The City and Complexity: Volterra, Italy: Pottery production during the Hellenistic Etruscan period and the Late Roman to Late Antique period 9781841716114, 9781407326689

Table of contents :
Front Cover
Title Page
Copyright
Table of Contents
List of Figures
List of Tables
List of Appendices
List of Plates
Introduction
CHAPTER 1: THE RESEARCH PROJECT
CHAPTER 2: THE CASE STUDY OF VOLTERRA, ITALY
CHAPTER 3: QUANTIFICATION ANALYSIS
CHAPTER 4: POTTERY CATALOGUE
CHAPTER 5: FORMAL ANALYSIS
CHAPTER 6: FABRIC ANALYSIS
CHAPTER 7: TECHNOLOGICAL AND ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
CHAPTER 8: MATERIAL CULTURE ANALYSIS
CHAPTER 9: CLAY SURVEY
CHAPTER 10: CLAY FIRING TEST AND FABRIC ANALYSIS
CHAPTER 11: SOIL CHARACTERIZATION TESTS
CHAPTER 12: CERAMIC STUDIES AND CLAY STUDIES
CHAPTER 13: THE LATE ROMAN TO LATE ANTIQUE TRANSFORMATION IN VOLTERRA
APPENDIX A: FORM NUMBERING SYSTEM
APPENDIX B: CERAMIC FABRIC GROUPS
APPENDIX C: CLAY FABRIC GROUPS
WORKS CITED

Citation preview

BAR S1251 2004 OSTMAN: THE CITY AND COMPLEXITY – VOLTERRA, ITALY

B A R

The City and Complexity: Volterra, Italy Pottery production during the Hellenistic Etruscan period and the Late Roman to Late Antique period

Rae Ostman

BAR International Series 1251 2004

The City and Complexity: Volterra, Italy Pottery production during the Hellenistic Etruscan period and the Late Roman to Late Antique period

Rae Ostman

BAR International Series 1251 2004

ISBN 9781841716114 paperback ISBN 9781407326689 e-format DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9781841716114 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

BAR

PUBLISHING

TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures List of Tables List of Appendices List of Plates Introduction Chapter 1: The Research Project Chapter 2: The Case Study of Volterra, Italy Chapter 3: Quantification Analysis Chapter 4: Pottery Catalogue Chapter 5: Formal Analysis Chapter 6: Fabric Analysis Chapter 7: Technological and Economic Analysis Chapter 8: Material Culture Analysis Chapter 9: Clay Survey Chapter 10: Clay Firing Test and Fabric Analysis Chapter 11: Soil Characterization Tests Chapter 12: Ceramic Studies and Clay Studies Chapter 13: The Late Roman to Late Antique Transformation in Volterra Appendices Works Cited

ii iv vi vii 1 2 8 17 25 139 158 181 187 191 200 214 221 233 241 258

LIST OF FIGURES Fig. 2.1: Location and territory of the ancient city of Volterra Fig. 2.2: Plan of Volterra Fig 2.3: Plan of Volterra, indication ancient monuments, and two of the Volterra Project excavation areas Fig. 3.1: Wares in the Area IV study collection Fig. 3.2: Wares in the Area I study collection Fig. 4.1: Area IV, Ware A/B, small closed vessels Fig. 4.2: Area IV, Ware A/B, closed platters Fig. 4.3: Area IV, Ware A/B, closed cover Fig. 4.4: Area IV, Ware A/B, pot Fig. 4.5: Area IV, Ware A/B, ollae Fig. 4.6: Area IV, Ware A/B, pitchers Fig. 4.7: Area IV, Ware A/B, open bowls Fig. 4.8: Area IV, Ware A/B, open bowl/plates Fig. 4.9: Area IV, Ware A/B, open bowls Fig. 4.10: Area IV, Ware A/B, open basins Fig. 4.11: Area IV, Ware A/B, open basin/platters Fig. 4.12: Area IV, Ware A/B, open plate/platters Fig. 4.13: Area IV, Ware A/B, open platter/covers Fig. 4.14: Area IV, Ware A/B, open cover/dishes Fig. 4.15: Area IV, Ware C, closed bowl and plate Fig. 4.16: Area IV, Ware C, unguentarium and similar forms Fig. 4.17: Area IV, Ware C, ollae Fig. 4.18: Area IV, Ware C, pitchers Fig. 4.19: Area IV, Ware C, open bowls Fig. 4.20: Area IV, Ware C, open bowl and bowl/plate Fig. 4.21: Area IV, Ware C, open cover/dishes Fig. 4.22: Area IV, Ware C, open pans Fig. 4.23: Area IV, Ware D, pot and ollae Fig. 4.24: Area IV, Ware D, ollae Fig. 4.25: Area IV, Ware D, open bowl and plates Fig. 4.26: Area IV, Ware D, open cover/dishes Fig. 4.27: Area IV, Ware D, open pans Fig. 4.28: Area IV, Ware D, open pot Fig. 4.29: Area I, Ware B, closed bowl, platters, and pan Fig. 4.30: Area I, Ware B, ollae Fig. 4.31: Area I, Ware B, olla/pitchers Fig. 4.32: Area I, Ware B, pitchers Fig. 4.33: Area I, Ware B, open bowls Fig. 4.34: Area I, Ware B, open plates Fig. 4.35: Area I, Ware B, open covers Fig. 4.36: Area I, Ware B, open pan Fig. 4.37: Area I, Ware C, closed bowls and platter/basin Fig. 4.38: Area I, Ware C, closed cover/dish Fig. 4.39: Area I, Ware C, pots Fig. 4.40: Area I, Ware C, unguentarium Fig. 4.41: Area I, Ware C, ollae Fig. 4.42: Area I, Ware C, olla/pitchers Fig. 4.43: Area I, Ware C, pitchers Fig. 4.44: Area I, Ware C, pitcher/bottles Fig. 4.45: Area I, Ware C, open bowls Fig. 4.46: Area I, Ware C, open basins Fig. 4.47: Area I, Ware C, open plates Fig. 4.48: Area I, Ware C, open cover/dishes Fig. 4.49: Area I, Ware C, open pans Fig. 4.50: Area I, Ware C, open pan and pot Fig. 4.51: Area I, Ware D, ollae

ii

14 15 16 22 23 57 57 58 58 58 59 60 62 63 65 66 67 69 69 71 71 72 74 74 75 75 76 76 77 80 80 82 83 104 105 105 106 106 108 109 110 110 110 110 111 111 112 114 115 116 118 119 120 123 126 126

Fig. 4.52: Area I, Ware D, olla/pitchers Fig. 4.53: Area I, Ware D, pitchers Fig. 4.54: Area I, Ware D, open bowls Fig. 4.55: Area I, Ware D, open covers Fig. 4.56: Area I, Ware D, open pans Fig. 4.57: Area I, Ware E, closed forms Fig. 4.58: Area I, Ware E, open cover Fig. 4.59: African pottery, Area I, closed forms Fig. 4.60: African pottery, Area I, open forms Fig. 9.1: Map of the clay survey sites Fig. 12.1: Fabric groups in the study collection Fig. 12.2: Clay sources in the pottery study collection

127 127 128 129 132 133 134 137 138 198 232 232

iii

LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1: Quantification Analysis results, Area IV Table 3.2: Wares in the Area IV study collection. Percentage by sherd count, sherd weight, and EVE Table 3.3: Quantification Analysis results, Area I Table 3.4: Wares in the Area I study collection. Percentage by sherd count, sherd weight, and EVE Table 3.5: Wares in the study collection: Change through time Table 5.1: Functional categories in the Area IV study collection. Count of forms and variants Table 5.2: Functional categories in the Area IV study collection. Percentage of forms and variants Table 5.3: Functional categories in the Area I study collection. Count of forms and variants Table 5.4: Functional categories in the Area I study collection. Percentage of forms and variants Table 5.5: Closed to open ratio in the Area IV study collection. Count of forms and variants Table 5.6: Closed to open ratio in the Area IV study collection. Percentage of forms and variants Table 5.7: Closed to open ratio in the Area I study collection. Count of forms and variants Table 5.8: Closed to open ratio in the Area I study collection. Percentage of forms and variants Table 5.9: Degree of variation ratio in the Area IV study collection Table 5.10: Degree of variation ratio in the Area I study collection Table 5.11: Functional categories in the study collection through time. Count of forms and variants Table 5.12: Association of functional category, ware, and excavation area Table 6.1: Profile of Fabric Group I Table 6.2: Profile of Fabric Group II Table 6.3: Profile of Fabric Group III Table 6.4: Profile of Fabric Group IV Table 6.5: Profile of Fabric Group V Table 6.6: Profile of Fabric Group VI Table 6.7: Fabrics documents in the Area IV study collection, by ware. Count of diagnostic sherds Table 6.8: Fabrics documents in the Area IV study collection, by ware. Percentage of diagnostic sherds Table 6.9: Association of functional category and fabric group, Area IV. Count of diagnostic sherds Table 6.10: Association of functional category and fabric group, Area IV. Percentage of diagnostic sherds Table 6.11: Fabrics documents in the Area I study collection, by ware. Count of diagnostic sherds Table 6.12: Fabrics documents in the Area I study collection, by ware. Percentage of diagnostic sherds Table 6.13: Association of functional category and fabric group, Area I. Count of diagnostic sherds Table 6.14: Association of functional category and fabric group, Area I. Percentage of diagnostic sherds Table 6.15: Association of excavation area and fabric group. Percentage of diagnostic sherds Table 6.16: Association of fabric group and ware through time. Percentage of diagnostic sherds Table 7.1: Mean economic values of formal groups in the Area IV study collection, Ware A/B Table 7.2: Mean economic values of formal groups in the Area IV study collection, Ware C Table 7.3: Mean economic values of formal groups in the Area IV study collection, Ware D Table 7.4: Mean economic values of formal groups in the Area I study collection, Ware B Table 7.5: Mean economic values of formal groups in the Area I study collection, Ware C Table 7.6: Mean economic values of formal groups in the Area I study collection, Ware D Table 7.7: Mean economic values of formal groups in the Area I study collection, Ware E Table 7.8: Mean economic values of formal groups in the imported African pottery from Area I Table 7.9: Average economic values of all formal group means in the study collection Table 7.10: Average economic values of all formal group means in the surface-treated wares from the study collection (local wares) and comparative collection (imported wares) Table 8.1: Color of surface-treated wares in the study collection. Count of diagnostic sherds Table 10.1: Profile of Clay Group A Table 10.2: Profile of Clay Group B Table 10.3: Profile of Clay Group C Table 10.4: Profile of Clay Group D Table 10.5: Profile of Clay Group E Table 11.1: Liquid Limit results. Sorted by Liquid Limit, then sample number Table 11.2: Plastic Limit results. Sorted by Plastic Limit, then sample number Table 11.3: Plastic Index results Table 11.4: ASTM particle size definitions Table 11.5: Particle Size Analysis: Range and mean by geographical origin Table 11.6: Particle Size Analysis: Range and mean by clay group

iv

21 21 22 23 24 149 150 151 152 152 152 153 153 153 154 155 157 168 170 171 172 174 175 177 177 177 178 178 178 179 179 179 180 184 184 184 185 185 185 186 186 186 186 190 206 209 209 211 212 218 218 219 219 219 220

Table 12.1: Abbreviated profile of ceramic Fabric Group I Table 12.2: Abbreviated profile of ceramic Fabric Group II Table 12.3: Abbreviated profile of ceramic Fabric Group III Table 12.4: Abbreviated profile of ceramic Fabric Group IV Table 12.5: Abbreviated profile of ceramic Fabric Group V Table 12.6: Abbreviated profile of ceramic Fabric Group VI Table 12.7: Abbreviated profile of Clay Group A Table 12.8: Abbreviated profile of Clay Group B Table 12.9: Abbreviated profile of Clay Group C Table 12.10: Abbreviated profile of Clay Group D Table 12.11: Abbreviated profile of Clay Group E Table 12.12: Identification of ceramic fabric groups and clay groups Table 12.13: Fabric groups in the study collection. Count and percentage of diagnostic sherds

v

228 228 229 229 229 230 230 230 230 231 231 231 232

LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A: Form Numbering System Appendix B: Ceramic Fabric Groups Appendix C: Clay Fabric Groups

241 247 253

vi

LIST OF PLATES Plate 6.1: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group I in cross-section: Sherd I.122 Plate 6.2: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group I in cross-section: Sherd I.163 Plate 6.3: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group I in cross-section: Sherd I.263 Plate 6.4: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group I in cross-section: Sherd I.311 Plate 6.5: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group I in cross-section: Sherd IV.346 Plate 6.6: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group II in cross-section: Sherd I.115 Plate 6.7: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group II in cross-section: Sherd I.203 Plate 6.8: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group II in cross-section: Sherd I.256 Plate 6.9: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group II in cross-section: Sherd I.260 Plate 6.10: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group II in cross-section: Sherd I.283 Plate 6.11: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group III in cross-section: Sherd I.141 Plate 6.12: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group III in cross-section: Sherd I.150 Plate 6.13: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group III in cross-section: Sherd I.274 Plate 6.14: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group III in cross-section: Sherd IV.342 Plate 6.15: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group IV in cross-section: Sherd I.50 Plate 6.16: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group IV in cross-section: Sherd I.152 Plate 6.17: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group IV in cross-section: Sherd I.359 Plate 6.18: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group IV in cross-section: Sherd IV.353 Plate 6.19: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group IV in cross-section: Sherd IV.422 Plate 6.20: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group V in cross-section: Sherd I.181 Plate 6.21: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group V in cross-section: Sherd I.210 Plate 6.22: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group V in cross-section: Sherd I.312 Plate 6.23: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group V in cross-section: Sherd IV.404 Plate 6.24: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group VI in cross-section: Sherd I.40 Plate 6.25: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group VI in cross-section: Sherd IV.113 Plate 6.26: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group VI in cross-section: Sherd IV.225 Plate 6.27: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group VI in cross-section: Sherd IV.400 Plate 9.1: Site 7 Plate 9.2: Site 4 Plate 9.3: Site 22 Plate 9.4: Site 3 Plate 10.1: Unfired briquettes Plate 10.2: Plain briquette (left), briquette with black slip (center), and briquette with untinted slip (right) Plate 10.3: Plain briquette, broken and fired in two parts Plate 10.4: Spalling of briquette with black slip Plate 10.5: Salt deposit on briquette with black slip (left) and briquette with untinted slip (right) Plate 10.6: Photomicrograph of Clay Group A in cross-section: Sample 4 Plate 10.7: Photomicrograph of Clay Group A in cross-section: Sample 5 Plate 10.8: Photomicrograph of Clay Group A in cross-section: Sample 6 Plate 10.9: Photomicrograph of Clay Group A in cross-section: Sample 7 Plate 10.10: Photomicrograph of Clay Group A in cross-section: Sample 11 Plate 10.11: Photomicrograph of Clay Group A in cross-section: Sample 13 Plate 10.12: Photomicrograph of Clay Group A in cross-section: Sample 14 Plate 10.13: Photomicrograph of Clay Group A in cross-section: Sample 18 Plate 10.14: Photomicrograph of Clay Group B in cross-section: Sample 8 Plate 10.15: Photomicrograph of Clay Group C in cross-section: Sample 9 Plate 10.16: Photomicrograph of Clay Group C in cross-section: Sample 10 Plate 10.17: Photomicrograph of Clay Group C in cross-section: Sample 12 Plate 10.18: Photomicrograph of Clay Group C in cross-section: Sample 15 Plate 10.19: Photomicrograph of Clay Group D in cross-section: Sample 1 Plate 10.20: Photomicrograph of Clay Group D in cross-section: Sample 16 Plate 10.21: Photomicrograph of Clay Group D in cross-section: Sample 17 Plate 10.22: Photomicrograph of Clay Group D in cross-section: Sample 20 Plate 10.23: Photomicrograph of Clay Group D in cross-section: Sample 21 Plate 10.24: Photomicrograph of Clay Group E in cross-section: Sample 2 Plate 10.25: Photomicrograph of Clay Group E in cross-section: Sample 3.1

vii

168 169 169 169 169 170 170 170 171 171 171 172 172 172 173 173 173 173 174 174 174 175 175 175 176 176 176 196 196 197 197 205 205 205 206 206 206 207 207 207 207 208 208 208 209 209 210 210 210 211 211 211 212 212 212 213

Plate 10.26: Photomicrograph of Clay Group E in cross-section: Sample 3.3 Plate 10.27: Photomicrograph of Clay Group E in cross-section: Sample 19 Plate 10.28: Photomicrograph of Clay Group E in cross-section: Sample 22

viii

213 213 213

INTRODUCTION Despite the great fascination that the collapse of past civilizations holds for the public, the process of decreasing social complexity has received surprisingly little attention from archaeologists, especially when compared to the voluminous research on increasing complexity. And most studies of the process have been oriented toward understanding complexity by seeing how it fails, not toward understanding how a different, “simpler” society emerged from a more complex society. But if there are specific motivations and particular processes for decreasing complexity—if “collapse” is a solution rather than a problem1—then clearly there is much to be learned from examining the societies that develop during periods of seeming decline.

Research was performed on an existing collection of ceramic material excavated from two contexts—one corresponding to each period under investigation—in the Vallebuona quarter of Volterra. Vallebuona manifests the important developments of late Antiquity: a striking transformation of the built environment in the city, its population, and its production and distribution of craft goods. The research results support the thesis, creating a descriptive model of how Volterra was transformed during late Roman to late Antique times, as Italian society became less complex. The model demonstrates that both external and internal stimuli affected the local craft economy, and that elements of both continuity and change contributed toward the development of a new system of pottery production, distribution, and consumption.

This research study examines how one complex society reorganized to a relatively simple society, recognizing the simultaneously constructive and destructive aspects of the process. The study focuses on the developments during the late Roman Empire through late Antiquity, a time of decreasing social complexity in the ancient Mediterranean world beginning in the late 2nd and continuing to the mid 6th centuries AD, on the basis of a detailed archaeological study of one city and its territory, Volterra, in Tuscany, Italy.

In addition, the model appears consistent with the theory that late Roman and late Antique society in Italy developed out of an attempt by the local élite to preserve Roman political and sociocultural institutions (and hence their own privileged position) on a regional level when the overarching unity of the empire was threatened (Motta 1997; Terrenato 1998i; Pasquinucci and Menchelli 1999). Ultimately, this reactionary impulse contributed to significant transformations in the very institutions the élite were attempting to preserve, because it entailed disintegrating the “basic unit”2 of Roman society: the city and its associated territory. The new economic relationships that formed during late Antiquity—between the city and the empire and between the city and the countryside—may have been significant to the revival of urbanized society in Italy during the Middle Ages.

The research examines how the local craft economy of Italian city-states was transformed as a result of integration into the Mediterranean-wide Roman economy. The thesis of the study holds that as Italian cities became increasingly reliant on economic connections with other urban centers, the traditional economic relationship between the cities and their territories was disrupted. This disruption contributed to what has been termed the “provincialization” of Italy, a process wherein Italy became increasingly reliant on its provinces. When long-distance relations faltered during late Antiquity, Italy was left with an incomplete domestic economy. Urbanized society, based on the complementary economic function of the city and the territory, was replaced by a ruralized society. Even Italy’s former cities came to resemble a concentration of small villages rather than an integral urban unit. Volterra represents an ideal case study for examining the thesis, because the general outlines of the city’s long history as an urban center are well known from historical and archaeological research. The study examines pottery production and consumption in the city center during two periods: the Hellenistic Etruscan period, the 3rd through 1st centuries BC, representing the period of greatest urban growth in Volterra; and the late Roman to late Antique period, the 2nd through 6th centuries AD, representing the period of its first significant decline. 1

2

As Tainter (1988) has suggested.

1

Dyson’s term (1992:1-2).

CHAPTER 1: THE RESEARCH PROJECT Chapter 1 introduces the research problem, and details two potential models for the late Roman to late Antique transformation that are evaluated by the research. The chapter is divided into four sections. The first section briefly situates the study within the theoretical problem of social complexity and establishes the primary question addressed by the research. The second section establishes the thesis of the study. The third section presents two models tested by the research, as well as the scheme by which the models will be evaluated. The fourth section provides an overview of the research study and publication.

model inside out, viewing the problem from a different perspective: focusing on the city during a period of decline rather than development; examining the process of decline in order to understand the simpler society that emerged from it, not the more complex society preceding it; and analyzing the process of decreasing complexity through the study of consumption as well as production. I apply this approach to a classic case of decreasing social complexity—the development of late Antique society out of late Roman society between the end of the 2nd and the middle of the 6th centuries AD—focusing on the craft economy of the ancient city of Volterra, Italy.

1.1 Introduction to the Research

In a recent study dedicated to the problem of decreasing social complexity, Joseph Tainter (1988) provides a concise definition of collapse: “A society has collapsed when it displays a rapid, significant loss of an established level of sociopolitical complexity” (1988:6; emphasis in the original). Another recent volume of collected studies (Yoffee and Cowgill, eds. 1988) also defines the collapse of complex societies as the fragmentation or discontinuity of the political institutions of formerly integrated states. Like Tainter, the editors of this volume emphasize that no state collapses in all parts equally, explicitly allowing for substantial cultural continuity following political collapse (Yoffee 1988:14-15; Cowgill 1988:256; compare to Tainter 1988:4).

Regardless of their theoretical perspective, most anthropological archaeologists define complex societies according to the constellation of factors articulated by V. Gordon Childe nearly 50 years ago (Childe 1957). Since Childe first emphasized urbanized settlement patterns, specialized craft production, and social stratification as essential elements to the definition of a complex society, social scientists have sought to describe and explain how these factors contribute to increasing social complexity. Although Childe’s specific models outlining the process of increasing complexity in the ancient Near East and Europe have been revised and in some cases rejected, the overall utility of his perspective has been affirmed (see Brumfiel and Earle, eds. 1987 and Wailes, ed. 1996).

Yoffee and Cowgill (eds., 1988) and Tainter (1988) take a processualist, generalizing approach to the problem, seeking to develop a comparative methodology for collapse and a model of collapse as a general phenomenon respectively (Yoffee 1988:2; Tainter 1988:43). Both works view complex societies as systemic in nature, emphasizing that change in one aspect of a society affects all other aspects. Both also argue that material phenomena (including economic, technological, demographic, and political aspects of social life) demonstrably had a primary or causal role in effecting the collapse, while cultural or ideational factors had a secondary role and may be disregarded for the sake of clarity and objectivity (Tainter 1988:39-41; Yoffee 1988:6-11). As a result, the description of collapse in both volumes emphasizes the profound disjunction and discontinuity between the earlier, more complex period and the later, less complex period (see especially Tainter 1988:4, 18-20).

Childe believed that the development of complex societies, or civilizations, was directly related to a shift in their living patterns to incorporate nucleated population centers. The “urban revolution,” as he considered it, necessitated profound changes in the economic organization of production. Primary producers supported a new administrative élite class residing in the urban centers, who in turn supported specialist craft producers. As technology advanced, the more productive economy could support a growing population (Childe 1957:4, 916). In Childe’s model, cities stand for complexity, as the home of specialized producers and dependent consumers, the seat of administrators and rulers, and the link to the outside world, its goods and ideas. From this perspective, the breakdown of urban life signals decreasing social complexity, just as the appearance and growth of cities indicates increasing social complexity. Recent research suggests, however, that the city is not simply an index for complexity, but that the relationship between urbanism and complexity is much more complicated and interesting.

Studies that take an alternative approach—examining decreasing complexity on a more detailed scale, and paying significant attention to the particularistic and continuous aspects of society and culture—reach quite different conclusions. Decreasing complexity is viewed as a process of transition and transformation rather than decline and collapse (Bowersock 1988:165), a process that occurs in a particular, meaningful context: the

In my study, I accept Childe’s materialist approach to the examination of urbanism and complexity, but turn his

2

Roman to late Antique period is considered a time of transformation which necessarily entailed both change and continuity.

ancient city (Adams 1988:33-34, 37). Bowersock (1988), examining the slow and complex dissolution of the Roman Empire, challenges generalizing projects such as that of Yoffee and Cowgill. He argues that even the Roman case defies typical definitions of collapse when it is examined in detail. He maintains that it is nearly impossible to locate exactly when and where Rome collapsed, due to the great variability in circumstance across time and space. Bowersock provocatively suggests that in the case of Rome, there was no collapse: instead, a profound “social, political, and intellectual reorganization” occurred “entirely within the framework of what had been there before” (Bowersock 1988:170). He concludes that collapse “is intimately connected with continuity” (Bowersock 1988:175).

The thesis of this research states that the local craft economy was transformed as a result of integration into the Mediterranean-wide Roman economy. This transformation changed the relationship of Italian cities with their territories. As Italian cities became increasingly reliant on their economic connections with other urban centers—which provided them with both craft products and agricultural goods—the traditional relationship between local (urban) craft producers and regional (territorial) agricultural producers was disrupted. This disruption contributed to what has been termed the “provincialization” of Italy, wherein Italy became increasingly reliant on its provinces, and ultimately the former center of the empire lost many of its social, economic, and political functions to the provinces. When the political unity of the Roman empire dissolved, Italy was left with an insufficient production network and weakened relationships between the two partners in the traditional social, economic, and political unit: the city and its territory. In place of an urban-based society, a rural-based society developed—and even former cities came to resemble a concentration of small villages rather than an integral urban unit. Especially after AD 550, production within Italy declined, and what remained was reorganized, relocated, and fragmented (Carandini 1988:42-44, 218-20, 317-19, 337; see also Marazzi 1998:136-37).

Clearly, decreasing complexity is as interesting and complicated as increasing complexity. On one hand, substantial political and economic change appears characteristic of the process, but on the other hand, so does significant social and cultural continuity. Periods of decreasing social complexity thus seem better understood as times of transition and transformation than decline and collapse. To do justice to the simultaneously constructive and destructive process of decreasing complexity, more focused and detailed analyses are required to complement “big-picture” or systemic research. The ancient city represents a convenient scale of analysis for new studies, and might even be considered the primary unit of analysis for examining social complexity (Adams 1988:36). If cities were essential to the creation and maintenance of complex societies, they certainly were essential to the transformation of complex societies.

The research thesis is inspired by and relies on important archaeological research during the last few decades by Italian scholars working in a historical-materialist tradition. (See, for example, Giardina, ed. 1986. The viewpoint shared among the contributing scholars is nicely summarized by Carandini 1986.) This tradition is influenced by a range of related theoretical schools, including Marxist thought and the Annales school, particularly the work of Braudel.

The presence of a specialized craft economy is considered essential to the definition of an urbanized, complex society, its absence or decline evidence of a corresponding lack of or decline in complexity. Numerous studies have shown that examining the organization of specialized craft production is useful to understanding the political factors involved in the development of complex societies (Brumfiel and Earle 1987:6). This study focuses on the other end of the trajectory, examining the organization of craft production as an existing complex, urbanized society gradually transformed.

My research contributes a local perspective to this body of work, a detailed examination of the effects of global changes on one Italian city. Using the case study of Volterra, Italy, the research examines the ways in which a local, relatively self-contained city-state economy was affected by and adapted to incorporation into a much broader imperial economy—and how the transformation of a local system of production, distribution, and consumption contributed to the creation of a new society, the late Antique world. When considered in light of other recent research on Volterra, the results of my study suggest that the well-known symptoms of late Antiquity could be considered proactive rather than passive responses to historical circumstances. The increasingly ruralized settlement pattern, self-sufficient economy, and fragmentation of the centralized imperial government may in fact have been deliberate responses of urban

1.2 Research Thesis Opinions vary on the character of late Roman and late Antique Italy, but most scholars agree that Late Antiquity represents a distinct political and economic entity together with substantial continuation of classical culture from late Roman times (see Bintliff and Hamerow 1995; Christie 1995; and Ward Perkins 1997). Here, the late

3

The External Change model is inspired by the research of Alberto Ciotola (Ciotola 2000) on the complete pottery assemblage from the Vallebuona quarter of Volterra, of which the dissertation study collection forms a part. It must be emphasized that the External Change model does not represent Ciotola’s reasoning or conclusions, but rather a development of his position. The study also applies his conclusions to a slightly different problem, as Ciotola’s study is particularly strong in its examination of the imported craft wares and transport wares of the assemblage.

residents to the realities of Italy’s new “provincial” status. 1.3 Models Comparing Hellenistic Etruscan Volterra to the late Roman/late Antique city, the research study was designed to specify where in the local craft economy patterns of change are dominant and where patterns of continuity are dominant. Ultimately, this information is synthesized into a model of the transformation of the craft economy during the late Roman and the late Antique periods. Two models were developed to describe the transformations taking place in late Roman to late Antique Volterra. One model emphasizes externallydriven change, while the other model emphasizes internal development and continuity. The two models are artificially extreme positions, but each is supported (to a more moderate degree, at least) by research for ancient Italy in general and Volterra in particular. By examining which aspects of the local economy best fit one position or the other, these models permit the complex patterns of change and continuity in the craft economy to be better understood. The results of the research permit the initial thesis to be revised certain aspects, and enriched with detail in others. For the sake of convenience, the two models are referred to throughout as the “External Change” model and the “Internal Development” model.

Internal Development Model The Internal Development model emphasizes the resilience of the local economy, and its fundamental stability even after Italian cities were incorporated into the broader Roman economy. It views the local economy as the foundation on which the broader Roman economy was superpositioned. It emphasizes the importance of the city as a central place for its territory. This perspective predicts substantial continuity in local Italian economies despite wide distribution of provincial products. In terms of the research problem, the Internal Development model envisions demonstrable continuity in the local pottery industry. It expects that changes developed out of internal trends, not as a result of competition by the widely-exported tablewares and utilitarian wares of northern Africa.

External Change Model

The Internal Development model holds that local pottery production, distribution, and consumption were only marginally affected by incorporation into the imperial economy. It posits that only the urban pottery market was affected by the arrival of African wares, and that the city’s continuing role as a craft production center for its territory provided a stable base for the local economy. As a result, when the city was no longer linked to the Mediterranean-wide economy, it could simply fall back on the more substantial relationship it had retained with its own territory. Thus, the pottery industry did not necessarily change dramatically as a result of the fall of the Roman Empire.

The External Change model emphasizes the impact on local economies of their incorporation into the Mediterranean-wide trade network of the Roman Empire. It views the local urban economy as having been substantially absorbed by the Roman economy and emphasizes the role of the city as a node in the imperial economy. This perspective predicts substantial change in the local Italian economies as a result of wide distribution of provincial products. In terms of the research problem, the External Change model envisions changes in the local pottery industry directly related to competition from the widely-exported tablewares and utilitarian wares of northern Africa.

The Internal Development model as presented here is inspired by the comprehensive research of Laura Motta on the Volterran regional economy (Motta 1997). Here too it must be emphasized that the Internal development model does not represent Motta’s reasoning or conclusions, but rather is a development of her perspective. Furthermore, the study applies Motta’s conclusions to a different problem, as Motta’s study focuses on the agricultural, pastoral, woodland, and coastal economy of Volterra.

The External Change model posits that the local producers responded to “competition” from imported wares by restricting and reducing their range of goods to specialize in those products that were not easily transported from abroad. As a result, the local industry no longer was oriented toward supplying all of the pottery needed in the city and territory, but rather toward supplementing the goods available externally. The industry was therefore no longer prepared to provide the complete range of pottery required locally when the supply of imported goods dried up.

4

a shift in the proportions of the wares, amounting to greater overall representation of plain tablewares and utilitarian wares.

Model Evaluation Scheme The study evaluates the two models according to an evaluation scheme. The scheme includes six aspects of the local craft economy that are significant to the research problem.

Internal Development Model The Internal Development model anticipates substantial continuity in the range of wares produced in the city, including wares of diverse qualities. Rather than viewing the local pottery industry as transforming to serve a niche of the local pottery consumption, the Internal Development model views the imported pottery as a niche or superfluous addition to a fundamentally stable system of local pottery production, distribution, and consumption. The Internal Development model therefore expects substantial stability through time in the diversity of the study collection wares and in the proportions of the various wares.

Parts A, B, and C of the model evaluation scheme are hypothetical, and specific expectations were developed for each model. Parts D, E, and F are exploratory studies, and no precise expectations were developed for each of the two models. Both the hypothetical and exploratory parts are equally relevant to assessing the nature of the transformation from Roman to late Antique times. The hypothetical parts address certain aspects of the current archaeological debate on the period, while the exploratory parts provide essential context for understanding the results of the research. All six parts focus on how local pottery producers and consumers responded to incorporation into a broader economic network, and on how their actions may have affected the transition from classical to late Antiquity.

Part B: Form and Function Part B examines the formal and functional attributes of the pottery in the study collection. Three aspects of the pottery are examined: the functional categories represented by the documented forms and variants; the ratio of open to closed forms; and the diversity of vessel forms and variants.

The scheme refers to the “study collection” of pottery. The study collection is presented in Chapter 2, but may be briefly described here as comprised of locallyproduced pottery from Volterra belonging to two time periods. The first time period is the Hellenistic Etruscan period of Volterra’s history and represents the period of urban development in the city. The second time period is the late Roman to late Antique period of Volterra’s history, the period of transformation under examination in the study.

External Change Model The External Change model expects the range of functional categories to become restricted through time, as local potters no longer made wares that competed with the imported pottery. The ratio of closed to open forms in the study collection should increase through time in favor of closed forms, as the local industry came to specialize in forms that could not be efficiently packed for transport overseas. The overall degree of variability in the study collection of locally-produced pottery therefore should decrease through time, as certain forms were no longer produced locally.

Part A: Composition of the Study Collection Part A examines the composition of the study collection, providing a general picture of the pottery wares which were produced and consumed during the two periods of Volterran history examined here. It identifies the various wares and establishes their proportions in the study collection.

Internal Development Model External Change Model The Internal Development model expects the range of functional categories to remain stable through time. Any changes in the products should be better explained by the internal development of the local ceramic industry than by external influence.

The External Change model predicts that the local pottery industry was profoundly affected by incorporation into the greater Roman imperial economy, and that through time the industry responded to competition from imported wares by restricting local production to a certain segment of pottery wares. In this view, during the earlier period the city produced the full range of wares it consumed, but during the later period the local industry focused on producing those wares that were not in direct competition with imported wares.

The individual forms and variants may change, but the local pottery products should represent more or less the full range of products consumed in the city. No particular expectation is advanced regarding the ratio of closed to open forms in the study collection, although a dramatic change would require an explanation consistent with the assumptions of the model. The overall degree of variability in the study collection of locally-produced pottery should remain stable through time; if it changes,

The External Change model therefore expects a decrease through time in the diversity of the study collection, in terms of the number of wares represented. It also expects

5

Part F: Consumption and Material Culture

the imported products should not compensate for the lost variation in the local products.

Part F examines the relationship between material culture and culture. It considers how the process of Romanization may have affected patterns of pottery consumption in Volterra, and how changes in taste may have in turn affected local pottery production and distribution. This exploratory analysis is intended to provide an alternative perspective on the pottery of the study collection, which was not only an economic good but also a part of everyday life in the past.

Part C: Production Technology and Economic Value Part C examines the production sequence used to build the study collection pottery. It documents the technology and techniques of local pottery production and evaluates the cost of local products in terms of labor expended. These results are compared to the production technology and techniques of the imported pottery, and to the cost of the imported products in terms of labor expended.

Part F considers whether cultural continuity or change might be inferred through a comparison of the Hellenistic Etruscan pottery and the late Roman/late Antique pottery of the study collection. It evaluates the degree and direction of continuity and change in function, form, diversity of the study collection, in search of patterns which appear significant in the historic context.

External Change Model The External Change model predicts that the local pottery industry used a distinct and more time-consuming technology than the African pottery industry. It expects that through time the local industry came to emphasize more efficient production techniques and pottery types, both in order to make the local pottery more competitive with the imported pottery, and in order to take over a specific niche of the market.

1.4 Overview of the Research Study The research tests the thesis on the basis of original field research, including two distinct projects. The first field project, or “ceramic study,” examines an existing collection of archaeological ceramics drawn from excavations in the Vallebuona quarter. The second field project, or “clay study,” includes a survey and analysis of clay deposits in the area surrounding Volterra.

Internal Development Model The Internal Development model predicts that the production sequence of the local industry developed without reference to the techniques used to produce the imported pottery. It expects that any changes in the production sequence and technology of local pottery are best explained by internal developments. The Internal Development model makes no specific predictions regarding the cost of the study collection through time in terms of labor expended.

The ceramic study provides a comprehensive field analysis of the ceramic deposits excavated from Areas IV and I, Vallebuona, Volterra. The excavations were performed from 1987 to 1989 under the field direction of Nicola Terrenato (Munzi and Terrenato 2000). The research was performed on material excavated from two contexts: Area IV dating to the Hellenistic Etruscan period (3rd through 1st centuries BC); and Area I to the late Roman imperial and late Antique transition (late 2nd through mid 6th centuries AD). These contexts correspond to the period of greatest ancient urban development and decline, respectively.

Part D: Exploitation of Local Clays Part D is an exploratory analysis which examines the relationship between local raw materials and local goods. It considers a number of interrelated questions: how local raw materials were processed and worked to create distinctive products; whether local clays were selectively exploited for certain wares or vessel forms; and whether these patterns changed or remained constant through time.

The ceramic study entails a number of contributing analyses: quantification of the deposit according to standard measures; creation of a pottery catalogue of the vessel forms and variants represented in the study collection; an analysis of the forms and variants present in the collection; characterization of the primary fabric groups present in the collection; documentation of the production techniques and technology used in pottery production in late Roman and late Antique Volterra; evaluation of the “cost” of the pottery production sequences; and consideration of the pottery consumed in Volterra as material culture.

Part E: Spatial Organization of Production and Distribution Part E is an exploratory analysis which examines the spatial organization of pottery production, distribution, and consumption in Volterra through time. Part E considers whether certain workshops or areas of the city specialized in certain wares; whether the organizational pattern changed through time; and what the pattern might mean in terms of the total craft economic system.

The clay study includes a survey of local clay resources, and the creation and characterization of a comparative collection of 23 clay samples taken from within a seven-

6

from the Hellenistic Etruscan period to the late Roman and late Antique period. The analysis considers both the locally-produced study collection pottery and the comparative collection of imported African pottery. Chapter 8 addresses Part F of the model evaluation scheme.

kilometer radius of the city center. The survey focuses on identifying clay sources close to Volterra, particularly along ancient roads serving the center. A number of analyses contribute to the clay study, including a firing test, fabric analysis, and soil characterization studies. The ceramic study and clay study provide a corpus of data which is then applied to the model evaluation scheme presented above. The results are presented in Chapters 2-13, following.

Chapter 9 presents the clay survey and sample collection. The survey was undertaken in order to permit the archaeological pottery, believed to have been produced locally, to be compared to local clay resources. Analyses of the clay samples are presented in subsequent chapters.

Chapter 2 introduces the case study of the ancient city of Volterra in Tuscany, Italy. It describes the geology and natural environment of Volterra, and outlines the city’s history and archaeological remains.

Chapter 10 presents the results of the Firing Test and Fabric Analysis of the clay samples collected during the survey. The Firing Test and Fabric Analysis were performed in order to test whether the clay samples would fire well, and to create fabric descriptions of the clay samples that were identical to and directly comparable with the characterization of the archaeological ceramics.

Chapter 3 introduces the study collection of archaeological pottery. It presents the results of the Quantification Analysis, which addresses Part A of the model evaluation scheme. Chapter 4 is the Pottery Catalogue. The catalogue presents reconstruction drawings of the forms and variants identified in the study collection. It provides the primary data source for Chapters 5 and 7 and serves as a general reference for the entire study.

Chapter 11 presents the soil characterization tests performed on the clay samples collected in the survey. Two complementary tests were performed, a Plasticity Analysis and a Particle Size Analysis. The clays were characterized in order to permit comparisons among the clay samples, to see if the natural clay sources surrounding Volterra were significantly different in character, and between the clay samples and the archaeological ceramics.

Chapter 5 presents the Formal Analysis of the archaeological pottery. The Formal Analysis establishes the functional categories present in the study collection, the ratio of closed to open vessel forms and variants, and the degree of variability represented by the study collection. It also examines patterns of change and continuity in the forms, variants, and wares present in the study collection. The conclusions from Chapter 5 are relevant to Part B of the model evaluation scheme.

Chapter 12 considers together the results of the both of field projects undertaken for the research: the ceramic study of Hellenistic Etruscan and Late Roman/Late Antique pottery found in Volterra; and the clay study of local Volterra clay samples. The chapter addresses Parts D and E of the model evaluation scheme.

Chapter 6 presents the Fabric Analysis. The Fabric Analysis comprises the characterization and classification of the clay pastes of the study collection pottery. It also includes an examination of the relationship of the resulting fabric groups with the study collection wares identified in Chapter 1, and forms and variants documented and discussed in Chapters 4 and 5. The results of Chapter 6 are significant to Part D of the model evaluation scheme.

Chapter 13 evaluates the External Change and Internal Development models of the late Roman to late Antique period of Italian history. Neither model is adopted in its entirety; instead, a new model of the transformation of the city and its craft economy is proposed on the basis of the research results.

