Ktahya between the Lines: Post-Medieval Ceramics as Historical Information

Author(s): Joanita Vroom

Reviewed work(s):
Source: Hesperia Supplements, Vol. 40, Between Venice and Istanbul: Colonial Landscapes in
Early Modern Greece (2007), pp. 71-93
Published by: The American School of Classical Studies at Athens
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20066766 .
Accessed: 06/11/2012 06:04
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The American School of Classical Studies at Athens is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to Hesperia Supplements.

http://www.jstor.org

CHAPTER

k?tahya
Post-Medieval
Historical

the

between

llnes:
as

Ceramics
Information

byjoanita Vroom

Interest in post-medieval ceramics inGreece from a purely archaeological

perspective began in the first half of the 20th centurywith the pioneer

and Allison Frantz inHesperia (1933 and

ing articles of Frederick Waag?
1942, respectively).Although useful publications have appeared since then,
much remains to be accomplished in the field of post-medieval archaeol
It should be noted that until 1950
ogy in this part of theMediterranean.
the archaeological legislation inGreece protected only antiquities dating
before 1453, the year of the "fall" of Constantinople.

The designation "post-medieval ceramics" used in this chapter refers to

pottery of themid-15th century through the 18th,when most of theGreek
lands were part of the Ottoman Empire or under Venetian domination.

that the designation "Ottoman pottery" is not used here, although this
term is sometimes associated with the production of finewares in 16 th- to

Note

1.1 thank thefollowingpeople for

allowing

me

to

study and publish the

material
from their exca

post-medieval
vations and surveys: Richard Hodges
in southern
of the Butrint Project

Vassilis Aravantinos,
Direc
Albania;
tor of the 9th
of Prehistoric
Ephorate

and Classical Antiquities; JohnBintliff

of the Boiotia
Snodgrass
Broodbank
and Evan
Cyprian

and Anthony
Project;

gelia Kiriatzi of theKythera Island

Project;BernardKnapp andMichael
Given of theTroodos Archaeological
and Environmental Survey Project

on

Cyprus;

and Peter Doom

and

Sebastiaan Bommelj? of theAetolia

Project.

Furthermore,

I thank Machiel

Kiel, JohnHayes, JackDavis, and Siriol

Davies
My

for their valuable

research was

by the Packard

suggestions.

supported
Humanities

financially
Institute.

Instead, I
19th-century Turkey (e.g., in Iznik, K?tahya, and ?anakkale).
as a
more neutral term
the
ceramics"
general designa
prefer
"post-medieval
tion for pottery finds from about themid-15th through the 18th centuries.

I focus on these centuries, omitting ceramic finds of the 19th and

20th centuries, which are, of course, interesting in their own right.

Here

In the firstpart of this chapter I present an overview of the history of

research

concerning

area

post-medieval

ceramic

finds

from

excavations

in the

mean theGreek mainland and islands,

Aegean
(bywhich I
Cyprus, and
western
parts of
Turkey). I briefly discuss the publications that have been
most important for the study of post-medieval pottery,with emphasis on
studies relating to excavations on theGreek mainland, inConstantinople/
Istanbul, and in theGreek islands and Cyprus. Furthermore, I tryasmuch
as
on this
possible to refer to themost recent publications
subject.

Next, I discuss some recent pottery finds from current archaeological

projects (excavations and surveys) in the Aegean. At these projects the
ceramics were approached strictlyfrom an archaeological point of view and
studied from the perspective of type,date, and quantity.1On the basis ofthat

information, I explore the possibilities of acquiring historical information

from post-medieval ceramics ingeneral.Work remains inprogress, however,
and the subject is still riddled with uncertainties. It should be noted that I

do not focus attention here on the relationship between changing pottery

72

JOANITA

VROOM

shapes and the history of dining habits during post-medieval times, a topic
that I have explored elsewhere and that presents an excellent opportunity to
combine evidence from the analysis of archaeological artifacts, fromwritten
sources, and from the pictorial representation of dining scenes.2 Instead, I

concentrate more on the fundamental practice of

studying post-medieval
ceramics as a part of field research, carefully considering the possible but

problematic relationship between archaeology and text.

RESEARCH ON POST-MEDIEVAL
THE AEGEAN
The

First

Pioneers:

Waag?

and

CERAMICS

IN

Frantz

first "archaeological" study of post-medieval pottery inGreece was

the publication by Frederick Waag?
of ceramic finds from the first season

The

of work by the American

School of Classical Studies in the Athenian
in
The
embraced
thewares used inAthens from about
1933.3
Agora
study

the 1st century b.c. (Late Hellenistic

times) through the 18th century
and
Ottoman
(Late
times),
included, therefore, discussion of a number
of new wares not previously described by excavators.Waag?
introduced,
for instance, the general term "Turkish painted ware." Information about

the stratigraphy of the excavation was minimal, however, and as a result,

no attention could be
to unglazed coarse wares; all the
given byWaag?
were
vessels
glazed.
published
More valuable was an articlewritten nine years later byAllison Frantz
on other
excava
post-medieval pottery finds from the Athenian Agora
tions.4 Here, for the first time, archaeological attention was paid solely
to the centuries following the conquest of Greek lands by the Ottomans.

However, the 16th- to 18th-century levels atAthens had been so severely

disturbed that the material (from 10 different deposits in the Agora)
was
presented by Frantz with only tentative suggestions for dating. The
groups she discussed offered only a few indications of absolute dates, but
the coincidence of differentwares allowed her to determine their relative

a
chronology.Most importantwas Frantz's recognition of locallymade type
of tin-glazed majolica that she called "blue and white painted ware," but
which today is known as local "majolica fromGreece" (discussed inmore
detail later in this chapter).5

More
Period

Recent
on

Ceramic
the

Greek

Finds

of the

Post-Medieval

Mainland

and Frantz there ensued a long

After the pioneering articles ofWaag?
period of apparent lack of interest by archaeologists in post-medieval
pottery inGreece. This relative silence lasted 30 years, until 1977. At that

Bakirtzis in
time, excavations by the Greek archaeologist Charalambos
a
new
to
the
stimulus
Thrace
and
Macedonia
study of pottery
provided
from this period on theGreek mainland. In particular, his publications of

2. See Vroom 1996; 1997, pp. 210

211; 1998b, pp. 540-545; 2000; 2003,
pp. 229-239,303-357.

3.Waag?

4. Frantz
5. See

1933.

1942.

also Vroom

2003,

p. 173.

post-medieval

ceramics

as

historical

information

73

Figure 4.1. Thebes: Fragments of

a slip-painted dish from
Didymo
teichon found during excavations in
the city center.

J.Vroom.

Scale 1:2

an
ceramics fromDidymoteichon,
importantThracian production center
were
during the post-medieval period,
groundbreaking.6
Here, for the first time, previously unknown locally produced wares
dating from the 15th century to the 19th century were presented. Most

vessels found at Didymoteichon were made in a "Byzantine" style, using

traditional decorative techniques from the Byzantine period in Greece,
such as sgraffito and slip-painting (Fig. 4.1). Previously unknown wares
in Bakirtzis s publications included monochrome green-glazed vessels in

various shapes and unglazed domestic vessels, such as chamber pots and
on the shoulder. Two
jugs with spouts
glazed jugs with rosettes in relief
on the outside looked similar to
inwestern
types produced at ?anakkale

Turkey. An unfinished jug of this type demonstrated, however, that these

wares also must have been made at
Didymoteichon. Local production at

was confirmed
Didymoteichon
by the discovery of two kilns, several potter s
tools, and much kiln waste datable to the early 19th century in a building
site just outside the townwalls.

article on "post-Byzantine" wares from Didymoteichon

a group of articles
spawned
published inGreek in the 1980s, mainly in
as
such
ApxawXoyia and E0voypa<piKa. Pottery pro
popular periodicals
duction centers of fine and domestic wares were located, for instance, in
16th- to 18th-century Larissa, in 17th- to 19th-century Athens, and in
17th- to 18th-century Arta.7
Bakirtziss

6. Bakirtzis
Vroom

2003,

1980,1984;
p. 184, with

see also
further

literature.
7. Vroom
literature.

2003,

p. 71, with

further

These publications showed that the production centers of glazed wares

in post-medieval Greece did not change their pottery
repertoire and deco
ration methods radically from those of Byzantine and medieval times. In
fact, the two main decorative techniques employed by the Greek potters
during the post-medieval period were painting and incision (sgraffito), and
they closely followed the conservative Byzantine color palette of green and
ochre-yellow brushstrokes (Fig. 4.2). Decoration was limited towinding
lines and circles and thewares were covered with a transparent lead
glaze,
as in themedieval
period.

