This is a repository copy of Between east and west : Amorgian pottery in Early Bronze Age

Heraion (Samos).

White Rose Research Online URL for this paper:

https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/158989/

Version: Accepted Version

Article:
Menelaou, S. and Day, P.M. (2020) Between east and west : Amorgian pottery in Early
Bronze Age Heraion (Samos). Oxford Journal of Archaeology, 39 (1). pp. 41-66. ISSN
0262-5253

https://doi.org/10.1111/ojoa.12186

This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: [Menelaou, S., and Day, P. M.
( 2020) BETWEEN EAST AND WEST: AMORGIAN POTTERY IN EARLY BRONZE AGE
HERAION (SAMOS). Oxford Journal of Archaeology, 39: 41– 66.], which has been
published in final form at https://doi.org/10.1111/ojoa.12186. This article may be used for
non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Use of Self-
Archived Versions.

Reuse
Items deposited in White Rose Research Online are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved unless
indicated otherwise. They may be downloaded and/or printed for private study, or other acts as permitted by
national copyright laws. The publisher or other rights holders may allow further reproduction and re-use of
the full text version. This is indicated by the licence information on the White Rose Research Online record
for the item.

Takedown
If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by
emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request.

[email protected]
https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/
 BETWEEN EAST AND WEST: AMORGIAN POTTERY IN EARLY BRONZE
AGE HERAION (SAMOS)

Sergios Menelaou ∗ and Peter M. Day

Department of Archaeology, University of Sheffield, Minalloy House, 10 – 16 Regent

Street, Sheffield, S1 3NJ, United Kingdom.

Acknowledgments

The research presented here was carried out within the framework of Menelaou's PhD
thesis at the University of Sheffield (2014-2018), which was funded through a three-
year scholarship by the Faculty of Arts and Humanities of the same institution. For
collection of data and fieldwork on Samos generous funding was received also from the
A.S. Onassis Foundation and the A.G. Leventis Foundation. S. Menelaou would like to
thank Assoc. Prof. Ourania Kouka for entrusting him the publication of the ceramic
material from the recent excavations at Heraion, as well as the German Archaeological
Institute at Athens and the Ephorate of Samos and Ikaria (Ministry of Culture, Greece)
for permits to accomplish the original study and sampling of the pottery. This paper was
prepared during a Post-doc Fellowship at Koç University, Research Center for
Anatolian Civilizations (ANAMED) in Istanbul (SM) and a Margo Tytus Visiting
Scholarship at the Department of Classics, University of Cincinnati (PD); we are
grateful for this support. The drawings of the Heraion ceramic vessels were prepared by
Christina Kolb and the photographs were taken by Chronis Papanikolopoulos (INSTAP-
SCEC). Many thanks are owed to Yiannis Papadias and Niki Papakonstantinou for their
valuable help in processing the figures used in this paper.

Abstract
The island of Samos occupies a key position between the central Aegean and western
Anatolia during the third millennium BC. A recent study of the substantial pottery
assemblages from the pivotal site of Heraion has defined a rich stratigraphy covering
the entire Early Bronze Age (EBA). Currently the only known EBA site on Samos,
Heraion has provided the opportunity to undertake a holistic ceramic study with the aim
of defining and characterising local pottery production and, by extension, determining
for the first time a secure provenance of suspected imported vessels, through the
application of an integrated typological/morphological, macroscopic and microscopic
(ceramic petrography) analytical methodology. This diachronic ceramic study,

∗
Current affiliation: Koç University, Research Center for Anatolian Civilizations (ANAMED),
İstiklal Caddesi No: 181 Merkez Han 34433 Beyoğlu P.O.B. 260 İstanbul, Turkey,
[email protected]

1
alongside a comparative fabric study of pottery of known origin from a number of
contemporary sites, shows clear evidence for the exchange/importation of specific
vessel shapes and, in the case of the collared jars, presumably their contents. This
enables the reconstruction of patterns of interaction during the later phases of EB II,
when there was a particular acceleration in the movement of goods. The present paper
draws on a distinctive ceramic class (blue and red schist/phyllite fabrics/wares) and
vessel types (transport jars with incised/slashed handles and beaked jugs with a two-
stage neck profile) particular to the EB II late period and discusses them in relation to
already published or analysed data from selected Cycladic and Anatolian sites.

INTRODUCTION
The archaeology of the Aegean and Anatolian EBA, covering chronologically the third
millennium BC (cf. Rahmstorf 2016 with references), has been dominated largely by
efforts to seek the roots of societal complexity which characterise the second
millennium palace societies and early states, building on or reacting to Renfrew’s
influential work (1972). Fundamental to such research has been the recognition of
transformations in the scale and frequency of movement of goods and people.

The EB II period (ca. 2750-2200 BC), characterised by Renfrew (1972, 451) as a time
of the ‘International Spirit’, has received special attention in the investigation of long-
distance exchange networks, cultural interaction and connectivity, and technological
transfer (e.g. Broodbank 2000, 279-287; Knappett and Nikolakopoulou 2015; Gauss et
al. 2016), particularly discernible in the identification of ceramic links between distant
sites or distinct cultural regions (Alram-Stern and Horejs 2018). This has entailed
narratives of maritime interaction and communication in an area dominated by the
Cycladic archipelago and a range of islands only a short distance offshore from the Asia
Minor coast. Broodbank’s examination of the Cyclades concentrated on connectivity
and the social standing that comes from journeying, seafaring, and technologies of
mobility (Broodbank 2000). Currently, popular network approaches and developments
in social network analysis theory also privilege ideas of mobility (Leidwanger and
Knappett 2018; Tartaron 2018; Knappett and Kiriatzi 2016), pointing towards the active
participation of a range of agents, causes, and incentives in the transmission of goods

2
and knowledge. These have shifted away from generalised models of similar trends
between one geographical node/link to another.

It is clear, therefore, that maritime routes and the ports of call that facilitate such
movement are crucial in the understanding of social and economic activity at this time.
These are usually investigated in archaeological contexts by ceramic material culture
and EB II (cf. mature/developed-late) is characterised by the spread of a number of
drinking/serving, transport, and storage vessels across a wide area (Maran 1998, 432-
433; Şahoğlu 2005; Angelopoulou 2008; Wilson 2013; Pullen 2013; Day and Wilson
2016). The later phase of EB II has attracted special attention as it hosts a westward
extension of Anatolian cultural traits, including pottery types, in the islands of the
Eastern Aegean, the Cyclades and specific areas of Mainland Greece as part of the
much discussed Kastri Group/Lefkandi I phenomenon (Pullen 2013; Broodbank 2013;
Kouka 2013).

[Figure 1 near here]

Pottery has been key to investigating these issues, mainly through typological and
stylistic analysis and the identification of similarities between sites/regions (Rutter
1979; Sotirakopoulou 1997; 2008), with morphology and design traditionally being
interpreted in terms of cultural affiliation, ‘influence’, the mobility of populations and
the passage of time. This has followed the various interpretational orthodoxies and
developments in archaeological theory, originated in culture-historical approaches that
favour exogenous factors and the evolutionary nature of cultural change.

Recently, however, there has been a turn in ceramic studies which highlights
technological variability and transmission, characterising craft practices in detail and
moving beyond vessel form and surface finish (Day et al. 2019; Menelaou 2018;
Mentesana 2016). This allows an investigation of the transfer of technological practice
and even the movement of craftspeople, though, of course, the detection of such
movement and change of time requires the establishment of locations of production.
Without knowing whether different pottery categories are made in the same location or
preferably where they are manufactured, our attempts at reconstructing patterns of

3
cultural variability and even chronological phases are compromised (Burke et al. in
press). Thus, the integration of new analytical methodologies in ceramic analyses has
demonstrated that questions of the distribution of pottery can be approached in a more
meaningful way, examining not only the movement of the pottery itself, but also its
technological character revealing mobilities and transmission.

Petrography, integrating macroscopic study of whole ceramic assemblages, has become

a regular part of most work in EB Crete (Wilson and Day 1994; Wilson et al. 1999;
Nodarou 2011; Mentesana 2016; Papadatos and Nodarou 2018) and the Cyclades
(Hilditch 2013; 2015), with analytical programmes commenced in the Peloponnese and
Attica more recently (Burke et al. 2016; Burke et al. 2018). However, the rarity of such
work in the eastern Aegean, or even western Anatolia (e.g. Day et al. 2009; Semiz et al.
2018), has impeded a better understanding of the very islands often thought of as
intermediaries or stepping stones in the transmission of finished products (e.g. ceramic
containers), knowledge and ideas, and people from East to West. When some influential
models of contact (e.g. Şahoğlu 2005; Efe 2007) postulate such E-W routes, such an
understanding is vital.