Chapter 7 presents the results of the Technological and Economic Analysis of the study collection. This analysis consists of two projects: the description of the pottery production techniques and technology documented for the study collection; and the application of an economic value measure to the study collection and to imported African pottery recovered from Vallebuona. Chapter 7 addresses Parts C, D, and E of the model evaluation scheme. Chapter 8 presents the Material Culture Analysis, an exploratory analysis of pottery consumption in Volterra

7

CHAPTER 2: THE CASE STUDY OF VOLTERRA, ITALY Chapter 2 introduces the case study of Volterra in Tuscany, Italy. Relying on a significant body of scholarship on the ancient city’s natural environment, history, and archaeological remains, the chapter demonstrates that Volterra is an ideal case for studying the response of a local economy to global changes during the late Roman and late Antique periods. 2.1 Natural History of Volterra The city of Volterra lies in the center of the present-day region of Tuscany, Italy, within the province of Pisa (see Fig. 2.1). The landscape surrounding Volterra includes three primary environmental areas, each supporting a distinct traditional economy. The coastal area, where Volterra’s ancient port was located, was characterized by marshes and lagoons in ancient times, and some land suitable for agriculture. The middle valley is diverse. To the north of Volterra, it includes fertile alluvial plains and hillsides that support arboreal cultivation. The inland territory to the east of Volterra has fertile fluvial terraces among more inhospitable clayey hills mined for salt and alabaster. The wooded high valley regions (at elevations above 1000 meters) support a forest-pastoral economy, and provide mineral and metallic resources (Motta 1997:246; 1998:14-15). The city of Volterra is built on the summit of a ridge overlooking two river valleys, the Cecina to the south and the Era to the north. Three natural features of the site encourage human habitation: an easily-defended hilltop position; nearby communication routes; and an abundance of mineral resources and fresh water. The city center is built on a series of plateaus oriented northwestsoutheast, varying in height from 555 meters above sea level at the Piano di Castello to about 460 meters above sea level at the Piano del Guerruccia. The flat city plains are framed by steep vertical drops, including a spectacular landform known as the Balze, or “precipices.” A number of small torrential streams originate at the feet of the city, channeling the drainage of spring water and dividing the slope of the hill into vales as they make their way into the major rivers. Toward the valley bottom the hillsides slope more gently toward the Cecina and Era valleys. The Cecina river links Volterra to the coast, while the Era links it to the Arno valley in the north (Furiesi 2000:10, 12; Motta 1998:13-15; Terrenato 2000a:187). The Volterran ridge was formed by successive sedimentary deposits during the marine environment of the lower and middle Pliocene. The surface of the hill is composed of a layer of arenaceous limestone, which lies over layers of sand and clay. The superposition of the limestone on top of friable clays creates a situation of

great instability, as manifested by the dramatic landslides that created the Balze (Furiesi 2000:11-12; Servizio Geologico d’Italia 1965; Terrenato 2000a:187). Other aspects of the geology of the ridge are advantageous to human settlement. The arenaceous limestone creates a relatively level and well-drained plain, and provides a source of building material. The clay outcrops surrounding the city are easily accessible, and have been exploited since prehistoric times. Numerous springs arise at the sandy levels of the hill (between the limestone and clay), providing water. The Volterran ridge and surrounding hills are rich in mineral resources, including salt and alabaster (Furiesi 2000:12; Motta 1997:245-46; Terrenato 2000a:187). 2.2 Archaeology and History of Volterra Volterra presents the opportunity to examine how one habitation and administrative center was integrated into several distinct kinds of sociopolitical organization during the periods under consideration here: a city-state within the Etruscan confederation; a city center within the Roman empire; and an agglomeration of villages in the late Antique world. A significant body of research indicates that the role of Volterra as an economic, administrative, and cultural center for its territory was distinctly configured during each of these periods (Terrenato 1998i; Motta 1997; Carafa 1994). The Etruscan Period The Etruscan civilization rose out of a complex society which developed in northern Italy during the late Bronze Age and early Iron Age (1300-800 BC). Most archaeologists now agree that the Etruscans were of indigenous origin. The Etruscan period begins around 900 BC with the prehistoric Villanovan period, and ends with the incorporation of all Etruscan territory into the Roman Republic in the 3rd century BC. Etruria reached its period of greatest political and economic significance in the Mediterranean during the 6th to 5th centuries BC. The traditional Etruscan territory included the land between the Arno and Tiber rivers; during the apex of Etruscan influence on the Italian peninsula Etruria expanded northward into the Po valley and southward into Campania (Banti 1973:208-11; Barker and Rasmussen 1998:139-40; Camporeale 1991; Pallottino 1975; Spivey and Stoddart 1990:19-20, 80). Etruria was linked through common social and cultural institutions rather than an overarching, hierarchical political structure. Etruscan political organization was generally oligarchic, with important families controlling the territory of individual city-states. Each Etruscan city-

8

state—numbering twelve through most of Etruscan history, but reaching fifteen in the late Etruscan period— was composed of an urban center and a rural territory. A clientship system may have linked powerful individuals to the agricultural producers in the countryside, just as it created dependencies among individuals in the cities (Barker and Rasmussen 1998:90, 99-101, 177; Spivey and Stoddart 1990:140). The Etruscan City Volterra, called Velathri by the Etruscans, was one of the twelve Etruscan city-states. During Etruscan times, Volterra grew into an urban center at the heart of an extensive regional territory. The city experienced its period of greatest geographic and demographic expansion during early Etruscan times, including the late Archaic period from 570-470 BC and the Classical period from 470-300 BC. Late Etruscan times, the Hellenistic period from 300-31 BC, saw great political and economic expansion in Volterra. The process of urbanization in Volterra during early Etruscan times is visible archaeologically in the concentration of the population and in the reorganization of urban space. Public places were defined, public works developed, and public cults celebrated. Economic development is suggested by residents’ ability to finance public building projects, by the wealth of contemporary burials, and by the minting of Volterran coins (Furiesi 2000:28; Terrenato 1998a:31). The great Etruscan wall circuit of Volterra was constructed from the end of the 4th century to the beginning of the 3rd century BC (see Fig. 2.2). The wall, with a perimeter of seven kilometers, enclosed an area of approximately 116 hectares. The city gates of Porta all’Arco and Porta Diana still stand, the beginning and end of the cardo maximus, respectively. The foothills of the valley were probably connected to the city in a complex system, as suggested by the discovery of a tract of road leading from Vallebuona to the center (Fiumi 1976:8; Furiesi 2000:29; Maggiani 1993:103; Volpi 1992:189, 193). The ancient Acropolis was developed monumentally during the Classical Etruscan period. The Acropolis occupied the highest ground in Volterra, the Piano di Castello (Volpi 1992:194-95; Cristofani 1973:244-45). Other sanctuaries were constructed near Porta Docciola and near S. Michele, in the area believed to become the forum during the Roman period (Carafa 1998b:33). Etruscan cemeteries were located beyond the habitation areas. Badia, Portone, and Ulimeto were used for burial during this period (Volpi 1992:187, 188, 190). Further urban development and renovation occurred during late Etruscan times. Public works—including

roads, agricultural terraces, city walls, and religious and civic structures—allowed settlement in the city center on a far greater scale than before (Terrenato 1998b:37). The city walls, begun during the late Classical period, were completed during the Hellenistic period. Other urbanization efforts are seen in the construction of terracing walls and a drainage and canal system. Evidence for Hellenistic habitation, though scarce, indicates extensive private building activity throughout the city (Carafa 1998a:38-39; Carafa 2000:144-46; Maggiani 1993:100-1; Terrenato 1998f:72; Volpi 1992:190, 193). All the sanctuaries of the Archaic city were redecorated or monumentalized during the Hellenistic period. Particularly intensive building activity took place on the Acropolis, creating a high-density quarter with a religious function (Carafa 1998a:38-39; Fiumi 1976:12-13; Furiesi 2000:23-26; Volpi 1992:194). The Badia, Balze, Poggio alle Croci, and Ripaie burial areas were used during the Hellenistic period. Rich grave goods in the Hellenistic tombs include urns in tuff and alabaster, golden objects, bronzes, bone objects, and vases (Volpi 1992:187, 187-88, 190, 193, 196). During the Hellenistic period, specialized craft production developed in the city center. Alabaster urns, bronze objects, and painted ceramics are among the goods associated with the Hellenistic city center. Rural production may also have become more systematic or better organized at this time (Terrenato 1998b:37; Carafa 1998a:38). The Etruscan Territory Like most of the Etruscan city-states, Volterra was located inland with a separate port along the coast, later known as Vada Volaterrana. Recent survey work in Volterra has established the settlement patterns in northern Etruria during the Etruscan period. The Etruscan settlement pattern was established during early Etruscan times, when the diffuse settlement of small farmsteads gradually became more concentrated, especially near the coastal strip and along the inland rivers. By the Hellenistic period, most of Volterra’s territory was densely settled with small farms. This pattern is particularly characteristic of the Cecina river valley, the heart of Volterra’s territory. In core areas, there is substantial site continuity from the Orientalizing and Archaic periods into the Classical and Hellenistic periods—an early indication of the stability and conservatism of the Volterran settlement pattern throughout the period under study (Cherubini 1998:4647; Motta 1997:250-51; Pasquinucci and Gambogi 1995:227-28; Saggin 1998:44-45; Terrenato 1998c:4243, 1998j:95-96. See also Bruni 1995; Carafa 1994:115-

9

16, 118; Cateni and Maggiani 1997; Chellini 1995; Cucini 1986). Among the Etruscan city-states, Volterra had one of the smallest urban centers, but one of the largest rural territories. Terrenato (1998a) suggests that these urbanrural proportions may have required “capillary control” on the part of the Volterran leadership. Unlike their peers in southern Etruria, Volterran élites probably could not live permanently in the city. The presence of the élite in the countryside is indicated by prestige materials in the villages and burial tumuli nearby, and perhaps also by fortified structures (Terrenato 1998a:31; see also Carafa 1998b:33). The Roman Republican and Early Imperial Periods Etruria’s incorporation into Rome was largely peaceful. Armed resistance occurred only in the early years of the process, especially the 5th and 4th centuries BC, and involved southern cities more than northern ones. With the battle of Sentinum in 295 BC between Rome and the Quattuor gentes (the Samnites, Gauls, Umbrians, and certain Etruscans) Rome gained supremacy over the entire Italian peninsula. After 270 BC, relations were peaceful between the Etruscans and Romans (Pallottino 1991:129-29, 134-37). Volterra joined the Italic confederacy in 260 BC, and had generally good relations with Rome for the next two centuries. In 90 BC, Volterrans gained Roman citizenship through the lex iulia de civitate, and they were assigned to the Sabatina tribe. The critical years for the Romanization of Volterra, like many northern Etruscan cities, fell in the 80s BC with the Social War and then the Civil War between Marius and Sulla. In the civil conflict, Volterra sided with Marius, and was among last strongholds of the Marians. The city surrendered to Sulla in 79 BC, after a two-year siege. Following his victory, Sulla imposed strict sanctions on Volterra, depriving residents of citizenship and claiming Volterran land for Roman resettlement. Cicero, patron of the prominent Caecina family of Volterra, intervened on the city’s behalf and the sanctions were greatly reduced. Augustus’ reorganization of the empire’s territory placed Volterra in the seventh region, Etruria (Banti 1973:147; Fiumi 1976:5-6; Pallottino 1991:152-59; Terrenato 1998e:64-65). From 60 BC to 60 AD, Roman society transformed itself from a republican league to an empire with far-reaching borders. The greatest expansion of the empire was achieved under the Julio-Claudian dynasty. By the end of the 1st century AD, northern Etruria—and hence Volterra—lay within the Italian core of a far-flung empire.

The Roman City Volterra joined the Roman state in 80 BC, but only during the Augustan period (27 BC to AD 14) did the city gain a Roman aspect. The Romanization of the city included extensive urban renovation, accompanied by the destruction of the previous urban fabric. The remains of numerous public and private buildings dating to this period have been uncovered in Volterra (Furiesi 2000:4849; Regoli 1998b:63). The Roman forum is thought to have been near the church of S. Michele in Foro, although there is little archaeological evidence to support or refute the evidence of the toponym. Remains of construction in concrete from this area have been interpreted as belonging to the imperial Forum. A fragmentary Latin inscription was also found in the area (Fiumi 1976:16; Munzi 1998a:67, 2000b:12; Volpi 1992:192). The greatest public building of Roman Volterra was realized between the 1st century BC and the 1st century AD in the locality of Vallebuona: the Roman theater and associated porticus (Fiumi 1955:114; Luchi 1997:39-41; Munzi 2000c:55). (See Fig. 2.3.) Vallebuona had remained largely undeveloped in the Etruscan period, but during the Roman period it became part of an important civic and habitation area, connected to the presumed forum by the cardo maximus. Up to 10 meters of fill were placed against the natural slope to level the area for development (Carafa 2000:144-49; Fiumi 1944:378-79; Furiesi 2000:48; Munzi 2000b:13; G. Ricci 2000:155-57; Terrenato 1998f:72; Volpi 1992:191-92). Numerous archaeological finds indicate that the western side of Volterra was intensively developed for habitation during the Roman period. Roman-period houses were also built throughout other areas of the city, particularly in the core area later enclosed by the medieval walls (see Cristofani 1973:273-79; Fiumi 1976:84; Motta 1997:25355; Munzi 1998a:68; Volpi 1992:189-192, 196). Residents of Roman Volterra continued to use existing Etruscan cemeteries. Badia, Portone, Ulimeto, and Ripaie all contain Roman-era burials (Munzi 1998a:68; Volpi 1992:187, 188, 190, 196). The Roman Territory Settlement patterns in the countryside remained remarkably stable from the Etruscan to the Roman period, with significant continuity of individual sites. Especially in the middle valley of the Cecina, the overall pattern remained one of small and medium-sized farms. At these traditional settlements, no attempts were made to intensify agricultural production, which continued to be based on cereal cultivation for a local and regional market. The villa, key to the Roman model of economic production, was rare in Volterra’s territory. There is no

10

evidence of centuriation at Volterra (as seen in surveys of Pisa, for example). This suggests that Roman resettlement under Sulla was not very extensive (Terrenato 1998g:76-77, 1998j:95-96; Motta 1997:25051; Pasquinucci and Menchelli 1999:125-26, 130-31. See also Barker 1983:339; Barker and Symonds 1984:285; Carafa 1994:118; Carandini 1988:14). The main exception to the rule of rural stability is seen in the coastal areas and along the main Roman communication axes. In these areas, characteristically Roman settlement types appear, conspicuously the villa with its rationalized economy. During the early imperial period a Roman port was built at Vada, through which most of Roman-period trade between the Volterran area and the other Mediterranean ports was effected through Vada. Recent excavations have uncovered two bath structures, an horrea (warehouse), and possible macellum (market) (Menchelli 1998b:106-7; 1998a:1089; Pasquinucci and Gambogi 1995:231-32; Pasquinucci and Menchelli 1999:126, 134; Pasquinucci 1998a:104-5, 1998b:102-3, 1998c:98-99; Regoli 1998b:63; Terrenato 1998d: 78-79). Another interesting exception to the overall pattern of rural stability is seen in the Sterza valley, where small Hellenistic farms were abandoned and replaced by midsized settlements, possibly including two villas. Also at this time many kilns for firing bricks and common pottery appeared. Motta (1997) suggests that in this area an attempt was made to rationalize and intensify the rural economy in the Roman manner (Motta 1997:250). These sites in the Sterza Valley might be considered examples of what Terrenato (1998j) describes as a “thin network” of specialized, market-driven Roman production sites incorporated into the traditional Volterran economy (Terrenato 1998j:113). The Late Roman and Late Antique Period Roman history during the late Roman and late Antique periods (late 2nd century AD to mid-6th century AD) is considered by many scholars to entail the “provincialization” of Italy. According to recent Italian scholarship, this process involved transformations in the government apparatus, fiscal policy, and leadership demographics (Giardina 1986:4-5). The late Roman period begins in the late 2nd century AD and continues into the 3rd century AD. At this time, African provinces replaced Italy as the economic center of the empire. The political significance of the Italian peninsula also waned, as powerful local families took greater roles in governing the provinces. The first wave of barbarian invasions came during the late Roman period, a brutal indication that the military could no longer ensure the safety of Italy (Carandini 1986:6-8; Giardina 1986:4-5; Panella 1986:432. See also Brown 1971:22-25 and Marazzi 1998:123-30).

The Late Antique period of Italian history begins during the late 3rd and early 4th centuries AD. During this time, Italy lost even its symbolic power as center of the empire, when Constantine declared Constantinople the new Rome in AD 324. Major trade routes bypassed the peninsula, as the significant axis of trade was now between Africa and the eastern empire. At the same time, the growing significance of Christianity contributed to great changes in cultural, social, and administrative institutions (Brown 1971:27-29; Carandini 1986:9; Giardina 1986:4-5; Marazzi 1998:123-32). During the 5th century AD, the outlook of Italy was increasingly regional, both economically and politically. Land was consolidated into large estates, and local patron-client relationships became increasingly important. By the end of the 5th century, there was no effective central administration. A collection of regional governments controlled the peninsula, leaving Italy vulnerable to another series of barbarian invasions. Byzantium struggled to control Italy, entering into a debilitating war with the Goths from AD 535-553 (Augenti 1998:140; Brown 1971:36-43, 60, 115-19; Finley 1973:175-76; Marazzi 1998:132; Wickham 1984:15-18, 25). The Late Antique period concludes in the mid 6th century AD with the Lombard invasion. The Lombards entered Italy in AD 569, and within a few years controlled substantial areas of the northern Italian peninsula. Volterra became a seat of Lombard power around AD 590 (Augenti 1998:140-41). The Late Roman and Late Antique City Many of the broad historical trends of the late Roman to late Antique period are reflected in the settlement patterns of Volterra. Most dramatic were the changes within the urban center, indicating a decline in élite investment in civic life. During both the Etruscan and Roman periods, there had been continual investment in Volterra’s civic institutions and public works, seen in ambitious building programs undertaken during the 3rd century BC and during the 1st centuries BC and AD. The late Antique period is instead primarily a period of abandonment, rebuilding, and reuse, with limited new construction. Many civic buildings went out of use during late Roman and late Antique times. At the end of the 3rd century AD, activity ceased at the theater. Cisterns were abandoned and filled with rubbish. The temples on the Acropolis were no longer frequented (Fiumi 1955:137-38; Furiesi 2000:61; Munzi 2000c:43-48). There is evidence suggesting a possible civic revival during the 3rd and 4th centuries AD. In the city center, two new bath structures were built in Volterra, one just outside the city gate of S. Felice and one inside the porticus post scaenam of the theater in Vallebuona

11

(Corvo 1993:77-86, 2000; Fiumi 1976:20; Furiesi 2000:63-69; Iozzo 1995:35-36; Munzi 1993:41, 1998b:124, 2000a:194, 2000c:45; Munzi, Ricci, and Serlorenzi 1994:639-46; Terrenato 1998f: 73; Volpi 1992:191-93). Only two settlement areas of late Antique and early Medieval Volterra are well-documented, one near the present-day Piazza dei Priori and the other at the site of the current church of S. Giusto. The first settlement appears to have been centered on S. Michele, probably founded by the Lombards, and S. Vitale, a church of Byzantine foundation. This settlement probably used the Ripaie burial area. A second early Medieval habitation area, known as Pratum Martium, began at the site of the current church of S. Giusto, and extended as far as the Balze. This area probably used the first church of S. Giusto, and the Badia burial area (Furiesi 2000:76; Munzi 2000a:195). After the 4th century AD, monumental construction was no longer attempted in Volterra. Existing monumental buildings gradually went out of use, a process complete by the 5th century. Areas previously occupied by civic buildings were reused or plundered for building material, often replaced by huts and cabins made of more perishable materials. These small dwellings were surrounded by garden plots and pasture land. The degradation of the structures and adjacent lands resulted in the strata of Black Earth found in archaeological excavations throughout the heart of the former center (Brocato and Motta 2000:139-43; Motta 1997:253-55; Munzi 1998b:124, 2000a, 2000b:9; Munzi, Ricci, and Serlorenzi 1994:644-46; Pasquinucci and Menchelli 1999:136; G. Ricci 2000:161; Terrenato 1998f: 73). Prehistoric and Etruscan cemeteries were still used for late Roman and late Antique (Christian) burials, including Ulimeto, Poggio alle Croci, Ripaie, Portone, and Badia. Burials were also introduced within the city walls, however, suggesting that various areas of the city were dissolving into relatively independent settlement areas, and that areas belonging to the formerly unified urban center were now available for reuse (Motta 1997:255-57; Munzi, Ricci, and Serlorenzi 1994:644-46). Considering all this evidence, it appears that during the late Roman to late Antique period settlement in Volterra fragmented into small habitation areas surrounding local ecclesiastical institutions. Open space surrounded and separated the individual settlement areas, in the form of pastures, cultivated fields, and abandoned land (Munzi 1998b:124-25, 2000b:9). The Late Roman and Late Antique Territory In contrast to the urban center, settlement in the rural territory of Volterra appears relatively stable during the transition from the imperial period to late Antiquity,

retaining the pattern established as far back as the Hellenistic period: a dense network of small farms interspersed with larger villages, practicing a consistent, traditional agricultural economy. Although some sites disappeared during the middle imperial period, those that survived then remained through late Antiquity. This pattern held even in areas which previously had shown evidence of Romanization. Innovative settlement types were abandoned during late Antiquity, and the valley reverted to a pattern similar to the surrounding area. Some parts of the Volterran landscape, especially in coastal regions but also inland, were dominated by the large villas of rich landowners, with smaller farmsteads surrounding them. Significantly, many of these villas were renovated in the third century, as élites made them their primary residences. Only in the 5th century AD are signs of decline evident in the countryside (Mirandola 1998:128-31; Motta 1997:263-64, 250-51; Motta, Camin and Terrenato 1993:114-15; Pasquinucci and Menchelli 1999:136; Terrenato 1998j:109; Terrenato 2000b:196; Terrenato 1998g, 1998h). The port at Vada appears to have remained active throughout the 6th century AD crisis in Volterra, as excavations have turned up trade goods belonging to the late imperial and late Antique periods. The baths, horrea, and macellum also appear to have been used at least through this period, although perhaps not longer. The horrea was systematically reworked during the 4th century, but by the 6th century it appears to have been abandoned for its original purpose and reoccupied by squatters. Large villas in the area also remained occupied (Cherubini 1998:138-39; Pasquinucci 1998c:99; Pasquinucci and Gambogi 1995:232; Pasquinucci and Menchelli 1999:126, 134-38). 2.3 The Locality of Vallebuona The locality of Vallebuona has preserved important archaeological evidence regarding Volterra’s civic and social history, from the Hellenistic period of urban expansion to the late Roman/late Antique period of urban contraction. The locality was included in the Etruscan (and Roman) city walls, but excluded by the smaller Medieval wall circuit. Vallebuona, once a vital part of the Etruscan, Roman, and Late Antique city, was isolated from the city and thereby preserved from further development during Medieval and later times. Vallebuona has been the subject of systematic excavation and conservation from 1950 to the present day.1 From 1987 to 1989, a program of excavation was initiated in Vallebuona, part of a greater research project on Volterra coordinated by Andrea Carandini and Edina Regoli, and known as the Volterra Project. The results of the Volterra Project provide a detailed picture of Vallebuona’s 1

Cateni (1993) and Munzi (2000b) provide surveys of the archaeological research in the locality.

12

development from Etruscan to Late Antique times. 2 The Hellenistic and Roman Republican period was the period of initial urban development in Volterra. Public works, including roads, agricultural terraces, city walls, and religious and civic structures, allowed settlement in the city center on a far greater scale than before. In Vallebuona, efforts at urbanization are seen in the construction of terracing walls to retain the slope and permit roadways through Vallebuona. This permitted the first use of the area, although it was not yet occupied by houses or public structures. A drainage and canal system was also put into place, and a series of reservoirs were cut into the virgin rock (Munzi 2000c:24; Terrenato 1998j:105). The imperial Roman period (from Augustus to the first half of the 3rd century AD) saw extensive urban renovation in Volterra, accompanied by the destruction of the previous urban fabric. In Vallebuona this is seen in construction of theater and porticus during the 1st century BC and the 1st century AD, the contemporary tribune, and the great quantities of Hellenistic trash contained in the leveling fill for the theater and porticus (Carafa 2000:144-49). During the late Antique period, the urban center witnessed the dispersal and disappearance of various civic institutions, amounting to a profound transformation in the character of the formerly urban settlement. These trends are reflected in numerous changes in the previously civic area of Vallebuona. The theater was abandoned in the late 3rd or early 4th century AD. The Vallebuona baths (possibly a private venture) were constructed as the theater was going out of use, and were abandoned by the late 5th or early 6th century when a wall was built from the bath salvage. Another building of unknown function was destroyed during the 4th century. Black Earth levels accumulated in Vallebuona from the 4th century into the 6th or 7th century, indicating that the former civic area was now a habitation area with perishable dwellings and perhaps small gardens. During 2

The complete Volterra Project research program includes several projects: Gabriele Cateni directed a survey of the city of Volterra; Edina Regoli directed excavations in four areas of Vallebuona (Areas I-IV), revealing layers pertinent to all significant phases of ancient life in Volterra; Nicola Terrenato directed a survey of the Cecina valley; and Laura Motta, Nicola Terrenato, and Lorenza Camin directed excavations of two rural sites, Podere San Mario and Podere Cosciano. Publications from the Volterra Project include: Cateni, ed. (1993); Munzi and Terrenato, eds. (2000); Motta, Camin and Terrenato (1993); Terrenato (1992), (1996), (1998d), (1998j); Terrenato and Ammerman (1996); and Terrenato and Saggin (1994).

late Antiquity, the Vallebuona public buildings were obliterated (Brocato and Motta 2000). 2.4 Discussion Archaeological evidence from the core rural areas of the Volterra region indicate great continuity of social and economic patterns from the Hellenistic Etruscan period up to the threshold of the Lombard conquest, in contrast to the conspicuous changes occurring in the urban center during these eight centuries. This pattern has suggested to scholars that the resilience of the Volterran economy and society was located in its rural core, and that the urban center was less crucial to maintaining traditional social structures (Motta 1997:250-51). Motta (1997), Terrenato (1998i) and Pasquinucci and Menchelli (1999) have provided a convincing explanation for this pattern: Volterran élites, who often had longstanding local ties as well as impressive imperial connections, chose to divest in the urban center and invest in the countryside, a conscious and self-interested action intended to preserve the conservative social structures in Volterra. Beginning in the 3rd century AD through in the 5th century AD, both the senatorial aristocracy and probably also the local élites abandoned the urban center together with the burdensome civic duties their offices required. Often the Senatorial and local élites were one and the same, due to the Roman policy of leaving intact local power structures and incorporating local élites into the imperial government (Pasquinucci and Menchelli 1999:137; Terrenato 1998i:123) When the élite were no longer committed to civic life and the burdens it placed upon them, there was a crisis in civic institutions. Especially quick to go were the aspects of civic culture introduced by the Romans, manifested materially in the theater. There was no accompanying crisis in the fundamental social and economic structures of the countryside, because the élite classes chose to invest in their country properties and to move their economic activities to their country estates. Especially long-lasting were the traditional forms of the rural settlement, which for centuries formed the basis of Volterra’s wealth (Motta 1997:263-64; Pasquinucci and Menchelli 1999:137). Because of this marked and profound rural stability, Motta (1997) rejects the idea that late Antiquity was a period of crisis for Volterra, viewing it instead as a period of transformation which remains incompletely understood due in part to a scarcity of archaeological data and an insufficiently-detailed chronology. Certainly the Volterran data call into question the applicability of generalizing models for the period that envision a drastic disappearance of settlements, a concentration of the population into larger sites, and a regional administration

13

significantly different from the imperial period. In Volterra, only the urban center is deconstructed, becoming more like a cluster of villages within the city walls than a city in the Childean or classical sense. The countryside instead preserved the traditional settlement pattern and social structures (Motta 1997:263-64).

perspective. This in turn indicates the value of examining this transitional period not in order to understand how the preceding society fell, but rather in order to understand how the succeeding society developed; that is, to examine how late Antiquity emerged, paving the way for early Medieval Italy.

The results of recent research in the Volterra region suggest that it may be useful to approach the problem of urbanism and social complexity from a different perspective than the Childean tradition. It seems necessary to evaluate critically rather than simply accept Childe’s identification of complexity and urbanism. The decline of Volterra’s center was not accompanied by a radical change in sociopolitical organization, but rather worked initially to preserve the traditional, local sociopolitical structure, and ultimately may have had its most direct affect on the character of early Medieval society. Surprising as it may seem, the decline of the great ancient cities and the fall of the Roman Empire simply do not appear to have been felt as strongly locally as we might expect viewing them from a global

Comparing and contrasting the city during its period of development (the Hellenistic Etruscan period) and its period of decline (the late Antique period) seems the logical place to begin, as the most dramatic changes in late Roman to late Antique Volterra took place in the former center, amounting to a profound social, political, economic, and cultural transformation. A new kind of urban living and a new kind of urban population developed, yet little is known about life in the city during this period. And life in Volterra’s former urban center would most effectively be studied by examining both production and consumption patterns, rather than focusing primarily on the organization of production as Childe proposed.

Fig. 2.1: Location and territory of the ancient city of Volterra (After Motta 1997:Fig. 1)

14

Fig. 2.2 Plan of Volterra (After Fiumi 1977:Plate 1)

15

Fig. 2.3 Plan of Vallebuona, indicating ancient monuments, and two of the Volterra Project excavation areas (After Munzi, Ricci, and Serlorenzi 1994:Fig. 7)

16

CHAPTER 3: QUANTIFICATION ANALYSIS Chapter 3 introduces the archaeological ceramic study. The first section of the chapter presents the study collection of archaeological material and summarizes past research on the material. The second section presents the results of one analysis, the Quantification Analysis, providing an overview of the composition of the study collection and indicating patterns of change and continuity through time.

plain tablewares representing the balance. (Very few examples of Italian sigillata were recovered.) The majority of the utilitarian wares are also local products. The amphorae come from more varied regions; notable in quantity are wine transport containers from Campania and southern Etruria. Overall, around 90% of the Area IV wares are local products, while only 10% are imports (Ciotola 2000:169-70).

3.1 Study Collection

The Area I pottery collection represents the late Roman and late Antique period of Volterra’s history. The complete pottery collection from Area I consists of about 57% tablewares, 24% utilitarian wares, and 19% transport amphorae. In addition to locally-produced plain tablewares, the tablewares from Area I include a notable quantity of African and Italian sigillata. The majority of the utilitarian wares are locally-produced. Among the amphorae, oil transport containers from Africa are present in significant numbers. Overall, around 70% of the Area I wares are local products, while 30% are imports (Ciotola 2000:173-75).

The study collection is drawn from the ceramic materials from two excavation areas of Vallebuona, each considered to be broadly representative of the pottery consumed in Volterra for one of the two periods under consideration. Excavation Area IV includes several stratigraphic units with pottery belonging to the Hellenistic Etruscan period, the largest of which are VB89-4021 and VB89-4034/5. The pottery from these two units was selected to provide material pertinent to the Hellenistic period of Volterra’s urban history. Excavation Area I includes several stratigraphic units with pottery belonging to the late Roman/late Antique period, namely VB87I07-VB87I18. Pottery from these seven units was selected to provide material pertinent to this period of Volterra’s history.

Ciotola’s study is particularly useful in outlining changes in Volterra’s interregional trade connections through time. He determined that during the Hellenistic period local production dominated the Volterran market for tablewares and utilitarian wares, and few external Mediterranean products were distributed. Those scarce imports that did enter Volterra tended to be transport containers, not tablewares or utilitarian wares. In contrast, during the late Roman/late Antique period local production was much weaker, and imported pottery made up a much greater percentage of both the tablewares and utilitarian wares. According to Ciotola, the increase in the proportion of imported wares through time is more likely due to a significant decrease in local pottery production, rather than a significant increase in longdistance trade (Ciotola 2000:175-76).

Pottery from the Area IV and Area I deposits includes several functional groups: tablewares; utilitarian wares for storage and cooking; and transport amphorae. This study focuses on the tablewares and the utilitarian wares from the Vallebuona finds, paying particular attention to the pottery believed to have been produced locally or regionally. These groups include fine-textured slipped and color-coated tablewares (vernice nera), fine-textured plain tablewares (ceramica comune), and mediumtextured utilitarian wares (impasto). Ciotola (2000) studied the entire Vallebuona pottery collection, and published the definitive study of the material. His research has developed a clear picture of Volterra’s participation in a local and regional network of craft production, trade, and distribution, thereby providing an essential context for interpreting the local pottery industry. His results for excavation Areas I and IV may be briefly summarized.

This study was designed to complement Ciotola’s work. While Ciotola’s research allows Volterra to be placed within the broader Mediterranean economy, this research examines the effects of that incorporation on the local pottery industry. To avoid unnecessarily duplication of Ciotola’s study, only limited analyses were performed on the wares he studied. Imported table and utilitarian wares were not studied per se, but do serve as reference points when evaluating certain aspects of the local and regional wares, such as the technology of their production, and the range of their formal repertoire.

The Area IV pottery collection represents the Hellenistic Etruscan period of Volterra’s history. The complete collection from Area IV consists of about 68% tablewares, 19% utilitarian wares, and 12% transport amphorae. The majority of the tablewares are local products, with black-slip tablewares representing more than half of the total, and

17

Three quantitative measures were used: sherd count; sherd weight; and estimated vessel equivalents. The sherd count measure is simply a count of all the sherds in the study collection, distinguished according to excavation area (i.e., time period), ware, and vessel part. The sherd weight measure presents the weight of the sherds within the study collection, again distinguished according to excavation area, ware, and vessel part. The vessel-equivalent technique measures the completeness of individual vessels on the basis of rim and base (foot) diameter, expressed in terms of the percentage of the vessel rim or base preserved in an individual sherd. For each pottery group under study, a sum is found for the percentages of rims preserved and for the percentages of bases preserved; these sums are then averaged. Considered as a group, these measures provide a valuable indication of the relative proportions of the different wares in the study collection, and provide measures comparable to those found in most other studies.

3.2 Quantification Analysis The Quantification Analysis establishes the relative proportions of local pottery wares found in the study collection, and identifies patterns of change and continuity through time. This delineation of the composition of the study collection allows the collection to be examined in more detail in succeeding chapters. The methods and presentation format of the Quantification Analysis were developed so as to create records comparable to those of other published site reports. The Quantification Analysis presents standard quantification data for the study collection, derived from three measures: sherd count; sherd weight; and estimated vessel equivalents. It groups pottery according to wares universally understood among archaeologists in Italy. During the initial sorting of the study collection pottery, five wares were identified in the study collection, here labeled A-E. Wares A, B, and C are tablewares, while Wares D and E are utilitarian wares.

The Quantification Analysis results are summarized below.2 The results for each excavation area are presented in turn, followed by a brief discussion of change and continuity through time.

Wares A, B, and C are made of fine-textured fabrics, and are distinguished by the presence, absence, or quality of a surface treatment. Ware A has a true (vitrified) slip applied to the surface1, and is found only in Area IV, representing the pottery of the Hellenistic Etruscan occupation of Volterra. Ware A is known as black-gloss ware, black-slip ware, Campana ware, or vernice nera in the archaeological literature. Ware B has a color coat (non-vitrified slip) applied to the surface, and represents a poorer-quality version of Ware A. It is present in the pottery study collection from both excavation areas (time periods) examined here. For easy comparison with other publications, Wares A and B are combined in the quantitative results, as the distinction among them is qualitative and often ignored in quantitative discussions. Ware C has no surface treatment, and is known as common ware, plain ware, or ceramica comune in the archaeological literature. It is present in the pottery study collection from both excavation areas.

Hellenistic Etruscan Pottery from Area IV Table 3.1 below summarizes the quantitative results for each of the three wares represented in the study collection from Area IV, representing the Hellenistic Etruscan period of Volterra. Three wares were identified in the study collection pottery from Area IV. Ware A/B includes fine-textured fabrics with a slip or color coat applied to the surface. Ware C includes fine-textured fabrics with no surface treatment. Ware D includes medium-textured fabrics with no surface treatment. Table 3.2 below presents the proportion of each ware group in the Area IV study collection, according to the three quantitative measures employed here. This exploratory data analysis table is derived from the data presented in Table 3.1. As Table 3.2 illustrates, the results from the three quantitative measures provide a somewhat inconsistent picture of the proportions of the three ware groups included among the locally-produced pottery examined from Area IV.3 The sherd count and sherd weight measures suggest that the plain fine-textured ware (Ware C) is most abundant ware, comprising approximately 45% of the study group, with slipped and

Wares D and E are made of medium-textured fabrics. They are known as coarse ware, kitchen ware, utilitarian ware, or impasto in the archaeological literature. Ware D has no surface treatment, while Ware E has a color coat applied to the surface. Ware D is found in both excavation areas, while Ware E was documented only in the study collection from Area I (the late Roman to late Antique period).

2 A complete presentation of the data from the Quantification Analysis may be found in Appendix A of Ostman (2002:820-859). 3 This inconsistency indicates the necessity of employing more than one quantitative measure, and using comparable measures when comparing and contrasting across time and space.

1

Vitrification of the surface treatment was achieved by producing a slip of extremely fine clay particles, or colloids, probably through levigation. During firing, the colloids vitrify at lower temperatures than the body of the vessel.

18

Change and Continuity Through Time

color-coated wares (A and B) comprising around 30-37% of the study group, and the plain medium-textured ware (D) comprising around 18-25% of the study group. The vessel-equivalent measure instead suggests that the slipped and color-coated fine-textured wares (A and B) are most abundant, representing around 50% of the study group, with the plain fine-textured wares representing around 31% of the study group and the plain mediumtextured wares representing approximately 19% of the study group.

The results of the Quantification Analysis provide a general idea of the change through time in Volterran pottery production between the Hellenistic Etruscan period and the late Roman/late Antique period. Four trends may be identified across time: an increase in the relative proportion of plain fine-textured wares (Ware C), and a corresponding decrease in surface-treated finetextured wares (Ware A/B); a decline in the relative quality of surface-treated fine-textured wares, which in the later period no longer include true slip applications, but only color-coat applications; a relatively stable proportion of medium-textured wares; and the appearance of color-coated medium-textured wares in the later period. These trends appear regardless of which quantitative measure is used, as demonstrated in Table 3.5 below.

The quantification results all agree that the fine-textured wares (A, B, and C) dominate the locally-produced assemblage during the Hellenistic Etruscan period. If the mean relative percentage is calculated from the results of each measure, the fine-textured wares comprise approximately 79% of the study group, while the medium-textured ware comprises only 21% of the study group. Plain and surface-treated fine-textured wares (A/B and C) are present in roughly equivalent proportions during the period—each representing around 40% of the study group—compared to the 20% represented by the medium-textured ware (D). Figure 3.1 below presents these proportions graphically.

A chi-square test was performed to test the statistical validity of the pattern, and Cramer’s V was used to test the strength of association between the two variables (ware group and time period/excavation area). Sherd count was used as the quantification measure. Wares A and B were combined to create one group of surfacetreated wares. Wares D and E were combined, due to the low sherd count for Ware E. The significance level (α) was set at 0.05.

Late Roman and Late Antique Pottery from Area I Table 3.3 below summarizes the quantitative results for each of the four wares represented in the Area I study collection, corresponding to the late Roman/late Antique period of Volterra’s history. Ware B includes finetextured fabrics with a color coat applied to the surface. Ware C includes fine-textured fabrics with no surface treatment. Ware D includes textured-textured fabrics with no surface treatment. Ware E includes texturedtextured fabrics with a color coat applied to the surface.

The null hypothesis (H0) states: The proportion of sherds documented for each of the three ware groups (A/B, C, and D/E) is the same for the Area IV and Area I study collections. The directional hypothesis (H1) states: The proportion of sherds documented for each of the three ware groups (A/B, C, and D/E) is not the same for the Area IV and Area I study collections: the Area IV collection contains a significantly greater percentage of Ware A/B, while the Area I collection contains a significantly greater percentage of Ware C.

Table 3.4 presents the proportion of each ware group in the Area I study collection, according to the three quantitative measures employed here. Although the percentages vary across the three measures, Table 3.4 indicates that the plain fine-textured ware (Ware C) is the most abundant type of locally-produced pottery in the Area I study collection, followed by the plain mediumtextured ware, then the slipped fine-textured ware, and finally the slipped medium-textured ware. Despite the discrepancies among the three measures, the quantification results suggest that the plain fine-textured wares dominate the locally-produced pottery for the late Roman/late Antique period. When the mean relative percentage is calculated using the results from all three quantitative measures, plain fine-textured wares are seen to represent approximately 74% of the study group. Medium-textured wares follow, representing around 18% of the study group. Nearly all the medium-textured wares are plain, with only a small fraction slipped. Finetextured wares treated with a color-coat represent around 8% of the total study collection. These findings are presented graphically in Figure 3.2.

