that area.15

Speculative is also the number of workshops that used this specific source at a particular site.

In general, a broader-based focus on pottery production and distribution will allow

us to refine our notions about the nature of Greek ceramic production, and I offer this

analysis of Greek kilns as one of the foundations for such an approach. By bringing nearer

the potters and their technological choices, the pots, the kilns, and the middlemen, we can

equip ourselves more securely against the threats or unfounded speculations of any Sabaktes,

or Omodamos, or other kiln demon.

15 In Vasanello (west-central Italy), a pottery workshop would use no fewer than four typesof clay, each one for specific types of ceramics (Peña 1992).



C ATALOGUE OF K ILNS : G EOMETRIC TO C LASSICAL

_____________________________________________319

CATALOGUE

GEOMETRIC TOCLASSICAL(ca. 1100-300 B.C.)

The catalogue is strongly influenced by two criteria: first, chronology and second,

geography, so that it can be easily accessible to scholars engaged either in chronological and/or

geographical surveys.

Each kiln has its own number, even when they belong to the same workshop. Their

presentation follows a chronological order:

Submycenaean and Geometric (1100-700 B.C.)

Orientalizing and Archaic (700-480 B.C.)

Classical (480-300 B.C.).

The Classical period is extended in order to include the entire fourth century B.C. since

excavators use this century frequently to date Classical kilns.




_____________________________________________320

Appendix I contains the Prehistoric kiln as well as the Hellenistic, Roman, Late Antique,

and Byzantine kilns. Within each period, I present the kilns according to larger geographical area

The geographical areas are then broken down to the modern Greek prefectures (nomoi) in

alphabetical order (see infra for list of geographical areas and prefectures in the order adopted in

this catalogue). The order of the geographical areas is clearly Atticocentric, but the purpose of a

catalogue is to operate within established conventions. Within each prefecture, the sites will be

presented alphabetically; for example, in the Peloponnese, in the prefecture Achaia, Aigion will

appear before Patras. This geographical approach follows the presentation adopted by the

Archaeologikon Deltion so that future researchers can add new entries to it.

A complete catalogue entry adopts the following format: Bibliography: Each entry includes a basic bibliography; references to

ADelt are provided first and then references to ARepLondon or BCH . The main article or monograph on

each kiln is indicated by an asterisk. At the end of the

entry, I have supplied the cross-references to previouscatalogues of kilns in reverse chronological order (e.g.Lang 1996, Seifert 1993, Momigliano 1986, Davaras 1980,

Davaras 1973, Belsché et al. 1963, Cook 1961). Description: The description follows the order of the architectural parts

of the kiln as presented supra Ch. II, starting from thecombustion chamber and moving upwards.

Date: In this section specific reasons are provided for the dateassigned. In the absence of this field, the chronological

range is the general period (e.g. Geometric, Archaic).Production: When wasters or deposits inform us about the specific

terracotta products manufactured in the workshop, an entryincludes this field.




_____________________________________________321

Discussion: This section contributes to the fuller understanding of the

workshop area and the location of the workshop inrelationship to the broader topography of the site in

question.

.

When any of these sections do not appear, no information is available. In workshops whermore than one kiln have been excavated, any information on Date, Production,and Discussionwill

be presented after the last kiln. For the sake of consistency I have labeled with letters of thealphabet the multiple kilns of a workshop. Where the excavators have assigned a different label, I

have included it in the discussion of the individual kiln.

The following abbreviations are used:L. Length Pres. Preserved

H. Height Dim. DimensionTh. Thickness Max. Maximum

Ø Diameter Ext. Exteriorcent. century

All measurements are in meters.




_____________________________________________322




_____________________________________________323

SUBMYCENAEAN-GEOMETRIC

(1100-700 B.C.)

ATTICA

01. ATHENS, Ancient Agora

Bibliography: Plates V.1-2

*J. Papadopoulos, HesperiaSupplementForthcoming; Thompson 1940, 6-7, figs. 4-6; R.S. Young, Late Geometric Graves anda Seventh Century Well in the Agora,1939; Monaco 2000, 175-9. Lang 1996, 130, no. 1; Seifert 1993, no.45; Belsché et al. 1963, 11, H1; Cook1961, 66, F2.

Description:Type: IaOnly the southern part of the combustionchamber is preserved. The northern part iscut by a well of the 5th cent B.C.Circular. Ø 1.33. Walls covered with alayer of clay 0.03 thick; central column ofcrude brick, surfaced with clay. Floor ofcombustion chamber and stoking chambercovered with a layer of clay 0.05-0.15

thick. Central column (Ø 0.33) serves assupport for the perforated floor. Columnbuilt of crude bricks plastered over withclay. No trace of the eschara. Stokingchannel entrance from the north, followingthe south-north slope of the ground.

Production:In the preliminary publication only fivevessels with Corinthianizing and Protoatticdecoration were presented (P 13326,P 13327, P 13329). No wasters were foundin the neighboring area.

Date:The workshop clearly predates thecemetery since the latter used thesouthwestern wall of the former. Theoriginal construction of the workshop mustbe placed before the Late Geometricperiod, when the burials are dated. If thekiln is indeed part of the workshop, then




_____________________________________________324

the beginning of its activity can be placed

in the 8th cent. B.C., remaining in use untilthe mid-7th cent. B.C. based on potteryfrom the destruction fill datable to thesecond or third quarter of the 7th cent. B.C.

Discussion:The kiln is under the Classical Tholos inthe interior of Building A of which onlythe southern walls have been found. Thesmall width of the cross-walls indicatesopen yards rather than roofed rooms,according to the excavator. Thecomplex had both covered and openareas easily distinguishable by thedifferent floor treatment (hard-packedearth for the covered areas, and mixtureof sand and gravel for open areas).Moreover, the irregular planning of thewalls as well as the presence of a clay-setting basin in the northeastern roompoint towards the identification of thespace as a workshop. The excavator ofthe complex also associatedchronologically the kiln with thestructure, interpreting it as a house witha kiln in its open yard. The existence ofa large number of trial pieces also

supports the continuous use of the space

as a workshop, rather than a sporadicuse of the kiln for occasional firings.To the west of the kiln and sharing

the same wall with the building is acemetery which was in use from theGeometric to the Archaic times. Theproximity of ceramic workshops tocemeteries has been discussed above (Ch.VI). An ancient road passed in front of thebuilding and the cemetery. In the samearea metallurgical activities were takingplace.

02. ATHENS,Makriyianni St.

Bibliography:Parlama and Stampolidis 2000, 32,plans 1, 2.

Description:Type: I?Circular. Ø 1.00.No more information available.

PELOPONNESE

03. ARGOLIS, ARGOS

Agora, Square G4 Bibliography:

*P. Courbin "Stratigraphie etstratigraphie." in P. Courbin (ed.),Étudesarchéologiques 1963, 59-102, esp. 72;Courbin 1966; P. Courbin, BCH 81 (1957)

677, fig. 31; V. R. d’ A. Desborough,The Last Mycenaeans and Their Successors,

1964, 278; K. Barakari-Gléni and A.Pariente, "Argos du VIIe au IIe siècle av.J.-C." in Argos and Argolide, 165-78.Seifert 1993, no. 40; Belsché et al. 1963,11, HM; Cook 1961, 65, E2.

Description:




_____________________________________________325

Type: I?

Combustion chamber, entrance andstoking channel partially preserved. Est.Ø (from the cuttings into the bedrock)less than 2.20 (E-W) and 2.50 (N-S).Walls made of orthostates. On top ofthem rectangular plaques were laid (oneof them was also the lintel for theentrance); entrance from the south;Pres.H. 0.60. Only the beginning of thestoking channel was preserved withthick walls of 0.25.

Date:Protogeometric (10th cent. B.C.),based on pottery found inside it.

Discussion:Excavations in 1956 and 1958 under thelocation of the present museum revealed aProtogeometric artisanal quarter wherepottery was produced as well as silver,using the cupellation method for the latter.Later the site was used for burials. Theprecise chronological relationship between

the artisanal quarter and the necropolis

(both Protogeometric) is not absolutelyclear, but Courbin prefers placing theartisans as the first occupants of the place.The site was used again by potters in theHellenistic period (3rd cent. B.C.), as kilnremains verify. Some traces of habitationare also attested in Byzantine and evenmodern times (walls, coins, and a hearth).This site is a good example of proximity ofdifferent industries and of exchange oftechnology between similar crafts. Thecupellation furnace was excavated insquareD 3. It was initially thought to be apottery kiln because of the similarconstruction features (see below).

ARGOLIS, ARGOS Plate Exc.9b A cupellation furnace misinterpreted as a pottery kiln. See supra Excursus, "The Metallurgical Furnace" and Appendix II,

CENTRALGREECE

04. EUBOEA, ERETRIA

Bibliography: C. Krause, "Eretria Ausgrabungen 1979-1980." AntK 24 (1981) 86; P. Ducrey, I.R.Metzger, and K. Reber, Le Quartier de la Maison aux Mosaiques Eretria VIII , 1993,21-2, figs. 13-14.

Description:Type: IaPear-shaped. Dim. 2.00x1.50. Stoking

channel L. 0.46. Combustion chamberwalls preserved up to H. 0.30. Centralrectangular pillar used as support for theeschara.

Date:Geometric (or Archaic).




_____________________________________________326

05-06. EUBOEA, KYME

Bibliography: Plate V.3Sapouna-Sakellaraki 1998.

05. K ILN A Description:

Type: II?Rectangular. Not completely excavated.Three finished, slightly raised, sides. Onlypart of the perforated floor preserved.Max.Pres.Dim. 0.60x0.73. Eleven

ventholes, lined with clay, are wholly orpartially preserved. Distinctive ringsformed in the upper surface.

06. K ILN B Description:

Type: II?Rectangular. Not completely excavated.Three sides, slightly raised, preserved.Max.Pres.Dim. 0.60x0.75.

Production:No architecture or other features are yetassociated with the kilns. The pottery fromthe site is generally discussed withoutmention of specific find spots. Themajority of the sherds belong to one-handled cups. Also jugs, skyphoi andpyxides were used at the site. Besidesdrinking vessels there is a considerablenumber of craters.

Discussion:It is unlikely that the two fragmentarystructures were part of one larger structurebecause their elevations are different. If theperforated floors have collapsed, and notfound in their original height, then theelevations are irrelevant.

It is difficult to visualize how thisstructure would have worked. It might be acollapsed perforated floor. The structures

remain mysterious, and given the absence

of any other trace of artisanal activity inthe area, it is tempting to consider themoutdoor ovens rather than industrial potterykilns. The undoubted presence ofventholes, however, complicates thisattribution.

The site in modern Viglatouri istentatively identified by the excavatorwith ancient Kyme, which is absentfrom the archaeological record duringthe Geometric period. The riverManikas runs down in the plain. Itsdistance from the coast is threekilometers.

The hill preserves extensiveprehistoric remains (Early Helladicthrough Mycenaean periods), but theexcavation focused on the Geometricremains on the southwestern side. In theGeometric settlement, a temenos occupiedthe same area as the prehistoric site. Itstands prominently with an enclosure wall,an oval building measuring 9.00x4.90(probably a heroon) , a large square pavedarea (4.60x3.00) to the north, and a circularstructure. A small but completelypreserved habitation site developed aroundthem with traces of many Geometriccurved buildings, streets, and tombs.

The area around the kilns had adistinctive yellowish clay. The local clay isred and this is why the locals call aneighboring areaKokkine Ekklesia(RedChurch).

07-09. E UBOEA , LEFKANDI

07. K ILN A Plate II.7b Bibliography:

*Catling and Lemos 1990, 74-5, pl. 35.

DescriptionType: I?




_____________________________________________327

A circular clay disk with six holes

which may be part of a kiln's perforatedfloor. More than half preserved. Est. Ø0.85-0.90; Th. 0.10-0.15. Ventholes:two are complete, three are incomplete,one reconstructed in the missing part; Øof ventholes 0.07-0.09 at a distance of0.06-0.10 from the edge of the plaqueand one is placed in the center of theplaque.

Date:Middle Protogeometric based on theassociated pottery.

Discussion:The disc was found during the cleaningof the south veranda of the long, apsidalProtogeometric building at Lefkandi. Itsshape and its movable character areunusual in the corpus of Greek kilns,but it has a parallel in the removabledisk reported to have been excavatedwith the Geometric kiln at Dodona,Epirus (10). Its friable and half-bakedcondition may be indicative of lowtemperatures in the kiln, or even itsassociation with an oven rather than akiln (the excavators also describe it askiln-oven!). No extensive traces of fireare seen on the underside. Since itsunderside is not grooved, this plaquecannot be associated with any of thefragments with grooved undersidesfound at Lefkandi (08).

08. K ILN B Bibliography:

*Catling and Lemos 1990, 75, pl. 36c. Description:

Type: II?Three non-joining fragments of theperforated floor of a possibly rectangularkiln. All three preserve parts of theventholes. Est. Ø of ventholes 0.09; one of

the fragments preserves a straight edge

which allowed the excavator to attributethem to a rectangular kiln. Th. offragments: 0.08-0.09. Pres.Dim. of thelargest piece: 0.28x0.30. A shallow groove,of yet unknown purpose is present on twofragments.

Date:Middle Protogeometric based on theassociated pottery.

Discussion:The fragments were found in the fill ofthe Protogeometric building and in themound that covered it, but with anoticeable concentration in and near theeastern room. Many more, smaller,fragments may belong to the same floor.From its dimensions it is not likely thatit was movable, like the previous disk.Its weight, combined with the more-blackened underside, reinforces themore permanent character of thisstructure. A minimum distance betweenthe ventholes is 0.15-0.20. With theavailable dimensions, one canreconstruct a rectangular kiln measuring2.00x2.00.

09. K ILN C Bibliography:

*Catling and Lemos 1990, 75-6, pl. 36a,b.

Description:Type: I?Nine fragments of a clay floor of a kilnor an oven. Dim. of the best preserved

fragment: 0.29x0.30. Th. 0.14. Date:

Middle Protogeometric based on theassociated pottery.




_____________________________________________328

Discussion:

The excavators suggest that the ninefragments belong to a floor of a kiln, butdo not explain why. Another possibility isthat they come from the roof of thebuilding; it is not clear what theimportance of the reed would have been.The description of the excavators does notdifferentiate clearly between this group

and the circular clay plaque (07). Although

the fabric is similar, we are certainlydealing with two different structuresbecause of the different thicknesses, thegrooves, and the large number offragments.

WESTERNGREECE

10. IOANNINA, DODONA

Bibliography: Plates III.7 , V.1-2*S.I. Dakaris , " jAnaskafhv tou' iJerou' th'"Dwdwvnh"." PAE 1967, 40-1, figs. 4-5, pls.30a, 33a, b.

Description:Type: IgCombustion chamber and stoking pit ina figure-eight formation, eschara, andpithos cover of the firing chamberpreserved. Combustion chamber andstoking hole dug into bedrock. Ø 1.10.Upper L. 2.40. Lower L. 1.90. Smallstep inside the combustion chamber atH. 0.40 from the floor of thecombustion chamber. Step's width fadesout near the entrance. Parts of theplaque which served as the eschara ispreserved. The plaque is not perforated.

The upper half of a hand-made pithoswith two vertical handles was used as acover of the firing chamber; Ø 0.55; H.0.40. Stoking pit (Dim. 0.70x0.85).Entrance from the north.

Date:Protogeometric (?).

Discussion:This small oven-kiln was located at theeastern end of the Doric stoa in front ofthe Bouleuterion at the sanctuary.During the period of its use (ca. 1000B.C.), inhabitants of the site were theprehistoric tribe of Selloi or Helloi.

Because of the movable character of theupper chamber and its dome-like shape,this oven-kiln at Dodona can beconsidered as an intermediary phasebetween an oven and a fully developedkiln. Dakaris (1967) mentions that thisstructure could also have been used toheat food. The non-perforated plaquewould considerably reduce thetemperature in the upper compartment.Two vessels, possibly of Protogeometricdate, were found inside the combustionchamber. Because of the restricted space inthe upper chamber the oven could holdonly two small jugs or cooking pots andas many as four to six small bowls ofthe Protogeometric type. It seems,therefore, that the structure was moreoften used as an oven for cooking and




_____________________________________________329

heating, rather than a kiln for vessels. If

it was indeed a pottery kiln, it could

have served only limited personal need

NORTHERNGREECE

11. CHALKIDIKE, TORONE


*Papadopoulos 1989;*Whitbread et al.1997 , 88-91; ARepLondon1982, 43 fig. 70.Seifert 1993, no. 44.

Description: Type: If Combustion chamber and stoking channelpreserved.Circular. Combustion chamber carvedin the bedrock. Ø 0.80. Pres.H. 0.40.The walls had a red and yellow claylining. Parts of the eschara are probably

preserved in the fill: Pres.Dim.0.30x0.10, but none carried anyventholes. No internal support wasfound. The stoking channel was cut inthe bedrock. Pres.L. 0.50-0.60; W. 0.40.The entrance is from the southeast(against the prevailing winds, as theexcavator notes).

Production:Pots found inside the kiln included largeamphoras and water jugs.

Date:Second half of the 8th cent B.C. (750-700B.C.) based on pottery found inside thecombustion chamber.

Discussion:Fourteen vessels in fragmentarycondition were recovered from thecombustion chamber. Probably the floorof the firing chamber collapsed underthe weight. Twelve of them probablybelonged to the last firing, whereas twomight have belonged to a previous one.One more kiln may have existed in thevicinity.

The kiln is located in an EarlyIron Age cemetery at the promontory ofTorone, where one hundred and thirtyfour tombs, mostly cremations, wereexcavated. The kiln postdates thecemetery and probably is quite distantchronologically since its products haveonly a faint resemblance to the offeringsinside the tombs.




_____________________________________________330

AEGEANISLANDS

12. CRETE, HERAKLEIOUPHAISTOS, Palace, Vano G


Tomasello 1996; Annuario 19-20 (1957/5)272-4, figs. 103, 104; BCH 81 (1957) 628; BCH 82 (1958) 797, fig. 34 (B, D). Davaras 1973, B3.

Description:Type: IIaPear-shaped. Dim. of combustion chamber(measured on plan): 1.25x1.60. Ext. Dim.3.00x3.00. Central support (Ø 0.40) placedoff center, to the right. Part of stokingchamber preserved (Pres.L. 0.40). Entrancefrom the south.

13. CYCLADES, AMORGOS

Bibliography: Plates V.1-2L. Marangou, Reports inPAE 1981-1998;id., Ergon 1987, 122, pl. 94 andErgon1998, 77.

Description:Type: IbCombustion chamber preserved.Circular. Ø 1.00. The structure is carvedin bedrock. The combustion chamberwalls are covered with clay. Pillar-shaped dividers were found. Fragmentsof the eschara are preserved.

Date:Both plain and painted sherds ofGeometric and Archaic times were found.

Discussion:The site is located near the modern town ofAmorgos, at the ancient site of Minoa. Ithas an acropolis with a Geometric culticbuilding and contemporary houses. In thelower city a distyle in antis temple dates toHellenistic times. Near the temple a

ceramic workshop specializing in theproduction of "Megarian" skyphoi waslocated outside the walls of the settlement,but incorporated inside the workshopstructure. Remains of the combustion fuelwere recovered (wood coals, olive pits) aswell as fired, clay lumps and slag. For aHellenistic kiln on the site see (227 ).

14. SAMOS, PYTHAGORIONGiannopoulou Plot

Bibliography: Plates V.1-2 , VI.10 ADelt 28 (1973) 537-40, pl. 500b; BCH 102 (1978) 748; ARepLondon1978-79, 36.Seifert 1993, no. 80(presented asHellenistic).

Description:Type: IIbRectangular kiln with two firingchambers. The eastern part of thecombustion chamber, the firingchamber, and the eschara are preserved.The northern and western parts weredestroyed by later activity. Ext.W. 2.00The floor of the combustion chamber iscovered with stone slabs. H. ofcombustion chamber from the highestpreserved wall of the firing chamber:1.40. The central columnar support was




_____________________________________________331

made of fragments of tiles, sherds, and

clay. W. of the eschara, 1.00. Entrancefrom the west. Dim. 0.40x 0.40. Firingchamber’s Pres.H. 0.20. The remains ofa thin clay wall in the middle of thefiring chamber is unusual and hard toexplain.

Date:The kiln predates the rectangularstructure whose foundations destroyedthe northern part of it.

Discussion:For the central separating wall the onlysimilar arrangement is to be seen in anextremely large circular kiln in Alexandria(El-Fattah 1998). The excavator attributedits function to a better control of the heat insuch a large firing chamber. It is

interesting that the wall in Alexandria

divides the area exactly in the middle. Itseems more probable to me that theAlexandrian wall was used for the ease ofstacking the vases; it was probably neververy high.

The kiln forms part of a widerartisanal establishment: three deep cuttingsin the earth (A, B, C), probably clay minesfor mining the famous, white clay or usedfor the pottery manufacture, were foundless than seven meters to the southwest ofthe kiln. Three mining pits (A, B, C) hadrough steps carved on the soil (Dim. A:2.40x1.70x3.50; B: 1.50x1.40; C:2.40x1.16x0.90). To the east of the kiln awell was found. Its fill had a few LateGeometric sherds.




_____________________________________________332

ARCHAIC

ATTICA

15. ATHENS,21-23 Herakleidon St.

Bibliography: ADelt 29 (1973-74) 86-7, fig. 1; BCH 103(1979) 536.

Description:Type: IIaRectangular. Central support.L. 1.27m.

16-17. SKALAOROPOU

Bibliography:A. Mazarakis-Ainian,*PAE 1996, 21-124,esp. 47, 49, 73, 91, 112, pls. 15b,16a; id.PAE 1998, 51-81;id., "Skavla Wrwpouv."Ergon1996, 27-38, 1997, 25-34.


Type: I?

Combustion chamber and central supportwall preserved. The kiln cuts the periboloswall T14.Circular. Ø 1.00. Combustion chamber’sPres.H. 0.35. The walls were highly burnt.Entrance from the east. W. 0.55. Pres.L.0.35. Inside it ash, coal, burnt olive pits,tile fragments and some sherds were found.The kiln was basically carved into theclayey soil.

Date:Relative stratigraphy: later than WallT14, which is later than Building A.


Type: IIbCombustion chamber and support centralwall preserved inside the ellipsoid buildingG.Roughly rectangular. Dim. 1.00x0.70. Acentral wall of clay supports the eschara. Alarge quantity of burnt wood, ash and olivepits were found. Entrance from the east.




_____________________________________________333

Date:

End of the 7th cent. B.C. (it belongs tothe fourth and last phase of thebuilding's occupation)

Discussion:The wall (or bench) T16 can be associatedas an addition or alteration to the BuildingB. This wall is contemporary with thephase of the kiln. A bench seems a morepreferable and practical feature near a kiln.The buildings B andG presented manyplaces with ash and burnt lumps of claywhere fire was used (hearth ovens or otherfiring structures, but no evidence ofmetalworking). Three spherical clay lumpsand one pyramidal loomweight found inthe fills of the building can be interpretedas kiln furniture.

The site where the two kilns wereexcavated has provided many LateGeometric and Archaic structures. Twomain complexes (here called western andeastern complex) occupy the area, theeastern one with five apsidal buildings (A-E) and the western one with three apsidalbuildings, two circular, and one rectangular(Z-IB). Each complex was surrounded byperibolos walls which were often repaired.At least six phases of occupation areattested archaeologically within the narrowlength of one and a half centuries. In bothcomplexes extensive traces ofmetalworking were excavated [circular pits(Ø 0.18. D. 0.050 in the floor of BuildingA), slag in Building D, similar ground pitswith burnt walls, blow pipes, slag, andpure ash layers in Building I]. A few more

parts of peribolos walls were excavated aswell as a cluster of Late Geometric andArchaic burials to the east and southeastarea of the site. The excavator believesthat, during the occupation phase of theindustrial establishments, the site was usedas a cemetery, primarily for children. Onlytwo burials date to the 6th cent. B.C., that

is, after the abandonment of the area. The

same area was also used by themetal workers as their dumpsite, since twolarge pits of industrial refuse were foundthere (pits XVIIIa and XXIVa).

The two kilns were established in thewestern complex. Earlier metal-workingand especially iron smelting were carriedon at the site. Ceramic industry followedthe metal-working establishments in thesite which date back to the second half ofthe 8th cent. B.C., but flourished in the 7thcent. B.C. A well (Ø 1.50) is locatedalmost half way between the two kilns.The excavators suggest locations of kilnsat a few more locations (near Building D)at the site because of the presence of firedmudbricks, ash, burnt olive pits; but all thisevidence should be regarded as indicativeof low-temperature firing structures usedas hearths, small ovens, but not kilns. Asmall pit XXVII measuring 1.08x0.57 isalso viewed as a clay-settling basinbecause of its content of pure clay.

The kilns definitely point to someindustrial activity, but whether we canspeak of an established workshop hereis still questionable since no auxiliaryclay tanks, misfired vessels, or anyconsiderable quantity of clay vesselswere recovered from the site. The kilnscould have served some other function,probably for the firing of metalcrucibles, and were probably not usedfor the systematic firing of pottery.

The industrial complexes lie close toan area occupied earlier by a (late-Geometric?) hekatompedon apsidal

building (only the eastern wall and the NEcorner have survived). Inside thehekatompedon structure a rectangularbuilding of the "pastas" type wasconstructed in the 7th cent. B.C. Thepresence of many tools, burnt olive pitsand fires suggests that this might havebeen the residence of a bronze smith




_____________________________________________334

(convenient location of his house near his

work), who was also carrying out somesmall scale industrial activities in hishouse. This area was separated from theindustrial complex by an Archaic road,0.60 wide.

Just east of the rectangular building,two pits were excavated which containedash and mudbricks, coals and burnt olivepits; it is not clear if they were used fordomestic or industrial activity and if theybelong to the same occupation phase as thehouse. The workshop was close to a naturalsource of water since a river at least nine toten meter wide was flowing by to the west,as attested by the numerous alluvial sand

deposits in the stratigraphy of the site,

especially to the east of the ancient road.The river, which was one of the mainreasons for the setting of the workshops inthis area, proved to be an unpleasantneighbor which flooded frequently andforced the inhabitants to move theClassical city further to the east. Thecontinuous efforts of the occupants of thesite for the construction of peribolos wallsmight have resulted from this threateningcoexistence with the river. The river stillflows some forty meters to the east of thesite. The site also lies only 150 metersfrom the ancient shoreline.

PELOPONNESE

18. ACHAIA, AIGIONDodekanisou St.

Bibliography: Plates III.9 , V.4 ADelt40 (1985) 121-3; L. Papakosta,"Parathrhv sei" scetikav me thntopografiv a tou arcaiv ou Aigivou ." inArcaiva Acaiva kai Hleiv a. Anakoinwvsei" katav to Prwvto Dieqnev" Sumpovsio, Aqhvna19-21 Maivou, 1989, 1991, 235-40 ; BCH116 (1992) 872, fig. 53.

Description:Type: IIbPart of the long supports of the escharapreserved.

Rectangular. Dim. 4.50x3.95. Two longwalls are preserved (L. 4.20). The entireshape of the kiln is not very discernible.

Date:6th cent. B.C.

Discussion:The date assigned to the kiln is provisional,due to the general context.

19. CORINTHIA,ANCIENTCORINTH, Gotsi Plot

Bibliography: ADelt 26 (1971) 68, pl. 58a.




_____________________________________________335

Description:

Type: I?Remains of a small circular kiln. No moreinformation available. No plan available.

Date:Archaic, based on the one thousandProtocorithian aryballoi found in thevicinity which may be products of thiskiln.

20. LACONIA, SPARTA

Bibliography: ADelt 16 (1960) 102, pl. 81; BCH 85(1961) 684, fig. 2.

Description:Type: IIbCombustion chamber and partition wallpreserved. Partially excavated.Rectangular. A long central wall forsupporting the perforated floor.

Discussion:It is located to the southeast of the eastwall of the Acropolis.

CENTRALGREECE

21-22. EUBOEA, ERETRIATamvaka Plot

Bibliography: ADelt 23 (1968) 227, plan 1 on p. 228; BCH 94 (1970) 1097. Lang 1996, 293-5.


Type: UncertainThe kiln is in a very fragmentary state;it is impossible to ascertain its shape ordimensions. It was made of crudeunbaked bricks. In its interior a largequantity of straw was collected.


Type I?Combustion chamber and stoking channelpartially preserved.Circular. Est.Ø 1.00. Total L. 1.80.Stoking channel L. 0.80.

Date:7th-6th cent. B.C.

Discussion:The surrounding area of the kilns includesan apsidal Geometric building and Archaicwalls.




_____________________________________________336

23-24. MAGNESIA,VELESTINO-PHERAI

Alcestes St., Tsoumbekou Plot

Bibliography: ADelt 42 (1987) 255-6, pl. 146 a, b.


Type: I?Circular. Ø 1.50.


Type: I?Circular. Ø 0.90.

Date:Both kilns are Archaic, based on potteryfound around them and inside theneighboring building.

Discussion:The two kilns belong to an Archaicbuilding located in the center of ancientPherai, to the W. of Hypereia Fountain. Inthe area burials and settlements alternatedin antiquity. Archaeological evidence onthe site preserved a burial ground from theMiddle Bronze Age, then a Mycenaeanwall, later Protogeometric and Geometricburials and finally an Archaic building,possibly an extensive workshop.

The Archaic building consisted of atleast three separate rooms: Room A: (Ø3.50x2.80 which preserved remains ofbronze-working). Room B: (Ø 3.05x5.50).Room C was partially preserved. The kilnswere dug to the south of this building. Thesite was occupied into the Classical periodby two rectangular buildings following theorientation of the Archaic structure

.

NORTHERNGREECE

25-26. THASOS, PHARI

Bibliography: Plates V.4 , VI.11* Perreault et al., 1992;*Perreault, 1990; *K. Peristeri, F. Blondé,J. Y. Perreault, and M. Brunet, "QASOS1985. Prwvth anaskafikhv evreuna se ev naergasthv ri aggeioplastikhv " sth qevsh

Favri Skav la" Mariv wn." AAA 18 (1985)29-38; *K. Peristeri, F. Blondé, andJ.Y.Perreault, "QASOS 1986-1987.Deuvterh kai triv th anaskafikhv evreunatou arcai> kouv aggeioplasteivou sth qevshSkavla" Mariv wn." AAA 19 (1986) 71-80; ADelt 41 (1986) 170-3; BCH 111 (1987)596; BCH 117 (1993) 869; ARepLondon

1985-86, 81, fig. 119; ARepLondon1986-87, 49, fig. 86; ARepLondon1987-88, 64. Lang 1996, 130, no. 60, fig. 126. Seifert1993, no. 48.


Type: IaThe combustion chamber and the stokingchannel are preserved.Pear-shaped. Ø 2.80. The entire kiln isbuilt within a square podium (full meas.5.00x5.00. Combustion chamber wallscovered with clay layer of 0.02-0.03.Central columnar support. Original Ø 1.15,after restoration, Ø 1.30-1.40. Due to




_____________________________________________337

renewed repairs it has lost its regular

shape. The basic floor was made out ofclay. Arches made of mudbricks connectthe eschara. Entrance from the southwest.Stoking channel’s L. 1.00. W. 0.95.)


Type: Ia?It lies five meters to the south of kiln,no. 25. Combustion chamber preserved.Pear-shaped. Ø 1.60. No central supportpreserved. Entrance from the southwest.

Pres. H. of walls: 0.60. Types of kilnfurniture: ring-shaped and rectangularones; fragments of small clay plaqueswith a hole in the middle are interpretedas test pieces.

Production:The workshop produced a wide range ofproducts capable of fulfilling the needsof the neighboring settlements. A totalof eleven shapes which bear similaritiesto Cycladic and Attic prototypes:drinking vessels lekythoi, olpae, wine jars, cups of Subgeometric andIonicizing style type B1 and B2, columncraters, amphorae, pithoi, lekanes. Acylindrical seal with flower motif usedfor the decoration of pithoi was found,and pyrauna. The potters produced bothdecorated and undecorated vessels aswell as Laconian-style tiles.