74

JOANITA

VROOM

Figure 4.2. Athens: Brown and green

sgraffitobowl fromtheDimitris
Oikonomopoulos Collection.
Reproduced with the permission of the
Greek Ministry of Culture

Figure 4.3. Arta: Locally produced

jug with theyear of production,
1791, painted on the shoulder.
Reproduced with the permission of the
Benaki Museum

Arta was one such production center of glazed wares where traditional
to survive in
post-medieval times. Its red-bodied, lead

methods managed

glazed products included slip-painted ware, colored sgraffitoware, and

brown and green painted ware.8 Noteworthy is a locally produced jug from
Arta inbrown and green painted colorswith the exact production year, 1791,
and theGreek lettersAH and MO, probably the initials or the beginning of
the potters name, painted on the shoulder of the vessel (Fig. 4.3).

8. Vavylopoulou-Charitonidou

1981-1982,1984.

post-medieval

ceramics

as

historical

information

75

4***i
Figure 4.4 (above). Athens: Local
imitation of amajolica trefoil-mouth
jug (AthenianAgora P1902). Cour
tesy of theTrustees of theAmerican
of Classical Studies atAthens

School

rescue excavations in the

during
city centers.9
In most of the locally produced post-medieval

Figure 4.5 (upper right).Thebes:

Locally produced majolica bowl
found

excavations
during
Street. J.Vroom. Scale

dou

at

Boeotia

rural

sites, recovered

Project.

J.Vroom.

Pelopi

1:3

the
by
Scale 1:4

9. See
Papanikola-Bakirtzi
pp. 249-265.
10. Frantz 1942, p. 2.

1999,

11. See Vroom 2003, p. 173 (ware

28), figs.6.33 and 6.44, for theBoiotian
examples;
the Theban
12.

see Vroom

(forthcoming)

examples.

Vavylopoulou-Charitonidou

1986-1987; Tsouris 1982.

ceramics inGreece,
the influence of Italian pottery technology of the

one can

Figure 4.6 (lower right).Boiotia:

Locally produced majolica fragments
from

production centers in Greece using Byzantine and medieval

techniques included Thessaloniki, Veroia, and Trikala, where unfinished
s
products, potter tools, and wasters of the post-medieval period were found
Other

for

distinguish
Renaissance period (such as tin-glazed majolica from northern Italy or
ware from the
polychrome sgraffito
region around Venice). The Italian
even appears to be imitated in Greece. Finds of imitations of
majolica

Italian blue-and-white majolica inAthens, published by Frantz in 1942,

were found
together with two potter s kilns, wasters, and potter s stilts
(Fig. 4.4).10The most characteristic shapes of this locally produced majolica
fromGreece are small bowls, plates, and trefoil-mouth jugs. Fragments of
this local majolica were found during excavations atCorinth and atThebes
as well as on rural sites in Boiotia
(Fig. 4.5),
(Fig. 4.6).n
In all, twomain types of locally produced ceramics of the post-medieval
period have been found during excavations on theGreek mainland: painted
wares in a traditional
and sgraffito
Byzantine style,and imitations of Italian

majolica. Archaeologists working in northwestern Greece published these

wares thatwere found
twomain types of
post-medieval
during excavations

at the castle of Rogon near Arta, and

during excavations at the Castle of
Ioannina in Epirus.12 The stratigraphy of these excavations, however, is

not

always

clear.

76

JOANITA

Ceramic

Finds

of

the

Post-Medieval

Period

VROOM

in

Constantinople/Istanbul
The

modern

standard for defining and dating glazed and domestic

of the post-medieval period from stratigraphical excavations at
was setmore
Constantinople/Istanbul
recently by John Hayes. His first
on thesewares concerned finds from excavations of the
report
preliminary
Bodrum Camii (or theMyrelaion), followed by amore detailed publication
ofmaterial from the Sara?hane excavations 11 years later.13

wares

In excavations of the Bodrum Camii, a 16th-century fill overlying a

Late Byzantine tiled floor yielded some 90% of the finds.The great bulk of

thematerial was uniform, comprising fragments of Iznik ware (and other

fine sherds) aswell as local domestic pottery prevalent during the firsthalf
of the 16th century. In addition, a small amount of 18th-century pottery
was recovered, of types characteristic of a
higher fill.The date of this later
fillwas provided by fragments ofwell-dated 18th-century Kiitahya ware.
In addition, a few pieces of modern china came from the surface of this
deposit.
In the excavations at Sara?hane, most of the post-medieval finds came
from 15 groups from pits and wells; these provided an excellent range of

pottery types prevalent between 1500 and 1650. The period from 1700 to
1850 was poorly represented. This phase, however, provided a convenient
break between the earlier ceramic finds (late 15th tomid-17th centuries)
and the later ceramic finds (18th to early 20th centuries).
In the absence of numismatic evidence, itwas mainly

the fine wares

as a dating tool for

(e.g., porcelain, Iznik ware, and majolica) that served
the coarse wares of the late 15th to 17th centuries. Some 20 wares of the

latter,glazed as well as unglazed, were identified by Hayes. According to

him, most were locally produced in Istanbul. About 190 types of vessels
were listed in a
preliminary conspectus of those used in Istanbul during
Early Ottoman times (ca. late 15th tomid-17th centuries). Unfortunately,
transitional shapes of the late 17th and early 18th centuries were under
represented in these samples.
Post-medieval coarse wares produced and used in Istanbul appear not
to have differed significantly from theirmedieval predecessors, displaying
new technical features in fabric and manufacture. Neverthe
no
markedly

less, one of the most striking new features in the post-medieval deposits
were
was the total absence of
probably replaced
large amphoras, which
was
the replacement of thin-walled,
by wooden barrels. Noteworthy also

a result, the pro

cooking pots by simple lead-glazed types.As
wares in the later
increased
of
assemblages
substantially, to
portion
glazed
around 35%-40% of finds in Early Ottoman contexts of the late 15th to
mid-17th centuries, with a further rise in the 18th-19th centuries, when
unglazed

wares came to
predominate (ca. 60%-80% of finds). The glazes of
glazed
the local wares were generally dark-toned and applied directly to the clay
body (though
common

on

a white

the domestic

slip

occurs on some wares). Decoration

was

not

wares.

A breakdown of the chief classes present in late 15th- to early 17th

century deposits at Sara?hane shows the following pattern: (1) fine wares
(Iznik, porcelain, etc.), some 1%-10% of total sherds; (2) plain glazed

13. Hayes

1981,1992.

post-medieval

ceramics

as

historical

information

jj

Figure 4.7. Iraklion: Polychrome

sgraffitobowl from Italy; rim
Diam.

0.24 m,

base Diam.

0.10 m,

H. 0.09 m (lower left isprofileview).

Reproduced with the permission of the
Greek Ministry of Culture

wares, about 25%-35%;

wares
unglazed coarse

tablewares, about 15%-20%; and (4)

(mainly drinking cups and spouted jugs), about 50%,
in the 17th century.14
(3) unglazed

and declining
The 18th-century increase in the proportion of glazed wares from the
Sara?hane excavations is largely explained by the partial glazing of formerly

were
spouted jugs from this time onward. New shapes, however,
for
bowls
mostly unglazed:
example, high-stemmed drinking
(goblets),
so-called
and
two-handled
(the
ibrik),
tall,
spouted jugs
flagons.
unglazed

Finds

Ceramic
the
Little
Greek
14.

Hayes
15. Vroom

1992, p. 233.

p. 73, with further

also Kontoyiannis
2002
on
for the post-medieval
pottery finds
2003,

literature. See

the island of Kos

ware, marbled
?anakkale

(e.g., majolica,

Iznik

ware,

ware);

K?tahya ware,
and Deliyianni-Dori,

Velissariou, andMichailidis 2003 for

on
the post-medieval
pottery finds
the island of Andros
(e.g., majolica,
Miletus
ware, Iznik ware, marbled ware,
?anakkale

ware).

