Soricelli - Libyan Studies 1987

8/10/2019 Soricelli - Libyan Studies 1987

1/16

Lib) al/

Sludi

eJ IK( I


2/16

G.

SO ruCELU

The analyses of diverse

groups

of ware

comin

g from excavations

carried out

in . he las t

few years at Pompeii (the Impianto Elettrico excavation: for preliminary results see Arthur

1986), at Naples

and

at o

ther Campanian si

tes (Ischja, Sinuessa, Cales) have, in fact,

permitted a quantitative eva

lu

ati

on of

the presence of 'Tripolitanian Sigillata' in

Campania

,

and as regards its origin, an

al ternative hypothesis to

that proposed

by Kenrick can n

ow

be

advanced .

'Production N sigillata in Campania

Among the

sigillata wares appearing in levels

datable between

the first century BC and the

s cond century AD, it has been possible to isolate a number of fragments of a ware which

I

shall refe r to as

'Production /1\

whose

ho

mogeneous morphological characteristics

c o

spond closely with those of 'Tripolitanian Sigillata', whilst being easily distinguishable both

fro m the best Italian sigillata and from other import

ed

sigillata wares (Soricellj 1984a ).

The iden tification of these fragments as 'Tripolitanian SigiLlata'

is

verified either by the

shapes of the vases

or

by the

prese

nce

of

a few

potters' stamps

in

common

.

An

example o f

this is the base of a cup found at Pompeii in a level of the Impianto

Elettrico

excavation,

the profile of which is comparable with the form Berenice B42 5,2. This bears the

rectangular stamp L.PVLLljCARPI (Fig. 1.1 ), the s

ame

po tter who stamped the base of a

pla te of 'Tripolitanian Sigillata' recovered at Berenice (Kenrick 1985 , 30 1, X164,

L.PVLL

/CA RPl .

In

con

trast

wi

th Bereruce and Sabratha, a t Pompeii -Producti

on

A/Tripolitaruan i g i l

lata' (hereafter refe

rred

to as 'Prod. /1\), appears

in

several

con

tex

ts

of the Impianto

Elettrico excavation with a

pre

liminary dating of around the middle of the first century

BC, a

per

iod

char

acterised by a greatly

reduced

prop0l1ion of sigillata (22 fragments in all,

of which m

or

e

than

half

are

attributable to

Easte

rn

i ~ i l l a t a

A

or

to

productions

imitating

its forms), with respect to other fragments offine tableware, cillefly Black Glaze.

These products recur at Pompeu in much larger quantity in

group

dated

abou

t 30-20

BC, assoc iated with the 'archaic' Arretine forms of Goudineau (1968, form 2, 5 and 6.)

and with the radial Arretjne stamp

C SER.

/

OCE eVArr

177 9). In till

group,

composed

f

68 fragments, 'Prod . /1\ I presents approximately 61.7 of the sigillata recovered,

against 27.9 of Italian si: iLla ta

and

5.5 of

Eastern

Sigillata A. The f

orm

most

quently enc

ountered

in this group (Fig. 1.2) has a hanging lip (wruch could be typologically

connec

t d with the rims of 'Service la' of Fellman),

appare

nt ly with a later da te of around

20 BC (Goudineau 1968,47). It has not been recognised at Berenice

or

Sabra tha. For the

other two forms presen t, a plate

and

a bowl, they may

be

compared with t

he

plate Berenice

B399.2 and the c

up

Bereruc B

42

3.1 (Fig. 1.3 ).

Well stratified level

of

later Augustan date have not

been

found save for a group of

sherds amongst willch was the stamp L.

PVLLI

/CARPI. T hese fragments,

tho

ugh not

belonging to any specific con text, are chronologically homogenous (their provenance was

the b c k i l l of a trench dug by A . Maiuri in the 1940's between the erarillm and the

pifo/

ium

almost certainly composed of material distu rbed by his excavation). In tills

group consisting f 200 fragments, 'Prod.

A

again represents approximately 38.5 of the

total tableware, against 51.5 of Italian sigillata, and 9(/0

made

up

of

J5 fragments

grouped t

ogether under

the name of 'Production

C,

being imilar to -Prod. either in

fab ric

or

type. Many of the -Prod. /1\ types in tills group compare with those noted at e r e

nice. T he t

wo

pla tes (Fig. 1

.4

and

1.5)

can

be

compared

respectively to t

he

shapes

Bere

nice

B399

and B4

{)O

willie o t

her

examples (Fig. 1.6 and 1.7) can be likened to the plates

Bere

n ice B409 and B4 10. Nevertheless

some

new designs

are

present,

such

as the

plate

(Fi

g.

1.8) with bipa rtite interna l wall and anothe r plate (Fig. 1.9), willch may be a deriva-

74


3/16

TRlPOUTANIAN SIGILLATA' FROM CAMPANIA

. G

-I

I

j

1

,:::?

)

=;

7

--

7.

6

~

7

7

C?

"

8

J

====

/

J

9

s

=

Fi

gure

I

Nos 1-9 Impilllllo Elellrico Po

mp

eii. Scale I:

2

tion

o f

the

'Servi

ce

l of Haltern (

equivalent to Kenrick

's group

A)

. Furthermore this is

the

only

gr

oup

of

stamped fr

agments

from

the

excavation .

In

addi

tion

to th

at

of

L.

Pullius Carpus, a ra

di

al

stamp

CHI/RE

in a

circular

cartouch

e

and

, on

the

base of a cup

Berenic

e B42S.2 a

rectangular stam

p with two lines

of uncertain

lettering (perhaps EROS on the lo

wer

line?) are also

to be

noted.