Date:Last quarter of the 6th-first quarter ofthe 5th cent. B.C. (525-475 B.C.)

Discussion:

This workshop consists of two kilnslocated five meters apart. They make partof an organized workshop since one largeclay-settling basin was excavated to thesouth. Dim. 4.00x3.80x1.20. The walls areinternally and externally plastered over.Another square basin to the southeastmeasuring 3.60x3.60x1.10 (estimatedvolume capacity of clay mixture: ca.18m3). A channel connects them. Twosmall lekanes were found at the southeastand southwest. Two holes on the south

wall allowed the water to flow out. At leasttwo building phases of the complex weredocumented. The excavators hadconjectured, unconvincingly, that Kiln Bpredated Kiln A because of the former'ssmaller size.

The workshop lies next to the sea onthe southwest coast of Thasos. Many moreceramic workshops have been located nearthe sea on the island on the basis either ofarchitectural features or materialfrequencies. In the surrounding area asmany as eight different clay types weredetected by Picon. The workshop made useof all of these.

Since many complete Laconian-styletiles, both pan and cover tiles, were foundstuck up against a wall in the southern partof the excavation, it has been surmised thatthe workshop produced both pottery andtiles. It is the first time that it is stronglysuggested that tiles could be fired in acircular kiln and do not necessarily need arectangular kiln.




_____________________________________________338

AEGEANISLANDS

27. CRETE, HERAKLEIOUKNOSSOS

Bibliography: Plate V.4*J.N. Coldstream and C.F. MacDonald,"Knossos: Area of South-West Houses." BSA 92 (1997) 191-245; *Tomlinson andKilikoglou 1998; BCH 118 (1994) 820.

Description:Type: IaCombustion chamber, eschara support,stoking channel and stoking holepreserved.Circular. Int.Ø 0.65. Total L. 1.50.Combustion chamber walls lined withthick clay ranging in color from red to graybecause of high temperatures. Centralsupport, columnar made of clay. Ø 0.18.Entrance from the northwest. Stoking hole

lined with clay. Ø 0.40.Production:

The kiln was used for firing primarilysmall fine vessels, many fragments ofwhich were found both inside the firingchamber and the stoking hole. This depositF contained twenty-three pieces: eightblack cups, two plain cups, five lekanidae,three hydriae, two domed lids, one lekane,and one cooking pot.

Discussion:The kiln was found during excavationsconducted in the area west of the southwesthouse where Evans had deposited some ofhis excavation’s dump. They uncovered ahouse (with no Minoan deposits) with asequence of layers from Protogeometric to

Classical. Hellenistic pits lay above themor have cut into them. Recognizablefeatures are the kiln, an Early Orientalizingroad, and an Early Classical road.Underneath this house must have been aLMIII house, which was later plunderedfor construction material by EarlyProtogeometric inhabitants. The houseoccupied a layer between the two

destruction levels of MMIIA and LMIIBperiods. The kiln is located in the interiorcorner of wall 12 which together with wall5 form the eastern and western limits of theEarly Orientalizing road (Pottery DepositG; very similar in date with the kiln'sdeposit).

From Neutron Activation Analysison seventeen sherds from the kiln it wasfound that the chemical composition offifteen of them was extremelyhomogeneous and paralleled LM I andClassical/Hellenistic clays, which meansthat the same clay sources were being usedover long periods of time. One of thesherds is definitely not local production.

Other possible traces ofcontemporary artisanal activity have beenidentified at the curved wall 45° to thenorthwest corner of the area wherepossible fragments of a furnace lining wereexcavated. It is interesting that despite thewide area uncovered no other signs ofceramic production were found in thevicinity. Had the kiln not been found, we

would never have assumed that there wasone there. This is a very good example ofthe very low visibility of small kilns withno other auxiliary features in the vicinity.




_____________________________________________339

28-30. CRETE, LASITHIOU,LATO

Bibliography: Plates II.5 , V.4*Ducray and Picard 1969. Lang 1996, 129, no. 26, fig. 59; Seifert1993, no. 47; Davaras 1973, 79, B1; id,.1980, 115, no. 3.


Type: IaCombustion chamber and columnpreserved; dug into bedrock in thesoutheast and south.Pear-shaped. Dim:1.00x0.80. Pres.H. 0.60.Central oval pillar: Dim. 0.24x0.18.Pres.H. 0.40. Inside the combustionchamber a powdery black layer full ofsherds and underneath this a layer of ash.Six semicircular niches around thecombustion chamber (to fit the supportingbranches of the eschara?). Part of the firingfloor is retained in the form of a shelfaround the interior circumference at the

same level as the openings of six semi-circular vertical channels hollowed into thewalls. Entrance from the west.


Type: If Combustion chamber preserved.Pear shaped. Ø 0.90; Pres.H. 0.10. Notraces of eschara or support were found.Very similar in construction to kiln A. Theentrance is from the north.

Date:The excavators placed this kiln only a littleearlier than kiln A, because the potteryfound inside both of them is similar.

30. K ILN C Description:

Type: I?

Partially preserved in a mass of bricks andstones. Only the southern side ofcombustion chamber has survived;Circular. Pres. Ø 2.00x1.60; Pres.H. 0.80.Combustion walls made of bricks andstones faced with clay lining. No trace ofinternal support or of the eschara. To thesouth one, or two (?) fragments of theperforated floor.

Production:Coarse pottery, large basins, smallpithoi, small skyphoi with flat bottom,large bowls (upper Ø 0.20-0.30, lowerØ 0.10-0.16), chalices, Daedalicterracotta figurines. With the exceptionof one basin, it was not possible torestore any complete vessel.

Date:7th-6th cent. B.C. based on the coarsepottery (provisional date). One plaqueand two terracotta Daedalic masquesgive us a more precise dating, ca. 650-625 B.C.

Discussion:Three kilns were excavated, in closeproximity to each other, between thenorthern wall of the temple and thepolygonal wall. The kilns predated thetemple as the northern part of the third kilnwas destroyed by the construction of thewall of the temple.

Three connecting pieces whichformed a hole (Ø 0.15) were misinterpretedas a chimney, whereas they obviously form

a venthole. All three kilns provided similarmaterial, which means that they were usedwithin a short period of time.

It is possible that they served aprevious sanctuary on the spot of the latertemple. Such a connection with thesanctuary would explain the production of




_____________________________________________340

figurines and terracotta plaques. Although

no scientific analyses have been performedon the clay of the kiln vessels and on localclays, it seems very possible that there wasa clay source nearby. That the site isnaturally endowed with raw materials isproved by the presence of a modern (in1969) ceramic workshop in Kritsa, only3km. away from Lato, from a plateaucalledKathare(a clue to the purity ofclay?), which had reserves of a fire-proofclay still used in the modern pithoiworkshops in Pachiammos (Hampe andWinter 1962, 14). The area to the east of kiln Crevealed a layer of clay 0.10 deep withsome fine gravel. At the surface this gravelwas decomposed into lime. Davaras 1980,122 interpreted it as a lime kiln.

31-36. CRETE, LASITHIOUPRINIAS

Bibliography: Plates II.7 , III.6 , V.4 , VI.1 , VI.9

Rizza 2000; *Rizza et al. 1992; G. Rizza,"Prinias nelle fasi geometrico eorientalizzante." ASAtene45 (1983) 45-51,fig. 3; G. Rizza in La Transizione dal Miceneo all’ alto arcaismo. Dal Palazzoalla Citta. Atti del Convegno Internazionale, Roma, 14-19/03/1988,1991, 331-47; BCH 116 (1992) 939; BCH 118 (1994) 822. Lang 1996, 129, no. 29, fig. 63; Seifert1993, no. 43 (wrongly grouped with theGeometric kilns).


Type: IaK1. Combustion chamber and stokingchannel preserved, dug into bedrock.

Circular. Ø 1.04. Pres.H. 1.20 in the

western wall which form the westernboundary of the kiln; interior plasteredwith clay layer 0.02-0.03 thick,sometimes even twice. This layer is anon-conductor of heat. Around theinterior a circular bench H. 0.30-35.Interior truncoid support Ø 0.31-33.Pres.H. 0.25. Slabs cemented. Stokingchannel L. 2.60. W. 0.50. Entrance fromthe north, L. 2.60.

Discussion:According to the excavator two measuringstandards were used in the construction ofthis kiln; one M (average 0.52m) waspresumably used for the calculation of theentire length, the diameter of thecombustion chamber and the width of thestomion. The diameter of the kiln is 2 M based on this theory. The columnarsupport, the width of the step and othersecondary features observed anothermeasuring unit equal to 0.31-0.33. whosesymbol ism (the length of the stokingchannel equals then 5m). The ratio betweenthe two standards of measurementis 5:3 (for extensive discussion, supra Ch.II).


Type: IaK2: Pear-shaped. Ø 0.95. Pres.H. 0.86.Combustion chamber walls covered withrectangular tiles. Central support made oftwo parts cemented together. Ø 0.31.Pres.H. 0.20. Sides covered with clay

plaques. Dim. of plaques:0.42x31.50x0.04. At one place a secondrow of plaques is preserved, slightlyrecessed. Bottom part cylindrical, upperpart truncoid. Lower Ø 0.23. Upper Ø 0.10.The two parts correspond to two phases ofuse. Fragments of the eschara preserved.The stoking channel is not entirely




_____________________________________________341

preserved. Stoking channel entrance made

of pithoi fragments stuck into soil.Entrance from the west. For K2 themeasuring point is P: 0.315.


Type: IaK3. Part of its perimeter is obliteratedby the eastern wall of K1.Circular. Ø 1.06. The combustionchamber’s walls were covered withrectangular slabs of clay coating.

Cylindrical support covered with layer ofclay coating 0.004 thick. Ø 0.31. Pres.H.0.30. Fragments of eschara, Th. 0.07-0.08.traces of the vent holes Ø 0.03-0.06.Distance between holes 0.10-0.125. Ringsaround some holes W. 0.03; H. 0.01.

34. K ILN D Description:

Type: I?K4. Pear-shaped. Dim. 1.15x1.06.Followed by a stoking channel and analimentation channel (Ø 0.90), Pres.H.0.63; L. of stoking channel: 0.47; W.0.63.

35. K ILN E Description:

Type: I?North Kiln: partially dug into theground.Pear-shaped. Dim. 3.14x2.35. Entrancefrom the east; W. of stoking channel:0.70-0.84.

36. K ILN F Description:

Type: IeSouth Kiln: It occupies the southwesterncorner of the area;Circular. Int. Ø 2.98. Ext. Ø 4.10. W. ofstoking channel 1.04. Entrance from the

east. Int.L. of room A 4.10; W. of wall

0.63-0.74.Production:

A wide variety of storage, cooking anddrinking vessels were found: pithoi(stamped with rosettes and spirals), basinsof coarse ware, a number of cups, hydriae,and craters of fine ware, some with bandsin black glaze. Many wasters of cups havebeen recovered. It is noteworthy that thesame type of cups were used at thesanctuary located on the Acropolis ofPrinias (at the hill across the workshop). Itis very likely then that this workshop wasalso providing the sanctuary and its visitorswith the necessary votive offerings.

Discussion:The Prinias workshop is located on theslopes of Mandra of Gipari at an altitude of653.40 meters. It occupies an area of20x15 meters. From the way that thewestern retaining wall bonds it seems thatthere are at least two phases of theworkshop.

Kiln A is constructed later than thewall to the east with an east-west direction.The stratigraphy of the stoking channelprovides some clues for the form of itssuperstructure. Over the layer of ash therewas a compact layer of pithoi (observedthroughout the channel's length), overwhich was laid a compact layer of clay.

The filling of the kilns was quitediversified (obviously a long process offilling followed an abandonment of thesite) so we have no clear indication of what

was fired inside each one of the kilns.Based on the size, though, the excavatorshave reconstructed quite convincingly thatthe large pithoi were fired inside the largeNorth Kiln (35). The firing of basinsshould also be considered since manyfragments were found in the filling.




_____________________________________________342

CLASSICAL

ATTICA

37-39. ATHENSApellou, Eupolidos and LykourgouSt.

Bibliography: Plate V.6 ADelt 23 (1968) 39-42.


Type: IIbPartially excavated. Combustion chamberpreserved, dug in bedrock. Only itssoutheastern half was investigated.Rectangular. Dim. 1.80x1.80. The walls ofthe combustion chamber were covered withmudbricks and a heavy clay coating. Pres. H.0.85. Entrance from the southeast. W. ofentrance: 0.50. Beneath this floorsemicircular drainage pipes were excavated.


Type: IIb

Rectangular. Dim. 2.80x2.80. Traces of acentral pillar. The eastern retaining wall of

the road was repaired since it overlaps thewestern side of the kiln.


Type: UnknownPartially excavated. No other informationavailable. Probably also rectangular.

Discussion:The ceramic workshop lies ca. 800 metersnortheast of the northern limits of theAthenian Agora and it might have served itsconstruction needs. The kilns were exposed

in an area where a road 5.50-9.00 wide and acemetery (active in Late Classical andHellenistc times) also came to light. Thestreet, which led to the Acharnian Gates,remained in use until Hellenistic times.

To the east of Kiln B there is arectangular cisternD (1.50x1.50). The wallswere 0.80 thick, plastered inside with mortar,




_____________________________________________343

and preserved up to 1.10 in height. They are

made of stones and mortar. The floor wascovered by a mosaic. It must have belongedto the workshop since its foundation is at thesame depth as the floor of Kiln A (3.80below modern level).

The excavation report does notmention what types of vessels wereassociated with these kilns. The area musthave been previously occupied by a streetsince parts of an earlier sewage system werefound under Kiln A. The cemetery was alater occupant of the area since tombs X andXI cut through Kiln B. It seems that bothKiln A and Kiln B were short-lived since therenewal of the road destroyed the westernside of the latter, and it leaves very littlespace for the unobtrusive function of Kiln A.

40-42. ATHENS, KERAMEIKOS(under new museum)

Bibliography: Plates II.5 , V.6 K. Gebauer and H. Johannes, "Ausgrabungenim Kerameikos." AA 1937, 184-203, fig. 4and plan in fig. II; Monaco 1999; Monaco2000, 206-7, pl. 25.Seifert 1993, no. 49; Cook 1961, 66, G1-3.


Type: IbCombustion chamber and centralsupportive wall preserved. Pear-shaped.Max.Dim. 4.00x5.00. Central supportivewall for the perforated floor: W. 0.50, L.3.00. L. of stoking channel: 1.00. Entrance

from the west. Date:

5th-4th cent. B.C. (from the associatedblack-glazed pottery).

41. K ILN B

Description:Type: I?Combustion chamber partially preserved.Circular. The walls are cut by the later kilnon the site. Max.Pres.Dim. 1.80x2.30. Theremains point to an unusually longcombustion chamber.


Type: IbCombustion chamber and supporting wall

preserved. Pear-shaped. Max.Dim.4.00x2.70. Central supportive wall of theperforated floor: L. 2.00, W. 0.50. Stokingchannel L. 1.00. Entrance from the south.

Discussion:This kiln is almost a twin of kiln no. 40 andtherefore must have been built shortly afterthe first one, perhaps because of thedefective performance of the first.

43-45. ATHENS, KERAMEIKOSChabrias Area

Bibliography:K. Gebauer, "Ausgrabungen imKerameikos." AA 1942, 204-6, figs, 1-3.Monaco 1999; Monaco 2000, 207-8.Seifert 1993, no. 51; Belsché et al. 1963 10,GN-GP; Cook 1961, 66, G 4-6.


Type: IaPartially preserved. Pear-shaped. Max. Dim.2.50x2.00. Central support, destroyed by alater sarcophagus. Entrance is from thesouthwest.





_____________________________________________344

Type: I?

Circular (?). Kiln B is oriented east-west.Only one part of the walls of the combustionchamber is preserved. To the north there is aboundary marker (horos). Between the Tombof the Peloponnesians and the State burialmonument Kiln B lies four meters to the eastof Kiln A and Kiln C two meters to the north(all enclosed inside the grave monument).


Type: II?

Only part of the eastern wall of thecombustion chamber is preserved.Rectangular. Est.Dim. 4.70x3.00 (fromMonaco 1999).

Production:Monaco (1999) suggested that the kiln wasused to fire architectural terracottas based onits large rectangular size.

Date:400-350 B.C.

Discussion:The seven channels that Monaco mentionsrepresent an unprecedented internalarrangement for a rectangular kiln. Perhapsthey represent different firings or phases.

Between the last period of use of KilnC and the use of the space as a cemeterysome time elapsed. The three kilns were notcontemporary. Each seemed to belong to aseparate phase.

46-49. ATHENS, KERAMEIKOSNorthwest of the Round Bath

Bibliography:K. Gebauer, "Ausgrabungen im Kerameikos" AA1938, 608-612; id., "Ausgrabungen im

Kerameikos" AA1940, 318-34; Monaco

1999; Monaco 2000, 209-11.Cook 1961, 66, H2-5.


Type: IaCombustion chamber walls partiallypreserved. Circular L. 1.95. Entrace from theeast. Kiln A is presented as the earliest of allkilns in this area.

47. K ILN B

Description:Type: IaCircular. Combustion chamber wallspreserved. Max. L. 1.35.


Type: I?Max. L. 4.72.

49. K ILN D Description:

Type: I?Preserved in a very fragmentary position.

Date:4th cent. B.C. The later kilns continued to beused into the 3rd cent. B.C.

50. ATHENS, KERAMEIKOS

Bibliography:Parlama and Stampolidis 2000, 273-4, 264.

Description:Type: IbPear-shaped. Central supporting wall.Entrance from the west.

Date:4th cent. B.C.




_____________________________________________345

Discussion:Many pits are scattered around theworkshop. The ceramic refuse of theworkshop covered an area of 80m2.

51-53. ATHENS,Lenormant Ave.

Bibliography: Plate VI.12* Baziotopoulou-Valavani 1994;Zachariadou et al. 1992; Zachariadou et al.

1985; Karagiorga-Stathakopoulou 1988; ADelt 40 (1985) 39-50, figs. 1, 4-5; BCH112(1988) 617; ARepLondon 1988-89, 13.Seifert 1993, no. 50.


Type: I?Circular. Ø 2.20-2.40. The combustionchamber has survived with overlaying layersof clay on the walls. Entrance from the south.The stoking channel had a saddle roof made

of clay, stones, plinths, and tiles. The kilnwas destroyed by later graves.


Type: I?Circular. Ø 2.00. There are six radiatinggrooves through which the heat wouldcirculate. The eschara would have restedupon the walls of the kiln since no centralsupport was excavated. The entrance is fromthe south, similar to that of kiln A.Kiln B is later than A (or at least it was builtlater than kiln A, since it rests on dump A1which is associated with Kiln A).


Type: II?

Rectangular. No dimensions available. Only

the northern and eastern walls survive. Pairsof pillars support the eschara. Fragments ofthe eschara were found.

Discussion:Three kilns, one room, and eleven depositswere excavated. Surrounding the area withthe workshops there are two ancient streets(labeled I and III) laid out in the LateArchaic-Early Classical period, whichconnected the area with the Hippios Kolonosarea. Street I, 5.00 wide, corresponds to themodern Lenormant Ave. and it was in usefrom the 6th cent. B.C. through the 2nd cent.A.D. This road was crossing the Iria Gate.The workshop at Lenormant Ave. is located800 meters away from the walls.

At the intersection of the streets I andIII, there was a subterranean room,3.60x3.16. This room was renovated andreduced in size (Dim. 3.60x 2.50) in the 5thcent. B.C. Later it was transformed to adump (A1). The excavators connected it withthe neighboring kilns. To the north there is aroom (on ground level) inside which manyring-shaped supports for pots were found.The kilns are contemporary with theClassical cemetery. The Classical cemeteryhad sixty-nine graves, both cremations andinhumations. The Hellenistic-Romancemetery extends to the south. The cemeterywas very active from late 6th to the 5th cent.B.C., with the number of graves decreasingin the 4th and 3rd cent. B.C. A new phase ofintensive occupation starts in the 2nd cent.B.C. and continues until the 2nd cent. A.D.

The dumps A2, A3, A4, and A5 around

the kiln contained mostly eye-cup fragmentsand pot supports, many bearing the name ofNaukratis, who might have been the ownerof one of the workshops. Dumps A7 and A8were inside the cemetery: A7 had fragmentsof kiln structure, pots supports, misfiredpieces. A8 had kotylae, kylikae, skyphoi,lekythoi, olpae, and mastoid cups. One of the




_____________________________________________346

deposits to the north was filled with products

of the Hemon Painter.

54. ATHENS,31, Monasteriou and Nafpliou Sts.Matsouka Plot

Bibliography: ADelt 42 (1987) 19-20; BCH 117 (1993)771; Baziotopoulou-Valavani1994, 47, n.10; Monaco 2000, 234, pls. 38-9.

Description:Type: I?Circular. Max.L. 4.00. Max.W. 1.00.Entrance from the southeast.

Discussion:South of the kiln there is a basin (Dim.3.80x0.71) perhaps for clay-settling. In theupper layers of the area there were burntplinths, with a few stones and sherds fromthe 5th cent. B.C. The area was laterdisturbed by cemeteries.

55. ATHENS,42, Monasteriou and Phaiakon Sts.

Bibliography: ADelt 34 (1979) 20, plan on p. 21;Baziotopoulou-Valavani1994, 45; Monaco2001, 234, pls. 38-39.

Description:Type: I?Circular. Preserved in a very fragmentarycondition.

Date:4th cent. B.C.

Discussion:

The kiln was uncovered across an area whereremains (architecture and pottery) ofworkshop were unearthed: cisterns, burntclay balls, test pieces, misfired pieces, andtools. The area was later occupied by burials.

56. ATHENS,Vouliagmenis Ave.

Bibliography: BCH 120 (1996) 1124;Adevsmeuto" Tuvpo" (daily press) 10.10.95; Parlama and

Stampolidis 2000, 129, plan 1;Eleuqerotupiv a (daily press)26.5.96.

Description:Type: I?Combustion chamber preserved.Circular (?). Total L. 2.50.

Date:Second half of the 5th cent. B.C.

Discussion:The excavations for the Athenian Metrobrought to light the existence of a necropolisin use from Archaic to Paleochristian times:eleven Classical tombs, traces of habitation,and a ceramic kiln were revealed.

At the corner of Vouliagmenis Ave.and Kassomouli St., in the ancient deme ofAlopeke. The site is near the modern churchof Agios Ioannis the Hunter. Nearby awaterfall ran down from the hill. A majorroad passes to the west of the workshopleading from the Diomeiai Gates to Sounion.

57. ATTICA, VOULAEleutherias and Drosini Sts.

Bibliography:




_____________________________________________347

ADelt 42 (1987) 89-90; BCH 117 (1993)

776; Lohmann 1993, 126-34; Monaco 2000,239.

Description:Type: IbThe stoking corridors of the combustionchamber are preserved.Pear-shaped. Dim. 1.90x0.70. The area leftbetween them must have been the supportingwall of the perforated floor. Stoking pit:Dim. 1.35x0.65. The description of thestructure by the excavator makes it hard toreconstruct its original plan.

Date:

4th cent. B.C. Discussion:

The kiln and its adjacent rooms form part ofa larger workshop area which was excavatedfurther south in Mani Plot [ ADelt40 (1985)62].

PELOPONNESE

58-59. ARGOLIS, BERBATI

Bibliography:*Penttinen 2001 (pers. comm.); BCH 120(1996) 1149; BCH 122 (1998) 753-4, fig.56; ARepLondon 118 (1998) 29-30.


Type: II?Rectangular. Combustion chamberpreserved, dug into the bedrock.Max.Pres.Dim. 4.10x2.50 Probably it waslarger originally. A large baulk of bedrockis left in the middle as support for theperforated floor.


Type: II?Rectangular. Max.Dim. 2.75x1.50.

Combustion chamber preserved. A largebaulk of bedrock is left in the middle assupport for the perforated floor.

Production:Misfired pottery and misfiredCorinthian-style tiles were found in thevicinity as well as tripods, terracottawedges, and terracotta "bobbins."

Date:Mid-5th cent. B.C.

Discussion:

The site was later occupied by aHellenistic farmhouse and a tower. If thevalley wasreoccupied by the Argives, then the kilnmight have served increasing needs forthe construction activity at Argos.




_____________________________________________348

60-62. ARGOLIS, NEMEA

Bibliography: Plates V.6 , 8-10 ADelt 20 (1965) 154-6; B. H. Hill,TheTemple of Zeus at Nemea. Rev. and Suppl.by C.K. Williams II, 1966; S. G. Miller,"Excavations at Nemea 1973-4." Hesperia44 ((1975) 143-72;id., "Excavations atNemea, 1975." Hesperia 45 (1976) 186-9;id., "Excavations at Nemea 1979." Hesperia 49 (1980) 178-205; Miller 1990,64, 131. ADelt 20 (1965) 155, pl. 138c;

BCH 89 (1965) 703, fig.3; Nemeaexcavation notebooks of areas M17, N17,NB 23.


Type: IIbCombustion chamber, eschara, and stokingchannel preserved. Excavated in 1964.Unpublished.Rectangular. Dim. 4.60x4.20. Combustionchamber H. 1.56. Clay plastering on walls,Th. 0.02. On the wall and flat ceiling,towards the southern end of the firingchamber the workman's finger strokes ofthe last coating are preserved. Thecombustion chamber was divided by acentral massive wall made of mud bricksand chunks of poros limestone. It was linedwith terracotta plaques (0.41x0.41x0.08).On top one or two layers of mudbrick;eschara Th. 0.40; ventholes arrangedsymmetrically in a row; total of twelveventholes in each row (Ø 0.08-0.09).Distance between rows: 0.33-0.39. The

firing chamber was delimited by bakedbrick walls to the west and east. Wallsplastered over with clay (0.2 thick).Stoking corridors extend northward, andwere partially excavated. Western corrido:rPres.L. 1.56. Eastern corridor: Pres.L. 0.45.Both have vault roofing. Upper Int.W.

1.22. LowerW. 1.00. The interior walls

were plastered with clay mortar. Thespace between them is of piséeconstruction. Entrance from the north.

Date:Late 5th cent. B.C. (Hill 1966) redated tomid-4th cent. B.C. (Miller 1975).

Discussion:The construction of the Gymnasiumwalls destroyed the kiln. Poros chipsfrom the cutting of its foundation stonesfilled the stoking channels of the kilns.The three distinct layers of the westernstoking corridor tell the history of thekiln quite clearly: starting from thebottom up there is a thin layer (Th. 0.05)of ash and carbon followed by a layer(Th. 0.36) mixed with poros, lime, clay,and ash apparently from a phase wherethe roofs were partially preserved andporos chips from the neighboringbuilding activities got in. And finally, thetop layer (Th. 0.86) was deposited whenthe roofs fell down completely and poroschips sealed the corridors A completecoarse ware hydria was found in the fillof the western stoking corridor providinga terminus ante quemfor theabandonment of the kiln.

Miller prolonged the period ofoperation of the kiln to after the end ofthe 4th cent. B.C. Therefore the kiln wasnot constructed only for producing therooftiles of the Late Classical temple ofZeus.

61. K ILN B Description:Type: II?Rectangular. Partially preserved.





_____________________________________________349

Type: I?

Combustion chamber preserved in M17;dug into bedrock. Excavated in 1977.Unpublished.Circular. Combustion chamber wallsvitrified. No remains of central support oreschara. Entrance from the northwest.

Date:Mid-4th cent. B.C. (Miller 1975)

Discussion:The upper layers were filled with carbon,ash, and burnt pottery and have someintrusive Byzantine pottery. A fewrooftiles recovered from the fill includedan antefix. The almost complete absence ofpottery and the tile separators point to theconclusion that the kiln was used probablyexclusively for tile production. At thenorthern area of the kiln, a red layerprobably represents a fallen mudbrick wall.

Based on the stratigraphicalcorrelation between the layers surroundingthe kiln and the neighboring northern wallof the Xenon, it is suggested that thecircular kiln was built into the layers,which accumulated following theconstruction of the Xenon (Nemeaexcavation notebook M17, p. 155).

The kiln seems to have beenrenovated at least twice based on thepresence of two floors. The earlier floorconsisted of a layer of bluish-gray charrelearth. The later floor is a layer of white,plastered mud material. The layer beneaththe floor consists of brownish red, fairlyhard earth and extends to the northwest.

(Nemea excavation notebook M17, p. 163).

63. ARKADIA, KYNOURIAAgios Petros

Bibliography: Plate V.6

K. Rhomaios "Ein Töpferofen bei H.

Petros in der Kynouria." AM 33 (1908)177-84;P. Faklaris, Arcaiva Kunouriva.Anqrwvpinh drasthriov thta kaiperibavllon, 1990, 127-9.Seifert 1993, no. 74 (dated as Hellenistic); Cook 1961, 66, G7.

Description:Type: IaCircular. Ø 1.80. Central support (Ø0.30). Entrance from the south. Recentattempts to locate it (Faklaris in 1972and in 1982) proved unsuccessful.

Date:Late 4th cent. B.C. Faklaris (1990) datesit to the 3rd cent. B.C.

64-65. CORINTHIA,ANCIENTCORINTH

Bibliography: Plates II.13-14 , V.6 , VI.2-6 * Corinth excavation notebooks nos.140, 141. Both kilns unpublished.Roebuck 1995;Corinth VII.III,205,Deposit 26 (Well C, Tile Works); Heiden1987; H.S. Robinson, "Corinth as acenter for the manufacture ofarchitectural terracottas." Acta Centri Historiae Terra Antiqua Balcanica, I(1986) 41-56; C. Roebuck, "Someaspects of urbanization in Corinth." Hesperia 41 (1972) 96-127; S.S.Weinberg, "Terracotta sculpture atCorinth." Hesperia 26 (1957) 289-319;S.S. Weinberg, "A cross section of

Corinthian antiquities." Hesperia17(1948) 197-241, pls. 87-88; Orlandos1955, figs. 41-42; O. Broneer, AncientCorinth. A Guide to the Excavations,1960; O. Walter, "ArchäologischeFunde. Griechenland." AA1940, 204-6;Seifert 1993, no. 55; Belsché et al. 1963,11, GZ; Cook 1966, 66, G13.




_____________________________________________350

64. K ILN A Description:Type: IIbWest kiln. Combustion chamber, forecourtand eschara preserved; dug into bedrock.Rectangular. Dim. W. 2.70. Pres.L. 3.70;combustion chamber divided into two longcorridors (called hypocausts by theexcavator), by a solid central baulk. L. ofhypocausts: 2.90. Parts of the eschara withfourteen holes preserved.

Date:Date of construction: 5th cent B.C.Period of use: downdated to 300-250 B.C.(by Merker 1988). Unfortunately no fillascribed definitely to the kiln's period ofuse was found during the excavation. Theonly stratigraphical help for dating is thegroup of skyphoi dating to the 4th cent.B.C. which were found near the bottom ofthe forecourt of the kiln. Archaeomagneticdating: 400-300 B.C. (Belsché et al. 1963consider this date "fair," i.e., fairlyreliable).

Discussion:The West kiln was made by digging arectangular pit out of the bedrock. In thecenter a baulk of soil was left to divide thetwo hypocausts and support the eschara.Against the eastern, western, and southernsides of the pit, walls made of bricks androoftiles were constructed.

A homogeneous loose fill of manybrick fragments and pieces of vitrified clayprobably represents the destroyed upper

part of the kiln. No fill of its period of usewas found inside the kiln.Remains of fourteen vent holes have

been preserved. Each row had six holes butit is difficult to estimate the total numberof rows, since we are uncertain of the totallength of the kiln. The preserved level on

the central core between these is

probably about that of the kiln floor.This kiln had been covered withthe upper clay layer (called strosis in thenotebooks). Accordingly the potteryfrom the kiln will give a post quem datefor the upper clay layer. Since the upperclay strosis is probably contemporarywith the large kiln, this kiln is probablythe direct predecessor of the larger kilnto the east. It is one-fourth the size of thelarger kiln.

There were joins in potteryfragments from the eastern and westernstoking corridors (called hypocausts inthe notebooks), and the forecourt joined,which means that the kiln was probablyfilled in at one time. Then came somefew sherds in the fill. One tin of sherdswas kept as context (MF 9516)containing an amphora , fragments ofcoarse basins, wedges, and skyphoi. Thekiln after its abandonment wascompletely covered under a clay layer.