Greek

of

Islands

the
and

Post-Medieval

Period

in

on Cyprus

is known about the pottery used in southern Greece

islands from the late 14th century to the 17th, when

and in the

these parts
rule. One might expect to find imported
pottery from Italy in these Venetian outposts and colonies of this period.
Very few Renaissance ceramics from theWest have been published until
of Greece were under Venetian

now, however, although one can suspect that ceramics of the Renaissance
were
to the
are
period
Aegean. Exceptions
exported from Italy
publica
tions of some occasional pieces of 15th- to 16th-century graffito,arcaica

and 16th-century majolica found on Rhodes and on Crete (for instance,

atMalia, Chania, and Iraklion; Fig. 4.7), aswell as two recent publications
on fortresses in the
Cyclades (e.g., Kos and Andros) that include imported

post-medieval pottery finds from Italy and Turkey.15

78

JOANITA

VROOM

On Crete, theGreek-Swedish Kastelli excavations at Chania provided

good stratified layers and sealed deposits of post-Byzantine finds (includ

aswell as
ing kitchenware
imported tableware from Italy and Turkey), but
thematerial was unfortunately very fragmentary.16A helpful addition was
the publication of six well-preserved
15th- to 16th-century tin-glazed

now in the collection of the

jugs found inwestern Crete,
Archaeological
of Chania.17 Although these jugs were all stray finds from vil
Museum
lages near Chania, and information about exact provenance and context
was scarce,
they provided the excavators of Chania with entire profiles to
help them in their study of the smaller fragments.
Another
15th- to 16th-century group of published material was

recovered in the course of public works in Iraklion.18 The finds, which

are now stored in the Iraklion Historical Museum,
included a lustre bowl

(Valencia), majolica from northern Italy, and one piece of a

man
polychrome painted ware, the so-called RMR (for the colors ramina,
as
as
ware
wares
from
southern
well
undecorated
ganese, rosso)
Italy,
glazed
and unglazed wares (cooking pots). Unfortunately, the photographs are not
from Spain

well reproduced in the publication of the finds and there is no information

about the find circumstances of these vessels.
regard to Cyprus,

the only serious publication dealing with

14th- to 16th-century imports from Italy is Peter Megaw's
pre-World
War II (but published in 1951) article concerning three closed deposits of
tableware and kitchenware from rubbish pits excavated inNikosia.19 These
With

finds were

the result of random discoveries during building operations.

as well as
contained
pits
majolica from Faenza, Padua, and Venice,
Italian polychrome sgraffitoware from theV?neto. Apart from these Ital
ian imports, some pieces from the East, such as Iznik ware fromTurkey,
Chinese porcelain, and painted bowls from Syria, also were found in the

The

pits. According toMegaw, the Syrian finds illustrated the flourishing trade
between Cyprus and theNear East, "when Syrian merchants, circumventing
the Papal Edicts which prohibited Christians from trading in the ports of
the Saracen enemy, transported theirmerchandise to Cyprus for re-ship
ment inChristian vessels to theWest."20
vonWartburg-Maier
recently, the archaeologist Marie-Louise
of
the
tablewares
Ottoman
period found on
published additional imported
at Kouklia.21 She distinguished 15
Cyprus, this time in Swiss excavations
More

groups of importedwares, among them pottery from Italy (Pisa,Montelupo,

Albisola), as well as imports fromThrace, western Turkey, and China.
In summary,we can conclude, even from this preliminary survey of
publications, that the main archaeological projects in the Aegean have
yielded littleknowledge about the types and dates of post-medieval ceramics
in theAegean. Until now,most publications of excavated pottery finds have
focused exclusively on glazed wares (mainly imports and usually complete
to the fragmentary unglazed coarse
pots). Little attention has been paid

wares, which constitute themain body of ceramic evidence of surface sur

veys (see, e.g., Fig. 4.8). This particularly limits the usefulness of previous
there are
When
published work for the interpretation of finds from surveys.
no
ware or K?tahya ware in surface
of
Iznik
easily recognizable fragments
pottery assemblages

of post-medieval material, we

simply cannot closely

16.Hahn 1989,1997.
17.Hahn 1991.
18. MacKay
19. Megaw

1996.
1951.

20. Megaw
1951, p. 145.
21. Von Wartburg-Maier

2001.

See

alsoGabrieli 2001; Cook andGreen

2002 for a few post-medieval
ceramic
at the theater
finds from excavations
site at Nea
as well

as

Paphos

inwestern

Cyprus;

and Vallauri

2001,
Fran?ois
ceramic
for post-medieval
pp. 539-546,
finds from a survey around Potamia
Ayios

Sozomenos

in central

Cyprus.

POST-MEDIEVAL

CERAMICS

AS

INFORMATION

HISTORICAL

79

date the remainder of the ceramics. It is therefore very difficult?if

not

quite premature?to speakwith any certainty about the distribution and the
quantities of pottery finds of the 15th-18th centuries in theAegean area,
let alone to compare the results from various survey projects inGreece.
In addition, hardly any attention has been paid until now to ceramics
thatwere imported during the post-medieval period into theAegean region
We know
from other parts of theMediterranean, such asmajolica from Italy.
in
that Italian majolica probably reached theAegean
large quantities, but

of a
Fragment
a local
in
storage jar
post-medieval
fabric, recovered
by the Kythera

Figure

Island

4.8.

Kythera:

Project.

J.Vroom. Scale

1:3

because of lack of publication we do not have insight into its distribution.

Nevertheless, recently I have made an effort to classify themost com
wares in the
Aegean that exhibit clear stylistic
monly found post-medieval
wares
have been categorized on the
and technological similarities. These
basis of their fabric, surface treatment, decoration, shape, origin, distribu
tion, and date range.22Also, I have argued that within this preliminary
classification system it is preferable to date post-medieval pottery finds in
theAegean only by century, and abandon traditional designations such as
or "Late Ottoman." In fact, dates lack the historical and
"Early Ottoman"
cultural connotations attached to conventional periodization

a clearer basis for discussion.

POST-MEDIEVAL

HISTORICAL

CERAMICS

INFORMATION

and provide

AS A SOURCE

OF

Literature dealing with post-medieval ceramics fromTurkey in general,

and in particular with the famous colorful tablewares produced in Iznik
(Fig. 4.9), K?tahya, and ?anakkale

extensive.

Research

into

these

inwestern Turkey, is, of course, quite

wares,

however,

was

until

recently

not

conducted from an archaeological perspective, and it strongly emphasized

variations in decorative styles,which were often influenced by styles from
the East, especially from Syria, Iran, and China. The technical aspects
of the production processes of these wares or their distribution and use

were hardly examined.23 The publication

throughout theOttoman empire
of the excavation of some pottery kilns at Iznik (with emphasis on kiln
now to be
or unfinished
products) appears until
equipment and deformed
a
to
the only example of different approach
post-medieval ceramics in the
eastern

Mediterranean.24

consequence of a concentration of scholarship on thewell

known wares from the large-scale production centers in Iznik, K?tahya, and
is that other types of decorated ware or domestic wares, which
?anakkale
Another

centers
at
produced throughout theOttoman empire medium-sized
or in small local
and
therefore
have
remained
workshops,
unpublished

were
22. Vroom
23. Laudable

pp. 138-177.
areTite
exceptions

2005,

and Raby 1994; and Car

1989; Atasoy
roll 2000. See also Baram
and Carroll
2000a
Ottoman

for the multiple

to an

archaeology.

24. Aslanapa,
1989.

pathways

Yetkin,

and Altun

are unknown. As has been demonstrated in the first part of this chapter,
we now have evidence for pottery production during Ottoman
times in
Athens, Didymoteichon, Arta, Thessaloniki, Veroia, and Trikala, but this
distribution, of course, only hints of the places where we may find evidence
of production

in the future.

The picture is not entirely gloomy, however. Post-medieval ceramics

have been and can be successfully used as a source of historical information.

8o

JOANITA

VROOM

Figure 4.9. Athens: Polychrome

painted vessel from Iznik, second
half of the 16th century.Reproduced

with the permission of the Benaki Museum

us new views on the

properly analyzed and dated theymay offer
material culture of the post-medieval past. Taken a step further,theymay
also shed light on aspects of life such as trade, dining habits, and the sym
bolism of consumption.

When

an

In the remainder of this section Iwill introduce three examples of such

two sherds of pottery from theUniversity of

approach. First, I discuss
inTirana excavations at
East Aiiglia and the Institute of Archaeology
Butrint in southern Albania.25 Found therewere two body fragments of a
were decorated on the outside
majolica jug of the early 16th century that
with an image of a lion, probably the Lion of St.Mark representing the
Venetian Republic (Fig. 4.10). We already know from ample documentary
evidence that Butrint was at that time inVenetian hands, but these pieces
seem to suggest something more?namely,
that the political and military

was
explicitly symbolized through the
expansion of theVenetian Republic
distribution of itsmaterial culture.26The Lion of St.Mark iswidely found
as a

symbol of theVenetian Republic in various parts of theMediterranean

thatwere under Venetian domination. These lions are normally incorpo
rated into gateways and conspicuous parts of Venetian fortifications and

to denote the authority of Venice.

public buildings, their purpose being

25. See, e.g., Hodges

et al. 2002.

Gilkes

26. Soustal

2004.

et al. 2000;

POST-MEDIEVAL

CERAMICS

AS

HISTORICAL

INFORMATION

It is therefore interesting to note that other post-medieval

Figure 4.10 (above, left).Butrint:

Two fragmentsof amajolica jug with
an image of a lion, found during
in the lower

excavations

Vroom
city. J.

Figure 4.11 (above, right).Serres:

Bacini fromOttoman and early
modern (20th century) times in a
wall of the 13th-centuryMonastery

ofTimios Pr?dromos (St. John the

J.Vroom

Baptist).