Despite being rather neglected within Aegean-Anatolian prehistoric archaeology, the

Asia Minor coast forms a significant interface between the Aegean basin and the
Anatolian plateau, itself linked through long distance exchange with early complex
societies across the Eastern Mediterranean. It is with this background that a project of
integrated ceramic analysis of the rich EBA pottery sequence from Heraion on Samos
was undertaken as a doctoral research project (Menelaou 2018). This major study has
enabled a renewed understanding of ceramic development and the interaction between
the Asia Minor coast and the island world of the Aegean.

The present article draws on results from this integrated analytical programme of
pottery at the island settlement of Heraion on Samos (Figure 1) and considers anew
issues of connectivity and ceramic exchange by the detailed characterisation of local
ceramic production throughout the EBA and the targeted analysis of suspected imports.
This aims at building a regional and inter-regional understanding of ceramic interactions

4
characterising the later third millennium BC, and especially shifts or continuities in
connectivity.

A number of suspected imports have been identified at Heraion by macroscopic and

microscopic analysis (Menelaou et al. 2016; Kouka and Menelaou 2018). In this article,
two vessel types, namely the beaked jug with a two-stage neck profile and the collared
jar with incised/slashed horizontal handles, thought by some to be transport jars (Wilson
1999; Day and Wilson 2016; Knapp and Demesticha 2017), are at the centre of our
analytical focus. Whether or not these types are entirely contemporary in all sites
discussed in this paper, a common agreement exists that dates them to the EB II, mainly
its mature and late phase. These particular shapes are of importance in emerging
debates, as a change in the general nature of pottery shape repertoires took place during
EB II (Day and Wilson 2004; Pullen 2013), perhaps related to the exchange of jars
designed to contain liquid produce, an early phase of containerisation (Day and Wilson
2016, 31-33). These changes, including an emphasis on pouring, hosting and the
appearance of individual ceramic sets for the table seem to reflect a widespread change
in commensal politics (Wilson 1999, 235; Wilson et al. 2008, 268).

While these specific pottery types have been shown to have been produced in a range of
production centres, they are exchanged widely, emphasising the direction and intensity
of interaction. In fact, with the increasing reliance on objects in reconstruction of
networks, knowledge of the provenance of pottery types takes on increasing importance,
as morphology and surface treatment alone are not sufficient to determine their source.
Indeed, the recognition of sources of specific, distinctive types is fundamental, and
requires us to work within an avowedly comparative perspective beyond the boundaries
of our assemblages and sites.

With the above in mind, whilst concentrating on the jug and jar shapes referred to
above, this paper focuses on examples of two specific macroscopic fabrics, namely
those labelled here ‘Blue/Purple Phyllite’ and ‘Red Phyllite’ (though the same fabrics
have been referred to with other names in previous literature; see below). These have
been identified and discussed at other sites, in the Cyclades and linked to production on
the island of Amorgos. Here we examine the occurrence of these fabrics at Heraion,

5
Samos and discuss this in the context of other sites we have studied, along with recent
publications of petrographic analysis. The movement of vessels and, in some cases,
their contents from the island of Amorgos is then discussed, especially regarding the
occurrence of such vessels at the Heraion.

METHODOLOGY
The occurrence of these distinctive fabrics at Heraion has been established during a
major macroscopic study of the entire EB sequence at the site by Menelaou. This
established contextual and typological information, which was then built upon by
detailed microscopic study and a targeted programme of ceramic petrography. The aim
of this analytical research was to determine the provenance of suspected imports, taking
into consideration ongoing discussions on the establishment of exchange networks in
the eastern Aegean region. This methodology has enabled three basic insights:

1. Grouping and fabric characterisation through the identification of petrology and other
compositional features of the clay paste.
2. The reconstruction of key components in the production technology of the pottery
and of crafting choices, applying the chaîne opératoire approach, a socially
contextualised approach to the manufacturing process from the choice and manipulation
of raw materials through to finished products.
3. Provenance determination through the identification of geological and/or
geographical source of raw materials.

Ceramic petrography, the main technique employed in this paper, enables the definition
of different fabric groups through the composition of clay and inclusions. Where
possible, this grouping has been used to suggest the provenance of specific vessel
shapes. Sixteen samples (Table 1) were selected from the EB II late phases at Heraion
(see Kouka and Menelaou 2018 for contexts and chronology), out of 300 thin sections
of Chalcolithic and EBA pottery examined from the site (Menelaou 2018).

MORPHOLOGICAL AND TECHNOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS

The study commenced with the macroscopic examination of pottery and its
classification according to morphology, surface modification, wares, and fabrics,

6
correlated with stratigraphy. This study comprised a full review of ceramic phasing and
stratigraphy of both the old and new excavations at the site. The two contemporary
pottery shapes considered here, the transport jar with slashed/incised handles and the
beaked jug with a two-stage neck profile, are both dated to the EB II late period.

[Table 1 near here]

Beaked Jug with a Two-stage Neck Profile

This jug type is characterised by a two-stage neck profile, where the lower truncated
part is separated by a funnel-shaped upper part, a usually leaf-shaped mouth, and a strap
or oval, tubular handle. The vertical handle can vary from elliptical to flattened oblong
in cross-section and usually appears with incised zig-zag, herringbone decoration or
with parallel diagonal incisions from lower right to upper left. Two examples are known
from Heraion, identified in the area of the Hera Temple, and comprise of a larger
(Milojčić 1961, pl. 44:2; Kouka and Menelaou 2018, 128-129, fig. 5: Heraion II.d;
petrographic sample Heraion 15/155) and a smaller beaked jug (Figure 2).

This type is thought to be Cycladic in origin (Sotirakopoulou 1993, 5, 8, 11-13 with

further bibliography; 1997, 526; 2008, 541, fig. 2:19). The Heraion examples find exact
typological, chronological, and fabric parallels at Panormos on Naxos (Angelopoulou
2003, fig. 30; 2008, 151, fig. 16.12; 2014, 226-228, fig. 3.68:BI.α.3) and probably also
Dhaskalio Phase A on Keros (Sotirakopoulou 2016, 48). Further parallels in fabric and
in decoration of the strap handle can be found in Markiani Phase III on Amorgos
(Birtacha 2006, 137, fig. 7.14:1, pl. 33c-d) (Figure 3).

Examples in ‘Blue Schist’ and ‘Red Schist/Phyllite’ fabrics are known already from
Dhaskalio Phase A on Keros (one neck sherd and one strap handle with incised
decoration), as well as in Phases B (five sherds) and C (two sherds) (Sotirakopoulou
2016, 116-117, 276, figs. 3.1:32, 3.70; Hilditch 2013, tabs. 23.9-23.10). This evidence
adds to the scanty picture we have from the Kavos Special Deposit North on Keros
(Broodbank 2007, 147, fig. 6.16:228-229).

[Figure 2 near here]

7
[Figure 3 near here]

Transport Collared Jar with Incised or Slashed Handles

EB II collared jars are characterised by a globular or elongated ovoid shape with
rounded or slightly flattened to indented base, ranging in height from 30cm to 50cm.
They have two opposing handles at about the point of maximum diameter. These jars
have one of two handle types: vertical strap handles and horizontal handles with an
elliptical or semi-elliptical, triangular or circular cross-section, the latter bearing
decoration of incised or slashed radiating lines on the upper surface. These two types
have meaning in terms of both chronology and regional distribution, according to
different production centres across the Aegean, but it is the version with horizontal
handles that are discussed here. This latter type represents a developed/mature-late EB
II feature, while those with vertical strap handles represent generally an earlier EB II
chronology (Day and Wilson 2016, 17).

Day and Wilson (2016, 17) have suggested that this incision on the handles may
comprise a skeuomorph of rope or cord tied around the handles to enhance grip. It can
vary from deeper incisions/grooves that are parallel and slightly curved to examples that
are less dense and thinner, which can also represent chronological and geographical
provenance differences. Some jars have ‘plug-in’ handles, where their attachment to the
body causes swellings or cylindrical protrusions on the interior. Jar collars also vary,
including concave- or cylindrical-necked jars, short collared necks and two-stage neck
profiles. These neck types can also have regional patterns, for example, marked two-
stage necks, sometimes with a concave interior to the upper part of the neck, have been
argued to be a Western Cycladic trait (Wilson 2013, 400; Day and Wilson 2016, 22).

