1
An Orientalising and Related Bird Bowls
Recently Excavated at the Athenaion at Francavilla Marittima1
by SØREN HANDBERG and JAN KINDBERG JACOBSEN
Figures catalogue
List of abbreviations
The current article deals with a number of
The Athenaion on the Acropolis of the
fragmentary bird bowls deriving from several
Timpone della Motta
votive layers situated against the S/SE wall
Today a total of five buildings are known to
foundations of Temples Vc and Vd of the
have been erected on the summit of the hill
Athenaion on the Acropolis of the Timpone
Timpone della Motta. In the 1960s the first
della Motta at Francavilla Marittima. In total
three buildings (building I-III) were excavated
seventy-eight fragments dating to the period
under supervision of the Dutch archaeologist
from the last quarter of the 8th century BC to
Maria W. Stoop, who dated the buildings to
the end of the 7th century BC can be
the late 6th/early 5th centuries BC. The three
identified.
many fitting
buildings had wall foundations built of
together, belong to two groups, the so-called
rounded riverbed cobbles and conglomerate
bird kotylai and the Sub-Geometric bird
blocks.2 A different interpretation of the three
bowls. Almost all contexts in this area had
structures was published by the German
previously been disturbed by clandestine
scholars
digging, which resulted in finds of fragments
Schläger.3 Mertens and Schläger interpreted
belonging to the same bowl in as many as six
the structural remains of building I-III as
different excavation contexts, some quite far
belonging to two successive building phases,
apart. The clandestine excavations of the
recognising postholes carved out in the
1970s also account for the fragmentary state
conglomerate bedrock as evidence for a
of many of the vessels found on the
building phase prior to the wall foundations.
Acropolis. In this article a chronological
Based on the excavated material Mertens and
sequence of the bird bowls will be presented
Schläger dated the posthole buildings to the
and related to the stratigraphical setting in
7th century BC and the buildings with the
which they were found. Also, an evaluation of
wall foundations to the 6th century BC. A
the possible meaning and function of the bird
fourth building was excavated at the northern
bowls in relation to cult rituals once practised
part of the Timpone della Motta in the 1980s
in Temples Vc and Vd will be offered.
under the supervision of the Soprintendenza
The
fragments,
Dieter
Mertens
and
Helmut
2
Archeologica della Calabria. Our knowledge
of the structure is limited since the results of
the excavation are yet to be published. Sadly,
a common feature of the four buildings is that
only limited stratigraphical information was
obtained during excavation, leaving behind a
substantial gab in the understanding of the
development of the sanctuary. However, in
Fig. 1. Fragment of Late Geometric bird kotyle
(drawing: Helle B. Thusing).
recent years excavations have been conducted
building Vb. Temple Vc was rectangular and
at the site by a Dutch excavation team from
shows obvious similarities with Greek temple
the University of Groningen under the
plans by the presence of an eastern pronaos
supervision of Prof. Dr. Marianne Kleibrink.
and a western adyton. The dating indications
These excavations have revealed remains of a
for the construction of Temple Vc derive
fifth building with five chronologically
mainly from finds in the lowest stratum in the
succeeding phases, erected at the same spot
postholes, among which were fibulae of the a
on the southern edge of the Acropolis. The
staffa lunga and a drago types and local matt-
buildings
as
painted pottery. Inside the temple sherds of
Building/Temple Va, Vb, Vc, Vd, and Ve.
the Thapsos class excavated just above the
The bird bowls examined in this article relate
conglomerate bedrock also support this
to Temples Vc and Vd. These two temple
foundation date. However, the majority of the
are
usually
referred
buildings are described briefly.
Temple
Vc.
This
to
4
material relating to Temple Vc was found in
temple
was
layers just S/SE of the postholes, where it
constructed in the last quarter of the 8th
appears to have been placed against the outer
century BC replacing an earlier Iron Age
wall of the building. The bird bowl sherd
timber dwelling (Vb), which showed clear
described in cat. no. 1 is related to this
traces of ritual use attested by a hearth with
building, whereas the remaining bird bowl
dedicated bronze objects and a standing loom
sherds are related to the subsequent Temple
5
of monumental size. Temple Vc measured
Vd.
ca. 22 x 7.20 m. and was constructed with the
Temple Vd. Just before the middle of
use of a native building technique, in which
the 7th century BC a new building was
wooden posts were placed in large postholes,
erected at the site of the former Temple Vc.
carved out in the conglomerate, a technique
The postholes in the conglomerate bedrock
that had already been used for the previous
were dismantled and filled with a stratum of
3
yellowish soil, the same soil was used to level
few sherds belonging to the phase of Temple
the area and subsequently served as the floor
Vd were recorded, indicating that some
of the new temple. The walls of this temple
disturbance of the votive layers occurred
probably consisted of mud bricks placed on a
when Temple Vc was replaced by Building
stone foundation, which was constructed in
Vd.
foundation trenches, carved out in the
The Greek as well as the native pottery from
conglomerate bedrock. Once again the best
the S/SE votive deposit consists mainly of
chronological indications for this Temple
drinking cups and pouring jugs. Overall, the
were obtained from the postholes; from the
Greek pottery in these layers accounts only
yellow stratum in and around the postholes a
for less than 5 percent of the finds but since it
large number of dedicated objects were
provides the best dating tool we will focus on
excavated. The dedications, in particular finds
it.
of Protocorinthian pottery, suggest that the
The Greek pottery from the votive
temple was erected around 660/650 BC.6 As
layer relating to Temple Vc consists mainly of
had already been the case in the previous
sherds of drinking cups, belonging to the
Temple Vc, the majority of the archaeological
Thapsos and pseudo-Thapsos groups, dating
material relating to this temple was found in
to the last quarter of the 8th century BC.
deposits of votive material located S/SE of
Dating to the same period are fragments of
Building Vd.