8l

ceramics include

one
(among various examples,
depictions of the Lion of St.Mark
two sgraffito
a
might note majolica plate from Stari Bar inMontenegro and
are now in the Ca' d'Oro inVenice and in theMuseo
which
fragments,
as well

Fiumi di Rovigo in the V?neto region). Consequently, what

see here may very well be the archaeological and iconographical side
of an expanding mercantile power.We know from written sources that
was
during the 16th century the production and distribution of majolica
seems
an
in
it
that
the
and
expansion
organized
early capitalistic manner,
of this system did not leave Greek lands untouched.27
A second example of the potential that ceramics hold as a source of
historical information is provided by the so-called bacini. These are often
dei Grandi

we

colorful, decorated bowls thatwere embedded in the facades and walls of

churches or other buildings from the 11th century onward. In theAegean,
the custom remained popular through Ottoman and even modern times
set into
(Fig. 4.11). Bacini of the 16th-20th centuries were, for instance,
thewalls of several churches inAttica and on the islands of Salamis and

on Mt. Pelion, on the island of Euboia, and in the

inMethana,
as a tool for
Cyclades.28 Since the 1960s these bacini have been recognized
of
these
and
therefore
the
may function
buildings,
establishing
chronology
as a sort of control for thewritten sources that refer to them.Machiel Kiel,

Hydra,

however, is one of the fewwho has written about bacini of the post-medieval
period inGreek churches.29

A thirdway that pottery can be used as a source of historical informa

tion is illustrated by the results of an excavation in 1993 and 1994 in the
was conducted
by theArchaeological
city center ofThebes. The excavation

of Thebes under the direction of Vassilis Aravantinos. During

this excavation, 14 rubbish pits and 1well were discovered. Three of the
pits contained closed deposits of theOttoman period.30

Museum

27. See,
Vroom

2003,

e.g., Goldthwaite
pp. 293-295.

28. Vroom
literature;

2003,

1989;

p. 45, with

see also
Korre-Zographou

further

for some
1995, pp. 69-76,
bacini of the post-medieval
Greece.

29. Kiel 1991.

examples
period

of
in

30. E.g., Aravantinos,

Godart,

and Sacconi 1995,2001,2002;

Vroom

2006.

82

JOANITA

VROOM

Figure 4.12. Thebes: Fragments of

Iznikware found during excavations
at

Street.

Pelopidou

J.Vroom.

Scale 1:3

Figure 4.13. Thebes: Fragments of

K?tahya coffee cups found during
at
Pelopidou
Scale 1:3

excavations
J.Vroom.

Street.

Present in all three rubbish pits were brightly colored tin-glazed

tablewares. The majority of the sherds came from Iznik and K?tahya in
wares were
western Turkey (Figs. 4.12,4.13).These
high-quality imported
the result of improved ceramic technology, leading to better durability and
better glaze techniques, and were designed for the table or status display.
eastern regions also are among the finds. One
on the
painted bowl with Chinese-inspired
designs
exterior and interior (Fig. 4.14). A Chinese calligraphic mark painted on
Imports from
is a blue-and-white

more

the bottom of the bowl suggests that it is a late-16th-century porcelain

bowl from theMing period, or at least a very good imitation ofMing
or Persia. Whatever
the case, the vari
porcelain manufactured inTurkey
ety of imported vessels in these rubbish pits suggests thatThebes
economically during Ottoman times.

thrived

relatively rich and varied contents of these rubbish pits contrast

with
earlier observations about thematerial culture ofThebes dur
sharply
ingOttoman times. The Greek archaeologist Sarantis Symeonoglou, for
The

instance,wrote that theTurkish period inThebes "is recognizable through

the poor quality of its pottery,which rarely includes glazed examples."31
Census and tax registers for 15th- and 16th-century Boiotia that have

Figure 4.14. Thebes: Blue-and-white

Ming porcelain bowl (or imitation)
found during excavations at Pelopi
dou

Street.

J.Vroom.

Scale 1:3

been translated and studied byMachiel Kiel (described in part inTable

4.1), however, offer a picture that ismore in linewith the finds from the

rubbish pits.According to these registers,Thebes appears to have been one

of the largest and most densely populated cities in central Greece at the
time.32The Theban economy was based on the production ofwheat, wine,
cotton, wool, and silk, and on the breeding of sheep. From about 1506 to

31. Symeonoglou 1985, p. 170.

32. Kiel 1992, p. 406 and table 3;
1999a,

p. 226.

CERAMICS

POST-MEDIEVAL

AS

INFORMATION

HISTORICAL

TABLE 4.1. CITY OF THEBES: OTTOMAN

IN THE 15TH AND 16TH CENTURIES

83

REVENUE

Households

487

1466

900

Ca. 1506
1540
1570

1,467
1,497
Production

Wheat

(per Household)

1540
660 kg
666 kg
1570

229 ak?e
296 ak?e

Sheep

1506
1,100
1540
2,100
1570
12,000

336,000 ak?e

24 per household
34 per household

224 per household

Production

Cotton

Silk

22,000 ak?e
50,400 ak?e

1540
2,460 bales
1570
4,060 bales

24,360 ak?e

1540361 ledre
1570770 ledre

11,200 ak?e
35,000 ak?e

12,300 ak?e

9 bales per household

16 bales per household

Production

Mills

17mills

1505

22 mills
157031 mills (ofwhich 20 were wool presses)

1540

Market

Dues

and

of

Revenue

1506
1540
1570
Source: After Kiel

Public

Weighing-House

14,000 ak?e
19,000 ak?e
30,000 ak?e

1991, p. 446.

1570, cotton production increased enormously and production of wine

and silk doubled, as did the number ofwater mills, and market dues and

the revenue from the public weighing-house.33 At the same time,Thebes

own school of icon and fresco
painters, whose survivingworks
produced its
can be found all over Greece.34

excavated pottery from the three rubbish pits offers an important

on the
perspective
apparently richmaterial culture ofThebes during Otto
The

man times. Itwould be

interesting to discover the extent towhich Iznik and
wares were used in normal households and inwell-to-do house
K?tahya
33. Kiel

1991, p. 433,

n. 8, and

p. 446; 1992, table5b.

34. Kiel 1991, pp. 431-433.

holds in towns and in the countryside. (References to household objects,

as notarial documents or
especially pottery, in documentary evidence such
inventory lists also will be of great assistance to research in post-medieval
ceramics in the future.)

84

JOANITA

Dating
and

Post-Medieval
Coffee

by Tobacco

Ceramics

VROOM

Pipes

Cups

Apart from finds of tin-glazed pottery fragments, clay tobacco pipes of the
chibouk stylehave become a new dating tool in theAegean since the 1980s.
Such pipes consist of a mouthpiece, a long wooden stem, and a molded
ceramic bowl (Fig. 4.15).
Today it is acknowledged that the study of clay tobacco pipes may

contribute to the resolution of the problems encountered in excavations and

surface surveys in establishing a tentative type chronology for the "difficult"

ceramics of post-medieval times.35According toRebecca Robinson in her

publications of tobacco pipes fromAthens and Corinth, these pipes may
have been used in theAegean after 1605 (subsequent to the introduction

of pipe smoking to theOttoman empire?an event thatmay have occurred

can be followed with some accuracy
as
as 1599). Their
early
development
as well as men, smoked this
the
centuries.36
Women,
through
following
type of pipe inOttoman

times (Fig. 4.16).

JohnHayes's preliminary report on post-medieval clay pipes from the
Sara?hane excavations, published in 1980, first established a chronology for
on associated finds, he constructed
pipe bowls of the chibouk style.37Based
a

provisional typology and chronology that divided them into 27 types,

which became vital for dating other materials from theAegean. Hayes's
report inspired other articles about post-medieval clay pipes, specifically
those published by Rebecca Robinson and Uzi Baram concerning examples
found inAthens and Corinth inGreece, on Cyprus, and in Palestine.38
Coffee cups are also easily identifiable in ceramic assemblages from

surface surveys and excavations; their production typologies offer another

valuable chronological tool.39Toward the end of the post-medieval period
a new type of glazed tableware made its
(probably in the 18th century),
to
small
thin-walled
cups from K?tahya inTurkey,
way
Greece?namely,
made of a fine, buff-colored fabric (Fig. 4.13). Polychrome painted designs
in blue, green, red, purple, and yellow were usually geometrical, floral, or
was
strongly influenced by Chinese
figurai.This tableware from K?tahya
as a
is
sometimes
described
and
therefore
cheap substitute for real
porcelain,
are
or as
clearly
porcelain
"peasant-porcelain."40 The small K?tahya cups
related to the spread of coffee consumption, and their shape was probably
35. See

Simpson

1990,

p. 10, and

1998, p. 17;Ziadeh 1995, pp. 210-211;

and Ziadeh-Seely
2000, p. 86, for such
an
in the Near East
(although
approach
Ziadeh's
dating and interpretation
of the pottery finds fromTicinnik
the Early Ottoman
questionable:

are

pot
tery finds from stratum 6 might also
centuries and,
be of the 14th-l5th
1985, p. 151. See
Robinson
1983, p. 266 and n. 7 on
Thomas
Dallam's
diary regarding the
36. Robinson

of tobacco

galley

an
a
English
ship and Turkish
at the Dardanelles.
Simpson

(1998, p. 15) suggeststhat smoking

was introducedto theMiddle East by
English sailorsdocking at Istanbulor
at

1599 and
ports between
Egyptian
1606. Baram
(2000, p. 149) refers to a
text about tobacco use in Istanbul
in
the 1590s, and states that the Dutch
a
as an oppor
treaty from 1612
to launch tobacco
into Turkish
tunity

used

therefore, Mamluk).

exchange

between

and

tobacco

pipes

social

life.