The results of the test reject the null hypothesis and support the directional hypothesis, while the value of Cramer’s V indicates a moderately strong association between to the two variables: N=6741; χ2=1871.44; df=2; p=0.0000 (one-tailed test); and V=0.5269. We may conclude that the over time there is a statisticallysignificant change in assemblage composition. Summary and Discussion The results of the Quantification Analysis are pertinent to Part A of the model evaluation scheme presented in Chapter 1. In Part A, the External Change model expects that through time the locally-produced pottery became restricted in terms of the number of different wares produced. It also expects the locally-produced pottery increasingly to emphasize the plain wares and utilitarian wares. The Internal Development model expects relative stability in ware diversity across time. While the specific

19

textured Ware D represents around 20%. Around 40% of the study collection consists of the combined category of slipped and color-coated fine-textured wares, Wares A and B. In contrast, during the late Roman/late Antique period, over 90% of the entire study collection consists of plain wares: the plain fine-textured Ware C represents around 74% of the collection, while the medium-textured Ware D represents around 17%. Only 9% of the collection consists of surface-treated wares: the finetextured Ware B represents around 8% of the Area I study collection, while the medium-textured Ware E represents only 1%. This pattern supports the prediction of the External Change model that the locally-produced pottery includes a greater proportion of plain wares over time.

wares present may change, there should be no dramatic difference in the variety of wares offered. The results of the Quantification Analysis show that the variety of wares remains stable through time. There are four wares in both the Area IV and Area I study collections: Wares A, B, C, and D for Area IV; and Wares B, C, D, and E for Area I. In addition, the overall proportion of fine-textured and medium-textured wares also remains more or less the same, at around 75-80% and 15-20% respectively. There is a significant qualitative change in the assemblage composition through time, however. Most apparent is the decrease in surface-treated wares, and the corresponding increase through time in the relative proportion of plain wares. The proportion of finetextured wares with a surface-treatment decreases through time, and there is an obvious decline in quality, as the slipped Ware A disappears and the color-coated Ware B is present in proportionately smaller quantities. A new medium-textured color-coated ware appears in the later period (Ware E), but it is documented in inconsequential amounts. During the Hellenistic Etruscan period, around 60% of the study collection consists of plain wares: the plain fine-textured Ware C represents around 40% of the collection, and the medium-

All considered, the results of the Quantification Analysis provide more convincing support for the External Change model than for the Internal Development model. The apparent stability in the variety of wares represents only weak support for the Internal Development model, because there is a notable qualitative difference in the range of wares documented for each period and a significant change in their overall proportions—and these changes follow the pattern predicted by the External Change model.

20

Table 3.1: Quantification Analysis results, Area IV Ware and measure rim base handle Ware A/ B sherd count 178 77 10 sherd weight (g) 1866 3580 243 vessel equivalent 10.58 29.41 n/a

wall

TOTAL for ware group

418 3964 n/a

683 9653 20.00

Ware C sherd count sherd weight (g) vessel equivalent

83 1635 10.62

57 3171 14.22

28 1914 n/a

652 8190 n/a

820 14910 12.43

Ware D sherd count sherd weight (g) vessel equivalent

85 1937 8.00

43 1581 7.55

1 108 n/a

201 4602 n/a

330 8228 7.78

Table 3.2: Wares in the Area IV study collection. Percentage by sherd count, sherd weight, and EVE Measure and ware sum figure percentage Sherd count Wares A and B 683 37.26 Ware C 820 44.74 Ware D 330 18.00 TOTAL for measure 1833 100.00 Sherd weight (g) Wares A and B Ware C Ware D TOTAL for measure

9653 14910 8228 32791

29.44 45.47 25.09 100.00

Vessel equivalent Wares A and B Ware C Ware D TOTAL for measure

20.00 12.43 7.78 40.21

49.74 30.91 19.35 100.00

Fig. 3.1: Wares in the Area IV study collection

Wares A and B 39%

Ware D 21%

Ware C 40%

21

Table 3.3: Quantification Analysis results, Area I Ware and measure rim base handle Ware B sherd count 39 20 7 sherd weight (g) 294 406 164 vessel equivalent 2.78 4.08 n/a

wall

TOTAL for ware group

9 72 n/a

75 936 3.43

Ware C sherd count sherd weight (g) vessel equivalent

124 1162 8.46

77 1911 9.73

65 1780 n/a

3999 29499 n/a

4265 34352 9.10

Ware D sherd count sherd weight (g) vessel equivalent

38 440 1.92

38 738 6.30

6 92 n/a

483 4680 n/a

565 5950 4.11

0 0 n/a

3 60 0.53

Ware E sherd count 0 3 0 sherd weight (g) 0 60 0 vessel equivalent 0.00 1.05 n/a Table 3.4: Wares in the Area I study collection. Percentage by sherd count, sherd weight, and EVE4 Measure and ware sum figure percentage Sherd count Ware B 75 1.53 Ware C 4265 86.90 Ware D 565 11.51 Ware E 3 0.06 TOTAL for measure 4908 100.00 Sherd weight (g) Ware B Ware C Ware D Ware E TOTAL for measure

936 34352 5950 60 41298

2.27 83.18 14.41 0.15 100.01

Vessel equivalent Ware B Ware C Ware D Ware E TOTAL for measure

3.43 9.10 4.11 0.53 17.17

19.98 53.00 23.94 3.09 100.01

4

Due to rounding, the totals in this table do not all equal exactly 100%.

22

Fig. 3.2: Wares in the Area I study collection

Ware B 8% Ware E 1% Ware D 17%

Ware C 74%

Table 3.5: Wares in the study collection: Change through time5 Measure Area IV, percentage Area I, percentage Sherd count Wares A and B 37.26 1.53 Ware C 44.74 86.90 Ware D 18.00 11.51 Ware E 0.00 0.06 TOTAL for measure 100.00 100.00 Sherd weight (g) Wares A and B Ware C Ware D Ware E TOTAL for measure

29.44 45.47 25.09 0.00 100.00

2.27 83.18 14.41 0.15 100.01

Vessel equivalent Wares A and B Ware C Ware D Ware E TOTAL for measure

49.74 30.91 19.35 0.00 100.00

19.98 53.00 23.94 3.09 100.01

Mean percentage Wares A and B Ware C Ware D Ware E TOTAL for measure

38.81 40.37 20.81 0.00 99.99

7.93 74.36 16.62 1.10 100.01

5

Due to rounding, the totals in this table do not all equal exactly 100%.

23

Table 3.5: Wares in the study collection: Change through time5 Measure Area IV, percentage Area I, percentage Sherd count Wares A and B 37.26 1.53 Ware C 44.74 86.90 Ware D 18.00 11.51 Ware E 0.00 0.06 TOTAL for measure 100.00 100.00 Sherd weight (g) Wares A and B Ware C Ware D Ware E TOTAL for measure

29.44 45.47 25.09 0.00 100.00

2.27 83.18 14.41 0.15 100.01

Vessel equivalent Wares A and B Ware C Ware D Ware E TOTAL for measure

49.74 30.91 19.35 0.00 100.00

19.98 53.00 23.94 3.09 100.01

Mean percentage Wares A and B Ware C Ware D Ware E TOTAL for measure

38.81 40.37 20.81 0.00 99.99

7.93 74.36 16.62 1.10 100.01

5

Due to rounding, the totals in this table do not all equal exactly 100%.

24

CHAPTER 4: POTTERY CATALOGUE e.g. to separate steeper conical forms from shallower conical forms. Within each shape group, forms are organized according to the following traditional functional groups, as presented in A. Ricci, ed. (1985:2129): glass; bowl; basin; tureen; plate or platter; cover or dish; pan; pot; unguentarium or similar vessel; olla; bottle or pitcher; and unknown form.

Chapter 4 presents the Pottery Catalogue. The catalogue includes reconstruction drawings of the most complete examples of all forms and variants identified in the study collection, organized according to a classification system unique to this study. The remaining chapters of the study rely on the Pottery Catalogue and the information it synthesizes and presents. Chapter 4 also presents a limited catalogue of the African pottery of Area I, selected to represent a comparative collection of the various forms of imported pottery.

After Peña, a form is defined as “a distinct vessel shape attained by a specific set of primary forming operations” (Peña 1999:60). Again after Peña, a formal variant is defined as “minor variations in vessel morphology and/or groups of vessels characterized by a distinctive set of secondary forming operations” (1999:60). As applied here, the definition of a form includes vessels of the same shape but different sizes.

Chapter 4 is divided into four sections. The first section provides a brief explanation of the classification system of the pottery catalogue. The second and third sections present the study collection pottery from Areas IV and I. The final section presents imported African pottery from Area I.

Forms are defined principally on the basis of rim morphology. Therefore, rims for each form or functional group are presented first, followed by bases. Unidentified rims, bases, handles, and other vessel parts are presented at the end of each ware section.

4.1 Classification System The catalogue of the study collection pottery from Areas I and IV was prepared on the basis of information collected and recorded in the field. Data were synthesized primarily from the diagnostic sherd records and corresponding drawings (amounting to 465 data sheets and accompanying drawings from Area IV, and 384 from Area I). Data were also obtained from photographs taken of all of diagnostic sherds (a total of over 2,000 photographs), and photomicrographs taken of approximately one-third of the diagnostic sherds (a total of around 350 photomicrographs).

The presentation of each form or formal variant includes the following elements: an identification of the functional category or a brief description of the form; list of the examples (diagnostic sherds) attested; size range attested; mode and median size; measurements of the most complete example documented; and a drawing of the most complete example documented. The pottery drawings are reproduced at half-size.

Organization of the Catalogue

Form Numbering System

The catalogue is divided into two parts, one for each period under examination. First, the pottery belonging to the Hellenistic Etruscan period (pottery from US 4034/5 and 4021, Area IV, Vallebuona) is presented. Second, the pottery belonging to the late Roman and late Antique periods is presented (pottery from US 07-18, Area I, Vallebuona).

Each form or variant was assigned a distinct number. The form number was assigned according to a two-part system including the following elements: RESTRICTION PREFIX + FORMAL GROUP . SHAPE PREFIX + FORM. The restriction prefix “1+” indicates a closed form and “2+” an open form. The formal groups were adapted from the Glossary in the Settefinestre publication by Andreina Ricci and colleagues (A. Ricci, ed. 1985:21-29). In the numbering system, “00” indicates a vessel from an unknown group, “01” a drinking glass, “02” a bowl, “03” a basin, “04” a tureen, “05” a plate or platter, “06” a cover or dish, “07” a pan, “08” a pot, “09” an unguentarium or similar vessel, “10” an olla, “11” a bottle or pitcher, and “12” a stopper.

In order to facilitate comparison between this catalogue and other relevant site reports and pottery typologies, the Pottery Catalogue is presented according to ware. The fine-textured wares (A, B, and C) are presented first, followed by the medium-textured wares (D and E). Within each ware, closed forms are presented first, followed by open forms. For both the closed group and the open group, forms are grouped according to similar geometrical shape. The geometrical shape groups are presented in the following order: sphere; ellipsis; oval; cylinder; hyperbola; and cone. In some cases these shape groups are further subdivided according to proportion;

The shape prefixes were adapted from Anna O. Shepard’s discussion of form, and were used to group vessels of similar geometrical shape (Shepard 1956:233-236; Figs. 23-24). The shape prefix “0+” was assigned to a vessel

25

exercise was helpful in classifying ambiguous reconstructed forms, but it did not seem wise to go on to draw parallels between the Vallebuona material and other sites when the forms of the study collection were so imperfectly reconstructed. I therefore concluded that it would be sufficient to assign a unique form number and provide supporting documentation.

of unknown geometrical shape, “1+” to a spherical vessel, “2+” to an ellipsoid vessel, “3+” to an ovoid vessel, “4+” to a cylindrical vessel, “5+” to a hyperboloid vessel, and “6+” to a conical vessel. Form numbers were assigned according to the following system. Each diagnostic sherd was assigned a number including the following elements: FABRIC . WARE – FORM . variant (part), where “FABRIC” indicates the fabric identified during the Fabric Analysis, “WARE” indicates the conventional ware name, “FORM” indicates the form number, and “(part)” indicates the part of the vessel represented by the sherd. The form suffix numbers were then assigned sequentially, using a lowercase letter to distinguish among variants. Bases and handles belonging to unidentified forms were differentiated by formal suffixes in the 80s and 90s, respectively.

Some of the study collection wares have been more extensively studied, however—notably the black-slip tableware (vernice nera). For these wares, an aborted attempt was made to provide cross-references to other widely-used typological sequences, particularly Morel (1981). Unfortunately, because I could not reconstruct the complete profile of most of the forms I documented, I was not able to classify the wares using standard typologies to the degree I had originally anticipated. Again, it seemed best simply to assign a form number and present the accompanying documentation produced as part of my research.

The classification system has been described only briefly here. Appendix A presents the form numbering system in greater detail.

4.2 Hellenistic Etruscan pottery from Area IV Forming and Finishing Techniques Wares A and B The Pottery Catalogue includes information on the forming and finishing techniques visible in the diagnostic sherds. Certain techniques were obliterated by later actions, so the documented actions do not represent the full production sequence for the form.

Closed forms Form 101.085b: small closed vessel • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.279: I.A-101.085b (4 cm) o Sherd IV.259: I.A-101.085b (4 cm) • One size documented: most complete example Sherd IV. 279 o rim diameter unknown o base diameter 4 cm o maximum diameter unknown but > 6.5 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o exterior of vessel smoothed o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard to hard in oxidizing atmosphere

The production techniques documented here indicate that the Volterran pottery producers used a production sequence common throughout the Mediterranean world. A pot was turned on the wheel and cut off with a string. At the leather-hard stage (half-dry), the pot was inverted on the wheel, and the base trimmed. Other parts such as handles, necks, and feet were added at this time (Hayes 1997:18). Final Comments It must be emphasized that due to the very fragmented nature of the collection the forms identified below are only tentatively assigned. That is, sherds were often assigned a form number despite having an incomplete profile reconstruction. The catalogue provides an adequate resource to satisfy the first goal of the Formal Analysis—a comparison through time at Vallebuona— but it may not prove exceptionally useful for other researchers attempting to compare the Vallebuona material to pottery recovered from other sites.

Form 101.286a: small closed vessel • One example documented o Sherd IV.267: III.B-101.286a (3 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown o base diameter 3 cm o maximum diameter unknown but > 7 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4.5 cm

Most of the pottery examined here is believed to have a predominately local distribution, with the result that there is little comparative literature on this pottery. An initial attempt was made to identify analogous forms within the published literature pertaining to comparable sites. This

26

•

•

Production and use o wheel-thrown o base trimmed o exterior of vessel smoothed o brown color coat applied to entire vessel o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere

•

Form 105.201a: platter (see similar forms 205.201 and 205.601) • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.347: III.B-105.201a (22 cm) o Sherd IV.344: IV.B-105.201a (26 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 22-26 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.347 o rim diameter 21.5 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 22 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o black color coat applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard to hard in oxidizing atmosphere

•

Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 24-28 cm o median size: rim diameter 26 cm Most complete example: Sherd IV.302 o rim diameter ca. 27 cm o base diameter unknown but < 24 cm o maximum diameter 28 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed or trimmed with a hard tool; evidence of this procedure remains on exterior but was smoothed away from interior o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard to hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 106.624a: cover or dish (see similar form 206.604) • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.371: III.B-106.624a (19 cm) o Sherd IV.288: IV.B-106.624a (30 cm) • Range of sizes documented: 19-30 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.288 o rim diameter 29 cm o base diameter unknown but < 26 cm o maximum diameter 30 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o gray/brown color coat applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard, Sherd IV.371 in reducing atmosphere and Sherd IV.288 in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 105.201b: platter (see similar forms 205.201 and 205.601) • One example documented o Sherd IV.291: III.B-105.201b (25 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 25 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 25 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed or trimmed with a hard tool; evidence of this procedure remains on exterior but was smoothed away from interior o gray/brown color coat applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 108.003c: pot • One example documented o Sherd IV.136: II.A-108.003c (15 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 15 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o rim incised/shaped o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 105.204: platter (see similar forms 205.204 and 205.604) • Three examples documented o Sherd IV.311: I.A-105.204 (24 cm) o Sherd IV.293: I.A-105.204 (26 cm) o Sherd IV:302: I.A-105.204 (28 cm)

27

Form 110.010e/p: olla with painted rim • One example documented o Sherd IV.442: IV.B-110.010e/p (15 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 15 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o painted decoration applied: two thin black lines at widest points of rim; one thick brown line in between the black lines o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 110.001b: olla • One example documented o Sherd IV.146: I.B-110.001b (13 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 13 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o exterior of vessel smoothed o brown color coat applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere Form 110.001d: olla with two incised lines, exterior rim • One example documented o Sherd IV.176: II.B-110.001d (14 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 14 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed, interior more carefully than exterior o two lines incised, exterior rim o gray/brown color coat applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 110.085a: flat base (probably for olla) • One example documented o Sherd IV.455: II.B-110.085a (12 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown o base diameter 12 cm o maximum diameter unknown but > 8 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o gray color coat applied to entire vessel o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere Form 111.001a: bottle or pitcher • One example documented o Sherd IV.313: I.A-111.001a (8 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 8 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed or trimmed with a hard tool o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired hard in reducing atmosphere

Form 110.010b: olla • One example documented o Sherd IV.321: IV.B-110.010b (14 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 14 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown but > 16 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o line incised, exterior rim o brown color coat applied to exterior of vessel and part of interior rim o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 111.001c: bottle or pitcher • One example documented o Sherd IV.292: III.A-111.001c (8 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 8 cm.

28

base diameter unknown maximum diameter unknown height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o rim trimmed/shaped o entire vessel smoothed o gray slip applied to entire vessel with uneven results o fired medium-hard in poorly-controlled atmosphere

o o o o o o

o o o

•

o o •

Form 111.003c: bottle or pitcher • One example documented o Sherd IV.374: IV.A-111.003c (8 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 8 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o rim trimmed/shaped o entire vessel smoothed o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere

•

•

Form 111.005a: bottle or pitcher • One example documented o Sherd IV.335: I.B-111.005a (8 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 8 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o brown color coat applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard/hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Sherd IV.346: Sherd IV.286: Sherd IV.303: Sherd IV.320: Sherd IV.154: Sherd IV.364: cm) Sherd IV.338: cm) Sherd IV.173:

I.A-202.101a.i (14 cm) I.A-202.101a.i (15 cm) I.A-202.101a.i (15 cm) I.A-202.101a.i (15 cm) II.B-202.101a.i (16 cm) III.A-202.101a.i (16 IV.A-202.101a.i (18 II.A-202.101a.i (21 cm)

Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 11-21 cm o median size: rim diameter 15 cm o mode size: rim diameter 15 cm Most complete example: Sherd IV.154 o rim diameter 16 cm o base diameter unknown but < 10 cm o maximum diameter 16 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 5 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed; exterior more carefully than interior o rough area without slip on Sherd IV.338 may indicate where a handle was attached o surface treatment applied to entire vessel: black slip for Ware A, brown or black color coat for Ware B o fired soft to medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202.101a.ii: bowl • One example documented o Sherd IV.383: IV.B-202.101a.ii (15 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 15 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 15 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o brown color coat applied: entire interior coated, and upper centimeter of exterior coated; dribbles on exterior suggest that vessel was dipped and solution swirled in interior, then vessel was emptied and uprighted o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Open forms Form 202.101a.i: bowl • Eleven examples documented (slip on entire vessel) o Sherd IV.138: II.A- 202.101a.i (11 cm) o Sherd IV.359: IV.B-202.101a.i (13 cm) o Sherd IV.300: III.A- 202.101a.i (14 cm)

29

Form 202.101b: bowl • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.159: I.A-202.101b (18 cm) o Sherd IV.124: II.A-202.101b (21 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 18-21 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.124 o rim diameter 21 cm o base diameter unknown but < 14 cm o maximum diameter 21 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired soft to medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

o o

o

decorated when leather-hard: two lines incised on exterior rim surface treatment applied to entire vessel: black slip for Ware A, gray color coat for Ware B fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202.101g: bowl • One example documented o Sherd IV.139: II.A-202.101g (18 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 18 cm o base diameter unknown but < 16 cm o maximum diameter 18 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o exterior rim incised/shaped o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired soft/medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202.101c: basin • One example documented o Sherd IV.126: I.B-202.101c (21 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 21 cm o base diameter unknown but < 17 cm o maximum diameter 21 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed or trimmed with a hard tool; evidence of this procedure remains on exterior but was smoothed away from interior o rim trimmed/shaped o gray color coat applied to entire vessel o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202.102a: bowl • One example documented o Sherd IV.145: I.A-202.102a (16cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 16 cm o base diameter unknown but < 11 cm o maximum diameter 16 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o rim incised/shaped o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202.101d: bowl with two incised lines, exterior rim • Three examples documented o Sherd IV.129: III.A-202.101d (18 cm) o Sherd IV.123: I.A-202.101d (19 cm) o Sherd IV.140: II.B-202.101d (21 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 18-21 cm o median size: rim diameter 19 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.123 o rim diameter 19 cm o base diameter unknown but < 16 cm o maximum diameter 29 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed

Form 202.102b: bowl • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.354: III.B-202.102b (18 cm) o Sherd IV.132: II.B-202.102b (21 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 18-21 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.132 o rim diameter 21 cm o base diameter unknown but < 16 cm o maximum diameter 21 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o exterior rim trimmed/shaped

30

o o o o

entire vessel smoothed gray/brown color coat applied to entire vessel fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere color coat worn on lip, possibly from use as cover

•

Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202.185b: bowl • One example documented o Sherd IV.283: III.B-202.185b (3.25 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown but > 7 cm o base diameter 3.25 cm o maximum diameter >7 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o exterior of vessel smoothed o gray/brown color coat applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202.103a: bowl • One example documented o Sherd IV.305: III.A-202.103a (11 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 11 cm o base diameter unknown but < 5 cm o maximum diameter 11 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o black/gray slip applied to entire vessel; there is an area on the exterior where slip appears to be preserved but where it contains no pigment o fired medium-hard/hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202.186a.i: bowl (slip on entire surface) • Three examples documented o Sherd IV.156: I.B-202.186a.i (3.5 cm) o Sherd IV.175: I.B-202.186a.i (5 cm) o Sherd IV.165: I.B-202.186a.i (6.5 cm) • Range of sizes documented documented: base diameter 3.5-9 cm o median size: base diameter 5 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.175 o rim diameter unknown but > 11 cm o base diameter 5 cm o maximum diameter > 11 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 5.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o base trimmed o entire vessel smoothed o gray/brown color coat applied to entire vessel (no slip is present inside ring of exterior base of Sherd IV.165) o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202.103b: bowl • One example documented o Sherd IV.349: IV.B-202.103b (19 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 19 cm o base diameter unknown but < 16 cm o maximum diameter 19 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o black color coat applied to entire vessel o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere Form 202.104a: bowl • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.314: I.A-202.104a (14 cm) o Sherd IV.177: I.A-202.104a (18 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 14-18 cm o median size documented: rim diameter 16 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.314 o rim diameter 14 cm o base diameter unknown but < 8 cm o maximum diameter 14 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3.5 cm

Form 202.186a.ii: bowl • One example documented o Sherd IV.169: III.B-202.186a.ii (9 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown but > 12 cm o base diameter 9 cm o maximum diameter > 11 cm

31

height unknown; maximum preserved height 3.5 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o base trimmed o entire vessel smoothed o color coat applied, probably to interior and upper few centimeters of exterior (one dribble of slip is preserved on exterior) o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

o

o

•

o

surface treatment applied to entire vessel: black slip for Ware A, gray/brown color coat for Ware B; in some cases, streaks and thin spots are visible under base fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202/5.186a.ii: bowl • Eight examples documented o Sherd IV.263: I.A-202/5.186a.ii (5.25 cm) o Sherd IV.168: IV.B-202/5.186a.ii (6 cm) o Sherd IV.170: I.B-202/5.186a.ii (6 cm) o Sherd IV.268: III.B-202/5.186a.ii (6 cm) o Sherd IV.281: III.B-202/5.186a.ii (6 cm) o Sherd IV.161: IV.B-202/5.186a.ii (7 cm) o Sherd IV.265: I.B-202/5.186a.ii (8 cm) o Sherd IV.254: IV.B-202/5.186a.ii (9 cm) • Range of sizes documented: base diameter 5.259 cm o median size: base diameter 6 cm o mode size: base diameter 6 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.168 o rim diameter unknown but > 18 cm o base diameter 6 cm o maximum diameter > 18 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o base trimmed o entire vessel smoothed; interior more carefully than exterior o gray/brown color coat applied: entire interior coated, and upper few centimeters of exterior coated; dribbles on exterior suggest that vessel was dipped and solution swirled in interior, then vessel was emptied and uprighted; in some cases, dribbles were wiped afterwards o fired medium-hard/hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202.186d: bowl with one incised line, exterior body • One example documented o Sherd IV.166: IV.B-202.186d (8 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown but > 12 cm o base diameter 8 cm o maximum diameter > 12 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 5.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o base trimmed, poorly o entire vessel smoothed; exterior more carefully than interior o brown color coat applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere Form 202/5.186a.i: bowl • Five examples documented o Sherd IV.144: II.B-202/5.186a.i (4 cm) o Sherd IV.163: I.A-202/5.186a.i (6 cm) o Sherd IV.162: I.A-202/5.186a.i (6.5 cm) o Sherd IV.277: III.B-202/5.186a.i (6.5 cm) o Sherd IV.153: IV.A-202/5.186a.i (7 cm) • Range of sizes documented: base diameter 4-7 cm o median size: base diameter 6.5 cm o mode size: base diameter 6.5 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.162 o rim diameter unknown but > 14 cm o base diameter 6.5 cm o maximum diameter > 14 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o base trimmed o entire vessel smoothed

Form 202/5.186k.i: bowl with three incised lines, interior base • One example documented o Sherd IV.174: I.A-202/5.186k.i (4 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown but > 4.5 cm

32

base diameter 3 cm maximum diameter unknown height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o base trimmed o entire vessel smoothed o interior base decorated when leather hard; preserved are three incised lines o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

o o

o o o

•

black slip applied to entire vessel fired medium-hard/hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202/5.186k.iv: bowl with two incised lines and stamp design, interior base • One example documented o Sherd IV.276: I.A-202/5.186k.iv (6 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown o base diameter 6 cm o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o base trimmed o entire vessel smoothed o interior base decorated when leather hard; preserved is one stamp imprint surrounded by two incised lines o brown/black slip applied to entire vessel o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202/5.186k.ii: bowl with roulette and stamp design, interior base • One example documented o Sherd IV.248: I.A-202/5.186k.ii (4.5 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown o base diameter 4.5 cm o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o base trimmed o entire vessel smoothed o interior base decorated when leather hard; preserved is one stamp imprint surrounded by three rows of roulette impressions o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere o slip worn on base from use

Form 202/5.186k.v: bowl with roulette and stamp design, interior base • One example documented o Sherd IV.150: I.A-202/5.186k.v (7 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown o base diameter 7 cm o maximum diameter unknown but > 12 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o base trimmed o entire vessel smoothed o interior base decorated when leather hard: preserved is one stamp imprint at center, surrounded by at least four rows of roulette impressions o black slip applied to entire vessel; slip is streaky near base and absent inside ring of base o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202/5.186k.iii: bowl with roulette and stamp design, interior base • One example documented o Sherd IV.264: I.A-202/5.186k.iii (4.5 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown o base diameter 4.5 cm o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o base trimmed o entire vessel smoothed o interior base decorated when leather hard; preserved is one stamp imprint surrounded by two rows of roulette impressions

Form 202/5.186k.vi: bowl with roulette and stamp design, interior base • One example documented o Sherd IV.256: I.A-202/5.186k.vi (7 cm)

33

•

•

Form 202.202a: bowl • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.315: I.A-202.202a (13 cm) o Sherd IV.160: I.A-202.202a (16 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 13-16 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.315 o rim diameter 13 cm o base diameter unknown but < 9 cm o maximum diameter 13 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed, interior more carefully than exterior o rim incised/shaped o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

One size documented o rim diameter unknown o base diameter 7 cm o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o base trimmed o entire vessel smoothed o interior base decorated when leather hard; preserved are: two stamps applied alternately 4 times each (for a total of eight imprints) at center; stamped designs are surrounded by at least one row of roulette impressions o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202.201a: bowl • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.125: I.A-202.201a (14 cm) o Sherd IV.309: III.A-202.201a (16 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 14-16 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.125 o rim diameter 14 cm o base diameter unknown but < 10 cm o maximum diameter 14 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard to hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202.202b: bowl • One example documented o Sherd IV.368: I.A-202.202b (17 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 17 cm o base diameter unknown but < 16 cm o maximum diameter 17 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o rim incised/shaped o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202.201e: bowl with two incised lines, exterior rim • One example documented o Sherd IV.336: III.A-202.201e (16 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 16 cm o base diameter unknown but < 15 cm o maximum diameter 16 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o two lines incised, exterior rim o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202.202k.i: bowl with six rings of roulette and one incised line, interior base • One example documented o Sherd IV.297: I.A-202.202k.i (10 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 10 cm o base diameter unknown but < 4 cm o maximum diameter 10 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o base trimmed o entire vessel smoothed o decorated when leather-hard: preserved are one incised line and seven or more rows of roulette design o black slip applied to entire vessel

34

o

fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

o o

Form 202.204a: bowl • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.318: I.A-202.204a (9 cm) o Sherd IV.127: II.A-202.204a (21 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 9-21 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.318 o rim diameter 9 cm o base diameter unknown but < 5 cm o maximum diameter 9 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed, interior more carefully than exterior o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere

o

o

base trimmed, rapidly and poorly entire vessel smoothed; interior more carefully than exterior brown color coat applied: entire interior coated, and upper few centimeters of exterior coated; dribbles on exterior suggest that vessel was dipped and solution swirled in interior, then vessel was emptied and uprighted fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere; non-oxidized circle in center of interior base of Sherd IV.275 may be evidence of kiln stacking

Form 202.286k.i: bowl with incised lines and stamped design, interior base • One example documented o Sherd IV.270: II.B-202.286k.i (5.5 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown but > 12 cm o base diameter 5.5 cm o maximum diameter > 12 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 5.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o base trimmed o entire vessel smoothed o decoration applied when leather hard: preserved are 2 incised lines and 3 stamped designs o gray color coat applied to entire vessel o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere; non-oxidized circle (diameter 4.5 cm) off-center of interior base of Sherd IV.275 may be evidence of stacking smaller bowls on top in kiln

Form 202.204d: bowl • One example documented o Sherd IV.172: I.A-202. 204d (18 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 18 cm o base diameter unknown but < 15 cm o maximum diameter 18 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o exterior rim incised/shaped o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202.286k.ii: bowl with one or more grooves, interior base • Two example documented o Sherd IV.269: III.B-202.2.86k.ii (6 cm) o Sherd IV.274: I.B-202.2.86k.ii (8 cm) • Range of sizes documented: base diameter 6-8 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.269 o rim diameter unknown but > 10 cm o base diameter 6 cm o maximum diameter > 10 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o base trimmed o entire vessel smoothed

Form 202.286a: bowl • Three examples documented o Sherd IV.278: IV.B-202.286a (5.5 cm) o Sherd IV.151: IV.B-202.286a (6 cm) o Sherd IV.275: IV.B-202.286a (6 cm) • Range of sizes documented documented: base diameter 5.5-6 cm o median size: base diameter 6 cm o mode size: base diameter 6 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.278 o rim diameter unknown but > 12.5 cm o base diameter 5.5 cm o maximum diameter > 12 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown

35

o o o

one or more grooves incised, interior base, probably while still wet color coat applied to entire vessel; surface treatment color not uniform fired medium-hard in poorly-controlled atmosphere

•

Form 202.386a: bowl • One example documented o Sherd IV.280: III.B-202.386a (4.5 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown but > 9 cm o base diameter 4.5 cm o maximum diameter unknown but > 9 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o base trimmed o gray/brown color coat applied: entire interior coated, and upper few centimeters of exterior coated; dribbles on exterior wiped off o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o rim trimmed/shaped; may have been intended for use with lid o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 203.202a: basin • One example documented o Sherd IV.367: IV.B-203.202a (21 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 21 cm o base diameter unknown but < 17cm o maximum diameter 21 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o brown color coat applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere Form 203.202b: basin • Six examples documented o Sherd IV.171: I.B-203.202b (21 cm) o Sherd IV.142: II.A-203.202b (21 cm) o Sherd IV.363: IV.B-203.102a (21 cm) o Sherd IV.378: I.B-203.202b (22 cm) o Sherd IV.380: III.B-203.202b (23 cm) o Sherd IV.128: II.A-203.202b (24 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 21-24 cm o median size: rim diameter 21.5 cm o mode size: rim diameter 22 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.378 o rim diameter 22 cm o base diameter unknown but < 15 cm o maximum diameter 22 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o surface treatment applied to entire vessel: black slip fro Ware A and gray color coat for Ware B (note: in some cases the color coat treatment approaches a true slip) o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 203.101c: basin • One example documented o Sherd IV.323: III.B-203.101c (27 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 27 cm o base diameter unknown but < 22 cm o maximum diameter 27 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 7.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o black/brown color coat applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere Form 203.201h: basin • One example documented o Sherd IV.287: I.A-203.201h (36 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 36 cm; probably took lid with diameter of 35 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 36 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm

36

Form 205.201a: platter (see also similar forms 105.201 and 205.601) • Nine examples documented o Sherd IV.290: I.A-205.201a (20 cm) o Sherd IV.319: I.A-205.201a (21 cm) o Sherd IV.343: IV.B-205.201a (22 cm) o Sherd IV.157: I.A-205.201a (26 cm) o Sherd IV.148: III.B-205.201a (28 cm) o Sherd IV.350: IV.B-205.201a (34 cm) o Sherd IV.306: I.A-205.201a (36 cm) o Sherd IV.304: I.A-205.201a (42 cm) o Sherd IV.152: I.A-205.201a (46 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 20-46 cm o median size documented: rim diameter 28 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.306 o rim diameter 36 cm o base diameter unknown but < 26 cm o maximum diameter 36 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown (great strength and skill were required to throw such a large form) o entire vessel smoothed; in some examples there is evidence that a hard tool was used to smooth or trim the vessels (evidence of this procedure remains on exterior but was smoothed away from interior) o surface treatment applied to entire vessel: black slip for Ware A vessels and black color coat for Ware B vessels o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 203.202d: basin • One example documented o Sherd IV.369: I.A-203.202d (36 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 36 cm o base diameter unknown but < 32 cm o maximum diameter 36 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o rim trimmed/shaped o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere Form 203.203d: basin (possibly pot) • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.339: IV.B-203.203d (20 cm) o Sherd IV.155: IV.B-203.203d (21 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 20-21 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.155 o rim diameter 21 cm o base diameter unknown but < 14 cm o maximum diameter 21 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o rim trimmed o brown color coat applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 205.201d: bowl with one incised line, exterior rim • One example documented o Sherd IV.342: III.B-205.201d (19 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 19 cm o base diameter unknown but < 18 cm o maximum diameter 19 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o one line incised, exterior rim o black/gray slip applied to entire vessel o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 203.601c: basin (?) • One example documented o Sherd IV.143: II.A-203.601c (21 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 21 cm o base diameter unknown but < 19 cm o maximum diameter 21 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o rim trimmed/shaped; may have been intended for use with lid o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

37

Form 205.204: platter (see also similar forms 105.204 and 205.604) • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.289: I.A-205.204 (23 cm) o Sherd IV.312: I.A-205.204 (28 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 23-28 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.312 o rim diameter 28 cm o base diameter unknown but < 22 cm o maximum diameter 28 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere

•

•

One size documented o rim diameter 27 cm o base diameter unknown but < 22 cm o maximum diameter 27 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o black/gray slip applied to entire vessel o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 205.214a: platter • One example documented o Sherd IV.316: I.A-205.214a (42 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 42 cm o base diameter unknown but < 34 cm o maximum diameter 42 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.25 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed; exterior more carefully than interior o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 205.213a: plate with incised line • One example documented o Sherd IV.317: I.A-205.213a (26 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 26 cm o base diameter unknown but < 22 cm o maximum diameter 26 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 205.214b: plate • One example documented o Sherd IV.299: I.A-205.214b (26 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 26 cm o base diameter unknown but < 18 cm o maximum diameter 26 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 205.213b: plate • One example documented o Sherd IV.295: I.A-205.213b (25 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 25 cm o base diameter unknown but < 15 cm o maximum diameter 25 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed or trimmed using a hard tool; evidence of this procedure remains on exterior but was smoothed away from interior o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 205.215b: plate • One example documented o Sherd IV.356: IV.B-205.215b (28 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 28 cm o base diameter unknown but < 20 cm o maximum diameter 28 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed

Form 205.213c: plate • One example documented o Sherd IV.362: I.A-205.213c (27 cm)

38

o o

black/gray color coat applied to entire vessel fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

o o o

Form 205.216a: plate • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.167: I.A-205.216a (21 cm) o Sherd IV.164: I.B-205.216a (22 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 21-22 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.164 o rim diameter 22 cm o base diameter unknown but < 14 cm o maximum diameter 22 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o surface treatment applied to entire vessel: black slip applied to Ware A; black color coat applied to Ware B o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere

brown color coat applied to entire vessel decorative painting on rim: 2 thin black lines preserved fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 205.286a: plate or platter • One example documented o Sherd IV.249: I.A-205.286a (7 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown but > 15 cm o base diameter 7 cm o maximum diameter unknown but > 15 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o base trimmed o entire vessel smoothed o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere o slip worn on base, presumably from use as plate

Form 205.216b: plate • One example documented o Sherd IV.296: III.A-205.216b (21 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 21 cm o base diameter unknown but < 15 cm o maximum diameter 21 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 205.286k.i: bowl, plate or platter; incised design of three thick lines and four thin lines, interior base • One example documented o Sherd IV.253: I.A-205.286k.i (6.25 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown but > 10 cm o base diameter 6.25 cm o maximum diameter unknown but > 10 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o base trimmed o entire vessel smoothed o decoration applied to interior base when leather-hard: 3 thick incised lines and 4 thin incised lines o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 205.216c/p.i: plate with slip and painted line decoration, interior rim • One example documented o Sherd IV.337: III.B-205.216c/p.i (26 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 26 cm o base diameter unknown but < 22 cm o maximum diameter 26 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o rim trimmed/shaped

Form 205.286k.ii: bowl, plate or platter; four incised lines and roulette design, interior base • One example documented o Sherd IV.252: I.A-205.286k.ii (7.25 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown but > 8 cm

39

Form 205/6.604b: platter or cover (see also similar forms 105.201 and 205.201) • One example documented o Sherd IV.361: III.A-205.604b (28 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 28 cm o base diameter unknown but < 22 cm o maximum diameter 28 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed or trimmed using a hard tool; evidence of this procedure remains on exterior but was smoothed away from interior o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere o slip worn on rim, possibly from use as cover

base diameter 7.25 cm maximum diameter unknown but > 8 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o base trimmed o entire vessel smoothed o decoration applied to interior base when leather-hard: preserved are four incised lines and two lines of roulette o black slip applied to entire vessel except inside ring of exterior base; drip marks are visible inside ring of exterior base suggesting the vessel was dipped in the slip o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere o o

•

Form 205/6.601a: platter or cover (see also similar forms 105.201 and 205.201) • Six examples documented o Sherd IV.373: I.A-205/6.601a (23 cm) o Sherd IV.147: I.A-205/6.601a (26 cm) o Sherd IV.149: II.B-205/6.601a (28 cm) o Sherd IV.307: I.A-205/6.601a (28 cm) o Sherd IV.310: II.A-205/6.601a (28 cm) o Sherd IV.130: II.A-205/6.601a (32 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 23-32 cm o median size: rim diameter 28 cm o mode size: rim diameter 28 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.149 o rim diameter 28 cm o base diameter unknown but < 22 cm o maximum diameter 28 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed or trimmed using a hard tool; evidence of this procedure remains on exterior but was smoothed away from interior o rim trimmed/shaped o black slip applied to entire vessel; in some cases slip layer is thinner on exterior than interior o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere o in some examples, slip is worn on rim, possibly from use as cover

Form 206.201c: cover or dish • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.141: II.A-206.201c (21 cm) o Sherd IV.285: I.A-206.201c (22 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 21-22 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.285 o rim diameter 22 cm o base diameter unknown but < 20 cm o maximum diameter 22 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o rim trimmed/shaped o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere Form 206.201d: cover or dish • One example documented o Sherd IV.137: II.A-206.201d (26 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 26 cm o base diameter unknown but < 24 cm o maximum diameter 26 cm o median size documented: 22 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.285 o rim diameter 22 cm o base diameter unknown but < 20 cm o maximum diameter 22 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1 cm

40

•

•

Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o rim trimmed/shaped o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 206.201e: cover or dish • One example documented o Sherd IV.294: I.A-206.201e (19 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 19 cm o base diameter unknown but < 17 cm o maximum diameter 19 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o rim trimmed; incised o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere o slip worn on rim, possibly from use as cover

Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed; interior more carefully than exterior o rim of vessel dipped in brown color coat, covering upper 3 cm of vessel o fired medium-hard/hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 206.202d: cover or dish with incised line, interior rim • One example documented o Sherd IV.377: III.B-206.202d (15 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 15 cm o base diameter unknown but < 8 cm o maximum diameter 15 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed; exterior more carefully than interior o line incised interior rim when leather hard o brown color coat applied to entire vessel o fired soft in reducing atmosphere

Form 206.202a.i: cover or dish • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.382: I.A-206.202a.i (14 cm) o Sherd IV.366: II.B-206.202a.i (16 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 14-16 • Most complete example: Sherd IV.366 o rim diameter 16 cm o base diameter unknown but < 12 cm o maximum diameter 16 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o surface treatment applied to entire vessel: black slip for Ware A, brown color coat for Ware B o fired medium-hard to hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 206.301d: cover or dish with two incised lines, interior rim • One example documented o Sherd IV.301: I.A-206.301d (13 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 13 cm o base diameter unknown but < 10 cm o maximum diameter 13 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o two lines incised interior rim when leather hard o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 206.202a.ii: cover or dish, partially color-coated • One example documented o Sherd IV.357: IV.B-206.202a.ii (17 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 17 cm o base diameter unknown but < 9 cm o maximum diameter 17 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3.5 cm

Form 206.601d: cover or dish • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.375: III.A-206.601d (16 cm) o Sherd IV.348: IV.A-206.601d (20 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 16-20 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.375 o rim diameter 16 cm o base diameter unknown but < 13 cm

41

maximum diameter 16 cm height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere; spalling caused by rehydration of calcareous inclusions after firing

•

o o

•

Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 206.611a: cover or dish • Three examples documented o Sherd IV.340: IV.B-206.611a (19 cm) o Sherd IV.351: IV.A-206.611a (20 cm) o Sherd IV.352: I.B-206.611a (20 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 19-20 cm o median size: rim diameter 20 cm o mode size: rim diameter 20 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.352 o rim diameter 20 cm o base diameter unknown but < 17 cm o maximum diameter 20 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o surface treatment applied to entire vessel: black slip applied to Ware A vessel; black color coat applied to Ware B vessels o fired medium-hard to hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 206.602a: cover or dish (see also similar form 206.202a) • Seven examples documented o Sherd IV.322: IV.B-206.602a (15 cm) o Sherd IV.353: IV.B-206.602a (16 cm) o Sherd IV.381: IV.B-206.602a (17 cm) o Sherd IV.298: II.A-206.602a (18 cm) o Sherd IV.365: IV.B-206.602a (18 cm) o Sherd IV.341: I.A-206.602a (19 cm) o Sherd IV.158: I.A-206.602a (20 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 15-20 cm o median size documented: rim diameter 18 cm o mode size documented: rim diameter 18 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.353 o rim diameter 16 cm o base diameter unknown but < 8 cm o maximum diameter 16 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed; in some cases interior smoothed more carefully than exterior o in some cases, rim appears trimmed or incised o surface treatment applied to entire vessel: black slip applied to Ware A vessels; gray/brown color coat applied to Ware B vessels o fired medium-hard/hard in oxidizing atmosphere; Sherd IV.353 over-fired

Form 206.612a: cover or dish • Two examples documented: o Sherd IV.376: IV.B-206.612a (19 cm) o Sherd IV.131: IV.B-206.612a (21 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 19-21 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.131 o rim diameter 21 cm o base diameter unknown but < 17 cm o maximum diameter 21 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o black color coat applied to entire vessel o fired soft/medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 206.604a: cover or dish • One example documented o Sherd IV.308: II.A-206.604a (18 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 18 cm o base diameter unknown but < 16 cm o maximum diameter 18 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1 cm

Form 206.622b: cover or dish • One example documented o Sherd IV.358: IV.B-206.622b (33 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 33 cm o base diameter unknown but < 30 cm

42

Unidentified forms

maximum diameter 33 cm height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed; exterior more carefully than interior o brown color coat applied to entire vessel o fired soft/medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere o color coat worn on rim, possibly from use o o

•

Form 100.000: unidentified form • One example documented o Sherd IV.122: IV.A-100.000 (9.5 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 9.5 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown; maximum preserved diameter 10 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o form trimmed o black slip applied to entire vessel o fired soft/medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 206.624a: cover or dish (see similar form 106.624) • Four examples documented o Sherd IV.372: IV.B-206.624a (17 cm) o Sherd IV.334: II.B-206.624a (29 cm) o Sherd IV.355: III.B-206.624a (32 cm) o Sherd IV.360: IV.B-206.624a (36 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 17-36 cm o median size: rim diameter 30.5 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.355 o rim diameter 32 cm o base diameter unknown but < 15 cm o maximum diameter 32 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 6 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o surface treatment applied to entire vessel: black slip applied to Ware A vessels; gray/brown color coat applied to Ware B vessels o fired soft/medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 205/6.000: plate or cover (?) • One example documented o Sherd IV.345: IV.B-205/6.000 (26 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 26 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 26 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 0.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o black color coat applied to entire vessel o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere Form 000.086: unidentified ring bases • Eleven examples documented o Sherd IV.272: III.B-000.086 (5 cm) o Sherd IV.251: III.B-000.086 (5.5 cm) o Sherd IV.271: IV.B-000.086 (5.5 cm) o Sherd IV.255: I.A-000.086 (6.25 cm) o Sherd IV.262: I.A-000.086 (6.5 cm) o Sherd IV.260: I.A-000.086 (7 cm) o Sherd IV.258: I.A-000.086 (7 cm) o Sherd IV.242: I.A-000.086 (8 cm) o Sherd IV.266: I.A-000.086 (9 cm) o Sherd IV.284: IV.B-000.086 (9 cm) o Sherd IV.257: I.A-000.086 (10 cm)

Form 206.624d: cover or dish • One example documented o Sherd IV.370: III.B-206.624d (30 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 30 cm o base diameter unknown but < 28 cm o maximum diameter 30 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o line incised, interior rim o brown color coat applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 000.087a: base (?) • One example documented o Sherd IV.282: I.B-000.087a (9 cm) Form 000.087b: base (?) • Three examples documented o Sherd IV.261: I.A-000.087b (9 cm)

43

o o

Sherd IV.250: I.A-000.087b (15 cm) Sherd IV.135: I.A-000.087b (22 cm)

maximum diameter 10 cm height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft to medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere o o

Form 000.095b: unidentified loop handles • Three examples documented o Sherd IV.331: II.B-000.095b (vessel diameter 18 cm at point where handle was attached) o Sherd IV.333: II.B-000.095b (vessel diameter 32 cm at point where handle was attached) o Sherd IV.332: IV.B-000.095b

•

Form 105.201a: plate • One example documented o Sherd IV.402: III.C-105.201a (21 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 21 cm o base diameter 18 cm o maximum diameter 22 cm o height 3.25 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 000.096b: unidentified strap handle • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.327: II.B-000.096b (vessel diameter 9 cm at point where handle was attached) o Sherd IV.328: I.A-000.096b (vessel diameter 10 cm at point where handle was attached) Form 000.097a: unidentified double-loop handles • Three examples documented o Sherd IV.325: I.A-000.097a o Sherd IV.330: I.A-000.097a o Sherd IV.324: III.A-000.097a

Form 109.585: unguentarium • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.79: II.C-109.585 (3 cm) o Sherd IV.80: IV.C-109.585 (3 cm) • One size documented; most complete example: Sherd IV.79 o rim diameter ca. 2 cm o base diameter 3 cm. o maximum diameter 4 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4.75 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed, exterior more carefully than interior o Sherd IV. 79: four marks on widest point of body indicate that handles or other attachments were applied o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 000.097b: unidentified double-loop handle • One example documented o Sherd IV.326: I.A-000.097b (vessel diameter 11 cm at point where handle was attached) Ware C Closed forms Form 102.201a: bowl • Nine examples documented o Sherd IV.12: IV.C-102.201a (10 cm) o Sherd IV.15: II.C-102.201a (10 cm) o Sherd IV.11: III.C-102.201a (14 cm) o Sherd IV.17: IV.C-102.201a (14 cm) o Sherd IV.13: II.C-102.201a (14 cm) o Sherd IV.436: IV.C-102.201a (14 cm) o Sherd IV.16: I.C-102.201a (18 cm) o Sherd IV.428: I.C-102.201a (18 cm) o Sherd IV.441: IV.C-102.201a (19 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 10-19 cm o median size: rim diameter 14 cm o mode size: rim diameter 14 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.12 o rim diameter 10 cm o base diameter unknown but < 6 cm

Form 109.5/085: unguentarium or similar small vessel • One example documented o Sherd IV.81: IV.C-109.5/085 (3 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown o base diameter 3 cm. o maximum diameter 5 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

44

Form 110.003b: olla • One example documented o Sherd IV.444: III.C-110.003b (17 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 17 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 109.685: unguentarium or similar small vessel • One example documented o Sherd IV.463: IV.C-109.685 (1.5 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown o base diameter 1.5 cm. o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere Form 110.001b: olla • Seven examples documented o Sherd IV.432: II.C-110.001b (9 cm) o Sherd IV.439: I.C-110.001b (12 cm) o Sherd IV.429: III.C-110.001b (12 cm) o Sherd IV.30: IV.C-110.001b (13 cm) o Sherd IV.27: IV.C-110.001b (14 cm) o Sherd IV.19: II.C-110.001b (16 cm) o Sherd IV.29: III.C-110.001b (18 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 9-18 cm o median size: rim diameter 13 cm o mode size: rim diameter 12 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.432 o rim diameter 9 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 110.009b: olla (possibly pitcher) • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.433: III.C-110. 009b (13 cm) o Sherd IV.438: IV.C-110. 009b (14 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 13-14 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.438 o rim diameter 14 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere Form 110.010b: olla • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.447: IV.C-110.010b (14 cm) o Sherd IV.21: II.C-110.010b (15.5 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim 14-15.5 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.447 o rim diameter 14 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 110.001c: olla (or pitcher) • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.26: III.C-110.001c (11 cm) o Sherd IV.25: IV.C-110.001c (18 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 11-18 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.26 o rim diameter 11 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o rim trimmed/incised o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 110.010c: olla • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.446: I.C-110.010c (14 cm) o Sherd IV.22: IV.C-110.010c (16 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 14-16 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.446 o rim diameter 16 cm o base diameter unknown

45

maximum diameter unknown height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o rim trimmed; intended to take lid? o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere o o

•

Form 110.010e: olla • Five examples documented o Sherd IV.440: IV.C-110.010e (13 cm) o Sherd IV.437: IV.C-110.010e (13.5 cm) o Sherd IV.445: IV.C-110.010e (16 cm) o Sherd IV.24: III.C-110.010e (16.5 cm) o Sherd IV.431: I.C-110.010e (17 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 13-17 cm o median size: rim diameter 16 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.431 o rim diameter 17 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 7 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o rim trimmed o exterior of vessel smoothed o fired soft to medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

•

•

•

Form 110.010g: olla • One example documented o Sherd IV.10: II.C-110.010g (12.5 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 12.5 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o “incision” on lip may be a stray mark rather than intentional decoration o entire vessel smoothed o vessel over-fired

o Sherd IV.454: III.C-110.085a (9 cm) o Sherd IV.48: IV.C-110.085a (9 cm) o Sherd IV.420: II.C-110.085a (9 cm) o Sherd IV.69: II.C-110.085a (9.5 cm) o Sherd IV.421: IV.C-110.085a (9.5 cm) o Sherd IV.39: II.C-110.085a (9.5 cm) o Sherd IV.424: II.C-110.085a (10 cm) o Sherd IV.449: IV.C-110.085a (10 cm) o Sherd IV.384: II.C-110.085a (10 cm) o Sherd IV.51: I.C-110.085a (10 cm) o Sherd IV.450: IV.C-110.085a (10 cm) o Sherd IV.453: I.C-110.085a (10 cm) o Sherd IV.460: III.C-110.085a (10 cm) o Sherd IV.46: I.C-110.085a (11 cm) o Sherd IV.52: II.C-110.085a (11 cm) o Sherd IV.61: II.C-110.085a (11 cm) o Sherd IV.66: III.C-110.085a (11 cm) o Sherd IV.462: I.C-110.085a (12 cm) o Sherd IV.62: II.C-110.085a (12 cm) o Sherd IV.448: III.C-110.085a (13 cm) o Sherd IV.427: III.C-110.085a (13 cm) o Sherd IV.423: IV.C-110.085a (13 cm) o Sherd IV.64: II.C-110.085a (unknown) Range of sizes documented: base diameter 3-13 cm o median size: base diameter 10 cm o mode size: base diameter 10 cm Most complete example: Sherd IV.457 o rim diameter unknown o base diameter 3 cm o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed; exterior more carefully than interior o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 110.085b: flat base (probably for olla) • Seven examples documented o Sherd IV.54: I.C-110.085b (4 cm) o Sherd IV.53: I.C-110.085b (6 cm) o Sherd IV.63: I.C-110.085b (6 cm) o Sherd IV.42: II.C-110.085b (8 cm) o Sherd IV.456: II.C-110.085b (8 cm) o Sherd IV.426: X.C-110.085b (8 cm) o Sherd IV.56: II.C-110.085b (10 cm) • Range of sizes documented: base diameter 4-10 cm o median size: base diameter 8 cm o mode size: base diameter 8 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.53 o rim diameter unknown o base diameter 6 cm o maximum diameter unknown

Form 110.085a: flat base (probably for olla) • Twenty-eight examples documented o Sherd IV.457: III.C-110.085a (3 cm) o Sherd IV.425: III.C-110.085a (4.5 cm) o Sherd IV.422: IV.C-110.085a (5 cm) o Sherd IV.464: IV.C-110.085a (6 cm) o Sherd IV.59: III.C-110.085a (7 cm)

46

Form 111.008a: bottle or pitcher (?) • One example documented o Sherd IV.435: III.C-111.008a (7.5 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 7.5 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

height unknown; maximum preserved height 5 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed; exterior more carefully than interior o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere o

•

Form 110.085d: flat base (probably for olla) with incision into exterior base • One example documented o Sherd IV.55: III.C-110.085d (unknown) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed; exterior more carefully than interior o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Open forms Form 202.101f: bowl with two incised lines, exterior rim • One example documented o Sherd IV.15bis: I.C-202.101f (21 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 21 cm o base diameter unknown but < 19 cm o maximum diameter 21 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o two lines incised, exterior rim o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 110.086a: ring base (probably for olla or basin) • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.47: II.C-110.086a (10 cm) o Sherd IV.458: III.C-110.086a (13 cm) • Range of sizes documented: base diameter 1013 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.458 o rim diameter unknown but > 18 cm o base diameter 13 cm o maximum diameter > 18 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o base trimmed o exterior of vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202.101g: bowl with one incised line, exterior rim • One example documented o Sherd IV.18: IV.C-202.101g (22 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 22 cm o base diameter unknown but < 18 cm o maximum diameter 22 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o one line incised, interior rim o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 111.004a: pitcher • One example documented o Sherd IV.28: IV.C-111.004a (12.5 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 12.5 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202.186a: bowl • Five examples documented o Sherd IV.452: III.C-202.186a (4 cm) o Sherd IV.44: I.C-202.186a (4.5 cm) o Sherd IV.418: I.C-202.286a (8 cm) o Sherd IV.57: IV.C-202.186a (9 cm) o Sherd IV.58: IV.C-202.186a (9 cm) • Range of sizes documented: base diameter 4-9 cm o median size: base diameter 8 cm

47

o mode size: base diameter 9 cm Most complete example: Sherd IV.57 o rim diameter unknown but > 13 cm o base diameter 9 cm o maximum diameter > 13 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed; exterior more carefully o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere Form 202.186b: bowl • Three examples documented o Sherd IV.37: I.C-202.186b (6.5 cm) o Sherd IV.41: I.C-202.186b (6.5 cm) o Sherd IV.36: II.C-202.186b (8 cm) • Range of sizes documented: base diameter 6.5-8 cm o median size: base diameter 6.5 cm o mode size: base diameter 6.5 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.37 o rim diameter unknown but > 15 cm o base diameter 6.5 cm o maximum diameter > 15 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o base trimmed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

•

•

•

•

o Sherd IV.461: I.C-202/5.286b (7 cm) Range of sizes documented: base diameter 4.5-7 cm o median size: base diameter 6.5 cm Most complete example: Sherd IV. 461 o rim diameter unknown but > 10 cm o base diameter 7 cm o maximum diameter unknown but > 10 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o base trimmed o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 206.301a: cover or dish • One example documented o Sherd IV.430: IV.C-206.301a (14 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 14 cm o base diameter unknown but < 12 cm o maximum diameter 14 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere Form 206.611a: cover or dish (possibly pitcher) • Three examples documented o Sherd IV.23: IV.C-206.611a (16.5 cm) o Sherd IV.434: I.C-206.611a (17 cm) o Sherd IV.20: I.C-206.611a (19 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 16.519 cm o median size: rim diameter 17 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.23 o rim diameter 16.5 cm o base diameter unknown but < 14 cm o maximum diameter 16.5 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202.201a: bowl • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.14: IV.C-202.201a (20 cm) o Sherd IV.229: I.C-202.201a (21 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 20-21 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.14 o rim diameter 20 cm o base diameter unknown but < 17 cm o maximum diameter 20 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft to medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere (IV.229 not completely oxidized)

Form 206.611c: cover or dish; or possibly a base • One example documented o Sherd IV.443: I.C-206.611c (15 cm) • One size documented o rim/base diameter 15 cm o maximum diameter 15 cm

Form 202/5.286b: ring base (for bowl, plate or platter) • Three examples documented o Sherd IV.68: I.C-202/5.286b (4.5 cm) o Sherd IV.417: I.C-202/5.286b (6.5 cm)

48

height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o rim trimmed o entire vessel smoothed o line incised in interior rim o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

•

height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere o

o

•

Unidentified forms Form 011.008a (r/h): bottle or pitcher (?) • One example documented o Sherd IV.329: III.C-011.008a (r/h) • One size documented o rim diameter 6 cm; loop handle attached to rim o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o (if pitcher, rim manipulated to create spout) o entire vessel smoothed o handle(s) attached o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 206.631a: cover or dish • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.115: III.C-206.631a (14 cm) o Sherd IV.405: II.C-206.631a (ca. 40 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 14 cm-ca. 40 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.115 o rim diameter 14 cm o base diameter unknown but < 10 cm o maximum diameter 14 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o slip applied or self-slip/slurry deposited from smoothing/throwing, Sherd IV.115 o Sherd IV.115 fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere; IV.405 over-fired

Form 100.086a: ring base for closed form • Five examples documented o Sherd IV.419: I.C-100.086a (4.5 cm) o Sherd IV.459: IV.C-100.086a (4.5 cm) o Sherd IV.65: I.C-100.086a (5 cm) o Sherd IV.67: IV.C-100.086a (5 cm) o Sherd IV.43: II.C-100.086a (6.5 cm)

Form 207.204h: pan • One example documented o Sherd IV.118: I.C-207.204h (16 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 16 cm; probably took lid with diameter of 14.5 cm o base diameter unknown but < 13 cm o maximum diameter 16 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown; step where body meets rim, suggesting use of mold? o rim trimmed; presumably took lid o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere o black deposit from use over fire

Form 100.086b: ring base (for olla or pitcher?) • One example documented o Sherd IV.451: IV.C-100.086b (4.5 cm) Form 100.086c: ring base (for large bowl?) • One example documented o Sherd IV.70: I.C-100.086c (13 cm) Form 000.086: unidentified ring bases • Four examples documented o Sherd IV.49: II.C-000.086 (6 cm) o Sherd IV.50: II.C-000.086 (7 cm) o Sherd IV.60: IV.C-000.086 (7 cm) o Sherd IV.45: II.C-000.086 (8.5 cm)

Form 207.402a: pan • One example documented o Sherd IV.31: II.C-207.402a (17.5 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 17.5 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown

Form 000.089: base (?) • One example documented o Sherd IV.416: III.C-000.089 (10 cm)

49

Form 000.095a: unidentified handles • Seven examples documented o Sherd IV.71: III.C-000.095a o Sherd IV.72: IV.C-000.095a o Sherd IV.73: III.C-000.095a o Sherd IV.74: II.C-000.095a o Sherd IV.75: IV.C-000.095a o Sherd IV.76: II.C-000.095a o Sherd IV.78: IV.C-000.095a

o o o

entire vessel smoothed fired soft to hard in oxidizing atmosphere uneven surface color (from use over fire?)

Form 110.001b: olla • Five examples documented o Sherd IV.188: V.D-110.001b (15 cm) o Sherd IV.101: V.D-110.001b (17 cm) o Sherd IV.187: V.D-110.001b (26 cm) o Sherd IV.191: VI.D-110.001b (28 cm) o Sherd IV.195: VI.D-110.001b (32 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 15-32 cm o median size: rim diameter 26 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.188 o rim diameter 15 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown but > 15 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o rim shaped or deformed by fingers o entire vessel smoothed o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere o use over fire created black deposit on exterior

Form 000.096a: unidentified handles • Three examples documented o Sherd IV.77: II.C-000.096a o Sherd IV.398: III.C-000.096a o Sherd IV.399: III.C-000.096a Ware D Closed forms Form 108.102a: pot or olla • One example documented o Sherd IV.201: V.D-108.102a (14 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 14 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter ca. 13 cm. o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 110.001c: olla • One example documented o Sherd IV.94: VI.D-110.001c (13 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 13 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o rim trimmed o entire vessel smoothed o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 110.101a: olla • Six examples documented o Sherd IV.182: VI.D-110.101a (9 cm) o Sherd IV.185: VI.D-110.101a (10 cm) o Sherd IV.184: V.D-110.101a (10 cm) o Sherd IV.196: V.D-110.101a (10 cm) o Sherd IV.203: V.D-110.101a (14 cm) o Sherd IV.198: V.D-110.101a (16 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 9-16 cm o median size: rim diameter 10 cm o mode size: rim diameter 10 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.182 o rim diameter 9 cm o base diameter ca. 7 cm. o maximum diameter 9 cm. o height unknown; maximum preserved height 6 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o rim shaped or deformed by fingers

Form 110.002a: olla • One example documented o Sherd IV.192: VI.D-110.002a (14 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 14 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown

50

height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere o uneven surface color (from use over fire?)

o

o

•

use over fire created black deposit on exterior

Form 110.004b: olla • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.403: V.D-110.004b (9 cm) o Sherd IV.410: V.D-110.004b (14 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 9-14 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.403 o rim diameter 9 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 110.103a: olla • Nine examples documented o Sherd IV.97: VI.D-110.103a (11 cm) o Sherd IV.189: VI.D-110.103a (13 cm) o Sherd IV.103: VI.D-110.103a (13 cm) o Sherd IV.202: V.D-110.103a (13 cm) o Sherd IV.186: V.D-110.103a (14 cm) o Sherd IV.190: V.D-110.103a (15 cm) o Sherd IV.181: VI.D-110.103a (15 cm) o Sherd IV.96: V.D-110.103a (17 cm) o Sherd IV.92: V.D-110.103a (24 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 11-24 cm o median size: rim diameter 14 cm o mode size: rim diameter 13 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.189 o rim diameter 13 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 15 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o rim shaped or deformed by fingers o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft to medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere o use over fire created black deposit on exterior

Form 110.004d: olla • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.100: V.D-110.004d (14 cm) o Sherd IV.95: V.D-110.004d (15 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 14-15 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.95 o rim diameter 15 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown but > 15 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o rim trimmed o entire vessel smoothed o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 110.103b: olla • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.105: V.D-110.103b (18 cm) o Sherd IV.107: VI.D-110.103b (23 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 18-23 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.107 o rim diameter 23 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter ca. 28 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 9 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 110.005b: olla • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.98: V.D-110.005b (14 cm) o Sherd IV.93: VI.D-110.005b (17 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 14-17 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.98 o rim diameter 14 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed

51

o o

fired medium-hard to hard in oxidizing atmosphere use over fire created black deposit on exterior and interior rim

o o o o

Form 110.006a: olla • One example documented o Sherd IV.194: V.D-110.006a (14 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 14 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown but > 15 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o rim shaped or deformed by fingers o entire vessel smoothed o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

rim shaped or deformed by fingers entire vessel smoothed fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere use over fire created black deposit on exterior

Form 110.185a: flat base (probably for olla or pitcher) • One example documented o Sherd IV.83: VI.D-110.185a (4 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown o base diameter 4 cm o maximum diameter ca. 12 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 5.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o exterior of vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere Form 110.185c: flat base (probably for olla) • One example documented o Sherd IV.219: V.D-110.185c (12 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown o base diameter 12 cm o maximum diameter 14 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 7 cm • Production and use o probably wheel-thrown; possibly handbuilt o entire vessel smoothed, poorly o fired medium-hard/hard in oxidizing atmosphere o use over fire created black deposit on interior

Form 110.007: olla • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.102: V.D-110.007 (12 cm) o Sherd IV.104: VI.D-110.007 (16 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 12-16 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.102 o rim diameter 12 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o rim shaped or deformed by fingers o entire vessel smoothed o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere o use over fire created black deposit on exterior

Form 110.085a: flat base (probably for olla) • Twenty examples documented o Sherd IV.408: V.D-110.085a (7 cm) o Sherd IV.215: V.D-110.085a (7 cm) o Sherd IV.217: V.D-110.085a (8 cm) o Sherd IV.209: V.D-110.085a (8 cm) o Sherd IV.211: V.D-110.085a (8 cm) o Sherd IV.212: V.D-110.085a (8 cm) o Sherd IV.401: V.D-110.085a (8.5 cm) o Sherd IV.220: V.D-110.085a (9 cm) o Sherd IV.216: V.D-110.085a (9 cm) o Sherd IV.88: V.D-110.085a (9 cm) o Sherd IV.89: VI.D-110.085a (9 cm) o Sherd IV.221: VI.D-110.085a (9 cm) o Sherd IV.84: VI.D-110.085a (9 cm) o Sherd IV.90: VI.D-110.085a (10 cm) o Sherd IV.87: VI.D-110.085a (11 cm)

Form 110.010a: olla • One example documented o Sherd IV.99: V.D-110.010a (15 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 15 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown but > 16 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown

52

•

•

•

o Sherd IV.207: VI.D-110.085a (11 cm) o Sherd IV.214: VI.D-110.085a (13 cm) o Sherd IV.86: V.D-110.085a (14 cm) o Sherd IV.218: VI.D-110.085a (15 cm) o Sherd IV.85: VI.D-110.085a (15 cm) Range of sizes documented: base diameter 7-13 cm o median size: base diameter 9 cm o mode size: base diameter 9 cm Most complete example: Sherd IV.215 o rim diameter unknown o base diameter 7 cm o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3.5 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o rim shaped or deformed by fingers o exterior of vessel smoothed using fingers o vessel set on loose sand to dry o fired soft to medium-hard in (primarily) oxidizing atmosphere o uneven surface color (from use over fire or from poorly-controlled firing atmosphere?)

height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o rim trimmed o entire vessel smoothed o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere o

•

Form 205.612a: plate (possibly cover) • Three examples documented: o Sherd IV.106: V.D-205.612a (16 cm) o Sherd IV.193: V.D-205.612a (26 cm) o Sherd IV.223: V.D-205.612a (38 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 16-38 cm o median size: rim diameter 26 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.106 o rim diameter 16 cm o base diameter unknown but < 12 cm o maximum diameter 16 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 110.085b: flat base (probably for olla) • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.228: V.D-110.085b (5 cm) o Sherd IV.120: VI.D-110.085b (5.5 cm) • Range of sizes documented: base diameter 5-5.5 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.120 o rim diameter unknown o base diameter 5.5 cm o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o vessel set on loose sand to dry o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 205.612b: plate (possibly cover) • One example documented o Sherd IV.222: V.D-205.612b (24 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 24 cm o base diameter unknown but < 21 cm o maximum diameter 24 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere Form 206.201a: cover or dish • One example documented o Sherd IV.246: V.D-206.201a (26 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 26 cm o base diameter unknown but < 24 cm o maximum diameter 26 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed

Open forms Form 202.102a: bowl (possibly pan) • One example documented o Sherd IV.200: V.D-202.102a (14 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 14 cm o base diameter unknown but < 11 cm o maximum diameter 14 cm

53

o

fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 206.201b: cover or dish • One example documented o Sherd IV.238: V.D-206.201b (17 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 17 cm o base diameter unknown but < 11 cm o maximum diameter 17 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o rim shaped or deformed by fingers o entire vessel smoothed o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

•

•

•

Form 206.201d: cover or dish • One example documented o Sherd IV.244: V.D-206.201d (15 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 15 cm o base diameter unknown but < 9 cm o maximum diameter 15 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o rim shaped or deformed by fingers o entire vessel smoothed o fired in oxidizing atmosphere o black deposit, possibly from use over fire

o Sherd IV.237: V.D-206.601a (16 cm) o Sherd IV.109: VI.D-206.601a (20 cm) o Sherd IV.241: VI.D-206.601a (20 cm) o Sherd IV.247: V.D-206.601a (21 cm) o Sherd IV.243: V.D-206.601a (30 cm) Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 15-30 cm o median size: rim diameter 20 cm o mode size: rim diameter 20 cm Most complete example: Sherd IV. 245 o rim diameter 15 cm o base diameter unknown but < 11 cm o maximum diameter 15 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o rim shaped or deformed with fingers o entire vessel smoothed o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 206.603d: cover or dish (?) • One example documented o Sherd IV.117: V.D-206.603d (30 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 30 cm o base diameter unknown but < 26 cm o maximum diameter 30 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o rim trimmed; step where rim and body meet (indicating use of mold?) o entire vessel smoothed o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere o use over fire created black deposit on rim

Form 206.301a: cover or dish • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.407: V.D-206.301a (15 cm) o Sherd IV.232: V.D-206.301a (16 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 15-16 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.232 o rim diameter 16 cm o base diameter unknown but < 10 cm o maximum diameter 16 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 5.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 206.613a: cover or dish • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.239: VI.D-206.613a (12 cm) o Sherd IV.240: V.D-206.613a (14 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 12-14 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.240 o rim diameter 14 cm o base diameter unknown but < 9 cm o maximum diameter 14 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed

Form 206.601a: cover or dish • Six examples documented o Sherd IV.245: V.D-206.601a (15 cm)

54

o

Form 207.401a: pan • One example documented o Sherd IV.225: VI.D-207.401a (15 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 15 cm o base diameter 13 cm o maximum diameter 15 cm o height 4 cm • Production and use o thrown on wheel o entire vessel smoothed o fabric-colored/brownish slip applied, or self-slip developed from smoothing o fired soft/medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 206.685a: cover • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.121: VI.D-206.685a (4 cm) o Sherd IV.234: V.D-206.685a (5 cm) • Range of sizes documented: base (knob) diameter 4-5 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.121 o rim diameter unknown but > 8 cm o base diameter 4 cm o maximum diameter unknown but > 8 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown; removed from wheel with string o entire vessel smoothed o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 207.401b: pan (or basin) • One example documented o Sherd IV.233: V.D-207.401b (34 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 34 cm o base diameter 33 cm o maximum diameter 34 cm o height 6.25 cm • Production and use o thrown on wheel or hand-built o entire vessel smoothed o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 206.685b: cover • One example documented o Sherd IV.236: V.D-206.685b (3 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown but > 8 cm o base diameter 3 cm o maximum diameter unknown but > 8 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o thrown on wheel o entire vessel smoothed o fired medium-hard/hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 207.402g: pan with three incised lines, interior rim • One example documented o Sherd IV.224: V.D-207.402g (22 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 22 cm o base diameter unknown but < 19 cm o maximum diameter 22 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o thrown on wheel o entire vessel smoothed o 3 lines incised when leather-hard o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 206.685c: cover • One example documented o Sherd IV.235: V.D-206.685c (4.5 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown but > 7 cm o base diameter 4.5 cm o maximum diameter unknown but > 7 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4 cm • Production and use o thrown on wheel o knob trimmed o entire vessel smoothed o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 207.402/3: pan • One example documented o Sherd IV.231: V.D-207.402/3 (21 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 21 cm o base diameter unknown but < 17 cm o maximum diameter 21 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4 cm

55

•

Form 207.601b: pan • One example documented o Sherd IV.409: VI.D-207.601b (44 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 44 cm o base diameter unknown but < 39 cm o maximum diameter 44 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o rim shaped or deformed by fingers o entire vessel smoothed o fabric-colored slip applied or self-slip developed from smoothing o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Production and use o thrown on wheel o entire vessel smoothed o either fabric-colored slip applied or self-slip developed from smoothing o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere o use over fire created black deposit on interior

Form 207.403a: pan • Two examples documented: o Sherd IV.108: V.D-207.403a (24 cm) o Sherd IV.114: V.D-207.403a (30 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 24-30 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.108 o rim diameter 24 cm o base diameter unknown but < 21 cm o maximum diameter 24 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o thrown on wheel o entire vessel smoothed o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere o use over fire created black deposit on exterior and interior

Form 207.611: pan • One example documented o Sherd IV.183: V.D-207.611 (32 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 32 cm o base diameter unknown but < 27 cm o maximum diameter 32 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o thrown on wheel, rapidly o rim shaped or deformed with fingers o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft/medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere o black deposit on exterior (from use over fire, or poorly-controlled firing?)

Form 207.485: pan • Four examples documented o Sherd IV.208: I.C/D-207.485 (8 cm) o Sherd IV.227: V.D-207.485 (9 cm) o Sherd IV.119: V.D-207.485 (10 cm) o Sherd IV.230: V.D-207.485 (26 cm) • Range of sizes documented: base diameter 8-26 cm o median size documented: base diameter 9.5 cm • Most complete example: Sherd IV.227 o rim diameter unknown but > 12 cm o base diameter 9 cm o maximum diameter > 12 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o thrown on wheel o rim shaped or deformed with fingers o entire vessel smoothed o placed on loose sand to dry o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 208.204: pot • One example documented o Sherd IV.116: V.D-208.204 (24 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 24 cm o base diameter unknown but < 12 cm o maximum diameter 24 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 6 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere Unidentified forms Form 200.401: tray or cover; possibly pan (with different orientation and measurements) • Two examples documented o Sherd IV.113: VI.D-200.401 (22 cm) o Sherd IV.112: VI.D-200.401 (40 cm)

56

• •

•

Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 22-40 cm Most complete example: Sherd IV.112 o rim diameter unknown but > 40 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter > 40 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm Production and use o thrown on wheel o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft; fluctuating atmosphere (?)

base diameter 5 cm maximum diameter unknown height unknown; maximum preserved height 5.5 cm Production and use o thrown on wheel o exterior and interior of vessel smoothed; bottom of base not smoothed o placed on loose sand to dry o fired medium-hard/hard in oxidizing atmosphere o o o

•

Form 000.095a: unidentified loop handle • One example documented o Sherd IV.404: IV.D-000.095a (vessel diameter at least 20 cm at point where handle was attached

Form 200.085b: small open vessel • One example documented o Sherd IV.226: V.D-200.085b (5 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown but > 10 cm

Fig. 4.1: Area IV, Ware A/B, small closed vessels Sherd IV.279:I.A-101.085b

Sherd IV.267:III.B-101.286a

Fig. 4.2: Area IV, Ware A/B, closed platters Sherd IV.347:III.B-105.201a

57

Sherd IV.291:III.B-105.201b

Sherd IV.302:I.A-105.204

Fig. 4.3: Area IV, Ware A/B, closed cover Sherd IV.288:IV.B-106.624a

Fig. 4.4: Area IV, Ware A/B, pot Sherd IV.136: II.A-108.003c

Fig. 4.5: Area IV, Ware A/B, ollae Sherd IV.146: I.B-110.001b

Sherd IV.176: II.B-110.001d

58

Sherd IV.321: IV.B-110.010b

Sherd IV.442: IV.B-110.010e/p

Sherd IV.455: II.B-110.085a

Fig. 4.6: Area IV, Ware A/B, pitchers Sherd IV.313: I.A-111.001a

Sherd IV.292: III.A-111.001c

Sherd IV.374: IV.A-111.003c

59

Sherd IV.335: I.B-111.005a

Fig. 4.7: Area IV, Ware A/B, open bowls Sherd IV.154: II.B-202.101a.i

Sherd IV.124: II.A-202.101b

Sherd IV.126: I.B-202.101c

Sherd IV.123: I.A-202.101d

Sherd IV.139: II.A-202.101g

60

Sherd IV.145: I.A-202.102a

Sherd IV.132: II.B-202.102b

Sherd IV.305: III.A-202.103a

Sherd IV.349: IV.B-202.103b

Sherd IV.314: I.A-202.104a

Sherd IV.283: III.B-202.185b

61

Sherd IV.175: I.B-202.185a.i

Sherd IV.166: IV.B-202.186d

Sherd IV.168: IV.B-202/5.186a.ii

Fig. 4.8: Area IV, Ware A/B, open bowl/plates Sherd IV.174: I.A-202/5.186k.i

Sherd IV.248: I.A-202/5.186k.ii

62

Sherd IV.264: I.A-202/5.186k.iii

Sherd IV.276: I.A-202/5.186k.iv

Sherd IV.150: I.A-202/5.186k.v

Sherd IV.256: I.A-202/5.186k.vi

Fig. 4.9: Area IV, Ware A/B, open bowls Sherd IV.125: I.A-202.201a

63

Sherd IV.315: I.A-202.202a

Sherd IV.368: I.A-202.202b

Sherd IV.297: I.A-202.202.k.i

Sherd IV.318: I.A-202.204a

Sherd IV.172: I.A-202.204d

Sherd IV.278: IV.B-202.286a

64

Sherd IV.270: II.B-202.286k.i

Sherd IV.269: III.B-202.286k.ii

Sherd IV.280: III.B-202.386a

Fig. 4.10: Area IV, Ware A/B, open basins Sherd IV.323: III.B-203.101c

Sherd IV.287: I.A-203.201h

65

Sherd IV.367: IV.B-203.202a

Sherd IV.378: I.B-203.202b

Sherd IV.369: I.A-203.202d

Sherd IV.155: IV.B-203.203d

Sherd IV.143: II.A-203.601c

Fig. 4.11: Area IV, Ware A/B, open basin/platters Sherd IV.342: III.B-205/3.201d

66

Sherd IV.306: I.A-205.201a

Sherd IV.312: I.A-205.204

Fig. 4.12: Area IV, Ware A/B, open plate/platters Sherd IV.317: I.A-205.213a

Sherd IV.295: I.A-205.213b

Sherd IV.362: I.A-205.213c

Sherd IV.316: I.A-205.214a

Sherd IV.299: I.A-205.214b

Sherd IV.356: IV.B-205.215b

67

Sherd IV.164: I.B-205.216a

Sherd IV.296: III.A-205.216b

Sherd IV.337: III.B-205.216c/p.i

Sherd IV.249: I.A-205.286a

Sherd IV.253: I.A-205.286k.i

Sherd IV.252: I.A-205.286k.ii

68

Fig. 4.13: Area IV, Ware A/B, open platter/covers Sherd IV.149: II.B-205/6.601a

Sherd IV.361: III.A-205/6.604b

Fig. 4.14: Area IV, Ware A/B, open cover/dishes Sherd IV.285: I.A-206.201c

Sherd IV.137: II.A-206.201d

Sherd IV.294: I.A-206.201e

Sherd IV.366: II.B-206.202a.i

69

Sherd IV.377: III.B-206.202d

Sherd IV.301: I.A-206.301d

Sherd IV.375: III.A-206.601d

Sherd IV.353: IV.B-206.602a

Sherd IV.308: II.A-206.604a

Sherd IV.352: I.B-206.611a

Sherd IV.131: IV.B-206.612a

70

Sherd IV.358: IV.B-206.622b

Sherd IV.370: III.B-206.624a

Fig. 4.15: Area IV, Ware C, closed bowl and plate Sherd IV.12: IV.C-102.201a

Sherd IV.402: III.C-105.201a

Fig. 4.16: Area IV, Ware C, unguentarium and similar forms Sherd IV.79: II.C-109.585