Type: IIbEast kiln. Combustion chamber, escharaand forecourt preserved, dug into thebedrock.Rectangular. Overall dimensions (incl.forecourt): 15.50x5.30. Kiln Dim. L.7.50, W. 5.50. Combustion chamberdivided into two corridors by a baulk ofsoil, Pres.D. 1.80. The sides of the wallswere made of tile fragments, mostlyslipped, and courses of bricks (Dim.

0.42x0.31x0.07-0.09) with layers of claybetween them. The courses alternate withbricks set flat and bricks set on theirsides. The walls were heavily vitrifiedand they gradually slope towards theinterior to form arches. At the northernend of the western corridor the beginningof a vault which would have arched the




_____________________________________________351

side walls with the central core is

preserved. The distances of the hypocauststo the central core are 0.90 at the base and1.10 at the top. Fifty ventholes wholly orpartially preserved, average Ø 0.10-0.12.Distance from each other 0.30. A singleflute usually has two holes as offshoots ina U-shaped arrangement. Entrance fromthe north. Dim. of forecourt: 7.00x5.00.

Discussion:Because of its size the East kiln is countedamong the largest examples in Greece,especially for its period.

The area is well suited for potteryproduction because of proximity to fueland water resources. It is not surprisingthat a rescue excavation conducted by R.Stroud revealed a small kiln at the siteKoutoumazi (Corinth excavation notebookno. 249, p. 165). This small kiln wascircular in shape. No support survives. Thekiln is undated. It was found during themodern construction of a ditch. On bothside of the kiln along the ditch five graveswere also excavated.

The substructure of the kiln ispreserved with two hypocausts runningalong the entire length. The hypocaustswere dug into the bedrock. The preserveddepth of the western hypocaust to bedrockis 1.80. The sides of the hypocausts werelined with bricks.

At many parts of the kiln we are ableto establish that the total number of rowsof the perforated floor is ten. Less clear isthe number of columns. The best guide toreconstruct the total number is given by the

sixth row from south: here four holes arepreserved. The remaining distance betweenthe last two holes to the westaccommodates only one more hole.

The distance of the opposite extremehole from the easternmost hole is greater,but here I preferred to reconstruct only onecolumn of holes rather than two, because

of the underlying system of directing

heat (two large channels spreading offfrom each hypocaust and branching outto two holes for each of them; making atotal of eight holes at each row). Thetotal number of ventholes is thenestimated to ca. eighty holes.

The walls of the forecourt were ofyellow-green mudbricks, fragments ofwhich had been found in its fill. Onegives the full dimensions: W.0.33, Th.0.08, D. ca 0.06. Its floor was a layer ofclay. There must have been two channelsin the forecourt fueling the two longhypocausts. The channels were coveredwith Laconian tiles, fragments of whichare found in great numbers in thegreenish brown earth fill in the forecourt(see infra discussion on stratigraphy).

The entire substructure wasunderground and the kiln floor was moreor less level with the ground. Almostnothing of the superstructure of the kilnhas survived. The excavator mentionedparts of side walls and a back wall madeof tile fragments with a layer of claybetween the courses. The back wall isbuilt entirely of bricks. The western wallis better preserved, especially at itsnorthern end.

Regarding the superstructure wehave very few hints: some bricks in thefills are thought to have come from theroof of the kiln. Orlandos (1955) hadsuggested a tentative reconstruction of adomed roof, but this is very unlikelysince this type of roofing undermines therectangular design of the kiln (aimed to

accommodate large numbers of tiles) byconsiderably decreasing its totalcapacity.

Instead, a superstructure withstraight walls, optimizing the totalcapacity, is more likely ( Plate VI.5 ). Thewalls must have been dismantled aftereach firing in order to take out the kiln




_____________________________________________352

load, but also to allow the tile makers to

put the new kiln load inside. The loadingcould have taken place from any of thethree sides (east, west, or south) except forthe northern side where the forecourt is.

The roof probably was notpermanent to allow the potter to hastilycover the top of the load with broken tilesor bricks. As for the chimney of the kiln, itis certain that the large pottery and tilekilns in traditional workshops have morethan one chimney in order to ensure evenheat circulation in the firing chamber. Thetwo-floor kiln at Limenas Thasos (LimenasThasos in Papadopoulos S. 1999) has threerectangular chimneys in one row on its topof different size and heights. The tile kilnat Pyrgos (D. Kirkilessis, pers. comm.)with a domed roof on straight tall walls hasno fewer than eight chimneys. The ancientkiln at Corinth, therefore, must have hadmore than one chimney.

From the accumulation of fills insidethe hypocausts one can surmise that thehypocausts were cleared when theestablishment went out of use. There wasno ash layer, which would be indicative ofthe last use of the kiln. They were probablyclearing the ash from the forecourt aftereach firing. Therefore the pits with thickash layers to the west of the West kilncould have been dumps of the ash from thefiring of the large kilns and not kilnsthemselves. (This interpretation still leavesunexplained the vitrified walls of thesepits). Furthermore the continuous use ofthe kilns must have produced a muchlarger quantity of ash than the amount

deposited in the two pits. Possibly it waswashed away by rainfall. Pottery lotsassociated with fills of the kiln: C-39-382,C-39-385, C-40-19, C-40-32, C-40-34, C-40-35, C-40-513, C-50-105.

After the abandonment a layer ofgravel washed in, mostly in the northern

end, and overlaying it, a brown fill of

slipped and glazed tiles with a fewsherds and small stones. This brown fillfrom the superstructure of the hypocausthad lain directly on the bedrock in otherplaces of the hypocaust. Thehomogeneity of the pottery from thevarious fills and joins of fragments fromdifferent fills supports the idea that thekiln filled up rapidly after it went out ofuse: for example, three fragments ofsima FS 877 were found in forecourt,western, and eastern hypocaust. In thefills of both the eastern and the westernhypocausts many wedges to hold the potsapart inside the kiln were found.(Seesupra Ch. II).

Stratigraphy:for the abandonment of thekiln we have two pictures: one offeredby the stratigraphy observed at theforecourt and one by the stratigraphyacross the two corridors in thecombustion chamber of the kiln.

The forecourt : A fill of greenishearth covered it; then the roof of theforecourt which was made of black-glazed Laconian tiles fell in and later onthe bricks from the upper parts of thekiln accumulated as a third layer.

A terminus post quem for theconstruction of the kiln is provided bythe number of architectural terracottaswhich were used as building material.They were found inserted mainly in thewestern wall and in the westernhypocaust of the kiln (Roebuck 1994).

They are all, with the exception of aMegarian bowl, of light-on-darkdecoration. Roebuck has dated them tothe 5th cent. B.C. The excavator's date is450-400 B.C.

Four vitrified basins:To the west of thewestern wall of the kiln there are four




_____________________________________________353

basins cut in the bedrock, labeled in the

notebooks hypocausts A, B, C, and Dstarting from the south. Their sides arelined with mortar 0.03 thick. In a laterphase brick walls lined the sides, thusdecreasing the interior space. These wallsare cut by the western wall of the East kiln,therefore they predate it. It is not clear yetif they belong to the same phase as theWest kiln.Their dimensions are :A: Pres.L. 2.20, W. 1.00,

Pres.D. 0.55.B: Pres.L. 2.55, W. 0.55. (between

walls), W. 0.70 (original), Pres.D.0.75 (original D. 0.35);

C: Pres.L. 2.60, W. 0.80, Pres.D. 1.10,original D. 0.90.

D: Pres.L: 2.70, W. 1.00, W. 0.90m(original), Pres.D. 0.20.

In section it is obvious that the floorsof Hypocausts C and D are at a deeperlevel than those of A and B. In Basins Aand B the fills are loose reddish earth withbrick fragments. Their function also seems unclear.The brick walls do bear traces of burningand vitrification, hence theircharacterization as hypocausts, but beforethe sides were lined with brick there was acement lining which suggests that theiroriginal function was associated withwater, perhaps a kind of basin.

Possible kiln structures at the Tile Works:Two circular pits at the southwesterncorner have been identified as possible

kilns (Corinth excavation notebook, no.190, p. 409: a. M'-P' 12-15 (Ø 2.00, D.0.30), and b. L'-O' 8-10 (Ø 2.20). Theirsides were smoothly cut and plastered withclay which was vitrified at places. Insidethem a thick layer of ash was found.

Merker (1988, 298) speaks ofanother kiln to the south. A little farther to

the west the existence of one more kiln

was suggested.

66. ELIS, ANCIENTELIS

Bibliography:*Karagiorga 1971; BCH 95 (1971) 909,figs. 225-226; ARepLondon 1970-71, 12.Seifert 1993, no. 52 (wrongly listed asbeing three kilns).She refers to theHellenistic kilns (172-174 ) in the presentcatalogue).

Description:Type: IaCombustion chamber, central pillar,supporting system of the perforated floorand parts of the perforated floorpreserved.Circular. Ø 3.60. Th. of combustionchamber’s walls: 0.60. Three layers ofclay lining on the walls can bedistinguished.A narrow ledge at 1.90 from the floorserves as a shoulder for the supportingarms of the perforated floor. Centralpillar, Lower Ø 0.90. Two circularopenings at 1.00 H. from the floor and at1.40 H. from the floor pierce this solidpillar horizontally. The upper openingturns into a vertical tube (Ø 0.24) whichfacilitated the upward draft of the heat.From the central pillar spring out thesupporting arms (W. 0. 20, L. 0.54-0.62).The ventholes are symmetricallyarranged in circles on the floor (Ø 0.11-0.22). The wider holes are located along

the periphery of the floor and in thecenter of the kiln’s floor. Walls of firingchamber preserved up to H. 0.40 (Th.0.50). A large number of teardrop-shaped supports of large size(0.06x0.035x0.03 – 0.11x0.07x0.045).




_____________________________________________354

Production:

Due to the paucity of pottery sherds, theexcavator attributed its function to thefiring of architectural terracottas. Latersherds of Roman date were interpreted bythe excavator as intrusive.

Date:Late 4th-early 3rd cent. B.C

67-72. ELIS, OLYMPIA,South Stoa

Bibliography: Plate VI.8E. Kunze and H. Schleif,OlBer III. Berichtüber die Ausgrabungen in Olympia: Winter 1938/39,1941, 30-7; Scheibler 1995, 97,fig. 93.Seifert 1993, no. 58; Belsché et al. 1963,10, GS; Cook 1961, 66, G15-20.


Type: IaCombustion chamber, supporting wall ofthe eschara, and lower parts of the firingchamber were preserved.Combustion chamber: Ø 0.75. H. 0.40.Support Wall: H. 0.23; W. 0.06; Stokingchannel’s L. 0.60, W. (at kiln mouth) 0.30.H. (at kiln mouth) 0.20.

68-72. K ILNS B-FRemains of those were found duringexcavation.The remains of at least six kilns wereidentified under the South Stoa at Olympia.Minimal information was retained.

73. ELIS, OLYMPIA,Byzantine Church

Bibliography: Plates III.10 , V.6 , VI.8

Kunze and Schleif 1944, 25-31, fig. 13,

pl. 11;OlB VI, pl. 2 (at II.7), and pl. 4 (at4).Seifert 1993, no. 57; Cook 1961, 66,G22.

Description:Type: IIbCombustion chamber, central supportingwall, and perforated floor preserved.Rectangular. Combustion chamber: L.3.40x3.40, H. 1.40. Praefurnium: L. 1.85Six rows of eleven ventholes each (sixty-six in total). Cf. that the smallerrectangular kiln to the south of thePalestra (347 ), measuring 3.50x2.90, has104 ventholes.

Date:350-300 B.C.

Discussion:Under room 7 of peristyle house II.Thought to be a tile kiln, but fragmentsof vases were also found in thecombustion chamber.

74. ELIS, OLYMPIA,Peristyle House V, above KladeosBaths

Bibliography: Plate VI.9Kunze and Schleif 1944, 57, 66, fig. 33,pls. 21-22.Seifert 1993, no. 56; Belsché et al. 1963,10, GV; Cook 1961, 66, G14.

Description:Type: IaCombustion chamber and centralsupporting column preserved.Circular. Ø 1.00.




_____________________________________________355

CENTRALGREECE

75. AETOLIA, THERMON

Bibliography:Rhomaios 1916.Seifert 1993, no. 60; Davaras 1980, 125, n.60.

Description:Type: II?Trapezoidal. Dim. 5.60x1.90 (one side), 2.50(the other side). A central rectangular pillarmade of bricks and clay. Inadequatelydescribed by excavator.

Date:Thought to be Classical or generally earlierthan Hellenistic, since many monochromepottery sherds were found. The reasons forsuch dating are very vague to be reliable.

76. EUBOEA, ANOKYME

Bibliography: ADelt31 (1976) 153; ARepLondon1984-85,17.Seifert 1993, no. 61.

Description:Type: I?Small circular kiln.

77. EUBOEA, KARYSTOS

Bibliography:Keller 1985, site no. 112, pp. 152, 208-12.

Description:Type: UncertainUnknown shape. Only fragments ofventholes of the kiln preserved. Nodimensions given.

Production:

Mainly cooking wares, lopades, chytrae,lids.

Date:Late 5th-4th cent. B.C.

Discussion:Large masses of clay were found in thevicinity as well as considerablequantities of misfired cooking ware sothat the surveyor believed that the kiln'smain production was cooking ware.

Keller (1985, 208-12) believesthat the kiln perhaps supplied cookingpots for a small community in theimmediate vicinity which consisted ofone tower and two structures. Theworkshop was located near a smallstream. At the opposite side of the bay,to the northwest, there is a good claysource.

78. KARDITSA, ORFANA

Bibliography: ADelt44 (1994) 345.

Description:Type: II?Combustion chamber, only partiallyexcavated.




_____________________________________________356

Rectangular. Entrance from the southwest.

79. MAGNESIA, DEMETRIADA

Bibliography: ADelt 45 (1990) 198, pls. 95b-c; BCH 120(1996) 1211.

Description:Type: I?Combustion chamber, central column support,stoking pit preserved, dug into the ground

Circular. Ø 0.70(?). Central column (Ø 0.20).Total L. (combustion chamber and stokingpit): ca. 1.50.

Discussion:Skyphos bases, black-glazed sherds withstamped decoration and a lamp, all Classicalin date, were found in this plot (in addition toa few Hellenistic walls) and are considered tobe the products of this kiln.

Abutting the kiln to the west there was afloor of beaten earth and pebbles. Near thekiln there was also a pit filled with porphyryshells, tiles, and sherds.

80-81. MAGNESIA,VELESTINO-PHERAI,

Admetou St., Kogouli Plot

Bibliography: ADelt42 (1987) 258; BCH 117 (1993) 834.


Type: I?Combustion chamber and stoking channelpreserved.Pear-shaped. Ø 1.40. Combustion chamberwalls, Pres.H. 0.60. Made of clay mixed withsherds, tile fragments and pebbles. Totallength: 3.30. Entrance from the southwest.

81. K ILN B Description:Type: I?Combustion chamber, only partiallyexcavated.Pear-shaped. Entrance from thesouthwest.

Date:5th cent. B.C.

Discussion:

The kilns are located on the hillKastraki, north-northeast of theHypereia Fountain. The distancebetween them is five meters. In the areaa Middle Helladic tomb was excavatedas well as Hellenistic walls.

82. MAGNESIA,VELESTINO-PHERAI

Dodou Plot

Bibliography: ADelt 44 (1989) 220, pl. 134a; BCH 120(1996) 1214;Doulgeri-Intzesiloglou1997b.

Description:Type: IaCombustion chamber, central support,and stoking channel preservedPear-shaped. Ø 1.50. Walls made ofupstanding stone plaques, tiles, andclay, Pres.H. 0.40. The central columnarsupport was made of small tile sherdsand clay plaques. Inside and all aroundthe combustion chamber were thicklayers of ash. Stoking channel’s L. 1.00.

Date:Late Classical-Early Hellenistic.




_____________________________________________357

Discussion:

The kiln intrudes through the Classicaldestruction layer. It was later used as adumpsite and was filled with pottery sherds,animal bones and other material. In the 2ndcent. B.C. a building of uncertain functionoccupied this site.

As was the case with other kilns it was

built around the Hypereia cistern, in thecentral part of the ancient town ofPherai.

WESTERNGREECE

83. ARTA,Corner of Ag. Vasileiou and Ag.Theodoras Sts., Karassoula Plot

Bibliography: Plate V.6 ADelt 43 (1988) 304-6;Hpeirwtikav Cronikav 31 (1994) 17-29, esp. 22-3, pl.25; BCH 119 (1995) 901.

Description:

Type: IaCombustion chamber preserved.Circular. Ø 1.30. Combustion chamberwalls plastered with clay.

Date:Late 5th-early 4th cent B.C.

Discussion:Many black-glazed and unglazed sherdswere found inside the kiln, some of themwasters. Also associated with the kiln areCorinthianizing and Atticizing skyphosbases, and a few fragments of largefigurines. The workshop (whose otherfeatures should be sought to the east-southeast) went out of use in the mid-4thcent. B.C. The site was later occupied by aHellenistic house.

NORTHERNGREECE

84. KAVALA, AMPHIPOLIS

Bibliography:D. Lazaridis, " jAnaskafaiv kaiv e[reunai

jAmfipovlew". " PAE 1973, 43-54, folded planG, pl. 59a;PAE 1974, 58-64.

Description:Type: II?Partially excavated; part of the escharapreserved.Trapezoidal. Pres.Dim. 4.20-4.35(westernside) x 2.85(eastern side). Centralrectangular wall as support W. 0.27.Ventholes Ø 0.09-0.12. At the center of the




_____________________________________________358

northern side, an arched opening is

preserved: Dim. 0.60x0.50. Discussion:

This kiln is cut by the northern branch of theClassical fortification wall of the city at adistance of 3.60 meters to the west of one ofthe walls' gates. This suggests that the kilnwas built after the wall and rests upon it.

85. PELLA, PELLAUnder Area I

Bibliography: Plate V.6 X. Makaronas, " jAnaskafaiv Pevllh " 1957-1960." ADelt 16 (1960) Meletai72-83, plan2, pl. 50b; BCH 83 (1959) 702, fig. 20; ARepLondon 1958, 13, fig. 16.Seifert 1993, no. 78 (presented as Hellenistic; wrongly presented as two kilns).

Description:Type: IIb

86-89. THESSALONIKI, SINDOS

Bibliography: Plates V.6 , VI.14*Despoini 1982; BCH 107 (1983) 795; BCH 108 (1984) 800, figs. 115-116; ARepLondon1982-83. 372; ARepLondon 1983-84, 44; ARepLondon1984-84, 41, figs. 53-54.Seifert 1993, no. 59.

86. KILN A Description:

Type: IaThe combustion chamber and the stokingchannel were preserved.Pear-shaped. Upper Pres. Ø 2.00; Lower Ø1.65; Pres. H. 0.90m. The combustionchamber is dug into bedrock; the wallsincline inwards, like the walls of a largepithos. The kiln has a southward slope. Two

layers of clay cover the walls. Total Th. 0.14.

Supporting arches for the eschara along witha pillar made of bricks partially preserved,Pres.H. 0.40. Its arches were made of twotypes of plinths, one for the genesis of thearch and another one for the curvature. Theeschara is partially preserved at the edges;four ventholes (Ø 0.12); estimated totalnumber thirty ventholes. Preserved pieces ofthe eschara: Th. 0.10. One layer of claycovered the underside of the eschara and thesupporting arches (possibly the escharasystem is covered with only one layerbecause it was rebuilt for each use, whereasthe combustion chamber remained the same).Stoking channel: L. 1.30, W. 0.80. Thestoking channel was covered with a vault, asthe remains of walls lean inwards prove. Athick layer of ash (Th. 0.10-0.40) filled theentrance from the southeast.

Associated pottery:Small black-glazed skyphoi, cooking pots,unglazed hydriae and oinochoai.

Date:375-350 B.C. on the basis of black-glazedskyphoi.


Type: IaCombustion chamber and stoking channelpreserved, dug into bedrock.Pear-shaped. Dim. 1.55x1.30. Combustionchamber walls plastered with two layers ofclay mixed with straw. Large fingerprintspreserved. Th. 0.12. Pres.H. 0.88. Central

ellipsoidal support, Pres.H. 0.35. Made ofsmall bricks; eschara started at ca. 0.70 fromthe floor of the combustion chamber. Parts ofthe eschara were found in fills; escharasupported by arches made bricks of twosizes: a) of semicircular section, W. 0;19. L.0.55. Th. 0.10. b) flat plaques, Pres.Dim. W.0.24, Th. 0. 085. The ends of these plaques




_____________________________________________359

sat on the combustion chamber walls;

cavities thereof were found on the southwall. Six supporting channels reconstructed.Stoking channel, L. 1.55. W. 0.75. The wallsincline inwards. The entrance was from theeast. A thick layer of ash was found in thecombustion chamber and in the stokingchannel.

Date:Late 5th-first half of 4th cent. B.C.Inside the combustion chamber were foundsherds of closed household vessels, such ascoarse hydriae.Because of the spatial arrangement of thetwo kilns, the possibility that both of themwere used simultaneously should not beexcluded.


Type Ia?Combustion chamber, supporting pillar andarches preserved, lower part dug intobedrock.

Circular. Ø 1.20; W. 0.60. Combustion

chamber walls plastered with clay mixedwith straw, Pres.H. 0.60. Rectangular pillarsupport, H. 0.50. Made of bricks mortaredtogether with clay. Arches made of one pieceof brick of semicircular section (Dim.0.23x0.10) filled the space between theeschara and the walls, providing extrasupport for the eschara. The arches started atca. 0.40 up from the ground. Four ventholespreserved. Stoking channel L. 1.00.

89. K ILN D

At the northeastern part of the late Archaiccemetery.

Description:Type: II?Combustion chamber, two supporting walls,and eschara preserved.Rectangular. Combustion chamber: max. L.4.25. Max. W. 1.85. One free standingsupport for the perforated floor vertical to thestoking channel.

AEGEANISLANDS

90. THASOS, KERAMIDI

Bibliography: ADelt39 (1984) 279-80; BCH 108 (1984)880; ARepLondon1983-84, 57; ARepLondon1984-85, 55.Seifert 1993, no. 64.

Description:Type: UncertainOnly fragments of the perforated floor werefound.

Date:A general date from the 5th-3rd cent. B.C.is assigned to the site.

91. CRETE, CHANIA

Bibliography: ADelt 45 (1990) 435-41; BCH 118 (1994)836; S. Markoulaki, "Arcaiologikev "eidhvsei". " Krhtikhv Estiva 4 (1991-93)206-7.




_____________________________________________360

Description:

Type: I?Combustion chamber preserved.Circular. Ø 1.00.

Production:Amphorae, lids for amphorae, and figurines.

Date:4th cent. B.C.

Discussion:Not only the kiln but also a deposit and a

clay-settling basin were uncovered in thevicinity of the kiln, pointing clearly to theexistence of an organized workshop. Nearbythey also found pithoi, frequently repairedas the lead joints testify. The pithoi wereprobably used to store clay.The clay was also either stored in theworkshop or dug out in the vicinity sincelarge quantities of it were found in theworkshop. Later the area was occupied by abath in the 1st cent. A.D.

92-93. CRETE, HERAKLEIOU,KNOSSOS, Kephali Monastery

Bibliography: Plate V.7*Homann-Wedeking 1950.Seifert 1993, no. 53; Davaras 1980, 122, n.37; Davaras 1973, 79 B2; Cook 1961, 66,G8-10.

92. K ILN A Description:Type: Ie

Combustion chamber partially preservedand partially subterranean.Circular. Est.Ø 2.30. The floor of thecombustion chamber is made of beatenearth. Two irregular walls seem to have

been the supports for the eschara, despite

their off-center position. Est.W. 0.20.Max.Pres.H. 0.60. Est. distance betweenthe two walls: 0.30. A third circularsupport to the south of these walls mighthave been an additional support for theeschara, or the remains of a thirdsupporting wall like the two betterpreserved ones. The entrance was fromthe northeast in an earlier phase, laterchanged to the east.

Production:The fragments and wasters retrieved fromthe interior of this kiln and from thesurrounding area belong to liquidtransportation vessels of small size(average H. 0.05-12m). Specifically, dark-glazed olpai, coarse lekythoi, glazed cups,and glazed craters. Coarsewares include jugs, hydriae, bowls in various sizes, aswell as cooking pots and large plates.These types differ considerably from thetypes found in the neighboring cistern.

Date:Beginning of the 4th cent. B.C.

Discussion:It is interesting to note that despite thepresence of kilns in the area of the Palace[four prehistoric ones (138-141 ), oneOrientalizing (26) and one Hellenistic(240 )], the prospection of suitable claysfor pottery which was conducted aroundthe palace by P. Day (1989) provednegative.

93. K ILN B Description:Type: I?Kiln C. Combustion chamber partiallypreserved.Pear-shaped. Pres. Max. Dim. 2.20x1.00.Figure-eight-shaped central support.Est.Dim. 1.00x0.30. To the northwest, the




_____________________________________________361

wall of the combustion chamber has been

relined twice. There is also a separate wallon its exterior remaining from anotherrestoration phase. Homann-Wedekingconsidered it a separate kiln (kiln B) but Iprefer to see it as a restoration phase of asingle kiln. (Note that he did not considerthe earlier phase of kiln A with its entrancefrom the northwest to be a separate kiln.)

Production:For a general idea, see the productionsection of the previous entry.

Date:Beginning of the 4th cent. B.C.

Discussion:This workshop is situated in the eastern sideof the hill Kephala Monastery to the west ofthe Palace at Knossos. The hill apparentlyoffered advantages to the establishment ofceramic workshops, since 50 m. to the south

of this Classical workshop, a Hellenistic

workshop with a rectangular kilnproducing mainly amphoras has beenrecently excavated (240 ).

The workshop was small in scaleemploying one kiln at a time. There aretwo recognizable kilns, A and B, with atleast two phases of repair for each. Kiln Ais considered earlier than Kiln B sinceKiln B cuts through Kiln A. To the northa cistern was partially excavated. It wasfilled with pottery which ischaracteristically different from thepottery found in association with theworkshop. The pottery from the cistern isquite homogeneous, probably the result ofone or two fills, and dates to theHellenistic period (2nd cent. B.C.). Thepredominant types are cups and bowls.The cistern provided a few types of kilnprops such as lower and taller version ofcylindrical rings.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________362

ABBREVIATIONS

For journals I have adopted the abbreviations as they appear inhttp://www.ajaonline.org/shared/pdfs/Instructions%20for%20Contributors.pdf ,

except for the following

JOURNALSAEMQ To Arcaiologikov vErgo sth Makedoniva kai

Qravkh EY PPO To vErgo tou Upourgeivou Politismouv ston

Tomeva th" Politistikhv " Klhronomiav" ADelt Archaeologikon Deltion AEphem Archaeologike EphemerisErgon Archaeologike Hetaireia. To Ergon

PAE Proceedings of the Archaeological Society(Praktika Archaeologikes Hetaireias)

MONOGRAPHS

Amphores grecques Recherches sur les amphores grecques. Actesdu colloque international organisé par lecentre national de la recherche scientifique, l’Université De Rennes II et l’ École française d' Athènes. Athènes 10-12 septembre 1984. Editedby J.-Y. Empereur and Y. Garlan. BCH Supplément. 13. Paris 1986.

Ancient Greek and Related Pottery Ancient Greek and Related Pottery. Proceedings

of the International Vase Symposium in Amsterdam, 12-15 April 1984.Edited by H.A.G.Brijder. Allard Pierson Series 5. Amsterdam1984.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________363

Archaeological Sciences Archaeological Sciences 1995. Proceedings of a

Conference on the Application of ScientificTechniques to the Study of Archaeology, Liverpool, July 1995. Edited by A. Sinclair, E.Slater, and J. Gowlett. Oxbow Monograph 64.Oxford 1997.

Archaeometric Studies of AncientGreek and Cretan Kilns

Field Report edited by the Dept. of Geophysics,Edinburgh University and the National Museumof Antiquities.Edinburg 1977.

Archaeometry 94 Archaeometry 94. The Proceedings of the 29th

International Symposium on Archaeometry, Ankara 9-14 May. Edited by S. Demirçi,A.M.Özer, and G.D. Summers. Ankara 1996.

Argos and Argolide Argos et l'Argolide. Topographie et Urbanisme. Actes de la Table Ronde Internationale, Athènes- Argos 24/4-1/5/1990. Edited by A. Pariente andG. Touchais. Athènes 1998.

Arcaiva Ellhnikhv Tecnologiva Arcaiva Ellhnikhv Tecnologiva. 1o Dieqnev"Sunevdrio, 4-7 Septembrivou 1997.Qessaloniv kh 1997.

Ateliers de potiers Les ateliers de potiers dans le monde grec auxépoques géométrique, archaïque et classique. Actes de la table ronde organisé à l'École française d' Athènes (2-3 octobre 1987). Editedby F. Blondé and J.Y. Perreault. BCH Supplément 23. Paris 1992.

Athenian Potters and Painters Athenian Potters and Painters. The ConferenceProceedings. Edited by J.H.Oakley, W.D.E.Coulson, and O. Palagia. Oxbow Monograph67. Oxford 1997.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________364

East Cretan White-on Dark Ware East Cretan White-on Dark Ware. Studies on a

Handmade Pottery of the Early to Middle Minoan Periods. Edited by P.P. Betancourt.The University Museum. University ofPennsylvania. Philadelphia 1984.

A v EllKer A v Episthmonikhv sunavnthsh gia thnEllhnistikhv keramikhv. Praktikav , Iwavnnina 6Dekembrivou 1986 . Iwavnnina 1989 .

B v EllKer B v Sunavnthsh gia thn Ellhnistikhv Kerameikhv. Cronologikav problhvmata th"ellhnistikhv " kerameikhv". Praktikav , Rovdo"22-25 Martivou 1989 . Aqhvna 1990 .

G v EllKer G v Episthmonikhv sunavnthsh gia thnEllhnistikhv keramikhv. Cronologhmevnasuvnola-Ergasthv ria. Qessaloniv kh, 24-27Septembrivou 1991 . Aqhvna 1994.

D v EllKer D v Episthmonikhv sunavnthsh gia thnEllhnistikhv keramikhv. Cronologikav problhvmata-Kleistav suvnola-Ergasthv ria.Aqhvna 1997 .

E v EllKer E v Episthmonikhv Sunavnthsh gia thn Ellhnistikhv Keramikhv. Cronologikav problhvmata-Kleistav suvnola-Ergasthv ria. Aqhvna 2000 .

Euboica Euboica. L’ Eubea e la Presenza Euboica inCalcidica e in Occidente. Atti del Convegno Internationale di Napoli, 13-16 Novembre1996. Edited by M. Bats and B. d’Agostinio.Napoli 1998.

Kerameikav Ergasthvria Kerameikav ergasthvria sthn Krhv th apov thn

arcaiovthta w" shvmera. Praktikav hmerivda" 30Septembrivou 1996. Margariv te" 1996 .



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________365

La production du vin et de l'huile en

Méditerranée

La production du vin et de l'huile en

Méditerranée. Actes du symposium internationalorganisé par le Centre Camille Jullian et leCentre archéologique du Var, Aix-en-Provence etToulon, 20-22 novembre 1991. BCH Supplément26. Paris 1993.

Prehistory and History of CeramicKilns

The Prehistory and History of Ceramic Kilns.Proceedings of the Prehistory and History ofCeramic Kilns, held at the 98th Annual Meeting of the American Ceramic Society in Indianapolis, Indiana, April 14-17, 1996.Edited by P.M. Rice. The American Ceramic

Society. Westernville 1997.

Production and the Craftsman Trade and Production in Premonetary Greece:Production and the Craftsman. Proceedings ofthe 4th and 5th International Workshops, Athens 1994 and 1995.Edited by C. Gillis, C.Risberg, and B. Sjöberg. Sima Publications143. Jonsered 1997.

Roman Brick and Tile Roman Brick and Tile: Studies in Manufacture, Distribution and Use in the Western Empire.