37. Hayes
pp. 391-395

1980; see Hayes

for his revisions

1992,
to the

chronology.

See

also Simpson's

review

(1993) of thesepublications,with criti

cal comments

on

Hayes's

typology.

38. Robinson 1983,1985; Baram

1995,2002.
39. Vroom
1996, with further litera
ture; see also Ward
2000, pp. 189-191,
for a more archaeological
7.1,
fig.
to the
study of 18th-century
approach
Island
coffee cups found on the Sadana
off the coast of Egypt.
shipwreck
40. Lane
1957, p. 65; see Vroom

2003, p. 178 (ware36).

POST-MEDIEVAL

CERAMICS

AS

HISTORICAL

INFORMATION

85

Figure 4.15 (above). Athens: Ceramic

pipe bowl of the chiboukstyle (Athe
nian Agora MC 1279). Courtesyof the

Trustees

of theAmerican

Studies atAthens.

School of Classical

Scale 1:1

Figure 4.16 (above, right).Antalya:

K?tahya plate of the second half
of the 18th centurypainted with
the

of a woman

figure

smoking

pipe of the chiboukStyle.Reproduced

with the permission of the Suna and Inan

Kira? Research Institute onMediterranean
Civilizations

Figure 4.17 (right). Istanbul: K?tahya

coffee

cup and

saucer

and

K?tahya

coffeepot,all of the 18th century.

Reproduced with the permission of the

Turkish Ministry of Culture and Tourism

derived from that of porcelain coffee cups made

ca. 1730-1740
(Fig. 4.17).41
(Germany)

41. Lane 1939, p. 236; 1957, p. 65.

42. Baram
are further
inwhich
"entangled
of material
past.

1999, p. 151; these ideas

in Baram 2000,

developed
tobacco pipes
objects"
changes

as
regarded
that show patterns
are

in the Ottoman

inVienna

and Meissen

According to the archaeologist and anthropologist Uzi Baram, in the

Ottoman empire of the 17th and 18th centuries, coffee cups and tobacco
pipes embodied "the new, themodern, the rebellion against the social order."
He suggests that by the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the
20th, these items had become old-fashioned or, in his words, "the vestiges
of an old empire," and were eventually to be "replaced by tea, cigarettes,
and nationalism" arriving from theWest.42 Smoking cigarettes indeed be
came much more convenient than
pipe-smoking

for all social classes at the

86

JOANITA

VROOM

manners
beginning of the 20th century, and this change in consumption
had far-reaching effects on the tobacco pipe industry in the East. Although
tobacco was still grown inTurkey and in Palestine, pipes were replaced by

and -produced cigarettes. According to Simpson, "the last

Western-styled
in
died in A.D. 1928, although others appear to have
Istanbul
pipe-maker
on as late as the 1950s in other parts of theMiddle East."43
lingered
as
dating
Apart from providing K?tahya coffee cups and tobacco pipes
as those
examination
of
the
of
tools,
consumption patterns (such
history
of coffee drinking and smoking) has the potential to shed further light on

the origins, spread, and social acceptance of the use of these stimulants.
a
point is illustrated by map that shows the density and spread of
coffeehouses inAnatolian villages between 1945 and 1960 (Fig. 4.18).44

This

Other

Means

of Dating

Post-Medieval

Ceramics

In the dating of post-medieval ceramics found in excavations and surveys,

can also be
tax
important chronological anchors
provided by the detailed
records (defters) from the Ottoman Imperial Archives.45 These registers
range in date from the 15th century to the 18th and provide all kinds
of information. The interaction between these historical sources and
can operate in more than one way.
Archaeological
archaeological finds
in the defters,
discoveries may help to identify place-names mentioned
and the textual information can sometimes aid in dating the post-medi
eval ceramics found in such places by providing archaeologists with their

have indeed
history. Several archaeological projects in theMediterranean
such as Machiel
benefited enormously from the work of Ottomanists

43.
44.
(1985)

as a new
type of place in the
come
East, where people
together
to engage in social activities. See also

house
Near

2000, p. 214, for the importance

in the social
of the coffeehouse
organi

Given

zation

Hadjianastassi.
archives to be linked to

archaeological data.46
Still, the data from theOttoman registers provide no easy or straight
forward solution to themany problems we face in post-medieval archaeol
ogy.The Ottomanist Suraiya Faroqhi has warned scholars to be careful in
the interpretation of these tax registers. She suggests that one must take
into account distorting factors such as the conditions of transportation and
communication during the 16th century, as certain taxpayersmay well have

hidden and thus avoided registration. Other problems are connected with
the fact that inmost parts of theOttoman empire the tax registers of the
16th century record very high rates of population growth. Some of these

increases, she argues, may simply reflectmore effective counting proce

dures. Finally, historians trying to arrive at estimates of rural population for
the 17th and 18th centuries?a
less detailed than before?are

seem much
period inwhich the registers
towork "with a rather intractable
obliged

documentation."47

a
are
perhaps too pessimistic,48 it is
Although Faroqhi's warnings
tax
to combine the information obtained from the Ottoman
challenge
registerswith actual archaeological data from the sites recorded in them.
In this regard, the information provided by the tax registers sometimes can

travelerswho regularly
be amplified and verified by accounts ofWestern
onward.
Some of these
passed through Greece from the late 15th century

on Ottoman

of villages

Cyprus.

45. Kiel 1997.

and Marios

Kiel, Fariba Zarinebaf, Thurstan Robinson,

This has allowed information from theOttoman

1998, p. 17.
1970, fig. 1. Hattox
Beeley
introduces the Ottoman
coffee
Simpson

studies on behalf

46. Cf. Kiel's

of various

projects

in the
Aegean

(Kiel 1991,1992,1999a, 1999b); see

also Zarinebaf's

contribution

to the

and economic

historical

of
geography
in the early 18th century in
and Davis
2005.
Bennet,

Messenia
Zarinebaf,
Unpublished

yet

are Robinson's

work

inTurkey (e.g.,Pisidia) and inAlbania

excava
(e.g., for the British-Albanian
tions at Butrint and for theMallakastra
Regional
Apollonia),
work on

Archaeological
as well as
Cyprus

Archaeological

Project

around

Hadjianastassi's

(e.g., for the Troodos

and Environmental

Survey Project).
Kiel

47. Cf. Faroqhi (1999, p. 89) versus

the dan
(1999b), who recognizes
gers but also the potential profits in
tax
using the
registers.
48. In fact, the registers for Crete at

the end of the 17th century, as those for

in 1715, are among the most
theMorea

detailed
mans,

ever
compiled by the Otto
as is shown in Greene
2000

in Zarinebaf,

Bennet,

and Davis

and

2005.

POST-MEDIEVAL

CERAMICS

AS

INFORMATION

HISTORICAL

87

TURKEY
VILLAGESWITH COFFEEHOUSES AS PERCENT OF
TOTAL VILLAGES
:.*...,

.J^vW45

l^S%-765i

NUMBER OF COFFEEHOUSES INVILLAGES

WITH AT LEAST ONE IN 1960
8MA

SYRIA

L??v]!1
Figure 4.18. Spread of coffeehouses
inAnatolian villages, 1945-1960.

WM

Beeley 1970, p. 477; reproduced with permis

sion of theAmerican Geographical
Society

49. See Constantine

with

further literature.