Sherd IV.81: IV.C-109.5/085

71

Sherd IV.463: IV.C-109.685

Fig. 4.17: Area IV, Ware C, ollae Sherd IV.432: II.C-110.001b

Sherd IV.26: III.C-110.001c

Sherd IV.444: III.C-110.003b

Sherd IV.438: IV.C-110.009b

Sherd IV.447: IV.C-110.010b

72

Sherd IV.446: I.C-110.010c

Sherd IV.431: I.C-110.010e

Sherd IV.10: II.C-110.010g

Sherd IV.457: III.C-110.085a

Sherd IV.53: I.C-110.085b

73

Sherd IV.458: III.C-110.086a

Fig. 4.18: Area IV, Ware C, pitchers Sherd IV.28: IV.C-111.004a

Sherd IV.435: III.C-111.008a

Fig. 4.19: Area IV, Ware C, open bowls Sherd IV.15bis: I.C-202.101f

Sherd IV.18: IV.C-202.101g

74

Sherd IV.57: IV.C-202.186a

Sherd IV.37: I.C-202.186b

Fig. 4.20: Area IV, Ware C, open bowl and bowl/plate Sherd IV.14: IV.C-202.201a

Sherd IV.461: I.C-202/5.201a

Fig. 4.21: Area IV, Ware C, open cover/dishes Sherd IV.430: IV.C-206.301a

75

Sherd IV.23: IV.C-206.611a

Sherd IV.443: I.C-206.611c

Sherd IV.115: III.C-206.631a

Fig. 4.22: Area IV, Ware C, open pans Sherd IV.118: I.C-207.204h

Sherd IV.31: II.C-207.402a

Fig. 4.23: Area IV, Ware D, pot and ollae Sherd IV.201: V.D-108.102a

76

Sherd IV.182: VI.D-110.101a

Sherd IV.188: V.D-110.001b

Sherd IV.94: VI.D-110.001c

Fig. 4.24: Area IV, Ware D, ollae Sherd IV.192: VI.D-110.002a

Sherd IV.189: VI.D-110.103a

77

Sherd IV.107: VI.D-110.103b

Sherd IV.403: V.D-110.004b

Sherd IV.95: V.D-110.004d

Sherd IV.98: V.D-110.005b

Sherd IV.194: V.D-110.006a

78

Sherd IV.102: V.D-110.007

Sherd IV.99: V.D-110.010a

Sherd IV.83: VI.D-110.185a

Sherd IV.219: V.D-110.185c

Sherd IV.215: V.D-110.085a

79

Sherd IV.120: VI.D-110.085b

Fig. 4.25: Area IV, Ware D, open bowl and plates Sherd IV.200: V.D-202.102a

Sherd IV.106: V.D-205.612a

Sherd IV.222: V.D-205.612b

Fig. 4.26: Area IV, Ware D, open cover/dishes Sherd IV.246: V.D-206.201a

Sherd IV.238: V.D-206.201b

Sherd IV.244: V.D-206.201d

80

Sherd IV.232: V.D-206.301a

Sherd IV.245: V.D-206.601a

Sherd IV.117: V.D-206.603d

Sherd IV.240: V.D-206.613a

Sherd IV.121: VI.D-206.685a

Sherd IV.236: V.D-206.685b

81

Sherd IV.235: V.D-206.685c

Fig. 4.27: Area IV, Ware D, open pans Sherd IV.225: VI.D-207.401a

Sherd IV.233: V.D-207.401b

Sherd IV.224: V.D-207.402g

Sherd IV.231: V.D-207.402/3

82

Sherd IV.108: V.D-207.403a

Sherd IV.227: V.D-207.485

Sherd IV.409: VI.D-207.601b

Sherd IV.183: V.D-207.611

Fig. 4.28: Area IV, Ware D, open pot Sherd IV.116: V.D-208.204

83

Form 105.201b: platter (see similar forms 205.201 and 205.601) • One example documented o Sherd I.256: II.B-105.201b (25 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 25 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 26 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o red color coat applied to entire vessel o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

4.3 Late Roman and Late Antique Pottery from Area I Ware B Closed forms Form 102.201a: bowl • One example documented o Sherd I.163: I.B-102.201a (22 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 21 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 22 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o red/fabric-colored color coat applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in reducing atmosphere; surface oxidized while cooling

Form 107.204b: pan (?) • One example documented o Sherd I.259: II.B-107.204b (15 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 15 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 15 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o brown color coat applied to entire vessel o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 102.201b: bowl • One example documented o Sherd I.86: I.B-102.201b (19 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 19 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 20 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o red color coat applied to entire vessel o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 110.001b: olla • Two examples documented o Sherd I.261: III.B-110.001b (10 cm) o Sherd I.36: II.B-110.001b (15 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 10-15 cm • Most complete example: Sherd I.261 o rim diameter 10 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o brown color coat applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 105.201a: platter (see similar forms 205.201 and 205.601) • One example documented o Sherd I.74: I.B-105.201b (21 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 21 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 22 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o red color coat applied to entire vessel o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 110.010e/p.i: olla • One example documented o Sherd I.90: II.B-110.010e/p.i (14 cm)

84

•

•

•

One size documented o rim diameter 14 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3.5 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o brown color coat painted on rim (between two widest points) o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

•

Form 110.085a: flat base (probably for olla) • Two examples documented o Sherd I.208: IV.B-110.085a (6 cm) o Sherd I.152: IV.B-110.085a (9 cm) • Range of sizes documented: base diameter 6-9 cm • Most complete example: Sherd I.152 o rim diameter unknown o base diameter 9 cm o maximum diameter unknown but > 13 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o red color coat applied to entire vessel o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Most complete example: Sherd I.24 o rim diameter unknown o base diameter 13 cm o maximum diameter unknown but > 18 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 5.5 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o base trimmed o red color coat applied to entire vessel o fired soft; Sherds I.344 and I.24 in oxidizing atmosphere, Sherd I.248 possibly partly in reducing atmosphere

Form 111.001a: pitcher • Two examples documented o Sherd I.297: II.B-111.001a (7 cm) o Sherd I.318: II.B-111.001a (8 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 7-8 cm • Most complete example: Sherd I.318 o rim diameter 8 cm; spout extends 1 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o red/gray color coat applied to entire vessel o fired soft; Sherd I.297 in oxidizing atmosphere and Sherd I.318 in reducing atmosphere

Form 110.085b: flat base (probably for olla) • One example documented o Sherd I.383: I.B-110.085b (18 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown o base diameter 18 cm o maximum diameter unknown but > 22 o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o red color coat applied to entire vessel o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 111.005b: bottle or pitcher • One example documented o Sherd I.55: II.B-111.005b (6 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 6 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o red color coat applied to entire vessel o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 110/111.086a: ring base (for olla or pitcher) • Three examples documented o Sherd I.344: I.B-110.086a (8 cm) o Sherd I.248: III.B-110.086a (10 cm) o Sherd I.24: I.B-110.086a (13 cm) • Range of sizes documented: base diameter 8-13 cm o median size: base diameter 10 cm

Form 111.006b: pitcher • One example documented o Sherd I.354: III.B-111.006b

85

•

•

•

One size documented o rim diameter unknown; spout extends 1.25 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o rim trimmed/shaped and deformed to produce spout o red color coat applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Production and use o wheel-thrown o rim trimmed/shaped o entire vessel smoothed o red color coat applied to entire vessel o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 111.000(s): spout (for pitcher) • One example documented o Sherd I.68: I.B-111.000 (s) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown; spout extends 1 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown

Form 111.007a: pitcher • One example documented o Sherd I.342: I.B-111.007a (8 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 8 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fabric-colored color coat applied to entire vessel o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Open forms Form 202.101b: bowl • One example documented o Sherd I.285: III.B-202.101b (12 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 12 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 12 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o color coat applied; poorly-preserved, interior only o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 111.007b: pitcher • One example documented o Sherd I.64: II.B-111.007b (11 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 11 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o red color coat applied to entire vessel o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202.101d: bowl with incised line, exterior rim • Two examples documented o Sherd I.170: I.B-202.101d (12 cm) o Sherd I.134: III.B-202.101d (17 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 12-17 cm • Most complete example: Sherd I.170 o rim diameter 12 cm o base diameter unknown but < 10 cm o maximum diameter 12 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o line incised into exterior rim o red color coat applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 111.007c: pitcher • One example documented o Sherd I.145: I.B-111.007c (8 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 8 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm

86

Form 202.101f: bowl/basin • One example documented o Sherd I.161: III.B-202.101f (22 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 22 cm o base diameter unknown but < 20 cm o maximum diameter 22 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o gray color coat applied to entire vessel o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

•

•

Most complete example: Sherd I.98 o rim diameter 15 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 15 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o two lines incised into exterior rim when leather-hard o red/brown color coat applied to entire vessel o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202.204b: bowl • Two examples documented o Sherd I.77: II.B-202.204b (18 cm) o Sherd I.91: X.B-202.204b (21 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 18-21 cm • Most complete example: Sherd I.91 o rim diameter 21 cm o base diameter unknown but < 18 cm o maximum diameter 21 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o red color coat applied to entire vessel o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202.103c: bowl • One example documented o Sherd I.67: II.B-202.103c (18 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 18 cm o base diameter unknown but < 16 cm o maximum diameter 18 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o rim trimmed o entire vessel smoothed o gray color coat applied to entire vessel o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere Form 202.201a: bowl • One example documented o Sherd I.100: I.B-202.201a (14 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 14 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 14 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o red color coat applied to entire vessel o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202.204d: bowl with incised line, exterior rim • One example documented o Sherd I.263: I.B-202.204b (15 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 15 cm o base diameter unknown but < 13 cm o maximum diameter 15 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o line incised into exterior rim o red color coat applied to entire vessel o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202.201/4e: bowl with two incised lines, exterior rim • Three examples documented o Sherd I.98: I.B-202.201/4e (15 cm) o Sherd I.80: I.B-202.201/4e (15 cm) o Sherd I.92: IV.B-202.201/4e (18 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 15-18 cm o median size: rim diameter 15 cm o mode size: rim diameter 15 cm

Form 202.086a: ring base (probably for bowl) • Three examples documented o Sherd I.27: II.B-202.086a (6 cm) o Sherd I.212: I.B-202.086a (7.5 cm) o Sherd I.158: I.B-202.086a (8 cm) • Range of sizes documented: base diameter 6-8 cm

87

•

•

Form 203.203a: basin (possibly pan) • One example documented o Sherd I.61: I.B-203.203a (25 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 25 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 25 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o red color coat applied to entire vessel o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

o median size: base diameter 7.5 cm Most complete example: Sherd I.158 o rim diameter unknown but > 10 cm o base diameter 8 cm o maximum diameter unknown but > 10 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o base trimmed o entire vessel smoothed o red/brown color coat applied to entire vessel o fired soft to medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 203.203b: basin (possibly pan) • One example documented o Sherd I.264: I.B-203.203b (23 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 23 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 23 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o red color coat applied to entire vessel o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202.086c: ring base (probably for bowl) • Two examples documented o Sherd I.154: IV.B-202.086c (6 cm) o Sherd I.130: I.B-202.086c (9 cm) • Range of sizes documented: base diameter 6-9 cm • Most complete example: Sherd I.154 o rim diameter unknown but > 10 cm o base diameter 6 cm o maximum diameter unknown but > 10 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o base trimmed o entire vessel smoothed o red/brown color coat applied to entire vessel o fired soft to medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 203.211e: basin • One example documented o Sherd I.374: III.B-203.211e (22 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 22 cm o base diameter unknown but < 18 cm o maximum diameter 22 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o rim trimmed/shaped o entire vessel smoothed o red color coat applied to entire vessel o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 203.201d: basin with incised line, exterior rim • One example documented o Sherd I.338: I.B-203.201d (25 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 25 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 25 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed, exterior more carefully than interior o line incised into exterior rim o red/brown color coat applied to entire vessel o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 205.214a: plate • One example documented o Sherd I.368: IV.B-205.214a (22 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 22 cm o base diameter unknown but < 18 cm o maximum diameter 22 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1 cm

88

•

Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o red color coat applied to entire vessel o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

o o o

Form 205.215a: plate • One example documented o Sherd I.355: I.B-205.215a (25 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 25 cm o base diameter unknown but < 19 cm o maximum diameter 25 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fabric-colored color coat applied to entire vessel o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere

entire vessel smoothed red/gray color coat applied to entire vessel fired medium-hard; Sherd I.166 in oxidizing atmosphere, Sherd I.159 in reducing atmosphere

Form 206.601d: cover with incised line, exterior rim • One example documented o Sherd I.275: II.B-206.601d (17 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 17 cm o base diameter unknown but < 12 cm o maximum diameter 17 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o line incised exterior rim when leatherhard o red color coat applied to entire vessel o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 206.601a: cover • Two examples documented o Sherd I.288: I.B-206.601a (9 cm) o Sherd I.266: III.B-206.601a (21 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 9-21 cm • Most complete example: Sherd I.288 o rim diameter 9 cm o base diameter unknown but < 7 cm o maximum diameter 9 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o red/brown color coat applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 206.631b: cover • One example documented o Sherd I.366: I.B-206.631b (14 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 14 cm o base diameter unknown but < 7 cm o maximum diameter 14 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o red/brown color coat applied to entire vessel o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere Form 206.633a: cover • One example documented o Sherd I.141: III.B-206.633a (18 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 18 cm o base diameter unknown but < 16 cm o maximum diameter 18 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o red color coat applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard/hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 206.601b: cover • Two examples documented o Sherd I.166: II.B-206.601b (11 cm) o Sherd I.159: II.B-206.601b (16 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 11-16 cm • Most complete example: Sherd I.166 o rim diameter 11 cm o base diameter unknown but < 8 cm o maximum diameter 11 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown

89

Form 000.095: loop handle • One example documented o Sherd I.231: III.B-000.095

Form 206.641d: cover • One example documented o Sherd I.104: I.B-206.641d (13 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 13 cm o base diameter unknown but < 8 cm o maximum diameter 13 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 0.75 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o red color coat applied to entire vessel o fired in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 000.096: unidentified strap handles • Six examples documented o Sherd I.114: II.B-000.096 o Sherd I.211: III.B-000.096 o Sherd I.232: II.B-000.096 o Sherd I.234: III.B-000.096 o Sherd I.236: IV.B-000.096 o Sherd I.238: II.B-000.096 Ware C Closed forms

Form 207.201c: pan • One example documented o Sherd I.356: III.B-207.201c (26 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 26 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 26 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o brown color coat applied to entire vessel o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 102.201a: bowl • Four examples documented o Sherd I.165: IV.C-102.201a (12 cm) o Sherd I.287: IV.C-102.201a (15 cm) o Sherd I.260: II.C-102.201a (16 cm) o Sherd I.311: I.C-102.201a (17 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 12-17 cm o median size: rim diameter 15.5 cm • Most complete example: Sherd I.165 o rim diameter 12 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 12 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o Sherds I.165 and I.287: fabric-colored slip applied, or self-slip developed from smoothing o fired soft to medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Unidentified forms Form 000.085: flat base for small vessel • One example documented o Sherd I.289: III.B-000.085 (4 cm) Form 000.085/86: base for medium vessel • One example documented o Sherd I.144: I.B-000.085/86 (18 cm)

Form 102.201b: bowl • Two examples documented o Sherd I.281: I.C-102.201b (15 cm) o Sherd I.339: II.C-102.201b (18 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 15-18 cm • Most complete example: Sherd I.281 o rim diameter 15 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 15 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed

Form 000.086c: ring base • Two examples documented o Sherd I.341: I.B-000.086c (6 cm) o Sherd I.146: I.B-000.086c (7 cm) Form 000.086d: ring base • Two examples documented o Sherd I.63: I.B-000.086d (5 cm) o Sherd I.156: II.B-000.086d (7 cm) Form 000.086e: ring base • One example documented o Sherd I.128: I.B-000.086e (6 cm)

90

o

fired soft to medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

•

Form 105.201a: platter or basin • One example documented o Sherd I.160: I.C-105.201a (29 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 28 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 29 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Production and use o wheel-thrown o rim trimmed o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 108.002c: pot • One example documented o Sherd I.340: II.C-108.002c (18 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 18 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 106.624b: cover or dish • One example documented o Sherd I.60: II.C-106.624b (23 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 23 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 24 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 109.585: unguentarium • One example documented o Sherd I.253: IV.C-109.585 (2.4 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown o base diameter 2.5 cm o maximum diameter 3.5 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown; removed from wheel with string o exterior and at least upper portion of interior of vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 108.001b: pot • One example documented o Sherd I.351: III.C-108.001b (21 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 21 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o rim trimmed o entire vessel smoothed o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 110.001a: olla (pitcher?) • One example documented o Sherd I.306: I.C-110.001a (13 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 13 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft to medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 108.001g: pot • One example documented o Sherd I.82: I.C-108.001g (ca. 36 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter ca. 36 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm

Form 110.001b: olla • Three examples documented o Sherd I.293: II.C-110.001b (16 cm) o Sherd I.73: IV.C-110.001b (17 cm) o Sherd I.309: III.C-110.001b (20 cm)

91

• •

•

•

Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 16-20 cm o median size: rim diameter 17 cm Most complete example: Sherd I.309 o rim diameter 20 cm; at least one strap handle attached at rim o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft to medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 110.010a: olla • One example documented o Sherd I.257: I.C-110.010a (15 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 15 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown but > 18 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 110.001f: olla • One example documented o Sherd I.76: III.C-110.001f (ca. 32 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter ca. 32 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 110.010b: olla (possibly pitcher) • One example documented o Sherd I.138: II.C-110.110b (15 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 15 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 110.001h: olla • One example documented o Sherd I.317: I.C-110.001h (22 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 22 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o intentional groove incised into interior rim? o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 110.010d: olla (possibly pitcher) • Two examples documented o Sherd I.70: I.C-110.010d (17 cm) o Sherd I.258: IV.C-110.010d (20 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 17-20 cm • Most complete example: Sherd I.70 o rim diameter 17 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown but > 19 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o rim trimmed o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 110.009a: olla (pitcher?) • One example documented o Sherd I.201: X.C-110.009a (11 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 11 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm

92

Form 110/111.004a: olla or pitcher • One example documented o Sherd I.95: II.C-110/111.004a (11 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 11 cm; strap handle attached at rim; second handle or spout probably attached opposite o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o handle(s) applied when leather-hard; visible difference between fabric of main body and handle see in Sherd I.95 o fired soft to medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 110.010e: olla • One example documented o Sherd I.272: II.C-110.010e (16 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 16 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere Form 110.000b: olla (?) • One example documented o Sherd I.294: II.C-110.000b (20 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 20 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1 cm

Form 110/111.000h: olla or pitcher • One example documented o Sherd I.75: I.C-110/111.000h (14 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 14 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1 cm

Form 110.010b: olla or bottle • One example documented o Sherd I.308: IV.C-110.010b (5 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 5 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o exterior of vessel smoothed o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 110.085a: flat base (probably for olla or similar form) • Fifteen examples documented o Sherd I.283: II.C-110.085a (6 cm) o Sherd I.329: III.C-110.085a (6 cm) o Sherd I.244: IV.C-110.085a (7 cm) o Sherd I.271: I.C-110.085a (9 cm) o Sherd I.157: III.C-110.085a (10 cm) o Sherd I.150: III.C-110.085a (10 cm) o Sherd I.22: II.C-110.085a (10 cm) o Sherd I.343: I.C-110.085a (11 cm) o Sherd I.131: IV.C-110.085a (12 cm) o Sherd I.32: I.C-110.085a (12 cm) o Sherd I.23: I.C-110.085a (13 cm) o Sherd I.149: I.C-110.085a (13 cm) o Sherd I.148: III.C-110.085a (15 cm) o Sherd I.364: IV.C-110.085a (16 cm) o Sherd I.151: III.C-110.085a (17 cm) • Range of sizes documented: base diameter 6-17 cm o median size: base diameter 11 cm o mode size: base diameter 10 cm • Most complete example: Sherd I.283 o rim diameter unknown o base diameter 6 cm

Form 110/111.001c: olla or pitcher • One example documented o Sherd I.277: IV.C-110/111.001c (13 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 13 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

93

maximum diameter unknown but > 12 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4.5 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o exterior of vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

•

maximum diameter unknown but > 16 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 5 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o base trimmed o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere o

o

•

Form 110.085d: flat base with two grooves incised, exterior (probably for olla or similar form) • One example documented o Sherd I.26: III.C-110.085d (12 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown o base diameter 12 cm o maximum diameter unknown but > 16 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o two grooves incised into exterior base when leather-hard o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 111.002a: pitcher • Six examples documented o Sherd I.371: I.C-111.002a (6 cm) o Sherd I.139: III.C-111.002a (7 cm) o Sherd I.89: I.C-111.002a (8 cm) o Sherd I.348: II.C-111.002a (12 cm) o Sherd I.247: III.C-111.002a (12 cm) o Sherd I.350: III.C-111.002a(s) (unknown) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 6-12 cm o median size: rim diameter 8 cm o mode size: rim diameter 12 cm • Most complete example: Sherd I.89 o rim diameter 8 cm; strap handle attached at rim; spout probably attached opposite o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o handle(s) attached when leather-hard o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 110/111.086: ring base (probably for olla or pitcher) • Sixteen examples documented o Sherd I.127: III.C-110/111.086 (6 cm) o Sherd I.269: IV.C-110/111.086 (6 cm) o Sherd I.50: IV.C-110/111.086 (7 cm) o Sherd I.347: III.C-110/111.086 (7 cm) o Sherd I.200: I.C-110/111.086 (7 cm) o Sherd I.249: III.C-110/111.086 (8 cm) o Sherd I.196: I.C-110/111.086 (9 cm) o Sherd I.204: III.C-110/111.086 (9 cm) o Sherd I.267: II.C-110/111.086 (9 cm) o Sherd I.155: III.C-110/111.086 (9 cm) o Sherd I.242: IV.C-110/111.086 (10 cm) o Sherd I.197: I.C-110/111.086 (10 cm) o Sherd I.252: I.C-110/111.086 (10 cm) o Sherd I.28: III.C-110/111.086 (11 cm) o Sherd I.320: IV.C-110/111.086 (11 cm) o Sherd I.147: IV.C-110/111.086 (11 cm) • Range of sizes documented: base diameter 6-11 cm o median size: base diameter 9 cm o mode size: base diameter 9 cm • Most complete example: Sherd I.204 o rim diameter unknown o base diameter 9 cm

Form 111.003a: pitcher • Two examples documented o Sherd I.279: I.C-111.003a (12 cm) o Sherd I.305: IV.C-111.003a (15 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 12-15 cm • Most complete example: Sherd I.305 o rim diameter 15 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

94

Form 111.003b: pitcher • One example documented o Sherd I.310: I.C-111.003b (14 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 14 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

base diameter unknown maximum diameter unknown height unknown; maximum preserved height 1 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere o o o

•

Form 111.006a: pitcher • Two examples documented o Sherd I.349: I.C-111.006a (8 cm) o Sherd I.62: IV.C-111.006a (8 cm) • One size documented; Most complete example: Sherd I.349 o rim diameter 8 cm; at least one strap handle attached o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 111.003d: pitcher • One example documented o Sherd I.199: I.C-111.003d (13 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 13 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o rim incised/shaped? o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 111.007a: pitcher (possibly olla or similar form) • One example documented o Sherd I.164: II.C-111.007a (12 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 12 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 111.004a: pitcher • Three examples documented o Sherd I.202: X.C-111.004a (9 cm) o Sherd I.265: III.C-111.004a (9 cm) o Sherd I.255: III.C-111.004a (9 cm) o Sherd I.136: I.C-111.004a (13 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 9-13 cm o median size: base diameter 9 cm o mode size: base diameter 9 cm • Most complete example: Sherd I.202 o rim diameter 9 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft to medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 111.007c: pitcher • One example documented o Sherd I.35: II.C-111.007c (11 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 11 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o rim trimmed/shaped o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 111.004b: pitcher (?) • One example documented o Sherd I.367: IV.C-111.004b (9 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 9 cm

95

Form 111.008a/d: bottle or pitcher (?) • One example documented o Sherd I.71: IV.C-111.008a/d (7 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 7 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

•

Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 111.014b: bottle • One example documented o Sherd I.72: I.C-111.0014b (8 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 8 cm; strap handle attached at rim; probably spout opposite o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 111.008d: pitcher • One example documented o Sherd I.133: II.C-111.008d (9 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 9 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 111.018b: pitcher (possibly olla) • Two examples documented o Sherd I.172: I.C-111.018b (12 cm) o Sherd I.254: X.C-111.018b (r/s) (15 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 12-15 cm • Most complete example: Sherd I.172 o rim diameter 12 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o rim deformed to produce spout o fired soft to medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 111.011a: bottle or pitcher (?) • Two examples documented o Sherd I.300: II.C-111.011a (9 cm) o Sherd I.99: I.C-111.011a (10 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 9-10 cm • Most complete example: Sherd I.300 o rim diameter 9 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 111.000 (s): spout (for pitcher) • One example documented o Sherd I.79: I.C-111.019 (s) Open forms

Form 111.012b: bottle (?) • One example documented o Sherd I.65: I.C-111.012b (9 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 9 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm

Form 202.101a: bowl • Three examples documented o Sherd I.30: II.C-202.101a (14 cm) o Sherd I.169: I.C-202.101a (16 cm) o Sherd I.31: III.C-202.101a (19 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 14-19 cm o median size: rim diameter 16 cm

96

•

•

Most complete example: Sherd I.169 o rim diameter 16 cm o base diameter unknown but < 11 cm o maximum diameter 16 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

o

fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202.104b: bowl • Two examples documented o Sherd I.34: I.C-202.104b (12 cm) o Sherd I.280: IV.C-202.104b (13 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 12-13 cm • Most complete example: Sherd I.280 o rim diameter 13 cm o base diameter unknown but < 11 cm o maximum diameter 13 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in poorly-controlled oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202.101b: bowl • One example documented o Sherd I.135: I.C-202.101b (15 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 15 cm o base diameter unknown but < 13 cm o maximum diameter 15 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed, exterior more carefully than interior o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202.104d: bowl with incised line, exterior rim • One example documented o Sherd I.87: III.C-202.104d (21 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 21 cm o base diameter unknown but < 19 cm o maximum diameter 21 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o line incised into exterior rim when leather-hard o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202.101d: bowl with incised line, exterior rim • Two examples documented o Sherd I.97: IV.C-202.101d (13 cm) o Sherd I.83: II.C-202.101d (13 cm) • One size documented; most complete example: Sherd I.97 o rim diameter 13 cm o base diameter unknown but < 9 cm o maximum diameter 13 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o line incised exterior rim when leatherhard o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202.201a: bowl • One example documented o Sherd I.299: III.C-202.201a (19 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 19 cm o base diameter unknown but < 17 cm o maximum diameter 19 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202.104a: bowl • One example documented o Sherd I.84: II.C-202.104a (14 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 14 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 14 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed

Form 202.201b: bowl • Two examples documented o Sherd I.307: IV.C-202.201b (14 cm) o Sherd I.81: I.C-202.201b (18 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 14-18 cm

97

•

•

•

Most complete example: Sherd I.307 o rim diameter 14 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 14 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Most complete example: Sherd I.381 o rim diameter unknown but > 6 cm o base diameter 4 cm o maximum diameter unknown but > 6 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1 cm

Form 202.086k.i: ring base with three incised lines, interior base • Two examples documented o Sherd I.53: I.C-202.086k.i (4 cm) o Sherd I.245: II.C-202.086k.i (4 cm) • One size documented; most complete example: Sherd I.245 o rim diameter unknown but > 6 cm o base diameter 4 cm o maximum diameter unknown but > 6 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1 cm

Form 202.601a: bowl • Three examples documented o Sherd I.276: I.C-202.601a (9 cm) o Sherd I.284: IV.C-202.601a (11 cm) o Sherd I.302: IV.C-202.601a (12 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 9-12 cm o median size: rim diameter 11 cm • Most complete example: Sherd I.276 o rim diameter 9 cm o base diameter 5 cm o maximum diameter 9 cm o height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere o Form 202.085b: flat base (probably for bowl) • Two examples documented o Sherd I.384: I.C-202.085b (5 cm) o Sherd I.290: I.C-202.085b (7 cm) • Range of sizes documented: base diameter 5-7 cm • Most complete example: Sherd I.384 o rim diameter unknown but > 9 cm o base diameter 5 cm o maximum diameter unknown but > 9 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o base trimmed o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing/reducing atmosphere

Form 202.186b: ring base (probably for bowl) • One example documented o Sherd I.282: I.C-202.186b (6 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown but > 8 cm o base diameter 6 cm o maximum diameter unknown but > 8 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o base trimmed o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere Form 202.186c: ring base (probably for bowl) • One example documented o Sherd I.250: II.C-202.186c (6 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown but > 10 cm o base diameter 6 cm o maximum diameter unknown but > 10 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o base trimmed o entire vessel smoothed, exterior less poorly than interior o fabric-colored slip applied, or sherd burnished from base trimming o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 202.185a: flat base (for bowl?) • Two examples documented o Sherd I.381: I.C-202.185a (4 cm) o Sherd I.129: III.C-202.185a (5 cm) • Range of sizes documented: base diameter 4-5 cm

98

Form 202.286c: ring base (for bowl?) • One example documented o Sherd I.292: III.C-202.286c (5 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown but > 7 cm o base diameter 5 cm o maximum diameter unknown but > 7 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o base trimmed o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

o o

entire vessel smoothed fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 203.086: ring base (probably for basin) • One example documented o Sherd I.295: IV.C-203.086 (14 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown but > 21 cm o base diameter 14 cm o maximum diameter unknown but > 21 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o base trimmed, poorly o entire vessel smoothed o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 203.101a: basin • One example documented o Sherd I.291: II.C-203.101a (22 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 22 cm o base diameter unknown but < 20 cm o maximum diameter 22 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft/medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 205.212a: plate • One example documented o Sherd I.66: II.C-205.212a (20 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 20 cm o base diameter unknown but < 14 cm o maximum diameter 20 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 203.201a: basin • One example documented o Sherd I.93: I.C-203.201a (30 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 30 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 30 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 205.212b: plate • One example documented o Sherd I.365: I.C-205.212b (15 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 15 cm o base diameter unknown but < 9 cm o maximum diameter 15 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 203.201b: basin • One example documented o Sherd I.303: IV.C-203.201b (28 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 28 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 28 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown

Form 205.213a: plate • One example documented o Sherd I.353: IV.C-205.213a (24 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 24 cm o base diameter unknown but < 15 cm o maximum diameter 24 cm

99

height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

o

o

•

fired soft to medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 206.611a: cover • Two examples documented o Sherd I.33: II.C-206.611a (18 cm) o Sherd I.268: III.C-206.611a (19 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 18-19 cm • Most complete example: Sherd I.33 o rim diameter 18 cm o base diameter unknown but < 15 cm o maximum diameter 18 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft to hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 205.601d: plate • One example documented o Sherd I.88: I.C-205.601d (26 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 26 cm o base diameter 22 cm o maximum diameter 26 cm o height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o line incised exterior rim when leatherhard o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 206.615b: cover • Three examples documented o Sherd I.57: III.C-206.615b (15 cm) o Sherd I.51: III.C-206.615b (22 cm) o Sherd I.162: I.C-206.615b (25 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 15-25 cm o median size: rim diameter 22 cm • Most complete example: Sherd I.51 o rim diameter 22 cm o base diameter unknown but < 18 cm o maximum diameter 22 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft to medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 206.201a: cover or dish • One example documented o Sherd I.78: IV.C-206.201a (34 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 34 cm o base diameter unknown but < 28 cm o maximum diameter 34 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o interior rim trimmed/shaped o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere Form 206.605b: cover • Three examples documented o Sherd I.301: IV.C-206.605b (17 cm) o Sherd I.168: III.C-206.605b (26 cm) o Sherd I.69: IV.C-206.605b (28 cm) • Range of sizes documented: rim diameter 17-28 cm o median size: rim diameter 26 cm • Most complete example: Sherd I.301 o rim diameter 17 cm o base diameter unknown but < 13 cm o maximum diameter 17 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed

Form 206.641a: cover or dish • One example documented o Sherd I.48: I.C-206.641a (> 52 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown but > 52 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown but > 52 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.25 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o wavy line incised while wet

100

o

fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired medium-hard/hard in oxidizing atmosphere o

•

Form 207.102a: pan • One example documented o Sherd I.192: IV.C-207.102a (50 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 50 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 50 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 207.401g: pan • One example documented o Sherd I.85: II.C-207.401g (22 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 22 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 22 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o rim incised/shaped o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 207.102h: pan • One example documented o Sherd I.370: III.C-207.102h (30 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 30 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 30 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o interior rim trimmed/shaped o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 207.602a: pan • One example documented o Sherd I.94: III.C-207.602a (38 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 38 cm o base diameter unknown but < 33 cm o maximum diameter 38 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft/medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 207.401c: pan • One example documented o Sherd I.278: III.C-207.401c (15 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 15 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 15 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 207.485: flat base (for pan?) • One example documented o Sherd I.52: III.C-207.485 (9 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown o base diameter 9 cm o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 207.401f: pan • One example documented o Sherd I.359: IV.C-207.401f (28 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 28 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 28 cm

Form 208.085: flat base (for pot?) • One example documented o Sherd I.56: I.C-208.085 (14 cm)

101

•

•

One size documented o rim diameter unknown o base diameter 14 cm o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1.5 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

o

Sherd I.358: IV.C-200.086 (3.5 cm)

Form 200.086c: unidentified ring base • Two examples documented o Sherd I.153: III.C-200.086 (8 cm) o Sherd I.243: IV.C-200.086 (8 cm) Form 007/8.000: pan or pot (?) • One example documented o Sherd I.346: X.C-007/8.000 (19 cm) Form 000.085: flat base • One example documented o Sherd I.372: I.C-000.085 (4 cm)

Form 212.001: stopper (?) • One example documented o Sherd I.137: I.C-212.001 • One size documented o rim diameter unknown o no base; hole in bottom probably original o maximum diameter unknown; maximum preserved diameter 2 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o intentionally punctured o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 000.085: unidentified ring bases • Six examples documented o Sherd I.246: I.C-000.085 (7 cm) o Sherd I.29: III.C-000.085 (7.5 cm) o Sherd I.274: III.C-000.085 (8 cm) o Sherd I.304: X.C-000.085 (9 cm) o Sherd I.286: IV.C-000.085 (10 cm) o Sherd I.251: I.C-000.085 (11 cm) Form 000.095: unidentified loop handles • Ten examples documented o Sherd I.54: IV.C-000.095 o Sherd I.117: IV.C-000.095 o Sherd I.121: I.C-000.095 o Sherd I.125: I.C-000.095 o Sherd I.218: III.C-000.095 o Sherd I.220: IV.C-000.095 o Sherd I.222: I.C-000.095 o Sherd I.241: IV.C-000.095 o Sherd I.253: IV.C-000.095 o Sherd I.369: IV.C-000.095

Unidentified forms Form 100.200: bottle (?) • One example documented o Sherd I.360: II.C-111.0010a (5 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 5 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o fired soft to medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 000.096: unidentified strap handles • Twenty-eight examples documented o Sherd I.113: III.C-000.096 o Sherd I.115: II.C-000.096 o Sherd I.118: I.C-000.096 o Sherd I.119: III.C-000.096 o Sherd I.120: III.C-000.096 o Sherd I.122: I.C-000.096 o Sherd I.123: IV.C-000.096 o Sherd I.124: IV.C-000.096 o Sherd I.126: II.C-000.096 o Sherd I.215: III.C-000.096 o Sherd I.216: I.C-000.096 o Sherd I.217: II.C-000.096 o Sherd I.219: I.C-000.096 o Sherd I.221: I.C-000.096 o Sherd I.223: I.C-000.096 o Sherd I.224: I.C-000.096 o Sherd I.225: IV.C-000.096

Form 100.085: unidentified flat base • One example documented o Sherd I.203: II.C-100.085 (7 cm) Form 200.085b: unidentified flat base • One example documented o Sherd I.132: I.C-200.085b (5.5 cm) Form 200.086a: unidentified ring base • Two examples documented o Sherd I.298: IV.C-200.086 (3.5 cm)

102

o o o o o o o o o o o

Sherd I.226: Sherd I.227: Sherd I.228: Sherd I.229: Sherd I.230: Sherd I.235: Sherd I.237: Sherd I.239: Sherd I.240: Sherd I.273: Sherd I.357:

IV.C-000.096 II.C-000.096 I.C-000.096 II.C-000.096 IV.C-000.096 I.C-000.096 I.C-000.096 IV.C-000.096 II.C-000.096 II.C-000.096 IV.C-000.096

height unknown; maximum preserved height 1 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o red color coat applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere o

•

Form 110/111.085b: flat base (probably for olla or pitcher) • One example documented o Sherd I.319: VI.E-110/111.085b (11 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown o base diameter 11 cm o maximum diameter unknown but > 13 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o red color coat applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard/hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Form 000.097: unidentified double-loop handle • One example documented o Sherd I.116: IV.C-000.097 Form 000.000(r): unidentified form • One example documented o Sherd I.270: II.C-000.000 (16 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 16 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 0.75 cm Ware E Closed forms

Form 110.185: flat base (for olla or large vessel) • One example documented o Sherd I.25: VI.E-110.185 (17 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter unknown o base diameter 17 cm o maximum diameter unknown but > 23 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 4.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o red color coat applied to entire vessel, with uneven results o fired medium-hard/hard in poorlycontrolled oxidizing atmosphere

Form 110.001d: olla • One example documented o Sherd I.321: V.E-110.001d (24 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 24 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown; step at rim suggests possible use of mold o entire vessel smoothed o rim trimmed/shaped o red color coat applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Open forms

Form 111.004a: pitcher • One example documented o Sherd I.140: VI.E-111.004a (11 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 11 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown

Form 206.602a: cover • One example documented o Sherd I.47: X.E-206.602a (34 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 34 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 34 cm

103

height unknown; maximum preserved height 1 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown o entire vessel smoothed o red color coat applied to entire vessel o fired medium-hard in oxidizing atmosphere o

•

•

o Sherd I.319: VI.E-002.085b (4 cm) One size documented o rim diameter unknown o base diameter 4 cm o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 1 cm

Form 000.086: unidentified ring base • One example documented o Sherd I.345: VI.E-000.086 (8 cm)

Unidentified forms Form 002.085b: flat base (for bowl or small vessel) • One example documented

Fig. 4.29: Area I, Ware B, closed bowls, platters, and pan Sherd I.163: I.B-102.201a

Sherd I.86: I.B-102.201b

Sherd I.74: I.B-105.201a

Sherd I.256: II.B-105.201b

Sherd I.259: II.B-107.204b

104

Fig. 4.30: Area I, Ware B, ollae Sherd I.261: III.B-110.001b

Sherd I.90: II.B-110.010e/p.i

Sherd I.152: IV.B-110.085a

Fig. 4.31: Area I, Ware B, olla/pitchers Sherd I.383: I.B-110.085b

Sherd I.24: I.B-110/111.086a

105

Fig. 4.32: Area I, Ware B, pitchers Sherd I.318: II.B-111.001a

Sherd I.55: II.B-111.005b

Sherd I.354: III.B-111.006b

Sherd I.342: I.B-111.007a

Sherd I.64: II.B-111.007b

Sherd I.145: I.B-111.007c

Fig. 4.33: Area I, Ware B, open bowls Sherd I.285: III.B-202.101b

106

Sherd I.170: I.B-202.101d

Sherd I.161: III.B-202.101f

Sherd I.67: II.B-202.103c

Sherd I.100: I.B-202.201a

Sherd I.98: I.B-202.201/4e

Sherd I.91: X.B-202.204b

Sherd I.263: I.B-202.204d

107

Sherd I.158: I.B-202.086a

Sherd I.154: IV.B-202.086c

Sherd I.338: I.B-203.201d

Sherd I.61: I.B-203.203a

Sherd I.264: I.B-203.203b

Sherd I.374: III.B-203.211e

Fig. 4.34: Area I, Ware B, open plates Sherd I.368: IV.B-205.214a

108

Sherd I.355: I.B-205.215a

Fig. 4.35: Area I, Ware B, open covers Sherd I.288: I.B-206.601a

Sherd I.166: II.B-206.601b

Sherd I.275: II.B-206.601d

Sherd I.366: I.B-206.631b

Sherd I.141: III.B-206.633a

Sherd I.104: I.B-206.641d

109

Fig. 4.36: Area I, Ware B, open pan Sherd I.356: III.B-207.201c

Fig. 4.37: Area I, Ware C, closed bowls and platter/basin Sherd I.165: IV.C-102.201a

Sherd I.281: I.C-102.201b

Sherd I.160: I.C-105.201a

Fig. 4.38: Area I, Ware C, closed cover/dish Sherd I.60: II.C-106.624b

Fig. 4.39: Area I, Ware C, pots Sherd I.351: III.C-108.001b

110

Sherd I.82: I.C-108.001g

Sherd I.340: II.C-108.002c

Fig. 4.40: Area I, Ware C, unguentarium Sherd I.253: IV.C-109.585

Fig. 4.41: Area I, Ware C, ollae Sherd I.306: I.C-110.001a

Sherd I.309: III.C-110.001b

Sherd I.76: III.C-110.001f

111

Sherd I.317: I.C-110.001h

Sherd I.201: X.C-110.009a

Sherd I.257: I.C-110.010a

Sherd I.138: II.C-110.010b

Sherd I.70: I.C-110.010d

Sherd I.272: II.C-110.010e

Fig. 4.42: Area I, Ware C, olla/pitchers Sherd I.294: II.C-110.000b

112

Sherd I.308: IV.C-110.010b

Sherd I.277: IV.C-110/111.001c

Sherd I.95: II.C-110/111.004a

Sherd I.75: IV.C-110/111.000h

Sherd I.283: II.C-110.085a

Sherd I.26: III.C-110.085d

113

Sherd I.204: III.C-110/111.086

Fig. 4.43: Area I, Ware C, pitchers Sherd I.89: I.C-111.002a

Sherd I.305: IV.C-111.003a

Sherd I.310: I.C-111.003b

Sherd I.199: I.C-111.003d

Sherd I.202: X.C-111.004a

Sherd I.367: IV.C-111.004b

114

Fig. 4.44: Area I, Ware C, pitcher/bottles Sherd I.349: I.C-111.006a

Sherd I.164: II.C-111.007a

Sherd I.35: II.C-111.007c

Sherd I.71: IV.C-111.008a/d

Sherd I.133: II.C-111.008d

Sherd I.300: II.C-111.011a

Sherd I.65: I.C-111.012b

115

Sherd I.72: I.C-111.014b

Sherd I.172: I.C-111.018b

Fig. 4.45: Area I, Ware C, open bowls Sherd I.169: I.C-202.101a

Sherd I.135: I.C-202.101b

Sherd I.97: IV.C-202.101d

Sherd I.84: II.C-202.104a

116

Sherd I.280: IV.C-202.104b

Sherd I.87: III.C-202.104d

Sherd I.299: III.C-202.201a

Sherd I.307: IV.C-202.201b

Sherd I.276: I.C-202.601a

Sherd I.384: I.C-202.085b

Sherd I.381: I.C-202.185a

117

Sherd I.245: II.C-202.086k.i

Sherd I.282: I.C-202.186b

Sherd I.250: II.C-202.186c

Sherd I.292: III.C-202.286c

Fig. 4.46: Area I, Ware C, open basins Sherd I.291: II.C-203.101a

Sherd I.93: I.C-203.201a

Sherd I.303: IV.C-203.201b

118

Sherd I.295: IV.C-203.086

Fig. 4.47: Area I, Ware C, open plates Sherd I.66: II.C-205.212a

Sherd I.365: I.C-205.212b

Sherd I.353: IV.C-205.213a

Sherd I.88: I.C-205.601d

119

Fig. 4.48: Area I, Ware C, open cover/dishes Sherd I.78: IV.C-206.201a

120

Sherd I.301: IV.C-206.605b

Sherd I.33: II.C-206.611a

Sherd I.51: III.C-206.615b

121

Sherd I.48: I.C-206.641a

122

Fig. 4.49: Area I, Ware C, open pans Sherd I.192: IV.C-207.102a

123

Sherd I.370: III.C-207.102h

Sherd I.278: III.C-207.401c

Sherd I.359: IV.C-207.401f

Sherd I.85: II.C-207.401g

124

Sherd I.94: III.C-207.602a

125

Fig. 4.50: Area I, Ware C, open pan and pot Sherd I.52: III.C-207.485

Sherd I.56: III.C-208.085

Fig. 4.51: Area I, Ware D, ollae Sherd I.213: VI.D-110.001b

Sherd I.330: V.D-110.001e

Sherd I.332: V.D-110.003d

Sherd I.209: V.D-110.009a

126

Sherd I.110: V.D-110.010b

Fig. 4.52: Area I, Ware D, olla/pitchers Sherd I.184: V.D-110.085a

Sherd I.183: X.D-110.0085b

Sherd I.333: VI.D-110/111.085

Sherd I.206: V.D-110/111.086

Fig. 4.53: Area I, Ware D, pitchers Sherd I.327: V.D-111.001d

127

Sherd I.328: V.D-111.002a

Sherd I.314: V.D-111.003b/d

Sherd I.105: V.D-111.004a

Sherd I.313: V.D-111.004h

Fig. 4.54: Area I, Ware D, open bowls Sherd I.96: VI.D-202.101a

Sherd I.191: VI.D-202.101d

Sherd I.111: V.D-202.201a

128

Sherd I.178: VI.D-202.085

Sherd I.316: V.D-002.085b

Fig. 4.55: Area I, Ware D, open covers Sherd I.106: X.D-206.231b

Sherd I.322: V.D-206.601a

129

Sherd I.312: V.D-206.601b

130

Sherd I.45: V.D-206.602a

131

Sherd I.190: V.D-206.631a

Sherd I.42: V.D-206.631b

Sherd I.103: V.D-206.085a

Sherd I.185: VI.D-206.085c

Fig. 4.56: Area I, Ware D, open pans Sherd I.315: V.D-207.204d

Sherd I.142: V.D-207.402a

Sherd I.331: VI.D-207.203b

132

Sherd I.44: VI.D-207.614a

Sherd I.173: V.D-207.085

Fig. 4.57: Area I, Ware E, closed forms Sherd I.321: V.E-110.001d

Sherd I.140: VI.E-110.004a

Sherd I.319: VI.E-110/111.085b

Sherd I.25: VI.E-110.185

133

Fig. 4.58: Area I, Ware E, open cover Sherd I.47: X.E-206.602a

134

4.4 Imported African Pottery from Area I • •

This section introduces the African pottery recovered from Area I, Vallebuona. This pottery is not part of the study collection of locally-produced pottery, but is instead a small comparative collection of imported pottery. Rather than a comprehensive treatment of the imported African pottery from Area I, the following represents an abbreviated catalogue of forms selected to be representative.