East
Greek
Late
Geometric
oinochoai,
globular pyxides of the Thapsos class, sherds
The stratigraphy of the S/SE deposits of votive
of Late Geometric II Corinthian kyathoi and
material
sherds from black glazed kantharoi probably
The S/SE layers of votive material were found
imported from Achaia (NW Peloponnesos)
in the excavation pits AC13, AC16/16A,
dating to the late 8th/early 7th century BC.7
AC17/17A,
and
Also belonging to this context are sherds of
AC23/23A. Due to extensive clandestine
early Protocorinthian kotylai and the bird
digging much of the original stratigraphy was
kotyle sherd described in cat. no. 1. The
destroyed, only in AC16/16A had an upper
overwhelming majority of jug and cup shapes
compact layer of soil protected the lower
among the pottery deposited near Temple Vc
layers. A deposit layer of votive material
point towards the dedication pattern that
related to Temple Vc was found in AC16A-
became dominant in the subsequent Temple
context 26 and 29. Though these contexts had
Vd where miniature water jugs (hydriskai)
not been disturbed by clandestine digging, a
and cups were dedicated in large numbers
AC21,
AC22/22A
4
together with lesser amounts of aryballoi and
painted
and
impasto
pottery
of
local
pyxides.
manufacture dated exclusively to the 8th
century BC. No 7th century BC material was
found at all in context 13.
The lower votive layer (AC16Acontext 18, AC16-context 20 and AC17Acontext 16) again contained extensive groups
of pottery vessels - often complete, but also
sherds of local and Greek origin. The sherds
from the bird bowls described in cat. nos. 4, 8,
Fig. 2. Fragments of a bird bowl, ca. 650 BC
(drawing: Helle B. Thusing).
9 and 15 were excavated from this lower
The votive material relating to Temple
Vd
was
obtained
from
two
vertically
separated layers: the upper votive layer
(AC16A-context 9) was 2-3 cm. thick, and the
lower votive layer (AC16A-context 18,
AC16-context 20 and AC17A-context 16) had
a thickness of ca. 10 cm. In the upper votive
layer a large number of sherds of local and
Greek origin were excavated along with
sporadic finds of bronze jewellery, bone and
amber beads and a number of terracotta
statuettes. The majority of Greek pottery
consists
of
Corinthian
imports,
dating
between ca. 660-610 BC. Likewise a smaller
number of sherds of East Greek origin were
recorded e.g. sherds belonging to the bird
bowls described in cat. nos. 3, 5 and 15.
A fill layer (AC16A-context 13)
consisting of ca. 30 cm of strong brown loose
soil forms a clear stratigraphical separation
between these upper and lower layers of
votive material. This soil contained matt-
layer. Frequent finds of bronze jewellery,
bone and amber beads, faience objects and a
number of terracotta statuettes also occurred
in this layer. Once again the majority of the
pottery dates between 660 and 610 BC with,
as mentioned above, only few sherds of
earlier date (ca. 680-660 BC) and sporadic
finds of late 8th century Greek pottery,
notably of the Thapsos class, along with Late
Geometric East Greek pottery, which fit in
with phase Vc of the Late Geometric II timber
temple.
The general interpretation of these 7th
century BC deposit layers is that the objects
(many almost complete) in the lower votive
layer were not found in any clear pattern, nor
did they appear to have been grouped or
sorted in any special way. In addition vessels
were often found upside down. All this seems
to indicate that the objects were not in the
position of meaningful primary deposits but
had been placed, secondarily, south of
5
Temple Vd, probably after having originally
correspondence in date between the materials
been used inside the temple or near an altar.
excavated in these two layers. It therefore
The
morphological
seems likely that both contexts were the result
the
material
of the closing of Temple Vd. Subsequently, in
excavated inside and outside Temple Vd
the decades just after 600 BC the entire area
suggests that towards the end of the 7th/
was covered by a layer of gravel several
beginning of the 6th century BC when the
meters thick.
chronological
correspondence
and
between
temple was levelled, the accumulation of
objects ceased. At that time the lower votive
The bird bowls
layer must have been sealed off by the thick
The bird bowls are a group of East Greek
layer of brown soil that, because of the
cups, sometimes also referred to as bird
complete absence of 7th century material in it,
skyphoi,
must have derived from elsewhere in the
Basically there are two types: the regular and
sanctuary.
the Orientalising type. The common feature is
In the upper votive layer quite a
different
pattern
appears:
a
thin
named
after
their
decoration.
the division of the upper part of the bowl into
but
metopal panels, the central one usually
continuous layer of fragments was excavated
carrying a representation of a bird, usually
here, but no vessels were found intact as in
with a crosshatched body. The Orientalising
the lower contexts. The fact that fragments
type has a far more elaborate decoration with
found in a wide area (squares AC10-AC23)
meander
can be reconstructed into almost complete
ornaments. The lower part of the body is in
vessels once again indicates that the upper
general either dark or carries rays.8 Of the
layer material was not found in its original
seventy-eight sherds recently excavated at
position. Moreover, a few sherds have
Francavilla Marittima fifteen different bowls
successfully been joined across the upper and
of varying quality could be reconstructed.
lower layers, suggesting that they were
deposited not long after one another with the
fill of brown soil in between. This observation
is
further
supported
by
the
close
trees
and
Orientalising
filling
6
Fig. 3. Fragment of a bird bowl, ca. 650 BC (drawing: Helle B. Thusing).