Edited by A. McWhirr. BAR 68. Oxford 1979.

Symposium on Ancient Greek and Related Pottery

Symposium on Ancient Greek and RelatedPottery. Proceedings of the 3rd Symposium on Ancient Greek and Related Pottery.Copenhagen, August 31-September 4, 1987 .Edited by J. Christiansen and T. Melander.Copenhagen 1988.

TECNH TECNH . Craftsmen, Craftswomen, andCraftsmanship in the Aegean Bronze Age.Proceedings of the 6th International AegeanConference, Philadelphia. Temple University,18-21 April 1996. Aegaeum 16.Edited by R.Laffineur and P.P. Betancourt. Liège 1997.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________366

Thasos Thasos: matiéres premières et technologie de

la prehistoire à nos jours. Actes du colloqueinternational 26-29 septembre 1995. Edited byC. Koukouli-Chrysanthaki, A. Müller, and S.Papadopoulos. Paris 1999.

Thessalie La Thessalie. Quinze années de recherchesarchéologiques, 1975-1990. Bilans et perspectives. Actes du colloque international Lyon, 17-22 avril 1990. Lyon 1994.

Wace and Blegen Wace and Blegen: Pottery as Evidence for

Trade in the Aegean Bronze Age, 1939-1989.Proceedings of the International Conferenceheld at the American School of ClassicalStudies at Athens, December 2-3, 1989. Editedby C. Zerner, P. Zerner, and J. Winder.Amsterdam 1993.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________367

REFERENCES

Adam, J.-P.1994 Roman Building: Materials and Techniques.Translated by A. Mathews. London.

Adam-Veleni, P.1998 "Pevtre" Flwv rina". " AEMQ 12: 1-22.

1999 "Balanei' o progenevstero th" Agorav " Qessaloniv kh". " AEMQ 11: 351-64.

Adamesteanu, D., D. Mertens, and F. D’Andria1980 Metaponto I: Scavi nella zona del Kerameikos. Notize degli Scavi

Supplement 29, Roma.Akamatis, I.M.

1993 Phvline" mhvtre" aggeivwn apov thn Pevlla. Sumbolhv sth melevth th"ellhnistikhv " keramikhv". Dhmosieuvmata tou Arcaiologikouv Deltivou, no. 51.Aqhvna.

Agricola G.1912 De re metallica. Edited and English translation by H.C. Hoover and L.H.

Hooper, London. The Mining Magazine.Aitken, M.J., A.L. Allsop, G.D. Bussell, and M.B. Winter

1989 "Geomagnetic intensity results for Greece and Crete for the first and secondmillennia B.C. Comparison with Egypt, Cyprus and the eastern Mediterranean."in Maniatis (ed.) 1989, 69-74.

Amyx, D.A.1983 "Archaic vase-painting vis-à-vis 'free' painting at Corinth." in Ancient Greek Art

and Iconography, edited by W.G. Moon, 37-52. Madison, Wisconsin.1988 Corinthian Vase-Painting of the Archaic Period. Berkeley.

Anderson, W.P.1987 "The kilns and workshops of Sarepta (Sarafand, Lebanon): remnants of a

Phoenician ceramic industry." Berytus 35: 41-51.André, J.

1964 "La résine et la poix dans l’ antiquité. Technique et terminologie." AntCl 33: 86-97.

Andreadaki-Chronaki, E.1999 "Epanavcrhsh plinqokeramopoieiv ou w" mouseivo biomhcanikhv" tecnologiv a".

Efarmoghv hliakwvn tecnikwvn kai susthmav twn." Aivqrion . Annual of theFaculty of Engineering, School of Architecture, University of Thessaloniki, 16(1997-98): 11-36.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________368

Antonetti, Cl.

1992 Les Étoliens. Image et religion. Paris.Arafat K. and C. Morgan

1989 "Pots and painters in Athens and Corinth."OJA 8: 311-46.Arnold, D.E.

1985 Ceramic Theory and Cultural Process.Cambridge.Attas, M.

1977 "Neutron Activation Analysis of Early Bronze Age pottery from LakeVouliagmeni, Perachora, central Greece." Archaeometry 19: 33-43.

1983 Regional Ceramic Trade in Early Bronze Age Greece: Evidence from Neutron Activation of Early Helladic Ceramics from Argolis and Korinthia.Unpublished

Ph.D. diss., McGill University.Bakirtzis, C.

1980 "Didymoteichon: un center de céramique postbyzantine." Balkan Studies21:147-53.

Bakker, J.T.1999 The Mills-Bakeries of Ostia. Description and Interpretation.Dutch

Monographs on Ancient History and Archaeology, Vol. 21. Amsterdam.Balfet, H.

1965 "Ethnographic observations in North Africa and archaeological interpretation: thepottery of Maghreb." inCeramics and Man,edited by F.R. Matson, 161-77. Aldine,Chicago.

1973 "A propos du tour de potier: l’ outil et la geste technique." in L’Homme hier etaujourd’hui, recueil d’ études en homage à André Leroi-Gourhan,109-22. Paris.

Barbetti, M. and D. Hein1989 "Palaeomagnetism and high-resolution dating of ceramic kilns in Thailand: a

progress report."World Archaeology21: 51-70.Battaglia, E.

1989 ARTOS, il lessico della panificazione nei papiri greci. Milano.Baziotopolou-Valavani, E.

1994 "Anaskafev " se aqhnai> kav keramikav ergasthv ria arcai> kwvn kai klasikwvncrovnwn." inThe Archaeology of Athens and Attica under the Democracy.

Proceedings of an International Conference celebrating 2500 Years since the Birth of Democracy in Athens, held at the American School of Classical Studiesat Athens, Dec. 4-6 1992,edited by W.D.E Coulson, O. Palagia, T.L. Shear, Jr.,H.A. Shapiro, and F.J. Frost, 45-54. Oxbow Monograph 37. Oxford.

Beatrice Annis, M.1985 "Resistance and change: pottery manufacture in Sardinia."World Archaeology17: 240-55.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________369

Beazley, J.D.

1946 Potter and Painter in Ancient Athens. London.1971 Paralipomena: additions to ABV and ARV 2. Oxford. Revised edition.

Bech Gregersen, M. L.1997 "Craftsmen in the Linear B archives." inProduction and the Craftsman,43-55.

Behura, N.K.1967a "Sociology of pottery among certain groups of potters in south India."

BullAntropSurvey of India13: 35-7.1967b "Sociology and cultural aspects of pottery in southern and south-eastern India."

BullAntropSurvey of India13: 123.Belsché, J.C., Cook, K., and R.M. Cook

1963 "Some archaeomagnetic results from Greece." BSA 58: 8-13.Benson, J. L.

1989 Earlier Corinthian Workshops. A Study of Corinthian Geometric andProtocorinthian Stylistic Groups.Amsterdam.

Betancourt, P.1985 The History of Minoan Pottery.Princeton.1999 The Potters at Thrapsano. A Modern Ceramics Tradition with Clues to Ancient Technology: Isle of Crete. Summer 1998. Cinegraphic Films. Videorecording.

Betancourt, P.P., T.K. Gaiser, E. Koss et al.1979 Vasilike Ware: An Early Bronze Age Pottery Style in Crete: Results of the

Philadelphia Vasilike Ware Project.Göteborg.Betancourt, P.P., J.D. Muhly, W.R. Farrand et al.

1998 "Research and excavation at Chrysokamino, Crete 1995-1998." Hesperia67:343-70.

Biers, W.1971 "From a furnace." AAA 4: 414-6.

Biringuccio, V.1977 De la pirotechnia, li dicce libri della pirotechnia,edited by A. Carugo. Venise

1540. Reprint Milan.Birmingham, J.

1967 "Pottery making in Andros."Expedition 10: 33-9.Blakely-Westover, S.

1998 Daimones, Metallurgy, and Cult. Ph.D. diss., U. of Southern California.Blegen, C.W.

1937 Prosymna. The Helladic Settlement preceding the Argive Heraion.Cambridge.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________370

Blitzer, H.

1984 "Traditional pottery production in Kentri-Crete: Workshops, materials,techniques, and trade." inEast Cretan White-on Dark Ware, 143-57.

1990 "KORWNEIKA. Storage-jar production and trade in the traditional Aegean." Hesperia 59: 675-711.

Blümner, H.1885-87 Technologie und Terminologie der Gewerbe und Künste bei Griechen und

Römern.Reprint New York 1979.Blyth, P.H.

1999 "The consumption and cost of fuel in hypocaust baths." in Roman Baths and Bathing. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Roman Baths heldat Bath, England, 30 March-4 April 1992,edited by J. Delaine and D.E.Johnston, 87-98. Portsmouth, Rhode Island.

Boardman, J.1954 "Painted votive plaques and an early inscription from Aegina." BSA 49:

183-201.1956 "Some Attic fragments: pot, plaque and dithyramb." JHS 76: 18-25.

Bookidis, N.2000 "Corinthian terracotta sculpture and the temple of Apollo." Hesperia69: 381-452.

Boss, M.1997 "Preliminary sketches on Attic red-figured vases of the early fifth century

B.C." in Athenian Potters and Painters,345-51.

Brijder, H.A.G.1997 "New light on the earliest Attic Black-Figure drinking-cups." in Athenian Potters and Painters,1-17.

Brodie, N.1997 "Chemical analysis of archaeological ceramics at the intra-regional level: the

case of Early Iron Age Cyprus." in Archaeological Sciences,55-61.Broekmans, T., A.M. Adriaens, K., and Van Lerberghe

1999 "Nabada potters: masters in clay preparation or just plain clay importers." in5thEuropean Meeting on Ancient Ceramics, 18th-20th October 1999. Abstracts, 17.Athens.

Bron, C. and F. Lissarangue1984 La cité des images. Religion et société en Grèce antique.Paris.Broneer, O.

1954 The South Stoa and its Roman Successors. Corinth I.V. Princeton.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________371

Bryant, G.F.

1978/9 "Romano-British experimental kiln firings at Barton-on-Humber, England,1968-1975." ActaPrehArch9/10: 13-22.

Burford, A.1969 The Greek Temple Builders at Epidauros. A Social and Economic Study of

Building in the Asklepian Sanctuary during the Fourth and Early ThirdCenturies B.C. Liverpool.

1972 Craftsmen in Greek and Roman Society. London.Burkhalter, F.

1990 "Archives locales et archives centrales en Egypte romaine."Chiron20: 191-216.Buxeda i Garrigos, J., V. Kilikoglou, and P.M. Day

2001 "Chemical and mineralogical alteration of ceramics from a Late Bronze Agekiln at Kommos, Crete: the effect on the formation of a control group." Archaeometry 43: 349-71.

Campbell, M.T.1946 Later Corinthian Pottery.Ph.D. diss., Bryn Mawr College.

Carpenter, T.H.

1989 Beazley Addenda: Additional References to ABV, ARV 2 and Paraleipomena.Oxford. Revised edition.

Carter, J.C.1983 "Preliminary report on the excavations at Pizzica Pantanello, 1974-1976." in

Metaponto II.407-90. Roma.Casson, S.

1938 "The modern pottery trade in the Aegean." Antiquity 18: 464-73.1951 "The modern pottery trade in the Aegean: further notes." Antiquity85: 187-90.

Catling, H.W. and I. Lemos1990 Lefkandi II . The Protogeometric Building at Toumba.London.

Chadwick, J.1973 Documents in Mycenaean Greek. Cambridge. Second edition.

Chapelot, J.1975 "L' approche ethnographique: le tuilier." inPotiers de Saintonge, huit siècles d'

artisanat rural. Catalogue de l’ exposition du musée national des arts ettraditions populaires,49-55. Paris.Charleston, R.

1978 "Glass furnaces through the ages." JGS 20: 9-33.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________372

Cherry, J. F., J. L. Davis, and E. Mantzourani

1991 Landscape Archaeology as Long-Term History: Northern Keos in the Cycladic Islands from Earliest Settlement until Modern Times. Los Angeles.

Chourmouziades, G.

1977 " vEna eij dikeumevno ejrgasthv rio kerameikhv " sto Neoliqikov Dimhvni. " AAA 10:207-26.

Chrysostomou, P.

1994 " To anavktoro th" Pev lla". " AEMQ 10: 105-42.

Clark, J.E.1995 "Craft specialization as an archaeological category." Research in Economic

Anthropology 16: 267-94.

Cockle, H.1981 "Pottery manufacture in Roman Egypt. A new papyrus." JRS 71: 87-97.

Coja, M. and P. Dupont1974 Histria V. Les ateliers céramiques.Bucuresti.

Coldstream, J.N.1968 Greek Geometric Pottery. A Survey of Ten Local Styles and Their Chronology.

London.Coleman, J.F.

1986 Excavations at Pylos in Elis. HesperiaSupplement 21. Princeton.Connan, J., P. Lombard, P. Killick et al.

1998 "The archaeological bitumen of Bahrain Iran. The Early Dilmun period (ca. 2200B.C.) to the 16th century A.D. A problem of sources and trade." ArabAEpigr9:141-81.

Conophagos, C.1974 "Kavminoi thvxew" kaiv tecnikhv th'" thvxew" tw'n ajrgurouvcwn metalleumav twn

moluvbdou th' " Laurewtikh' " uJpov tw'n ajrcaivwn JEllhv nwn." Praktikav th' " jAkadhmiva" Aqhnw' n 49: 262-99.

1980 To arcaivo Lauvrio kai h ellhnikhv tecnikhv paragwghv" tou arguvrou. Aqhvna.

Conophagos C., H. Badecca, and C. Tsaimou1976 "La technique athenienne de la frappe des monnaies à l’ époque classique." Nom.

Chron. 4: 4-33.Consolaki, H., and T. Hackens

1980 "Un atelier monétaire dans un temple argien?" inÉtudes argiennes. BCH Supplément 6, 279-94. Paris.

Contenson, H. de and L.C. Courtois1979 "A propos des vases en chaux: recherches sur leur fabrication et leur origine."

Paléorient 5: 177-82.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________373

Cook, R.M.

1948 "Notes on the Homeric epigram to the potters."CR 62: 55-7.1951 "The Homeric epigram to the potters." CR 65: 9.1961 "The ‘double-stoking tunnel’ of Greek kilns." BSA 56: 64-7.1984 "The Calke Wood kiln." in Ancient Greek and Related Pottery, 63-6.1997 Greek Painted Pottery. London and New York. Third Edition.

Corbett, P.E.1965 "Preliminary sketch in Greek vase-painting." JHS 85: 16-28.

Corder, P.1957 "The structure of Romano-British pottery kilns." Archaeological Journal114:

10-27.Costamagna, L. and C. Sabbione

1990 Una citta in Magna Grecia, Locri Epizefiri: guida archeologica.ReggioCalabria.

Costello, J.G.1997 "Brick and tile making in Spanish California with related old and new world

examples." inThe Prehistory and History of Ceramic Kilns,195-217.Costin, C.L.

1991 "Craft specialization: Issues in defining, documenting, and explaining theorganization of production." Archaeological Method and Theory 3: 1-56.

Coulson, W.D.E and N.C. Wilkie

1984 "Ptolemaic kilns in the western Nile Delta." in Ancient Greek and RelatedPottery, 67-71.

Courbin, P.1963 (ed.)Études archéologiques: recueil de travaux.Paris.1966 La céramique géométrique de l' Argolide. BEFAR 208. Paris.

Cracolici, V.1998 I sostegni di fornace dal Kerameikos di Metaponto. Aspetti tecnici e modi di

produzione delle ceramica dall’ éta arcaica all’ Ellenismo.Ph.D. diss., U. ofNaples.

Craddock, P.T.

1995 Early Metal Mining and Production. Washington D.C.Crielaard, J.P., Stissi, V., and G.J. von Winjgaarden (eds.)

1999 The Complex Past of Pottery Production, Circulation and Consumption of Mycenaean and Greek Pottery (Sixteenth to Early Fifth Centuries B.C.).Proceedings of the ARCHON International Conference held in Amsterdam, 8-9 November 1996.Amsterdam.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________374

Crosby, M.

1950 "The leases of the Laureion mines." Hesperia 19: 189-312.1957 "More fragments of mining leases from the Athenian Agora." Hesperia 26: 1-23.

Curbera, J.B. and D.R. Jordan1998 "A curse tablet from the ‘Industrial District’ near the Athenian Agora." Hesperia

67: 215-8.Cuomo Di Caprio, N.

1971/72 "Proposta di classificazione delle fornaci per ceramica e laterizi nell'areaitaliana, dalla preistoria a tutta l'epoca romana."Sibrium 11: 371-414.

1978/9 "Updraught pottery kilns and tile kilns in Italy in pre-Roman and Roman times." ActPrHistA9/10: 21-31.

1979a "Pottery- and tile-kilns in south Italy and Sicily." in Roman Brick and Tile, 73-95.1979b "La cottura della ceramica." ReiCretActa 19-20: 236-9.1981 "Rassegna di fornaci per ceramica e laterizi." RdA 5: 61-80.1982 "Rassegna di fornaci per ceramica e laterizi." RdA 6: 88-100.1984 "Pottery kilns on pinakes from Corinth." in Ancient Greek and Related Pottery,

72-82.1985 La ceramica in archeologia. Antiche tecniche di lavorazione e moderni metodi

d'indagine.Roma.1992a "Les ateliers de potiers en Grande Grèce." in Ateliers de Potiers, 69-85.1992b Fornaci e officine da vasaio tardo-ellenistiche. Morgantina Studies: Results of

the Princeton University Archaeological Expedition to Sicily. Princeton.

1995 "Osservazioni tecniche sul tornio da vasaio nell’ antiquita." RdA 19: 145-52.Dakaris, S.I.

1960 " To iJerov th'" Dwdwvnh"." ADelt 16: 4-40 .

Davaras, C.1973a "Kerameikhv kavmino" eij" [Istrwna j Anatolikhv " Krhvth". " ADelt 28A: 110-5.1973b "Minwikhv kerameikhv kavmino" eij" Stuvlon Caniv wn." AEphem75-80.1980 "A Minoan pottery kiln at Palaikastro." BSA 75: 115-26.

Davidson, G.R.

1943 "A Medieval glass-factory at Corinth." AJA44: 297-324.Day, P. L.

1989 "Technology and ethnography in petrographic studies of ceramics." in Maniatis(ed.) 1989, 139-47.

De Caro, S.1985 "Anfore per pece del Bruzio." Klearchos 27: 105-8.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________375

Delcroix, G. and J.L. Huot

1972 "Les fours dits 'de potier' dans l' Orient ancient."Syria 49: 35-95.Delorme, J.

1961 Délos XXV. Les Paléstres. Paris.Demierre, B.

2000 Contribution à l’ étude des fours céramiques et des fours à chaux en Grèce. Unpublished mémoire d’ archéologie classique. Université de Lausanne.

Despoini, A.

1982 "Kerameikoiv klivbanoi Sivndou. " AEphem61-84.Déroche, J. and P. Petridis

1993 "Agora romaine et Villa Sud-Est." BCH 117: 641-44.Deshayes, J.

1974 "Fours néolithiques de Dikili-Tash." in Mélanges helléniques offerts à Georges Daux, 67-91, Paris.

Diaz, M.1966 Tonala: Conservation, Responsibility, and Authority in a Mexican Town. Los

Angeles.Dinsmoor, W.B.

1921 "Attic Building Accounts IV. The Statue of Athena Promachos." AJA 25: 118-29.Dix, B.

1982 "The manufacture of lime and its uses in the western Roman Provinces."OJA 1:331-45.

Doulgeri-Intzesiloglou, A.

1990a "Feraiv ." Arcaiologiv a 34: 58-64.1990b "Ferai> kav ergasthv ria 'megarikwvn' skuvfwn. " inB v EllKer, 121-36.1992 "Ergasthv ria kerameikhv " ellhnistikhv " epochv" sthn arcaiv a povlh twn Ferwv n."

in Praktikav tou dieqnouv" sunedrivou gia thn arcaiv a Qessaliv a, sth mnhvmhtou D.R. Qeocavrh, Bovlo" 1987 , 437-47.Aqhvna.

1994 "Oi newvtere" arcaiologikev " evreune" sthn periochv twn arcaiv wnFerwvn." inThessalie,71-92.

1997a "Un atelier de produits céramiques moulés à Phères." in Le moulage en terrecuite dans l' antiquité. Création et production dérivée, fabrication et diffusion. Actes du XVIIIe colloque du centre de recherches archéologiques-Lille III, 7-8décembre 1995,edited by A. Müller, 295-314. Lille.

1997b " 'Kleistov ' suvnolo ferai> khv" keramikhv" ellhnistikhv " epochv" apov swstikhv anaskafhv sto oikov pedo Q. Ntovntou, sto Belestiv no." inD v EllKer , 59-78.

Drews, G.1978/9 "Die Entwicklung der Keramikbrennöfen." ActPrHistA 9/10: 33-48.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________376

Ducray, P. and O. Picard

1969 "Recherches à Lato." BCH 93: 792-822.Dufaÿ, B.

1996 "Les fours de potiers gallo-romains: synthèse et classification. Un nouveaupanorama." inSFECAG. Actes de Congrés de Dijon,edited by L. Rivet, 297-312.Marseille.

Dufaÿ, B., Barat, Y, and S. Raux1997 Fabriquer de la vaisselle à l' époque romaine. Archéologie d' un centre de

production céramique en Gaule, La Boissière-Ecole (Yvelines), 1er-IIIème s.apr. J.C. Versailles.

Duhamel, P.1973 "Les fours céramiques gallo-romains." in Recherches d’ archéologie celtique et

gallo-romaine,edited by P.M. Duval, 141-54. Genève.1978/9 "Morphologie et évolution des fours céramiques en Europe occidentale.

Protohistoire, monde celtique et Gaule Romaine." ActPrHistA 9/10: 49-76.Duttenhöfer, R.

1993 "Die Function and Stellung desejrgasthriv ou in der Getreide Verwaltung derPtolemäerzeit." ZPE 98: 253-62.

Dyggve, E. and F. Poulsen1948 Das Laphiron, der Tempelbezierk, von Kalydon. Stockholm.

Echallier, J.-C. and J. Montagu1985 "Donnés quantitatives sur la préparation et la cuisson en four à bois de

reconstitutions actuelles de poteries grecques et romaines." Documents d'archéologie méridionale8: 141-5.

Eisman, M.M. and L. Turnball1978 "Robinson’s kiln skyphos." AJA 82: 394-9.

El-Ashmawi, F.1998 "Pottery kiln and wine-factory at Burg el-Arab." inCommerce et artisanat dans

l'Alexandrie hellénistique et romaine. Actes du colloque d'Athènes, 11-12décembre 1988, BCHSupplément 33, 55-64. Paris.

El-Fattah, A. A.1998 "Recent discoveries in Alexandria and the Chora." inCommerce et artisanat

dans l'Alexandrie hellénistique et romaine. Actes du colloque d'Athènes, 11-12décembre 1988. BCHSupplément 33, 37-53. Paris.Empereur, J.-Y.

1993 "La production viticole dans l’ Égypte ptolémaique et romaine." in La production du vin et de l’ huile en Méditerranée, 39-47.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________377

Evans, M.E. and M. Marescha

1989a "Secular variation and magnetic dating of fired structures in southernItaly." in Maniatis (ed.) 1989, 59-68.

1989b "Secular variation and magnetic dating of fired structures in Greece." inProceedings of the 26th Symposium on Archaeometry, Toronto 1988, edited byM. Farquhar, R.G.V. Hancock, and L.A. Pavlish, 75-9. Toronto.

Evely, R.D.G.1988 "The potter’s wheel in Minoan Crete." BSA 83: 83-126.1993 Minoan Crafts:Tools and Techniques. Vol.1. Studies in Mediterranean

Archaeology. Vol. 92. Göteborg.2000 Minoan Crafts:Tools and Techniques. Vol.2. Studies in Mediterranean

Archaeology. Vol. 92. Göteborg.Ewell, C.A.

2000 An Etruscan Hellenistic Workshop: The Kiln and Artizan's Zone atCetamura del Chianti.Ph.D. diss., U. of Florida.

Fabbri, B.1996 "Evaluation of the degree of purity in the clay bodies of ancient majolica

wares." in Archaeometry 94, 227-32.Faklaris, P.

1997 "Ergasthv ria sthn Akrov polh th" Bergiv na". " inArcaiva Ellhnikhv Tecnologiva, 193-200.

Farnsworth, M.

1960 "Draw pieces as aids to correct firing." AJA 64: 72-5.1963 "Coloring agents for Greek glazes." AJA67: 389-96.

Farnsworth, M., I. Perlman, and F. Asaro1977 "Corinth and Corfu. A Neutron Activation study of their pottery." AJA81: 455-

68.Faraone, C.A.

1991 "The agonistic context of early Greek binding spells." in Magika Hiera. AncientGreek Magic and Religion, edited by C.A. Farraone and D. Obbink, 3-32.Oxford.

Faure, P.

1973 La vie quotidienne en Crète au temps de Minos (1500 avant J.C.).Paris.Feyel, C.

1998 "La structure d'un groupe socio-économique: les artisans dans les grandssanctuaires grecs du IVe siècle."Topoi8: 561-79.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________379

Furtwängler, A.

1885 Beschreibung der Vasensammlung im Antiquarium. 2 vols. Berlin.Galaty, M.L.

1999 Nestor's Wine Cups. Investigating Ceramic Manufacture and Exchange in a Late Bronze Age "Mycenaean" State. BAR IS 766. Oxford.

Garlan, Y.1986 "Quelques nouveaux ateliers amphoriques à Thasos." in Amphores

grecques,201-74.Garfinkel, Y.

1987 "Burnt-Lime products and social implications in the pre-pottery Neolithic Bvillages of the Near East."Paléorient 13: 69-76.

Gaugler, W.M. and R.N. Anderson1980 "Analysis of a clay sample from an Etruscan statue found at Veii." AJA84: 91-2.

Geagan, H.1970 "Mythological themes on the plaques from Penteskoufia." AA 85: 31-48. (see also under H.A. von Raits)

Giannopoulou, M.

1996-7 "H tecnikhv kataskeuhv " twn ceiropoiv htwn keramikwvn antikeimevnwn touMesshniakouv kovlpou. " Praktikav tou E v dieqnouv" sunedrivouPeloponnhsiakwvn spoudwvn. vArgo"-Nauvplion, 6-10 Septembrivou 1995. Vol.3, 199-208. Aqhvna.

1999 "Purotecnologiv a sthn paradosiakhv kerameikhv th" Qavsou. " inThasos, 349-57.Giannopoulou, M. and S. Demesticha

1998 Tskalariav . Ta ergasthv ria aggeioplastikhv " th" periochv" MantamavdouLevsbou. Kevntro Melev th" Neovterh" Kerameikhv ". Koinovthta Mantamav dou.

Gillis, C.1988 "The distribution of Greek vases and long distance trade." inSymposium on

Ancient Greek and Related Pottery,186-94.Goldman, H.

1931 Excavations at Eutresis in Boeotia Conducted by the Fogg Art Museum of Harvard University in Cooperation with the American School of ClassicalStudies at Athens.Cambridge, Mass.

Goodman, G., Y. Nishimura, T. Uno, and T. Yamamoto1994 "A ground radar survey of medieval kiln sites in Suzu City, western

Japan." Archaeometry 36: 317-26.Gourdin, W.H. and W.D. Kingery

1975 "The beginnings of pyrotechnology. Neolithic and Egyptian lime plaster." JFA 2: 133-50.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________381

1965 Bei Töpfer und Ziegler in Süditalien, Sizilien und Griechenland. Mainz.

Hannestad, L.1988 "The Athenian potter and the home market." inSymposium on Ancient Greek and

Related Pottery,222-30.Harold, M.R.

1960 "Magnetic dating: kiln wall fall-out." Archaeometry 3: 45-6.Hasaki, E.

2000 The Pottery Workshops at Moknine, Tunisia. Video documentary. Athens.2001 "Rectangular ceramic kilns in Greece: issues of production and specialization."

AJA105: 298. Abstract.In prep. "The Ethnoarchaeological project at Moknine, Tunisia." Leptiminus IV.

Hayward, C.L.1995 "High-resolution provenance determination of construction-stone: a preliminary

study of Corinthian oolitic limestone quarries at Examilia." Geoarchaeology 11:215-34.

Henrickson, R.C. and M. James Blackman1999 "Hellenistic production of terra-cotta roof tiles among the ceramic industries at

Gordion."OJA 18: 307-26.Hesnard, A., M. Moliner, F. Conche, and M. Bouiron

1999 Parcours de villes. Marseille: 10 ans d’ archéologie, 2600 ans d’ histoire. Aix-en-Provence.

Hess, J. and I. Perlman1974 "Mössbauer spectra of iron in ceramics and their relation to pottery colours."

Archaeometry 16: 137-52.Heurtley, W.A.

1939 Prehistoric Macedonia. An Archaeological Reconnaissance of Greek Macedonia(West of the Struma) in the Neolithic, Bronze, and Early Iron Ages.Cambridge.

Heurtley, W.A. and C.A.R. Radford1927-28 "Two Prehistoric sites in Chalcidice." BSA29: 117-86.

Homann-Wedeking, E.1950 "A kiln site at Cnossus." BSA45: 165-92.

Höpfner, W. and E.-L. Schwandner1994 Haus und Stadt im klassischen Griechenland. München.Hostetter, E.

1994 Lydian Architectural Terracottas: Study in Tile Replication, Display andTechnique. The Archaeological Exploration of Sardis.With contributions byC.H. Greenwalt. Jr., J. R. Dennis, and K.L. Gleason. Illinois Classical StudiesSupplement 5. Atlanta, Georgia.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________382

Huber, S.

1991 "Un atelier de bronzier dans le sanctuaire d’ Apollon à Erétrie." AntK 34: 137-54.

1997 "Activité metallurgique dans le sanctuaire d'Apollon à Erétrie." inProductionand the Craftsman, 173-83.

Hughes, D.1983 "How the ancients viewed deforestation." JFA 10: 437-45.

Humphrey J. W., Oleson, J.P., and A. N. Sherwood1998 Greek and Roman Technology. A Sourcebook of Annotated Translations of

Greek and Roman Texts and Documents. London.Ignatiadou, D.

2000 "Three cast-glass vessels from a Macedonian tomb in Pydna." in Annales du 14econgrès de l’ Association Internationale pour l' histoire du verre, Italia/Venezia- Milano 1998, 35-8. Lochem.

Ioannou, I.

n.d. Marousiwvtikh Kerameikhv. Istorikov Laografikov Mouseivo DhvmouAmarousivou.

Ivaschenko, Y.1997 "Les ateliers de céramiques du VIe au XVe s. au Nord de la Mer Noire: le

problème de la continuité." in La céramique Médievale en Méditerrannée. Actesdu VIe congrès de l’ AIECM 2, Aix-en-Provence, 13-18 novembre 1995,editedby G. Demians and A. Archimbaud, 73-85. Aix-en-Provence.

Jackson, C.M, P.T. Nicholson, and W. Gneisinger1998 "Glassmaking at Tell el-Amarna: An integrated approach." JGS 40: 11-23.

Jameson, M.H.1969 "Excavations at Porto-Cheli and vicinity. Preliminary report, 1. Halieis 1962-

68." Hesperia38: 311-42.Janke, D.M.

1989 Technik und Herkunft mittelalterischen Ofenkacheln aus der Nordwestschweiz.Unpublished Diploma. U. of Fribourg, Switzerland.

Jeffery, L. H.1990 The Local Scripts of Archaic Greece: A Study of the Origin of the Greek

Alphabet and its Development from the Eighth to the Fifth Centuries.Revisededition with a supplement by A.W. Johnston. Oxford.

Jena Painter1996 Der Jenaer Maler: eine Töpferwerkstatt im klassischen Athen: Fragmente

attischer Trinkschalen der Sammlung Antiker Kleinkunst der Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena. Wiesbaden.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________383

Jones, J.E.

1991 "The planning and construction of Atticergasteria." in Bautechnik der Antike. International Kolloquium à Berlin vom 15.-17. Februar 1990,edited by A.Hoffmann, E.L. Schwander, and W. Hoepfner, 107-15. Mainz.