2

75


4/16

G. SORIC LLl

The percentage values obtained for 'Prod. A' are lower in two contexts of the excavation

dated respectively to the Tiberian and Claudian eras. [11 the Tiberian context (185 frag

ments ) 'Prod. P\ reaches approximately 25.5 ,against 65.4 of Italian sigillata and 3 of

Eastern Sigillata A

The

most complete type in this group corresponds to the bowl Bere

nice B427 (Fig. 2

.1

0), though

other

rims,

comparab

l with the plate Berenice

B409

and

carinated bowl Berenice B417 also occur. In the Claudian context the p roportion

of

'Prod.

P\ drops again, resulting in only 19.7

of

the total 66 sherds, as

do

cs the

prop

ortion of

Italian sigillata (a pproximately 57.6 ); Eas tern Sig illata A howev

er

, rises to approximately

7.5. Overall, the composition of this group is anomalo us with a high

number

of frag

ments of unidentified

pr

oduction (around 13':;'0) and a strong component of residual

material (this seems to be especially true for Eastern

Si

gillata A

).

Data from a group of sherds from excavations at S. Sofia, Naples, seem more reliable.

These

are datable from the Tiberian/Claudian

era

and consist

of

365

fragments.

The

percentage

of

'Prod.

A is

approximately 14.5 , against 73.8

of

Italian sigillata

and

1.5

of Eastern Sigillata A To these must be added c 50/

of

fragments attributed to other local

production. The most

common

types are the large plate Berenice

B407/B409

(F

ig.

2.11 ),

the carinated bowl Berenice

B417

and the conical cup Berenice B427. Some fragments

can be attributed to the hemispherical bowl Berenicc B419, while one base (Fig. 2.12) can

be likened to the plate Berenice B403.

A group of sherds from the excavation at the Girolamini (Naples), may be assigned to

the Claudio-Neronian period. This has yielded a fair quantity of fragments

of

'Prod. P\

with divers examples capable of being almost completely recomposed. The most common

types are still the large plate Berenice

B409

(Fig. 2.13 ) and the conical cup Berenice B427

(Fig. 2.14 ). The carinated bowl Berenice B41 7 is also frequently found, to which may be

added two examples of the hemispherical bowl Berenice B419 (Fig. 3. 15) and one

example similar to the small plate Berenice B410

(Fig. 3.16

).

A group

of

94

sherds from the excavation

of

Carminiello ai Mannesi (Naple

s)

may

be

dated to the middle

of

the first century

AD

.

Here

'P rod

repr

esents approximately

12.8

of

the sigillata, against 73.4

of

Italian sigillata. A further c 10.5

is

made up

of

a

group of fragments of 'Production D', identified for the moment only in Naples (appearing

for the first time at S. Sofia, where they represent 3.6

of

the entire collection of pottery

found ) and whose forms resemble those of 'Prod. ~ 'Prod is represented by the forms

which

appear

to be the most frequent from

Tiberian

times - the large plate Berenice

B409

, the conical

cup

Berenice

B427

and the carinated bowl Berenice B417.

'Prod.

P\ is

again present in

another

group, consisting

of

147 fragments, dated to the end

of the first century A D, also found in the excavations of Carminiello ai

Mann

esi. It

is

represented by approximately 16.8 of the total fine pottery, against 6.1.7 of Italian sigil

lata and 10 of imported products.

In the groups of later date, and particularly in those assigned to the first half of the

second century

AD

the presence

of

'Prod.

P\ is

always meagre, sometimes to tally non

existent,

as in

the assemblage from

Cratere

Senga at Pozzuoli (SoriceUi

1984b

). This leads

me to believe that circulation of this ware in Campania did not continue beyond the firs t

century AD. A reasonably precise chronological peg

is

offered by the Pompeian material

in use in

AD

79.

These

products were still in circulation, as demonstrated by a plate Bere

nice

B407

with a rectangular stamp BL ST

inv.

10139 ) and a few unstamped carinated

bowls attributable to the form Berenice B417

(inv.

15258

and 15271 ). To these

one

may

perhaps also

add

a fragmentary plate, attributable to the type Berenice

B410

with a

rectangular stamp

EP PR

(inv. 37145). However,

one

is

dealing with a reduced percen

tage

of

examples when

compared

with the rest

of

the sigillata discovered at Pompeii and

they may be considered residual specimens still in use at the time of the eruption.

76


5/16

----

--

'

TRIPOLlTANlAN

SIGILLATA' F

ROM CAMPAN

IA

....

....

II II

....

h

N

....


6/16

G. SORlC LLI

~ ; '

C3

'f2

~

..",.

:

Vi

r

( )

I

o

N

N

.:...."

'53

::::,..

::::,..

,,'

'-'

-'

:..:.J

2

.

::::,..

~

.....

I

.:....,

g

I

I

~

co

-2 '


7/16

'TRlPOLITANlAN SIGILLATA' FROM CAMPANIA

In addition, two large groups

of

'Prod. P\ found at Ischia, in the excavations carried out

under the

church

of

S.

Restituta, and at Monte S. Angelo, in the immediate hinterla

nd

of

Pozzuoli, are

wor

thy of consideration.

Bo

th of these lack precise stratigraphic co ntext

s,

though a few sherds

bear

potters' stamps, whilst the class is well represented in

proportion

to

other

contemporaneous sigillata wares.

The

Ischian material provides two stamps:

EROS,

in a rectangular cartouche (Monti

1980, Fig. 95),

prob

ably the same

potter represe

nted at Berenice (Ke

nr

i

ck

1

985

, 30 1,

X 157), and SEX on a palm branch, in an oval

cartou

che (Monti 1980, Fig. 95 ).

From

Monte S.