Thirteen of these bowls are of the regular
Marittima suggests that it is an imitation.
type, one is probably an imitation of the
However, whether it was made locally or
regular type and another is an extraordinary
imported from Populonia is not yet clear. It
specimen of the Orientalising type.9 The
still remains uncertain where the major
individual
production centre of the bird bowls was
bowls
are
described
in
the
catalogue at the end of the article.
situated, but trace element analysis suggests a
place of origin in the North Ionian area,
The origins and distribution
possibly around Clazomenae or Teos and in
The place of origin of the bird bowls has been
the case of the Orientalising bowls possibly at
discussed for a long time and the question has
Miletus.12 In Southern Italy and Sicily bird
still not been answered satisfactorily. At first
bowls have been found at e.g. Gela, Syracuse,
they were all thought to be of Rhodian origin
Megara Hyblaea, Siris, Malta and Sybaris,13
because they were most numerous on this
but the high amount of bowls at Francavilla is
island and because some of the best pieces
noteworthy. In fact it seems that no other
were found there. This view has now been
single votive deposit in Magna Graecia has
entirely abandoned. Locally produced bowls
produced the same amount of similar bowls as
have been identified at Chios, in Sparta,
Francavilla. The Orientalising type of bird
Ephesos, Gela10 and now probably also at
bowl is the most elaborately decorated of the
Francavilla (cat. no. 14). This new bowl has
bird bowls and they have not been found in
zigzags in the lateral metopal fields instead of
the same quantity as the regular bird bowls.
the usual crosshatched lozenge, which is not
They may not have been as extensively
very common and found only at two other
exported as the regular type, at least not as
sites,
Populonia
and
Rhodes.11
The
many of them have yet been found and they
craftsmanship on the bowl from Francavilla
seem to be centred around Miletus and the
7
eastern Mediterranean.14 The Orientalising
of the century the lower outline of the bird’s
bowl from Francavilla seems to be the only
body continues as a straight line to form the
one of its type found in Magna Graecia.
tip of the tail, which is the case on the bowls
from Francavilla Marittima. This makes a
Typology of the bird bowls from the Timpone
date around the middle of the century more
Della Motta
likely. The bowls with void rays on the lower
The sequence of the decorative scheme on the
part of the body (cat. nos. 7-13), should all be
bird bowls has been fairly well established
placed some time after 650 BC17 and before
and divided into five stages (Coldstream’s
the final phase of development, where the
bird-kotyle workshop and Sub-Geometric
birds loose their stand line, i.e. somewhere
groups I-IV) beginning at the end of the 8th
between 650 and 615 BC (Coldstream’s
century
and
group III). Another feature supporting this
continuing until ca. 600 BC after which the
date is the elongated central panels, which
bird disappears as a motive, but the form of
expand during the 7th century BC. This is
the vessel continues.15 The development of
best seen on the almost complete bowl (cat.
the
becomes
no. 7). The imitation (cat. no. 14) should be
progressively more mannered.16 Regarding
dated some time after 650 BC, possibly even
the dates of the bowls presented here the bird
as late as the last quarter of the century. This
kotyle (cat. no. 1), should, as it belongs to the
bowl has zigzags in the lateral metopal fields
bird-kotyle workshop, be dated to the period
instead of the usual crosshatched lozenge,
720-690 BC. The bowls with dark paint and a
which is quite uncommon and found only at
reserved band on their lower part (cat. nos. 2-
two other sites, Populonia and Rhodos.18 The
6) are traditionally recognized as earlier than
craftsmanship on the bowl from Francavilla
those with rays and should be placed before
suggests that it is a local imitation. However,
650 BC but after the earlier type that only has
whether it was made locally or imported from
a band usually with dots or stripes below the
Populonia is not clear. The Orientalising bird
panels, i.e. between 675 and 650 BC
bowl (cat. no. 15) is more difficult to date,
(Coldstream’s group II). The manner of
mainly because there seems to be no direct
drawing, especially the rendering of the tail of
parallels for the one found at Francavilla. The
the bird, would suggest a date towards 650
rays again imply a date after 650 BC and a
BC. Earlier in this stage the body of bird is
stylistic comparison with the Wild Goat Style
more drop-shaped, later on, before the middle
pottery would suggest a date somewhere in
BC
with
decoration
the
bird-kotyle
generally
8
the third quarter of the 7th century BC (see
completely black, sometimes with a reserved
below).
tondo or band or white lines on a black
The fact that the majority of the vessels were
background. The meander tree ornament is
broken at the time they were deposited means
also seen on other earlier vessels from the
that the sherds were scattered over a large
Late and Sub-Geometric periods, especially
area. Therefore not all the sherds were found
on the bird-oinochoai and the bird kotylai.
in the undisturbed layers. Sherds from the
The meander tree on the Orientalising bird
bird bowls cat. nos. 1, 4, 8 and 9 were found
bowls may be seen as a revival of this earlier
in the lower votive layer and sherds from cat.
type of decoration and it also seems likely
nos. 3, 5 and 15 were found in the upper
that it was inspired by the tapestry-like
votive layer both relating to Temple Vd. The
decoration of the Wild Goat Style that
presence of bird bowls with bands in both the
emerged around the middle of the 7th century
upper and the lower layers suggests, together
in the same area.19 This inspiration from the
with other material, that the two layers are
Wild Goat Style pottery is further implied by
chronologically contemporary.