1984, pp. 7-33,

2-3 MR

>3

IRAQ

(National ?vorago-2.9)

?fV.,OCT.,1CT

travelerswere trained scholars and antiquarians visiting the ancient sites

and

classical

monuments

of Greece;

others

were

more

casual

travelers

was

antiquarian perspective
expressed, for instance, by
the canon of Durham Cathedral, George Wheler, who traveled with his
companion, the French physician Jacob Spon, through Greece in 1676.49

and observers. The

Where

relevant, general observations about theGreek

landscape and sites

88

JOANITA VROOM

AND UNIDENTIFIED
TABLE 4.2. IDENTIFIED
IN TAX REGISTERS
FOR THE DISTRICTS
VILLAGES
EASTERN AITOLIA
OF LIDORIKI AND VITRINITSA,
Villages

1466

1506

1521

Identified
Unidentified
Problematic

38
14
4

38
14
456 3

38

Total

56

56

56

Source: After Doom

15
3

1540
41
55
8
16

1570

ca.1780

38
11
54 66

63

1989, table 2.

on contemporary vil
as
as their
specific comments
by such travelers, well
can
be used to support the dating and interpretation
lages and settlements,
of the sherdswe now find in the fields.50
We must also face, however, the difficultpractical problems of relating
ceramics to thesewritten sources. Do we just stop asking questions afterwe

thinkwe have "identified" a place-name that ismentioned in the defers}

And ifwe "identify" an Ottoman site in the landscape, how can we judge
the relationship between a broad spectrum of post-medieval pottery finds
and a written source describing conditions at one specific point in time?

Figure 4.19. Kythera: Fragment of a

19th-century transfer-printedplate
fromEngland with willow tree
design, recovered by theKythera
Island

Project.

J.Vroom.

Scale 1:1

much pottery of what period should we find in order to be certain

of "identifying" a settlement mentioned in the sources? In the end, we try
tomerge two very different types of sources in one argument.

How

Furthermore, the problem of identification varies substantially from

one region to another. This point may be illustrated by the case ofAitolia,
a contrast to the
a Greek mountain
low-lying,
landscape that forms quite
most
in
which
surface
accessible
surveys have been con
regions
easily
ducted.51 Although there are, thanks toMachiel Kiel, detailed Ottoman
it
defters available forAitolia from about the mid-15th century onward,
matter
to
the
listed
settlements
another
proves quite
archaeologi
identify
or to associate the 15th- and 16th-century toponyms
cally in the landscape

with currently existing villages or surviving toponyms.52 In general, virtually

no
post-medieval pottery is to be found in theAitolian mountains, and
identification of the many listed settlements is possible only by recourse
in travel accounts, or
to toponyms on old maps, to names mentioned
to oral information provided by locals. About one-third of the settle
ments mentioned in the defters remain without certain identification (see
Table

4.2).
Another

one not exclusive to Aitolia, is the contrast

problem, this
between the great detail provided in census lists of the late 15th and 16th

centuries and themore summary character of those of the 17th and 18th
centuries. All kinds of changes can be observed in the lists that are ap
parently not reflected in thematerial finds recovered by archaeologists in
the field.

Yet another elusive problem is posed by themany new Albanian settle

we see social
ments that are listed in the
defters of the 15th century.Can
and ethnic differences reflected in the pottery finds from these villages and
those described as "Greek"?

50. Studies
accounts

using Western
in combination
with

travelers'
contem

are,
porary archaeological
approaches
and Vbutsaki
1991; Davis,
e.g., Bennet
and Bennet

Zarinebaf,
2003;

2004.

Broodbank,

51. E.g.,
also Vroom

2000; Vroom

Bennet,

et al. 1987;

Bommelj?
1998a,

and Davis

pp. 147-158,

see

with

further literature.

52. See Doom 1989 for thepos

sibilitiesand difficultiesof processing
data

from Ottoman

defers

and

iden

tifyingsettlementsin thedistrictsof
Lidoriki andVitrinitsa (in the eastern
area
part of the research
investigated
team inAitolia)
that were

by Doom's
recorded

in 15th-

and

16th-century
registers. See also Kiel 1999b,
in the
fig. 15.8, for settlements recorded
district of Agrafa
(in the northern part

Ottoman

of the research

area).

POST-MEDIEVAL

In

general,

CERAMICS

we

cannot

explain

AS

HISTORICAL

the contrast

INFORMATION

between

the relative

89

abun

dance of the easily recognized glazed post-medieval ceramics of the 15th

and 16th centuries and the scarcity of later finds, even in settlements that,
according to the defers, remained inhabited.We have seen such scarcity in

s surveys in theCorinthia and on

Timothy Gregory
Kythera, and apparently
there is also a lack of post-medieval pottery on sites in Palestine.53
Several hypotheses thatmight explain this lack of potterywere discussed

during theworkshop inCincinnati: shifts in siteuse, shifts in land use, popu

lationmovements, and relocations of villages. This absence of archaeological
artifactsperhaps can also be explained by the phenomenon of the "sherdless
site," a term I introduced in a previous article on early modern ceramics
inGreece. There I noted that in some parts of theMediterranean,
and in

some
periods, people used in theirhouseholds nonceramic objects made of
materials such as wood, stone, basketry, and metal.54 This could also have
been the practice in some parts ofGreece (particularly in rural areas) during
Ottoman times, especially in the 17th and 18th centuries, reflectingpoorer
standards of living. InAitolia, for instance,we know from village interviews

and fromwritten sources that transporting ceramics into the mountains

was difficult and
ate fromwooden bowls with
expensive.55 People therefore
spoons. Furthermore, metal objects were verymuch in favor (espe
in
transhumant households). Over time theywere cheaper because,
cially
when broken, they could be repaired easily and reused several times.

wooden

It is only with the introduction of industriallymanufactured wares in

the 19th century,which were cheaper and mass-produced
in the
West, that
to
in
Greece
A
consumption patterns
began
change.56
19th-century transfer
awillow tree
on the island
with
from
printed plate
design
England, found
of Kythera by the Kythera Island Project (Fig. 4.19), is typical of this type

introduction of these industriallymanufactured wares was

an increase in consumer
accompanied by socioeconomic changes (e.g., by
new means of distribution such as
purchasing power, and by
steamships),
aswell as
in
by changes
dining habits. Today these changes are reflected in
of pottery.57The

the large quantities of earlymodern ceramics

(mainly of the 19th and 20th
centuries) that archaeological survey teams discover on the surface.

CONCLUSION: THE CURRENT STATE OF

AFFAIRS AND FUTURE PROSPECTS
53. For
see

Chap.

the Corinthia

and Kythera,
see Ziadeh
9 in this volume;

p. 223, and Baram 2002,

sites.
21, for the Palestinian
1995,

54. Vroom

1998a,

pp. 20

pp. 151-158.

55. See Bommelj? andDoom

on the intricate network

1996

of roads and

khans

that existed for the transportation

of goods across the Aitolian
landscape.
56. Vroom
2003, pp. 236-237.
57.

E.g.,

Broodbank

1999.

Interest in post-medieval pottery in theAegean is a fairly recent phenom

enon. In fact, excavations in the
more
Aegean have yielded
systematically
collected stratigraphical information on medieval and
ceram
post-medieval
ics during the past 10 years thanwas
in
the
produced
previous century.
1992 publication of the pottery from the Sara?hane
John Hayes's
excavations in Istanbul is a landmark for the study of
post-Roman pot
for several reasons: (1) themultiperiod
tery in the easternMediterranean

nature of the excavation; (2) the

comprehensive and detailed presentation
of the finds; and (3) the exhaustive comparisons with material from other
excavations.

QO

JOANITA

VROOM

must not cheer too

regard to post-medieval
early, however.With
pottery, the situation is still far from ideal.Although there now exists a basic
We

chronology for finewares, there is stillmuch uncertainty about the relative

dating ofmany ceramic types. For example, little is known about the local

production and dating of glazed wares, and especially of unglazed domestic

outside Istanbul.
wares, from parts of the easternMediterranean
recent publications of
Most
post-medieval pottery offer few new
type-series for the material examined, and little progress has been made
in understanding patterns of exchange. The emphasis inmost publications
continues to be the presentation of complete pots from private ormuseum

collections, and these almost always lack stratigraphical context. As far as

are concerned, it seems that the
post-medieval ceramics in the Aegean

more

recent the pottery, the more art-historical and

ethnographic the
it
of
has
For
been.
from
the
pottery
study
post-medieval period, systematic
archaeological research has been done in northern Greece (Macedonia and

but pottery from excavations in the large urban centers inGreece

Athens,
Corinth, and Thessaloniki) has not been thoroughly studied
(e.g.,
and littlehas been published with its stratigraphical context. Studies of the
distribution and use of ceramics of theOttoman and Venetian periods in

Thrace),

theAegean area are lacking altogether.

We need more information about production centers and kilns in the

area.We need more examinations of closed

exca
Aegean
deposits from
in
vations
the large urban centers, including all excavated material (fine
wares aswell as
we need more scholars
cooking wares). In short,
pursuing
to
research
archaeological approaches
concerning pottery of theOttoman
and Venetian periods inGreece and theAegean.
In addition, as I have argued before, translations of the Ottoman

tax

a
new
a
registers have opened up world of
possibilities, but also host of new
one
to
is
in
it
the
has
admit
This
that
remains dif
because,
end,
problems.
on
to
to
ficult make the jump from the sherd
the surface
thewritten text in
the archives. It is a stimulating, but perhaps also questionable, characteristic
of some archaeological projects inGreece that theory building tends to
advance farmore rapidly than the slow, tedious, less spectacular work of

establishing solid typologies and chronologies for ceramic types (not least
for coarse wares). So, far from advocating less theory, I believe that the
main task of post-medieval archaeology remains the fundamental work of
further refining the analysis and documentation of pottery finds. Every new
text that becomes available demonstrates the urgency of that task.