[Figure 4 near here]

The majority of individual vessels recovered at Heraion comprise horizontal handles

(Figure 4), identified in the area of the Hera Temple (e.g. Milojčić 1961, pls. 24:1 and
48:33; Kouka and Menelaou 2018, 128-129, fig. 5: Heraion II.e). Only one vessel is
almost entirely preserved and bears incised decoration in the form of a fish motif on its

8
upper part (Milojčić 1961, pls. 16:3 and 44:3; Figure 4, top). In the context of the
present paper, it is important that a similar incised motif occurs also on a beak-spouted
jug of a potentially different fabric (Milojčić 1961, pl. 19:7). This decorative motif or
other curvilinear ones with concentric arcs are known from Dhaskalio Phase A on Keros
(Sotirakopoulou 2016, 53, fig. 2.28) and Markiani Phase IV on Amorgos (Eskitzioglou
2006, 155, fig. 7.17:1, 7.26:14, 17, 18, pls. 36e, 38a). Other examples of collared
transport jars at Heraion (Figure 4, bottom) include body sherds (HS13.28.39;
HS13.28.54) and rim/neck sherds (HS13.67.11; HS13.69.9), identified in the area north
of the Sacred Road (Kouka 2017, fig. 9.7).

Common examples of incised/slashed handles are known throughout Early Cycladic

(EC) II in the Cyclades (Figure 5) and, indeed imported to Crete in Early Minoan (EM)
IIA levels at Poros-Katsambas and Knossos (Wilson et al. 2008, 265, fig. 26.4:a-f). A
large number of Cycladic production centres have been identified by recent contextual
and analytical studies (Sotirakopoulou 1993, 15, n. 81-93; 1999, 210-212; Wilson 1999,
235; Day and Wilson 2016, 25-30), while a number of Cycladic and east Aegean sites
reported the presence of the fabrics under discussion. In addition, growing evidence of
imported transport jars is also becoming available from western Anatolian sites (Troy,
Liman Tepe, Gümüldür, 1 Çukuriçi Höyük, etc.). (Table 2).

[Table 2 near here]

Research on Keros and Dhaskalio has been more precise than most in terms of the
detailed recording of macroscopic fabric and gives us an insight into the frequency there
of the specific fabrics that are addressed in this paper. Sotirakopoulou reports one ‘Blue
Schist’ jar handle at Dhaskalio in Phase A (2016, 29, 53, tab. 2.2, fig. 22.6), and
remarks that out of a maximum number of 50 horizontal slashed handles in Phase B, 28
are in ‘Blue Schist’ or ‘Blue-and-Red Schist’ fabrics. Furthermore, of the 24 slashed
handles in Phase C, the majority are made in the Amorgian fabrics (Sotirakopoulou
2016, 307, fig. 4.98, 4.224).

[Figure 5 near here]

9
 MACROSCOPIC FABRIC ANALYSIS
Macroscopic analysis of the Heraion material allowed the identification of distinct
technological stages (raw material choice, paste preparation, forming, surface treatment,
firing), correlated with typological patterns and stylistic/morphological features. The
main features recorded were the colour, texture, hardness, feel of surface, fracture,
voids, as well as a preliminary identification of non-plastic inclusions and description of
size, shape, roundness, frequency and sorting within the paste (Table 3). The two
macroscopic fabrics under consideration here are now described.

Blue/Purple Phyllite Macroscopic Fabric Group

This distinctive group (Menelaou 2018, 142, 615-618) is characterised by angular, platy
and elongate blue/purple, low grade metamorphic rock inclusions displaying foliation,
most probably phyllite, a low grade metamorphic rock, set in a dark red/reddish brown
to reddish yellow (2.5YR 5/6-5/8, 5YR 5/4-5/6) coarse clay paste with a soapy-smooth
feel (Figure 6). The surface is occasionally covered with a matt slip. It is readily
identifiable macroscopically and it has clear parallels from other Aegean sites of the EB
II period. The fabric and form of these vessels at Heraion clearly represent non-local
products.

The fabric corresponds to the ‘Blue Schist’ macroscopic fabric group described by
Broodbank (2007, 124-125, 179) in the EC II Kavos Special Deposit North on Keros
and is directly comparable with the ‘Blue Schist Ware’ frequently encountered in
Markiani Phases III-IV on Amorgos (Vaughan 2006, tab. 7.3; Marangou et al. 2008,
102), with rare examples in Phase II (Karantzali 2006, 107, 123, 158, tab. 7.6). It is also
called ‘Glaucophane-Schist’ fabric, ‘Phyllite-Quartzite’ fabric, and more recently
‘Coarse or Dark Phyllite’ fabric and has been identified in other EB II Cycladic sites,
including Panormos on Naxos (Angelopoulou 2003, 172; 2008, 151; 2014, 93-94:
4.33% relative frequency), and Skarkos on Ios (Marthari 2008, 79). It has been
documented at Akrotiri on Thera by Sotirakopoulou (1999, 69-71, tab. 10) and by one
of the present authors in transport jars from an EB II late deposit in Pillar Pit 35
(Kariotis et al. forthcoming), from Phylakopi on Melos (Broodbank 2007, 125) and
Kavos on Keros (Hilditch 2007, 239, 247, fig. 6.48; 2015, 220, 234 [V3A Macroscopic
Group]; 2018, 447, tab. 7.1). More recent finds include the material from Dhaskalio,

10
where this fabric shows a considerable increase from Phase A to Phase B
(Sotirakopoulou 2016, 18, 71, 74, tabs. 2.6-2.7, 3.6 [braziers, cooking pots,
concave/cylindrical-necked jars, horizontal arched handles]; Hilditch 2013, 467, 471-
472, tabs. 23.3-23.4). A considerable decrease is noted in Phase C, occurring mainly in
barrel jars, and smaller quantities of neckless jars, basins, and cooking pots
(Sotirakopoulou 2016, 157, 162, tabs. 4.2, 4.6). It may be of interest that, despite the
large number of such jars being present in EM IIA at Poros-Katsambas on the north
coast of Crete, this fabric is not present.

The fabric has been positively identified as local to the island of Amorgos, as it is
present in several sites throughout the island (Broodbank 2007, 124-125; Birtacha 2006,
135: Kastri, Kato Akrotiri, Ta Nera, Vigla, Vouni, Sellades, Xenotaphia, etc.) in larger
amounts than at any other sites in the Cyclades (Vaughan 2006; Day and Wilson 2016,
29). At Kavos on Keros and Dhaskalio there appear to be different subgroups with the
additional presence of angular crystalline inclusions and occasionally red shale/phyllite,
which might reflect the exploitation of different, but still related, clay sources or even
the existence of different, contemporary potting traditions (Hilditch 2015, 220-221).

[Figure 6 near here]

Red Phyllite Macroscopic Fabric Group

This fabric is present in only one sample and most likely relates to the previous fabric as
they share common inclusions (Menelaou 2018, 142-143, 619-620). It has a coarse, red-
orange base clay and is characterised by the presence of red-brown, elongate and
angular inclusions that can be identified as phyllite or shale.

As in the case of the Dark Phyllite Macroscopic Group, it finds strong parallels in
assemblages from Amorgos, where it has been described as the ‘Red Shale’
macroscopic fabric (Vaughan 2006, tab. 7.3). It corresponds to the ‘Red Schist’ group
from Kavos Special Deposit North on Keros (Broodbank 2007, 125, tabs. 6.4-6.5) and
to ‘Red Phyllite’ (Macroscopic Group V4) at Dhaskalio, where this fabric shows an
increase from Phase A (2.8%) to Phase B (4.8%) and a decrease in Phase C (1.7%)
(Hilditch 2013, 472). Broodbank (2007, 125) suggested an Amorgian provenance,

11
perhaps reflecting a different production location/unit or different raw material sources
to that of his ‘Blue Schist’ macroscopic fabric group. However, a more detailed
understanding of the variation within these fabrics is needed for such interpretations to
be valid. It is represented in comparative material in various shapes, but beaked jugs
with a two-stage neck profile are made in this fabric only in Phase B (Hilditch 2013,
tabs. 23.9). A similar picture is observed between Phases II and IV at Markiani on
Amorgos (Renfrew 2006, 97, tab. 7.1), but ‘Red Schist’ is generally less frequent than
‘Blue Schist’ (Birtacha 2006, 131, 138, 162, tab. 7.10; Eskitzioglou 2006, 139, 143,
146, 149, 164, tab. 7.14 [tankards, baking pans, hearths, collared jars with slashed
handles]). Other parallels include examples from Panormos on Naxos (Angelopoulou
2014, 93).