a fine Orientalising bird bowl from Vroulia20
where the corners of the central field, carrying
The Orientalising bowl
To
the
best
of
the bird, are decorated with quarter circles
our
knowledge
the
identical to the roundels of the middle Wild
Orientalising bird bowl from Francavilla
Goat Style, which also appears in the central
Marittima cat. no. 15 is unique in its form and
field on the one from Francavilla.21 This
decoration. It will therefore be treated
would place the bowl from Francavilla
separately. The form of the body is much
somewhere in the period 640-625 BC. An
more shallow than the regular bird bowls,
important question raised by the date of the
although in general they also tend to become
Orientalising bowls is that of the vessel shape.
more shallow during the 7th century BC. The
The shape of the Vroulia bowl is that of the
decoration is exquisite with the chain- and
earlier type of bird bowls, the bird kotyle,
double saw ornaments, as well as the finely
with the characteristic nicked rim, which is
drawn filling ornaments and the tongues
believed
where the handles join the body. The flower
Protocorinthian
phase.
tondo with the chain ornament on the interior
appearance
the
of the bowl has never before been observed
ornament would have occurred before the
on a bird bowl; the common decoration being
proper Wild Goat Style or the hemispherical
not
of
to
outlive
So
Wild
the
Early
either
Goat
the
roundel
9
kotyle shape should be allowed to continue
significant role in the cult practice. The
into the Wild Goat Style, which seems most
function of the bird bowls therefore seems to
likely. In case these two Orientalising bird
be firmly linked to the general function of the
bowls are contemporary the difference in
drinking vessels found in the S/SE deposits.
shape is noteworthy. The Orientalising bird
The key question is how to interpret the
bowl from Francavilla could be regarded as
presence of these vast amounts of drinking
the finest bird bowl that has come to light so
vessels (bird bowls included) and locally
far, another possible candidate being the
produced hydriskai. The main issue being
previously mentioned bowl from Vroulia now
whether these vessels should be interpreted as
in the British Museum.22
actual ex-votos dedicated to the goddess for
their own sake or maybe more precisely for
The function of the bird bowls from the
the sake of their content or whether the
Timpone della Motta
drinking vessels and hydriskai should be
As noted earlier the Timpone della Motta has
interpreted as a reflection of a ritual in which
produced one of the highest number of bird
the dedicators participate, such as communal
bowls from any single context from Magna
dining and drinking. Concerning the pottery
Graecia. Thus it would be tempting to
associated with Temple Vd, it seems likely
suppose that these bird-decorated drinking
that the possibility of ritual dining can be
vessels had a special meaning in the cult
ruled out, since no cooking vessels nor plates,
practised in the sanctuary. However, in order
which are normally considered an indication
to assess the possible special significance of
for such activities, have been found.23 Thus it
the bird bowls, one has to take into account
appears that the pottery reflects a drinking
the total amount and variation of pottery
ritual. As described above the objects from
excavated from the successive Temples Vc
the S/SE deposits were not found in their
and Vd and in the S/SE deposits. When
original place of deposition, which makes it
viewed in this overall perspective the bird
difficult to determine the combinations in
bowls only account for a small fraction of the
which they were used or dedicated. The find
total amount of pottery. In comparison, more
contexts from the interior and partly from the
than 3000 fragments of Protocorinthian
immediate exterior of Temple Vd on the other
kotylai and skyphoi were found in the S/SE
hand bring some valuable information on the
deposits, which effectively rules out that the
nature of this drinking ritual. Inside Temple
bird bowl itself should have played any
Vd isolated assemblages containing a couple
10
of drinking cups and hydriai together with a
normally
function
as
water
containers
few aryballoi and pyxides were often found
indicates that the adorants were offering the
on the yellow temple floor, indicating that
goddess Athena a drink of water. As we have
they had been placed there as an intentional
recently argued,27 the only literary link
set.24 Similar assemblages were occasionally
between Athena and water seems to occur in
found outside the walls of the building (not to
the legend of Epeios, who received help from
be confused with the S/SE deposits). Among
Athena because among heroes he was
those was the bird bowl cat. no. 7, which was
regarded as a kind of underdog with the duty
found together with a hydriskos. The cups and
to carry water to the heroes of the house of
hydriskai in these assemblages rather point
Atreus.28 According to literary sources,
towards an interpretation as votive sets
Epeios was the maker of the Trojan horse.
dedicated to the goddess (or her statue) rather
Strabo informs us that after the Trojan War
than remains of adorants engaged in ritual
Epeios founded the city of Lagaria and
drinking.25 In the Greek cultural sphere the
dedicated his tools in a famous Athena
hydria is normally associated with water
sanctuary nearby.29 Through time the city of
(drinking?) and in fact only very little
Lagaria has been placed by scholars at a
evidence for wine drinking is present at the
number of different locations among those
Timpone della Motta, since only very few
Metapontion and Amendolara, these places,
fragments of craters have been recovered. The
however, are missing a vital element in favour
vast amounts of drinking vessels and hydriai
of such an identification: That of an early
found in the sanctuary throughout the years
Athena sanctuary! In the light of the presence
indicate that the dedication of these sets had a
of a well-attested sanctuary at the Motta
central position in the cult practise. Support
dedicated to Athena, it seems more probable
for this interpretation derives from a locally
to attest a possible identification of Lagaria to
produced pyxis dated around 700 BC which in
this place than to any other. The vast amounts
all probability came from the S/SE deposits.26
of dedicated hydriai and drinking vessels,
The central scene on the pyxis depicts a
among those also the bird bowls, reflect, as
procession of female adorants approaching an
mentioned above, the most central dedication
enthroned goddess. The leading adorant is
ritual practised in the sanctuary in the 7th
offering the goddess a drinking cup with one
century BC. The ritual of offering water to
hand, while holding a jug in the other. The
Athena, as depicted on the Ticino pyxis, is, at
fact that the dedicated pouring vessels
the same time, related to both Athena and
11
Epeios. The adorants carrying water to the
chronology of the bird bowls is the fact that
sanctuary could, as a reflection of the legend
the only group missing is Coldstream’s I
of Epeios, have regarded themselves as
group, which he dated to 690-675 BC. This
hydrophoroi having the duty of carrying
absence corresponds well with the general
water to the heroes, and in the act on doing
chronological sequence of the Greek pottery
so, hoping to receive the same favours from
found both inside Temples Vc/Vd and in the
Athena as Epeios did.
