DOI Kapitel:
3. Schluß
DOI Seite / Zitierlink:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.65793#0114
still a pressing need for the future. However, in
the present stage of research it is immediately
evident that the globular jugs with cylindrical
neck, which are the most common single form at
Coppengrave (K. 1, pl. 46), appear in identical
forms at the Rhineland centres but are less com-
mon. On the other hand Coppengrave produces
fewer of the slender jugs with cylindrical neck;
particularly, the common , Jacobakanne” form
of the Rhineland (pl. 45, 2) appears generally in
a somewhat different form. Funnel-necked jugs
(Trichterhalskrüge) are also rare in Southern Lo-
wer Saxony, especially those with rounded hand-
les. Finally, bowls with lids (BECKMANN 1975,
fig. 79) and tumblers (Sturzbecher) (REINE-
KING-VON BOCK 1971, no. 139) have so far
been altogether absent. On the other hand, the
pitchers (Tüllenkannen, pl. 34) which are fre-
quent at Coppengrave and the quatrefoil and
trefoil beakers (pl. 36) are so far unknown from
the Rhineland. Thus two forms which are typical
of Southern Lower Saxony are demonstrable. In
the Rhineland lids with the projecting lug type
of fitting are at least rare (pl. 51, 9). Miniature
vessels and typical toy figures are a further cha-
racteristic product of Coppengrave stoneware
(pl. 59—76). Also typical for Coppengrave is the
buff-fabric proto-stoneware with red slip (570),
which though it appears occasionally from other
potteries does so commonly only from Langerwe-
he (analysis in OHM 1971). To sum up, closer
investigation reveals clear differences in the me-
dieval stoneware production in the Rhineland »
and at Coppengrave (Southern Lower Saxony).
As regards comparison with the medieval stone-
ware of Saxony (BERLING 1934; HORSCHIK
1977), too little has yet been firmly established
to allow the development of views. „proto-sto-
neware” from Frankfurt on the Oder shows fea-
tures common with Southern Lower Saxony,
both in the basic forms and also in regard to the
weak forming of the frilled bases (HUTH 1974).
Comparison with Dreihausen and the stoneware
of Upper Hesse also appears premature owing to
lack of research.
Nevertheless in the later phases there is so close
correspondence between, on the one hand, the
northern Hesse products at Gottsbüren (DESEL
1968) close by Hofgeismar and those of Southern
Lower Saxony at the D. M. V. site of Bengerode
near Fredelsloh/Solling (GROTE 1976) and, on
the other hand, those of Coppengrave and
Duingen, that a direct relationship appears cer-
tain. The pottery of these places, apart from cer-
tain special types, cannot be distinguished. Fur-
ther, the fact that, in addition to proto and near
stoneware, both grey-fabric and, at any rate oc-
casionally, buff-fabric earthenware was made at
all these places makes them constitute a group
and distinguishes them from all other pottery
centres. It is therefore possible to think in terms
of a relatively closed or compact local pottery in-
dustry in the area of northern Hesse and Sou-
thern Lower Saxony.
In regard to the grey-fabric earthenware, compa-
rison with other areas is more difficult. Reasona-
bly large deposits in the areas of the lower Rhi-
ne, Westphalia and Lower Saxony, for the pur-
pose of establishing a desirable chronological
and regional differentiation, are still too limited
(on this, see especially STEPHAN 1978/1979),
and it is too early to pronounce. However, some
differences can already be seen between the
grey-fabric wäre dealt with in the present report
and that of the Rhineland (HINZ 1962) and We-
stern Westphalia (LOBBEDEY 1972 and 1975)
and, in other respects, that of the Magdeburg
area (NICKEL 1969; STOLL 1961), North Fries-
land (HARTMANN 1975) and northern Olden-
burg (ZOLLER 1975). Differences may also be
seen in the types of wares (or, in other words,
the pottery techniques) and in details, for exam-
ple use of grooving and particular kinds of Orna-
ment, forms of handles, body and rims and dif-
ferences in vessel shapes. The variations, particu-
larly minor ones which would have had no signi-
ficance for the user and are of interest only for
establishing economic patterns, will have ap-
plied in relatively small areas, corresponding
with the limited areas of distribution (STE-
PHAN 1978/1979, 33—34). The wäre of nor-
thern Hesse has the same, or at any rate very si-
milar, forms (HAARBERG 1973), but certain ty-
pes of pots with developed bases (HAARBERG
1973, plate 2, nos. 42—53) and possibly also so-
me of the less common jug forms (HAARBERG
1973, plate 3, nos. 21 and 22) may perhaps be
regional specialities.