Angelo we have a rectangular sta

mp

reading

Nlr P

(F ig. 3.17 ) and a

radial stamp on two lines, unfortunately illegible (in the u

pper

line only the last two letteL,

10

can be read ). These fragments (a few

of

which are illustrated in F ig. 3.18-21) come from

the area of a villa, the object

of clande

stine excavations, where 'Prod. A' represen ts a

pp

ro

ximately 25.5 of the total of 184 fragments of sigillata gat

hered

from the surface, against

67.4 made up

of

fragments of Italic sigillata, and 7

.1

of

other

types.

Figure 4 summar ises graphically the percentages of the groups found in the excavations

at Pompeii (Impianto Elettrico) and Naples (S. Sofia and Canniniello ai Mannesi ), between

'Prod. A', Italian sigil lata, other sigillata wares attributed to local production (in cluding the

fragments

grouped

toget

her

under the names 'Production C'

and

'Production D' )and other

sigillata wares either inlported or simply unidentified (miscellaneous). To this is added a

frequency table of the material from

Monte

S. Angelo which illustrates the quantities

obtained from an analysis of the surface finds.

These results appeal'

to

indicate a progressive fall-off of '

Pro

d. N. with respect to Italian

sigillata. After having

obtained

par ticularly high percentage values in contexts of the e

nd

of

the first century BC, from the

Ti

berian era 'Prod. N.

represen

ts only 15- 25 in the assem

blages, against 65 - 75

of

Italian sigillat

a. This

strongly marked fall-off would seem to

correspond with a decline in the number of types.

While groups of

sherds from the Augustan period would seem to be characterised by a

larger

number of

vessel types, in l

ater

groups these

seem

to

be

limited to plates

Beren

ice

B409 and B410, (which represent two diverse sizes of the same type-form), the con ical

cup Berenice B4 27 (which would

make

up the 'service;' with the two

pre

ceding forms ), and

the Berenice carinated bowl

(841

7 - to which perhaps may also be added the hemispher ical

bowl Berenice

B419

, relatively

welJ

represented

in

the pottery group of Girolaminj).

All this could be interpreted as a consequence of t

he opening

of the Pozzuoli workshops

in the last years of the first century BC which, with their high-quaHty products, were able

to take over in a short space

of

time, a large slice

of

the

Campanian

market previously

supplied by potters who were producing 'Prod.

A'. The

Pozzuoli workshops, or at least

those which were noted during excavations carr ied

out

by Di Criscio

in

18 73

-74

(Bruzza

1875;

Comfort

196

4 )

must

have begun their activity

around

15-

10

Be.

(

Comfort 1970

,

810), at least twenty five years later than the appearance of

Prod. A'.

This chronological gap between the two wares can be clearly perceived ,

not

only in the

early

appearance

of 'Prod. N. in those levels of the Impianto Elettrico excavation dating to

around

the middle

of

the first century

BC

, but also in various typological differences. In

fact, while some forms

of

'Prod. N. are

correlated

with those of 'Service r

of

Haitern, thus

appearing to indicate their contemporaneity, the typological

repertory

of Puteolan sigillata

seems to consist almost exclusively of later types

or

'Service II' (von Schnurbein

1982,

84 ).

What is more, while the potters who produced 'Prod . N

made

use of the radial

stamp

which, according to Gou

dinea

u (1968,352- 353), was substituted by the central stamp at

Arezzo around I5 - I() BC , radial stamps were never employed for the products of the

Pozzuoli workshops. An even earlier

da

te could be assigned to a series of fragments of

Prod.

A'

which

pr

esent a 'lozenge' stamp.

In

addition to the base of the plate found at

Girolamini (Fig. 3.2 2), two

diff

erent examples

of

this

stamp

may

be no

ted: the first comes

79


8/16

G. SORICELLI

654

61

.7

576

515

27

.9

Pompeii I. E.

l iberian

Pompeii I.E.

claudia

pompeii

I,E.

augustan

73.4

Pompe ii

I.

E

30-20 Be

7 8

S.

Sof ia

iberia - claudia

67.4

Carminiello ai Mannesi

mid I AD

61.7

Carminiello ai

Mannesi

late I AD

c J Produzione

A-TripOlitania

Sigi

ll at

a

Italian Sigillata

_ Other loc l Products

Imported and Miscellaneous

Fig

ur

e

4.

'erce l1li1ge vallles 0/ dijTere

ll1

Iypes o/ sigillalo pUllely ("hod. A , laliOI1, ()Iher local prodllcis alld

ill1por/ed or

unid

ellliJied ware.) III Po

mp

eii (/mpianlO

Llellrico

sile),

Napl

es

(S.

Sofia

alld

Canniniello

ai

MIIllnesi) ( l i ld PozUlo

li

(IHol li eS Angelo).

Monte

S.

Ange

1

80


9/16

TRlPO

LITANIAN

SIGILLATA

FROM CAMPANIA

from Carminiello ai Mannesi, the second is preserved in the

storerooms

at Pompeii (inv.

37136). Very similar lozenge stamps characterise a

production of

Black Glaze ware of

B-type located in

northern

Campania, probably at Cales and well distributed in the region

Morel, 1975,279-280;

1981,82).

On the other hand, this type of stamp is rather rare on

sigiUata .