S/SE deposits, where a clear lack of pottery
from this period is evident. The bird kotylai
Conclusion
together with at least three Late Geometric
In addition to the bird bowls published here,
bird oinochoai are the earliest imports from
other sherds were found by Maria W. Stoop
the East Greek area, and it seems plausible
during the campaigns 1963-1969 in the area
that they were imported as sets consisting of a
of Building III, belonging to either one or
kotyle and an oinochoai, which probably
possibly two bird kotylai.30 In total at least
came via Sybaris, where similar bird bowls
sixteen bird bowls have so far been published
and bird oinochoai have been found.31 The
from the Acropolis at Francavilla Marittima.
Orientalising bird bowl is clearly the vessel in
As mentioned before, this high number does
this group that draws the most attention, not
not reflect a special relation of the bird bowl
only because of its artistic expression, but
with the sanctuary, but is rather the result of a
also because of the fact that it is the only one
dedication ritual that was focused on offering
found in Magna Graecia. Perhaps this bowl
sets of hydriskai and drinking vessels. The
accompanied one of the few contemporary
result was that over the years a huge amount
Wild Goat oinochoai, which are also present
of these vessels accumulated at the site. The
at Francavilla Marittima
striking phenomenon in respect to the
12
CATALOGUE 32
The only preserved decoration consists of the
No. 1 (Fig. 1): One rim fragment of a bird
lower part of one bird, one foot of another and
kotyle, FMAC 16-20/303.
a small part of the dark paint with a broad
The upper part of the fragment has the
reserved band on the lower part. The
characteristic inset rim. The decoration
distinctive feature here is the fact that only
consists of two panels framed on all sides by
one line is used as division between the upper
two lines. The left panel contains a
and lower part of the bowl and between the
crosshatched lozenge, the right panel has a
panels.
threefold hourglass ornament, which is also
Diameter: Not determinable. Clay: Munsell 5
crosshatched.
YR 6/2 pinkish grey. Paint: Munsell 5 YR 3/2
Diameter: 10 cm. Clay: Munsell 5 YR 6/6
dark reddish brown.
brownish yellow. Paint: Munsell 5YR 4/6
yellowish red
No. 4 (Fig. 4): One body fragment, FMAC
16A-18/204.
No. 2 (Fig. 2): Two rim fragments and three
Preserved are parts of a lozenge, three vertical
body fragments, FMAC 13-15/r136, FMAC
and three horizontal lines, small part of dark
13-4/313, 2812/s.17.
paint on lower part of the fragment and the
Part of bird with crosshatched body and a
tail of a bird. A noticeable feature on this
panel with crosshatched lozenge preserved.
fragment is the rendering of the bird’s tail.
The lower part of the bowl is covered with
The lines of the body overlap so as to form a
dark paint except for a reserved band.
y-shape, which is found on this fragment
This bowl is distinct because it is thick-walled
only.
and the drawn lines are quite thickly applied
Diameter: Not determinable. Clay: Munsell
and especially the lozenge in the panel is big
2.5 YR 7/1 reddish grey. Paint: Munsell 5 YR
and crudely drawn.
4/4 reddish brown.
Diameter: 13 cm. Clay: Munsell 7.5 YR 6/6
reddish yellow. Paint: Munsell 10 YR 2/1
No. 5 (Fig. 5): Four body fragments, FMAC
black.
16A-9/260, FMAC 13-6/2, FMAC 13-4/115,
FMAC 16-12/1130.
No. 3 (Fig. 3): Four body fragments, FMAC
The feet of a bird standing on one horizontal
21-3/4, FMAC 16A-22/13, FMAC 16A-9/4,
line are preserved on two of the fragments.
FMAC 13-4/900.
13
Part of the lower half of the bowl with a
three horizontal lines. The lower part carries
reserved band is also preserved.
five void rays and ends in a low ring foot. The
Diameter: Not determinable. Clay: Munsell 5
interior of the bowl is covered with dark
YR 6/2 pinkish grey. Paint: Munsell 5 YR 3/2
paint.
dark reddish brown.
Diameter: 12.9 cm. Clay: Munsell 5 YR 6/2
pinkish grey. Paint: Munsell 5 YR 5/6 dark
No. 6 (Fig. 6): One body fragment, FMAC
reddish brown.
23-1/20.
The preserved decoration is similar to the
No. 8 (Fig. 8): Four rim fragments and one
previous bowl (no. 5), but the hind part of a
body fragment, all adjoining, FMAC 17A-
bird is preserved on this fragment.
12/507, FMAC 16-20/313,315, FMAC 17A-
Diameter: Not determinable. Clay: Munsell
cl./1, 18A-cl/101.