POST-MEDIEVAL

CERAMICS

AS

HISTORICAL

INFORMATION

91

REFERENCES
and A. Sac
V., L. Godart,
Aravantinos,
coni. 1995. "Sui nuovi testi del pal
a Tebe," RendLinc
azzo di Cadmo
9,
no. 6, pp. 809-845.
-,eds. 2001. Th?bes. Fouilles
de la odos
mentaire,

et com

Edition

Pelopidou:
Pisa.

-, eds. 2002.

de la

Th?bes: Fouilles

tablettes en lin?aire B

1: Les

Cadm?e

de la

tablettes en lin?aire B

1: Les

Cadm?e

de la odos

Pisa.

Pelopidou,
O., S. Yetkin, and A. Altun,
Aslanapa,
eds. 1989. The Iznik Tile Excavation,
Istanbul.
and J. Raby. 1994. ?znik: The
Ottoman
London.
Pottery of
Turkey,
Bakirtzis, C. 1980. "Didymoteichon:
Un centre de c?ramique
post-byzan
tine," BalkSt 21, pp. 147-153.

Atasoy,

N.,

-. 1984.

ArchDelt

"Ai?uuoxeixo,"

32, B'2 (1977), pp. 284-287.

Baram,

U.

1995.

nary Typologies

of Production

and

Chronology for theClay Tobacco

Pipes ofCyprus,"RDAC1995,
-.

pp. 299-309.
1999.

Pipes and
"Clay Tobacco
Coffee Cup Sherds in the Archaeol
East: Artefacts
of
ogy of theMiddle
from the Ottoman
Social Tensions
International

Past,"

His
of
137-151.

Journal

torical

-.

3, pp.
Archaeology
2000. "Entangled
Objects
from the Palestinian
Past: Archaeo
for the Ottoman

logical Perspectives
Period,

-.

in Baram

1500-1900,"

Historical
Overview

"The

36, pp. 12-29.

Archaeology
2000a.
U., and L. Carroll.
Future

of the Ottoman

"The
in

Past,"

Ottoman
Break
ology of the
Empire:
New Ground, New York.
ing

1970. "TheTurkishVil
as a Social
Review

tion," Geographical
pp. 475-493.
Bennet, J., and S. Voutsaki.
Synopsis

and Analysis

Institu

"A

of Travelers'

Accounts ofKeos (to 1821)," in

Landscape

Archaeology

as

(Monumenta

pp. 365-382.
and P. Doom.

1996.

"The Long andWinding Road:

Land Routes inAetolia (Greece)

in
since Byzantine Times,"
Interfac
the Past, ed. H. Kamermans
and
ing
K. Fennema,
343-351.
Leiden,
pp.
S., P. Doom,

Bommelj?,

M.

J.Vroom, Y. Bommelj?,
and H. van Wijngaarden.
and theAetolians:
Aetolia
the

Deylius,
R. Fagel,
1987.
Towards

a Greek
Study of
Interdisciplinary
(Studia aetolica 1), Utrecht.

Region

C.

Broodbank,

1999.

"Kythera

Survey:

PreliminaryReport on the 1998

BSA

Broodbank,

C,

94, pp. 191-214.

and J. L.

J. Bennet,

2004.

Davis.

Insularity
Kythera

"Aphrodite Observed:
on
and Antiquities
Outsiders'
Eyes,"
through

inExplaining SocialChange: Studies

inHonour

of Colin Renfrew, ed.

J. Cherry, C. Scarre, and S. Shennan,
pp. 227-239.
Cambridge,
Carroll,

L. 2000.

"Toward

an Archaeol

in
ogy of Non-Elite
Consumption
Late Ottoman
in Baram
Anatolia,"

and Carroll 2000b, pp. 161-183.

Constantine,
Travellers

1984.
Early
and theHellenic

D.

Theatre

Greek
Ideal,

and J. R. Green.
2002.
from the
Wares

Glazed

Site at Nea

Preliminary
pp. 413-426.

Report,"

Pafos, Cyprus:
RDAC
2002,

and J. Bennet.
J. L., F. Zarinebaf,
2000. "The Pylos Regional Archae

Davis,

ological Project III: SirWilliam

Gell's

in the
Pylia and
in theMorea
Landscapes

Itinerary

Regional
in the Second

Ottoman

Period,"

69, pp. 343-380.

E., P. Velissariou,
Deliyianni-Dori,
Hesperia

and

M. Michailidis. 2003. K?rcoK?azpo

(AvSpiaic?Xpovuc? 34),Andros.

60,
1991.

Bommelj?,

"Medieval

and Carroll 2000b, pp. 3-32.

-, eds. 2000b. A Historical Archae

lage Coffeehouse

Y.,

of

Baram

Beeley,B.W.

Los Angeles,

Cambridge.
Cook, H. K. A.,

Development
in Israel: An
Archaeology
and Prospects," Historical

Baram,

Times

16), ed. J. F. Cherry,

archaeologica
and E. Mantzourani,
J. L. Davis,

and

Carroll 2000b, pp. 137-159.

2002.

untilModern

Season,"

on the Prelimi

"Notes

History: Northern Keos in the Cycladic

Islands from Earliest
Settlement

Long-Term

P. 1989. "Population
Doom,
ments
in Central Greece:

and Settle
Com

of Ottoman
puter Analysis
Regis
ters of the Fifteenth
and Sixteenth

92
in
and
History
Comput
P.
S.
and
ed.
Denley,
Fogelvik,
ing II,
-.
C. Harvey, Manchester,
pp. 19-208.

Centuries,"

Faroqhi,
man

Otto
Approaching
to the
An Introduction

S. 1999'.
History:

Sources, Cambridge.
Fran?ois, V., and L. Vallauri.

de

-.

A.

1942.

"Turkish

from the
Agora,"

11, pp. 1

R.

"Medieval

Pafos,"

and Painting
1460-1570:

pp. 335-356.
R. Hodges,

RDAC2001,

O., A. Crowson,

Ottoman
in Istanbul

Given,

2000.

29,

"Agriculture,
in Ottoman
and Landscape
Levant
32, pp. 209-230.
Cyprus,"
R. A. 1989. "The Eco
Goldthwaite,
nomic

and Social World

Maiolica,"

Christians

Hahn,

M.

and Muslims

Mediterranean,
1989.

of Italian
Renaissance

Crete,"

in Recherches

-. 1997.

and J.M.
227-232.
ens, pp.
1991. "A Group

-.

Production
According
Agricultural
to
Ottoman-Turkish
Unpublished
in
and Taxation
Census
Records),"

at Khania,
sur la
c?ramique

Recent
and

Spieser, Ath

358.
-.

Aikaterini

Agia
Khania,

Excavations

Mosque:
as a Source

The

Monuments

at the

Case

Square, Kastelli,
ed. E. Hallager

W. 1980. "TurkishClay
Hayes, J.
Pipes: A ProvisionalTypology," in
The Archaeology

Tobacco
of the Clay

Icon

and the

Christian

to Retrieve
of Ottoman

Archi

Greece,

of Istife/Thebes,"

Art

the Lost

in

the
Essays

ed.
ofAptullah Kuran,
L.
and
?. Kafescioglu
Thys
Istanbul, pp. 223-232.
Senocak,
inHonor

Stockholm,

and
Coffee
Coffee
houses: The Origins of a Social
Near East,
in theMedieval
Beverage
Seattle.

"The

tecture of Southern

1970-1987,

and B. P. Hallager,
pp. 170-196.
R. S. 1985.
Hattox,

1999a.

Orthodox

Potteryand theFinds," inThe

Greek-Swedish

in the
History
Greece.
of Central
International
of the 6th

Developments

Archaeology

Proceedings
Boeotian
666),
Conference (BAR-IS
ed. J. L. Bintliff, Oxford,
pp. 315

of 15th-16th

Periods:

ish, and Venetian

and Decline

(Remarks on the Settle

Century
ment Pattern,
and
Demography,

in the
Early
Princeton.

Crete,"
Century Jugs fromWestern
Acta
3, pp. 311-320.
Hyperborea
1997. "Modem
Greek, Turk

"The Rise

ofTurkish Boeotia, 15th-19th

byzantine(BCH Suppl. 18), ed.