Jones, R.E.1986a Greek and Cypriot Pottery. A Review of Scientific Studies. The British

School at Athens. Fitch Laboratory Occasional Paper 1. Athens.1986b "Geophysical prospection at amphora production sites on Thasos." in

Recherches sur les Amphores Grecques, 279-85.1993 "Pottery as evidence for trade and colonisation in the Aegean Bronze Age: the

contribution of scientific techniques." inWace and Blegen, 11-7.Jordan, D.S.

2000 "A personal letter found in the Athenian Agora." Hesperia 69: 91-103.Jorro, F.A. and F.R. Adrados

1985 Diccionario Micénico. Madrid.Kakavoyiannis, E.

1984 "Paragwghv moluvbdou apov liqarguv rou sthn Ellhnistikhv Rovdo. " AAA 17: 124-40.

Kalogeropoulou, A.1970 "From the techniques of pottery." AAA 3: 429-34.

Kalogirou, A.

1997 "Pottery production and craft specialization in Neolithic Greece." inTECNH , 11-8.Kantzia, C. and K. Kouzeli

1987 "Ergasthv rio paraskeuhv " crwmavtwn sthn arcaiv a agorav th" Kw. Toaiguptiakov mple. " AAA 20: 211-55.

Karagiorga, T.

1971 "Kerameikov" klivbano" ejn jHlivdi. " AAA4: 27-32.Karagiorga-Stathakopoulou, T.

1988 "Dhmovsia kai anaskafev " sthn Aqhvna ta teleutaiv a pevnte crovnia. " HOROS 6:87-108.

Karayianni, E.

1984 Minwikav Suvnqeta Skeuvh-Kevrnoi ( ;) Ph.D. diss., U. of Ioannina .

Kardulias, P.N.2000 "The 'traditional' craftsman as entrepreneur: a potter in Ermioni." inContingent

Countryside. Settlement, Economy, and Land Use in the Southern Argolid since1700,edited by S.B. Sutton, 275-89. Stanford.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________384

Kardos, J. et al.

1985 "Scientific investigations of the Sopron-Krautacker Iron Age potteryworkshop." Archaeometry 27: 83-93.

Karivieri, A.1996 The Athenian Lamp Industry in Late Antiquit y. Helsinki.

Kehrberg, I.1982 "The potter-painter’s wife: some additional thoughts on the Caputi

hydria." Hephaistos 4: 25-35.Keller, D.R.

1985 Archaeological Survey in Southern Euboea, Greece. A Reconstruction of Human Activity from Neolithic Times through the Byzantine Period.Ph.D. diss., IndianaUniversity.

Keramopoulos, A.D.

1909 "To anavktoro tou Kav dmou." AEphem 57-122.1911 " jAqhnw'n eujrhvmata. " AEpher 237-261.

Kesisoglou, M.D., E.A. Mirtsou, and I.A. Stratis

1985 "Sumbolhv sthn evreuna th" tecnologiv a" th" makedonikhv " kerameikhv ". PrwvimhEpochv Calkouv ." Anqrwpologikav7: 7-16.

1996 "Melevth deigmavtwn kerameikhv " apov to Mavndalo. Prwv i>mh Epochv touCalkouv ." in Archaeometrical and Archaeological Research in Macedonia andThrace. Proceedings of the 2nd Symposium, Thessaloniki 26-28 March 1993,161-7.Thessaloniki.

Kilikoglou, V., Y. Maniatis, and A.P. Grimanis1988 "The effect of purification and firing of clays on trace element provenance

studies." Archaeometry 30: 37-46.Kilikoglou, V., M. Vassilaki-Grimani, Y. Maniatis, and A.P. Grimanis

1988 "A study of ancient roof tiles found in Pella, Greece." Material ResearchSociety Symposium Proceedings123: 117-22.

Killebrew, A.1996 "Pottery kilns from Deir-el-Balah and Tel Miqne-Ekron." in Retrieving the Past.

Essays on Archaeological Research and Methodology in Honor of G. W. van Beek,edited by G.D. Seger, 135-62. Winona Lake.

Kingery, W.D.1997 "Operational principles of ceramic kilns." inThe Prehistory and History ofCeramic Kilns,11-9.

Kingery, W.D., P.B. Vandiver, and M. Prickett1988 "The beginnings of pyrotechnology, 2. Production and use of lime and

gypsum plaster in the pre-pottery Neolithic Near East." JFA 15: 219-44.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________385

Klein, J.

1972 "A Greek metalworking quarter. Eighth-century excavation on Ischia." Expedition 14: 34-9.

Kleiner, D.E.E.1986 "Private portraiture in the age of Augustus." inThe Age of Augustus,

edited by R. Winkes, 123-6. Louvain.1992 Roman Sculpture. New Haven and London.

Knapp, A.B., V. Kassianidou, and M. Donnelly1999 "Excavations at Politiko-Phorades 1998." RDAC 125-46.

Korres, G.S.

1971 " vEforoi purov "." AEphem 235-46.

Kotsakis, K.1983 Kerameikhv tecnologiva kai kerameikhv diaforopoivhsh. Problhv mata th"

grapthv" kerameikhv" th" Mevsh" Neoliqikhv" Epochv" tou Sevsklou.Qessaloniv kh.

Kourkoumelis, D. and S. Demesticha1997 "Outils de potier de l’ atelier de Figareto à Corfu." BCH 121: 553-71.

Kovacheva, M.1989 "Archaeomagnetic studies as a dating tool and some considerations on the

archaeomagnetic methology." in Maniatis (ed.) 1989, 35-44.Kovacheva, M., V. Spatharas, and I. Liritzis

2000 "New archaeointensity results from Greek materials." Archaeometry 42: 415-29.Kretschmer, F.1953 "Hypokausten."Saalburg Jahrbuch 12: 7-41.

Kunze E. and H. Schleif1944 IV. Bericht über die Ausgrabungen in Olympia. 1940 und 1941.Berlin.

Kurtz, D.C.1985a Beazley and Oxford. Oxford.1985b "Beazley and the connoisseuship of Greek vases."Occasional Papers on

Antiquities, 3. Greek Vases in the J. Paul Getty Museum,237-50. Malibu.Lacovara, P.

1985 "The ethnoarchaeology of pottery production in an upper Egyptianvillage." in Ancient Technology to Modern Science. Ceramics andCivilization I, edited by W.D. Kingery, 51-60. Columbus.

Lalonde, G.V., M. K. Langdon, and M.B.Walbank1991 Horoi. Poletai Records. Leases of Public Lands. The Athenian Agora XIX.

Princeton.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________386

Lambrinoudakis, V.K.

1988 "Ierov Apovllwno" Maleav ta Epidauv rou ." PAE 21-9.Lapatin, K.D.S.

1997 "PheidiasElefantourgov "." AJA 101: 663-82.Laubenheimer, F., F. Wideman, M. Attas, P. Fontes et al.

1978/9 "Atelier de potiers gallo-romain de Sallèles d' Aude (Narbonne). Lechargement du four B5." ActaPrehArch 9/10: 115-24.

Lauter, H.1974 Die gesellschaftliche Stellung des bildenden Künstlers in der griechichen

Klassik. Mit einem Exkurs: Paradeigmata. Erlangen.Leach, J.

1957 "Tampa."Pottery Quarterly 4: 13-4.Lemonnier, P. (ed.)

1993 Technological Choices. Transformation in Material Cultures since the Neolithic.London and New York.

Lemos, A.A.1997 "Rizari. A cemetery in Chios town." inGreek Offerings. Essays on Greek Art in

Honour of John Boardman,edited by O. Palagia, 73-85. Oxbow Monograph 89.Oxford.

Le Ny, F.1988 Les fours de tuiliers gallo-romaines. DAF 12. Paris.

Levi, D. and C. Laviosa1979/80 "Il forno minoico da vasaio di Hagia Triada." ASAtene 41-2: 7-47.

Lilimbaki-Akamati, M.

1993 "Nevo ergasthv vrio kerameikhv " kai koroplastikhv " sthn Pev lla ."AEMQ 7: 170-9.

1997 "Sugkrothvmata ergasthriv wn kai loutrwv n sthn Pev lla. " AEMQ 11: 193-203.

Liritzis, Y.1984 "Reappraisal of Minoan kilns by Thermoluminescence and Neutron

Activation/XRF Analyses." Révue d' Archéometrie 8: 7-20.Liritzis, Y. and R. Thomas

1980 "Paleointensity and Thermoluminescence measurements on Cretan kilnsfrom 2000 to 1300 B.C." Nature 283, no. 5742, 54-5.

Lohmann, H.

1993 ATENE . Forschungen zu Siedlungs- und Wirtschaftsstruktur des klassischen Attika. Köln.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________387

Loberdou-Tsigarida, K. and V. Messis

1997 "Swstikhv anaskafhv sti" topoqesiv e" Prwvth kai Deuv terh Misgav gkeia sthnperiochv tou kavstrou tou Platamwv na. " AEMQ 11: 275-84.

Loberdou-Tsigarida, K., V. Vessi, E. Mastora, V. Karagianni, and M. Kontogiannopoulou

1999 " Arcaiologikev " evreune" sthn periochv tou kavstrou tou Platamwv na 1998-1999." AEMQ 13: 435-64.

London, G.A.1987a "Cypriote potters: past and present." RDAC 319-22.1987b ‘Regionalism in traditional Cypriote ceramics. A knapsack full of

pottery." Newsletter of Pottery Technology 5: 125-36.1989a "Past and present: village potters in Cyprus." Biblical Archaeologist 52:

219-29.1989b "On fig leaves, itinerant potters, and pottery production locations in

Cyprus." inCross-Craft and Cross-Cultural Interactions in Ceramics.Ceramics and Civilization IV, edited by P.E. McGovern and M.R.Notis, 64-80. Westerville.

1991a "Ethnoarchaeological evidence of variation in Cypriot ceramic and itsimplications for the taxonomy of ancient pottery." inCypriot Ceramics: Reading the Prehistoric Past,edited by J. Barlow, D. Bolger, and B. Kling,221-35. Philadelphia.

1991b "Standardization and variation in the work of craft specialists." inLongacre (ed.) 1991, 182-204.

2000a "Ethnoarchaeology and interpretations of the past." Near Eastern Archaeology 63: 2-8.

2000b "Continuity and change in Cypriot pottery production." Near Eastern Archaeology63: 102-10.

2000c Women Potters of Cyprus. Video Docuntary. Nicosia, Cyprus.Longacre, W.A.

1991 "Ceramic ethnoarchaeology: an introduction." inCeramicEthnoarchaeology,edited by W.A. Longacre, 1-10. Tuscon, AZ.University of Arizona.

Longacre, W.A., ed.1991 Ceramic Ethnoarchaeology. University of Arizona, Tucson.

Loomis, W. T.1998 Wages, Welfare Costs and Inflation in Classical Athens.Ann Arbor.

Lorber, F.1979 Inschriften auf korinthischen Vasen: Archäologisch-epigraphische

Untersuchungen zur korinthischen Vasenmalerei im 7. und 6. Jr. v. Chr. Berlin.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________388

Lupack, S.

1999 "Palaces, sanctuaries, and workshops: the role of the religious sector inMycenaean economics." in Rethinking Mycenaean Palaces: New Interpretion ofan Old Idea, edited by M.L. Galaty and W.A. Parkinson, 25-34. The CotsenInstitute of Archaeology. Monograph 41, University of California, Los Angeles.

MacGillivray, J.A.1987 "Pottery workshops and the Old Palaces in Crete." inThe Function of the

Minoan Palaces. Proceedigns of the Fourth International Symposium at theSwedish Institute in Athens 10th-16th June 1984,edited by R. Hägg and N.Marinatos, 273-9. Stockholm.

Maniatis, Y.1984 "Firing conditions of White-on-Dark ware from western Crete." inEast

Cretan White-on-Dark Ware, 75-7.1989 (ed.) Archaeometry: proceedings of the 25th International Symposium.Amsterdam.

Maniatis, Y. and M.S. Tite1978 "Ceramic technology in the Aegean world during the Bronze Age." in

Thera and the Aegean World,Vol. 1, edited by C. Doumas, 483-92.London.

1981 "Technological examination of Neolithic-Bronze Age pottery from centraland southeast Europe and from the Near East." JArcSciences 8: 59-76.

Maniatis, Y., R.E. Jones, I.K. Whitbread, A. Kostikas et al.1984 "Punic Amphoras found at Corinth: an investigation of their origin and

technology." JFA 11: 205-22.Maniatis, Y. and Y. Fa k orellis

1998 "Diereuvnhsh th" purotecnologiv a" se phlokataskeuev " tou Arcontikouv Giannitswvn." AEMQ 12: 315-26.

Maniatis, Y., Y. Fak orellis, A. Pillali, and A. Papanthimou-Papaefthimiou1999 "Firing temperature determination of low fired clay structures." in5th European

Meeting on Ancient Ceramics, 18th-20th October 1999. Abstracts, 56. Athens.Maniatis Y. and Y. Bassiakos

2000 "A pigment roasting kiln: Its characterisation and use." inColor Conference heldin Thessaloniki in April 2000. Abstract.

Marketou, T.1999 "Ergasthv rio porfuv ra" sthn pov lh th" Rovdou. " in Rovdo" 2400 crovnia. H povlh

th" Rovdou apov thn ivdrushv th" mev cri thn katav lhyh apov tou" Touvrkou" 1523,Rovdo" 24-29 Oktwbrivou 1993. Praktikav dieqnouv" episthmonikouv sunedrivou Vol. 1, 243-52. Athens.

Martin, R.1965 Manuel d' architecture grecque. Part I. Les matériaux. Paris.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________389

1973 "Aspects financiers et sociaux des programs de construction dans les villes

grecques de Grande Grèce et de Sicile." inEconomia e Società nella MagnaGrecia. Atti del dodicesimo convegno di studi sulla magna Grecia. Taranto 8-14ottobre 1972,185-205. Napoli.

1987 "Principes fonctionelles dans l'urbanisme de la Grèce antique." in Architecture etUrbanisme. École Française d' Athènes99. Rome. Originally published in Lescahiers techniques de l' art 1955, 5-22.

Marwitz, H.1960 "Zur griechischen Vasentechnik." JDOI 45: 207-56.

Mattingly, D. J.1988 "Megalithic madness and measurement or how many olives could an olive-press

press?"OJA 7: 177-95.

1993 Maximum figures and maximizing strategies of oil production." in La Production du vin et huile en Mediterranée,483-98.

Mattusch, C. C.1975 Casting Techniques of Greek Bronze Sculpture.Ph.D. diss., U. of North

Carolina, Chapel Hill.1977 "Bronze and iron-working in the area of the Athenian Agora." Hesperia 46: 340-

79.1980 "The Berlin foundry cup: the casting of Greek bronze statuary in the early fifth

century B.C." AJA 84: 435-44.1988 Greek Bronze Statuary from the Beginnings through the Fifth Century B.C.

Ithaca and London.Mau, A.

1910 s.v. "Furnus." RE VII: 378-80.Mavriyannaki, C.

1972 Recherches sur les larnakes minoennes de la Crète occidentale.Roma.Mayes, P.

1961 "The firing of a pottery kiln of a Romano-British type at Boston, Lincs." Archaeometry4: 4-30.

1962 "The firing of a second pottery kiln of Romano-British type at Boston,Lincolnshire." Archaeometry5: 80-6.

Mayes P. and K. Scott1984 Pottery Kilns at Chilvers, Nuneaton. London.

Mazarakis-Ainian, A.1998 "Oropos in the Early Iron Age." inEuboica, 179-215.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________390

McDonald, B.R.

1981 "The emigration of potters from Athens in the late fifth century B.C. and itseffect on the Attic pottery industry." AJA 85: 159-68.

McLoughlin, B.1993 The Kilns of Ancient Greece: A Typology. Unpublished BA honor’s thesis. U. of

Sidney, Australia.Merritt, B.D.

1936 "Greek inscriptions. The statue of Athena Parthenos." Hesperia 20: 362-80.

Meroussis, N. and M. Nikolaidou

1997 "H keramikhv th" neoliqikhv " kai th" Prwv imh" Epochv" tou Calkouv apov toMavndalo. " AEM Q 11:157-64.

Mertens-Horn, M.1978 "Beobachtungen an dädalischen Tondächern." JDAI 93: 30-65.

Michaelidis, P.1993 "Potters' workshops in Minoan Crete."SMEA32: 7-39.

Miller, S.G.1990 Nemea: A Guide to the Site and Museum.Berkeley.

Mingazzini, P.1954 "Velia scavi 1927: Fornace di mattoni ed antichita varia." AttiMGreciaINS 1: 21-

60.Misailidou-Despotidou, V.

1998 "O kerameikov " klivbano" th" Neva" Filadev lfeia". " inMneiva" Cavrin, Tovmo"sth mnhvmh Maivrh" Siganivdou, edited by M. Lilimbaki-Akamati and K.Tsakalou-Tzanavari, 161-74.Qessaloniv kh .

Momigliano, N.1986 "Fornaci minoiche per ceramica." RdA 10: 75-8.

Monaco, M.C.1999 "Fornaci da ceramica e scarti di produzione di età classica e tardo-classica." AM

114: 105-16.2000 Ergasteria: impianti artigianali ceramici ad Atene ed in Attica dal

Protogeometrico alle soglie dell'Ellenismo. Studia Archaeologica. Roma.Moore, A.M.T.

1995 "The inception of potting in western Asia and its impact on economy andsociety." inThe Emergence of Pottery. Technology and Innovation in AncientSocieties,edited by W.K. Barnett and J.W. Hoopes, 39-53. Washington andLondon.

Morgan, C.H.1942 The Byzantine Pottery. Corinth XI. Princeton.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________391

Morris, C.

1995 "Fishy tales from Knossos: a Minoan larnax and vase-painter." inKlados. Essays in Honor of J.N. Coldstream, edited by C. Morris,185-93. London.

Müller, D.1974 Handwerk und Sprache. Die sprachlichen Bilder aus dem Bereich des

Handwerks in der griechischen Literatur bis 400 v. Chr.Beiträge zurklassischen Philologie Heft 51. Meisenheim am Glan.

Myers, J. W., E.E. Myers, and G. Cadogan1992 The Aerial Atlas of Ancient Grete.University of California Press.

Mylonas, G.E.1929 Excavations at Olynthus.Baltimore.1959 Aghios Kosmas. An Early Bronze Age Settlement and Cemetery in Attica.

Princeton.Neesen, L.

1989 Demiurgoi und Artifices. Studien zur Stellung freier Handwerker in antikenStädten. Europäische Hochschulschriften Reihe 3. Geschichte und ihreHilfswissenschaften 03. Frankfurt am Main.

Nenna, M.-D.1998 "Les ateliers de verriers dans le monde grec aux époques classique et

hellénistique."Topoi 8: 693-701.Nicholson, P. T.

1995 "Construction and firing of an experimental updraught kiln." in Amarna Reports, vol. 6, edited by B.J. Kemp, 239-78. London. Egypt Exploration

Society.1997 "Early glass and glazing in Egypt: new excavations at Tell el-Amarna." in

Archaeological Sciences,49-53.Nicholson, P.T. and C.M. Jackson

1998 "Kind of blue: Glass of the Amarna period replicated." inPrehistory and History of Glassmaking Technology,edited by P. McCray , 105-20.Cincinnati.

Nicholson, P. and H. Patterson1985 "Pottery making in Upper Egypt: an ethnoarchaeological study."World Archaeology 17: 222-39.1989 "Ceramic technology in Upper Egypt: a study of pottery firing." World

Archaeology 21: 71-86.Nicklin, K.

1971 "Stability and innovation in pottery manufacture."World Archaeology3: 13-48.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________392

Niemeier, W. D.

1997 "The Mycenaean potter's quarter at Miletus." inTECNH , 347-51.Nijboer, A.J.

1998 From Household Production to Workshops: Archaeological Evidence forEconomic Transformation, Premonetary Exchange, and Urbanization inCentral Italy from 800-400BC. Groningen.

Noble, J.V.1988 The Techniques of Painted Attic Pottery.London. Revised edition.

Nordquist, G.1995 Who made the pots? Production in the Middle Helladic society." inPoliteia.

Society and State in the Aegean Bronze Age, Proceedings of the 5th International Aegean Conference University of Heidelbrg, Archäologisches Institut 10-13 April 1994. Aegaeum 12. Edited by R. Laffineur and W.-D. Niemeier, 201-7.Liège.

1997 "Male craft and female industry in the Aegean Bronze Age." inTECNH , 533-7.

Nunez, J.I, M.L. Osete, D. Bernal, and D.Tarling1999 "Establishment of the archaeomagnetic dating technique to Spain. A first secular

variation curve for the Iberian peninsula." in5th European Meeting on AncientCeramics, 18th-20th October 1999. Abstracts, 62. Athens.

Oakley, J.1999 "Through a glass darkly I: some misconceptions about the study of Greek

vase-painting." inProceedings of the XVth International Congress ofClassical Archaeology, Amsterdam, July 12-17, 1998,edited by R.F.Docter and E.M. Moorman, 286-90. Amsterdam.

Oddy, W.A. and J. Swaddling1985 "Illustrations of metalworking furnaces on Greek vases." inFurnaces and

Smelting Technology in Antiquity,edited by P.T. Craddock and M.J.Hughes, 43-57. Occasional Paper no. 48. London, British Museum.

Olson, S.D.1991 "Firewood and charcoal in classical Athens." Hesperia60: 411-20.

Orlandos, A.1966 Les matériaux de construction et la technique architecturale des anciens

Grecs. Vol. 1. Paris.Papadopoulos, J.K.

1989 "An Early Iron Age potter’s kiln at Torone." MeditArch 2: 9-44.1992 "LASANA , tuyères and kiln firing supports." Hesperia 61: 203-21.1994 "Early Iron Age potters' marks in the Aegean." Hesperia 63: 437-507.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________393

1996 "The original Kerameikos of Athens and the sitting of the Classical Agora."

GRBZ 37: 107-28.Papadopoulos, J.K, J.F. Vedder, and T. Schreiber

1998 "Drawing circles. Experimental archaeology and the pivoted multiple brush." AJA102: 507-29.

Papadopoulos, S.1999a "Ceramic technology and use. Some observations on the traditional

pottery of Thasos." inThasos, 367-85.1999b Paradosiakav aggeioplasteiv a th" Qavsou. Kevntro Melev th" Neovterh"

Kerameikhv ". Aqhvna.Papaeuthimiou-Papanthimou, A. and A. Pilali-Papasteriou

1994 ` ̀ "Anaskafhv Arcontikouv 1994. Tomeva" B. " AEMQ 8: 83-90.1995 "Anaskafhv Arcontikouv 1995. Tomeva" B. " AEMQ 9: 137-42.1997a "Oi proi>storikoiv oikismoiv sto Mav ndako kai sto Arcontikov Pevlla". " AEMQ

10: 143-58.1997b "Anaskafhv ston proi> storikov oikismov tou Arcontikouv katav to 1997. " AEMQ

11: 165-72.1998 "Arcontikov 1998. Proi> storikov" oikismov "." AEMQ 12: 309-14.

Papagiannopoulou, A.G.1991 The Influence of Middle Minoan Pottery on the Cyclades.Göteborg.

Papanikola-Bakirtzi, D.

1987 "Tripodiv skoi yhsivmato" twn Buzantinwv n kai metabuzantinwv n aggeivwn." inAMHTOS. Timhtikov" tovmo" gia ton kaqhghthv Manovlh Androvniko, 641-52.Qessaloniv kh .

1999 "Kevntra paragwghv " efualwmevnh" buzantinhv " kerameikhv "." inThe 7th International Symposium on Medieval Pottery in the Mediterranean.Thessaloniki 11-16 October. Abstract.

Papathanassopoulos, G.

1971 "Sphvlaia Dirouv 1971. " AAA 4: 289-304.Papathanassopoulos, G.A. (ed.)

1996 Neolithic Culture in Greece. N.P. Goulandris Foundation. Museum ofCycladic Art. Athens.

Papousek, D.1989 "Technological change as social rebellion." inWhat’s New: A Closer

Look at the Process of Innovation, edited by S.E. van der Leeuw and R.Torrence, 140-66. London.

Parlama, L. and N.C. Stampolidis (eds.)2000 The City under the City. Finds from the Excavations of the Metro at Athens.

Athens.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________394

Payne, H.

1931 Necrocorinthia. A Study of the Corinthian Art in the Archaic Period. Oxford.

Peacock, D.P.S.1979 An ethnoarchaeological approach to the study of Roman bricks and tiles." in

Roman Brick and Tile, 5-10.1982 Pottery in the Roman World: An Ethnoarchaeological Approach.London and New York.

Peña, J.T.1992 "Raw material use among nucleated industry potters: the case of Vasanello,

Italy." Archaeomaterials 6: 93-122.Penttinen, A.

2001 Berbati between Argos and Corinth: Excavations at Pyrgouthi in 1995 and 1997 from the Early Iron Age to the Early Roman Period. Ph.D. diss., StockholmUniversity.

Perdrizet, P.1908 Fouilles de Delphes V. Monuments figurés. Petits bronzes, terres-cuites,

antiquités diverses.Paris.Pernice, E.

1897 "Die korinthischen Pinakes im Antiquarium der königlichen Museen." JdI 12: 9-48.Perreault, J.Y.

1990 "L’ atelier de potier archaique de Phari (Thasos). La production de tuiles."in Proceedings of the International Conference on Greek ArchitecturalTerracottas of the Classical and Hellenistic Periods, December 12-15, 1991. Hesperia Supplement 27, edited by N. Winter, 201-9. Princeton.

Perreault, J. Y., F. Blondé, and C. Péristéri1992 "Un atelier de potier archaique à Phari (Thasos)." in Ateliers de potiers,11-40.

Perrot, G. and C. Chipiez1911 Histoire de l'art dans l'antiquité. Vol. IX. La Grèce archaique. Paris.

Petrasch, J.1986 "Typologie und Funktion neolithischer Öfen in Mittel und Südeuropa."

ActaPrehA18: 33-83.

Petridis, P.1997 "Delphes dans l’ antiquité tardive: première approche topographique et

ceramologique." BCH 121: 681-95.1998 "Les ateliers de potiers à Delphes à l' époque paléochrétienne."Topoi 8: 703-10.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________395

Petropoulos, M.

1999 Ta ergasthv ria twn rwmai> kwvn lucnariwvn th" Pavtra" kai to Lucnomanteiv o.Aqhvna.

Philipp, H.1968 Tektonon Daidala. Der bildende Künstler und sein Werk im vorplatonischen

Schriftum. Berlin.Platon, L.

1993 "Ateliers palatiaux minoens: une nouvelle image." BCH 117: 103-22.Platon, N.

1979 "L’ exportation du cuivre de l’ île de Chypre en Crète et les installationsmétallurgiques de la Crète minoenne." in Acts of the International Symposium,"The Relations between Cyprus and Crete, ca. 2000-500 BC. Nicosia 16-22 April1978". 101-10. Nicosia.

1980 "Metallourgikov kamivni sth Zav kro Krhv th". " in Pepragmevna tou D v dieqnouv"krhtologikouv sunedrivou, 29 Augouvstou-3 Septembrivou 1976 , 436-446.Herakleion.

Preka-Alexandri, K.1992 "A ceramic workshop in Figareto, Corfu." in Ateliers de potiers, 41-52.

Psaropoulou, B.

1986 Oi teleutaiv oi tsoukalav de" tou anatolikouv Aigaivou. Nauvplio.1996 " Ta kerameikav ergasthv ria twn teleutaiv wn 100 crovnwn sthn Krhv th. " in

Kerameikav Ergasthvria, 103-38.

Ramage, A. and P. Craddock2000 King Croesus' Gold: Excavations at Sardis and the History of Gold

Refining. Cambridge Mass.Raubitschek, A.E.

1949 Dedications from the Athenian Acropolis. A Catalogue of the Inscriptions of theSixth and Fifth Centuries B.C.Cambridge, Mass.

Rayet, O.1880 "Plaques votives en terre cuite trouvées à Corinthe."Gazette Archéologique 6:

101-7.Renfrew, C., M. Gimbutas, and E. Elster

1986 Excavations at Sitagroi: A Prehistoric Village in Northeast Greece. LosAngeles.Rhodes, D.

1968 Kilns. Design, Construction, and Operation. Philadelphia.Rhomaios, K.A.

1916 " [Ereunai ej n Qevrmw." ADelt 2: 185-6.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________396

Rice, P.M.

1987 Pottery Analysis. A Sourcebook . University of Chicago.1997a "Introduction and overview." inThe Prehistory and History of Ceramic Kilns,1-

10.1997b "Concluding comments." inThe Prehistory and History of Ceramic Kilns,251-9.

Rice, P.M. (ed.)1984 Pots and Potters: Current Approaches in Ceramic Archaeology. Los

Angeles.1997 The Prehistory and History of Ceramic Kilns. Proceedings of the Prehistory and

History of Ceramic Kilns, held at the 98th Annual Meeting of the AmericanCeramic Society in Indianapolis, Indiana, April 14-17, 1996. The AmericanCeramic Society. Westernville.

Richter, G.M.1923 The Craft of Athenian Pottery: An Investigation of the Technique of Black-

figured and Red-figured Athenian Vases . New Haven.Rieth, A.

1960 5000 Jahre Töpferscheibe. Konstanz.Rizza, G.

2000 Citta Cretese dell' "Eta Oscura" sulla Patela di Prinias." in Un ponte fra l'Italia e laGrecia: atti del Simposio in onore di Antonino Di Vita, Ragusa, 13-15 febbraio1998, 39-54, Padova.

Rizza, G., D. Palermo, and F. Tomasello

1992 Mandra di Gipari. Una officina protoarcaica di vasai nel territorio di Priniàs.Priniàs 2. Scavi e ricerche pubblicati da Giovanni Rizza. Studi e Materiali diArcheologia Greca 5. Università di Catania.

Roberts, J.P.1963 "Determination of the firing temperature of ancient ceramics by measurement of

thermal expansion." Archaeometry 6: 21-5.Robertson, M.

1982 "Beazley's use of terms." in Beazley Addenda. Additional References to ABV, ARV, and Paralipomena,edited by L. Burn and R. Glynn, xi-xviii.Oxford.

Robinson, D.M.

1938 CVA. United States Fasc. 7: The Robinson Collection, Baltimore. Fasc. 3.Cambridge, Mass.

Robinson, O.1984 "Baths: An aspect of Roman local government law." inSodalitas: Scritti in

onore di Antonio Guarino.Vol. 3, 1065-82. Naples.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________397

Rodziewicz, M.

1998 "Experimental identification of local and imported pottery from Mareotis." inCommerce et artisanat dans l'Alexandrie hellénistique et romaine. Actes ducolloqued'Athènes, 1-12 décembre 1988, BCHSupplément 33, 245-60. Paris.

Roebuck, C. (ed.)1969 The Muses at Work: Arts, Crafts and Professions in Ancient Greece and

Rome. Cambridge Mass. London.Roebuck, M.

1995 "Architectural Terracottas from Classical and Hellenistic Corinth." inProceedings of the International Conference on Greek ArchitecturalTerracottas of the Classical and Hellenistic Periods, December 12-15,1991. Hesperia Supplement 27, edited by N. Winter, 39-51. Princeton.

Rossetto, P.C.1973 Il Sepolchro del Fornaio Marco Virgilio Eurisace a Porta Maggiore. Città di

Castello.Rostoker W. and E.R. Gebhard

1981 "The reproduction of rooftiles for the Archaic temple of Poseidon atIsthmia, Greece." JFA 8: 211-27.

Rothenberg, B. (ed.)1990 The Ancient Metallurgy of Copper: Archaeology-Experiment-Theory.London.

Rotroff, S.I.1982 The Athenian Agora XXII. Hellenistic Pottery: Athenian and Imported

Moldmade Bowls. Princeton.1984 "Ceramic workshops in Hellenistic Athens." in Ancient Greek and Related

Pottery,173-7.Rotroff, S.I., H. A. Thompson, and D. B. Thompson

1997 Hellenistic Pottery and Terracottas. Princeton.Rouet, P.

2001 Approaches to the Study of Attic Vases: Beazley and Pottier.OxfordMonographs in Classical Archaeology. Translated by L. Nash. Oxford.