7.5 YR 7/4 pink. Paint: Munsell 7.5 YR 5/6
The decoration scheme is identical with the
strong brown.
previous bowl, except that two lines separate
the panels and the upper and lower parts of
No. 7 (Fig. 7): An almost completely
the bowl. Furthermore, this bowl is smaller, in
preserved bird bowl consisting of nine sherds,
fact it is the smallest of all the bowls. The
eight of which adjoin, FMAC 21-2/5, FMAC
decoration is not as well preserved and it
17A-21/102.
seems to be secondarily burnt. The interior
It has the typical decoration of the regular
has a central reserved tondo with three
type of bird bowl with three metopal panels
concentric circles.
on either side. The two panels next to the
Diameter: 9.5 cm. Clay: Munsell 2.5 YR 6/3
handles have an outlined crosshatched
light yellowish brown. Paint: Munsell 5 YR
lozenge. The broader central panel comprises
2.5/1 black.
a bird with a crosshatched body and a small
circle in front. Also in front of the bird is a
No. 9 (Fig. 9): Three rim fragments and two
fringe ornament in the shape of a half circle
body fragments, FMAC 16-17/800, FMAC
with a line and behind the bird is a pendant
16-12/1070, FMAC 18A-1/2, FMAC17A-
crosshatched triangle. Three vertical lines
16/56, FMAC 17A-16/57.
divide the panels and the handles have one
Part of metopal panel with crosshatched
vertical line on either side. The panel zone is
lozenge and part of central field with a
separated from the lower part of the bowl by
pendant ornament and a circle preserved on
14
the upper half of the bowl. On the lower half
difference in the colour of the paint, which is
is preserved part of a void ray. These five
clearly distinct from that of the other bowls
fragments can all be ascribed to one and the
with the same decoration scheme, especially
same bowl due to the fact that three lines are
the dusky red colour of the ray.
used as dividing lines for both panels and the
Diameter: Not determinable. Clay: Munsell 5
horizontal division between the upper and
YR 6/2 pinkish grey. Paint: Munsell 2.5 YR
lower parts of the bowl in combination with
4/3 dusky red.
the void rays.
Diameter: 13 cm. Clay: Munsell 7.5 YR 6/6
No. 12 (Fig. 12): One rim fragment and three
reddish yellow. Paint: Munsell 2.5 YR 6/6
body fragments, FMAC 23-2/2, FMAC 16A-
reddish yellow.
cl/219, FMAC 22-3/13.
Part of central field with part of feet of a bird
No. 10 (Fig. 10): Four rim fragments and one
is preserved on the upper part of the bowl.
body fragment, FMAC 21-3/3 and FMAC
The lower part has an incompletely preserved
18A-1/3, FMAC 21-3/2 and FMAC 18-4/53.
void ray. Part of a handle is preserved on the
The preserved decoration consists of part of
rim fragment.
metopal panels with crosshatched lozenges,
Diameter: Not determinable. Clay: Munsell
the central field with a bird with crosshatched
10 YR 6/4 yellowish brown. Paint: Munsell
body and part of a void ray. Only two lines
10 YR 2/1 black – 10 YR 3/2 very dark
are used here as dividing lines and in front of
brown.
the bird the fringe ornament takes the shape
of a quarter circle bordering the vertical line
No. 13 (Fig. 13): Two body fragments,
instead of the usual half circle with a line.
FMAC 18A-cl/102.
Diameter: 11 cm. Clay: Munsell 2.5 YR 7/4
Parts of void rays and horizontal lines are
pale red. Paint: Munsell 10 YR 3/2 very dark
preserved. Due to the very different colour of
greyish brown.
the paint used on the bowl cat. no. 10, these
two fragments are ascribed to a separate bowl.
No. 11 (Fig. 11): One body fragment, FMAC
Diameter: Not determinable. Clay: Munsell
13-7/807.
10 YR 6/4 yellowish brown. Paint: Munsell 5
The only preserved decoration is three
YR 4/4 reddish brown.
horizontal lines and part of a void ray. The
No. 14 (Fig. 14): Three rim fragments, FMAC
fragment belongs to a specific bowl due to the
18A-2/2, FMAC 18A-2/1, FMAC 16-2/121.
15
This is probably an imitation of an East Greek
one place. A general idea of the decoration
bird bowl. It has a slip on the exterior and the
can therefore be obtained. It had a light slip
interior is covered with dark paint. The form
all over. The interior has a central tondo with
of the decoration is taken directly from the
two concentric circles. Around this tondo runs
regular bird bowl consisting of a broad dark
an outlined tongue ornament, followed by two
band on the handle, which is framed on either
lines and a band with a chain ornament, the
side by a vertical line. Two dividing lines
rest of the interior to the rim is covered with
separate the upper from the lower part of the
dark paint. On the exterior each side of the
bowl and the panels. No bird is preserved, but
handles is divided into five panels, the central
part of the central panel bears a fringe
one contains the bird. A fragment with a bird
ornament in the shape of a triangle. The side
has recently been found (October 2004). One
panels have vertical zigzag lines. The top part
of the side panels has an outlined
of one ray is also preserved on one of the
crosshatched lozenge, the other an outlined
fragment. The quality of drawing is not good;
crosshatched meander tree. This decoration
the lines are thick and have blurry and unclear
seems to have been repeated on both sides of
edges.
the central bird panel. Four lines divide the
Diameter: 11 cm. Clay: Munsell 10 YR 6/4
panels. Beneath the panels runs a band with
light yellowish brown. Paint: Munsell 5 YR
an alternating chain and double saw
3/3 dark reddish brown.
ornament, which is framed above and below
by four horizontal lines. The lower part of the
No. 15 (Figs. 15a-15c): Thirty-one fragments
bowl has void rays and again four lines, the
are ascribed to a single bird bowl of the
foot is dark with another four reserved lines.