T

hi

s provides

an

opportunity to refer to a unique example from Rome of a lozenge with

fi

ve points, hearing

T/

at the centre, which has been attributed hypothetically to local pro

duction (Schindler

Kaudelka 1984,24, No. 81 )

and

which resembles a series

of

stamps on

Black Glaze ware (themselves bearing five-pointed lozenges with

A T

(from

Capua,

CVA

Capua-Museo

Campano

,

fasc. HI, plate 29, No.9 ), or P

at

the centre (from the Vesuvian

area, DAvino-Parma

1981,

Fig. 1)). The presence on sigillata of lozenge stamps similar to

those which appear on Black Glaze ware justifies the belief in their

contemporaneity and

indicates that the design was passed from Black Glaze ware to sigillata. In this case the

fragments of Prod. A (and the Roman example ) could

be

dated towards the middle

or

the

third quarter

of the first century BC

Considering, therefore, that these products appear in the region of the Bay of Naples

earlier than their appearance at Berenice and Sabratha, and the fact that they possess

higher percentage values in Italy, it is difficult to believe that these wares were imported

into Campania from North Africa.

Furthermore, the distribution of the few stamps attributed to this ware, their

appearance

in

both

G reek and Latin, and the names of the potters themselves, all seem to indicate a

Campanian origin for this class of pottery, particularly in the Phlegraean Fields, an area of

Greek culture and language. The potter s stamp of BAACT//MOYN, as has already been

noted, occurs on four vessels, coming respectively from Pozzuoli, Cuma and Catania and a

fourth from Berenice. A further example from Tarragona gives the same name in Latin-

BLAST/

/NIVNA

T/

CVAr,.

1033d

).

The

plate from Pompeii with the

stamp

BLAST

can

also be attributed to this potter (for the

Grecian

Blastus see Solin 1982,962-963 ). In addi

tion to the relative concentrations

of

these stamps in the Phlegraean-Vesuvian

area

, it must

be noted that the genlilicium Munatius is very common in the region. It has been noted in

Naples even

ill

mid-Imperial times CIL10.1492; NOI.Sc.

1887,291;

Maiuri

1913.

Perhaps

even

CILIO.2573,

attributed to Pozzuoli, is Neapolitan).

The

name occurs at Pozzuoli

CIL10.1767, 2048,2285,2751

, 2752,2754,

Not.Sc.1913,

25 ), Miseno

CILlO.3505,

3609

), Herculaneum

CIL1

0.14(3 ), and Pompeii (Castren 1975, 193 ).

The

Greek/Latin

alternation on the stamps may reflect a bilingualism in the

area

of

pro

duction. Potters who signed their ware in Greek , but whose products were distributed

exclusively in the West are known at Pozzuoli, where the stamps LJ/ONYEION

and f lYAA

were found by Di Criscio (Comfort 1964, 24. No. 89 , while examples

of

bilingual signa

tures

are

known also at a later

date on

the lamps with the stamps

KELCEI/CELSI,

produced for approximately a century at a workshop located most probably in

Campania

(Pavolini 198 1, ).

The

base of a plate from Nuceria referred to as form Goudineau ] 4 and with a rect

angular stamp AMlwN, (Budetta et al. 1984 ) may be equatable with the potter who at

Catania, Carthage and Berenice signed himself

AMPHIO or ANIPHIOI

on vessels

of

Prod.

A

CVArr

65b

and c; Ke

nr

ick

19

85, 300, X 152

and

X 153 ). Bearing in mind that

the stamp

AMlw

N recurs also on Eastern Sigillata A

s

ee Hayes

1985, 36,

form 48

),

the

fragment from Nuceria (not examined by the writer) could equally, therefore, have an

Eastern origin.

Examples

of

signatures known, at the moment, only in Greek, are the stamp NlrEP

together with the stamps signed

EPlfl

from Berenice (letters which Kenrick 1985,

300

,

X156, prefers to EPID ): the use of Greek by these potte rs lends

support

to the hypothesis

of their localisation in an

area

of

Greek

culture. One may bear in mind that even in

8


10/16

G. SORlC LLI

Imperial times magistrates at Nap les

re

tained their

Greek

names, whilst also k

eep

ing alive

the typically

Greek

institutions like the fratriae and using Greek for pu blic documents.

In Campania, other family names which appear on these prod ucts turn out to be rather

comm on, uch as Pompeius, Marius and Pullius.

Th

e first two do not appear to be

particularly indicative since, alt ho ugh

th

ey are

widespread

in Ca

mpani

a, they are also fre

quentl

y

attested

in

other

areas. Sex. Pompeii are, howev

r,

attested

at Pozzuoli

(CIL IO .1 594, 2862 )

and in the Ve suvius

area

(ClL10

.1 403

fro m

Herculan

e um;

8157

fr m Pompeii),

wh

ile a O

Pomp

eius ap pears

am

ongst the

Ii

t

of pott

rs from Pozzuoli

0.

Pompeius Serenus, CVA . . 1

354

- 1359). Similarly, M. Marius

is

no ted

many

times in the

Phlegraean area (C

lL

IO.27 12 from Pozzuoli; Denni on 1898,385, No. 29 from Pozzuoli;

3 2,

No.

49

fro m Baia; IGXrv

720 from

Nap les).

T he name Pullius,

on

the ot

he

r

han

d, is f

requ

ntly

met

with in Campania,

but

seldom

elsewh re: it is

found

at

Pozzuo

li by the

end of

the

seco

nd

cen

tury B (Cl

Ll 0.1 781,

datable to 105 BC). Pullii are

noted

at Capua in early Imperial times

CILl

0.4309), at

So rrento

(CILl

O.742 )and possibly in th v suvian area CIL1 0.2900 - 29

02

, at tri buted to

Pozzuoli , bu t found in the Ve suvian area .

The

na

me

i usua lly widespread in Campania

under

the

form

of Po

ll

ius, a

lready

attested at Capua in

94

BC

(CILI O.3772),

and fre

q

ue

ntly at Pozzuol i

CIL1 0.1574 ,

in the Ne

ro

nian era;

10.2252, 2856 ).