•

In the catalogue, the form names, dates and other general information are taken from Hayes (1972) and Atlante I (1981). The relevant pages in one or both works are indicated in parentheses after the form name. All information reported as “documented” for a form corresponds to the specific examples excavated from Area I, Vallebuona. I have indicated both the functional name given to the vessel by Hayes and Atlante I, and the corresponding formal group under my system.

•

including northern Italy Size range: rim diameter 22-41 cm One example documented o Sherd I.3: platter (scodella), 105+ (26 cm) One size documented o rim diameter 25.75 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 26 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3.5 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown using mold o vessel smoothed o slip applied (to entire vessel?) o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere

Lamboglia 10a (=Hayes 23B) (Atlante I 1981:138, Table LXVI) • Produced at least from second half of the 2nd century and until the beginning of the 3rd century AD, and possibly longer: the form is reported at Ostia from the second half of the 2nd century to the end of the 4th or beginning of the 5th century • Size range 19-34 cm • Two examples documented o Sherd I.10: casserole, 107+ (22 cm) o Sherd I.11: casserole, 107+ (22 cm) • One size documented; most complete example: I.10 o rim diameter 22 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 22 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown using mold o exterior of vessel smoothed o slip applied to interior o fired medium-hard to hard in oxidizing atmosphere

The full range of formal groups present in locallyproduced study collection are not represented in the limited collection of imported African pottery from Vallebuona. The African wares attested primarily consist of utilitarian forms for cooking (but not storage). There are also a few tableware forms. Catalogue of Selected African Pottery, Area I, Vallebuona Closed forms Similar to Çandarli Form 4 (Hayes 1972:321-322, Fig. 64) • Produced during the 3rd century AD; probably dates to the second half of the century • One example documented o Sherd I.15: dish, 102+ (20 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 20 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 20 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown (using mold?) o vessel smoothed, poorly o slip applied to entire vessel o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere; slightly reduced (darkened) rim

Similar to Pallarés 6 (=Hayes 36, no. 2, =Ostia I, fig. 85) (Atlante I 1981:146, Table LXXII) • Produced the beginning or first half of the 3rd century AD • Documented in the western Mediterranean • One example documented o Sherd I.9: bowl/pan, 108+ (17 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 17 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm

Hayes 61A (Hayes 1972:100-107, Fig.16) • Produced 325-400/420 AD • Commonly distributed across the Mediterranean,

135

•

Production and use o wheel-thrown using mold o vessel smoothed o slip applied to entire vessel o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere; reduced rim

• •

Open forms

•

Hayes 8A, no. 4 (Hayes 1972:33-35, Fig. 4; Atlante I 1981:26, Table XIV) • Hayes dates this form from 80/90-160 AD; Atlante I dates it from 150 AD to the beginning of the 3rd century AD • Well-distributed across the Mediterranean • Size range: rim diameter 5-23 cm, usually 16-18 cm • One example documented o Sherd I.12: bowl, 102+ • One size documented o rim diameter unknown o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter unknown o height unknown; maximum preserved height 5.5 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown using mold o vessel smoothed o roulette and incised designs o slip applied to entire vessel o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere

•

from late 2nd century AD to the end of the 4th century or beginning of the 5th century AD Distributed throughout the western Mediterranean One example documented o Sherd I.18: kitchen ware (ceramica da cucina africana), 203+/207+ (29 cm) One size documented o rim diameter 29 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 29 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm Production and use o wheel-thrown using mold o rim added and shaped o vessel smoothed, poorly o slip applied (?) o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere; reduced rim

Hayes 106 (no. 2) (Hayes 1972:169-71, Fig. 32; Atlante I 1981:99, Table XLV, 8) • Suggested production dates 600-660 AD • Rarely distributed in Lombard Italy • Size range: rim diameter 32-39 cm • One example documented o Sherd I.1: plate, 205+ (28 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 28 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 28 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown using mold o slip applied (to entire vessel?) o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere; reduced rim

Ostia I, fig. 261 (Atlante I 1981:212-13, Table CIV) • Sigillata africana D is attested most frequently from late 2nd century AD to the end of the 4th century or beginning of the 5th century AD • Distributed throughout the western Mediterranean • One example documented o Sherd I.8: kitchen ware (ceramica da cucina africana), 203+/207+ (29 cm) • One size documented o rim diameter 29 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 29 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 2 cm • Production and use o wheel-thrown o exterior of vessel smoothed o slip applied o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere; reduced rim

Similar to Hayes 196 (Hayes 1972:208-9, Fig. 36), to Ostia II, fig. 302, and to Ostia III, fig. 332 (Atlante I 1981:212, Table CIV) • Hayes 196 dated from the mid 2nd to the mid 3rd century AD; Ostia II and III dated from ca. 1st century AD to the second half of the 2nd century AD • Commonly distributed throughout the Mediterranean • Size range of Hayes 196: rim diameter ca. 22.536 cm; of Ostia II and III: rim diameter 19-30 cm • Two examples documented o Sherd I.2: cover, 206+ (20 cm) o Sherd I.4: cover, 206+ (26 cm)

Ostia IV, fig. 60 (Atlante I 1981:212-13, Table CIV) • Sigillata africana D attested most frequently

136

•

•

Most complete example Sherd I.2 o rim diameter 20 cm o base diameter unknown o maximum diameter 20 cm o height unknown; maximum preserved height 3 cm

Fig. 4.59: African pottery, Area I, closed forms Sherd I.15: Similar to Çandarli Form 4

Sherd I.3: Hayes 61A

Sherd I.10: Lamboglia 10a (=Hayes 23B)

Sherd I.9: Similar to Pallarés 6 (=Hayes 36, no. 2, =Ostia I, fig. 85)

137

Production and use o wheel-thrown o slip applied (?) o fired hard in oxidizing atmosphere; reduced rim

Fig. 4.60: African pottery, Area I, open forms Sherd I.12: Hayes 8A, no. 4

Sherd I.8: Ostia I, fig. 261

Sherd I.18: Ostia IV, fig. 60

Sherd I.1: Hayes 106 (no. 2)

Sherd I.2: Similar to Hayes 196

138

CHAPTER 5: FORMAL ANALYSIS The examination was performed on the basis of the form and variant counts described in the section introduction. Because the study collection includes a limited number of forms and variants, it was necessary to combine categories in order to have counts large enough to be meaningful and to be tested statistically. The forms and variants were combined according to function as identified in A. Ricci, ed. (1985:21-29), resulting in five groups (formal prefixes are identified in parentheses):1

Chapter 5 presents the Formal Analysis of the archaeological pottery, comprised of four interrelated examinations of the Pottery Catalogue data. The first examination looks at the functional categories present in the study collection. The second considers the ratio of closed to open vessel forms and variants. The third examines the degree of variation represented by the study collection. The final examination explores the patterns of change and continuity in the forms, variants, and wares present in the study collection. All four examinations include an investigation of patterns of change and continuity through time. The chapter is concluded with a section providing a summary and discussion of the results of the Formal Analysis.

1. 2.

The examination of the functional categories and of the ratio of closed to open vessels is performed for the study collections of Area IV and Area I independently as well as in comparison with each other. For these analyses, the patterns observed in the data are tested for statistical significance and for strength of association. The examination of the degree of variation and the change and continuity of forms and variants is performed only through comparison of Area IV and Area I. These analyses consist of descriptive statistics only; the significance and strength of association of the observed patterns are not tested.

3. 4. 5.

bowl/basin group: small closed vessel (101+), closed bowl (102+), open bowl (202+), and open basin (203+) plate/cover group: closed plate/platter (105+), closed cover/dish (106+), open plate/platter (205+), and open cover/dish (206+) pot/pan group: closed pan (107+), closed pot (108+), open pan (207+), and open pot (208+) olla group: unguentarium (109+) and olla (110+) pitcher/bottle group: pitcher/bottle (111+) and stopper (012+)

In the examination, the trends for forms are given more weight than the trends for variants. Where rankings of the various categories are assessed, the percentages of the forms are given greater consideration, while the percentages of the variants were used to break ties and resolve ambiguities.

Two kinds of count are employed in the Formal Analysis, a form count and a variant count. In the form count, each form is counted once per excavation area, regardless of the number of variants existing in that form, the various sizes documented for the form, or the number of wares for which it is attested. In the variant count, each distinct formal variant is counted once per area, regardless of the various sizes documented for the form, or the number of wares for which it is attested. Bases are not “doublecounted” if a rim with the same shape prefix is also present for that form (even if the base is decorated). If no rim with the same shape prefix is present, then the base is counted as a variant. Unidentified forms and vessel parts belonging to unidentified forms are omitted from both counts.

Hellenistic Etruscan Pottery from Area IV Table 5.1 below presents the form and variant count of the various functional categories for the wares in Area IV. In order to interpret these data, the figures in Table 5.1 are converted to percentages in Table 5.2. The data in Table 5.2 indicate a number of interesting patterns. These are significant to interpreting the composition of the individual wares, as well as the study collection from Area IV as a whole. Ware A/B is dominated by the categories of plates/covers and bowls/basins. Only a small percentage of the other functional categories appear to have been produced in Ware A/B. This distribution of forms is consistent with

5.1 Functional Categories The first examination contributing to the Formal Analysis considers the functional categories represented by the vessel forms and variants in the study collection. Pottery forms were assigned a function by consulting the glossary of forms and functions presented in the Settefinestre publication (A. Ricci, ed. 1985:21-29).

1 These “functional” categories are not mutually exclusive, of course; nor are they absolute. Pitchers/bottles could be assigned to either category, as could cover/dishes. Here, pitchers/bottles were placed with the utilitarian wares, since it is often difficult to distinguish these rim sherds from those of ollae. Likewise, cover/dishes were placed with tablewares, since it is often difficult to distinguish these rim sherds from those of plates/platters.

139

forms and variants; Ware C contains a relatively even number of tableware and utilitarian forms and variants; and Ware D contains a significantly greater number of utilitarian forms and variants than of tableware forms and variants.

the traditional definition of the slipped and color-coated wares as tablewares. Ware C contains a broader variety of vessel types. The category of ollae is best-represented. Also wellrepresented are bowls/basins and plates/covers. Finally, pots/pans and pitchers/bottles are also attested. This pattern indicates that the plain common ware from Area IV included both tableware and utilitarian forms, again consistent with its traditional definition as a multipurpose ware.

The results of both chi-square tests (i.e., the test using form count as a measure and the test using variant count as a measure) reject the null hypothesis and support the directional hypothesis. For both tests, the value of V indicates that the association between to the two variables is somewhat weak, but this is partly due to the relatively even distribution of Ware C across the two broad functional categories. Using form count as a measure, N=82, χ2=21.34, df=2, p=0.0000 (one-tailed test), and V=0.2606. Using variant count as a measure, N=125, χ2=35.35, df=2, p=0.0000 (one-tailed test), and V=0.2828.

The best-represented categories in Ware D are pots/pans and ollae. Plates/covers are also frequently-attested; the majority of the examples in this category are cover/dishes. Bowls/basins were rarely attested. No pitchers/bottles were documented. Thus Ware D appears to be composed primarily of cooking and storage vessels, once again consistent with its traditional definition.

We may therefore conclude that the different wares in Area IV contain a different distribution of forms according to broad functional categories. These differences follow the traditional distinctions made among the wares: Ware A/B is dominated by tableware forms and variants; Ware C is composed of both tableware and utilitarian forms and variants, in relatively even numbers; and Ware D is dominated by utilitarian forms and variants.

Considering the Area IV study collection as a whole, it appears that tableware forms are most numerous (plates/cover, and bowls/basins), followed by utilitarian forms (ollae and pots/pans). The serving/utilitarian forms of pitchers/bottles are rare. The chi-square test was used to test the statistical validity of these patterns between ware and functional category, while Cramer’s V was used to measure of the strength of the association between the variables. Separate tests were performed for form count and variant count. Because of the small numbers of forms and variants, it was necessary to combine the functional categories into two greater categories, tablewares and utilitarian wares. Two form and variant categories were assigned to the greater tableware category: bowls/basins; and plates/covers. Three form and variant categories were assigned to the greater utilitarian category: pots/pans; ollae; and pitchers/bottles. The statistical tests therefore verify the dominant function of the ware (table use or utilitarian use), but do not address the proportion of the form and variant categories changes within these greater functional categories. Wares A and B were combined to create one group of surface-treated wares. The significance level (α) for the tests was set at 0.05.

Late Roman and Late Antique Pottery from Area I Table 5.3 below presents the count for the forms and variants in Area I, according to ware. In order to interpret these data, the figures in Table 5.3 are converted to percentages in Table 5.4. Ware B is dominated by bowls/basins and plates/covers. There is also a significant percentage of pitchers/bottles. Few pots/pans or ollae were documented. This pattern is consistent with the traditional definition of the colorcoated ware as a tableware. Ware C contains a wide variety of forms. Pitchers/bottles are most numerous, followed by bowls/basins and plates/covers. Pots/pans and ollae are also represented. The plain common ware from Area I was used to produce both table and utilitarian forms, consistent with its traditional definition.

The null hypothesis (H0) states: The proportion of the two broad functional categories (tablewares and utilitarian wares) present in the Area IV study collection is the same for the three wares (A/B, C, and D), as measured by form and variant count. The directional hypothesis (H1) states: The proportion of the two broad functional categories (tablewares and utilitarian wares) present in the Area IV study collection is not the same for the three wares (A/B, C, and D): Ware A/B contains a significantly greater number of tableware forms and variants than of utilitarian

Pitchers/bottles are the best-represented category in Ware D/E pottery. Plates/covers, pots/pans, and ollae are also numerous. Bowls/basins were rarely documented for Ware D/E. Consistent with its traditional definition, the Ware D pottery from Area I appears to be composed primarily of cooking and storage vessels, with serving and storage vessels (pitchers and bottles) also well-

140

represented.

dominated by utilitarian forms and variants.

Overall, the Area I study collection is dominated by serving vessels and tablewares. Most numerous are pitchers/bottles, followed by bowls/basins and plates/covers. Utilitarian forms such as pots/pans and ollae are rarely documented.

Change and Continuity Through Time Tables 5.2 and 5.4, discussed above, present the percentages of different functional categories of forms and variants in the wares of the study collection. By comparing the results of Table 5.2 for Area IV and Table 5.4 for Area I, a number of observations may be made regarding change and continuity of vessel forms and variants through time. Trends for each ware and for the entire study collection from each area are identified below. Identified patterns are then tested for statistical significance and strength of relationship.

The chi-square test was used to test the statistical validity of these patterns between ware and functional category, and Cramer’s V to measure the strength of the association. Separate tests were performed for form count and variant count. As with Area IV, the Area I functional categories were combined to create two greater categories: tableware forms and variants; and utilitarian forms and variants. Wares D and E were combined to create one group of medium-textured wares. The significance level (α) for the tests was set at 0.05.

Area IV and Area I include the various identified functional categories in different proportions. Area IV contains the categories in this order of frequency: plates/covers; bowls/basin; ollae; pots/pans; and pitcher/bottles. Area I contains the categories in this order: pitcher/bottles; bowls/basins; plates/covers; ollae; and pots/pans. For both areas, the majority of the study collection consists of table and serving forms, with a minority of cooking and utilitarian forms. However, there is an obvious and interesting shift in the relative order of the table and serving categories: through time, pitchers/bottles become much more numerous, at the expense of plates/covers and bowls/basins. There is also an increase in the percentage of bowls/basins with a corresponding decrease in the percentage of plates/covers. In both areas, utilitarian forms are in the minority, with the multifunctional ollae more numerous than pots/pans.

The null hypothesis (H0) states: The proportion of the two broad functional categories (tablewares and utilitarian wares) present in the Area I study collection is the same for the three wares (B, C, and D/E). The directional hypothesis (H1) states: The proportion of the two broad functional categories (tablewares and utilitarian wares) present in the Area I study collection is not the same for the three Wares (B, C, and D/E): Ware B contains a significantly greater number of tableware forms and variants than of utilitarian forms and variants; Ware C contains a relatively even number of tableware and utilitarian forms and variants; and Ware D/E contains a significantly greater number of utilitarian forms and variants than of tableware forms and variants.

The chi-square test was used to test the statistical validity of these patterns, while Cramer’s V was used to measure of the strength of the association between time period and functional category. The total figures (i.e., all wares combined) for form count and variant count for each functional category were used to compare Area IV to Area I. Separate tests were performed for form count and variant count. Wares A and B were combined to create one group of surface-treated, fine-textured wares. Wares D and E were combined to create one group of mediumtextured wares. The significance level (α) for the tests was set at 0.05.

Both chi-square tests (using form count as a measure, and using variant count as a measure) reject the null hypothesis. Examining the distribution of the observed and expected frequencies, it appears that although they largely follow the pattern predicted by the directional hypothesis, the differences are not as great as we saw in Area IV. In addition, the value of V indicates that the association between to the two variables is weak. For the form count, N=80, χ2=6.15, df=2, p=0.0460 (onetailed test), and V=0.0769. For the variant count, N=121, χ2=12.06, df=2, p=0.0012 (one-tailed test), and V=0.0997. These results do not provide strong support for the directional hypothesis.

The null hypothesis (H0) states: The proportions of the various functional categories present is the same for the Area IV and Area I study collections, as measured by form count and variant count. The directional hypothesis (H1) states: The proportions of the various functional categories present is different for the Area IV and Area I study collections, as measured by form count and variant count: the Area IV collection contains a significantly greater percentage of forms and variants in the categories

Nonetheless, we may conclude that the different wares represented in the Area I study collection do differ in terms of the functions served by member forms and variants. These differences follow the traditional distinctions made among the wares: Ware A/B is dominated by tableware forms and variants; Ware C is composed of both tableware and utilitarian forms and variants, in relatively even numbers; and Ware D/E is

141

The null hypothesis (H0) states: The proportion of open to closed forms is the same for Wares A/B, C, and D of the Area IV study collection, as measured by form and variant count. The directional hypothesis (H1) states: The proportion of open to closed forms is not the same for Wares A/B, C, and D of the Area IV study collection, as measured by form and variant count: Ware A/B contains a significantly greater number of open forms and variants than closed forms and variants; Ware C contains a significantly greater number of closed forms and variants than open forms and variants; and Ware D contains a significantly greater number of open forms and variants than closed forms and variants.

of plate/cover and bowl/basin, while the Area I collection contains a significantly greater percentage of forms and variants in the category of pitcher/bottle. Both chi-square tests (using form count and variant count) reject the null hypothesis. Comparing the pattern of expected to the observed frequencies, it appears that the predictions of the directional hypothesis were fulfilled. The value of V is weak, however. For the form count measure, N=162, χ2=12.26, df=4, p=0.00781 (onetailed test), and V=0.0757. For the variant count measure, N=246, χ2=22.68, df=4, p=0.0001 (one-tailed test), and V=0.0922. In essence, the difference in the two areas consists primarily of the sharp increase in the pitcher/bottle category through time. We may conclude that through time there is a statistically-significant change in the study collection in terms of functional categories, but that the relationship between the two variables is not substantial, and primarily reflects an increase in one specific category: pitchers and bottles.

The results of both chi-square tests reject the null hypothesis. The value of V indicates that the association between to the two variables is somewhat to moderately weak. For the form count test, N=82, χ2=4.53, df=2, p=0.0268 (one-tailed test), and V=0.2350. For the variant count test, N=159, χ2=22.38, df=2, p=0.0000 (one-tailed test), and V=0.3752.

5.2 Ratio of Closed to Open Forms and Variants We may therefore conclude that the different wares in Area IV contain a significantly different ratio of closed to open forms: Ware A/B contains more open than closed forms; Ware C contains more closed than open forms; and Ware D contains more open than closed forms. However, the relationship between the ratio and ware is not particularly strong.

The second examination contributing to the Formal Analysis considers the ratio of closed to open forms and variants in the study collection. The Pottery Catalogue categorized the study collection according to closed and open forms and variants. A simple count establishes the proportion of closed to open forms and variants within this system.

Late Roman and Late Antique Pottery from Area I Hellenistic Etruscan Pottery from Area IV Table 5.7 below presents the count open and closed forms and variants in Area I. In order to interpret these data, the figures in Table 5.7 are converted to percentages in Table 5.8.

Table 5.5 below presents the count of open and closed forms and variants in Area IV. Table 5.6 converts these data to percentages. Comparing the percentages in Table 5.6, it appears that the ratio of closed to open forms varies according to ware in the study collection of Area IV. The majority of Ware A/B forms and variants are open, a trend which is more evident for the forms than for the variants. The majority of Ware C forms and variants are closed, a trend which is more evident for the forms than for the variants. Finally, the majority of Ware D forms and variants are open, a trend which is more evident for the variants than for the forms.

Comparing the percentages in Table 5.8, it appears that there is little variation in ratio of closed to open forms among the wares in the study collection of Area I. The majority of Ware A/B forms and variants are open, a trend which is more evident for the forms than the variants. The proportion of open to closed forms and variants is relatively even for Wares C and D/E. The chi-square test was used to determine whether there is any statistical validity in the seemingly weak relationship between ware and open to closed ratio, while Cramer’s V was used to measure of the strength of the association between the variables. Separate tests were performed for form count and variant count. Wares D and E were combined to create one group of mediumtextured pottery. The significance level (α) for the tests was set at 0.05.

The statistical validity of the association between ware and open to closed ratio was tested with the chi-square test, while Cramer’s V was used to measure of the strength of the association between the variables. Separate tests were performed for form count and variant count. Wares A and B were combined to create one group of surface-treated wares. The significance level (α) for the tests was set at 0.05.

The null hypothesis (H0) states: The proportion of open

142

variants, although the gap narrows through time. The trend for an increasing percentage of closed forms and variants is more visible for the variants than the forms.

to closed forms is the same for Wares A/B, C, and D of the Area I study collection, as measured by form and variant count. No directional hypothesis was proposed, as the null hypothesis was expected to be supported by the results of the test. Neither test rejected the null hypothesis. Furthermore, the value of V for both tests indicates that the association between the two variables is quite weak. For the form count, N=81, χ2=1.34, df=2, p=0.5082 (two-tailed test), and V=0.1286. For the variant count, N=153, χ2=1.17, df=2, p=0.5585 (two-tailed test), and V=0.0874. We may therefore conclude that the different wares in Area I do not contain a significantly different ratio of closed to open forms and variants.

The chi-square test was used to test the statistical validity of the patterns noted above, while phi was used to measure the strength of the association between time period and closed to open ratio. Chi-square tests were performed for each of the trends noted above, using form and variant count as the quantification measure. Separate tests were performed for form count and variant count. Wares A and B were combined to create one group of surface-treated, fine-textured wares. Wares D and E were combined to create on group of medium-textured wares. The significance level (α) for the tests was set at 0.05.

Change and Continuity Through Time

Ware A/B

The results for Area IV and Area I may be compared in order to evaluate the degree of change or continuity through time in the ratio of closed to open forms and variants. Comparing the results of the exploratory data tables discussed above (Table 5.6 for Area IV and Table 5.8 for Area I), a number of patterns may be identified in the data. The primary trend for each ware and for the entire study collection from each area are identified below, and these are then tested for statistical significance and strength of relationship.

The null hypothesis (H0) for Ware A/B states: The proportion of Ware A/B forms and variants classified as closed and open is the same for the Area IV and Area I study collections. The directional hypothesis (H1) states: The proportion of Ware A/B forms and variants classified as closed and open is not the same for the Area IV and Area I study collections: the Area IV collection contains a significantly greater percentage of open forms and variants, while the Area I collection contains a significantly greater percentage of closed forms and variants.

For Ware A/B, the majority of forms and variants are open in both periods. There is a slight tendency toward an increase in closed forms and variants through time, and a corresponding decrease in the percentage of open forms and variants. This trend is more pronounced for the variants than for the forms.

Using form count as a measure, the chi-square test does not reject the null hypothesis (N=65, χ2=0.82, df=1, and p=0.3670 [two-tailed test]). The results of phi indicate that the association between the time period and closed to open ratio is weak (ø=0.1123). We must therefore that through time there is no statistically significant change in Ware A/B in terms of closed to open form ratio, and that the relationship between the ratio and time period for Ware A/B is not substantial.

For Ware C, the proportion of closed to open forms and variants is much more evenly split in both periods, although the study collection for both Area IV and Area I contains a slightly greater percentage of closed forms and variants. This pattern remains relatively stable through time, although there is a slight decrease in the percentage of closed forms and variants, and a corresponding increase in the percentage of open forms and variants. Again, this trend is more pronounced for the variants than for the forms.

Using the variant count measure, however, the null hypothesis may be rejected and the directional hypothesis accepted: N=129, χ2=8.72, df=1, and p=0.0031 (twotailed test). The possibility that the observed differences could have occurred by chance is well below the established level. The value of phi suggest that the association between to the two variables (time period and closed to open ratio) is not particularly strong (ø=0.2600), but indicates that the association is worth consideration.

For Ware D/E, open forms and variants are more numerous than closed forms and variants, although through time the proportion of closed forms and variants increases. This trend is more apparent in the forms than the variants.

We may conclude therefore that through time there is no statistically significant change in Ware A/B in terms of time period and closed to open form ratio, but that there is a significant relationship between time period and closed to open variant ratio. This relationship represents a modest increase through time in the proportion of closed

Comparing the study collection of each area as a whole, we see that open forms and variants represent a greater percentage of the collection than closed forms and

143

variants to open variants in Ware A/B.

All Wares

Ware C

Finally, the relationship between time period and closed to open ratio was tested for all wares combined. The null hypothesis (H0) for All Wares states: The proportion of forms and variants classified as closed and open is the same for the Area IV and Area I study collections. The directional hypothesis (H1) for All Wares states: The proportion of forms and variants classified as closed and open is not the same for the Area IV and Area I study collections: the Area IV collection contains a significantly greater percentage of open forms and variants, while the Area I collection contains a significantly greater percentage of closed forms and variants.

The null hypothesis (H0) for Ware C states: The proportion of Ware C forms and variants classified as closed and open is the same for the Area IV and Area I study collections. No directional hypothesis was established for Ware C, as the null hypothesis was expected to be upheld, due to the apparent stability in the proportion of closed to open forms and variants in Ware C through time. For Ware C, the chi-square test does not reject the null hypothesis, regardless of whether the form count or variant count measure is used. The results of phi indicate that the association between the two variables (time period and closed to open ratio) is very weak. For the form count, N=56, χ2=0.04, df=1, p=0.8364 (twotailed test), and ø=0.0300. For the variant count, N=110, χ2=0.79, df=1, p=0.3737, and ø=0.0800. As anticipated, the chi-square tests indicate that through time there is no statistically significant change in Ware C in terms of closed to open form or variant ratio, and that the relationship between the ratio and time period for Ware C is not substantial.

Using form count as a measure, the null hypothesis cannot be rejected: N=127, χ2=0.45, df=1, and p=0.4994 (two-tailed test). The results of phi indicate that the association between to the two variables (time period and closed to open ratio) is very weak (ø=0.0600). We must conclude that through time there is no statistically significant change in terms of closed to open form and vessel ratio, and that the relationship between the ratio and time period is tenuous. Using variant count as a measure, however, the null hypothesis is rejected: N=207, χ2=3.94, df=1, and p=0.0476 (two-tailed test). The possibility that the differences observed between the study collections of the two areas could have occurred by chance is below the established level, but the results of phi indicate that the association between to the two variables (time period and closed to open ratio) is weak (ø=0.1400). We may conclude that through time there is a statistically significant change in the study collection composition in terms of closed to open variant and vessel ratio, but that the relationship between the ratio and time period is not strong. As only the variant count test (and not also the form count test) supports the directional hypothesis, it cannot be accepted without reservations.

Ware D/E The null hypothesis (H0) for Ware D/E states: The proportion of Ware D/E forms and variants classified as closed and open is the same for the Area IV and Area I study collections. The directional hypothesis (H1) states: The proportion of Ware D/E forms and variants classified as closed and open is not the same for the Area IV and Area I study collections: the Area IV collection contains a significantly greater percentage of open forms and variants, while the Area I collection contains a significantly greater percentage of closed forms and variants. For Ware D/E, the null hypothesis is not rejected, whether form count or variant count is used as a measure. For the form count test, N=42, χ2=0.30, df=1, and p=0.5901 (two-tailed test). For the variant count test, N=73, χ2=0.002, df=1, and p=0.9623 (two-tailed test). The results of phi indicate that the association between to the two variables (time period and closed to open ratio) is very weak (ø=0.0300 for the form count test and ø=0.0050 for the variant count test). We must conclude that through time there is no statistically significant change in Ware D/E in terms of closed to open form ratio, and that the relationship between the ratio and time period for Ware D/E is not substantial.

5.3 Degree of Variation Ratio The third examination contributing to the Formal Analysis evaluates the degree of variation in the study collection. The Pottery Catalogue categorized the study collection according to forms and variants present for each ware. In order to examine the degree of variation, the count of forms and variants documented in the catalogue is divided by the number of diagnostic sherds examined, thereby establishing a degree of variation ratio. In other words, the degree of variation ratio represents the number of forms and variants documented for a given number of sherds (the actual number of diagnostic sherds examined in the appropriate part of the study collection).

144

It establishes a measure of variation in the study collection defined as the number of forms documented per diagnostic sherd (a fraction between 0.0 and 1.0). In this measure, a higher degree of variation is represented by a greater fraction.2 Table 5.9 below presents the count of forms and variants in Area IV, together with the degree of variation ratio. Table 5.10 presents the count of forms and variants in Area I, together with the degree of variation ratio.

5.4 Continuity and Change Through Time in Forms, Variants, and Wares The fourth part of the Formal Analysis is an exploratory examination of the patterns of change and continuity through time in the various functional categories documented in the study collection. The analysis first considers the various functional groups attested in the study collection. It then groups these into the functional categories used throughout the Formal Analysis. Finally, it combines the functional categories into the broader groups of tableware and utilitarian ware.

It is possible to consider change and continuity through time by comparing and contrasting the degree of variation in forms and variants for the Area IV and Area I study collections. Examining the results of Tables 5.9 and 5.10, a number of patterns may be identified in the data. As this is an exploratory study, the patterns are described but not tested for statistical significance.

Table 5.11 below presents a count of the forms and variants for each formal group, indicating their distribution in Areas IV and I. The final two columns of the table assess the degree of continuity and the direction of change suggested by the figures in the preceding columns. Degree of continuity is assessed as “minimal”, “moderate”, or “substantial”, and is assigned on the basis of the proportion of total forms and variants found in both excavation areas: up to ca. 33% is considered “minimal”; up to ca. 66% “moderate”; and up to 100% “substantial.” Direction of change is assessed as “none”, “increase”, or “decrease” in formal variety through time, and is assigned by comparing the number of forms and variants documented in Area IV only and in Area I only: no difference in the figures is assigned “none”; a greater figure in Area IV only column is assigned “decrease”; and a greater figure in the Area I only column is assigned “increase.” These assessments are made three times per formal group: once as an overall decision (in the same row as the formal group prefix and description), once for the forms, and once for the variants. In many cases, these assessments must be considered tentative or suggestive, due to the small numbers of examples.

Comparing the results for Ware A/B in Areas IV and I, it appears that there is a greater degree of variation in Area I. The ratio of forms to diagnostic sherds is greater for Area I than for Area IV, due to the greater variety of closed forms. The ratio of variants to diagnostic sherds is also greater, due to the greater variety of both closed and open variants in the Area I study collection. Comparing the results for Ware C in Areas IV and I, it again appears that there is a greater degree of variation in Area I. The ratio of forms to diagnostic sherds is greater for Area I than for Area IV, due to the greater variety of closed forms. The ratio of variants to diagnostic sherds is also greater, due to the greater variety of both closed and open variants in the Area I study collection. The degree of variation for Ware D/E is relatively similar for Areas IV and I, suggesting stability through time. There is a slight trend for greater variation in Area I, representing a slight trend for increasing variation through time. The ratio of forms to diagnostic sherds is greater for Area I than for Area IV, due to the greater variety of closed forms. The ratio of variants to diagnostic sherds is also greater, due to the greater variety of both closed and open variants in the Area I study collection.

Table 5.12 below indicates the association of the formal groups with the wares documented in the study collection. The predominant wares are given first, additional wares follow, and wares with minimal representation appear last in parentheses. The column entitled “Degree of continuity” provides an assessment of the information in the preceding two columns: “minimal”, “moderate” and “substantial” were assigned. The column entitled “Nature of change” provides a judgment of the nature or direction change: “stable” was assigned where there was no change; “diversification” was assigned where more wares were documented for Area I than Area IV (“reduction” would have been assigned in the opposite situation); “simplification” was indicated where the wares shifted from predominately surface-treated to predominately plain (“elaboration” would have been assigned in the opposite situation); and “other” was assigned for other situations.

2 The degree of variation ratio is not a measure of vessel standardization. As defined here, individual vessels belonging to a form share a common morphology regardless of their metric dimensions, while variants of the form share the basic morphology with additional distinctive characteristics. Thus the degree of “standardization” of vessels into uniform and discrete size categories is a separate issue, and would be measured by determining the variation of individual vessels from those discrete sizes. (The relatively poor preservation of the pottery in this study collection probably would not permit such a study.)

145

exhibit moderate continuity in forms and variants, decreasing in number through time. Their association with the various wares exhibits moderate continuity, tending toward diversification.

A review of the data from Tables 5.11 and 5.12 indicates that the trends are substantially similar among the formal groups included in each of the five functional groups used throughout the Formal Analysis. The general trend for each functional category is summarized below, then an overall assessment is provided relative to the broad groups of tableware and utilitarian ware.

Pot/pan There are four formal groups in the pot/pan category: closed pan; closed pot; open pan; and open pot. Closed pans exhibit minimal continuity in forms and variants through time, with a tendency to increase in number. Closed pots exhibit moderate continuity in forms and variants through time, with tendency to increase in number. They exhibit minimal continuity in wares through time, with a shift from fine-textured to mediumtextured clay paste. Open pans exhibit moderate continuity in forms and variants through time, with a tendency to increase in number. They exhibit substantial continuity in their association with the various wares through time, with a stable tendency. Open pots exhibit minimal continuity in forms and variants through time, with a tendency to decrease in number.

Bowl/basin There are four formal groups included in the bowl/basin category: closed glass or small vessel; closed bowl; open bowl; and open basin. Closed glasses or “small vessels” are present only in Area IV, and only in small numbers. Closed bowls and open bowls exhibit moderate continuity of forms and variants, with a decrease through time. They exhibit moderate continuity in their association with the various wares, with a trend for diversification through time. Open basins exhibit minimal continuity of forms and variants, with a decrease in the number of forms and variants through time. Open basins exhibit moderate continuity, with a trend for diversification through time.

Overall, the member groups in the pot/pan category exhibit minimal to moderate continuity in forms and variants, with a tendency to increase in number. Their association with the various wares is somewhat ambiguous, but may be characterized as exhibiting moderate continuity, with a fairly stable tendency.

Overall, the member groups in the bowl/basin category exhibit moderate continuity in forms and variants through time. More existing forms and variants were lost than new forms and variants gained, leading to an overall trend for a decrease in formal variety. The association of the member formal groups with the various wares exhibits moderate continuity, with a trend toward a diversification of wares (i.e., an increase in the number of wares associated with each formal group).

Olla There are two formal groups in the olla category: olla; and unguentarium or similar form. Ollae exhibit moderate continuity in terms of forms and variants through time, with a tendency to decrease in number. They exhibit substantial continuity and stability in their association with ware. Unguentaria and similar forms exhibit moderate continuity in forms and variants through time, with a tendency to decrease in number. They exhibit substantial continuity and stability in their association with ware.

Plate/cover Four formal groups are included in the plate/cover category: closed plate/platter; closed cover/dish; open plate/platter; and open cover/dish. Closed plates and platters exhibit moderate continuity in forms and variants through time, decreasing through time. They exhibit substantial continuity and stability in their association with the various wares. Closed cover/dishes exhibit moderate continuity in forms and variants through time, increasing in number through time. They exhibit minimal continuity in wares through time, tending toward simplification. Open plates and platters exhibit moderate continuity in forms and variants through time, decreasing through time. They exhibit moderate continuity in ware through time, tending toward diversification. Open cover/dishes exhibit moderate continuity in forms and variants through time, decreasing in number through time. They too exhibit moderate continuity in ware through time, tending toward diversification.