Rouse, W.H.D.1902 Greek Votive Offerings. An Essay in the History of Greek Religion.

Cambridge. Reprinted in 1976.Roux, G.1961 L' architecture de l' Argolide aux IVe et IIIe siècles avant J.-C.Paris.

Rudolph W.1988 "Workshops: some reflections and some pots." inSymposium on Ancient

Greek and Related Pottery,524-35.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________398

Rutter, J.

1993 "Early Helladic pottery: inferences about exchange and production fromstyle and clay composition." inWace and Blegen,19-37.

Sagui, L.2000 "Produzioni vetrarie a Roma tra V e VII secolo. Nuovi dati archeologici." in

Annales du 14e congrès de l’ Association Internationale pour l' histoire du verre, Italia/Venezia-Milano 1998, 203-7. Lochem.

Salmon, J.B.1984 Wealthy Corinth: A History of the City to 338 BC. Oxford.

Sanders, G.D.R.1995 Byzantine Glazed Pottery at Corinth to c. 1125. Ph.D. diss., U. of

Birmingham.1999 "A Late Roman bath at Korinth. Excavations in the Panayia field, 1995-1996."

Hesperia 68: 441-80.

Sapouna-Sakellaraki, E.1998 "Geometric Kyme. The excavation at Viglatouri, Kyme on Euboea." in

Euboica,59-104.Saraswati, B.

1967 "Social and cultural aspects of pottery manufacture in northern and westernIndia." BullAntroSurvey of India 13: 40-3.

Sayre, E.V. and R.W. Dodson1957 "Neutron Activation study of Mediterranean potsherds." AJA 61: 35-41.

Schallin, A.M.1997 "The Late Bronze Age potter’s workshop at Mastos in the Berbati valley." in

Production and the Craftsman, 73-88.Scheibler, I.

1979 "Griechische Künstlervotive der archaischen Zeit." MJbK 30: 7-30.1984 "Zur mutmaßlichen Größe attischer Töpfereien des 6. Jahrhunderts v. Chr." in

Ancient Greek and Related Pottery,130-4.1986 Formen der Zusammenarbeit in attischen Topfereien des 6. und 5. Jrs. v. Chr.

Studien zur alten Geschichte. Festschrift Siegfried Lauffer,787-804. Roma.1995 Griechische Töpferkunst. Herstellung, Handel und Gebrauch der antiken

Tongefässe. Munich. Second Edition.Schneider, G., H. Knoll, K.Gallis, and J. P. Demoule

1991 "Transition entre les cultures néolithiques de Sesklo et de Dimini: Recherchesminéralogiques, chimiques et technologicques sur les céramiques et les argiles." BCH 115: 1-64.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________399

Schram, J. and S. Wolf

1999 "Examination of organic combustion residues in ceramics." in5th European Meeting on Ancient Ceramics, 18th-20th October 1999.

Abstracts, 73. Athens.Schreiber, T.

1999 Athenian Vase Construction: A Potter’s Analysis. Getty Museum Publications.Schwandner, E.L.

1988 "Handwerkerviertel in Gründungsständten des 5. und 4. Jahrhunderts."Praktikav tou CII Dieqnouv" Sunedrivou Klasikhv" Arcaiologiv a"Vol. 4, 363-75. Aqhvna

Schwandner, E.L., G. Zimmer, and U. Zwicker1983 "Zum Problem der Öfen griechischer Bronzegiesser." AA 57-80.

Seifert, M.1993 "Pottery kilns in mainland Greece and on the Aegean islands." RdA 17: 95- 105.

Shaw, J.W., A. van de Moortel, P.M. Day, and V. Kilikoglou1997 "A LM IA pottery kiln at Kommos, Crete." inTECNH , 323-31.2001 A LM IA Ceramic Kiln in South-Central Crete: Function and Pottery

Production. Hesperia Supplement 30. Princeton.Sherratt, S.

1980 "Regional variation in the pottery of Late Helladic IIIB." BSA 75:175-202.1982 "Patterns of contact: manufacture and distribution of Mycenaen pottery, 1400-

1100B.C." in Interaction and Acculturation in the Mediterranean Proceedings ofthe 2nd International Congress of Mediterranean Pre-and Protohistory, Amsterdam, 19-23 November 1980, edited by J.G.P. Best and N.W. de Vries,179-95. Amsterdam.

Sillar, B.2000 "Dung by preference: the choice of fuel as an example of how Andean

pottery production is embedded within wider technical, social, andeconomic practices." Archaeometry 42: 43-60.

Skibo, J.M.1992 "Ethnoarchaeology, experimental archaeology and inference building."

Ceramic Research Apol 30: 27-38.Sparkes, B.

1962 "The Greek kitchen." JHS82: 121-37.1975: "Illustrating Aristophanes." JHS95: 122-35.1991 Greek Pottery: an Introduction.New York.1996 The Red and the Black Studies in Greek Pottery. London and New York.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________400

Sparkes, B. A. and L. Talcott

1958 Pots and Pans of Classical Athens. Princeton.Spatharas, V., D. Kondopoulou, I. Liritzis, and G. N. Tsokas

2000 "Archaeointensity results from two ceramic kilns from N. Greece." Journal of the Balkan Geophysical Society3: 67-72.

Stark, B.L.1985 "Archaeological identification of pottery production locations:

Ethnoarchaeological and archaeological data in Mesoamerica." in DecodingPrehistoric Ceramics, edited by B.A. Nelson, 158-94. Carbondale.

Stevens, C.1992 "Refractory bricks for lime kilns: small-scale production using local raw

materials." in LIME. Lime and Other Alternative Cements,edited by N. Hilll, S.Holmes, and D. Mather, 150-5. London.

Stillwell, A.N.1948 Corinth XV.1: The Potters' Quarter . Princeton.1952 Corinth XV.2. The Potters’ Quarter. The Terracottas.Princeton.

Stillwell, A.N., and J.L. Benson1984 Corinth XV.3. The Potters’ Quarter. The Pottery.Princeton.

Stirling, L.M. and N.B. Lazreg1999 "Roman kilns and pottery production at Leptiminus, Tunisia: Results of

Excavations in 1995-1998." inProceedings of the XVth InternationalCongress of Classical Archaeology,edited by R.F. Docter and E.M.Moorman, 402-4. Amsterdam.

Stissi, V.1999a "Production, circulation and consumption of Archaic Greek pottery: sixth

and early fifth century B.C." inThe Complex Past of Pottery Production,Circulation and Consumption of Mycenaean and Greek Pottery (Sixteenth toearly fifth centuries B.C.). Proceedings of the ARCHON InternationalConference held in Amsterdam, 8-9 November 1996,edited by J.P.Crielaard, V. Stiissi, and G.J.v. Winjgaarden, 83-113. Amsterdam.

Stone, D.L., L.M. Stirling, and N. Ben Lazreg1998 "Suburban land-use and ceramic production around Leptiminus (Tunisia):

Interim Report." JRA 11: 305-17.Swan, V.G.

1984 The Pottery Kilns of Roman Britain.Royal Commission on HistoricalMonuments. Supplementary Series 5. London.

Tarling, D.H. and W.S. Downey1989 "Archaeomagnetic study of the Late Minoan kiln 2, Stratigraphical Museum

Extension." BSA 84: 345-52.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________401

Taylor, R. J., V.J. Robinson, and D.J.L. Gibbins

1992 "Investigation of the provenance of the Roman amphora cargo from thePlemmirio B shipwreck." Archaeometry39: 9-21.

Taylor, R.J. and V.J. Robinson1996 "Provenance studies of Roman African Red Slip Ware using Neutron Activation

Analysis." Archaeometry38: 245-55.Tekkök-Biçken, B.

2000 "Pottery production in the Troad: ancient and modern Akköy." Near Eastern Archaeology63: 94-101.

Thellier, E.1981 "Sur la direction du champ magnétique terrestre en France durant les deux

derniers millénaires."Physics of the Earth and planetary interiors 24: 89-132.Thellier, E. and O. Thellier

1959 "Sur l’ intensité du champ magnétique terrestre dans le passé historique etgeologique", Ann. Geophysique 15: 285-376.

Themelis, P.1975 " jAnaskafhv jErevtria" ." PAE 36-48.

Thiersch, H.1939 "Ergasteria, Werkstätte griechischer Tempelbildhauer." in Neue Gött. Gel.,

Phil. Hist. III, no 1: 1-19.Thomas, R.

1981 Archaeomagnetism in Greek and Cretan Pottery Kilns.Ph.D. diss.,University of Edinburg.

Thompson, H.A.1940 The Tholos of Athens and Its Predecessors.Princeton.

Tiverios, M.1995 "Eptav crovnia (1990-1996) arcaiologikwv n ereunwvn sth diplhv travpeza

Agciavlou-Sivndou. O arcaiv o" oikismov"." AEMQ 10: 407-25.1998 "The ancient settlement in the Anchialos-Sindos Double Trapeza. Seven years

(1990-1996) of archaeological research." inEuboica, 243-53.Tomasello , F.

1996 "Fornaci a Festos ed Haghia Triada dell' eta medominoica alla geometrica." inKerameikav Ergasthvria , 27-37.

Tomlinson, J.E and V. Kilikoglou1998 "Neutron Activation Analysis of pottery from the Early Orientalizing kiln at

Knossos." BSA 93: 385-8.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________402

Tournavitou, I.

1986 "Towards an identification of a workshop space." inProblems in GreekPrehistory: Papers Presented at the Centenary Conference of British School at Athens, edited by E.B. French, 447-68. Athens-Manchester.

1992 "Practical use and social function: a neglected aspect of Mycenaean pottery." BSA87: 181-210.

Torrence, R.1986 Production and Exchange of Stone Tools. Prehistoric Obsidian in the

Aegean. Cambridge.Tréuil, R.

1992 Dikili Tash. Village préhistorique de Macédoine orientale 1. Les fouilles de Jean Deshayes 1961-1975. 1. BCH Supplément 24. Paris.

Triantaphyllidis, P.

2000a Rodiakhv Ualourgiva I. Aqhvna.

2000b "New evidence on the glass manufacture in Classical and HellenisticRhodes." in Annales du 14e Congrès de l’ Association Internationale pour l’histoire du Verre, Italia/Venezia-Milano 1998, 30-8. Lochem.

Tsaravopoulos, A.1986 "The ancient city of Chios. A contribution to the topography of the city

from the results of rescue excavations." Horos 4: 124-44.Tsenoglou, E.N.

1991 "Kataskeuhv xulanqrav kwn. Prwvta apotelev smata mia" epitov pia" evreuna" ston

Kavtw Staurov tou nomouv Qessaloniv kh". " inIstoriva th" Neoellhnikhv "Tecnologiva". A v trihvmerh ergasiva, Pavtra 21-3 Oktwbrivou 1988, 171-6.Koinwfelev " vIdruma ETBA-Nomarciv a Acaiva".

Tsipopoulou, M. and L. Vagnetti1997 "Workshop attributions for some Late Minoan III East Cretan larnakes." in

TEXNH, 473-9.Tsoumis, G.

1999 "O Qeovfrasto" w" tecnolov go"." inArcaiva Ellhnikhv Tecnologiva, 43-8.Tsouni, K. and G. Aikaterinidis (eds.)

2001 Mesogaia. History and Culture of Mesogeia in Attica. Athens.Türkmenoglu, A.G. and E.K. Göktürk

1996 "An investigation on the manufacturing technology of the Degirmentepe(Malatya) pottery." in Archaeometry 94,599-607.

Uscatescu, A.1994 "Fullonicae" y "tinctoriae" en el mundo romano.Barcelona.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________403

Valavanis, P.

1990 " vEna arcaiv o ergasthv rio sthn epochv ma"." Arcaiologiv a 36: 31-41.1997 "Bavkcio", Kivtto" kai panaqhnai>koiv amforeiv ". Skevyei" gia th domhv twn

klasikwv n keramikwvn ergasthriv wn tou 4ou ai. p. C. " in Athenian Potters andPainters,85-95.

Valladas, H.1977 "On the magnetic separation of quartz for the thermoluminescence dating of an

ancient kiln." Archaeometry 19: 88-95.Vallianos, C. and M. Padouva

1986 Ta krhtikav aggeiva tou 19ou kai 20ou ai. Ekdovsei" Mouseiv ou Krhtikhv "Eqnologiva", Bovroi Hrav kleio.

van der Leeuw, S.E.1977 "Towards a study of the economics of pottery making." inEx Horreo: IPP

1951-1976 , edited by B.L. van Beek, R.W. Brandt, and W. Groenman-VanWaateringe, 68-76. Amsterdam.

Vekris, E.

1998 "To asbestokav mino tou Karelav ." Z v Episthmonikhv sunavnthshNotioanatolikhv " Attikhv", Korwpiv 19-22 Oktwbrivou 1995, 177-99.Korwpiv.

Velenis, G.

1996 "Nomismatokopeiv o sthn arcaiv a Agorav th" Qessaloniv kh". " inCarakthvr.Afievrwma sth Mantwv Oikonomivdou , 49-54. Aqhvna.

Verfenstein, C.D

2001 "Craftsmen's dedications and the Penteskoufia plaques." AJA 105: 303. Abstract.Vickers, M. and D. Gill

1994 Artful Crafts: Ancient Greek Silverware and Pottery. Oxford.Vitelli, K.

1993 Franchti Neolithic Pottery. Vol. 1: Classification and Ceramic Phases 1 and 2.Excavations at Francthi Cave, Greece, fasc. 8. Indiana University Press.Bloomington.

1994 "Experimental approaches to Thessalian Neolithic ceramics: Gray ware andceramic color."inThessalie, 143-48.

1995 "Pots, potters, and the shaping of Greek Neolithic society." inThe Emergence of Pottery. Technology and Innovation in Ancient Societies, edited by W.K. Barnett and J.W. Hoopes, 55-63. Washington and London.1997 "Inferring firing procedures from sherds: early Greek kilns." inThe Prehistory and History of Ceramic Kilns, 21-40.1999 "‘Looking Up’ at early ceramics in Greece." inPottery and People. A

Dynamic Interaction, edited by J. Skibo and G.M. Feinman, 184-98. SaltLake City.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________404

von Bothmer, D.

1987 "Greek Vase-Painting: two hundred years of connoisseurship." inPapers on the Amasis Painter and his World,edited by M. True, 184-204. Malibu, J. PaulGetty Museum.

von Raits, H. A.1964 The Pinakes from Penteskoufia. M.A. Thesis. U. of Cincinnati. (see also

H.A. Geagan)von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, U.

1929 Vitae Homeri et Hesiodi in usum scholarum.Berlin.Vossen, R.

1984 "Towards building models of traditional trade in ceramics: case studies fromSpain and Morocco." inThe Many Dimensions of Pottery: ceramics in Archaeology and Anthropology,edited by S. E. van der Leeuw, 339-98.Amsterdam.

Voulgari, E., M. Sophronidou, and K. Touloumis1997 "Apov to ovstrako sto aggeiv o. Keramikhv apov to neoliqikov Disphlio.v " AEM Q

11: 9-17.Voyatzoglou, M.

1974 "The Jar-makers of Thrapsano in Crete."Expedition16: 18-24.1984 "Thrapsano, village of jar makers." inEast Cretan White-on-Dark Ware, 130-42.

Wade, M. F.

2001 "Human and chemical fingerprints: potters and pots from Pantanello,southern Italy." AIA105: 297-8. Abstract.

Wagner, U., F.E. Wagner, and J. Riederer1986 "The use of Mössbauer Spectroscopy in archaeometric studies." in

Proceedings of the 1984 Symposium on Archaeometry. Washington 1984,edited by J.S. Olin and M.J. Blackmann, 129-42. Washington, D.C.

Warren, P.1972 Myrtos: An Early Bronze Age Settlement in Crete. BSA Supplement 7. London.

Washburn, O.M.1906 "Excavations in Corinth in 1905." AJA 10: 19-20.

Webster, T.B.L.1968 "Another red figure pelike with a hole on its side."Klearchos 10: 65-8.

Wertime, T.A.1983 "The furnace versus the goat: the pyrotechnologic industries and

Mediterranean deforestation in antiquity." JFA 10: 445-52.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________405

Wertime, T. A. and S.F. Wertime (eds.)

1982 Early Pyrotechnology: The Evolution of the First Fire-Using Industries.Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C.

Whitbread, I.1995 Greek Transport Amphorae. A Petrological and Archaeological Study.Fitch

Laboratory Occasional Papers 4. Athens.Whitbread, I., R. J. Jones, and J. K. Papadopoulos

1997 "The Early Iron Age kiln at Torone, Greece: geological diversity and thedefinition of control groups." in Archaeological Sciences 1995,88-91.

Whitehead, D.1986 The Demes of Attica from 508/7 to ca. 250 BC. A Political and Social

Study. Princeton.Wiencke, M.H.

1970 "Banded pithoi of Lerna III." Hesperia39: 94-110.1989 "Change in Early Helladic II." AJA 93: 495-509.

Williams, C. K.1977 "Corinth 1976. Forum Southwest." Hesperia 46: 40-81.

Williams, C.K. and J.E. Fischer1975 "Corinth, 1974: Forum Southwest." Hesperia 44: 1-50.1976 "Corinth, 1975: Forum Southwest." Hesperia 45: 99-162.

Wilson, D.E. and P.M. Day

1994 "Ceramic regionalism in Prepalatial central Crete: The Mesara imports at EMI toEM IIA Knossos." BSA89: 1-87.

Winter, A.1957 "Eine Deutung des korinthischen Töpferofens mit den Zwei Kanälen."

Keramische Zeitschrift 9: 14-6.1959 "Die Technik des griechischen Töpfers in ihren Grundlagen."Techniche Beiträge zur Archäologie I . Mainz, 1-45.

Winter, N.1993 Greek Architectural Terracottas from the Prehistoric to the End of the Archaic

Period.Oxford.

Wiseman, J.1978 The Land of the Ancient Corinthians. Göteborg.Wood, B.G.

1990 The Sociology of Pottery in Ancient Palestine. The Ceramic Industry and the Diffusion of Ceramic Style in the Bronze and Iron Ages.Journal for the Study ofthe Old Testament. Supplement Series 103. Sheffield.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________406

Wright, J., J.F.Cherry, J.L. Davis, E. Mantzourani et al.

1990 "The Nemea Valley Archaeological Project. A preliminary report." Hesperia59:579-659.

Wright, R.P.1991 "Woman’s labor and pottery production in prehistory." inEngendering

Archaeology. Women and Prehistory, edited by J.M.Gero and M.W. Conkey,194-223. Cambridge. Mass.

Wurch-Kozelj M. and T. Kozelj1995 "Fours à chaux et fours à poix à Thasos de l' antiquité à nos jours." ASMOSIA IV.

Actes de la IVème Conférence Internationale, Bordeaux, France, 9-13 octobre1995,359-68. Lyon.

Yegül, F.1992 Baths and Bathing in Classical Antiquity.The Architectural History

Foundation and the Massachusetts Institute of Archaeology. New York.Young, R.S.

1951 "An industrial district of ancient Athens." Hesperia20: 135-288.Youni, P.

1996 "H sumbolhv twn arcaiometrikwv n ereunwvn sth melevth th" Neoliqikhv"kerameikhv "." in Archaeometrical and Archaeological Research in Macedoniaand Thrace. Proceedings of the 2nd Symposium, Thessaloniki 26-28 March 1993,135-148.Thessaloniki.

Youni, P., P. Koukouli-Chrysanthaki, and P. Ploumis

1994 "Tecnologikhv anavlush th" neoliqikhv " kerameikhv " apov ton Promacwv naTopolni a." AEMQ 8: 343-48.

Zachariadou, O., D. Kyriakou, and E. Baziotopoulou

1985 "Swstikhv anaskafhv ston anisov pedo kovmbo Levnorman-Kwnstantinoupovlew". " AAA18: 39-50.

Zerner, C.1993 "New perspectives on trade in the Middle and Early Late Helladic periods on the

mainland." inWace and Blegen, 39-56.Zikos, N.

1998 "Swstikhv anaskafikhv evreuna sto Mikrov Pistov nomouv Rodovph" ." AEMQ 12:41-52.

Zimmer, G.1982 Antike Werkstattbilder . Berlin.1990 Griechische Bronzegusswerkstätten. Zur Technologieentwicklung eines

antiken Kunsthandwerkes.Mainz.



R EFERENCES

_____________________________________________407

Ziomecki, J.

1958 "Przedstawienia Pieców na Tabliczkach Z Koryntu." Archeologia Warszawa 10:153-63.

1975 Les représentations d’ artisans sur les vases attiques. Wroclaw.



BRONZE AGE , HELLENISTIC THROUGH BYZANTINE K ILNS _____________________________________________

408

APPENDIX I:LIST OF BRONZE AGE

AND HELLENISTIC THROUGH BYZANTINE K ILNS

Explanatory Note:

In this list I adopted the same way of presentation of entries as I did in the Catalogue.

First chronologically, Bronze Age (EBA-MBA-LBA). Hellenistic, Hellenistic-Roman, Roman,

Late Antique, Byzantine and Undated. Within each period the entries are arranged

geographically: Attica, Peloponnese, Central Greece, Western Greece, Northern Greece, and

Aegean Islands. Within Attica, I start with Athens and each site is listed alphabetically accordingto the name of the street. Outside Athens, the sites are listed alphabetically. Within the other

regions, the sites are entered alphabetically according to their prefectures and again alphabetically

within each prefecture. The numbers after some sites (e.g. Athens, Corinth, Pherai) denote

separate workshops that have been excavated in the same site. Kilns believed to belong to the

same workshop are labeled A, B, etc. For example, Pherai-7A-C (Stamouli-Bolia Plot) is the

seventh recorded workshop in the area and it has three kilns.



APPENDIX I: LIST OF BRONZE AGE AND HELLENISTIC THROUGH BYZANTINE KILNS

C AT.N O. R EG IO N P RE FE CT UR E S IT E S TR EE T/ PL OT T YP E S UB TY PE D IM EN SI ON S P ER IO D S PE CI FI C D AT E R EF ER EN CE S

no. 162 Attica Attica Attica Spata 1 I ? 1.2 Hellenistic G. Steinhauer, " vEreuna cwvrou aerodromiv ou Spavtwn." PAE 1982, 122-126. Mesogaia 2000.

no. 163 Attica Attica Attica Spata 2 I ? 1.5 Hellenistic supra no. 162.

no. 164 Attica Attica Attica Spata 3 II ? 2.5 Hellenistic supra no. 162.

no. 165 Attica Attica Attica Spata 4 II ? 5 .0 0x 2.5 0 Hel le ni st ic supra no. 162.

no. 166 Attica Attica Attica Spata 5 II ? 8 .5 0x 6.2 0 Hel le ni st ic supra no. 162.

no. 167 Peloponnese Achaia Patras-1Germanou and K.Palaiologou St.

Unknown Hellenistic BCH 115 (1991) 870.

no. 168 Peloponnese Argolis Argos-2 Agros Piteros II ? Hellenistic ADelt 46 (1991) 100, pl. 546.

no. 169 Peloponnese Argolis Argos-3 Archaias Voulis St. Unknown Hellenistic ADelt 37 (1982) 96; BCH 114 (1990) 727.

no. 170 Peloponnese Argolis Argos-4 N. Kourou St. Unknown Hellenistic ADelt 18 (1963) 62, pl. 73a.

no. 171 Peloponnese Argolis Argos-5 Paliopyrgos, N. and BBlogiari Plot Unknown Hellenistic ADelt 35 (1980) 111-20; ADelt 36 (1981) 107-14; BCH 113 (1989) 602, 709, fig. 11.

no. 172 Peloponnese Elis Ancient Elis-2A II b 6 .8 0x 6.8 0 Hel le ni st ic ADelt 26 (1971) 138-42, plan 1, pl. 120b.

no. 173 Peloponnese Elis Ancient Elis-2B II b 3 .8 0x 3.6 0 Hel le ni st ic supra no. 173.

no. 174 Peloponnese Elis Ancient Elis-2C I g 2.8 Hellenistic supra no. 173.

no. 175 Central Boeotia Elateia I a Hellenistic ADelt 41 (1987) 65-6, pl. 66c; BCH 117 (1993) 829.

no. 176 Central Boeotia Pyrgaki/Palaiomazi Unknown Hellenistic ARepLondon 1982-83, 32.

no. 177 Central Euboea Eretria-4 SE sector of the city II b Hellenistic ADelt 21 (1966) 257-61, pls. 328 a-b.

no. 178 Central Euboea Karystos-2 Site no. 57 Unknown Hellenistic Keller 1985, 114, 222-3.

no. 179 Central Karditsa Metropoli-1 Papadouli Plot I ? 0.59 Hellenistic ADelt 40 (1985) 195, pl . 68b; BCH 115 (1991) 893, fig. 72.

no. 180 Central Karditsa Metropoli-2 Kotoula Plot I ? Hellenistic BCH 122 (1998) 832; EUPPO 1 (1997) 93.

no. 181 Central Larissa Krannon A II b 5 .7 0x 5.7 0 Hel le ni st ic Late Hellenistic ADelt 29 (1973-74) 564, plan 4, pl. 376.

no. 182 Central Larissa Krannon B II b 3 .0 0x 3.0 0 Hel le ni st ic Late Hellenistic supra no. 181.





no. 199 Western Ionian Corfu-Figaretto C Mikalef Plot C I a Hellenistic supra no. 197.

no. 200 Western Ionian Corfu-Figaretto D Mikalef Plot D I a 1.9 Hellenistic supra no. 197.

no. 201 Western Ionian Corfu-Figaretto E Mikalef Plot E I a 1. 15 -1 .3 5 He ll en is ti c supra no. 197.

no. 202 Western Ionian Corfu-Figaretto F Mikalef Plot F I a 2.8 Hellenistic supra no. 197.

no. 203 Western Ionian Corfu-Figaretto G Mikalef Plot G I a 1. 10 -1 .3 0 He ll en is ti c supra no. 197.

no. 204 Western Ionian Corfu-Figaretto H Mikalef Plot H I a 1. 10 -1 .3 0 He ll en is ti c supra no. 197.

no. 205 Western Ionian Corfu-Figaretto I Mikalef Plot I I a 1.2 Hellenistic supra no. 197.

no. 206 Western Ionian Corfu-Figaretto J Mikalef Plot J I ? 1. 60 -1 .9 2 He ll en is ti c supra no. 197.

no. 207 Western Ionian Corfu-Figaretto K Mikalef Plot K I ? Hellenistic supra no. 197.

no. 208 Western Ionian Corfu-Figaretto L Mikalef Plot L I a 1.4 Hellenistic supra no. 197.

no. 209 Western Ionian Corfu-Figaretto M Mikalef Plot M I a 0.8 Hellenistic supra no. 197.

no. 210 Northern Kozanis Polymylos-1A I ? Hellenistic ADelt 50 (1995) 568-9; "Via Egnatia. Ancient Greek cities along a restored Roman road." M

no. 211 Northern Kozanis Polymylos-1B I ? 3 Hellenistic supra no. 210.

no. 212 Northern Pella Dion A II c 2 .60 x. 3.0 0 Hel le ni st ic S. Pingiatoglou, " To ierov th" Dhvmhtra" sto Div on." AEMQ 10 (1996) 225-32.

no. 213 Northern Pella Dion B II ? 3 .6 0x 3.6 0 Hel le ni st ic supra no. 212.

no. 214 Northern Pella Pella-2 South of Area I I a Hellenistic ADelt 18 (1963) 200, 202, plan 2, pl. 240d.

no. 215 Northern Pella Pella-3 South of Area I II b HellenisticC. Makaronas, " Anaskafaiv Pevllh" 1957-1960 ." ADelt 16 (1960) Meletai 72-83, plan 2, pl13, fig. 16.

no. 216 Northern Pella Pella-4 Area I Unknown Hellenistic supra no. 215.

no. 217 Northern Pella Pella-5Sanctuary of the Motherof Gods

Unknown HellenisticM. Lilimbaki-Akamati , "Ierav th" Pev v vlla". " in Pov li" kai Cwv ra sthn Arcaiv a Makedoniv a karcaiologikouv sunedriv ou Kabav la 9-11 Maiv ou 1986, 1990, 195-200.





no. 254 Attica Attica Athens-20 Asomaton Square Unknown Roman Eleuqerotupiv a ( daily press ) 26.5.96, 10.4.07, 11.4.97; BCH 122 (1998) 724.

no. 255 Attica Attica Athens-21 16-18, AthanassiouDiakou St.

I ? 1.2 Roman ADelt 25 (1970) 60, fig. 16.

no. 256 Attica Attica Athens-22A5, Demophon St. A;Ifantidou Plot

II a 1.80x1.40 Roman Late Roman AAA 1 (1968) 224-9; ADelt 24 (1969) 37-41; BCH 95 (1971) 819; Karivieri 1996.

no. 257 Attica Attica Athens-22B5, Demophon St. B;Ifantidou Plot

II a 2.50x2.50 Roman Late Roman supra no. 256.

no. 258 Attica Attica Athens-23 7-9 Kekropos St. II ? Roman ADelt 24 (1969) 50.

no. 259 Attica Attica Athens-24 Kerameikos-6 I ? Roman 4th-6th cent. A.D. U. Knigge, "Tätigkeitbericht Kerameikos 1977." AA 1979, 178-87, fig. 15.

no. 260 Attica Attica Athens-25A Kerameikos-7A-Bau Y II a Roman Late Roman U. Knigge and A. R ügler, "Die Ausgrabungen im Kerameikos 1986/1987." AA 1989, 80-99,

no. 261 Attica Attica Athens-25B Kerameikos-7B- Bau Y II a Roman Late Roman supra no. 260.

no. 262 Attica Attica Athens-25C Kerameikos-7C- Bau Y II a Roman Late Roman supra no. 260.

no. 263 Attica Attica Athens-25D Kerameikos-7D- Bau Y II a Roman Late Roman supra no. 260.

no. 264 Attica Attica Athens-25E Kerameikos-7E- Bau Y II a Roman Late Roman supra no. 260.

no. 265 Attica Attica Athens-25F Kerameikos-7F- Bau Y II a Roman Late Roman supra no. 260.

no. 266 Attica Attica Athens-25G Kerameikos-7G- Bau Y II a Roman Late Roman supra no. 260.

no. 267 Attica Attica Athens-25H Kerameikos-7H- Bau Y II a Roman Late Roman supra no. 260.

no. 268 Attica Attica Athens-25J Kerameikos-7I- Bau Y II a Roman Late Roman supra no. 260.

no. 269 Attica Attica Athens-25I Kerameikos-7J- Bau Y II a Roman Late Roman supra no. 260.

no. 270 Attica Attica Athens-26 Kerameikos-8 Pompeion II a 2.08x2.08 RomanW. Zschietzschmann, "Einbauten im griechischen Pompeion." AM 56 (1931) 90-6; AA 1937

Nachforgerbauten. 1976, 172, fig. 158; Cook 1961, 66, J1; Belsché et al. 1963, 11, HE.

no. 271 Attica Attica Athens-27AKerameikos- 9A-Propylon of thePompeion A

II a 1.20x1.20 Roman W. Hoepfner, Das Pompeion und seine Nachforgerbauten. 1976, 173, figs. 185-9; Cook 1961

no. 272 Attica Attica Athens-27BKerameikos-9B Propylonof the Pompeion B

II a 1.00x1.00 Roman supra no. 271.

no. 273 Attica Attica Athens-28Kerameikos-10 West ofSacred Gate

Unknown Roman 4th cent. A.D. Cook 1961, 67, J4.





no. 274 Attica Attica Athens-29-1 Kotzia Square 1 II ? Roman 3rd cent. A.D. Karagiorga-Stathakopoulou 1988; ADelt 43 (1988) 22-9; BCH 110 (1986) 676; BCH 111 (1

no. 275 Attica Attica Athens-29-2 Kotzia Square 2 II ? Roman 3rd cent . A.D. supra no. 274.

















no. 292 Attica Attica Athens-29-19 Kotzia Square 19 II ? Roman 3rd cent. A.D. supra no. 274.













no. 301 Attica Attica Glyfada Ion. Metaxa St. Unknown Roman ADelt 35 (1980) 67, fig. 3; BCH 113 (1989) 588; ARepLondon 1988-89, 16.

no. 302 Attica Attica Marathon-2 National Road, 34th km I ? 4 Roman ADelt 46 (1991) 70, pl. 38d; BCH 122 (1998) 734.

no. 303 Attica Attica Marathon-3 National Road, 34th km I ? Roman supra no. 302.



no. 306 Attica Attica Eleusis Perikleous St. Unknown Roman 1st-2nd cent. A.D. ADelt 39 (1984) 14-9; BCH 115 (1991) 852.

no. 307 Attica Attica Megara-142, Konstran.Palaiologou St.