F inally, two

examples

of

sigillata s

tam

p d

POLLl eVAr. 1349)

probably ref

er

to the

gentilicium of

Polliu , n

oted on

possibly locally p

rod

uced vessels

from

D i

Cri

'cio 's excavation at

Pozzuo li.

The

h pothesis that the so-call

ed

'Tripolitanian sigillata'

or i

ginated in t

he

Bay of Naples

receives additional supp

or

t,

howeve

r fro m p

trolog

ical a nalys s and

fro

m the discovery of

possible kiln was te which aUow Naples to b

pin-pointed a

a

poten

ti al centre of

prod

uc tion.

Petrology

Result

from

the thin se

ct

ion analyses ca rried out by Dr. D. F Williams

on

five samples f

'Production A

(Sam

ples 1,

2

,3,

4, 6)

and

one

of

Produ

ction C' (Sample 5)

,

are given

her

e:

Sample I : the most prominent non-p lastic inclusions are grains

of

grcen colourless clinopyroxene scattered

throughollt the fabric. Also present are some fragments of volcanic rock , sanidine felspar, ye llow-b rown

g

am

t, some gra in s

of quartz

and l1e ks

of

mica, and with a little limestonc.

This

sherd is d istinctive in thc

hand specim n as the fabric appears to con ta in much 'black san d ' - due to the presence of dark-colou red

augite, T his re ails the fab ric of Pompeian Rcd Ware and the am phora typcs Dress I 1 and D ressel 2-4 ,

thought to have been m

ade

in the region

of

Pompcii and He rculaneum (Peacock 1971 , fabric 2; 1977,

fa

bric

1). A si milar origin seems likely f

or

the sigi

ll

ata sherd.

Samples 2 -6: sa

mp

les 2 (F ig , 1

,7

) a

nd

3 ap pear fai rly simila r under th e microsc

ope

with a scatte r

of

sub

angul

ar

quart

z grains, nec ks

of

mica, s

ome

li

me

tone , sanidine

fel

sp

ar

and a few gra in s

of

clinopyroxene,

Th

e

other th ree sampl es also co ntain some grains of clinl>pyroxene and sanidine but lack the limeston e and are

slightly coarser, with samplcs 5 (F ig. 3.23 ) and

j

(F

ig, 1.

6) in pa rt icular di splaying frequ ent grains

of

qua

rtz

and tlecks of mica. Thc presence of clinopyroxene and sanidine in all fi e she rds sugge,.ts a so urce, o r more

like ly so urces , along thc It

li

an volc

an

ic tract.

The

fab ric of th se [j e sherds is diffe r

en

t from previously

sampled sigill ata and mou ld s fro m

Cu

ma (So rice

lli ,

while the Po Valley seems geologica

ll

y unlikely (tw

sugncsted origins).

The

pctrology wou ld fit a local Campanian

or

ig in, and Puteo

li

is a possibility (Will iams

J97 8), howe er othe r sources cannot be ruled ou t (includ ing eapolis),

Some possible k lo

wasters

At least two probab le wasters from kilns have been discovered at Naples.

The

first was

found in the pottery

assem

blag from the Girolamini xcavations. This

con

i ts of a small

cup,

simi

l

ar

to the

form Berenice

B427,

wi

th

the

body stro

ngly

deformed

by a firing acci

dent

(Fig.

3.24 ). The

clay

where

it is not overfired ,

i

brown, with flecks

of

mica

and

grains

of

limestone.

The

slip

comple

tely b

urnt on

the

rim

and

on

pa

rt of

the bowl, has tu

rned

brown

and shows flecks

of

mica.

82


11/16

'TRIPO

LITANI

AN S

lGlLLATA' FROM

CAMPANIA

Thesecondwasterhasbeenfound inthecourse

of

recentexcavationscarried

out

inthe

sq

uareinfrontofthechurchof

S.

MariaMaggiore,inaback-fillgivenapreliminarydating

to

thefi rs tyearsof the

secon

dcenturyAD. This exampleis afragmentof aplateattribut

able to theformBereniceB409 (Fig.3.25).

The

characteristics

of

theclayandtheslipare

not definablebecauseof overfiring. Inthesamestratumasecondfragment

of

'Prod. \ has

alsobeenfound,exhibiti ngreduction

on

t

he

internalsurfaces.

W hilst

itmust

be

admittedth

at

vesselscan

be

distorted byheatincircumstances

other

than theirinitialmanufactureand thatinneither casewasanykiln structure located,the

presenceof possiblewastersunderlinesthebeliefthatNapleswasthe seatof one or more

wor

ks

hopswhichmade this pottery.Itmustbe added that, at leastmicroscopically, the

clay of these products is differentfromthatof the Black Glazeware Campana /\, also

produced atNaples betweentheendof thethirdcenturyBC and the middleof thefirst

centuryBC,either because oftheemployment

of

differenttechniques, or becauseofthe

useofdifferentclayso

ur

ce

s.

It isprobable, however,that, in additiontotheworks hopssuggestedby thewastersat

Naplesandahypothetical one inthe Vesuvianareapresumedon thebasisof clayanalyses,

theremayhave

been other

wo

rk

sh

ops

locatedin thearea

of

theBay

of

Naples.Infact,des

piteasubstantialmorphologicaluniformitywithin 'Prod./\, sufficientvariationsoccur to

suggest the

pr

esence

of

various wo rkshops: variations which, as in the exampleof the

groupsfrom IschiaandMo

nte

S.Angelo,may

be

notedbythethicknessof thewails, the

typeofslip,thesurfacefinishandthegradeofclayelutriation.