Overall, the olla category exhibits moderate continuity in forms and variants through time, with a tendency to decrease in number. It also exhibits substantial continuity and stability in the association of the member groups with the various wares. Pitcher/bottle There are two formal groups in the pitcher/bottle category: pitcher/bottle; and stopper. Pitchers and bottles exhibit moderate continuity in forms and variants, increasing in number through time. They exhibit moderate continuity in their association with ware, with a

Overall, the member groups in the plate/cover category

146

The results of each of the four contributing examinations are summarized below. The chapter concludes with a brief discussion of the significance of the sum results of the Formal Analysis to the model evaluation scheme. The Formal Analysis permits Part B of the scheme to be assessed and provides contributing information to Part F.

tendency toward simplification through time. Only one stopper is present in the study collection, documented for Area IV. Overall, the pitcher/bottle category exhibits moderate continuity in forms and variants, increasing in number through time. The category also exhibits moderate continuity in the association of forms and variants with the various wares, with a tendency toward simplification.

Functional Categories The first portion of the Formal Analysis examines the composition of the study collection in terms of functional categories. This examination provides a fundamental understanding of the various wares and vessel forms and variants of the two periods.

Tableware vs. utilitarian ware The information provided above concerning the five functional categories can be further distilled to consider patterns of change and continuity in the forms, variants, and wares between the broad groups of tableware and utilitarian ware pottery.

The results demonstrate that the three traditional pottery wares identified in the study collection are composed differentially in terms of the presumed function of their member forms and variants. The surface-treated, finetextured Ware A/B primarily includes tableware forms and variants; the plain, fine-textured Ware C contains a relatively even distribution of tableware and utilitarian forms and variants; and the medium-textured Ware D/E primarily contains utilitarian forms and variants. This differential function persists through time, although the association between ware and functional category is stronger for Area IV than for Area I. This result is consistent with the traditional ware categories used to examine locally-produced pottery for the time periods examined here, and justifies the use of the ware categories in the research.

The tableware group consists of two member categories: bowl/basin; and plate/cover. The overall trend for both categories is the same: moderate continuity in forms and variants through time, with a decrease in number through time; and moderate continuity in their association with the various wares, with a trend toward diversification through time. This trend may be considered to characterize the group. The utilitarian ware group consists of three member categories: pot/pan; olla; and pitcher/bottle. The overall trend for each of these categories differs. The utilitarian group may be characterized as follows: moderate continuity in forms and variants, with the pots and pans remaining stable, the ollae decreasing in number, and the pitchers and bottles increasing in number through time; and moderate continuity in the association between forms/variants and wares, with the wares of pots, pans, and ollae remaining stable, and the wares of the pitchers and bottles exhibiting a tendency toward simplification through time.

In addition, the analysis demonstrates that through time there is a statistically-significant change in the study collection in terms of the functional categories of both forms and variants. However, the statistical analysis indicates that the relationship between the two variables (excavation area/time period and functional category) is not substantial. A close examination of the results indicates that the difference reflected in the tests primarily reflects an increase in one specific category— pitchers and bottles—and thus does not indicate a dramatic change through time.

5.5 Summary and Discussion The Formal Analysis provides basic information on the composition of the study collection in terms of forms and variants. The Formal Analysis is composed of four parts: an examination of the functional categories associated with the forms and variants attested for the various wares in the study collection; an examination of the ratio of closed to open forms and variants in the study collection; an exploration of the degree of variation in the forms and variants of the study collection; and an exploration of patterns of change and continuity in the forms, variants, and wares present in the study collection. For each of these studies particular attention is paid to change and continuity through time in the study collections of excavation Areas IV and I.

In these somewhat ambiguous results, we should probably read more continuity than change. However, the results may be interpreted as providing partial support for both models. As the External Change model anticipates, there is a significant increase in a fragile, closed form (the pitcher/bottle), as well as a corresponding decrease in the production of open forms which were frequently imported (bowl/basin and plate/cover)—a change which could plausibly be attributed as a response to external economic forces. On the other hand, the general picture and the weak association between the variables would seem to support

147

cultural stability during a period of great economic and political change.

the Internal Development model with its emphasis on continuity and internal developments. The results of the examination of functional categories appear best interpreted as contradicting the External Change model and supporting the Internal Development model.

The results indicate that through time both the tablewares and the utilitarian wares exhibit moderate continuity in their member forms and variants. The tablewares exhibit an overall decrease in the number of forms and variants through time. The utilitarian wares exhibit a more complex pattern: in certain formal groups the number of forms and variants remains stable, while in others the number increases or decreases through time. Both the tablewares and the utilitarian wares exhibit moderate continuity in the association of member forms and variants with the various wares. The tablewares exhibit a tendency for ware diversification (an increase in the number of wares associated with forms/variants) through time. Among the utilitarian wares, certain formal groups exhibit a stable pattern in the association of wares and forms/variants, while others exhibit a pattern of simplification (an increase in the use of plain wares and corresponding decrease in the use of surface-treated wares through time). The results indicate moderate continuity in forms and variants through time for the entire study collection (including both tablewares and utilitarian wares), suggesting that there is no dramatic break in tradition in local pottery production and consumption between the Hellenistic Etruscan and late Roman to late Antique periods. Around 25% of the forms and variants is specific to the earlier period, around 50% is common to both periods, and around 25% is specific to the later period. This pattern implies that the study collection as a whole is better understood in terms of continuity and gradual development than in terms of abrupt change.

Ratio of Closed to Open Forms and Variants The second part of the Formal Analysis examines the ratio of closed to open forms and variants, in order to evaluate Part B of the model evaluation scheme. In Part B of the scheme, the External Change model expects an increase through time in the proportion of closed forms in the study collection. In contrast, the Internal Development model expects substantial continuity through time. The results indicate substantial continuity in this ratio for both forms and variants, thereby contradicting the External Change model and supporting the Internal Development model. Degree of Variation Ratio The third part of the Formal Analysis establishes a degree of variation ratio for the study collection, developed in order to evaluate certain aspects of Part B of the model evaluation scheme. In Part B, the External Change model expects a decrease through time in formal diversity, while the Internal Development model expects substantial continuity. The degree of formal/variant variation appears quite stable through time, on the basis of a comparison of the degree of variation ratio for Areas IV and I. Ware A/B showed an increase in the degree of variation of forms and variants through time. Ware C showed a similar trend, although results were more ambiguous. The degree of variation in Ware D/E forms and variants was quite stable through time. Thus the results of this part of the analysis again contradict the External Change model and support the Internal Development model.

The results for the association of the vessel forms and variants with the pottery wares also indicate moderate continuity. There is an interesting tendency for the tableware formal categories to “diversify” or be associated with an increasing number of wares through time, and for certain of the utilitarian ware formal categories to “simplify” or be increasingly associated with plain wares through time, but no conclusions can be drawn at this point. It can be stated, however, that the continuity in association between ware and form/variant through time again suggests a picture of continuity and development rather than dramatic change.

Continuity and Change Through Time in Forms, Variants, and Wares The fourth part of the Formal Analysis considers continuity and change of individual forms and variants through time in the study collection. This information is used to evaluate change and continuity in the five functional categories, and in the broad groups of tablewares and utilitarian wares. The examination addresses Part F of the model evaluation scheme. By establishing the degree of continuity or change in the pottery collection, the examination provides a means for evaluating continuity or change in Volterran craft production and consumption—contributing important contextual information for assessing the overall degree of

Implications of the Formal Analysis From many perspectives there appears to be substantial continuity in the forms and variants of the study collection through time, as well as substantial continuity in the association of the forms and variants with the various wares of the collection. There is no compelling evidence that any external force caused substantial

148

change to the study collection in terms of formal categories attested and their association with the various wares; the ratio of open to closed vessels; the degree of variation in the collection; or the continuity of documented forms and variants and their relationship

with the various wares. Thus, the results of all four parts of the Formal Analysis appear to support the Internal Development model and to contradict the External Change model.

Table 5.1: Functional categories in the Area IV study collection. Count of forms and variants Wares A and B Ware C Ware D bowl/basin forms 16 4 1 variants 28 5 1

TOTAL 21 34

plate/cover forms variants

19 33

4 5

6 9

29 47

pot/pan forms variants

1 1

2 2

8 9

11 12

olla forms variants

2 4

6 10

8 12

16 26

pitcher/bottle forms variants

3 4

2 2

0 0

5 6

TOTAL forms variants

41 70

18 24

23 31

82 125

149

Table 5.2: Functional categories in the Area IV study collection. Percentage of forms and variants3 Wares A and B Ware C Ware D bowl/basin forms 39.02 22.22 4.35 variants 40.00 20.83 3.23

TOTAL 25.61 27.20

plate/cover forms variants

46.34 47.14

22.22 20.83

26.09 29.03

35.37 37.60

pot/pan forms variants

2.44 1.43

11.11 8.33

34.78 29.03

13.41 9.60

olla forms variants

4.88 5.71

33.33 41.67

34.78 38.71

19.51 20.80

pitcher/bottle forms variants

7.32 5.71

11.11 8.33

0.00 0.00

6.10 4.80

100.00 99.99

99.99 99.99

100.00 100.00

100.00 100.00

TOTAL forms variants

3

Due to rounding, the totals in this table do not all equal exactly 100%.

150

Table 5.3: Functional categories in the Area I study collection. Count of forms and variants Ware B Ware C Wares D and E bowl/basin forms 9 7 2 variants 14 14 3

TOTAL 18 31

plate/cover forms variants

7 10

8 8

4 6

19 24

pot/pan forms variants

2 2

6 10

4 4

12 16

olla forms variants

2 2

5 14

4 6

11 22

pitcher/bottle forms variants

4 6

11 16

5 6

20 28

TOTAL forms variants

24 34

37 62

19 25

80 121

151

Table 5.4: Functional categories in the Area I study collection. Percentage of forms and variants4 Ware B Ware C Wares D and E bowl/basin forms 37.50 18.92 10.53 variants 41.18 22.58 12.00

TOTAL 22.50 25.62

plate/cover forms variants

29.17 29.41

21.62 12.90

21.05 24.00

23.75 19.83

pot/pan forms variants

8.33 5.88

16.22 16.13

21.05 16.00

15.00 13.22

olla forms variants

8.33 5.88

13.51 22.58

21.05 24.00

13.75 18.18

pitcher/bottle forms variants

16.67 17.65

29.73 25.81

26.32 24.00

25.00 23.14

TOTAL forms variants

100.00 100.00

100.00 100.00

100.00 100.00

100.00 99.99

Table 5.5: Closed to open ratio in the Area IV study collection. Count of forms and variants Wares A and B Ware C Ware D TOTAL5 Closed forms 11 10 9 24 Open forms 30 8 14 43 TOTAL 41 18 23 67 Closed variants Open variants TOTAL

16 73 89

19 12 31

17 22 39

37 74 111

Table 5.6: Closed to open ratio in the Area IV study collection. Percentage of forms and variants Wares A and B Ware C Ware D TOTAL6 Closed forms 26.83 55.56 39.13 35.82 Open forms 73.17 44.44 60.87 64.18 TOTAL 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Closed variants Open variants TOTAL

17.98 82.02 100.00

61.29 38.71 100.00

43.59 56.41 100.00

33.33 66.67 100.00

4 Due to rounding, the totals in this table do not all equal exactly 100%. 5 The figures in this column do not equal the sum of the figures in the adjacent rows, because some forms and variants are documented for more than one ware. 6 The figures in this column do not equal the sum of the figures in the adjacent rows, because some forms and variants are documented for more than one ware.

152

Table 5.7: Closed to open ratio in the Area I study collection. Count of forms and variants Ware B Ware C Wares D and E TOTAL7 Closed forms 9 20 9 25 Open forms 15 18 10 35 TOTAL 24 38 19 60 Closed variants Open variants TOTAL

17 23 40

41 38 79

15 19 34

45 51 96

Table 5.8: Closed to open ratio in the Area I study collection. Percentage of forms and variants Ware B Ware C Wares D and E TOTAL8 Closed forms 37.50 52.63 47.37 41.67 Open forms 62.50 47.37 52.63 58.33 TOTAL 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Closed variants Open variants TOTAL

42.50 57.50 100.00

51.90 48.10 100.00

44.12 55.88 100.00

46.88 53.13 100.00

Table 5.9: Degree of variation ratio in the Area IV study collection count Ware A/B Ware C Ware D TOTAL9 ratio Closed forms 11/25 10/76 9/59 24/160 0.44 0.13 0.15 0.15 Open forms

30/143 0.21

8/24 0.33

14/36 0.39

43/203 0.21

TOTAL

41/168 0.24

18/100 0.18

23/95 0.24

67/263 0.25

Closed variants

16/125 0.13

19/76 0.25

17/59 0.29

37/160 0.23

Open variants

73/143 0.12

12/24 0.50

22/36 0.61

74/203 0.36

TOTAL

89/268 0.33

31/100 0.31

39/95 0.41

111/363 0.31

7 The figures in this column do not equal the sum of the figures in the adjacent rows, because some forms and variants are documented for more than one ware. 8 The figures in this column do not equal the sum of the figures in the adjacent rows, because some forms and variants are documented for more than one ware. 9 The fraction numerators representing the number of forms and variants in this column do not equal the sum of the numerators in the adjacent rows, because some forms and variants are documented in more than one ware.

153

Table 5.10: Degree of variation ratio in the Area I study collection count Ware B Ware C Ware D/E TOTAL10 ratio Closed forms 9/22 20/73 9/42 25/137 0.41 0.27 0.21 0.18 Open forms

15/32 0.47

18/53 0.34

10/26 0.38

3/111 0.32

TOTAL

24/54 0.44

38/126 0.30

19/68 0.28

60/248 0.24

Closed variants

17/22 0.77

41/73 0.56

15/42 0.36

45/137 0.33

Open variants

23/32 0.72

38/53 0.72

19/26 0.73

51/111 0.46

TOTAL

40/54 0.74

79/126 0.63

34/68 0.50

96/248 0.39

10 The fraction numerators representing the number of forms and variants in this column do not equal the sum of the numerators in the adjacent rows, because some forms and variants are documented in more than one ware.

154

Table 5.11: Functional categories in the study collection through time. Count of forms and variants Formal Area IV Both Area I Degree of Direction Description TOTAL group only areas only continuity of change 101+

102+

105+

106+

107+

108+

109+

110+

111+

closed small vessel forms variants

2 2

2 2

0 0

0 0

minimal minimal minimal

decrease decrease decrease

closed bowl forms variants

1 2

0 0

1 1

0 1

moderate increase substantial none moderate increase

closed plate/platter forms variants

2 3

1 1

1 2

0 0

moderate moderate moderate

closed cover/dish forms variants

1 2

0 1

1 0

0 1

moderate increase substantial none minimal increase

decrease decrease decrease

closed pan forms variants

1 1

0 0

0 0

1 1

minimal minimal minimal

closed pot forms variants

2 4

0 1

1 0

1 3

moderate increase moderate increase minimal increase

unguentarium or similar forms variants

2 3

1 2

1 1

0 0

moderate moderate minimal

decrease decrease decrease

olla forms variants

9 26

4 12

5 7

0 7

moderate moderate moderate

decrease decrease decrease

pitcher or bottle forms variants

12 25

0 4

5 2

7 19

moderate moderate minimal

increase increase increase

(Table 5.11 is continued on the following page.)

155

increase increase increase

Table 5.11 (continued) Formal group Description 202+ open bowl forms variants 203+

205+

206+

207+

208+

012+

TOTAL

TOTAL

Area IV only

Both areas

9 26

3 13

5 7

open basin forms variants

6 12

2 6

3 0

1 6

minimal moderate minimal

decrease decrease increase

open plate/platter forms variants

9 15

4 11

4 2

1 2

moderate moderate minimal

decrease decrease decrease

open cover/dish forms variants

28 30

8 17

5 6

5 7

minimal minimal minimal

decrease decrease decrease

open pan forms variants

11 19

3 8

4 1

4 10

moderate moderate minimal

increase increase increase

open pot forms variants

1 1

1 1

0 0

0 0

minimal minimal minimal

decrease decrease decrease

stopper forms variants

1 1

0 0

0 0

1 1

minimal minimal minimal

increase increase increase

forms variants

97 170

27 79

36 29

22 64

moderate minimal

decrease decrease

156

Area I Degree of only continuity moderate 1 moderate 6 moderate

Direction of change decrease decrease decrease

Table 5.12: Association of functional category, ware, and excavation area Formal Area IV wares Area I wares Degree of group continuity Description 101+ closed small vessel A/B n/a n/a 102+ closed bowl C B, C moderate 105+ closed plate/platter A/B, C B, C substantial 106+ closed cover/dish A/B C minimal 107+ closed pan n/a B n/a 108+ closed pot D C minimal 109+ unguent. or similar C C substantial 110+ olla D, C, (B) D, C, (E) substantial 111+ pitcher of bottle A/B, C C, B, D moderate 202+ open bowl A/B, (C), (D) B, C, D moderate 203+ open basin A/B B, C moderate 205+ open plate/platter A/B, (D) B, C, D, E moderate 206+ open cover/dish A/B, (D) B, C, D moderate 207+ open pan C, D C, D substantial 208+ open pot D n/a n/a 012+ stopper n/a C n/a

157

Nature of change n/a diversification stable simplification n/a other stable stable simplification diversification diversification diversification diversification stable n/a n/a

CHAPTER 6: FABRIC ANALYSIS pertaining to fabric appearance and texture, including color, hardness, feel, fracture pattern, and overall texture. An overall judgment of “fine”, “medium”, or “coarse” was designated for each diagnostic sherd on the basis of these measures (excluding color).

Chapter 6 presents the Fabric Analysis, comprising the characterization and classification of the clay pastes of the study collection pottery from excavation Areas IV and I, Vallebuona. It also includes an examination of the relationship of the resulting fabric groups with the study collection wares, identified in Chapter 1, and forms, documented and discussed in Chapters 4 and 5.

Fabric color was recorded using Munsell Soil Color Charts (Munsell Color Company, 1975). For each diagnostic sherd, color values were recorded for the exterior surface, interior surface, exterior margin, interior margin, and core.

The chapter is divided into six sections. The first section defines the six major fabric groups identified in the study collection pottery. The next section examines the relationship among the fabric groups, wares, and forms documented for the pottery belonging to the Hellenistic Etruscan period (US 4021 and 4034/5, Area IV, Vallebuona). The third section examines the pottery belonging to the late Roman and late Antique periods (US 07-18; Area I, Vallebuona). The following section compares and contrasts the results for the two time periods. The sixth and final section of the chapter summarizes results of the Fabric Analysis and draws some preliminary conclusions.

Fabric hardness was rated on the following scale: “soft”, where scratched with a fingernail, “medium-hard”, where easily scratched with a steel needle; “hard”, where resistant to scratching with a steel needle; “very hard”, where not scratched with a steel needle; and “overfired”, specified as either “friable” (crumbly), or “clinky” (glassy, very hard, and making a characteristic sound). Two terms were circled in ambiguous cases. Fabric feel was described in the following qualitative terms, adapted from Orton, Tyers, and Vince (1993:235): “harsh”, where the sherd feels abrasive; “rough”, where the sherd feels quite irregular; “gritty”, where the sherd feels slightly irregular or abrasive; “smooth”, where no irregularities can be felt; “soapy”, where the sherd feels like soap or soapstone; and “powdery”, where fine clay particles are removed on touch. Two terms were circled in ambiguous cases or in cases where more than one term was applicable (e.g. “gritty” and “powdery”).

6.1 Fabric Groups in the Study Collection In the Fabric Analysis, the pottery is classified according to ware and fabric. Wares are assigned according to the traditional Italian method of classifying pottery, taking into account function, appearance, and the character of the clay body. The Fabric Analysis was performed on diagnostic sherds from the study collection. Fabric groups are assigned according to the principal void and mineral inclusions found in the clay matrix. Following Peña (1999), a fabric group is defined here as “a ceramic body characterized by a distinctive set of raw materials and/or raw materials processing procedures” (1999:60). A fabric is defined as “a subclass of a fabric group distinguished either on the basis of a distinctive surface treatment or … significant textural variation with respect to the other subclasses in the group” (Peña 1999:60).

The texture of the fracture surface of a fresh break was described in the following terms, from Orton, Tyers, and Vince (1993:235): “subconchoidal”, where the sherd breaks like flint, with ridges; “smooth”, where the sherd breaks with a flat or slightly curved surface, and no irregularities are visible; “fine”, where small, closelyspaced irregularities are visible; “irregular”, where larger, more widely-spaced irregularities are visible; “hackly”, where large, angular irregularities are visible; and “laminated”, where the sherd breaks in a stepped pattern. Two adjacent terms were circled in ambiguous cases.

Each fabric is assigned an alphanumeric designation: a Roman numeral identifies the fabric group to which it belongs; and a capital letter identifies the ware to which it belongs. In this method, where the wares and fabric groups intersect, a fabric is defined. Thus, Fabric I.A belongs to Fabric Group I and Ware A, Fabric II.B to Fabric Group II and Ware B, and so on.

The microscopic description recorded information pertaining to the petro-mineralogical inclusions and voids contained within the clay matrix. Inclusions were described according to color, frequency, size, shape, and sorting. Voids were described according to frequency, size, shape, and association with petro-mineralogical inclusions.

The fabrics were characterized by examining the diagnostic sherds in hand and under magnification (36x). The following methods were used in the fabric characterization.

The colors of petro-mineralogical inclusions were recorded using common English-language color terms (white, red, yellow, gray, etc.). Other visual characteristics (such as transparency or a glassy

The macroscopic description recorded information

158

The potential origin of voids (e.g., organic matter) was noted where applicable. Any association with petromineralogical inclusions (e.g., calcareous bodies) was also noted.

appearance) were also noted. The frequency of inclusions and voids was recorded according to the following scale: “absent or very sparse” (0-c. 3%); “sparse” (c. 5%); “moderate” (c. 10%); “abundant” (c. 20%); and “very abundant” (c. 30%). Frequencies falling between these intervals were indicated by circling the two bracketing values (e.g., a frequency of 7% was indicated by circling both “sparse” and “moderate”). Matthew, Woods, and Oliver’s Inclusion Comparison Chart was used as a reference for estimating inclusion percentages (Matthew, Woods, and Oliver 1991).

The information gathered on the fabric of each diagnostic sherd was then used to characterize the sherd in terms of “major inclusions” and “other inclusions.” “Major inclusions” were defined as those present in frequencies sparse-to-moderate or greater, and/or inclusions that were medium or greater in size. “Other inclusions” were defined as those both sparse in quantity and fine in size. On the basis of the resulting profiles, like sherds were grouped according to their major inclusions. The characterization information of the member sherds was then synthesized, defining the fabric groups. (See Appendix B.)

The size of inclusion and voids was recorded with reference to the scale established by the United States Department of Agriculture: “very fine” (up to 0.1 mm); “fine” (0.11 mm to 0.25 mm); “medium” (0.26-0.50 mm); “coarse” (0.51 to 1.0 mm); and “very coarse” (1.1 mm and larger).

The common macroscopic characteristics of each group were identified by a tally system, where the values recorded for each sherd were marked onto a master sheet. Each characteristic could then be defined according to majority. A two-thirds majority was generally required for each characteristic; two adjacent values were circled where necessary to achieve this majority.

The shape of inclusions was recorded with reference to a simplified version of Powers’ Scale of Roundness (reproduced in Orton, Tyers and Vince 1993:Appendix). Inclusions were judged by comparison with the scale to be “angular”, “subrounded”, “rounded”, or “flat.” The shape of voids was judged to be “long”, “round”, “square”, or “other” (in this latter option, a sketch was provided). Two terms were circled in ambiguous cases or in cases where there was variety in the observed examples.

The common microscopic characteristics were identified according to a slightly more complex process. The occurrence of inclusions in a fabric group was characterized according to the following scale, describing the frequency with which they were observed in the member sherds: “always” (observed in 100% of the member sherds); “almost always” (observed in ca. 90% of the sherds, with a range of 85-99%); “usually” (ca. 75%, range 65-84%); “often” (ca. 50%; range 45-64%; “occasionally” or “sometimes” (ca. 25%, range 15-44%); rarely (ca. 10%, range 1-14%); and “never” (observed in 0% of the group member sherds). Each inclusion was then characterized according to the tally system described above, so that the resulting characterization is adequate to describe at least two-thirds of the observed examples.

Inclusion and void sorting (homogeneity) was characterized as “poor”, “fair”, or “good.” Generally, if the observed examples of an inclusion varied on no parameters or on one parameter (frequency, size, or shape) the sorting of that inclusion was considered “good”. If they varied on two parameters or varied substantially on one, the sorting was considered “fair”. If the examples varied on all three parameters, or varied substantially on two or three, the sorting of the inclusion was considered “poor.” These rules were not rigidly followed, however; “sorting” was a somewhat subjective measure. Two adjacent terms (“poor” and “fair,” or “fair” and “good”) were circled in ambiguous cases.

Fabric Groups in the Study Collection Six fabric groups were identified among all of the pottery examined here, presumably representing local Volterran production from the Hellenistic Etruscan period through the late Roman to late Antique period. Each fabric group consists of several fabrics sharing a common profile of mineral inclusions and voids. Nearly all of the fabrics examined contain varying quantities and sizes of a common suite of rock, mineral, and organic inclusions, provisionally identified as follows: ferric minerals; calcareous minerals; quartz or gypsum; light-colored mica or gypsum; and shell. These fabrics were grouped according to the varying configurations, relative proportions, and sizes of their most frequent inclusions into Fabric Groups I-V. Fabric Group VI contains

Tentative identifications were proposed for the petromineralogical inclusions, on the basis of the recorded information and the guidance provided by Peacock’s key to the identification of inclusions in pottery (Peacock 1977:30-32; reproduced in Orton, Tyers and Vince 1993:Table A.2). Additional tests were occasionally performed to assist in inclusion identification, as required by the key. Where possible (based on the accessibility and size of the inclusions) and necessary (based on the qualities of the inclusions), the following additional tests were performed: test for reaction with dilute hydrochloric acid; scratch test with steel needle; and test for attraction to a magnet.

159

quantities of fine- to medium-sized quartz/gypsum inclusions, sparse to moderate quantities of fine- to medium-sized voids, and sparse quantities of additional fine- to medium-sized mineral inclusions. One ware is documented for Fabric Group V: Fabric V.D includes plain wares. (See Table 6.5 and Plates 6.20-6.23, below.)

substantial quantities of coarse, dark-colored mica not seen in the other fabrics. The profiles of the fabric groups and individual fabrics are summarized below. At the end of the chapter, an abbreviated profile of each fabric group is presented, together with a selection of representative photomicrographs. A more detailed characterization of all six fabric groups is available in Appendix B.

Fabric Group VI

Fabric Group I includes table and utilitarian wares with sparse to moderate quantities of fine-sized voids, and sparse quantities of fine-sized mineral inclusions. Three wares are documented for Fabric Group I: Fabric I.A includes black-slip wares; Fabric I.B includes color-coat wares; and Fabric I.C includes plain wares. (See Table 6.1 and Plates 6.1-6.5, below.)

Fabric Group VI includes utilitarian wares with sparse quantities of medium- to coarse-sized dark mica inclusions, moderate quantities of fine- to coarse-sized quartz/gypsum inclusions, sparse to moderate quantities of fine- to medium-sized voids, and sparse to moderate quantities of additional mineral inclusions of varying sizes. Two wares are documented for Fabric Group VI: Fabric VI.D includes plain wares; and Fabric VI.E includes color-coated wares. (See Table 6.6 and Plates 6.24-6.27, below.)

Fabric Group II

6.2 Hellenistic Etruscan Pottery from Area IV

Fabric Group II includes table and utilitarian wares with moderate quantities of fine-sized calcareous mineral inclusions, sparse to moderate quantities of fine-sized voids, and sparse quantities of additional fine-sized mineral inclusions. Three wares are documented for Fabric Group II: Fabric II.A includes black-slip wares; Fabric II.B includes color-coat wares; and Fabric II.C includes plain wares. (See Table 6.2 and Plates 6.6-6.10, below.)

This section presents two related examinations of the study collection from Area IV. First, the relationship among the fabric groups and pottery wares is examined. Second, the relationship among the fabric groups and forms is examined.

Fabric Group I

Fabric Groups and Wares Four wares are documented in the pottery in the Area IV study group: Ware A, with a fine-textured fabric (Fabrics I-IV) and vitrified slip; Ware B, with a fine-textured fabric (Fabrics I-IV) and color coat; Ware C, with a finetextured fabric (Fabrics I-IV) and no surface treatment; and Ware D, with a medium-textured fabric (Fabrics VVI) and no surface treatment. Table 6.7 below presents the distribution of different wares across the fabric groups, by means of a count of the diagnostic sherds documented for each fabric of Area IV.

Fabric Group III Fabric Group III includes table and utilitarian wares with moderate quantities of fine-sized quartz/gypsum inclusions, sparse to moderate quantities of fine-sized voids, and sparse quantities of additional fine-sized mineral inclusions. Three wares are documented for Fabric Group III: Fabric III.A includes black-slip wares; Fabric III.B includes color-coat wares; and Fabric III.C includes plain wares. (See Table 6.3 and Plates 6.116.14, below.)

In Table 6.8, the diagnostic sherd count figures are converted into percentages, establishing the proportions of the various fabrics in each ware. This exploratory data analysis table indicates some interesting patterns in the relationships between the fine-textured wares (A, B, and C) and fabric groups (I-IV), and between the mediumtextured ware (D) and fabric groups (V and VI).

Fabric Group IV Fabric Group IV includes table and utilitarian wares with moderate quantities of fine-sized quartz/gypsum and calcareous mineral inclusions, moderate quantities of fine-sized voids, and sparse to moderate quantities of additional fine-sized and medium-sized mineral inclusions. Three wares are documented for Fabric Group IV: Fabric IV.A includes black-slip wares; Fabric IV.B includes color-coat wares; and Fabric IV.C includes plain wares. (See Table 6.4 and Plates 6.15-6.19, below.)

Comparing the relative distribution of the fabrics in each ware to the overall percentage of the fabrics in the Area IV study collection, the following patterns may be noted. A disproportionately high percentage of sherds classified as Ware A were also independently classified as Fabric Group I, while a disproportionately low percentage of sherds were also classified as Fabric Group IV. In contrast to Ware A, a disproportionately low percentage of sherds classified as Ware B vessels were also classified as Fabric Group I, while a disproportionately high

Fabric Group V Fabric Group V includes utilitarian wares with moderate

160

Discussion

percentage were also classified as Fabric Group IV. In contrast to Wares A and B, sherds classified as Ware C vessels appear to have been classified as Fabric Groups I, II, III and IV in relatively even proportions, although the percentage represented by Fabric Group I seems somewhat low, and the percentage represented by Fabric IV seems somewhat high. Finally, sherds classified as Ware D appear to include a disproportionately high percentage of sherds also classified as Fabric V, and a disproportionately low percentage classified as Fabric VI.

The results for Area IV suggest that certain fabrics were preferentially used to create pottery wares in Hellenistic Etruscan Volterra. The finest-textured fabric group (I) appears to have been preferred for or necessary to the production of Ware A, the finest tableware of the study collection with a vitrified slip. In contrast, coarser fabric groups (notably IV, the coarsest of the fine-textured fabric groups) were either considered adequate for or could only result in Ware B, a somewhat coarser tableware with a color coat surface treatment. All four of the available fine-textured fabric groups appear to have been adequate to producing the plain tablewares. For Ware D, Fabric Group V was used almost twice as frequently as Fabric Group VI.

Chi-square tests were performed to determine whether these patterns are statistically valid. The association of the fine-textured wares (A, B, and C) with the finetextured fabrics (I, II, III, and IV) was tested separately from the association of the medium-textured ware (D) with the medium-textured fabrics (V and VI). Cramer’s V was calculated to measure the strength of the relationship between ware and fabric group for the finetextured fabrics, while phi was calculated for the medium-textured fabrics. Sherd count was chosen as the quantification measure. For both tests, the significance level (α) was set at 0.05.

Fabric Groups and Forms This section examines the relationship in the Area IV study collection between the six fabric groups identified in the Fabric Analysis and the forms identified in the Pottery Catalogue. The analysis examines the distribution of diagnostic sherd counts among the forms and fabric groups. The limited number of sherds documented in certain form/fabric combinations made it necessary to combine formal groups into functional categories in order to create counts large enough to be meaningful. As established in Chapter 4, these functional category groups are: bowl/basin; plate/cover; pot/pan; olla; and pitcher/bottle.

For the fine-textured test, the null hypothesis (H0) states: The proportion of sherds classified in the four finetextured fabric groups (I-IV) is the same for Wares A, B, and C. The directional hypothesis (H1) states: The proportion of sherds classified in the four fine-textured fabric groups (I-IV) is the not same for Wares A, B, and C: there is a disproportionately great number of Ware A sherds classified as Fabric I; there is a disproportionately great number of Ware B sherds classified as Fabrics III and IV; and there is a relatively even proportion of Ware C sherds classified as Fabrics I, II, III, and IV.

Table 6.9 below presents the distribution of different functional categories across the fabric groups for Area IV, by means of a sherd count. In Table 6.10, the diagnostic sherd count figures are converted into percentages. Comparing the relative distribution of the functional categories in each ware to the overall percentage of the categories in the Area IV study collection, the following patterns may be noted.

For the medium-textured test, the null hypothesis (H0) states: The proportion of sherds classified in the mediumtextured fabric groups (V-VI) is the same for Ware D. The directional hypothesis (H1) states: The proportion of sherds classified in the two medium-textured fabric groups (V-VI) is the not same for Ware D: there is a disproportionately great number of Ware D sherds classified as Fabric V.

First, the fine-textured fabric groups (I-IV) may be considered. A disproportionately high percentage of sherds classified as Fabric Group I were also independently classified in the categories of bowl/basin and plate/cover, while a disproportionately low percentage of sherds were also classified as pot/pan and olla. In comparison, the sherds classified as Fabric Groups II, III, and IV appear relatively evenly distributed across the functional categories.

The results of the chi-square tests reject both null hypotheses and support the directional hypotheses. In both cases, the measure of association is not particularly high. For the fine-textured fabric groups, N=318, χ2=76.66, df=6, p=0.0000 (one-tailed test), and V=0.3472. For medium-textured Ware D, N=102, χ2=10.04, df=1, p=0.0008 (one-tailed test), and ø=0.3134. In both tests, the disproportional relationships proposed in the directional hypothesis were borne out, indicating that there is a statistically significant relationship between pottery ware and fabric group among the fine-textured sherds from Area IV.

Next, the medium-textured fabric groups (V-VI) may be considered. Sherds classified as Fabric Group V appear to include a disproportionately high percentage of sherds also classified in the categories of pot/pan and olla, and a disproportionately low percentage of sherds classified in the category of bowl/basin. Sherds classified as Fabric Group VI appear to include a disproportionately high percentage of sherds classified in the categories of

161

Group I was also used for plain vessels (Ware C) to a lesser degree, and for color-coated vessels (Ware B), to a still lesser degree. In contrast, the slightly coarser finetextured fabric groups (Fabric Groups II, III, and IV) were used for a greater variety of forms. As discovered in the previous section, these fabric groups were used most often for plain vessels (Ware C), but also for the color-coated wares (Ware B).

pot/pan and olla, and a disproportionately low percentage of sherds classified in the category of bowl/basin and plate/cover. These differences may be summed up as follows: Fabric Group I appears to include a disproportionately high percentage of tableware forms and low percentage of utilitarian forms. Fabric Groups II, III, and IV appear to include a balanced proportion of the various forms (that is, a distribution relatively proportionate with the overall distribution of forms in the Area IV study collection). Fabric Groups V and VI appear to include a disproportionately high percentage of utilitarian forms and a disproportionately low percentage of tableware forms.

The results also indicate that both of the medium-textured fabric groups (Fabric Groups V and VI) were used most often for utilitarian forms rather than tableware forms. (Sherds from Fabric Groups V and VI were classified as Ware D exclusively.) 6.3 Late Roman and Late Antique Pottery from Area I

The statistical validity of these patterns was tested using the chi-square test, while Cramer’s V was calculated to test the strength of the relationship between fabric group and vessel function. The functional categories given above were combined into two greater categories of tableware and utilitarian forms, as established in the previous chapter, in order to reach estimated frequencies large enough to perform the test. Sherd count was used as the quantification measure. The significance level (α) was set at 0.05.

This section presents the results of two related examinations of the study collection from Area I. First, the relationship among the fabric groups and the pottery wares is examined; second, the relationship among the fabric groups and the forms is examined. Fabric Groups and Wares Four wares were documented in the pottery from the Area I study group: Ware B, with a color coat applied over a fine-textured fabric (Fabrics I-IV); Ware C, plain wares with a fine-textured fabric (Fabrics I-IV); Ware D, plain wares with a medium-textured fabric (Fabrics V-VI); and Ware E, wares with a color coat applied over a mediumtextured fabric (Fabric VI).

The null hypothesis (H0) states: The proportion of Area IV sherds classified in the six fabric groups (I-VI) is the same for the two broad functional categories (tableware and utilitarian forms). The directional hypothesis (H1) states: The proportion of Area IV sherds classified in the six fabric groups (I-VI) is the not same for the two broad functional categories (tableware and utilitarian forms): there is a disproportionately great number of Fabric I sherds classified as tableware forms; there is a disproportionately great number of Fabric V and VI sherds classified as utilitarian forms; and there is a relatively even proportion of Fabric II, III, and IV sherds classified as tableware and utilitarian forms.

Table 6.11 below presents the distribution of different fabrics across the wares, by means of a count of the diagnostic sherds documented for each fabric for Area I. The sherd count figures are converted into percentages in Table 6.12, establishing the proportions of fabric groups in each ware. Table 6.12 indicates interesting patterns in the way that the fine-textured Fabric Groups I-IV are related to Wares A, B, and C, and the medium-textured Fabric Groups V-VI are related to Wares D and E.

The results reject the null hypothesis and support the directional hypothesis: N=361, χ2=75.43, df=5, and p=0.0000 (one-tailed test). The value of Cramer’s V is moderate (V=0.4571), in part because Fabric Groups II, III, and IV exhibit a fairly even distribution of forms. The results of the chi-square test indicate that in the study collection from Area IV, there is a statistically-significant relationship between fabric group and broad functional categories of forms.

Ware B appears to include a disproportionately high percentage of sherds classified as Fabric I, and a disproportionately low percentage of sherds classified as Fabric IV. In contrast, Ware C appears to include a relatively even distribution of fabrics, although the percentage of Fabric Group I seems slightly low and the percentage of Fabric Group IV slightly high. Ware D also appears to include a relatively even distribution of fabrics. Ware E appears to include a disproportionately low percentage of Fabric Group V and a high percentage of Fabric Group VI. So few examples of Ware E were documented, however, that this relationship is suggestive only.

Discussion The results for Area IV suggest that certain fabrics were used preferentially to create the various forms attested in Hellenistic Etruscan Volterra. Fabric Group I, the finesttextured fabric group, appears to have been preferred for the production of tableware forms, and particularly for those tableware forms with a slip (Ware A). Fabric

Chi-square tests were performed to determine whether these patterns are statistically significant, and

162

the very finest fabric, Fabric I (with few or no inclusions visible at 36x), was preferred for producing color-coated vessels. It must be noted that the results for the finetextured fabric groups, while statistically significant, indicate a rather weak relationship between fabric group and ware. Thus while there may have been a “real” (if slight) preference to use the fabric groups for certain wares, to a large degree the fabric groups were used generally rather than specifically in terms of wares.

contingency coefficients were calculated to test the strength of the relationship between ware and fabric. The association of the fine-textured wares (A, B, and C) with the fine-textured fabrics (I, II, III, and IV) was tested separately from the association of the medium-textured wares (D and E) with the medium-textured fabrics (V and VI). Wares D and E were combined for comparison with the medium-textured fabric groups (V and VI) in order to create a large enough sample to perform the test. Sherd count was chosen as the quantification measure. For both tests, the significance level (α) was set at 0.05.

For the combined group of medium-textured wares (Ware D/E), Fabric Group V was demonstrated to be preferred over Fabric Group VI. Interestingly, Fabric VI (with medium- to coarse-sized dark-colored micaceous inclusions) may have been used disproportionately often for the color-coated medium-textured Ware E, but so few examples were documented that the pattern is uncertain and the relationship could not be tested independently of Ware D.

For the fine-textured test, the null hypothesis (H0) states: The proportion of sherds classified in the four finetextured fabric groups (I-IV) is the same for Wares B and C. The directional hypothesis (H1) states: The proportion of sherds classified in the four fine-textured fabric groups (I-IV) is the not same for Wares B and C: there is a disproportionately great number of Ware B sherds classified as Fabric I and a disproportionately small number classified as Fabric IV; and there is a relatively even proportion of Ware C sherds classified as Fabrics I, II, III, and IV.

Fabric Groups and Forms This section examines the relationship between the fabric groups and the forms documented for the Area I study collection. The analysis is performed in the same way as for Area IV, by examining the distribution of sherd counts among functional categories and fabric groups. The limited number of sherds documented for certain combinations again made it necessary to combine the formal categories according to presumed function, into the following categories: bowl/basin; plate/cover; pot/pan; olla; and pitcher/bottle.

