Universitätsbibliothek HeidelbergUniversitätsbibliothek Heidelberg
Hinweis: Ihre bisherige Sitzung ist abgelaufen. Sie arbeiten in einer neuen Sitzung weiter.
Überblick
loading ...
Faksimile
0.5
1 cm
facsimile
Vollansicht
OCR-Volltext
THE ARCHAIC POTTERY AND ITS CLASSIFICATION.

expect her temple to be Doric; just as that of
Apollo of the Milesians was Ionic. Hence it
seems more likely that we should find the temple
of Aphrodite at the south-west corner of the
cleared region of the town, than elsewhere.

Possibly another temple may lie in the un-
cleared part on the north-east of the town, as a bit
of the rim of a bowl, inscribed . . . NE0HKE . . .
was found at the edge of the cleared region here;
it may, however, have wandered from the Apollo
temple.

Of the temenos of Athena, whose priest, Helio-
doros, was keeper of the city records, according
to the decree of the city which I found, there are
no traces yet known. The same may be said of
the temenos of Zeus dedicated by the Aeginetans,
'since the dedications to the Theban Zeus refer
probably to Zeus Ammon or Amun of Thebes,
and not to a Greek divinity or a Greek temple.

CHAPTEE III.

THE AECHAIC POTTERY AND ITS
CLASSIFICATION.

21. The pottery of the Apollo temple is so far
separate from all other which has been found, being
earlier than the bulk of ordinary Greek pottery, and
is at the same time so far of value owing to its being
relatively, and to some extent absolutely, dated,
that it is best to describe it by itself as a single
class. The following is a classification of the
varieties of it (including a few varieties found in the
town), judging more by material than by design.
The letters refer to whole classes generally, judged
by the body of the ware, and the numbers to sub-
divisions of those classes generally, judged by the
superficial colouring and painting. Of course in a
growing subject it is impossible to maintain a
strictly regular system of reference in this way;
some numbered classes might well rank as whole
letter classes, and the order of the numbers is not
the natural order of subdivision. Such a system,
however, will serve for practical purposes of cata-

loguing at present, and may well last until some
consistent and general scheme can be arranged,
when we know more, and our information is not
so likely to change its appearance. The type
specimens, where such are distinct and remarkable,
are entered in parenthesis; if dedicated, by the
dedicator's name. All these are in the British
Museum, excepting one.

ROUGH :—

A. Yellow-Brown :

1 white-faced.

2 brown-faced, and white-faced, red striped.

Tall bowls.

3 brown-faced (varies to O3). Jugs.

B. Red-Rrown :

1 black stripes (earliest pottery from well,

retrograde inscriptions).

2 fine-faced, with Indian-red geometrical and

lotus. Dishes.

3 faced with drab and brown, lotus, &c.

(EPMAroPHS, Bulak).

4 rough plain.

5 coarse.

6 very coarse red, white face.

C. Beown:

1 hardish plain (label with two holes).

2 hardish, faced smooth. Statuettes, &c.

3 hardish, painted brown (aryballos).

4 white-faced, brown, black and applied red

pattern, either animals (riPflTAPXOS),
guilloche, or crescent pattern, doubled.

5 thick, light brown, plain.

HARD BROWN:—

D. Light Drab Face*.

1 yellow-brown and applied red, lotus, chequer,

guilloche, &c.

2 brown, lotus, &c.

3 black animals and lotus, applied red; red

and white line inside.

4 black fret and bands outside, or brown-black

bands.

5 plain.

A. No Colouring:

Hard, varies to C or to G* if lined.

JE. Thin, Polished Red Face :

Often with pinched-up necks, and wheel- '
pattern handle-knobs.
 
Annotationen