Orientalising type. Due to the fragmentary
The bottom of the foot has a central tondo
state of the bowl and the small size of many
with solid rays radiating to four lines at the
of the fragments, numbering of the individual
edge. Fill ornaments comprise dot crosses,
sherds was abandoned. The sherds were found
swastikas, stylised quatrefoils, elaborate
in six different contexts; FMAC 13-15,
fringe ornaments and four dots connected
FMAC 16-1, FMAC 16-10, FMAC 16-20,
with lines as forming a cross. The handles
FMAC 16A-9 and FMAC 18A-2, with a
have a floral ornament at the junction with the
distance more than four meters apart.
body Diameter: 14 cm. Clay: Munsell 2.5 YR
Although the bowl is incomplete and very
6/3 light yellowish brown. Paint: Munsell 5
fragmentary, the whole section is preserved in
YR 2.5/1 black.
16
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
BABesch = Bulletin antieke beschaving. Annual Papers on Classical Archaeology
BSR = Papers of the British School at Rome
IstMitt = Istanbuler Mitteilungen
JHS = Journal of Hellenic Studies
NSc = Notizie degli scavi di antichità
ÖJh = Jahreshefte des Österreichischen Archäologischen Institutes in Wien
PMGF = Poetarum Melicorum Graecorum Fragmenta, 1. Alcman, Stesichorus, Ibycus (ed. M.
Davis, Oxford, 1991)
17
CAPTIONS
Fig. 1. Fragment of Late Geometric bird
kotyle (drawing: Helle B. Thusing).
Fig. 15b. Fragment of an Orientalising bird
bowl with bird (photo: Jan K. Jacobsen 2004).
Fig. 2. Fragments of a bird bowl, ca. 650 BC
(drawing: Helle B. Thusing).
Fig. 15c. Orientalising bird bowl, ca. 640-625
BC (drawing: Helle B. Thusing)
Fig. 3. Fragment of a bird bowl, ca. 650 BC
(drawing: Helle B. Thusing).
Fig. 4. Fragment of a bird bowl, ca. 650 BC
(drawing: Helle B. Thusing).
Fig. 5. Fragment of a bird bowl, ca. 650 BC
(drawing: Helle B. Thusing).
Fig. 6. Fragment of a bird bowl, ca. 650 BC
(drawing: Helle B. Thusing).
Fig. 7. Bird bowl, 650-615 BC (drawing:
Helle B. Thusing).
Fig. 8. Fragments of a bird bowl, 650-615 BC
(drawing: Helle B. Thusing).
Fig. 9. Fragments of a bird bowl, 650-615 BC
(drawing: Helle B. Thusing).
Fig. 10. Fragments of a bird bowl, 650-615
BC (drawing: Helle B. Thusing).
Fig. 11. Fragment of a bird bowl, 650-615 BC
(drawing: Helle B. Thusing).
Fig. 12. Fragments of a bird bowl, 650-615
BC (drawing: Helle B. Thusing).
Fig. 13. Fragments of a bird bowl, 650-615
BC (drawing: Helle B. Thusing).
Fig. 14. Fragments of an imitation of a bird
bowl, second half of 7th century BC
(drawing: Helle B. Thusing).
Fig. 15a. Orientalising bird bowl, ca. 640-625
BC (photo: Marianne Kleibrink 2004).
18
Notes:
Achei d’occidente, Tekmeria 3 (Paestum, 2002),
1
The material study, on which this article is
331-355.
based, was made possible by generous financial
support provided by the Ny Carlsberg Foundation.
8
2
M.W. Stoop, “Note sugli scavi nel santuario di
Atena sul Timpone della Motta (Francavilla
J.N. Coldstream, Greek Geometric Pottery (London,
1968), 277-279; R.M. Cook & P. Dupont, East Greek
Pottery (Oxford, 1998), 26-28.
Marittima – Calabria) 4”, BABesch 58 (1983): 1652.
9
M. Kerschner, “Neutron Activision Analysis of Bird
Bowls and Related Archaic Ceramics from Miletus”,
3
D. Mertens & H. Schläger, “Die Bauten auf der
Archaeometry 35 (1993): 197-210.
Motta”, Atti e Memorie della Società Magna
Grecia 21-23 (1981-83): 143-171.
10
J. Boardman, Excavations in Chios 1952-1955,
Greek Emporio (Athens, 1967), 134; J.P. Droop in
4
For a detailed description, see M. Kleibrink,
The Sanctuary of Athemis Orthia at Sparta, ed. R.
Oinotrians and Greeks on the Timpone della
M. Dawkins (London, 1929), 115; M. Kerschner
Motta, Accordia Publications, forthcoming.
et al., “Ephesos in archaischer und klassischer
Zeit. Die Ausgrabungen in der Siedlung Smyrna”
5
E.g. M. Kleibrink, “Early cults in the Athenaion
at Francavilla Marittima as evidence for a precolonial circulation of nostoi stories” in Akten des
Symposion, Die Ägäis und das westliche
Mittelmeer, Beziehungen und Wechselwirkungen
8. bis 5. Jh. v. Chr, ed. F. Krinzinger (Wien,
2000), 165-185; M. Kleibrink, Dalla Lana
in Akten des Symposions, Die Ägäis und das
westliche Mittelmeer, Beziehungen und
Wechselwirkungen 8. bis 5. Jh. v. Chr., (ed.) F.
Krinzinger (Wien, 2000), 47-48; E. De Miro,
“Gela proto-arcaica”, Annuario della Scuola
Archeologica di Atene e delle Missioni Italiane in
Oriente 61 (1984): 92.
all’Acqua, culto e identitá nell’Athenaion di
Francavilla Marittima (Rossano, 2003).