For the medium-textured test, the null hypothesis (H0) states: The proportion of sherds classified in the mediumtextured fabric groups (V-VI) is the same for Ware D/E. The directional hypothesis (H1) states: The proportion of sherds classified in the medium-textured fabric groups (V-VI) is not the same for Ware D/E: there is a disproportionately large number of Ware D/E sherds classified as Fabric V, and a disproportionately small number classified as Fabric VI.

Table 6.13 below presents the distribution of different functional categories across the fabric groups for Area I, measured by diagnostic sherd count. In Table 6.14, the diagnostic sherd count figures are converted into percentages, establishing the proportions of the various functional categories in each ware. Examining the relative distribution of each category in each ware, the following patterns may be noted.

Both tests reject the null hypothesis and support the directional hypothesis. In the fine-textured ware test, N=262, χ2=8.57, df=3, and p=0.0178 (one-tailed test). The value of Cramer’s V is quite low (V=0.1809), in part because the distribution of fabrics in Ware C is relatively even. In the medium-textured ware test, N=77, χ2=7.95, df=1, and p=0.0000 (one-tailed test). The value of phi is adequately high to indicate a relationship between the two variables (ø=0.4544). The test results therefore indicate that there is a statistically significant relationship between pottery ware and fabric group among the pottery sherds of Area I.

First, the fine-textured fabric groups (I-IV) may be considered. A disproportionately high percentage of sherds classified as Fabric Group I were also independently classified in the categories of bowl/basin and pitcher/bottle, while a disproportionately low percentage of sherds were classified as pot/pan and olla. In comparison, the sherds classified as Fabric Groups II, III, and IV appear to be relatively evenly distributed across the functional categories, with a few exceptions: Fabric Group II contains a relatively high percentage of sherds in the pitcher/bottle category; Fabric Group III contains a relatively high percentage of sherds in the pot/pan category; and Fabric Group IV contains a relatively high percentage of sherds in the olla category.

Discussion The results for Area I imply that certain fabrics were preferentially used to create the various ceramic wares attested in late Roman/late Antique Volterra. Fabric Group I appears to have been considered particularly appropriate for the production of Ware B, fine tableware with a color coat. Ware C, the fine tableware with no surface treatment, include a relatively even distribution of fabric groups. This distribution suggests that all of the fine-textured fabrics were considered appropriate for producing tableware with no surface treatment, but that

Next, the medium-textured fabric groups (V-VI) may be considered. Sherds classified as Fabric Group V appear

163

fabrics was not determined to be statistically significant. These results suggest that in terms of forms, the documented fabric groups were employed generally rather than specifically in late Antique to late Roman Volterra.

to include a disproportionately high percentage of sherds classified in the category of olla, and a disproportionately low percentage of sherds classified in the category of bowl/basin. Sherds classified as Fabric Group VI appear to include a disproportionately high percentage of sherds classified in the categories of pot/pan and olla, and a disproportionately low percentage of sherds classified in the category of bowl/basin, plate/cover, and pitcher/bottle.

6.4 Change and Continuity Through Time Thus far, the results of the Fabric Analysis have established that there appear to have been a number of distinct clay fabric groups utilized by ancient potters in both Hellenistic Etruscan and late Roman to late Antique Volterra. Furthermore, there appear to be interesting patterns in the association between certain fabric groups and pottery wares, and between certain fabric groups and functional categories of forms. The question now arises whether these patterns change or are stable across time.

These differences may be summed up as follows: Fabric Group I appears to include a disproportionately high percentage of tableware forms and of serving/utilitarian forms (pitcher/bottle). Fabric Groups II, III, and IV appear to include a balanced proportion of the various forms (that is, a distribution relatively proportionate with the overall distribution of forms in the Area I study collection). Fabric Groups V and VI appear to include a disproportionately high percentage of utilitarian forms and a disproportionately low percentage of tableware forms.

This next section compares and contrasts the results of the Fabric Analysis for Area IV and Area I. First, a prefatory examination investigates the relationship between fabric group and excavation area (time period), in order to determine whether the basic proportions of fabric group use changed over time. Then, change and continuity across time in the relationship between wares and fabric groups is considered. Finally, change and continuity across time in the relationship between forms and fabric groups is examined.

The statistical validity of these patterns was tested using the chi-square test, while Cramer’s V was calculated to test the strength of the relationship between fabric group and vessel function. The functional categories given above were combined into the greater categories of tableware and utilitarian forms. Sherd count was used as the quantification measure. The significance level (α) was set at 0.05.

Fabric Groups and Excavation Area Table 6.15 below presents the percentages of the various fabric groups observed in the study collections from Area IV and Area I, calculated on the basis of a diagnostic sherd count. The table indicates that the various fabric groups were used in quite similar proportions across both time periods.

The null hypothesis (H0) states: The proportion of Area I sherds classified in the six fabric groups (I-VI) is the same for the two broad functional categories (tableware and utilitarian forms). The directional hypothesis (H1) states: The proportion of Area I sherds classified in the six fabric groups (I-VI) is the not same for the two broad functional categories (tableware and utilitarian forms): there is a disproportionately great number of Fabric I sherds classified as tableware forms; there is a disproportionately great number of Fabric V and VI sherds classified as utilitarian forms; and there is a relatively even proportion of Fabric II, III, and IV sherds classified as tableware and utilitarian forms.

A chi-square test was performed to assess whether there is statistical significance in the differences noted, and Cramer’s V was calculated to test the strength of the relationship between excavation area and fabric group. The significance level (α) was set at 0.05. The null hypothesis (H0), was stated as follows: There is no difference in the distribution of the six identified fabric groups (Fabric Groups I-VI) in Areas IV and I. On the basis of information provided by the exploratory data analysis table, the null hypothesis was expected to be upheld, and so no directional hypothesis was proposed.

The results of the test do not reject the null hypothesis: N=254, χ2=7.08, df=5, and p=0.1078 (one-tailed test). Furthermore, the value of V is modest (V=0.1670). We may interpret the results of the chi-square test as indicating that in the study collection from Area I, there is no statistically-significant relationship between fabric group and broad functional categories of forms.

The results of the test do not reject the null hypothesis: N=759, χ2=3.94, df=5, and p=0.5592 (two-tailed test). The value of V is very low (V=0.0720), indicating that the relationship between excavation area and fabric group is weak. The results of the test indicate clearly that there is no statistically significant relationship between excavation area (time period) and fabric group.

Discussion The results for Area I suggest that only there was only a slight trend for preferential use of certain fabrics to create the various forms attested in late Roman/late Antique Volterra. The differential distribution of forms across the

164

For Ware C, the chi-square tests results do not reject the null hypothesis: N=324, χ2=3.72, df=3, and p=0.2918 (two-tailed test). In other words, in terms of fabric groups there is no significant change across time in the composition of Ware C (plain wares). The value of V is low (V=0.1071), indicating a weak relationship among the variables. The results of the test indicate that the relationship between excavation area (time period) and fabric group in Ware C is weak and statistically insignificant.

Discussion The stability in the use of the six fabric groups across time simplifies the task of performing the Fabric Analysis across time (i.e., comparing and contrasting the results from Area IV and Area I), as there is no need to take into account any change in the use of the fabric groups through time. Wares and Fabric Groups Table 6.16 below presents the relationship among the various fabric groups and wares in the Area IV and Area I study collections, on the basis of percentages calculated from a diagnostic sherd count. Wares A and B from Area IV are combined to create a comparable class of surfacetreated wares across both time periods. Ware E from Area I is combined with Ware D, due to the low number of sherds classified as Ware E. The table indicates that the proportions of different fabric groups associated with the different wares remains strikingly stable across time.

For Ware D/E, the chi-square test results again do not reject the null hypothesis: N=179, χ2=1.03, df=1, and p=0.3144 (two-tailed test). The value of phi is low (ø=0.0759), indicating that the relationship between the variables is weak. Therefore, the results of the test indicate no statistical significance in the relationship between excavation area (time period) and fabric group in Ware D/E.

A chi-square test was performed to assess the significance of the observed stability in the proportions of fabric groups in each ware, and contingency coefficients calculated to determine the strength of the relationship between the variables. Separate tests were performed to test the composition of each of the three wares (A/B, C, and D/E) across time. The significance level (α) for the three tests was set at 0.05.

Overall, the results indicate that the use of the six fabric groups remained stable over time. In the study collections of Areas IV and I, Fabric Groups I-IV were used in quite similar proportions to create fine-textured wares, and Fabric Groups V and VI were used in similar proportions to create medium-textured wares. Furthermore, the preferred relationships between certain wares and certain fabrics also remained stable over time. The proportions of fine-textured Fabric Groups I-IV used to produce plain fine-textured Ware C was similar in the study collection of Areas IV and I. Likewise, the proportions of mediumtextured Fabric Groups V and VI used to create mediumtextured Ware D/E was similar in the study collections of the two excavation areas. The tendency to prefer Fabric Group I for Ware A/B also appears to remain stable over time; although a statistically-significant change was observed, the observed pattern still indicates stability rather than a clear directional change.

Discussion

The null hypothesis (H0) for Ware A/B states: There is no difference in the distribution of the four fine-textured fabric groups (I-IV) in Ware A/B across time. The null hypothesis (H0) for Ware C states: There is no difference in the distribution of the four fine-textured fabric groups (I-IV) in Ware C across time. The null hypothesis (H0) for Ware D/E states: There is no difference in the distribution of the two medium-textured fabric groups (VVI) in Ware D/E across time. On the basis of the information provided in the exploratory data analysis table, all three null hypotheses were expected to be upheld, so no directional hypotheses were proposed.

Fabric Groups and Forms Comparing the results from Area IV and Area I suggests a change through time in the association of certain fabric groups with certain functional categories: the use of the common fabric groups appears to become less specialized and more generalized. In particular, the following patterns may be noted: for Fabric Group I, the distribution of sherds becomes more evenly distributed across the tableware and utilitarian wares, and less markedly concentrated in the tableware; for Fabric Groups II, III, and IV, the distribution remains stable, relatively evenly distributed across the tableware and utilitarian wares; and, for Fabric Groups V and VI, the distribution of sherds becomes more evenly distributed across the tableware and utilitarian wares, and less concentrated in the utilitarian wares.

Contrary to expectation, the results of the chi-square test for Ware A/B reject the null hypothesis: N=256, χ2=8.50, df=3, and p=0.0368 (two-tailed test). In other words, in terms of fabric groups there is a statistically significant change across time in the composition of Ware A/B. On the other hand, the value of V is low (V=0.1822), indicating that the relationship between the two variables (fabric group and excavation area) is weak. No clear pattern was apparent in the discrepancy between expected and observed frequencies. Therefore, we may interpret the results of the test as indicating that although the distribution of the fabric groups across time varies in a statistically-significant way, the relationship between excavation area (time period) and fabric group in Ware A/B remains weak and unexplained.

165

Chi-square tests were performed to assess the statistical significance of these patterns, and to test the strength of the relationship between excavation area (time period) and fabric group for the two functional categories. The relationship between excavation area and fabric group was tested separately for each of the two categories. The significance level (α) for both tests was set at 0.05.

The test results indicate that there is a statisticallysignificant relationship between excavation area (time period) and fabric group for the tableware sherds, and that the relationship indicates an increasingly generalized use of the six fabric groups for utilitarian forms.

The null hypothesis (H0) for the tableware test states: Sherds categorized as tableware forms are distributed evenly across the six identified fabric groups (I-VI) in Areas IV and I. The directional hypothesis (H1) for the tableware test states: Sherds categorized as tableware forms are not distributed evenly across the six identified fabric groups (I-VI) in Areas IV and I: The Area IV study collection contains a significantly greater number of sherds belonging to Fabric Group I than to the other five groups (II-VI), while Area I contains a relatively even distribution of sherds across the six fabric groups (IVI).

The following conclusions may be drawn from the examination of the relationship between functional category and fabric group across time. For Area IV, fabric groups appear to some degree to have been selected by potters to produce different vessels forms. In particular, Fabric Group I was preferentially used to produce tableware forms, while Fabric Groups V and VI were preferentially used to produce utilitarian ware forms. For the Area I study collection, this pattern largely disappears, and the six fabric groups were used in relatively proportionately to create tableware and utilitarian ware forms. Although the difference across time is statistically-significant only for the utilitarian forms, the chi-square tests indicate that the trend for an increasingly generalized use of the six fabric groups exists for both tableware and utilitarian ware forms.

Discussion

The null hypothesis (H0) for the utilitarian ware test states: Sherds categorized as utilitarian ware forms are evenly distributed across the six identified fabric groups (I-VI) in Areas IV and I. The directional hypothesis (H1) for the utilitarian ware test states: Sherds categorized as utilitarian ware forms are not evenly distributed across the six identified fabric groups (I-VI) in Areas IV and I: the Area IV study collection contains a significantly greater number of sherds belonging to Fabric Groups V and VI than to the other four groups (I-IV), while Area I contains a relatively even distribution of sherds across the six fabric groups (I-VI).

6.5 Summary and Discussion The Fabric Analysis established six fabric groups common to the pottery in the entire study collection (that is, common to both time periods under examination). The consistent use of the same six fabric groups suggests that the entire study collection plausibly could have originated at a common production location or locations, supporting the identification of the pottery as locally- or regionally-produced. (Whether the petro-mineralogical characteristics of these six fabric groups are in fact consistent with those of the local clay deposits is considered later, in Chapter 12.)

The results of the test performed for the tableware forms do not reject the null hypothesis: N=315, χ2=5.49, df=5, and p=0.1788 (one-tailed test). In other words, there is no statistically significant difference in the distribution of the Area IV and Area I tableware sherds across fabric groups. However, the distribution pattern does follow the trend anticipated by the directional hypothesis. The value of Cramer’s V is low (V=0.1320), further indicating that the relationship between excavation area and fabric group is weak for the tableware forms. The results therefore indicate that there is no statistically-significant relationship between excavation area (time period) and fabric group among the sherds classified as tableware forms, although there still appears an interesting yet subtle pattern for increasing generalization through time.

The Fabric Analysis explored and tested the relationship of the fabric groups with the various pottery wares (identified in Chapter 2) and with the documented forms (presented in Chapter 4). For each excavation area, the relationship between fabric group and ware was tested in order to determine whether any specialized or preferential use of fabric groups existed in terms of ware production. Again for each excavation area, the relationship between form and fabric group was tested in order to determined whether any specialized or preferential use of the fabric groups existed in terms of the functional categories of the forms. These relationships were then compared and contrasted for the two excavation areas, in order to identify patterns of change or continuity through time.

The results of the test performed for the utilitarian ware forms reject the null hypothesis and support the directional hypothesis: N=300, χ2=16.80, df=5, and p=0.0024 (one-tailed test). In other words, there is a statistically-significant difference in the distribution of the Area IV and Area I tableware sherds, in terms of fabric groups. The value of V is modest (V=0.2366), in part because of the relatively even distribution of fabric groups in Area I (predicted by the directional hypothesis).

Fabric Group and Ware The Fabric Analysis identified a number of specific fabrics, by linking the fabric groups with the pottery wares previously identified in the collection. This made

166

IV), it was noted that Fabric Group I appeared to include a disproportionately high percentage of tableware sherds, and a correspondingly low percentage of utilitarian ware sherds. In contrast, the remaining fine-textured fabric groups (Fabric Groups II, III, and IV) appeared to include a relatively proportionate percentage of tableware and utilitarian ware sherds. For both of the medium-textured fabric groups (Fabric Groups V and VI) a disproportionately high percentage of utilitarian ware sherds was noted, together with a correspondingly low percentage of tableware forms.

it possible to consider the distribution of different fabric groups across the various wares. An initial exploratory examination of the percentages of fabric groups attested for each ware indicated that for certain wares the distribution was not normal, in turn suggesting that certain fabric groups may have been used preferentially in the production of those wares. For the Area IV study collection, the following patterns were noted and their statistical significance established. Among the fine-textured wares and fabrics: a disproportionately high percentage number of sherds identified as Ware A appeared to have also been identified as Fabric I, and a correspondingly low percentage identified as Fabric IV; a disproportionately high percentage number of sherds classified as Ware B appeared to have also been classified as Fabric IV, and a correspondingly low percentage classified as Fabric I; and a relatively normal (or even) distribution of Fabrics was identified among the sherds classified as Ware C.

For the Area I study collection, the same pattern was observed but it was noted to be less distinct. Fabric Group I was noted to include a relatively high percentage of tableware sherds, Fabric Groups II, III, and IV were noted to include a relatively proportionate percentage of tableware and utilitarian ware sherds, and Fabric Groups V and VI were noted to include a relatively high percentage of utilitarian ware sherds. This pattern was not proven to be statistically significant.

Among the medium-textured ware and fabrics of Area IV, the following pattern was noted and its statistical significance established. Among the sherds classified as Ware D, a disproportionately high percentage appeared to have also been classified as Fabric V, and a correspondingly low percentage classified as Fabric VI.

Implications of the Fabric Analysis Results The Fabric Analysis identified a number of relationships among the fabric groups, wares, and forms (or functional categories) of the study collection pottery. In the Area IV study collection, representing the Hellenistic Etruscan period of Volterra, the six fabric groups were used in different ways to produce the wares and forms attested. Of the four fine-textured fabric groups (I-IV), one appears to have been used for a specialized purpose, and three to have been used for multiple purposes: Fabric I was used preferentially in the creation of black-slipped (Ware A) tableware forms, and much less frequently for utilitarian forms or for tableware forms with no surface treatment or a color-coat; while Fabric Groups II, III, and IV were used for both tableware and utilitarian forms, most often plain but also treated with a color-coat (and rarely a slip).

For the Area I study collection, the following patterns were noted and their statistical significance established. Among the fine-textured wares and fabrics: a disproportionately high percentage number of sherds classified as Ware B appeared to have also been classified as Fabric I, and a correspondingly low percentage classified as Fabric IV; and a relatively normal (even) distribution of Fabrics were identified among the sherds classified as Ware C. Among the Area I medium-textured wares and fabrics, the following pattern was noted and its statistical significance established. Among the sherds classified as Ware D, the distribution was relatively normal. Among the sherds classified as Ware E, a disproportionately high percentage was also classified as Fabric VI, and a correspondingly low percentage classified as Fabric V.

In other words, in the Hellenistic Etruscan period the very finest-textured of the six fabric groups (I) was preferentially used to produce the finest tablewares. The two coarsest-textured of the six fabric groups (V and VI) were used to produce the utilitarian wares. And the remaining fine-textured fabrics (II, III, and IV) were multipurpose fabrics used relatively proportionately for all the wares produced in Volterra.

Fabric Group and Form The second examination performed as part of the Fabric Analysis tested the relationship between functional categories and fabric group. An initial exploratory examination of the percentages of the functional categories attested for each fabric group suggested that the fabric groups may have been used preferentially in the production of certain functional categories of forms.

In the Area I study collection, representing the late Roman to late Antique period, the same six fabric groups were still used in the same proportions to create pottery, but the specificity of their use declined. Although the general trend to use certain fabric groups for certain wares and functional categories remained the same as that described for the Hellenistic period, during the late Roman to late Antique period the trend is observed to a

For the Area IV study collection, the following patterns were noted and their statistical significance established. Among the fine-textured fabric groups (Fabric Groups I-

167

of potters were using different clays or recipes to produce different wares, whose recipes or composition again remained stable across time? Does the change from a more specialized to a more generalized use of the fabric groups indicate that the different workshops were now serving more distinct communities of consumers rather than contributing to one broader market—a shift from locational specialization to locational generalization? These questions are addressed in Chapter 12, which synthesizes the data from the ceramic study and clay study. The implications of the results of the Fabric Analysis are discussed in Chapter 13, which considers the implications of the entire study for the proposed models.

much lesser degree. In contrast to the earlier period, the use of the different fabric groups may be characterized as more generalized and less specialized in terms of the resulting wares and functional categories of forms. These results raise a number of interesting questions. It would seem that the different fabric groups could plausibly represent different clay sources or clay recipes used by different potters’ workshops. Does the stability in the proportions of their use indicate substantial continuity in the location of pottery workshops and in the overall proportion of their contributions to the pottery industry in Volterra across a wide stretch of time? Could the stability instead indicate that a more limited number Table 6.1: Profile of Fabric Group I Inclusion Observed voids almost always ferric minerals usually quartz/gypsum often calcareous minerals often/sometimes light mica/gypsum sometimes shell sometimes/rarely

Frequency sparse to moderate sparse sparse sparse sparse sparse

Size fine fine fine fine fine fine

Plate 6.1: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group I in cross-section: Sherd I.122 (36x)1

1 General note on the photomicrographs: The photomicrographs were taken at a magnification of 36x. A scale is visible on the surface of each fabric cross-section. To read the scale, use the numbers in parentheses above the ticked line. These numbers mark millimeters along the line at a magnification of 36x. Thus, the space from “(1)” to “(2)” is one millimeter and the tick marks represent micrometers. The other numbers above and below the line should be disregarded.

168

Plate 6.2: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group I in cross-section: Sherd I.163 (36x)

Plate 6.3: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group I in cross-section: Sherd I.263 (36x)

Plate 6.4: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group I in cross-section: Sherd I.311 (36x)

Plate 6.5: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group I in cross-section: Sherd IV.346 (36x)

169

Table 6.2: Profile of Fabric Group II Inclusion Observed calcareous minerals always voids almost always ferric minerals usually quartz/gypsum often shell sometimes gypsum/ light mica sometimes/rarely

Frequency moderate sparse to moderate sparse sparse sparse to moderate sparse

Size fine fine fine fine fine fine

Plate 6.6: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group II in cross-section: Sherd I.115 (36x)

Plate 6.7: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group II in cross-section: Sherd I.203 (36x)

Plate 6.8: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group II in cross-section: Sherd I.256 (36x)

170

Plate 6.9: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group II in cross-section: Sherd I.260 (36x)

Plate 6.10: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group II in cross-section: Sherd I.283 (36x)

Table 6.3: Profile of Fabric Group III Inclusion Observed quartz/gypsum always voids always/almost always ferric minerals usually/often calcareous minerals usually/often light mica/gypsum sometimes/rarely shell sometimes/rarely

Frequency moderate sparse to moderate sparse sparse sparse sparse

Size fine fine fine fine fine fine

Plate 6.11: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group III in cross-section: Sherd I.141 (36x)

171

Plate 6.12: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group III in cross-section: Sherd I.150 (36x)

Plate 6.13: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group III in cross-section: Sherd I.274 (36x)

Plate 6.14: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group III in cross-section: Sherd IV.342 (36x)

Table 6.4: Profile of Fabric Group IV Inclusion Observed quartz/gypsum always calcareous minerals always/almost always voids almost always ferric minerals usually/often shell often/sometimes light mica/gypsum rarely

Frequency moderate moderate moderate sparse moderate sparse

172

Size fine fine fine fine fine to medium fine

Plate 6.15: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group IV in cross-section: Sherd I.50 (36x)

Plate 6.16: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group IV in cross-section: Sherd I.152 (36x)

Plate 6.17: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group IV in cross-section: Sherd I.359 (36x)

Plate 6.18: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group IV in cross-section: Sherd IV.353 (36x)

173

Plate 6.19: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group IV in cross-section: Sherd IV.422 (36x)

Table 6.5: Profile of Fabric Group V Inclusion Observed quartz/gypsum always voids almost always/usually ferric minerals often/sometimes gypsum/light mica sometimes/rarely and dark mica calcareous minerals rarely shell rarely

Frequency moderate sparse to moderate sparse sparse

Size fine to medium fine to medium fine to medium fine

sparse sparse

fine fine

Plate 6.20: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group V in cross-section: Sherd I.181 (36x)

Plate 6.21: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group V in cross-section: Sherd I.210 (36x)

174

Plate 6.22: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group V in cross-section: Sherd I.312 (36x)

Plate 6.23: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group V in cross-section: Sherd IV.404 (36x)

Table 6.6: Profile of Fabric Group VI Inclusion Observed dark mica always quartz/gypsum almost always voids usually ferric minerals sometimes calcareous minerals rarely shell rarely

Frequency sparse moderate sparse to moderate sparse sparse moderate

Size medium to coarse fine to coarse fine to medium medium fine fine to coarse

Plate 6.24: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group VI in cross-section: Sherd I.40 (36x)

175

Plate 6.25: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group VI in cross-section: Sherd IV.113 (36x)

Plate 6.26: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group VI in cross-section: Sherd IV.225 (36x)

Plate 6.27: Photomicrograph of Fabric Group VI in cross-section: Sherd IV.400 (36x)

176

Table 6.7: Fabrics documented in the Area IV study collection, by ware. Count of diagnostic sherds FABRIC Ware A Ware B Ware C Ware D TOTAL GROUP I 72 14 29 0 115 II 18 11 30 0 59 III 11 24 27 0 62 IV 7 37 38 0 82 SUBTOTAL 108 86 124 0 318 V VI SUBTOTAL

0 0 0

0 0 0

0 0 0

67 35 102

67 35 102

X SUBTOTAL

0 0

0 0

1 1

0 0

1 1

TOTAL

108

86

125

102

421

Table 6.8: Fabrics documented in the Area IV study collection, by ware. Percentage of diagnostic sherds2 FABRIC Ware A Ware B Ware C Ware D SUBTOTAL3 GROUP I 66.67 16.28 23.20 0.00 36.16 II 16.67 12.79 24.00 0.00 18.55 III 10.19 27.91 21.60 0.00 19.50 IV 6.48 43.02 30.40 0.00 25.79 SUBTOTAL 100.01 100.00 99.20 0.00 100.00

TOTAL 27.32 14.01 14.73 19.48 75.53

V VI SUBTOTAL

0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00

65.35 34.65 100.00

65.35 34.65 100.00

15.91 8.31 24.23

X SUBTOTAL

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.80 0.80

0.00 0.00

n/a n/a

0.24 0.24

TOTAL

100.00

100.00

100.00

100.00

n/a

100.00

Table 6.9: Association of functional category and fabric group, Area IV. Count of diagnostic sherds Fabric Fabric Fabric Fabric Fabric Fabric Group I Group II Group III Group IV Group V Group VI bowl/ 50 16 19 24 1 0 basin plate/ 34 10 14 20 19 4 cover pot/pan 2 2 0 0 11 2 olla 11 21 17 21 33 24 pitcher/ 2 0 2 2 0 0 bottle 99 49 52 67 64 30 TOTAL

2

TOTAL 110 101 17 127 6 361

Due to rounding, the totals in this table do not all equal exactly 100%. 3 The figures in this column represent the relative percentage of each fabric within the appropriate ware (fine-textured wares for Fabric groups I, II, III and IV, and medium-textured wares for Fabric groups V and VI).

177

Table 6.10: Association of functional category and fabric group, Area IV. Percentage of diagnostic sherds Fabric Fabric Fabric Fabric Fabric Fabric Group I Group II Group III Group IV Group V Group VI bowl/ 50.51 32.65 36.54 35.82 1.56 0.00 basin plate/ 34.34 20.41 26.92 29.85 29.69 13.33 cover pot/pan 2.02 4.08 0.00 0.00 17.19 6.67 olla 11.11 42.86 32.69 31.34 51.56 80.00 pitcher/ 2.02 0.00 3.85 2.99 0.00 0.00 bottle 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 TOTAL

TOTAL 30.47 27.98 4.71 35.18 1.66 100.00

Table 6.11: Fabrics documented in the Area I study collection, by ware. Count of diagnostic sherds FABRIC Ware B Ware C Ware D Ware E TOTAL GROUP I 27 65 0 0 92 II 15 40 0 0 55 III 15 45 0 0 60 IV 5 50 0 0 55 SUBTOTAL 62 200 0 0 262 V VI SUBTOTAL

0 0 0

0 0 0

53 17 70

3 4 7

56 21 77

X SUBTOTAL

1 1

6 6

2 2

1 1

10 10

TOTAL

63

206

72

8

349

Table 6.12: Fabrics documented in the Area I study collection, by ware. Percentage of diagnostic sherds4 FABRIC Ware B Ware C Ware D Ware E SUBTOTAL5 GROUP I 42.86 31.55 0.00 0.00 35.11 II 23.81 19.42 0.00 0.00 20.99 III 23.81 21.84 0.00 0.00 22.90 IV 7.94 24.27 0.00 0.00 20.99 SUBTOTAL 98.42 97.08 0.00 0.00 99.99

TOTAL 26.36 15.76 16.91 15.76 74.79

V VI SUBTOTAL

0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00

73.61 23.61 97.22

37.50 50.00 87.50

72.73 27.27 100.00

16.33 6.02 22.35

X SUBTOTAL

1.59 1.59

2.91 2.91

2.78 2.78

12.50 12.50

n/a n/a

2.87 2.87

TOTAL

100.01

99.99

100.00

100.00

n/a

100.01

4

Due to rounding, the totals in this table do not all equal exactly 100%. 5 The figures in this column represent the relative percentage of each fabric within the appropriate ware (fine-textured wares for Fabric Groups I, II, III and IV, and medium-textured wares for Fabric Groups V and VI).

178

Table 6.13: Association of functional category and fabric group, Area I. Count of diagnostic sherds Fabric Fabric Fabric Fabric Fabric Group I Group II Group III Group IV Group V bowl/ 26 11 10 11 6 basin plate/ 10 7 6 5 7 cover pot/pan 3 2 6 2 3 olla 17 10 16 15 19 pitcher/ 16 9 6 4 8 bottle 72 39 44 37 43 TOTAL Table 6.14: Association of functional category and fabric group, Area I. Percentage of diagnostic sherds6 Fabric Fabric Fabric Fabric Fabric Group I Group II Group III Group IV Group V bowl/ 36.11 28.21 22.73 29.73 13.95 basin plate/ 13.89 17.95 13.64 13.51 16.28 cover pot/pan 4.17 5.13 13.64 5.41 6.98 olla 23.61 25.64 36.36 40.54 44.19 pitcher/ 22.22 23.08 13.64 10.81 18.60 bottle 100.00 100.01 100.01 100.00 100.00 TOTAL Table 6.15: Association of excavation area and fabric group. Percentage of diagnostic sherds7 Area IV Area I Fine-textured fabrics Fabric Group I 27.32 26.36 Fabric Group II 14.01 15.76 Fabric Group III 14.73 16.91 Fabric Group IV 19.48 15.76 SUBTOTAL 75.53 74.79 Medium-textured fabrics Fabric Group V Fabric Group VI SUBTOTAL

15.91 8.31 24.23

16.33 6.02 22.35

Fabric X SUBTOTAL

0.24 0.24

2.87 2.87

100.00

100.01

TOTAL

6 7

Due to rounding, the totals in this table do not all equal exactly 100%. Due to rounding, the totals in this table do not all equal exactly 100%.

179

Fabric Group VI 4

TOTAL

1

36

3 11 0

19 88 43

19

254

Fabric Group VI 21.05

TOTAL

5.26

14.17

15.79 57.89 0.00

7.48 34.65 16.93

99.99

100.00

68

26.77

Table 6.16: Association of fabric group and ware through time. Percentage of diagnostic sherds8 Area IV Area I Wares A and B Fabric Group I 44.33 42.86 Fabric Group II 14.95 23.81 Fabric Group III 18.04 23.81 Fabric Group IV 22.68 7.94 TOTAL 100.00 98.42 Ware C Fabric Group I Fabric Group II Fabric Group III Fabric Group IV TOTAL

23.20 24.00 21.60 30.40 99.20

31.55 19.42 21.84 24.27 97.08

Wares D and E Fabric Group V Fabric Group VI TOTAL

65.35 34.65 100.00

72.73 27.27 100.00

8 These figures are derived from the data presented in Tables 6.8 and 6.12.

180

CHAPTER 7: TECHNOLOGICAL AND ECONOMIC ANALYSIS production information recorded for every diagnostic sherd belonging to a form/variant (in each ware and area).1

Chapter 7 presents the Technological and Economic Analysis of the study collection pottery. The analysis consists of two projects: the description of the pottery production techniques and technology used in Volterra during the Hellenistic Etruscan and late Roman/late Antique periods, as represented by the study collection; and the application of an adapted version of Peña’s economic value measure to the study collection and to a comparative collection of African pottery excavated from Area I (Peña 1999). The first of these projects was incorporated into the Pottery Catalogue (Chapter 4). The second is presented here.

Two versions of the production sequence were recorded, and from these two sums were figured: one corresponding to the procedure as documented, and one which projected additional steps not exhibited by the sherds but suggested by other similar forms in the study collection or other comparable pottery assemblages.2 These two figures are referred to in shorthand as the “documented” and “projected” figures respectively. To explain the difference between the figures, we may consider a hypothetical pitcher form, represented by a single sherd. If this sherd were a rim fragment of a wheel-thrown, smoothed vessel with a spout, the documented figure would reflect only those features of the finished vessel, and only those production steps visible in a surface inspection. The projected figure would reflect the likely possibility that the form also included a ring base and a handle, and thus would add the appropriate values for trimming the base and producing and attaching a handle. While the documented figure represents a minimum value, the projected figure does not represent a maximum but rather a likely or potential minimum value. (It is difficult to predict the maximum value of the completed vessel, as any number of additional decorative techniques could have been performed on our hypothetical pitcher but not preserved on the sherd examined.)

The data on the technology and economic value of the pottery are analyzed by means of two examinations. The first examination looks at change and continuity through time in locally-produced Volterran pottery, by comparing and contrasting the study collection of Area IV to that of Area I. The second examination compares and contrasts the locally-produced Volterran pottery from Areas IV and I to the imported African wares recovered in Area I. The chapter consists of four sections. The first section discusses the methods and materials of the Technological and Economic Analysis and presents the economic value data derived from the analysis. The second section compares the data from the locally-produced pottery from Areas IV and I. The third compares the surface-treated wares of the study collection to the comparative collection of African pottery. The fourth and final section recapitulates and interprets the results of the Technological and Economic Analysis.

These data were compiled to create a mean documented value and mean projected value measure for each formal group (by ware and excavation area). These formal group mean values were then employed in the examinations discussed below. For some of the exploratory data analyses, these formal group means were further distilled into average values for the various wares.3

7.1 Technological and Economic Analysis In order to compare the economic value of the local and the imported pottery, a modified version of Peña’s economic value measure was employed. As Peña developed it, this measure combines vessel weight and aspects of manufacturing technique in a single figure (Peña 1999:Appendix 3). I adapted the measure for use with the study collection, and applied it differently.

1

This is the most significant difference between the measure as Peña developed it and my application of it: whereas that Peña adjusted his measure to reflect the weight of his various pottery categories, I ignored sherd weight and instead used the measure to create a mean economic value for each formal group. 2 These comparable assemblages include those published for other sites in Volterra (e.g. Maggiani 1973) and other Italian sites (notably the Settefinestre assemblage published in A. Ricci, ed. 1985 and the Cosa assemblage published in Dyson 1976). 3 The data for the analyses were extracted from the complete body of technological and economic data presented in Ostman (2002), Appendix F (2002:915-927).

As applied here, the method may be described as follows. For each form or variant a value (1 or 2) was assigned to the various operations involved in the production sequence. For example, throwing on the wheel was valued at 2, while trimming a ring base was valued at 1. For the most part, the values assigned to each operation were taken from Peña (1999:Appendix 3, pp. 191-200), although I modified them slightly to suit the study collection pottery. The method was applied to each form/variant included in the Pottery Catalogue (figured separately for forms in each of the various wares as well as the two excavation areas). The operations attested for each form/variant were identified by synthesizing the

181

states: There is no difference in the average economic value measure of formal groups from the Area IV and Area I study collection. The directional hypothesis (H1) states: The average economic value measure of the formal groups from the Area IV study collection is significantly greater than the average economic value measure of the formal groups from the Area I study collection. The significance level was set at α=0.05.

Hellenistic Etruscan Pottery from Area IV Tables 7.1-7.3 below summarize the mean economic values of the formal groups for the Area IV wares: Wares A/B, C, and D. The tables indicate that the Ware A/B formal groups appear to have the greatest economic value of the Area IV wares. This higher value reflects the steps required to procure, prepare, and apply the slip or color coat, as well as the additional operations performed to create the most highly-decorated examples in the study collection, with roulette, incised, and stamped designs.

The test results do not reject the null hypothesis. The number of observations N=23; n1=25 for the Area IV study collection; n2=32 for the Area I study collection; R1=782; mean R1=31.28; R2=871, mean R2=27.22; U=343 (corrected for ties); z=-0.92, and p=0.1788 (onetailed). From the test results we must conclude that the difference in the economic value measures between the Area IV formal groups and the Area I formal groups is not statistically significant.

Late Roman and Late Antique Pottery from Area I Tables 7.4-7.7 below summarize the economic value measure results for the various wares of Area I: Wares B, C, D, and E. The tables indicate that in the Area I study collection, the formal groups of Wares B and E appear to have the greatest economic value. Their higher value is due in large part to the application of a surface treatment to those wares.

This result implies substantial continuity through time in the value of the study collection pottery, as measured here. The insignificant tendency for a decrease in value through time may be ascribed to the loss of Ware A, which included the most elaborately-decorated and therefore highly-valued examples in the study collection, as well as to the general decline in the percentage of surface-treated wares.

Imported African Pottery from Area I Table 7.8 below presents the mean economic values of the formal groups documented for the imported African pottery recovered from Area I, Vallebuona. The table suggests that the African wares were indeed produced at low cost, at least as measured here.

7.3 Comparison of Local Pottery to Imported Pottery

The comparative pottery collection exhibits evidence of a distinct technology used to produce the imported African tableware and utilitarian wares: the extensive use of molds on the wheel (studied and documented by Hayes 1972:292-296).4

This section compares the economic value of three groups of pottery: the locally-produced slipped and color-coated pottery from the Hellenistic Etruscan period from excavation Area IV (Ware A/B); the locallyproduced color-coated pottery from the late Roman/late Antique period from excavation Area I (Wares B and E); and the imported African pottery from excavation Area I. The mean economic value measure of the formal groups documented for each of the three groups are compared, in order to assess the following predictions advanced by the External Change model: that the imported African pottery was significantly less “expensive” than the locally-produced pottery, as measured by the adapted version of Peña’s economic value measure; and that the “cost” of the locally-produced surface-treated wares declines over time, as a result of “competition” from the less-expensive African wares.

7.2 Change and Continuity Through Time in Local Pottery Comparing the mean economic values for the formal groups of the Area IV study collection (Tables 7.1-7.3 below) and the formal groups of the Area I study collection (Tables 7.4-7.7 below), it appears that the Area IV pottery tends to include higher values than the Area I pottery. Calculating the average of the formal group means for each ware by excavation area confirms this impression; see Table 7.9 below.

Table 7.10 below presents the average of the formal group means for the surface-treated wares from the study collection and from the comparative collection. These data suggest that the overall economic value mean for the locally-produced surface-treated wares did indeed decline through time, as the values for Ware A/B from Area IV are higher than those for Wares B and E from Area I. They also indicate that the average value for the imported African slipped wares was lower than that of any of the locally-produced wares.

The Mann-Whitney U test was used to test the statistical significance of the observation that the formal groups from Area IV tend to have a greater economic value than the formal groups from Area I. The null hypothesis (H0) 4

The most characteristic evidence of the use of the mold which may be observed in a single sherd is the “step” where a rim was imperfectly joined to the mold-produced body. This feature may be seen clearly in Sherd I.18 (Fig. 4.61, Chapter 4).

182

performed on mean economic value measures derived for each formal group (in each ware and excavation area) of the study collection. First, all pottery wares from the Area IV study collection were compared to all pottery wares from the Area I study collection, seeking patterns of change or continuity through time. Second, the surface-treated wares from the following three groups were compared: Ware A/B from Area IV; Wares B and E from Area I; and the imported African pottery from Area I.

The Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance by ranks was employed to test the statistical significance of this observation. The null hypothesis (H0) states: There is no significant difference in the mean economic value measure of formal groups among the surface-treated wares of the study collection (Ware A/B from Area IV, and Wares B and E from Area I) and the mean economic value measure of formal groups from the comparative collection (imported African pottery excavated from Area I, Vallebuona). The directional hypothesis (H1) states: There is a significant difference in the mean economic value measure of formal groups among the surfacetreated wares of the study collection (Ware A/B from Area IV, and Wares B and E from Area I) and the mean economic value measure of formal groups from the comparative collection (imported African pottery excavated from Area I, Vallebuona): The mean economic value measure of the formal groups from Area IV (Ware A/B) is greater than the mean economic value measure of the formal groups from the surface-treated pottery from Area I (Wares B and E); and the mean economic value measures of the formal groups from the study collection (surface-treated pottery from Areas IV and I) are greater than those from the imported African pottery excavated from Area I, Vallebuona. The significance level was set at α=0.05.

The first examination performed on the economic value measure data compared technological and economic value of pottery produced in Volterra through time, by comparing the study collection from Area IV (representing the Hellenistic Etruscan period of the city’s history) to the study collection from Area I (representing the late Roman to late Antique period). The results of this examination indicate that there was a subtle decrease through time in the economic value measure of the formal groups of the locally-produced pottery, but that this decrease was statistically insignificant. These results imply substantial continuity in the economic value of the Area IV and Area I study collections, considered as a whole. This continuity in value is closely linked to the substantial continuity in production sequence and production techniques documented in the Pottery Catalogue (Chapter 4).

The test results reject the null hypothesis and support the directional hypothesis: N=31, df=3, H=22.97, and p