[Table 3 near here]

PETROGRAPHIC ANALYSIS AND PROVENANCE DETERMINATION

Petrographic analysis provides a visual continuum from the morphostylistic and
macroscopic fabric analyses. It aims at the reconstruction of technological practice (raw
material processing and clay preparation, forming techniques, firing characteristics) and
where possible, to suggest provenance through comparison with geology and
petrographic data from comparative assemblages. In order to investigate the distribution
of the two characteristic vessel types found in this fabric at Heraion, comparative
material included contemporary sites across the Aegean and Western Anatolia, either
published or currently being studied, including pottery by Day and collaborators from
Ayia Irini on Kea, Akrotiri on Thera, Panormos on Naxos, Liman Tepe and Bakla Tepe.
In the case of both the jugs and collared jars, petrography and the infrequent presence of
these fabrics at Heraion suggested their non-local provenance. A full description of the
fabrics is provided in the Appendix (see Supplementary file).

Coarse/Dark Phyllite Petrographic Fabric

Corresponding to the Blue/Purple Phyllite Macroscopic Fabric Group, this is
characterised by a red to dark brown clay base and the dominant presence of coarse
non-plastic inclusions that consist predominantly of low-grade, fine-grained
metamorphic rock fragments and more specifically of red-brown, manganese and iron-

12
rich phyllite fragments grading into slate (Figure 7:A-B). The coarse fraction also
contains mica schist, possible sedimentary rock fragments (quartz arenites/quartzites or
sandstones), and quartz-feldspar aggregates. Judging from its weak optical activity, the
fabric was fired to a relatively high temperature, probably in an oxidising atmosphere.
Despite slight variability in texture, inclusion density and the ratio of phyllite/shale to
quartz-rich rocks, this fabric is generally consistent and represents a tight group.
Although easily recognisable macroscopically, the variation identified in thin section
may reflect different raw material sources or even the existence of more than one
production unit, although metamorphic material of this sort is inherently varied.

[Figure 7 near here]

This petrographic group has been recorded at a number of other sites:

Akrotiri, Thera: Akrotiri 03/120, 128, 132: three collared jars with slashed handles
(Figure 7:C). These come from a large, late EB II fill of a rock-cut chamber (Chamber
35; Kariotis et al. forthcoming).
Panagia Koimisis, Therasia: Fabric Θ occurs in 1 sample (Kordatzaki et al. 2018, 12-
13, fig. 7:l).
Keros and Dhaskalio: Petrographic Group P4 (Kavos Special Deposit North: Hilditch
2007, 239, 247, fig. 6.48; Kavos Special Deposit South: Hilditch 2015, 228; Dhaskalio:
Hilditch 2013, 479).
Markiani, Amorgos: Phyllite-Quartzite Fabric occurs in 22 samples (Vaughan 2006,
99-100).
Panormos, Naxos: Coarse Phyllite fabric, Panormos 03/29 = B VI.β.3 (Angelopoulou
2014, 297), beaked jug with incised handle; 03/30 (Angelopoulou 2014, plate 3.58,
right), jug/jar body with incised cross-hatching (Figure 7:D); 03/42 = B II.α.9
(Angelopoulou 2014, 281, pl. 3.55), transport jar; 03/44, transport jar with incised
horizontal handle.

The petrographic analysis of selected samples from various assemblages from Kavos
and Dhaskalio resulted in the identification of at least three sub-variants, according to
the presence of calcite and quartzite and the combination of dark phyllite and red
phyllite/shale (Hilditch 2018, 454, 485-486, P4A-C Groups, tab. 7.5, pl. 15). All

13
assemblages from Keros revealed a broad range of shapes in this fabric, including
several jar types with incised handles, baking pans, cooking pots, pyxides, one-handled
tankards, and depas cups (Hilditch 2015, 220, 231; 2018, 447, 454).

Wherever it is found, the consistency of this fabric demonstrates that it derives from one
broad source. It is compatible with the flysch deposits of southern Amorgos where the
sites of Markiani and of Minoa are located. The flysch contains deposits of blue
shale/slate known locally as patelia that are used traditionally in the sealing of roofs. Its
frequency and compatibility indicate a provenance in Southern Amorgos.

Red Phyllite Petrographic Fabric

This fabric is very similar to the Coarse/Dark Phyllite Petrographic Fabric in
compositional and textural terms and is characterised by a red/orange-firing clay paste.
It is characterised by the presence of elongate, low-grade metamorphic rock fragments,
principally phyllite/shale, but also a substantial amount of medium to coarse-grained
quartz-mica schist (Figure 8:A).

It is represented at Heraion by two transport collared jars with horizontal, slashed

handles. Macroscopically it was not distinguished from the previous fabric, as the
colour of the inclusions could conceivably be due to relative oxidation of the inclusions.
This petrographic fabric was first identified by Vaughan (2006) at Markiani on
Amorgos and was named ‘Red shale’ fabric (10 thin sections were included in this
group). It was suggested to be local on the basis of its correlation with the ‘Phyllite-
Quartzite’ fabric (see previous fabric group). Other possible petrographic parallels
derive from the Kavos Special Deposit North on Keros, where it is named as ‘Shale and
quartzite’ fabric (Hilditch 2007, 247, 253). At Dhaskalio it corresponds to petrographic
fabric ‘P4: Phyllite and marble’ (‘Dark/red phyllite sub-group’) and covers a range of
shapes (Hilditch 2013, 479). The same picture emerges for the Kavos Special Deposit
South, both macroscopically and petrographically, and corresponds to a wide range of
domestic shapes (Hilditch 2015, tab. 6.1, 220-221, 228, 231). Other parallels are found
at the late EB II site of Panormos on Naxos (sample Panormos 03/16, a collared
transport jar, Figure 8:B); in addition to an example in the late EC II fill referred to
above at Akrotiri on Thera of the ‘Red phyllite fabric’ (samples Akrotiri 03/133, 134,

14
representing a two-stage jar neck and a transport jar with slashed handles; Figure 8:C-
D).

[Figure 8 near here]

AMORGIAN FABRICS IN COASTAL ASIA MINOR

Grooved/incised horizontal handles and cylindrical necks belonging to a total of nine
amphorae have been reported recently from Çukuriçi Höyük (Phase III) dated to the EB
I period (Horejs and Weninger 2016, 130, Fig 4,8; Horejs et al. 2017, fig. 5.16;
Röcklinger and Horejs 2018, 91, fig. 8). These vessels appear with a characteristic red-
brown clay paste with metamorphic inclusions, most likely corresponding to the Slate
Fabric from the same site. The latter fabric has been presented as being compatible with
local manufacture (Peloschek 2017), yet this is part of a narrative that seeks to
accommodate the wide variety of fabrics within a model of local production,
interpreting the variability as different local fabrics and interpreting that in terms of
practice of raw material selection and the structure of production.

However, such a level of variability in Aegean sites of the EBA and other periods
almost always indicates the consumption of non-local pottery, even in the Neolithic. A
model of ‘compatibility’ of local production of petrographic fabrics is usually based on
broad geological characterisations. Yet the primary material for comparison with
pottery should be pottery from other assemblages, preferably with an indication of
provenance.

Instead, we note both the macroscopic and microscopic similarities between the familiar
incised handled collared jars and the well-studied blue and phyllite fabric and contend
that its similarities with the equivalent slate/phyllite fabrics from Amorgos imply
importation from that island. 2

The dating of these vessels at Çukuriçi Höyük also requires some discussion. It is
argued that “Large closed jars with grooved decorated handles had already appeared in
the earlier phase ÇuHö IV and were still in use in phase III (fig. 4, 8)” (Horejs and
Weninger 2016, 130). ÇuHö III is dated to Troy I and EB I in Anatolian terms. Yet

15
collared jars such as these are well documented across the Aegean and never occur in
undisturbed EB I contexts. Instead they are characteristic of EC II pottery production,
with some suggestion of the Amorgian examples that they are more frequent in mature
and late sub-phases. Their presence at Çukuriçi Höyük could reflect either an
incompatibility of the relative chronological schemes used between western Anatolia
and the Aegean, or the presence of an EB II phase at Çukuriçi Höyük that lacks
architectural remains. The suggestion that “the assumed time of first emergence of these
shapes might be reassessed at least for the eastern Aegean” (Röcklinger and Horejs
2018, 91) should be reassessed, as the occurrence of this vessel type is clearly recorded
in a whole variety of other assemblages. Even when such jar handles occur at Liman
Tepe they are in assuredly (local) EB II contexts (Şahoğlu 2011, 138-9, 265-6, cat no.
108, 109). Indeed we should be wary of special pleading, as it may mask problems of
synchronicity in our terminology and chronology, between the Aegean and the Asia
Minor littoral, which we try to explain as regionalism and a time-lag or precociousness
in the adoption of specific stylistic elements.