V. D?roche

Preserved

424.

and Post
"Byzantine
from the Greek

Pottery
Byzantine
Swedish Excavations

Greece

and Ankara,"

of Greek Christian
Culture,"
Spread
et son
in Soliman le
temps,
Magnifique
ed. G. Veinstein,
Paris, pp. 399

1-32.
Quarterly 42, pp.
2000. A Shared World:
Greene, M.
Modern

27,

Age: Preliminary Notes

S?leymanic
on
Economic
Growth,
Population
Its Influence on the
and
Expansion,

Settle

ment,

Renaissance

Exca

Byzantini
scheForschungen
16, pp. 429-446.
-. 1992. "Central Greece
in the

at theTriconch Palace 2000 and

M.

Survey and
m?di?vale

"Byzantine Architecture
in Central Greece

isters for Central

2002.
and J.Vroom.
Butrint: Excavations
"Medieval
m?di?vale

at Sara?hane

Its Demographic
and
to the
Basis According
Census
and Taxation
Reg

Economic

K. Lako,

2001," Archeologia
pp. 343-353.

1991.

Kiel, M.

Site at Nea

from the Theatre

Wares

Gilkes,

and J. R.
Kitchen

S, B. McCall,

2001.

Green.

pp. 36-41.
1992. Excavations

vations," Archeologia
pp. 241-257.

28.
Gabrieli,

Pottery
in The

Camii,"

Butrint, Albania:

Pottery

Hesperia

"The Excavated

2: The
Princeton.
Pottery,
Bowden, O. J.Gilkes,
R., W.
Hodges,
and K. Lako. 2000. "Late Roman

otto
l'?poque
523-546.
pp.

BCH125,

mane,"
Frantz, M.

1981.

ed., rev.,

in Istanbul

franque

2nd

in Istan
(Bodrum Camii)
Myrelaion
bul, ed. C. L. Striker, Princeton,

c?ramiques ? Potamia (Chypre)de

l'?poque

4, ed. P. Davey,
Oxford,
pp. 233-395.
Pipe

from the Bodrum

2001.

et consommation

"Production

-.

VROOM

JOANITA

-.

1999b. "The Ottoman

Impe
and
rial Registers: Central Greece
in the 15th-19th
Northern
Bulgaria
Devel
the Demographic
opment of Two Areas Compared,"
in Reconstructing Past
Population
Trends inMediterranean
Europe

Century,

POST-MEDIEVAL

B.c.-A.D.

(3000

Butrint: Excavations

ed. J. F.

1800),

Bintliffand K. Sbonias,Oxford,

R. Hodges,
N.

2002. MeoaicoviK?

KacJTpa Km oxvpcoaei?

KepajueiKa

tov eXXr\viKov %capov,

Lane,

Production,"
1939.

"Turkish

Peasant

Pot

pp.

and Kutahia,"
tery from Chanak
The Connoisseur
104, pp. 232-259.
-. 1957\ Later Islamic
Pottery:
Persia, Syria, Turkey, Egypt, 2nd ed.,
London.

Tsouris,

inTheArchaeologyof
Medieval

Greece, ed. P. Lock

ott|v ?pxoc

R.

ott|v Apia,"

Papanikola-Bakirtzi,
Glazed
Byzantine

ayye?a

ed. 1999.

Ceramics:

bacco
-.

Pipes

1983.

The Art
von

"Clay To

Pipes from Jerusalem and

Levant: A Critical Review

the

-.

1993.

"Turkish Clay

39, pp. 17-23.

-. 1998. "'Where There's
Smoke,
There's
Fire ...' Pipe-Smoking

Soustal,

-.

Empire,"
31, pp. 15-17.
Magazine
P. 2004. "The History
of

Butrint in theMiddle Ages," in

and Pans: New

inMedieval

Europe:

Papers

Conference 7, ed. G. De Boe and

F. Verhaeghe,
Zellik, pp. 203-213.
1998a. "Early Modern
Archae

ology in Central Greece: The Con

trast of Artefact-Rich
and Sherdless

British

Museum

"Pots

ofthe "MedievalEurope Brugge1997"

Pipes:

Research Newsletter

in the Ottoman

Culture

28,

A Review," Society
for Clay Pipe

pp. 361-396.

on theMedieval
Perspectives
inMaterial
Ceramics
of Greece,"

Published Evidence," Society

for
Clay Pipe Research Newsletter
pp. 6-16.

at

Period,"

J. 1996. "Coffee and Archaeol

on a
A
Note
ogy:
K?tahya Ware
in Boeotia, Greece,"
Find
Pharos 4,

of the

-.

Sites," JMA
1998b.
Medieval
Boeotia:

toModern
2005.
Byzantine
Pottery in theAegean: An Introduction
and Field Guide, Utrecht.
2006.

and
"Byzantine Garbage
in
Fouilles
Th?bes.
Waste,"

Lin?aire

131-164.

11, pp.
"Medieval

and Post

a Site in
Pottery from
A Case
Study Example

II.2: Les

B de la "Odos

tablettes en

et la
Pelopidou
du Lin?aire B, E. Andri

chronologie
kou, V. L. Aravantinos,
A.

"La

Pelopidou.

de la Odos

c?ramique

"MeToc?uCavTiva
to KocoTpo t v Pcoycov,"
2%, pp. 37
Xpovuc?

Studies,

(Archaeological

de la Cadm?e
4,

Vroom,

pp. 5-19.
1997.

-.

Ottoman

ttj?Xpiana
Eraipeia?

Century

Leiden University 10),Leiden.

-.

KEpajieiKa

in the Ottoman

RDAC2001,

1985. "Tobacco
of Cor
Pipes
inth and of the Athenian
Agora,"
54, pp. 149-203.
Hesperia
St. J. 1990. "Ottoman Clay
Simpson,

1981

M.-L.
2001.
Wartburg-Maier,
of
Table
Ware
"Types
Imported
Kouklia

from the Kerameikos,"

AM 98, pp. 265-285.

-.

ano

Hneipmixa
42.

Athens.
ofSgraffito,
R. C. W.

tral Greece

1986-1987.

pp. 145-162.

D.,

Aekt?ov

Ceramics

After Antiquity:

to the Twentieth

Seventh

3, pp. 5-22.
"Bv?avTiva

7,

Dialogues

A. G A Case Study
from Boeotia,Cen

Kepocu?iicr|

viktj? Apzaio?oyiKij?
pp. 453-472.
-.

from Nicosia,"

-. 2003.

24,

A.

Archaeological
129-216.

to Ottoman

and Societyin the

Aegeanfrom the

?7t?ToupKOKpoeT?ac,"

EOvoypa?iKa
1984.

Oxford,
pp. 127-137.
A. H. S. 1951. "Three Medi

RDAC1937-1939,

pp.

"Kepocfienc?
to xeko? xov 18ou

Vavylopoulou-Charitonidou,
1982. "Neo?>Ar|viKr|

and

in Central

Change
from Byzantine

Times,"

of

Xpovuca

2000.
and Cultural

pp. 267-281.

Sanders,

Megaw,
eval Pit-Groups

1982.

oticova," Hneipmixa

-.

and G. D.

K. E.

in

Archaeology
93, pp. 513-546.
"Byzantine Garlic

BSA

Greece

31,

Archaeometry

93

TurkishDelight: Dining Habits

115-132.

Icoocvv?vcov ano

T. S. 1996. "A
of
MacKay,
Group
Renaissance
Pottery from Herak
and Questions,"
lion, Crete: Notes

Robinson,

of theMethods

Investigation

Athens.
A.

-.

Oxford.
Topography

Tite,M. S. 1989. "iznikPottery:An

Ta

INFORMATION

Greece,"

Princeton.

Times,

Korre-Zographou,

and K. Lako,

HISTORICAL

of Post-Classical

Survey

Modern
from BronzeAge to
ofThebes

rrf?Kco,

1995.

AS

Bowden,

S. 1985. The

Symeonoglou,

Athens.
K.

and

ed.W.

1994-1999,

pp. 195-218.
Kontoyiannis,

CERAMICS

L. Godard,

and J.Vroom, Pisa and

Rome, pp. 181-233.
F. 0.1933.
in the
"Excavations
Waag?,
Sacconi,

Athenian

The

Agora:

Roman

Byzantine
Pottery," Hesperia
pp. 279-328.
Ward,

C.

2000.

"The

Sadana

and
2,

Island

Shipwreck:A Mid-Eighteenth

Century

Treasure

Trove,"

in Baram

andCarroll 2000b, pp. 185-202.

and J. L. Davis.
F., J. Bennet,
and Economic
2005. A Historical

Zarinebaf,

Geography of Ottoman Greece: The

in the 18th
Southwestern Morea

Century (HesperiaSuppl. 34),

Princeton.

Ziadeh, G. 1995.
from Ticinnik,

"Ottoman

Ceramics

Palestine,"

Levant

pp. 209-245.
Ziadeh-Seeley,

G.

2000.

"The Archae

ology ofOttoman Ticinnik:An

in
Interdisciplinary
Approach,"
Baram
and Carroll 2000, pp. 79
91.

27,