It is clear thatpreciseanswers to thisproblem will be obtainedonlythrough thedis

covery ofmore rich kilnwaste(andconsequentidentificationof eventualcentresof pro

duction )andbyamore thoroughprogramme of petrologicalanalyses.

Another problem which needs clarifying is that of the connection with other

terr

sigillata

productioninnorthernCampania(where,however, Prod./\

is

recorded),particu

larlywith the'Localimitationsof

terr sigillata

signalledamongstthesherdsfromthevil

las

of

Posto and San Rocco (Morris 1979,

123-

126; Bird 1985, 188-190 ).This last

groupseemsto possessa ratherdifferenttypological repertoryfromthat

of

theproducts

from theBayof Naples,(thoughthismaybedue toratherscantydocumentation),but also

sharescertaintraits,possiblydue toanalogousproductiontechniques.

If

the 'Localimita

tions'fromPostoand S. Rocco belongto'Prod. \ thetypologicaldifferencesencountered

couldindicatetheexistenceoffurtherworkshopssitedinthe

north of

Campania.

istribution

Leavingaside the

mo

reor less limited circulation so far ascertainedfor the

pr

oducts

of

individual works

ho

ps, the field

of di

stributi

on

of 'Prod. A' on the whole appears to be

widespread,taki nginSouthern

It

aly,t

he

c

oa

st

of

NorthAfricaand, tosomedegree,Spain

(Fig.5).T hedistributioninSouthItalyappearslimitedmost

ly

totheregionsborderingthe

Ty rreneanSea.

Inaddition tobeingparticularlywidespreadin theareasurroundingtheg

ul

fofNaples,

'Prod. \ is also recorded, in apparently more modest quan ti ties, also in Northern

Campania, atLiternum,SinuessaandCales.For themoment,the

mo

st

nor th

erlyappear

anceofthiswareis

repre

s

ented

byasmallgroup

of

fragmentsfoundatthevilla

of

Matrice

(nearCampobasso),inMo

li

se.

Information fromsouthern

Campania

has notyet beengathered though the classmay

bepresentatPaestum(Pedley- Torelli

1984,375,

pointed

out

thepresence

of

an'imita

tion sigillata of unknown provenance' without, however, describing its characteristics).

FromCalabriaother examples

of

'Prod.A

.'

have

been

recorded:fromViboValentia(infor

mation from

Dott

. B. Sangineto ); from Reggio Calabria (material exhibited in the

83


12/16

--

G. SORICELLI

t-

0

;[

'

.::

:o

VJ

.g

.

S-

C

t::

t;

;:;

l:

e..

c-

t::

'S

's

'

Q

lr

-'

:::

5fo

-

114


13/16

'TRlPOLlT

AN

lAN SIGILLATA FROM CAMPANLA

museum ); fro m Scolacium (excavation by Prof. E. Arslan ) and perhaps also from

Ciro'

Marina (material exhibited in the museum of Reggio Calabria).

As regards Sicily, at present one must refer to finds reported by Kenrick (19R5,

281-28 4 ).

The pre

se

n

ce

of Prod.

N in

Adriatic coastal regions may be confirmed by several frag

ments discovered at O tranto (information from Dott.ssa G. Semeraro). To these may

p

er

haps

be adde

d a

sma

ll

group

of

sherds

from

Ordona

(Vanderhoeven

1976

,

81,

Tech

nique C) which, from a typological point of view,

are

fairly similar to forms up tiU now

classed as Prod.

A:

(e .g. Vanderhoeven 1976, Plates XLIV, 130; XLVlll , 186; LVIIJ, 404 ).

A Campanian origin for these fragments could be backed up by the relatively high percen

tage

of

Puteo lan sigiJlata ware found at Ordona (approximately 13

of

the stamps on

Italian si,gilla ta published by Vanderhoeven), though a possible local origin has been sug

gested

on

somewhat dubious grounds (Vanderhoeven 1979,83 ).

Fo r the

North

African discoveries one turns once again to Kenricks

reports

( l985 ,

283-

28 4). The conspicuous presence of Prod. N at Benghazi exists side by side with an

equally no table quantity of

other

products from Campania and , in particular, from the Bay

of

Na

ples (fine

pottery

, coarseware

and

amphorae

).

These

finds point to the existence

of

stron

g tra

de

links between

Campania

and Benghazi in the

fi

rst century

AD

(Kenrick 1985 ,

49 4), which would explain the large market which Prod. N found in this area. The ware

may also have been

more common

at

Carthage

than was originaUy thought (Hayes

1976;

1978; M. Fulford pers comm ).

T he presence of this ware in Spain is indicated by the stamp-BLASTI/MVNATI,

reported from Tarragona

eV rr

1033d ). It could also be present in France,

where

, more

over, local wares exist with morpl1ological characteristics very close to Prod. N (e.g. the

ateliers of

Bram

). Two plates recovered from the wreck of the Tradelier, attributed to an

eastern production, could be Prod. A forms (Liou, 1975 , Fig . 41 ; in particular Fig. 41.1

could be identified with form Berenice

B399,

and Fig. 41.2 with form Berenice B401 ).

Conclusion

In conclusion, the p r m remains as to how to define, in future , 'Production A/Tripolita

nian Sigillata.

f

one accepts the localisation of the production of this ware in the area of

the Gulf

of

Naples, it will be necessary to abandon the term Tripolitanjan SigiJlata in

favour of another,

more appropriate

name.

One possibility would be to rename it 'Campanian Sigillata - a definition which, how

ever, could

generate

confusion with

other

sigillata wares which were produced in the

region and which show noticeable morphological differences, such as those of Pozzuoli

and

Cuma

and, in particular, those of the Campanian'

potters reported

by Pucci (

1977,

14-15

). lt

is

perhaps prefe

rable to

continue

to call the

ware 'Production

A

of

the Bay

of

Naples, whilst awaiting mo

re

precise evidence regarding its centres of

production

,

of

which Naples is currently the strongest possibility.