This has been acknowledged further in Şahoğlu’s research in Liman Tepe, where EC II
dark-on-light painted (Şahoğlu 2011, cat. nos. 96-100) and urfirnis black slipped
(Şahoğlu 2011, cat. nos. 101-107) sauceboats have been found in local EB I contexts.
Sauceboats are assuredly an EB II phenomenon in the Aegean. Not only that, but the
urfirnis sauceboats, for example, occur at Liman Tepe is in a well-known fabric (macro-
and microscopic) found in the Cyclades and Crete in EB II contexts (for Ayia Irini,
Wilson 1999, 71-75, 134). When found at Akrotiri-Thera, Knossos, Poros-Katsambas
and Ayia Irini, these sauceboats are consistent in their fabric and share a single
(probably Cycladic) source.

This is, then, the crux of the matter. Our increased ability to provenance pottery
provides an extra confirmation that we are talking about the same objects from the same
sources. In both the case of the blue schist collared jars at Çukuriçi Höyük and the
sauceboats at Liman Tepe, we are dealing not only with morphological similarity, but of
products demonstrated to be from the same production centres. In this case arguing for
an early appearance of specific types in the East Aegean is not valid. Instead we have to
look to the synchronisms of the phases we have constructed and named.

16
 EAST AND WEST: AMORGIAN FABRICS, ROUTES AND THE ROLE OF
HERAION
The identification of these characteristic imports in mature to late EB II at Heraion has
revealed not only their provenance to be the island of Amorgos, but also has led us to
make links with a number of other EB II sites, where the same pottery shapes and
fabrics occur, both published (Keros/Dhaskalio; Markiani-Amorgos), so far unpublished
(Akrotiri-Thera; Panormos-Naxos), and still others perhaps unrecognised (Çukuriçi
Höyük).

These two very diagnostic and well-known ceramic types, namely the beaked jug with a
two-stage neck profile and the transport jar with incised/slashed horizontal handles,
seem to appear at about the same time in the later part of the EB II period and join other
similar examples, especially in the transport jars, which reveal a number of production
centres of both the vessels and - presumably - their exchanged contents. This forms part
of a general phenomenon, in which the popularity of pouring and drinking vessels
coincides with the emergence of the extensive trade in collared jars/amphorae and their
liquid contents (Day and Wilson 2016). These sets of containers and serving vessels,
which sometimes match in their surface finishes, further signalling the link in their
intended usage, can be linked to major changes in commensal practice during EB II
based around individual servings, hosting, and pouring. Their typological,
compositional and distributional analysis has much to reveal about social practice,
identity and competition (Day and Wilson 2004; Halstead 2012; Hamilakis 1999;
Peperaki 2004). The mobility of the vessels encourages us to think of the transmission
of practice and perhaps of the movement of people.

Of course, with the phenomenon of the Kastri Group/Lefkandi I, the emphasis has been
on an East-to-West movement, whether one believes material culture, people - or both -
are moving in that direction. The Amorgian pottery found at Heraion is a convenient
reminder that, with the increased use of integrated analytical programmes, with a
regional and inter-regional scale of investigation, we can acknowledge routes, but
perhaps should see them as conduits where goods, ideas and people move in both (all?)
directions. In other words, the examination and characterisation of local traditions and

17
the related context of receptivity of connectivity, and in extension the identification of
geographical areas of pottery production and deposition, enables a better understanding
of the exchange mechanisms responsible for the movement of ceramics from one place
to the other.

The analytical programme at Heraion has demonstrated that the location of Samos on a
major route between the Aegean and the Asia Minor littoral does not mean that it is just
a receptor of either Cycladicising or Anatolianising ceramic forms. Instead it is an
active participant in the changes in intensity of connectivity with certain areas but also
changing consumption practices. Samos is situated in a very advantageous geographical
area, on a maritime artery that links communication networks between East and West,
and perhaps should be seen as a ‘bridge’ between western Anatolian littoral - Çukuriçi
Höyük, Miletus, Liman Tepe, Tavşan Adası so to name a few sites contemporary with
Heraion - and the Cycladic islands or even the west coastlands of Mainland Greece.
More particularly, Samos is the last landfall before the Gulf of Kuşadası, if sailing from
the South, crossing the passage between the islands of Rhodes, Kasos, and Karpathos,
as well as the passage between the Dodecanese and the Cyclades (Papageorgiou 2002,
163-164, 303-321), and the first on the principal route from Asia Minor to the central
Aegean and Mainland Greece or in reverse (Agouridis 1997, 8). Particularly important
in this communication are the two arteries extending from the interior of Asia Minor:
the Gulf of Ephesus northeast of Samos formed by the Kaystros or Küçük Menderes
River, and the Meander valley to the southeast formed by the Büyük Menderes River.
Thus, the appearance of a range of vessels across the Aegean and western Anatolia and
the selective adoption, adaptation, emulation, and experimentation of specific elements
indicates among others changes in directionality, intensity, and purposes of interactions.
This is shown in its pottery assemblages, whether locally produced or imported
(Menelaou 2018).

Our material with a provenance on Amorgos fits well into this picture. Studies of
maritime interaction have emphasized the circulation of material goods and have
assessed the centrality of EC settlements by geographical proximity. Broodbank, in his
consideration of inter-island maritime connectivity, is often led to emphasise the
important place that Amorgos occupies in a movement of goods and people between the

18
Aegean and Asia Minor. This is clear from something as basic as inter-island distance
(Broodbank 2000, 75, fig. 15) and target/proximal point analysis (Broodbank 2000,136,
fig. 39). While he is dealing with this in the context of colonisation, the clear routes that
link Samos to the Central Cyclades, via Leros/Patmos, Levitha, Kinaros to Amorgos,
show the importance of the latter island in maritime movement. Nevertheless, new
approaches that rely on a combination of geographical distance, frequency of
connections based on travel time, and the practicalities of ancient seafaring in the
reconstruction of EC maritime connectivity have shown that sites such as Markiani on
Amorgos has a limited potential for connectivity with the rest of the Cyclades, unless
the connection is made through the north of the island (Jarriel 2018, 62, fig. 4). This
‘cost-surface model’ has also shown that during the EB II the area between Naxos and
Paros and the area around the Erimonisia, including also western Amorgos, emerge as
the centre of high connectivity in the Cyclades (Jarriel 2018. 69, fig. 7). While we can
consider Panormos to be in the locale of Amorgos, just across the Erimonisia, the
confirmation of the presence of these specific EB II maritime containers from Southern
Amorgos in Akrotiri-Thera in a late EB II context is important, as the island is a
springboard to further afield, though these specific fabrics do not seem to have been
present in EM IIA Poros-Katsambas.

The appearance in Heraion of these pottery shapes from Amorgos casts further light on
a late EB II phenomenon, where the Anatolian and Cycladic worlds are in intense
contact. This is the period of ‘longboat ideology’ when Cycladic seafarers establish
their reputation in the long-distance connectivity on both sites of the Aegean Sea and
“through their role as mediators between Greece and the east at a time when - before the
advent of sailing ships to this part of the world - the only route into the Aegean from the
south-east via the Dodecanese and Cyclades (particularly Amorgos)” (Sherratt 2000,
18). That these pots represent both serving vessels and the means of transport of the
contents served in these sets is important. Their indication of a movement towards the
Asia Minor coast via Heraion is positive, especially if it encourages us to see the late
EB II phenomenon of the Kastri Group as a multi-directional relationship.

Disclosure Statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

19
 REFERENCES

AGOURIDIS, C. 1997: Sea routes and navigation in the third millennium BC Aegean.
Oxford Journal of Archaeology 16(1), 1–24.

ALRAM-STERN, E., and HOREJS, B. (eds.) 2018: Pottery Technologies and

Sociocultural Connections between the Aegean and Anatolia during the 3rd millennium
BC, OREA 10 (Wien, Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften-Philosophisch-
historische Klasse, Oriental and European Archaeology).

ANGELOPOULOU, Α. 2003: Η ‘Ομάδα Καστριού’ και το Κορφάρι των Αμυγδαλιών

(Πάνορμος) Νάξου. In VLACHOPOULOS, A. and BIRTACHA, K. (eds.), Αργοναύτης.
Τιμητικός τόμος για τον Καθηγητή Χρίστο Γ. Ντούμα από τους μαθητές του στο
Πανεπιστήμιο Αθηνών (1980-2000) (Athens), 159–91.