11
M.M. Cristofani, “La ceramica greco-orientale
in Etruria” in Les Cerámiques de la Grèce de l’est
6
Kleibrink, Oinotrians and Greeks.
et leur diffusion en occident, Centre Jean Bérard
(Naples, 1978), 150-212 ; G. Jacobi, Esplorazione
archeologica di Camiro I. Scavi nelle necropoli
7
For the kantharoi from Francavilla Marittima,
see L. Tomay, “Ceramica di tradizione achea della
Sibaritide” in Gli Achei e l’identità etnica degli
Camiresi 1929-1930, Clara Rhodos IV (Rhodos,
1931), 274.
19
12
Kerschner, “Neutron Activision Analysis”;
Kerschner et al., “Ephesos”.
1963”, IstMitt 23/24 (1973/74): 63-115; V. v.
Graeve, “Milet. Vorläufiger Bericht über die
Grabung im Südschnitt an der hellenistischen
13
P. Orlandini & D. Adamesteanu, “Gela,
Stadtmauer 1966”, IstMitt 25 (1975): 35-59; M.
l’acropoli di Gela”, NSc 87 (1962): 340-408;P.
Heinz, “Katalog ausgewählter Funde im Milet
Pelagatti, “Siracusa: Le Ultime Ricerche in
1989”, IstMitt 40 (1990): 56-61; M. Robertson,
Ortigia”, Annuario della Scuola Archeologica di
“The excavations at Al-Mina Sueidia 4, The Early
Atene e delle Missioni Italiane in Oriente 60,
Greek Vases”, JHS 40 (1940): 2-21; M.D.
(1982): 117-163; G. Vallet and F. Villard, Megara
Robinson, Vases found in 1934 and 1938.
Hyblaea II. La céramique archaique (Roma,
Excavations at Olynthus vol. 13 (Baltimore,
1964); B. Hänsel, “Scavi eseguiti nell’area
1950); D.R. Barnett,“Ancient Oriental Influences
dell’acropoli di Eraclea negli anni 1965-1967”,
on Archaic Greece” in The Aegean and the Near
NSc 98 (1973): 400-494; C. Sabbione, “Reggio e
East. Studies presented to Hetty Goldman on the
Metauros nell’VII e VII sec. A.C.”, Annuario
occasion of her seventy-fifth birthday, ed. S.S.
della Scuola Archeologica di Atene e delle
Weinberg (New York, 1956), 212-238; R.
Missioni Italiane in Oriente 59 (1981): 275-289;
Wolfgang, “Die frühsten Wehrmaurn von
T.J. Dunbabin, “Rock tomb at Ghajn Qajjet, near
Pergamon und die zugehörigen Keramikfunde”,
Rabat, Malta”, BSR 21 (1953): 32-41; P. Guzzo et
IstMitt 42 (1992):163-234; J.N. Coldstream &
al., “Descrizione dei Materiali. Sibari III,
H.W. Catling, Knossos North Cemetery, Early
Rapporto preliminare della campagna di scavo”,
Greek Tombs. BSA Supplementary vol. 28 (1996):
NSc suppl. 97 (1972): 48-146. For a wider
tomb 56.
distribution, see M. Kerschner, “Die bemalte
ostgriechische Keramik auf Sizilien und ihr
15
Coldstream, Greek Geometric Pottery.
16
Cook & Dupont, East Greek Pottery;
Zeugniswert für den archaischen Handel” in Akten
des Symposions, Die Ägäis und das westliche
Mittelmeer, Beziehungen und Wechselwirkungen
Coldstream, Greek Geometric Pottery.
8. bis 5. Jh. v. Chr., ed. F. Krinzinger (Wien,
2000), 487-91; F. Brommer, “Ein ostgriechischer
Skyphos” in Studies in honour of Arthur Dale
Trendall, ed. A. Cambitoglou (Sydney, 1979), 39-
17
J. Boardman, “Tarsus, Al-Mina and Greek
Chronology”, JHS 85 (1965): 6-7.
45.
18
14
V. v. Graeve, “Milet. Bericht über die Arbeiten
im Südschnitt an der hellenistischen Stadtmauer
Cristofani, “La ceramica greco-orientale”;
Jacobi, Scavi, 274
20
19
Cook & Dupont, East Greek Pottery, 26
30
Stoop, “Note sugli scavi”.
20
K.F. Kinch, Fouilles de Vroulia, Rhodes
31
A. Bedini, Parco del Cavallo. Sibari scavi al
(Berlin, 1914), 166-67.
Parco del Cavallo (1960-1962,1969-1970 ) e agli
stombi (1969-1970), NSc 95 suppl. III (1970):
21
See H. Goldman, Excavations at Gövlü Kule,
173-74; Guzzo et al., “Descrizione dei Materiali”.
Tarsus, vol. III, The Iron Age (Princeton
University Press, 1963), no. 1442.
32
All drawings are made by Helle Bjærre
Thussing.
22
Barnett, “Ancient Oriental Influences”.
23
N. Bookidis, “Ritual dining at Corinth” in Greek
Sanctuaries: new approaches, eds. N. Marinatos & R.
Hägg (London & New York, 1993), 45-61.
24
Kleibrink et al., “Ephesos”; Kleibrink, Dalla
Lana all’Acqua.
25
For the interpretation of the aryballoi and
pyxides, see Kleibrink, Oinotrian and Greeks.
26
Kleibrink, Dalla Lana all’Acqua, 77-78, 91.
27
M. Kleibrink et al., “Water for Athena: votive
gifts at Lagaria”, World Archaeology 36/1 (2004):
60.
28
Stesichoros frag. 200 in PMGF; cf. also Plato,
Ion, 533b.
29
Strabo 6.1.14.