Acknowledgements

Although this article has d isagreed wit h Philip Kenricks

hy

pothesis concern.ing the provenance of 'Trip oli

tanian Sigillata ,

it

must

be

str

es

sed th at many other aspects

of hi

s

outstanding

and pioneering resea rch

on

Me

diterranean

fine wares

wi

ll

remain of fund amental

importance

for many years to come.

I wi sh to thank Dr Jo hn Lloyd for having invited me to contribute this paper to the journal ihyan Sill dies

and for having offered me the opportunity to prepare for publication the sig

ill

ata from his excavations at

Matrice.

This

s

tud

y forms part of a r

esea

rch project on

the

production a

nd

distribution of Roman potte ry in

Ca

mpania

,

coordinat

ed by

Dr

Paul

Arthur,

whom I thank for he lpful criticism.

Furthermore

I also

wi

sh to

thank Prof. Raffaela Pierobo n,

Dr M.

Fulford

and Dr

P. Kenrick for having r

ea

d and

comm

ented on this study.

Prof. Enrica Pozzi

and

Prof.

Balda

ssa re Conticello, Superintendents of the provinc

es

of Naples

and

Caserta, and Pompeii respectively, as we

ll

as Dott. G iuseppe Vecchio, Sergio Cascel la and Don

Pietro

Monti ,

8

-


14/16

G. SORlCE LU

have permitted me access to

unpublish

ed mate rial. Dr David W

il

liams kindly carried out the petrological

analyses.

La

st,

but

not leas t, Dott.ssa Aless

andra

Pollio prepared

the

illustrations

and Mr

s linny

Hutchinson under

t

oo

k bo th the burden of translating my Italian text into E nglish , and the task of typing it.

All rrors arc my own.

Bi

bli

graphy

Arthu

r,

P.

198(). Problems

of

the Urbanisation of Pomp

ii

: xcavations 1980-198l. Antiquaries Journal

06:

29-44

Bird , l .

1985.

Local Terra Sigillata. In M.

A

Cotton

and

G. P. R. Met rau x The S(/II

Roc

co Villa /1 Francolise,

London: 188-190.

Bruzza, L IS75. Scoperta di figuline in Po

zzuoli.

Bullelino dell ' InSlilUiO di Corrispondenza

Ar

cheologica.

242-246.

Budetta, T.

,

Laforgia, E. and

Miniero

, P. 19 84. La sequenza stratigrafica ed i materiali dello scavo della torre

III di Nocera. l

Selllillario de cicio: Su lle orliftcaziolli in Italia

ce

ntro-meridio

nal

e

Il

el

1I

e lleI I secolo

o. C. Centre Jea n Berard apoli.

Castren, P. 1975. Ordo Populusque Pompeianus. Polily and SocielY in roman Pompeii . Romel.

e

lL

=

Corpus

In

sc

ripliol1ul11

LalillalTllI1.

Comfort. H . 1964 .

Puteolan

SigiUata at the Louvre. Rei Crelariae Romane F([U/orum A C

a.

5/6: 7-28.

Co mfort, H . 1970. Ceramica

Puteolana. sotto

voc e Terra Sigillata. In En ciclopedia dell'Arle Anlica,

Suppl

e

mento , Roma: 8

10-81

1

C VA = Corpus Vasomm Allliqllomm.

eVA rr

= A.

Oxe

and

H. Comfort (

eds

), Corpus Vasorum Arretil1orllll1. Bonn.

D'Avino, R. and Parma, N. 1981. Una villa rust ica romana in localita' up a Olivella a S nt'Anastasia. In 1I

COllvegllo dei Gruppi Archeologici della Campania. (Maddaloni, 24-25 aprile 1981 ): 9-53.

Dennison,

W.

1898. Some new inscriptions from Puteoli, Baiae, Misenum and C umae. Am

erica

ll

Journal

or

Archaeology 2: 373-398.

Goudineau , Ch.

1968. La

cerarnique aretine lisse (Fol/illes de I'Eco

le

Fral/{'aise de Rome i Bolse

na-Po

gg io

Moscini -

1962-/96 7 IV ), in

Melang

es

de {'Eco

le rran(

'oise de Rome,

Suppl. IV.

Hayes, 1. W. 1976. Pottery, stratified groups and typology. In J. H .

Humphr

ey (ed.), Excavations at Carthage

1975 conducted by the University

of

Michigan.

Vol. 1.

Ann Arbor:

47-123.

Hayes, 1. W. 1975. Pottery repo rt. In 1. H. Humphrey (ed. ), EXClivatiol1s al Carlhage 1976 condl/cted by Ihe

Ulliversity

a/M

ichigan. Vol.

rv.

Ann Arbor: 23- 98.

Hayes, 1. W. 1985. SigiJlate Orientali. In Atla/7/e delle forme ceramiche

II

Ceramicajlne romona nel bacino del

Medilerraneo

(ICIrdo

ellen ism

0

e primo illlpero). t;ncicIopedia dell'Arte Antica. Supplemento, Roma:

1-95

.

IG = Im criptiones Graecae.

Kenrick, P. 1985. Excavaliolls at Sidi Khrebish, Benghazi (Berenice

),

1I1,

I: The jine pOltel)'. Tripoli.

Kenrick,

P. 1986.

Excavalions at Sabratha 1948-N51.

London.

Liou, B. 1975. Recherches Archeo logiques

sous-marines.

Galha 33; 570-605.