ANGELOPOULOU, A. 2007: Κορφάρι των Αμυγδαλιών (Πάνορμος) Νάξου. Μία

οχυρωμένη Πρωτοκυκλαδική ακρόπολη. In PROBONAS, I.K. and PSARRAS, S.E.
(eds.), Η Νάξος δια μέσου των αιώνων. Πρακτικά Γ' Πανελλήνιου Συνεδρίου, 4-7
Σεπτεμβρίου 2003, (Athens), 101-26.

ΑNGELOPOULOU, A. 2008: The ‘Kastri Group’: Evidence from Korfari ton

Amygdalion (Panormos) Naxos, Dhaskalio Keros and Akrotiri Thera. In BRODIE, N.J.,
DOOLE, J., GAVALAS, G. and RENFREW, C. (eds.), Horizon/Όρίζων. A Colloquium
on the Prehistory of the Cyclades (Cambridge, McDonald Institute Monograph Series,
McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research), 149–64.

ANGELOPOULOU, A. 2014: Κορφάρι των Αμυγδαλιών (Πάνορμος) Νάξου: μια

οχυρωμένη Πρωτοκυκλαδική ακρόπολη (Athens, Υπουργείο Πολιτισμού, Ταμείο
Αρχαιολογικών Πόρων και Απαλλοτριώσεων).

ANGELOPOULOU, A. forthcoming: Astypalaia and the Cyclades: the pottery evidence

from Vathy on Astypalaia. In MARKETOU, T. and VITALE, S. (eds), SASCAR I. The

20
Southeast Aegean/Southwest Coastal Anatolian Region: Material Evidence and
Cultural Identity. The Early and Middle Bronze Age.Proceedings of the Conference
Held at the Italian Archaeological School at Athens, 12th-14th May 2016 (Rome).

AVGERINOU, P. 1997: Ο οικισμός της Μύρινας. Πρώτες εκτιμήσεις. In DOUMAS,

C.G. and LA ROSA, V. (eds.), Η Πολιόχνη και η Πρώιμη Εποχή του Χαλκού στο Βόρειο
Αιγαίο, Διεθνές Συνέδριο, Αθήνα 22-25 Απριλίου 1996 (Athens, Scuola Archaeologica
Italiana di Atene, University of Athens), 273–81.

BERNABO BREA, L. 1964: Poliochni, città preistorica nell’isola di Lemnos, I.

Monografie della Scuola Archeologica di Atene e delle Missioni Italiane in Oriente 1
(Rome).

BERNABO BREA, L. 1976: Poliochni, città preistorica nell’isola di Lemnos, II.

Monografie della Scuola Archeologica di Atene e delle Missioni Italiane in Oriente 3
(Rome).

BIRTACHA, K. 2006: The pottery from Markiani Phase III. In MARANGOU, L.,
RENFREW, C., DOUMAS, C. and GAVALAS, G. (eds.), Markiani, Amorgos: An
Early Bronze Age fortified settlement. Overview of the 1985-1991 investigations
(London, British School at Athens Supplementary vol. 40), 130–38.

BLEGEN, C.W., CASKEY, J.L., RAWSON, M., and SPERLING, J. 1950: Troy I.
General introduction. The first and second settlements (Princeton).

BLEGEN, C.W., CASKEY, J.L., and RAWSON, M. 1951: Troy II. The third, fourth,
and fifth settlements (Princeton).

BROODBANK, C. 2000: An island archaeology of the early Cyclades (Cambridge).

BROODBANK, C. 2007: The pottery. In RENFREW, C., DOUMAS, C.,

MARANGOU, L. and GAVALAS, G. (eds.), Keros, Dhaskalio Kavos/Κέρος, Κάβος
Δασκαλιοῦ. The investigations of 1987–88. Keros 1 (Cambridge, McDonald Institute
Monograph Series, McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research), 115–237.

21
BROODBANK, C. 2013: “Minding the gap”. Thinking about change in Early Cycladic
island societies from a comparative perspective. American Journal of Archaeology
117(4), 535–43.

BURKE, C., DAY, P.M., and PULLEN, D. 2016: The contribution of petrography to
understanding the production and consumption of Early Helladic ceramics from Nemea,
Mainland Greece. In OWNBY, M. KELLY, S., MASSUCCI, M. and DRUC, I. (eds.),
Integrative Approaches in Ceramic Petrography (Salt Lake City), 104–15.

BURKE, C., DAY, P., ALRAM-STERN, E., DEMAKOPOULOU, K., and HEIN, A.
2018: Crafting and consumption choices: Neolithic - Early Helladic II ceramic
production and distribution, Midea and Tiryns, Mainland Greece. In ALRAM-STERN,
E. and HOREJS, B. and (eds.), Pottery technologies and sociocultural connections
between the Aegean and Anatolia during the 3rd millennium BC. OREA 10. (Wien,
Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften-Philosophisch-historische Klasse,
Oriental and European Archaeology), 145–59.

BURKE, C., DAY, P.M. and KOSSYVA, A. in press. Early Helladic I and Talioti
Pottery: is it just a phase we are going through? Oxford Journal of Archaeology.

DAY, P.M., DOUMAS, C.G., ERKANAL, H., KILIKOGLOU, V., KOUKA, O.,
RELAKI, M. and V. ŞAHOĞLU. 2009: New light on the ‘Kastri Group’: a petrographic
and chemical investigation of ceramics from Liman Tepe and Bakla Tepe. XXX
Arkeometri Sonuçlarɩ Toplantɩsɩ 24, 335–47.

DAY, P.M. and WILSON, D. 2004: Ceramic change and the practice of eating and
drinking in Early Bronze Age Crete. In HALSTEAD, P. and BARRETT, J.C. (eds.),
Food, cuisine and society in Prehistoric Greece (Oxford, Sheffield Studies in Aegean
Archaeology 5), 45–62.

DAY, P.M. and WILSON, D. 2016: Dawn of the amphora: the emergence of maritime
transport jars in the Early Bronze Age Aegean. In DEMESTICHA, S. and KNAPP,

22
A.B. (eds.), Maritime transport containers in the Bronze-Iron Age Aegean and Eastern
Mediterrannean (Uppsala), 17–37.

DAY, P.M., MÜLLER, N.S., and KILIKOGLOU, V 2019: The Middle Bronze Age
pottery: Phase A. In NIKOLAKOPOULOU, I (ed.), Akrotiri Thera: Middle Bronze Age.
Pottery and stratigraphy. Volume I, Stratigraphy, ceramic typology and technology,
weaving equipment (Athens, The Archaeological Society at Athens Library Series No
318), 323–76.

EFE, T. 2007: The theories of the ‘Great Caravan Route’ between Cilicia and Troy: the
Early Bronze Age III period in inland Western Anatolia. Anatolian Studies 57, 47–64.

ESKITZIOGLOU, P. 2006: The pottery of Markiani Phase IV. In MARANGOU, L.,

RENFREW, C., DOUMAS, C. and GAVALAS, G. (eds.), Markiani, Amorgos: an
Early Bronze Age fortified settlement. Overview of the 1985-1991 investigations
(London, British School at Athens Supplementary vol. 40), 139–57.

GAUSS, W., KLEBINDER-GAUSS, G., and VON RÜDEN, C. (eds.) 2016: The
transmission of technical knowledge in the production of ancient Mediterranean
pottery. Proceedings of the international conference at the Austrian Institute at Athens
23rd-25th November 2012 (Vienna).

GEORGIADIS, M. 2012: Kos in the Neolithic and Early Bronze Age. The Halasarna
finds and the Aegean settlement pattern (Philadelphia, Prehistory Monographs 38).

HALSTEAD, P. 2012: Feast, food and fodder in Neolithic-Bronze Age Greece:

commensality and the construction of value. In POLLOCK, S. (ed.), Between feasts and
daily meals: towards and archaeology of commensal places (Berlin, Berlin Studies of
the Ancient World 30), 21–51.

HAMILAKIS, Y. 1999: Food technologies/technologies of the body: the social context

of wine and oil production and consumption in Bronze Age Crete. World Archaeology
31(1), 38–54.

23
HILDITCH, J. 2007: Appendix D. Petrographic analysis of the ceramics from Kavos,
Keros. In RENFREW, C., DOUMAS, C., MARANGOU, L. and GAVALAS, G. (eds.),
Keros, Dhaskalio Kavos/Κέρος, Κάβος Δασκαλιοῦ. The investigations of 1987–88.
Keros 1 (Cambridge, McDonald Institute Monograph Series, McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research), 238–63.