In the Upper Weser region in Westphalia bea-
kers with rounded bases and the globular pots
98
the present stage of research it is immediately
evident that the globular jugs with cylindrical
neck, which are the most common single form at
Coppengrave (K. 1, pl. 46), appear in identical
forms at the Rhineland centres but are less com-
mon. On the other hand Coppengrave produces
fewer of the slender jugs with cylindrical neck;
particularly, the common , Jacobakanne” form
of the Rhineland (pl. 45, 2) appears generally in
a somewhat different form. Funnel-necked jugs
(Trichterhalskrüge) are also rare in Southern Lo-
wer Saxony, especially those with rounded hand-
les. Finally, bowls with lids (BECKMANN 1975,
fig. 79) and tumblers (Sturzbecher) (REINE-
KING-VON BOCK 1971, no. 139) have so far
been altogether absent. On the other hand, the
pitchers (Tüllenkannen, pl. 34) which are fre-
quent at Coppengrave and the quatrefoil and
trefoil beakers (pl. 36) are so far unknown from
the Rhineland. Thus two forms which are typical
of Southern Lower Saxony are demonstrable. In
the Rhineland lids with the projecting lug type
of fitting are at least rare (pl. 51, 9). Miniature
vessels and typical toy figures are a further cha-
racteristic product of Coppengrave stoneware
(pl. 59—76). Also typical for Coppengrave is the
buff-fabric proto-stoneware with red slip (570),
which though it appears occasionally from other
potteries does so commonly only from Langerwe-
he (analysis in OHM 1971). To sum up, closer
investigation reveals clear differences in the me-
dieval stoneware production in the Rhineland »
and at Coppengrave (Southern Lower Saxony).
As regards comparison with the medieval stone-
ware of Saxony (BERLING 1934; HORSCHIK
1977), too little has yet been firmly established
to allow the development of views. „proto-sto-
neware” from Frankfurt on the Oder shows fea-
tures common with Southern Lower Saxony,
both in the basic forms and also in regard to the
weak forming of the frilled bases (HUTH 1974).
Comparison with Dreihausen and the stoneware
of Upper Hesse also appears premature owing to
lack of research.
Nevertheless in the later phases there is so close
correspondence between, on the one hand, the
northern Hesse products at Gottsbüren (DESEL
1968) close by Hofgeismar and those of Southern
Lower Saxony at the D. M. V. site of Bengerode
near Fredelsloh/Solling (GROTE 1976) and, on
the other hand, those of Coppengrave and
Duingen, that a direct relationship appears cer-
tain. The pottery of these places, apart from cer-
tain special types, cannot be distinguished. Fur-
ther, the fact that, in addition to proto and near
stoneware, both grey-fabric and, at any rate oc-
casionally, buff-fabric earthenware was made at
all these places makes them constitute a group
and distinguishes them from all other pottery
centres. It is therefore possible to think in terms
of a relatively closed or compact local pottery in-
dustry in the area of northern Hesse and Sou-
thern Lower Saxony.
In regard to the grey-fabric earthenware, compa-
rison with other areas is more difficult. Reasona-
bly large deposits in the areas of the lower Rhi-
ne, Westphalia and Lower Saxony, for the pur-
pose of establishing a desirable chronological
and regional differentiation, are still too limited
(on this, see especially STEPHAN 1978/1979),
and it is too early to pronounce. However, some
differences can already be seen between the
grey-fabric wäre dealt with in the present report
and that of the Rhineland (HINZ 1962) and We-
stern Westphalia (LOBBEDEY 1972 and 1975)
and, in other respects, that of the Magdeburg
area (NICKEL 1969; STOLL 1961), North Fries-
land (HARTMANN 1975) and northern Olden-
burg (ZOLLER 1975). Differences may also be
seen in the types of wares (or, in other words,
the pottery techniques) and in details, for exam-
ple use of grooving and particular kinds of Orna-
ment, forms of handles, body and rims and dif-
ferences in vessel shapes. The variations, particu-
larly minor ones which would have had no signi-
ficance for the user and are of interest only for
establishing economic patterns, will have ap-
plied in relatively small areas, corresponding
with the limited areas of distribution (STE-
PHAN 1978/1979, 33—34). The wäre of nor-
thern Hesse has the same, or at any rate very si-
milar, forms (HAARBERG 1973), but certain ty-
pes of pots with developed bases (HAARBERG
1973, plate 2, nos. 42—53) and possibly also so-
me of the less common jug forms (HAARBERG
1973, plate 3, nos. 21 and 22) may perhaps be
regional specialities.
In the Upper Weser region in Westphalia bea-
kers with rounded bases and the globular pots
98