Maiuri, A. 1913. La nuova isc ri zione della fratria Napoletana deg

li

Artemisii. Studi

Romani

1: 21-36.

Monti P. 1980.

Ischia, archaeolog

ia

e sloria.

Napoli .

Mor

el,

1.

P.

1975.

Aspects

de

I

artisanat dan

s la

Grande Grcce

Romaine. In

La

J\llaglla

G

re

c

ia

in ela' romal/o.

Alii

del

XV

Convegno di sludi sulla lVlagn(/ Grecia

T

a

ranto

), 5-lO ottobre

1975: 263- 324.

Morel,1.

P.

198 I. Giramique campal1iel1lle. Les Formes. Roma.

Morris

, 1. 197

c

. Te rra Sigillata Wares

and

Imitations . In M. A. Cotton The Late Republical/ Villa al POS IO ,

Fr([llcofise. London :

177

-126.

Not. Sc. = NOlizie Salvi Antichila.

Pavolini, C. 1981. Le lucerne nell 'lt alia

romana.

In

A

G iardina and

A Schiavone

(eds ), Merci, mercali e

scambi

nel tvledilerran eo. Ba

ri: 139-184.

Peacock, D .

P.

S. 1971. Roman amphorae in Pre-Roman Br

it

ain. In M. J

esso

n and D. H

ill

(eds ), The Iron Age

and its lIill-Forts.

Southampton:

169-18

8.

Peacoc k, D. P. S. 19 77. Pompeian Reel Ware. In D. P. S. Peacock (ed. , Pot/elY and early

cO

lllmerce. Southamp

ton: 147-162.

Pedley,

1. G. and To

relli, M.

19 84. Excavations

at

Paestum 1983.

American Joul'I1al

of

Archaeology 88:

367-376.

Pucci, G.

1977.

Le terre sigillatae italic he, galliche e orientali. In

A.

C

arandini

(

cd

.),

L'lnstmm

elllwn domesti

CUIIl

di Ercolano e Pompei nel/a Prima eta' imperiale. Quademi di cullum materia

Ie,

I:

9-21.

Schindler

Kaud

elka,

E.

1984. Terra Sigillata aus Rom. D ie

Sammlung

O lcott.

Re

i Cretariae ROlllallae

Faulomm

Acta 26: 13 -3 6 .

86


15/16

TRJPOLITANIAN SIGLLLATA' FROM CA MPA NIA

Solin, H .

198

2.

Die G riechischen Persollenllomen in R om. Ein

Iiandbll

c

h. Berlin-New York.

So rieelli, G .

1982.

U n

o

ffieina di

N.

Naevius Hilarus a

Cuma.

A rcheo logia C1assica 34: ]

90-195.

Soricelli, G . 1984a.

Ricerche Preliminuri sulla Produz ione e

la

circo[azione della Terra Sigillata ill Campania

Ira la [(/I da

r

epubbli

ca e la

prima

eta ' imperiale.

University of Naples, undergraduate thes is.

Soricelli,

G.

19

84b

. Le sigilJate.

n F.

Garcea, G. Miraglia and G .

So

rice

lli

, U

no sca

rico di materiale

ceramico

di

eta'

ad

rianeo-antonina da C ratere Senga (Pozzuoli .

Puleo

i 7/8: 245-285.

Vanderho

even. M . 1976 .

La

terre sigillee

i

sse , In J. Mertens

cd.),

Ordona V. Bruxelles : 79-182.

Vanderh oeven, M.

1979

.

La terr

e s igillee

a

re lief.

In

J . Mertens (ed.

, Or

dona

VI.

Bru

xe

ll

cs:

83-104.

von Schn

ur

bein, S. 1

982

.

Die unverzierle Terra S

igill(ll(1

aus H.allern . Bociellalleriimer Westfalens

19, Mtinste r.

Willia

ms

, D.

F.

19

78

. Petrological analysis of Arretine

and

early Samian: a

pr

eliminary

report.

In P. Arthur

and

G. Marsh, (ed s.), ar

ly fine

wa

res in Roman Britain.

British Archaeological Report s 57: 5-12.

87


16/16

G. SORICELLI

Tripolitanian SigilIata : A Response

By

P M enrick

I am grateful to Dr. Soricelli

and

to thc Editor for the opportunity to see this intercsting article in

advance

of

publication.

The evidence

prcscnted here

of

chronology,

distribution

and petrology

seem

to me to offer com-

pelling reasons for supposing the ware discussed to have

been

produced in Campania

and

this is

further

supported by the

names

of the potters and their

occasional

use

of

the G reek

alphabet.

(

This

was a factor to

which I had not given adequate weight

in

suggesting an origin in Punic North A frica ). As to the precise origin

of the warc within the region, I am dubious of the significance of two wasters found on their own in separate

excavations:

an accident

in the later life of a vessel may on occasion

be

indistinguishable from

an

original fault

in firing, and a greater concentration of Wasters would be necessary to have the force of definite proof. Besides

which, the foot of the cup illustrated in

Figure 3.24

is not typ ical for P

roduction

A/ Tripolitanian Sigillata.

Soricelli is undoubtedly right in suggesting that a plurality of similar wares was produced

in

different parts of

Campania (and probably other parts of Southern Italy and Sicily) during the first

ccnturies

BC and AD. Their

individual characterisation will

depend on

the

publication

an d

study of

a great deal more material from the

region and the

present

article represents an important step

l

ong that road.

And

as we

know

that the products

of Campania could

so

readily find their way into distant

markcts throughout

the Mediterranean

so

the

identification

of more

of these products

is

likely

t be of

relevance to

xcavators

working in

many

different

parts of the Roman World.

Documents

Soricelli - Libyan Studies 1987