HILDITCH, J. 2013: The fabrics of the ceramics at Dhaskalio. In RENFREW, C.,

PHILANIOTOU, O., BRODIE, N., GAVALAS, G. and BOYD, M.J. (eds.), The
settlement at Dhaskalio. The sanctuary on Keros and the origins of Aegean ritual
practice: the excavations of 2006–2008 Vol. I, (Cambridge, McDonald Institute
Monograph Series, McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research), 465–82.

HILDITCH, J. 2015: The ceramic fabrics of the Special Deposit South. In RENFREW,
C., PHILANIOTOU, O., BRODIE, N., GAVALAS, G. and BOYD, M.J. (eds.), The
settlement at Dhaskalio. The sanctuary on Keros and the origins of Aegean ritual
practice: the excavations of 2006–2008 Vol. II, (Cambridge, McDonald Institute
Monograph Series, McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research), 229–47.

HILDITCH, J. 2018: The fabric study of the pottery of Dhaskalio and Kavos. In
RENFREW, C., PHILANIOTOU, O., BRODIE, N., GAVALAS, G. and BOYD, M.J.
(eds.), The marble finds from Kavos and the archaeology of ritual. The sanctuary on
Keros and the origins of Aegean ritual practice Vol. III, (Cambridge, McDonald
Institute Monograph Series, McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research), 445–93.

HOOD, S. 1981-1982: Excavations in Chios 1938-1955. Prehistoric Emporio and Ayio

Gala. Bd. I-II (Oxford, The British School of Archaeology at Athens. Suppl. Vols. No.
15-16).

HOREJS, B., GRASBÖCK, S. and RÖCKLINGER, M. 2017: Continuity and change in

an Early Bronze Age 1 metal workshop. In HOREJS, B. (ed.), Çukuriçi Höyük 1.
Anatolia and the Aegean from the 7th to the 3rd Millennium BC, OREA 5 (Wien,

24
Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften-Philosophisch-historische Klasse,
Oriental and European Archaeology), 95–124.

HOREJS, B., and WENINGER, B. 2016: Early Troy and its significance for the Early
Bronze Age in Western Anatolia. In PERNICKA, E., ÜNLÜSOY, S. and BLUM,
S.W.E. (eds.), Early Bronze Age Troy: chronology, cultural development and
interregional contacts (Bonn), 123–45.

JARRIEL, K. 2018: Across the Surface of the Sea: Maritime Interaction in the Cycladic
Early Bronze Age. Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 31(1), 52–76.

KARANTZALI, E. 2006: The pottery of Markiani Phases I and II. In MARANGOU,

L., RENFREW, C., DOUMAS, C. and GAVALAS, G. (eds.), Markiani, Amorgos: an
Early Bronze Age fortified settlement. Overview of the 1985-1991 investigations
(London, British School at Athens Supplementary vol. 40), 101–30.

KARIOTIS, S., DAY, P.M. and WILSON, D. forthcoming: The Early Bronze Age
ceramic sequence at Akrotiri, Thera. In DOUMAS, C., GIANNIKOURI, A. and
KOUKA, O. (eds.), The Aegean Early Bronze Age: new evidence. International
conference, April 11th-14th 2008 Ministry of Culture – Archaeological Institute of
Aegean Studies (Athens).

KNAPP, A.B. and DEMESTICHA, S. 2017: Mediterranean connections. Maritime

transport containers and seaborne trade in the Bronze and Early Iron Ages (New York
and London).

KNAPPETT, C. and KIRIATZI, E. 2016: Technological mobilities: perspectives from

the eastern Mediterranean - an introduction. In KIRIATZI, E. and KNAPPETT, C.
(eds.), Human mobility and technological transfer in the prehistoric Mediterranean
(Cambridge), 1–17.

KNAPPETT, C. and NIKOLAKOPOULOU, I. 2015: Inside out? Materiality and

connectivity in the Aegean archipelago. In KNAPP, A.B. and VAN DOMMELEN, P.

25
(eds.), The Cambridge prehistory of the Bronze and Iron Age Mediterranean
(Cambridge), 25–39.

KORDATZAKI, G., SBONIAS, K., FARINETTI, E. and TZACHILI, I. 2018:

Technological and provenance analysis of an Early and Middle Cycladic pottery
assemblage from Therasia, Greece. The Annual of the British School at Athens 113, 1–
17.

KOUKA, O. 2013: “Minding the gap”. Against the gaps: the Early Bronze Age and the
transition to the Middle Bronze Age in the northern and eastern Aegean/western
Anatolia. American Journal of Archaeology 117(4), 569–80.

KOUKA, O. 2017: Η Προϊστορική κατοίκηση στο Ηραίον Σαμου: οι ανασκαφές 2009–

2013 Βόρεια της Ιερας Οδου. In TRIANTAPHYLLIDIS, P. (ed.), Το αρχαιολογικό έργο
στα νησιά του Αιγαίου. Διεθνές επιστημονικό συνέδριο, Ρόδος, 27 Νοεμβρίου–1
Δεκεμβρίου 2013 (Athens, Αρχαιολογικό Ινστιτούτο Αιγαιακών Σπουδών, Υπουργείο
Πολιτισμού και Αθλητισμού), 163–80.

KOUKA, O. and MENELAOU, S. 2018: Settlement and society in the Early Bronze
Age Heraion: exploring stratigraphy, architecture and ceramic innovation after mid–
3rdmillennium BC. In ALRAM-STERN, E. and HOREJS, B. (eds.), Pottery
Technologies and Sociocultural Connections between the Aegean and Anatolia during
the 3rd millennium BC, OREA 10 (Wien, Österreichische Akademie der
Wissenschaften-Philosophisch-historische Klasse, Oriental and European Archaeology),
119–42.

LEIDWANGER, J. and KNAPPETT, C. 2018: Maritime networks, connectivity, and

mobility in the Ancient Mediterranean. In LEIDWANGER, J. and KNAPPETT, C.
(eds.), Maritime networks in the Ancient Mediterranean world (New York) 1–21.

MARAN, J. 1998: Kulturwandel auf dem griechischen Festland und den Kykladen im
späten 3. Jahrtausend v. Chr. Studien zu den kulturellen Verhältnissen in Süd osteuropa

26
und dem zentralen sowie östlichen Mittelmeerraum in der späten Kupfer- und frühen
Bronzezeit (Bonn, Universitätsforschungen zur prähistorischen Archäologie 53).

MARANGOU, L., RENFREW, C., DOUMAS, C., and GAVALAS, C. 2008: Markiani
on Amorgos: an Early Bronze Age fortified settlement – overview of the 1985-91
investigations. In BRODIE, N.J., DOOLE, J., GAVALAS, G. and RENFREW, C.
(eds.), Horizon/Όρίζων. A Colloquium on the Prehistory of the Cyclades (Cambridge,
McDonald Institute Monograph Series, McDonald Institute for Archaeological
Research), 97–103.

MARTHARI, M. 2008: Aspects of pottery circulation in the Cyclades during the early
EB II period. Fine and semi-fine imported ceramic wares at Skarkos, Ios. In BRODIE,
N.J., DOOLE, J., GAVALAS, G. and RENFREW, C. (eds.), Horizon/Όρίζων. A
Colloquium on the Prehistory of the Cyclades (Cambridge, McDonald Institute
Monograph Series, McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research), 71–84.

MENELAOU, S. 2018: A diachronic study of the Early Bronze Age Pottery from
Heraion on Samos, Greece: an integrated approach (Unpublished PhD thesis,
University of Sheffield). http://etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/id/eprint/21398

MENELAOU, S., KOUKA, O. and DAY, P.M. 2016: Pottery production and exchange
at the Heraion, Samos during the late third millennium BC. First steps in the study of
technology and provenance. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 7, 480–488.

MENTESANA, R.B. 2016: The Final Neolithic-Early Bronze Age transition in

Phaistos, Crete: an investigation of continuity and change in ceramic manufacture
(Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Sheffield). http://etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/15354/

MILOJČIČ, V. 1961: Die prähistorische Siedlung unter dem Heraion. Grabung 1953
und 1955. SAMOS I (Bonn).

NODAROU, E. 2011: Pottery production, distribution and consumption in Early

Minoan West Crete: an analytical perspective (Oxford).

