Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-wtssw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-18T05:53:22.332Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On the Date and Origin of Minyan Ware

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 September 2015

V. Gordon Childe
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Mr. Forsdyke in his brilliant article on this subject was unfortunately unable to make use of the important results of Dr. Soteriadhis' recent excavations in Phocis. The site explored near Dhrakmani on the estates of Messrs. Piperis and Ghiannakopoulos has greatly increased our knowledge of the forms of this pottery, supplying just the evidence Mr. Forsdyke requires as a test of his theory. The exploration of the mound near Hagia Marina in the same district serves to supplement the unpublished results from Orchomenos in Boeotia. Now, however, by the kindness of Dr. Soteriadhis I have been able to see the material in the Chaeronea Museum. It will accordingly be interesting to review Mr. Forsdyke's theory in the light of these new finds.

In the large mound of Hagia Marina the excavator has been able to distinguish three main strata. Below the disturbed layers containing modern sherds, came a stratum one metre thick, containing Mycenean (L. M. III.) sherds mixed with Minyan ware. Immediately below this, the pottery called by Furtwängler at Orchomenos Kamares began to appear. At first apparently Minyan and ‘Early Mycenean’—by this I suppose is meant the northern variety of Mattmalerei—occur with it plentifully, but towards the bottom of the layer these disappear.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Hellenic Studies , Volume 35 , November 1915 , pp. 196 - 207
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies 1915

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See the excellent publication in Revue des Études Grecques, 1912, pp. 260 ff.

2 I could find very little of this in the museum. It is of the Chaeronea variety.

3 Loc. cit. p. 276.

4 Ib. Fig. 15.

5 Ib. p. 281.

6 Loc. cit. I compare Seager, Mochlos, Fig. 49, No. 59 and University of Pennsylvania, Sphoungara, Fig. 23 c.

7 This is well seen on the sherds in the British Museum.

8 Phylakopi, Fig. 74.

9 Rev. Ét. Gr. loc. cit. Fig. 12.

10 Ib. Fig. 13, No. 1, top row.

11 E.g. loc. cit. Fig. 13, No. 4, in row 1.

12 Ath. Mitt. 1911, p. 163.

13 Ἐϕ. Ἀρχ. 1899, pp. 77–115.

14 πρακτικὰ, 1904, 1905, and 1906.

15 B.S.A. xvii. p. 16.

16 E.g. at Koumasa.

17 The material though unpublished is visible, more or less chronologically arranged, in the Chaeronea Museum.

18 Ἐϕ. Ἀρχ. 1899, Pl. IX. 7 and 11.

19 ‘It is utterly different from anything of which the clay of Melos was capable, it could never pass at Phylakopi for anything but an imported fabric.’ (B.S.A. xvii. p. 17.)

20 In the tombs excavated by Tsountas at Dimini and Sesklo, belonging definitely to the bronze age a considerable quantity has been found. These cist graves are typical of Minyan burials and probably point to a Minyan occupation, see pp. 126 ff.

21 In view of the mainland finds, I incline to the Berlin date for the XIIth Egyptian dynasty.

22 This was a very long occupation, showing three distinct architectural periods (Bulle, , Orchomenos, p. 53).Google Scholar This will serve well to bring the end down to L. M. II. or III.

23 Prehistoric Thessaly, Fig. 63.

24 Bulle, , Orchomenos (vol. i.), p. 19.Google Scholar

25 Mr. Wace tells me he has seen these sherds from the excavations of the American School.

26 Prehistoric Thessaly, p. 235 f. and Fig. 131.

27 Prehistoric Thessaly, p. 159 and table.

28 Eight layers were found—apparently settlements destroyed by fire, ib. p. 135.

29 Rev. Ét. Grec. p. 269 f.

30 J.H.S. xxxiv. p. 152.

31 They are Minyan in form though, not in fabric.

32 This persists even in some of the (?) Minyan vessels of Troy VI., e.g. Schliemann Samml. No. 3,491.

33 Cf. e.g. loc. cit. Nos. 1,809, 2,514, and 2,515. Only about five seem to have been. found. None have feet.

34 The shape resembles the early jugs from Knossos (B.S.A. ix. Fig. 66 c and o).

35 e.g. No. 3,435. No. 3,406 is almost certainly L. M. III. b, not L. M. 1.

36 Troja und Ilion, p. 284 f.

37 Supra, p. 199.

38 Cf. Ἐϕ. Ἀρχ. 1899, Pl. IX. Nos. 7 and 11.

39 Cf. Schliemann Samml. Nos. 1,198 f. Kahrstedt has noticed this, Ath. Mitt. 1913, p. 182.

40 Edgar, in Phylakopi, p. 96.Google Scholar

41 Schl. Samml. No. 2,066.

42 For these see Papabasileios, , Πϵρì τῶν ἐν ΕυΒοίᾳ ἀρχίων τάϕων, Athens, 1910.Google Scholar

43 Cf. Schliemann's Ilios, Figs. 1161 and 1162 (hand-made) and Fig. 1152 (wheel-made).

44 For 3rd, 4th, and 6th see above; for the 5th cf. Schl. Samml. Nos. 2,235 and 2,814.

45 Ib. Fig. 14 and Plate B.

46 Ἐϕ. Ἀρχ. Pl. VIII. 11.

47 Equal Schl. Samml. 2,470.

48 Schliemann Samml. 2,412.

49 Cf. the neck band Troja und Ilion, Fig. 163, centre of lower row, and Phylakopi, Pl. V 17. Note also the pointillé work of Troy.

50 The one jug from Euboea must be an import.

51 Troja und Ilion, p. 280.