II ? Roman ADelt 29 (1973-74) 79, plan 34; ADelt 42 (1987) 34-49; BCH 117 (1993) 782.

no. 308 Attica Attica Megara-2 28th October St. II b Roman ADelt 29 (1973-74) 79, plan 32-33.

no. 309 Attica Attica Megara-3 Sahtouri St. Unknown Roman ADelt 44 (1989) 44-5.

no. 310 Attica Attica Megara-4 Unknown Roman ADelt 44 (1989) 45, plan 8, pl. 38a.

no. 311 Attica Attica Skala Oropou-2A28 Octobriou and Meg.Alexandrou St.-PlotBarsos A

Unknown Roman Late Roman ADelt 44 (1989) 82; BCH 116 (1992) 846.

no. 312 Attica Attica Skala Oropou-2B

28 Octobriou and Meg.

Alexandrou St.-PlotBarsos B Unknown Roman Late Roman supra no. 311.

no. 313 Peloponnese Achaia Aigeira-2 Unknown Roman Imperial BCH 109 (1985) 789.

no. 314 Peloponnese Achaia Aigio-2 4, Messinezzi St. Unknown Roman Imperial ADelt 35 (1980) 198; BCH 116 (1992) 872; ARepLondon 1988-89, 40 .

no. 315 Peloponnese Achaia Aigio-3 8, Polychroniadou St. Unknown Roman ADelt 37 (1982) 148.





no. 316 Peloponnese Achaia Kallithea I e 2 Roman ADelt 45 (1990) 132, plan 3, 133; BCH 120 (1996) 1172.

no. 317 Peloponnese Achaia Patras-3 105, Agiou Dimitriou St. Unknown Roman ADelt 44 (1989) 127; BCH 110 (1986) 195; BCH 120 (1996) 1175.

no. 318 Peloponnese Achaia Patras-4 Danielidos St. Unknown Roman ADelt 42 (1987) 137-151; BCH 117 (1993) 804.

no. 319 Peloponnese Achaia Patras-5 160-162, Gounari St. I ? 2 Roman 2nd cent. A.D. ADelt 35 (1980) 188, fig. 13.

no. 320 Peloponnese Achaia Patras-6 Ileias St. Unknown Roman Imperial ADelt 42 (1987) 137-51; BCH 117 (1993) 804.

no. 321 Peloponnese Achaia Patras-732, Ipirou and HellenosStratiotou St.

Unknown Roman BCH 115 (1991) 870.

no. 322 Peloponnese Achaia Patras-8A212, Karaiskaki andKalamogdarti St. A

I a 1.5 Roman ADelt 43 (1988) 151, plan 5, 154; BCH 119 (1995) 887, figs. 29-30.

no. 323 Peloponnese Achaia Patras-8B212, Karaiskaki andKalamogdarti St. B

I a 1.3 Roman supra no. 322.

no. 324 Peloponnese Achaia Patras-8C212, Karaiskaki andKalamogdarti St. C

I g 1.5 Roman supra no. 322.

no. 325 Peloponnese Achaia Patras-8D 212, Karaiskaki andKalamogdarti St. D II ? 3.80x2.10 Roman supra no. 322.

no. 326 Peloponnese Achaia Patras-9 148-150, Londou St. I ? 0.6 Roman 1st-2nd cent. A.D. ADelt 37 (1982) 140, fig. 1; BCH 114 (1990) 750.

no. 327 Peloponnese Achaia Patras-1087-89, Patreos and Al.Ipsilantou St.

I ? 1.20x1.00 Roman 1st-3rd cent. A.D. ADelt 35 (1980) 185, fig. 12; Petropoulos 1999.

no. 328 Peloponnese Achaia Patras-11209-211, Trion

Nauarhon and MaizonosSt.

I ? 0.72 Roman ADelt 33 (1978) 89-91.

no. 329 Peloponnese Achaia Patras-12A 60, Votsi St. A I a 0.82 Roman 1st-3rd cent. A.D. ADelt 33 (1978) 86; BCH 110 (1986) 695; BCH 120 (1996) 1174; ARepLondon 1985-86, 3

no. 330 Peloponnese Achaia Patras-12B 60, Votsi St. B I ? Roman 1st-3rd cent. A.D. supra no. 329.

no. 331 Peloponnese Achaia Patras-12C 60, Votsi St. C I ? Roman 1st-3rd cent. A.D. supra no. 329.

no. 332 Peloponnese Achaia Patras-12D 60, Votsi St. D I ? Roman 1st-3rd cent. A.D. supra no. 329.

no. 333 Peloponnese Achaia Pharai Vasiliko Unknown Roman ADelt 44 (1989) 132.

no. 334 Peloponnese Achaia Sihaina A I a Roman ADelt 51 (1996) forthcoming.

no. 335 Peloponnese Achaia Sihaina B I a Roman supra no. 334.

no. 336 Peloponnese Achaia Sihaina C I a Roman supra no. 334.





no. 356 Western Ionian Corfu Anemomylos Unknown Roman BCH 115 (1991) 873.

no. 357 Western Thesprotia Thesprotia Gitani Unknown Roman Leeskey 1980, 45; AEphem 1952, 13-14.

no. 358 Northern Chalkidiki Stratoni A II c 2.50x2.35 Roman ADelt 48 (1993) 347-8.

no. 359 Northern Chalkidiki Stratoni B I ? Roman supra no. 358.

no. 360 Northern Chalkidiki Nea Roda-Tripiti Unknown 3.00x2.00 Roman ADelt 44 (1989) 328; BCH 120 (1996) 1261.

no. 361 Northern Chalkidiki Paliouri-Kassandras A II ? Roman Imperial ADelt 38 (1983) 277; BCH 108 (1984) 803; BCH 114 (1990) 792; Misailidou-Despotidou 199

no. 362 Northern Chalkidiki Paliouri-Kassandras B I ? Roman Imperial supra no. 361.

no. 363 Northern Kilkis Europos II c 2.45x2.35 Roman Late RomanM. Valla , "Keramikov" klivbano" sthn Eurwpov tou nomouv Kilkiv "." AAA 13-18 (1990-1995), 11992." AEMQ 6 (1992) 433-51.

no. 364 Northern Veria Aliakmon II c 4.00x3.75 RomanA. Hondroyianni-Metoki, " Aliavkmwn1997. Stoiceiv a apov thn epifaneiakhv evreuna kai thn an

AEMQ 11 (1997) 31-42, fig. 4.

no. 365 Northern Kozanis Polymylos-2A II c 2.85x2.75 RomanG. Karamitrou-Medessidi and M. Vatali, " Poluvmhlo" Kozavnh" 1998." AEMQ 12 (1998) 48"Poluv mhlo" Kozavnh" 1999." AEMQ 13 (1999) 369-98.

no. 366 Northern Kozanis Polymylos-2B II c 3.40x3.30 Roman supra no. 365.

no. 367 Northern Kozanis Polymylos-2C II c 3.80x3.40 Roman supra no. 365.

no. 368 Northern Pieria Methone I ? Roman ADelt 41 (1986) 142-3; BCH 117 (1993) 845.

no. 369 Northern Thessaloniki Thessaloniki-1 18, K. Palaiologou St. Unknown Roman 3rd cent. A.D. ADelt 38 (1983) 285, fig. 3; BCH 114 (1990) 788.

no. 370 Northern Thessaloniki Nea Philadelpheia II c Roman Misailidou-Despotidou 1998.

no. 371 Aegean Chios Chios-2Ancient City-ChoremiPlot

Unknown Roman 4th cent. A.D. Tsaravopoloulos 1986; BCH 109 (1985) 831; BCH 110 (1986) 732; ARepLondon 1986-87, 53

no. 372 Aegean Chios Chios-3 Christou Plot Unknown Roman 4 th c ent . A. D. B CH 109 (1985) 831; BCH 110 (1986) 732; ARepLondon 1986-87, 53; ARepLondon 1988-8

no. 373 Aegean Chios Chios-4 Spartounda I ? Roman Ciakav Cronikav 17 (1985) 65-73, 76-7; Ciakav Cronikav 18 (1987) 61-7; BCH 113 (1989) 6

no. 374 Aegean Dodekanese Rhodes-1 New Cemetery-1 I ? 2.7 Roman 3 rd c en t. B .C . A De lt 33 (1978) 400.

no. 375 Aegean Dodekanese Rhodes-2 New Cemetery-2 I ? Roman 3rd cent . B.C. supra no. 374.





no. 376 Aegean Dodekanese Rhodes-3 New Cemetery-3 I ? Roman 3rd cent . B.C. supra no. 374.

no. 377 Aegean Dodekanese Rhodes-4 New Cemetery-4 I ? 7 Roman 3rd cent . B.C. supra no. 374.

no. 378 Aegean Dodekanese Rhodes-5 New Cemetery-5 I ? Roman 3 rd c en t. B .C . A De lt 18 (1963) 325.

no. 379 Aegean Crete-Chania Kastelli-1A I ? 1 Roman ADelt 43 (1988) 558-63; Markoulaki 1989.

no. 380 Aegean Crete-Chania Kastelli-1B I ? Roman supra no. 379.

no. 381 Aegean Crete-Chania Kastelli-2 Theodosaki Plot Unknown Roman ADelt 48 (1993) 476.

no. 382 Aegean Crete-Chania Kastelli-3 Berdiou Plot Unknown Roman ADelt 46 (1991) 420-2.

no. 383 Aegean Crete-Chania Topolia Ay Kyr-Yiannis Unknown Roman ADelt 43 (1988) 553; BCH 119 (1995) 1030.

no. 384 Ae ge an C re te -H er ak le io u K at o Ka st el li an a G er ok ol ym po s II b 2.00x1.70 Roman 4th cent. A.D. ADelt 27 (1972) 624, pls. 583 a-b; BCH 101 (1977) 648; ARepLondon 1976-77, 64.

no. 385 Ae ge an C re te -L as it hi ou Istronas-Kalo ChorioMirabellou I a 4 Roman Krhtikav Cronikav 18 (1963) 405; Davaras 1973a, 80, B4; id ., 1973b, figs. 1-2; pls. 62-67; i

no. 386 Attica Attica Athens-30 Areos St. Unknown Late Antique 6th cent. A.D. EY PP O 2 (1998) 74.

no. 387 Attica Attica Athens-31 Makriyianni I ? Late Antique 5-7th cent. A.D. ADelt 39 (1984) 8-10.

no. 388 Attica Attica Skala Oropou-3A I ? 0.6 Late Antique ADelt 43 (1988) 79-81, plan 4; BCH 119 (1995) 860.

no. 389 Attica Attica Skala Oropou-3B I ? 0.6 Late Antique supra no. 388.

no. 390 Peloponnese Achaia Patras-13AKaraiskaki, Ermou andIpsilantou St. A

I ? Late Antique ADelt 31 (1976) 107.

no. 391 Peloponnese Achaia Patras-13BKaraiskaki, Ermou andIpsilantou St. B

I ? Late Antique supra no. 390.

no. 392 Peloponnese Elis Ancient Olympia-5 NW of Palestra II b 3 .0 0x 3. 00 L at e A nt iq ue 6th cent. A.D. Kunze and Schleif 1944, 21-3, figs. 10-11; Cook 1961, 67, J8; Belsché et al. 1963, 10, GT.

no. 393 Peloponnese Laconia Sparta-4 Christou Plot II b Late Antique ADelt 16 (1960) 102, pl. 81d; BCH 85 (1961) 684, fig. 2.

no. 394 Central Phocis Delphi-1 Gymnasium, Xyste II ? 4 .0 0x 2. 00 L at e A nt iq ue 4th cent. A.D. BCH 111 (1987) 611, fig.2; BCH 112 (1988) 723-4 fig. 4; ARepLondon 1986-87, 25, fig. 38

no. 395 Central Phocis Delphi-2 North-Eastern Villa II ? 2 .0 0x 1. 00 L at e A nt iq ue 6th-7th cent. A.D. BCH 117 (1993) 641-4, fig. 23; Petridis 1998.

no. 396 Central Phocis Delphi-3 North-Eastern Villa II ? 1.80+x1.80+ Late Antique 6th-7th cent. A.D. BCH 118 (1994) 423-8, fig. 4H; Petridis 1998.





no. 397 Central Phocis Delphi-4 North-Eastern Villa II ? Late Antique 6th-7th cent. A.D. BCH 121 (1998) 545; Petridis 1998.

no. 398 Central Phocis Delphi-5 North-Eastern Villa II ? Late Antique 6th-7th cent. A.D. supra no. 397.

no. 399 Central Phocis Delphi-6 North-Eastern Villa II ? Late Antique 6th-7th cent. A.D. supra no. 397.

no. 400 Central Phocis Delphi-7 North-Eastern Villa II ? 2 .0 0x 1. 90 L at e A nt iq ue 6th-7th cent. A.D. BCH 121 (1998) 546-7, fig. 10; Petridis 1998.

no. 401 Central Phocis Kirrha-2 Desfina, Seimeni Plot Unknown Late Antique ADelt 38 (1983) 190; BCH 114 (1990) 762.

no. 402 Western Ioannina Kato Vassiliki Keramidario II b 5 .0 0x 3. 90 L at e A nt iq ue Ergon 1988, 48-50; Ergon 1989, 40-3.

no. 403 Aegean Crete-Herakleiou Knossos-5 Venizeleio Hospital II a 2 .0 0x 2. 00 L at e A nt iq ue ADelt 50 (1995) forthcoming.

no. 404 Attica Attica Athens-32 Areopagus-1 II c Byzantine R.S. Young, "An industrial district of ancient Athens." Hesperia 20 (1951) 135-288.

no. 405 Attica Attica Athens-33 Areopagus-2 Unknown Byzantine H.A. Thompson, "Excavation of Athenian Agora 1947." Hesperia 17 (1948) 149-96, fig.6. C

no. 406 Attica Attica Athens-34 Areopagus-3 Unknown Byzantine supra no. 405.

no. 407 Attica Attica Athens-35 Areopagus-4 Unknown Byzantine supra no. 405.

no. 408 Attica Attica Athens-36 Hadrian's Library I a Byzantine ADelt 48 (1993) 12-17; ADelt 49 (1994) 18-20, plan 1; BCH 122 (1998) 718.

no. 409 Attica Attica Athens-37 Roman Agora I ? Byzantine ADelt 13 (1930-31), Appendix, 4-6, figs. 5-6.

no. 410 Peloponnese Achaia Patras-14 39-41 Korai St. I ? Byzantine ADelt 32 (1977) 89.

no. 411 Peloponnese Argolis Argos-96, Diomedous St.-Dimopoulou Plot

Unknown Byzantine ADelt 36 (1981) 113.

no. 412 Pe lop on ne se Cor int hi a Anc ie nt Cor int h- 7 Ago ra N.E. 19 36 I a 2.7 Byzantine Morgan 1942.

no. 413 Pe lop on ne se Cor int hi a An ci en t Co ri nt h- 8 Ago ra S. C. 1 93 6 I a 3 Byzantine supra no. 412.

no. 414 Peloponnese Corinthia Ancient Corinth-9

St. John Theologos

Church I a 5 Byzantine supra no. 412.

no. 415 Peloponnese Messenia Chora Trifyllias I ? 3 Byzantine ADelt 23 (1968) 156; ADelt 24 (1969) 145.





no. 416 Central Boeotia Thebes-2 Fasoulopoulou Plot I e Byzantine ADelt 22 (1967) 239, pl. 168.

no. 417 Central Trikala Trikala 50, Stournara St.-Zacharaki Plot

Unknown Byzantine ADelt 32 (1977) 137.

no. 418 Western Arta AmbrakiaTzabela and Philellinon-Sklivanitis Plot

II ? Byzantine Late Byz-Post Byz. ADelt 39 (1984) 183-4, pl. 74a; BCH 115 (1991) 878.

no. 419 Northern Chalkidiki Veria Neon Syllaton A II c Byzantine 10th century ADT. Pazaras and A. Tsanana, " Anaskafikev " evreune" sth Bev ria N. Sullatwv n." AEMQ 4 (19758.

no. 420 Northern Chalkidiki Veria Neon Syllaton B II c Byzantine 10th century AD supra no. 419.

no. 421 Northern Evros Didymoteicho A 3, Karaiskaki St. I ? Byzantine Bakirtzis 1980.

no. 422 Northern Evros Didymoteicho B 3, Karaiskaki St. I ? Byzantine supra no. 421.

no. 423 Northern Emathias Naoussa Lefkadia II b Byzantine Ergon 1959, 60-6, fig. 63.

no. 424 Northern Pieria Pydna Plot 568 II c Byzantine ADelt 42 (1987) 410-1; M. Besios and A. Chrahtopoulou, " Anaskafhv sto B. Nekrotafeiv o"Anaskafhv ergasthriv ou keramikhv " kai cuv teush" sidhv rou sthn Arcaiv a Puvdna. " in A.B.

N. B. Drandavkh, 1994, 121-31.

no. 425 Aegean Crete-Herakleiou Gortyna Unknown Byzantine ADelt 41 (1986) 225.

no. 426 Aegean Crete-Herakleiou Gortyna I ? Byzantine A. Di Vita, " Il forno bizantino per ceramica dipinta di Gortina (Creta)." in Kerameika Ergaste

no. 427 Attica Attica Athens-38 Dionysiac Theater I ? Undated ADelt 40 (1985) 10.

no. 428 Attica Attica Attica Eleusis Unknown Undated ADelt 15 (1933-35), Appendix 23.

no. 429 Peloponnese Achaia Aigeira-3 II ? Undated W. Alzinger, "Aigeira." AAA 6 (1973) 193-200.

no. 430 Peloponnese Achaia Patras-15A 206, Antheias St. A I ? 1.2 Undated ADelt 43 (1989) 149.

no. 431 Peloponnese Achaia Patras-15B 206, Antheias St. B I ? 1.4 Undated supra no. 430.

no. 432 Peloponnese Achaia Patras-16 90-92, Boukaouri St. I ? Undated supra no. 430.

no. 433 Peloponnese Achaia Patras-17 142, Kanakari St. I ? Undated ADelt 36 (1981) 160.

no. 434 Peloponnese Achaia Patras-18A 217, Kanakari St. A Unknown Undated ADelt 31 (1976) 89; ADelt 31 (1976) 105-6, plan 5.

no. 435 Peloponnese Achaia Patras-18B 217, Kanakari St. B I ? Undated supra no. 434.





no. 436 Peloponnese Achaia Patras-19A184, Kanakari andGounari Sts. A

I a 1.8 Undated ADelt 33 (1978) 87.

no. 437 Peloponnese Achaia Patras-19B 184, Kanakari andGounari Sts. B

II c Undated supra no. 436.

no. 438 Peloponnese Achaia Patras-20 48-52, Kanari St. I ? 1 Undated ADelt 34 (1979) 144.

no. 439 Peloponnese Achaia Patras-21 3-5, Katerinis St. Unknown Undated ADelt 34 (1979) 134.

no. 440 Peloponnese Achaia Patras-22A 100-102, Londou St. A II ? Undated ADelt 31 (1976) 109-11.

no. 441 Peloponnese Achaia Patras-22B 100-102, Londou St. B II ? Undated supra no. 440.

no. 442 Peloponnese Achaia Kleitor Katarrachi II ? Undated ADelt 44 (1989) 137.

no. 443 Peloponnese Achaia Kastritsi Unknown Undated ADelt 47 (1992) 143.

no. 444 Peloponnese Achaia Kato Achaia A Leivada Plot A II c Undated EUPPO 2 (1998) 87, fig. 2.

no. 445 Peloponnese Achaia Kato Achaia B Leivada Plot B II a Undated supra no. 445.

no. 446 Central Boeotia Narthakio Unknown Undated EUPPO 2 (1998) 109.

no. 447 Central Amphissa Amphissa35, Thermopylon, Str,Giatsou Plot

Unknown Undated ADelt 38 (1983) 187.

no. 448 Western Ioannina Vonitsa Katochi II ? 3.30x3.20 Undated ADelt 29 (1973-1974) 536, pl. 358a.

no. 449 Northern Chalkidiki Kassandra-Sarti Platanitsi I ? Undated ADelt 43 (1988) 363.

no. 450 Northern Pieria Pella-7West of the Agora,Kanali

Unknown Undated Ergon 1986, 74-8; ARepLondon 1986-87, 39.

no. 451 Northern Thessaloniki Thessaloniki-2AKoloniari and GalinaSts. A

II ? Undated ADelt 47 (1987) 405-6.

no. 452 Northern Thessaloniki Thessaloniki-2BKoloniari and GalinaSts. B

II ? Undated supra no. 451.

no. 453 Aegean Crete-Chania Agia Marina Unknown Undated ADelt 43 (1988) 570.

no. 454 Aegean Crete-Lasithiou Ierapetra I ? Undated A. Zois, " Anaskafhv Basilikhv " Ieravpetra". " PAE 1991, 331-91, pls. 219 a,b.

no. 455 Aegean Crete-Rethymno Axos I ? Undated ADelt 30 (1975) 348.

no. 456 Aegean Cyclades Delos Palestra II b 2.20x2.20+ Undated Delorme 1961.





no. 457 Aegean Dodekanese Rhodes-5A2, Kennedy andDiagoridon Sts. A

I ? 1 Undated ADelt 29 (1973-74) 957, pl. 723, plan 9.

no. 458 Aegean Dodekanese Rhodes-5B 2, Kennedy andDiagoridon Sts. B

I ? 1 Undated supra no. 457.

no. 459 Aegean Dodekanese Rhodes-6 Archangelos Unknown Undated ARepLondon 1988-89, 115.



APPENDIX II: C ONCORDANCE TO SEIFERT 'S LIST OF K ILNS

_____________________________________________ 429

APPENDIX II: C ONCORDANCE TO SEIFERT ’S (1993)

LIST OF A NCIENT GREEK K ILNS

no. 1: Dimini not considered a kiln in the present study

no. 2: Olynthus not considered a kiln in the present study

no. 3: Achladia (146)

no. 4: Agios Kosmas not considered a kiln in the present study

no. 5: Aigeira (108)no. 6: Asine (109-110)

no. 7: Berbati (111)

no. 8: Chania Seemingly an oven/kiln

no. 9: Cnossus (Knossos) (139-141)

no. 10: Eretria (103)

no. 11: Eutresis not considered a kiln in the present study

no. 12: Festos (142)

no. 13: Kannia (Chania) incorrect reference; the reference providedrefers to Metropoli at Gortyne, Creteno. 14: Kavousi (151)

no. 15: Lerna (96-99)

no. 16: Palaikastro (150)

no. 17: Perachora no evidence for kilns after geomagnetic survey (J.M. Fossey, pers. comm.2000)

no. 18: Pylos (114)

no. 19: Sesklo not considered a kiln in the present study

no. 20: Sparta (101-102)

no. 21: Stylos (126)

no. 22: Thebes (115)

no. 23: Tiryns (112)

no. 24: Tiryns (113)

no. 25: Vathypetro (124)




_____________________________________________ 430

no. 26: Festos not visible -registered

no. 27: Kea not a ceramic kiln (lime kiln)

no. 28: Mallia uncertain identification

no. 29: Mycenae (100) the second "kiln" not considered in the present study

no. 30: Plasi (Phasi) (95)

no. 31: Zou (125) the second "kiln" not considered in the present study

no. 32: Chania no kiln excavated

no. 33: Myrtos no kiln excavated

no. 34: Stavrakia no kiln excavated

no. 35: Turkissa Chondru Viannu no kiln excavated

no. 36: District Turtula no kiln excavated

no. 37: Near Vathypetro no kiln excavated

no. 38: Zominthos no kiln excavated

no. 39: Zygouries no kiln excavated

no. 40: Argos, South District (03)

no. 41: Argos, Square Delta not a ceramic kiln (a cupellation furnace)

no. 42: Ancient Elis no kiln excavated

no. 43: Prinias (31-36)

no. 44: Torone (11)

no. 45: Athens, Agora (01)

no. 46: Athens, Acropolis not a ceramic kiln (a lime kiln)

no. 47: Lato (28-30)

no. 48: Thasos (25-26)

no. 49: Athens, Kerameikos (40-42)

no. 50: Athens, Lenormant Ave. (51-53)

no. 51: Athens, Chambrias Area (43-45)

no. 52: Elis (66) (incorrect reference)

no. 53: Cnossus (Knossos) (92-93)

no. 54: Corinth Corinth not a ceramic kiln (a bath furnace)

no. 55: Corinth (64-65)




_____________________________________________ 431

no. 56: Olympia, Peristyle House V (74)

no. 57: Olympia, Byzantine Church (73)

no. 58: Olympia, South Stoa (67-72)

no. 59: Sindos (86-89)

no. 60: Thermos (Thermon) (75)

no. 61: Ano Potamia Kyme (76)

no. 62: Paximadhi not included

no. 63: Palaiomazi (176) the same as Pyrgaki, Seifert's no. 143

no. 64: Thasos (90)

no. 65: Aigion incorrect referenceno. 66: Amorgos (230)

no. 67: Argos no specific information for a kiln

no. 68: Argos. N. Kourou St. (170)

no. 69: Argos, Paliopyrgos (171)

no. 70: Atalanti (185-186)

no. 71: Athens, Kerameikos (46-49)

no. 72: Athens, Poulopoulou St. (90)

no. 73: Athens, Pallinaion St. (160-161)

no. 74: Cynuria (Kynouria) (63)

no. 75: Kato Panionion not included

no. 76: Krannon (188-189)

no. 77: Lemnos (235-237)

no. 78: Pella (85)

no. 79: Rhodos (Rhodes) (374-378)

no. 80: Samos (14)

no. 81: Samothrace not a kiln (J. MCCredie, pers.comm.)

no. 82: Thasos, Kalonero no kilns excavatedno. 83: Thasos, Gounophia (225)

no. 84: Velestino, Avlagadia (189)

no. 85: Velestino, Pherai (190-192)

no. 86: Patras, Nikita St. (244)




_____________________________________________ 432

no. 87: Troizen incomplete reference

no. 88: Michalitsi no kiln excavated

no. 89: Aigeira (429)

no. 90: Aigeria, Gymnasion (313)

no. 91: Athens, Kerameikos, Pompeion (270)

no. 92: Athens, Kerameikos, Pompeion (271-273)

no. 93: Athens, Kerameikos, Bau Y (260-264)

no. 94: Athens, Plateia Demarchiou(Plateia Kotzia) (278-304)

no. 95: Aulis (247)

no. 96: Chalkis (351)

no. 97: Chios (351)

no. 98: Chios, Spartounda (371-373)

no. 99: Corinth (343)

no. 100: Epitalion (346)

no. 101: Gortys (337)

no. 102: Kalo Chorio (385)

no. 103: Kastelli Chania (379-380)

no. 104: Olympia, Kladeos Bath (74)no. 105: Olympia,

South wall of the Palestra (347)

no. 106: Olympia, West entrance (392)

no. 107: Patras, 60 Votsi (329-332)

no. 108: Patras, 87-89 Patreos St. (327)

no. 109: Patras, 160-162 Gounari St. (319)

no. 110: Athens, Kerameikos incomplete reference

no. 111: Delphi, Xyste (394)

no. 112: Glyphada (301)

no. 113: Kato Kasteliana (384)

no. 114: Pella (214)

no. 115: Chalkis no kiln excavated

no. 116: Athens, Areopagus (404)




_____________________________________________ 433

no. 117: Athens, Agora (405-407)

no. 118: Athens, Kerameikos incomplete reference

no. 119: Didymoteichon (421-422)

no. 120: Megalopolis no kiln excavated

no. 121: Pherai post-Byzantine kiln (outside the limits ofthis study)

no. 122: Thessaloniki incorrect reference

no. 123: Lefkadia (423)

no. 124: Nichoria not included

no. 125: Samothrace not a kiln-pers. comm. with excavator

no. 126: Trikkala (Trikala) (417)

no. 127: Amphipolis (225) )

no. 128: Athens, Kerameikos (158)

no. 129: Dendrochorion unexcavated kiln

no. 130: Gortys (337)

no. 131: Keramidario-Kato Vassiliki (402)

no. 132: Kirra (105)

no. 133: Lesbos unexcavated remains -

no. 134: Olympia incomplete referenceno. 135: Patras, 184 Kanakari St. (436-437) )

no. 136: Patras, Katerinis St. no kiln excavated

no. 137: Pella (450)

no. 138: Philippoi not included

no. 139: Thessaloniki not a ceramic kiln (a metallurgical furnace)

no. 140: Aliartos not included

no. 141: Megara not considered a kiln in this study

no. 142: Paliouri (361-362)

no. 143: Pyrgaki (176) the same as Palaiomazi, Seifert's no. 63

no. 144: Rhodos (Rhodes) (459)



APPENDIXIII: PENTESKOUFIAPLAQUESDEPICTINGKILNS_____________________________________________

434

APPENDIX III: P ENTESKOUFIA PLAQUES DEPICTING K ILNS

Inv. no. Picture (when available) Not in scale

CATALOGUE 1

1. LouvreMNB2856

A. The plaque is completely preserved. Aman is stoking a kiln. The kiln is painted inoutline and its loading door is clearlydepicted.B. Not known.

Cuomo 1988.

2. LouvreMNB2858

A. A man holding up a rod is watching thekiln. Flames are coming out from thechimney and the stoking channel.B. Not known.

Inscription: SODRIS

Rayet 1881; Cuomo 1988.

3. I74 A. Right half preserved. H. 0.08m. Strongfires come out of the kiln.B. Undecorated.

Pernice 1897, 44.

4. I75 A. Total height 0.10m. To the left of the kilna figure is standing.B. Undecorated.

11 In the bibliography, I refer only to the primary publications and illustrations in Antike Denkmäler(abbr. as AD), inFurtwängler 1885, Pernice 1897, Geagan 1970, Zimmer 1982, and Cuomo 1988. n.n. refers to uncatalogufragments in Furtwangler's description. The numbers preceded by F refer to fragments inventoried by Furtwän1885, and the ones preceded by I refer to fragments inventoried by Pernice 1985; The joining fragments are enteaccording to the lowest number, unless the joining has occurred much later and for the sake of easy reference I hkept the higher number first. I first describe the side which bears the kiln scene (side A), then the rear side (sideAt the end of each entry I supply the basic bibliographical references.




435

Pernice 1897, 44.

5. I76 A. The right half of the plaque is preserved.H. 0.108m. To the left the remains of a hookheld by a worker.B. Undecorated.

Pernice 1897, 44.

6. I77 A. Parts of a small kiln are depicted. A manstands on the stoking channel.B. Undecorated.

Pernice 1897, 44.

7. I78 A. Depiction of a kiln.B. Undecorated.

Pernice 1897, 44.

8. I79 A. The leg of a man standing on the stokingchannel is depicted.B. Undecorated.

Pernice 1897, 44.

9. I80 A. A kiln is painted in outline. Parts of amale figure are preserved.B. Undecorated.

Pernice 1897, 44.

10. I 123 A. A kiln with its loading door is depicted.B. Feet and chiton of Poseidon.

Pernice 1897, 45.

11. I 141? A. A large black-glazed surface; possiblyremains of a large kiln.




436

B. The head and arm of a man facing right

are depicted.

Pernice 1897, 46.

12. I 172? A. A kiln?B. The leg of a man and a small bird are

presented.

Pernice 1897, 48.

13. I 179 A. Depiction of a kiln. A man stands on the

stoking channel of the kiln.B. Not known.

Pernice 1897, 48.

14. F414 A. A kiln with its loading door is depicted.B. Poseidon facing right.

Pernice 1897, 14.

