DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.4759#0015
XIV TOTTERY OF CYPRUS.
found at Athens, Hissarlik, Phylakopi in Melos,1 Thera, Lachish and Tell-el-
Hesy2 in Palestine, and at Saqqara (C 216) and Tell-el-Amarna in Egypt, in
the last-named instance along with Mycenaean vases. The resemblance of some
white-slip wares to the Greek geometrical pottery is worth noting,3 but hardly
suggests the idea of direct influence.
The remaining local painted wares are not so common, at least on
"Mycenaean" sites. They form a class of unpolished white ivare (C 258-325 ;
Plate II.), with fine cream-coloured clay, on which patterns, such as groups of
straight or zigzag lines, chevrons, chequers, and triangles filled with hatched
lines, are painted in a pigment varying from dull black to dull red. Though
often careless, the technique shows considerable advance on previous attempts.
The commonest shapes are one-handled bowls and small bottles of globular or
ellipsoidal form. The latter are distinguished by often having long beak-like
or tubular spouts attached, and by the numerous perforated projections for the
attachment of strings, handles being generally absent at first, but when they are
introduced the projections remain as an ornamental survival. In a few isolated
specimens, classed separately by Prof. Myres as polished white tvare (Class II. 2 ;
cf. C 326-330), the surface is covered with a polished slip, and the patterns are
in bright lustrous red paint, laid on very thick.
This pottery is not usually found in the same tombs as Mycenaean ware ;
it is, for instance, very rare at Enkomi and Curium, but very common at
Phoenikiais near Dali, where Mycenaean vases were seldom found. It probably
begins at a date antecedent to the introduction of the Mycenaean vases and
continues concurrently with it, as some specimens (e.g. C 326-330) show
Mycenaean influence in technique, while others (e.g. C 258-259) are obvious
imitations of the white slip ware. Moreover, this class is closely related to the
succeeding "sub-Mycenaean" fabrics (see below, p. xvi.).
The Mycenaean pottery (see Plate III.) which has been found on not a few
sites in Cyprus, and of late years in such surprising quantities at Enkomi and in
the neighbourhood of Larnaka and Limassol (Klavdia, Curium, etc.) would not
be included in this section of the Catalogue, were it not that in Cyprus it
presents certain features which seem to be almost exclusively local. At all
events it is advisable to consider how far Mycenaean pottery in Cyprus differs
from that found in Rhodes, Crete, or Mycenae.
Two points must be noted in the first instance: (1) That in regard to
technique the Cypriote finds fall absolutely into line with those in other parts
of the Mycenaean world4; (2) that the range of subjects depicted on the vases
found in Cyprus is wider and in a measure more developed than elsewhere.
1 Excavations at Phylakopi, p. 15S, fig. 148.
- Petrie, Tell-d-Hesy, p. 45, pi. 8, No. 157; Myres, op. cit., p. 39.
3 Cf. Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 408, fig. 29.
4 For the classification of Mycenaean pottery in regard to technique see Furtwaengler and Loeschcke,
Myken, Vasen, p. vi., and Graef, Ant. Vasen v. d. Akropolis zu Atlun, i. pp. 4, 11, 18, 21.
found at Athens, Hissarlik, Phylakopi in Melos,1 Thera, Lachish and Tell-el-
Hesy2 in Palestine, and at Saqqara (C 216) and Tell-el-Amarna in Egypt, in
the last-named instance along with Mycenaean vases. The resemblance of some
white-slip wares to the Greek geometrical pottery is worth noting,3 but hardly
suggests the idea of direct influence.
The remaining local painted wares are not so common, at least on
"Mycenaean" sites. They form a class of unpolished white ivare (C 258-325 ;
Plate II.), with fine cream-coloured clay, on which patterns, such as groups of
straight or zigzag lines, chevrons, chequers, and triangles filled with hatched
lines, are painted in a pigment varying from dull black to dull red. Though
often careless, the technique shows considerable advance on previous attempts.
The commonest shapes are one-handled bowls and small bottles of globular or
ellipsoidal form. The latter are distinguished by often having long beak-like
or tubular spouts attached, and by the numerous perforated projections for the
attachment of strings, handles being generally absent at first, but when they are
introduced the projections remain as an ornamental survival. In a few isolated
specimens, classed separately by Prof. Myres as polished white tvare (Class II. 2 ;
cf. C 326-330), the surface is covered with a polished slip, and the patterns are
in bright lustrous red paint, laid on very thick.
This pottery is not usually found in the same tombs as Mycenaean ware ;
it is, for instance, very rare at Enkomi and Curium, but very common at
Phoenikiais near Dali, where Mycenaean vases were seldom found. It probably
begins at a date antecedent to the introduction of the Mycenaean vases and
continues concurrently with it, as some specimens (e.g. C 326-330) show
Mycenaean influence in technique, while others (e.g. C 258-259) are obvious
imitations of the white slip ware. Moreover, this class is closely related to the
succeeding "sub-Mycenaean" fabrics (see below, p. xvi.).
The Mycenaean pottery (see Plate III.) which has been found on not a few
sites in Cyprus, and of late years in such surprising quantities at Enkomi and in
the neighbourhood of Larnaka and Limassol (Klavdia, Curium, etc.) would not
be included in this section of the Catalogue, were it not that in Cyprus it
presents certain features which seem to be almost exclusively local. At all
events it is advisable to consider how far Mycenaean pottery in Cyprus differs
from that found in Rhodes, Crete, or Mycenae.
Two points must be noted in the first instance: (1) That in regard to
technique the Cypriote finds fall absolutely into line with those in other parts
of the Mycenaean world4; (2) that the range of subjects depicted on the vases
found in Cyprus is wider and in a measure more developed than elsewhere.
1 Excavations at Phylakopi, p. 15S, fig. 148.
- Petrie, Tell-d-Hesy, p. 45, pi. 8, No. 157; Myres, op. cit., p. 39.
3 Cf. Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 408, fig. 29.
4 For the classification of Mycenaean pottery in regard to technique see Furtwaengler and Loeschcke,
Myken, Vasen, p. vi., and Graef, Ant. Vasen v. d. Akropolis zu Atlun, i. pp. 4, 11, 18, 21.