15. F482+627+943+n.n

A. Total W. 0.09m. To the right a kiln withits stoking chamber is depicted. Flames arecoming out from the chimney. Further to theleft a man is inspecting the chimney of thekiln with a stick.B. Not known.

Inscription (on side A): KAMINOS

Pernice 1897, 19, 25; Cuomo 1988.

16. F555 A. Pres.Dim. 0.045x0.052m. A kiln is painted in red color. A man is standing on itsstoking channel.B. Front parts of two horses preserved andone person, shown from the back, stands infront of them (this side is illustrate here).

Inscription: LUSIP(P)OS. Under the feet of




437

the horses, ACI ] LEUS.

Furtwängler 1875, 67; Pernice 1897, 24.

17. F607 A. A kiln is depicted; its loading door isclearly shown.B. Not known.

Pernice 1897, 25.

18. F608 A. The plaque is almost complete. Dim.

0.077x0.11m. The kiln is preservedcompletely with its firing chamber andstoking channel facing left. Flames arecoming out of the chimney. A man isstanding on top of the stoking channel with ahooked tool checking the firing. A secondman behind the first seems to be placing fuelinto the stoking channel.B. Undecorated.

Inscription: POTEDAA

AD I.8.1; Furtwängler 1875,70; Zimmer1982; Cuomo 1988.

19. F609+356

A. Same depiction as F608, but without thesecond man to the left. Dim. 0.065x0.095m.The kiln occupies the entire width of the

plaque.B. Undecorated.Inscription: .. NA EIMI

Furtwängler 1885, 70; Geagan 1970.

20. F610 A. Complete plaque. Dim. 0.085x0.09m. Thekiln has no stoking channel, but preserves adistinct chimney. A man, smaller than thekiln, is climbing on the kiln. He seems tohold something in his right hand in front ofthe loading door of the kiln. A slender vase




438

is hanging to the right.

B. Undecorated.

Furtwängler 1885, 71.

21. F611 A. Almost completely preserved plaque.Dim. 0.05x0.07m. A complete kiln, facingright, is depicted; the stoking channel isshown in section. An object (pot?) serves asa chimney (cf. F631, F802). A man isstoking the kiln. Similar in style with

plaques F557, F558.B. Undecorated.

Inscription: FLEBWN M ANEQHKE

AD I.8.26; Furtwängler 1885, 71; Cuomo1988; Lorber 1979, no. 75, pl. 17.

22. F612 A. A youth with a hooked tool in his hand isabout to climb on the stoking channel of thekiln. On the kiln itself there is an inscriptionto Poseidon.B. Undecorated.Inscription: POTEDA


23. F613 A. Lower left corner preserved. In front ofthe large stoking channel of the kiln there arelogs of wood. The left leg of a standing manholding a hooked tool is depicted.B. Undecorated.


24. F614 A. A man is standing on the stoking channelof the kiln with both his hands raised. In hisright hand he is holding a stick. Flames comeout from the chimney. To the left a flying




439

eagle is depicted.

B. Undecorated.


25. F615 A. Lower right corner preserved. A manstands in front of a bell-shaped structure (akiln?). Behind him two rectangular thingsare barely discernible.

B. Undecorated.

AD II.24.19; Furtwängler 1885, 71.

26. F616 A. Lower right corner preserved. A kiln withis stoking channel looking left is depicted inoutline. Flames are coming out both from thechimney and through the stoking channel. Aman rests his left foot on the stoking channelholding a hooked tool to inspect the firedobjects. A crater is depicted behind him,

probably held by a second figure; three linesat the back seem incidental (?).B. Undecorated.

AD I. 8, 12; Furtwängler 1885, 71; Cuomo1988 (wrong illustration for F616).

27. F617 A. The lower part of a man wearing a chitonis standing on top of the stoking chamber ofthe kiln.B. Undecorated.





440

28. F618 A. Upper left corner preserved. Half of thekiln is preserved. The beginning of thestoking channel is shown. Flames arecoming out of the chimney. A man isstanding on top of the stoking channelinspecting the kiln with a tool.B. Undecorated.


29. F619+826

A. Complete plaque. Dim. 0.055x0.75m. Akiln and parts of a man holding a stoking rod

are preserved. A man is placing one of hislegs on top of the stoking channel.B. Amphitrite.Inscription: A] ] NFIT [ RIT ] AS EIMI

Furtwängler 1885, 72, 89; Pernice 1897, 25.

30. F620 A. The lower right corner preserved. A kilnis depicted with flames coming out from thechimney and the stoking channel. To the left,the right arm of a man is shown holding astick.B. Undecorated.


31. F622+n.n

A. The central part of a large kiln withchimney is depicted; flames are coming outof the chimney. Pernice found anotherfragment restoring thus the right half of the

plaque.B. Undecorated.


32. F623 A. A kiln is depicted with flames coming outof the chimney and the stoking channel. ARectangular closed opening is depicted at the




441

upper part of the kiln. No trace of a man

although there is ample space for one.B. Undecorated.


33. F624 A. The upper part of a kiln facing left is preserved; flames are coming out of thechimney. To the left a flying bird is depicted.B. Undecorated.


34. F625 A. Flames are coming out from a kiln; to theleft a flying eagle is depicted.B. Undecorated.


35. F626A. A kiln with its loading door depicted.B. Undecorated.


36. F628+666

A. Part of a kiln is depicted. A man isclimbing on the stoking channel. He wears atall hat, he is holding a rod with his righthand while his left hand is extended.B. Undecorated.Inscription:

ANEQHK ] E POTEIDAN [ I FANAKT ] I


37. F629 A. Part of a kiln; in the free space theinscription is written.B. Undecorated.Inscription: DERIS




442


38. F631 A. A kiln is partially depicted. A pithos (?)serves as a chimney. Flames are coming outthrough the pithos (cf. F611, F802).B. A flying bird?


39. F632+887

A. The lower right corner preserved. A kilnwith stoking channel and a small hole for

observing the progress of the firing. Flamesare coming out from the chimney. The legsof a man are shown climbing on the stokingchannel.B. A man in profile, seated on a stool, istouching his forehead with a finger of hisright hand. The scenes painted on the twosides of the plaque have oppositeorientations.

AD II. 40.21; Furtwängler 1885, 98; Pernice1897, 25.

40. F633 A. Parts of a kiln.B. A flying bird.

Furtwängler 1885, 72-3.

41. F634 A. Parts of a kiln.B. A flying bird.


42. F635 A. Parts of a kiln preserved.B. A flying bird.





443

43. F636 A. Parts of a kiln.B. Two sets of curved parallel lines, with arow of dots in the center between them.

AD II. 40.11; Furtwängler 1885, 72-3.

44. F637+819

A. A kiln is depicted on the right half of the plaque facing left. A man is stoking the kiln;he is holding two stoking rods (is thisevidence for two stoking channels?). He has

placed on of his legs on top of the stokingchannel. Behind him one leg from a second

figure is shown holding something in hishands.B. Poseidon.

AD II.40.9; Pernice 1897, 25.

45. F683+757+822+829

A. The lower right corner preserved; part ofthe firing chamber; an owl standing on thedome of the kiln; in front of it an ithyphallicfigure and to the right as standing man withan underdeveloped right leg.B. Amphitrite (or Zeus) and Poseidon.Inscription: YOKA

LAI AKOFLOKRIS

AD II.39.12; Furtwängler 1885, 76, 78, 89,90; Pernice 1897, 30.

46. F694+524

A. A kiln with its loading door and thestoking channel is depicted. A man with arod stands on the stoking channel.B. The front legs of the horses of a quadrigaare preserved.Inscription: ANEQHKE POTI[ DANIF ] ANA(KTI AUTOPOKIA

Pernice 1897, 22.




444

47. F709+n.n. A. A large kiln is depicted. The firingchamber with its loading door and thestoking channel are clearly indicated.B. The leg of a man.


48. F763 A. A kiln with the loading door is depicted.B. Bull's head with two horns.


49. F785? A. Dim. 0.08x0.06m. A komast (?) stands infront of a double-pyramidal structureresembling the structure on the Robinson'sskyphos (see supra Ch. 1).B. Not known.

AD II.39.9. Furtwängler 1885, 82.

50. F800 A. A large kiln is depicted. In front of thestoking channel a man is standing wearing along chiton and is inspecting the chimney.B. Two horses pulling a wagon. Birds areflying above. Poseidon and Amphitrite musthave been depicted in the lost part of the

plaque .


51. F801 A. A large kiln is depicted; a short manstands in front of the stoking channelwhereas on top of the stoking channel standsa large male figure wearing a long chiton.

The figure, most probably Athena, is holdinga shield with her left and a spear with theright.B. Poseidon and Amphitrite ride a wagon.





445

52. F802 A. Plaque almost completely preserved.Dim. 0.105x0.12m. A kiln with its stokingchannel facing left is depicted. Flames arecoming out from the chimney. A man isclimbing up a ladder holding both a stokingrod and a hooked tool to inspect the firing.Chimney clearly indicated (cf. F611, F631).To the left of the plaque branches of a tree(?) are shown.B. Poseidon.

AD I.8.4. Furtwängler 1885, 85.

53. F803 A. Left upper corner preserved. The top partof a kiln is depicted with flames coming outof it. To the right the right arm of a man is

preserved holding a stoking rod.B. Poseidon holding a trident.Inscription (on side A):POTDAN (POT (EI SAN)

PI


54. F804 A. A man is doing something in front of alarge kiln. Pernice mentions that there is nottrace of the kiln, but there are traces of asecond man who is standing on the stokingchannel of the presumed kiln.B. Poseidon.

Inscription: . . SOPETS


55. F805 A. A man is standing on top of the stokingchannel of the kiln holding a stoking rod inhis right hand. To the right a second man isholding another stoking rod. The figures are




446

rendered on a small scale compared to the

space available.B. Poseidon holding a trident.

Remains of inscriptions.


56. F806 A. The upper part of a blazing kiln is shown.B. Poseidon.


57. F807 A. The upper part of a kiln is preserved.B. Poseidon holding a trident.


58. F808+691

A. A kiln with a man standing in front of it.B. Poseidon holding a trident.


59. F809 A. Parts of a kiln and of a rod are preserved.B. Poseidon holding a trident.


60. F810 A. The head of a man wearing a hat isstoking a kiln. The kiln is facing left; thetorso and the hand of another and the hand ofa third who are holding a pot (?) over thestoker's head are depicted.B. Not known.





447

61. F811 A. A man standing on a stoking channel.Flames are coming out of it; from the left a bearded man with a stoking rod and a youthholding a basin in the right handB. Poseidon holding a trident.Inscription: ARISTOFILOS


62. F812+773

A. A short man is climbing on top of theentrance of the kiln. The fragment 773 showsthe upper part of the kiln.

B. Bottom part of a clad figure (Poseidon?).


63. F814? A. A man with a vase on the potter's wheel;to the right a small kiln (?) and a manstanding in front of it are depicted.B. Poseidon holding a trident.


64. F816 A. Pres.Dim. 0.10x0.07m. To the upper leftcorner of the plaque a flying bird is depicted.The upper part of a man holding a rod in hishand is probably stoking the kiln. Anotherman is standing higher (possibly on thestoking channel of the kiln).B. Poseidon holding a trident.


65. F817? A. A small figure is walking on a ropeholding something perforated (an animal'sskin?) in his hand. In the background aladder lays against a structure (a kiln?).




448

B. Poseidon with trident and dolphin.


66. F827 A. Firing chamber and stoking channelfacing right. A small jug is hung on the kiln.A man is standing on top of the stokingchannel (probably holding the hooked toolfrom the position of his arm); another man is

stoking the fire; or he is closing the stokingchannel with a cover. Only the cover is

preserved. Flames and wood are depicted atthe mouth of the stoking channel.B. Amphitrite.

Inscription: AMFITRITHS EIMI

AD I.8.22; Furtwängler 1885, 89.

67. F830 A. Depiction of a kiln.B. Amphitrite.Inscription: .. LOS and another inscription

. KRA .

Furtwängler 1885, 90; cf F846 (in the styleof the painter Timonidas).

68. F845? A. Parts of a kiln are depicted.B. Upper part of a man.

Inscription: DASO P ] OTE [ DAN





450

72. F866+546

A. The right part of the plaque is preserved.Part of firing chamber of a kiln facing rightand the complete stoking channel aredepicted. Flames are coming out of it. A manholding a stoking rod stands on top of hestoking channel.B. Galloping horse.

AD II.39.13; Furtwängler 1885, 66, 95; Zimmer1982; Cuomo 1988.

73. F867 A. The kiln, facing left, is being inspected bya man without the use of a ladder. Unusualdepiction of the flames coming out from thestoking channel of the kiln.B. Parts of a horse.


74. F878+909

A. Head of a man holding a rod forinspecting the firing from the chimney thekiln. Only the very top of the firing chamberwith the chimney is preserved. Flames arecoming out from the chimney.B. Horseback riders; Bellerophon andPegasos?

AD I.8.21; Furtwängler 1885, 97, 102;Zimmer 1982.




451

75. F881?A. Two men standing in front of a kiln (?)B. Horseback rider.


76. F885? A. A man swings a long staff (for the kiln?)B. A man is sitting in front of a vessel.

AD I.8.14; Furtwängler 1885, 98; Pernice1897, 39.

77. F889 A. The stoking channel of a kiln facing left is partially preserved. The hand of a man whois stoking the fire with a rod is preserved.B. A man with extended both arms (in anabnormal anatomically way) is on top of aheap of material (clay?) The scenes of thetwo sides of the plaque have oppositeorientations.

AD II.39.17 a, b; Furtwängler 1885, 98.

78. F890+n.n.

A. A small figure is bending over thestroking channel of a kiln.B. Poseidon and Amphitrite.


79. F891? A. A man holding a stick in his right handstands in front of a round structure (kiln?).B. Two men are shown and an unusualobject is hung in the middle of the plaque.

AD I.8.6; Furtwängler 1885, 98-9.




452

80. F892 A. A kiln is depicted. Flames are coming outof chimney. A man with a rod is standing ontop of a stoking channel.B. A standing man is digging lumps out froma scarp of stones or clay.

Furtwängler 1885, 99; Pernice 1897, 40, fig.35.

81. F893 A. A vertical section of the interior of a kiln,

showing schematically the vessels inside andthe support of the eschara. A vessel is placedunder the perforated floor. Initial

publications present it as a horizontalsection.B. Lower left corner preserved; a man is

behind an animal bull partially shown

AD I.8.19a, b; Furtwängler 1885, 99.

82. F900? A. Dim. 0.095x0.06m. Two bulls aredepicted. Underneath a kiln (?)B. Men?


83. n.n A. Parts of the firing chamber and thestoking channel facing right are preserved.Over the stoking channel the back half of a

bird is preserved.B. Not known.

AD II.40.17; Pernice 1897, 44, 92.



453

PLATES



454

P l a t e I . 1 :

P e n t e s k o u f i a p l a q u e s d e p i c t i n g k i l n s . P a r t I . ( M N B 2 8 5 6 , F 6 1 6 ) .



455

P l a t e I . 2 :

P e n t e s k o u f i a p l a q u e s d e p i c t i n g k i l n s . P a r t I I ( a n d p o s s i b l y p a i n t e d b y t h e s a m e a r t i s t ) .

( F 6 0 8 , F 6 0 9 ,

F 6 1 8 , F 6 3 7 + 8 1 9 , F 8 6 7 ) .



456

P l a t e I

. 3 :

P e n t e s k o u f i a p l a q u e s d e p i c t i n g k i l n s . P a r t I I I . ( F 6 1 5 , F 6 8 3 + 7 5 7 + 8 2 2 + 8 2 9 , F 8 1 0 , F 8 1 1 , F 8 1 6 ) .



457

P l a t e I . 4 :

P e n t e s k o u f i a p l a q u e s d e p i c t i n g k i l n s . P a r t I V . ( M

N B 2 8 5 8 , F 6 3 2 + 8 8 7 , F 8 4 3 , F 8 6 6 + 5 4 6 , F 9 0 9 ) .



458

Plate I.5: Penteskoufia plaques depicting kilns. Part V. (F482+627+943, F611, F802,F846, F863+877+879, F865).



459

P l a t e 1

. 6 :

P e n t e s k o u f i a p l a q u e s p o s s i b l y p a i n t e d b y t h e s a m e a r t i s t . ( F 6 3 9 , F 7 8 9 , F 8 6 5 , F 8 7 1 , F 8 9 3 ) .



460

–

Plate I.7: Penteskoufia plaques with the same orientation of scenes on both sides.

(F595, F797, F848, F849, F855, F860, F894, F921).



461

Plate I.8: Penteskoufia plaques with sketchy compositions. Part I.(F368, F460, F555, F835, F839, F900).



462

Plate I.9: Penteskoufia plaques with sketchy compositions. Part II.

(F489, F722, F769, F873, F899).



463

P l a t e I . 1 0 :

a . P e n t e s k o u f i a p l a q u e s w i t h k i l n s a n d i n s c r i p t i o n s . ( F 6 0 8 , F 6 1 1 ) ;

b . A n a r y b a l l o s ( a f t e r P a y n e 1 9 3 1 , c a t . n o .

1 4 5 9 ) . a n d a P e n t e s k o u f i a p l a q u e ( F 8 4 8 ) s i g n e d b y T i m o n i d a s .



464

Plate I.11: Representations of kilns. a. Terracotta model from the Potters’ Quarter atancient Corinth (KN 131); b. Hydria attributed to the Leagros Group

(Munich, StaatlicheAntikensammlungen 1717).



465

Plate I.12: Uncertain representations of kilns. a. Black-figure skyphos from the Robinsoncollection in Baltimore, by the Theseus Painter; b-c. Gem engravings (now lost).



466

P l a t e I I . 1

M u l t i - l i n g u a l d i c t i o n a r y o f t h e s t r u c t u r a l p a r t s o f t h e k i l n .



467

Plate II.2: Different methods for firing pottery a. pit firing; b. horizontal kiln firing; c-d. so-called horizontal kilns from ancient Palestine. Scale applies only to d.



468

P l a t e I I . 3 :

a . M a j o r p a r t s o f a k i l n ; b . K i l n a t P e l l a ( 8 5 ) ; c . S c h e m a t i c r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f a k i l n .



469

Plate II.4: Hellenistic kiln at Chalkis ( 349 ). Walls of the combustion chamber lined withCorinthian-style rooftiles.



470

P l a t e I I . 5 :

T h e s t o k i n g c h a n n e l o f t h e k i l n . a . C l a s s i c a l k i l n s a t K e r a m e i k o s , A t h e n s ( 4

0 - 4

2 ) ; b . A r c h a i c k i l n s a t L a t o ( 2 8 - 3 0 ) ;

c . R o m a n k i l n a t P h i l o t a s ( 2

5 0 ) ; d . K i l n w i t h d o u b l e - s t o k i n g c h a n n e l a t K l i r o u o n C y p r u s . S c a l e a p p l i e s o n l y t o a .



471

Plate II.6: Two reconstructions of the Pentekoufia plaque F893.



472

a.

b.

Plate II.7: Ventholes of the perforated floor. a. Fragments of ventholes fromProtoarchaic kilns at Prinias ( 31-36 ) and their restored diameters; b.

Joining fragments of a venthole from Geometric kilns at Lefkandi ( 07-09 ).



473

Plate II.8: Examples of diversity in the arrangement of the ventholes of the perforatedfloors from ceramic kilns in Egypt. a. Burg-el Arab; b. Amphora kiln at Desert Road

Alexandria-Cairo, Km 203.



474

P l a t e I I . 9 : S u p p o r t i n g s y s t e m f o r t h e p e r f o r a t e d f l o o r a t I s t r o n a , C r e t e ( 3 8 5 ) .



475

Plate II.10: Roman Kiln at Gortys, Arcadia ( 337 ) preserving the perforated floor and thesystem of supporting arms.



476

Plate II.11: Supporting arms of the perforated floor. a. Nemea Valley ArchaeologicalProject; b. Berbati, Argos ( 340 ), c. Mitropoli, Karditsa ( 353 ); d. Asomatos, Crete. Scales apply

only to a and b.



477

Plate II.12: Different types of stacking supports. Part I. a-b. From the Athenian Agora ; c.Tripods from ancient Corinth and the Athenian Agora; d-e. Types of supports from Corinth.

Reconstructions A and B of their use inside the kiln.



479

Plate II.14: Experimental use of L-shaped stacking supports at ancient Corinth ( 64-65).



480

Plate II.15: Clay rings from Athenian workshops.



481

P l a t e I I . 1 6 :

a . K i l n s u p p o r t s o r h a n d l e m o l d s f r o m H e l l e n i s t i c w o r k s h o p a t P a r o i k i a , P a r o s ( 2 2 9 - 3

3 4 ) .

b . S t a c k i n g t e c h n i q u e s o f a n c i e n t p o t t e r y . L M I k e r n o s f r o m G o r t y n .



482

P l a t e I I . 1 7 :

T o w e r - s t a c k e d c u p s f r o m t h e c e m e t e r y a t M e r e n d a i n t h e B r a u r o n M u s e u m .



483

P l a t e E x c .

1 :

M o d e l s o f N e o l i t h i c t e r r a c o t t a o v e n s a n d r e c o n s t r u c t i o n s o f t h e i r u s e i n a N e o l i t h i c s e t t l e m e n t ( a ) , b . N e o l i t h i c

m o d e l f r o m P l a t e i a M a g o u l a Z a r k o u i n T r i k a l a ; c . N e o l i t h i c m

o d e l f r o m S i t a g r o i .



484

Plate Exc.2: Experimental reconstruction of a Neolithic hut with an oven in Volos.



485

–

Plate Exc.3: Fifth-century B.C. model of oven from Boeotia (Berlin, Staatliche Museen31644).



487

Plate Exc.5: Comparison of a ceramic kiln and a lime kiln.



488

P l a t e E x c .

6 :

C o e x i s t e n c e o f a c e r a m i c a n d a l i m e k i l n f r o m K o k k i n o v r y s i i n a n c i e n t C o r i n t h ( 3 4 3 ) .



489

P l a t e E x c . 7

:

L i m e k i l n i n

s e c t i o n f r o m K o k k i n o v r y s i a t a n c i e n t C o r i n t h ( 3 4 3 ) .



490

a.

– b.

Plate Exc.8: a. Glass furnaces at Tell el-Amarna, ca. 1400 B.C.; b. Late-Roman glassworkshop in Rome.



492

Plate Exc.10: Metal furnace and casting pit from Kladeos foothills at Olympia.



493

Plate Exc.11: Representations of metallurgical furnaces on Greek vases .



494

Plate Exc.12: Plans, pictures, and reconstructions of a casting pit at Kassope.



495

P l a t e E x c .

1 3 :

V a r i o u s t y p e s o f f u r n a c e s . a . C o i n f o u n d r y a t t h e A g o r a , T h e s s a l o n i k i ; b . W o r k s h o p f o r p r e p a r a t i o n o f c o l o r s o n

C o s



496

P l a t e E x c .

1 4 :

R e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a c o i n f o u n d r y .



497

P l a t e E x c .

1 5 :

S u m m a r y o f c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f p y r o t e c h n o l o g i c a l s t r u c t u r e s .



498

Plate III.1: Cuomo Di Caprio's typology.



499

Plate III.2: Development of pottery-firing structures in Syria and Palestine.



500

Plate III.3: Typology of circular and rectangular tile kilns in Roman France.



501

Plate III.4: Typology of Greek circular kilns.



502

Plate III.5: Kilns with a central wall from ancient Syria and Palestine.



503

Plate III.6: Archaic circular kiln at Prinias with two parallel walls ( 36 ).



504

Plate III.7: Circular kilns with benches ( 10 , 146, 150 ).



505

P l a t e I I I . 8 :

T y p o l o g y o f G r e e k r e c t a n g u l a r k i l n s .



506

Plate III.9: Archaic (?) rectangular kiln at Aigion ( 18).



507

P l a t e I I I . 1 0 :

P l a n s a n

d s e c t i o n s o

f r e c t a n g u

l a r k i l n s a t

O l y m p

i a ( f r o m

l e f t t o r i g h

t 7 3

, 3 4 7

, 3 9 2 ) .



508

Plate III.11: Roman rectangular kilns at Polymylos, Kozanis ( 365-367 ).



509

Plate III.12: Traditional rectangular kilns from Cos (above) and Chios.



510

P l a t e I I I . 1 3 :

T y p o l o g y o f c i r c u l a r a n d r e c t a n g u l a r k i l n s i n a n c i e n t G r e e c e .



511

Plate III.14: Rectangular kilns/ovens from ancient Iran and Mesopotamia.



512

P l a t e I I I . 1 5 :

T y p o l o g y o f G a l l o - R o m a n k i l n s .



513

P l a t e I I I . 1 6 :

C o m p a r i s o n o f G r e e k t y p o l o g y w i t h o t h e r M e d i t e r r a n e a n t y p o l o g i e s .



514

a.

b.

Plate III.17: Ceramic kilns in Magna Graecia. a. Classical kilns at Metaponto; b. Classicalkilns at Naxos.



515

Plate IV.1: Plans and reconstructions of the Neolithic “oven” at Olynthus.



516

Plate IV.2: Early Helladic ovens/kilns. a. Agios Mamas, Chalkidike; b. Polychrono,Chalkidike ( 94 ). The north arrow applies only to b.



517

P l a t e I V

. 3 :

M i d d l e H e l l a d i c k i l n s : L e r n a ( 9

6 ) , S p a r t a ( 1 0 1 - 1

0 3 ) , K i r r h a ( 1 0 4 - 1 0 6 ) . T h e s c a l e a p p l i e s o n l y t o t h e p l a n s .



518

Plate IV.4: Middle Helladic kiln from Eretria ( 103 ).



519

P l a t e I V

. 5 :

K i l n s i t e s o n C r e t e ( w i t h t h e a d d i t i o n o f t h e l a t e r p r o d u c t i o n c e n t e r , T h r a p s a n o ) .



520

Plate IV.6: a. Late Minoan IB channel kiln at Kommos ( 145 );b. Reconstruction of the Late Minoan IB channel kiln at Kommos ( 145 ).

a.

b.



521

Plate IV.7: Plans and sections of the Late Minoan IB kiln at Agia Triadha ( 143 ).



522

P l a t e I V

. 8 :

R e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f r e c t a n g u l a r k i l n a t A g i a T r i a d h a ( 1 4 3 ) f i r i n g p i t h o i .



523

Plate IV.9: Late Minoan IIIA Potters' Quarter at Gouves, Herakleion.



524

Plate IV.10: Reconstruction of kiln IV at Gouves, Herakleion.



525

Plate IV.11: Metallurgical furnace/pottery kiln at Zakros, Crete ( 123 ).



526

P l a t e I V

. 1 2 :

L a t e M i n o a n I I I B c h a n n e l k i l n s f r o m K n o s s o s ( 1

3 9 - 1

4 1 ) .



527

P l a t e I V

. 1 3 :

S i z e s o f P r e h i s t o r i c k i l n s ( a l l i n t h e s a m e s c a l e ) . a . A g i a T r i a d h a ( 1

4 3 ) ; b . D i m i n i ( 1 1 6 ) ; c . A c h l a d i a (

1 4 8 ) .



528

P l a t e I V

. 1 4 :

L a t e M i n o a n I I I B c i r c u l a r k i l n a t K a v o u s i , C r e t e ( 1 5 1 ) .



530

P l a t e I V

. 1 6 :

C e r a m i c w o r k s h o p a t K i r r h a , D e l p h i ( 1 0 4 - 1

0 6 ) .



531

Plate IV.17: Distribution of Prehistoric kilns.



532

Plate V.1: Plans of Geometric kilns (all in the same scale). Amorgos ( 13), Athens ( 01 ),Dodona ( 10 ), Phaistos ( 12 ), Torone ( 11 ).



533

Plate V.2: Distribution of Geometric kilns.



534

Plate V.3: Perforated floor of Geometric kiln at Kyme on Euboea ( 05).



535

Plate V.4: Plans of Archaic kilns. Aigion ( 18), Knossos ( 27 ), Lato ( 28-30 ), Phari ( 25-26 ),Prinias ( 31-36 ).



536

Plate V.5: Distribution of Archaic kilns.



537

Plate V.6: Selection of Classical kilns (all in the same scale).



538

Plate V.7: Distribution of Classical kilns.



539

P l a t e V

. 8 :

G e n e r a l p l a n o f t h e s a n c t u a r y o f Z e u s a t N e m e a ( 6 0 - 6 2

) i n d i c a t i n g a r e a o f t h e k i l n s



540

P l a t e V

. 9 :

T h e s a n c t u a r y o f Z e u s a t N e m e a . P l a n o f t h e k i l n s a r e a i n r e l a t i o n s h i p t o t h e X e n o n a n d t h e B a s i l i c a .



541

Plate V.10: Rectangular kiln at the sanctuary of Zeus at Nemea ( 60) .



542

Plate V.11: Distribution of Hellenistic kilns. Sites in italics and triangles are dated asHellenistic-Roman.



543

P l a t e V

. 1 2 :

H e l l e n i s t i c w o r k s h o p a t P e l l a ( 2 1 8 - 2

2 3 )



544

Plate V.13: Distribution of Roman kilns. Sites in italics and triangles are dated asHellenistic-Roman.



545

P l a t e V

. 1 4 :

A t h e n s , K o t z i a S q u a r e . L a t e R o m a n

w o r k s h o p s a r e a ( 2 7 4 - 3

0 0 ) . ( K i l n s i n d i c a t e d w i t h r e d , b a s i n s w i t h b l u e c o l o r )



546

Plate V.15: Rectangular Roman kilns at Kerameikos (Bau Y) ( 260-269 ).



547

Plate V.16: Distribution of Late Antique kilns.



548

Plate V.17: Distribution of Byzantine kilns.



549

Plate V.18: Byzantine kilns at ancient Corinth.



550

P l a t e V

. 1 9 :

B y z a n t i n e k i l n s a t a n c i e n t C o r i n t h (

4 1 2 - 4

1 3 ) .



551

Plate VI.1: The Protoarchaic ceramic workshop at Prinias, Crete ( 31-36 ).



552

Plate VI.2 Site plan of the Tile Works, ancient Corinth ( 64-65 ).



553

Plate VI.3: Section plans of the East kiln at the Tile Works, ancient Corinth ( 64-65 ).



554

P l a t e V I . 4 :

T h e E a s t k i l n a t t h e T i l e W o r k s , a n c i e n t C o r i n t h ( 6 5 ) .



555

Plate VI.5: a. Orlandos' reconstruction of the superstructure of the East kiln at the TileWorks at ancient Corinth ( 65); b. New reconstruction of the East kiln at the Tile Works at

ancient Corinth ( 65); c. Modern abandoned tile kiln (1968) at ancient Elis.



556

P l a t e V I . 6 :

E s t i m a t i o n s o f t i m e r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r t h e E a s t k i l n a t t h e T i l e W o r k s t o f i r e r o o f s o f b u i l d i n g s o f v a r i o u s s i z e s .



557

P l a t e V I . 7 :

W o r k s h o p s w i t h r e c t a n g u l a r k i l n s i n a n c i e n t C o r i n t h . A . T

i l e W o r k s ( 6 4 - 6

5 ) , B . W e s t T i l e W o r k s ( 3 4

4 ) , C .

K o k k i n o v r y s i ( 3

4 3 ) .



558

a.

b.

Plate VI.8: a. Plan of the Olympia Sanctuary with locations of kilns indicated; b. Detailed plan ofencircled area in plan a.



559

Plate VI.9: The Protoarchaic ceramic workshop at Prinias ( 31-36 ).



560

Plate VI.10 : Geometric (?) kiln and clay pits on Samos ( 14 ).



561

Plate VI.11: Archaic ceramic workshop at Phari, Thasos ( 25-26 ).



562

P l a t e V I . 1 2 :

C l a s s i c a l c e r a m i c w o r k s h o p a t L e n o r m a n t A v e . i n

A t h e n s ( 5 1 - 5

3 ) .



563

Plate VI.13: Kerameikos at Figaretto, Corfu operating from Archaic to Hellenistic times(197-209 ).



564