27
PAPADATOS, Y. and NODAROU, E. 2018: Pottery technology(ies) in Prepalatial
Crete: evidence from archaeological and archaeometric study. In ALRAM-STERN, E.
and HOREJS, B. (eds.), Pottery Technologies and Sociocultural Connections between
the Aegean and Anatolia during the 3rd millennium BC, OREA 10 (Wien,
Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften-Philosophisch-historische Klasse,
Oriental and European Archaeology), 287–303.

PAPAGEORGIOU, D.K. 2002: Θαλάσσιοι δρόμοι στο προϊστορικό Αιγαίο κατά τη

Νεολιθική και την Πρώιμη Εποχή του Χαλκού (Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of
Athens).

PELOSCHEK, L. 2017: Social dynamics and the development of new pottery

signatures at Çukurici Höyük, 7th to 3rd millennium BC. In HOREJS, B. (ed.), Çukuriçi
Höyük 1. Anatolia and the Aegean from the 7th to the 3rd Millennium BC, OREA 5
(Wien, Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften-Philosophisch-historische Klasse,
Oriental and European Archaeology), 125–35.

PEPERAKI, O. 2004: The House of Tiles at Lerna: dimensions of ‘social Complexity’.

In BARRETT, J.C. and HALSTEAD, P. (eds.), The Emergence of Civilisation Revisited
(Oxford, Sheffield Studies in Aegean Archaeology 6), 214–31.

PULLEN, D.J. 2013: “Minding the gap”. Bridging the gaps in cultural change within
the Early Bronze Age Aegean. American Journal of Archaeology 117(4), 545–53.

RAHMSTORF, L. 2016: Emerging economic complexity in the Aegean and western

Anatolia during earlier third millennium BC. In MOLLOY, B.P.C (ed.), Of Odysseus
and oddities: scales and modes of interaction between prehistoric Aegean societies and
their neighbours (Oxford, Sheffield Studies in Aegean Archaeology 10), 225–76.

RENFREW, A.C. 1972: The emergence of civilization: the Cyclades and the Aegean in
the third millennium BC (London).

28
RENFREW, A.C. 2006: The pottery: Introduction. In MARANGOU, L., RENFREW,
C., DOUMAS, C. and GAVALAS, G. (eds.), Markiani, Amorgos: an Early Bronze Age
fortified settlement. Overview of the 1985-1991 investigations (London, British School
at Athens Supplementary vol. 40), 95–99.

RENFREW, A.C. and EVANS, R.K. 2007: The Early Bronze Age pottery. In
RENFREW, C. (ed.), Excavations at Phylakopi in Melos 1974-77. BSA Supplementary
Volume 42 (London), 129–80.

RÖCKLINGER, M. and HOREJS, B. 2018: Function and technology: a pottery

assemblage from an Early Bronze Age house at Çukuriçi Höyük. In ALRAM-STERN,
E. and HOREJS, B. (eds.), Pottery Technologies and Sociocultural Connections
between the Aegean and Anatolia during the 3rd millennium BC, OREA 10 (Wien,
Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften-Philosophisch-historische Klasse,
Oriental and European Archaeology), 77–104.

RUTTER, J.B. 1979: Ceramic change in the Aegean Early Bronze Age. The Kastri
Group, Lefkandi I and Lerna IV. A theory concerning the origin of EH III ceramics,
UCLA Institute of Archaeology Occasional Papers 5 (Los Angeles).

ŞAHOĞLU, V. 2005: The Anatolian Trade Network and the Izmir region during the
Early Bronze Age. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 24, 339–61.

ŞAHOĞLU, V. 2011: Early Bronze Age pottery in coastal western Anatolia. In

ŞAHOĞLU, V. and SOTIRAKOPOULOU, P. (eds.), Across the Cyclades and western
Anatolia during the 3rdmillennium BC, (Istanbul), 136-43.

SEMIZ, B., ABAY, E., DEDEOĞLU, F., KONAKÇI, E. and OZAN, A. 2018. An
archaeometric investigation of Early and Middle Bronze Age pottery from the Upper
Meander Basin in Southwestern Anatolia. Mediterranean Archaeology and
Archaeometry 18(3), 121–50.

29
SHERRATT, S. 2000: Catalogue of Cycladic antiquities in the Ashmolean
Museum: The Captive Spirit, Volume I (Oxford).

SOTIRAKOPOULOU, P.I. 1993: The chronology of the ‘Kastri Group’ reconsidered.

The Annual of the British School at Athens 88, 5–20.

SOTIRAKOPOULOU, P.I. 1997: Κυκλάδες και Βόρειο Αιγαίο. Οι σχέσεις τους κατά
το δεύτερο ήμισυ της 3ης χιλιετίας π.Χ. In DOUMAS, C.G. and LA ROSA, V. (eds.), Η
Πολιόχνη και η Πρώιμη Εποχή του Χαλκού στο Βόρειο Αιγαίο, Διεθνές Συνέδριο, Αθήνα
22-25 Απριλίου 1996 (Athens, Scuola Archaeologica Italiana di Atene, University of
Athens), 522–42.

SOTIRAKOPOULOU, P.I. 1999: Ακρωτήρι Θήρας. Η Νεολιθική και η Πρώιμη Εποχή

του Χαλκού επί τη βάσει της κεραμεικής (Athens, Βιβλιοθήκη της εν Αθήναις
Αρχαιολογικής Εταιρείας αρ. 191).

SOTIRAKOPOULOU, P.I. 2008: The Cyclades, the East Aegean islands and the
western Asia Minor: their relations in the Aegean Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age.
In ERKANAL, H., HAUPTMANN, H., ŞAHOĞLU, V. and TUNCEL, R. (eds.), The
Aegean in the Neolithic, Chalcolithic and the Early Bronze Age: proceedings of the
international symposium, October 13th -19th 1997, Urla - İzmir (Turkey) (Ankara),
533–557.

SOTIRAKOPOULOU, P. 2016: The pottery from Dhaskalio. The Sanctuary on Keros

and the origins of Aegean ritual practice: the excavations of 2006–2008 Vo.l IV.
(Cambridge, McDonald Institute Monograph Series, McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research).

TARTARON, T.F. 2018: Geography matters: defining maritime small worlds of the
Aegean Bronze Age. In LEIDWANGER, J. and KNAPPETT, C. (eds.), Maritime
networks in the Ancient Mediterranean world (New York) 61–92.

30
VAUGHAN, S.J. 1990: Petrographic analysis of the Early Cycladic wares from
Akrotiri, Thera. In HARDY, D.A., DOUMAS, C.G., SAKELLARAKIS, J.A. and
WARREN, P.M. (eds.), Thera and the Aegean World III, Vol. 1: Archaeology.
Proceedings of the Third International Congress, Santorini, Greece, 3-9 September
1989 (London), 470–87.

VAUGHAN, S.J. 2006: Macroscopic and petrographic studies of pottery from Markiani
on Amorgos. In MARANGOU, L., RENFREW, C., DOUMAS, C. and GAVALAS, G.
(eds.), Markiani, Amorgos: an Early Bronze Age fortified settlement. Overview of the
1985-1991 investigations (London, British School at Athens Supplementary vol. 40),
99–101.

WILSON, D.E. 1999: Keos IX. Ayia Irini: Periods I-III. The Early Neolithic and Early
Bronze Age settlements. Part 1. Pottery and small finds (Mainz on Rhine).

WILSON, D.E. 2013: Ayia Irini II-III, Kea. The phasing and relative chronology of the
Early Bronze Age II settlement. Hesperia 82, 385–434.

WILSON, D.E. and DAY, P.M. 1994: Ceramic regionalism in Prepalatial Central Crete:
the Mesara imports at EMI-EMIIA Knossos. The Annual of the British School at Athens
89, 1–87.

WILSON, D.E., DAY, P.M. and JOYNER, L. 1999: EM IIB ware groups at Knossos:
the 1907-1908 South front tests. The Annual of the British School at Athens 94, 1–62.

WILSON, D.E., DAY, P.M. and DIMOPOULOU-RETHEMIOTAKI, N. 2008: The

gateway of Poros-Katsambas: trade and exchange between North-central Crete and the
Cyclades in EB I-II. In BRODIE, N.J., DOOLE, J., GAVALAS, G. and RENFREW, C.
(eds.), Horizon/Όρίζων. A Colloquium on the Prehistory of the Cyclades (Cambridge,
McDonald Institute Monograph Series, McDonald Institute for Archaeological
Research), 261–70.

31
ZACHOS, K. and DOUSOUGLI, A. 2008: Observations on the Early Bronze Age
sealings from the Cave of Zas at Naxos. In BRODIE, N.J., DOOLE, J., GAVALAS, G.
and RENFREW, C. (eds.), Horizon/Όρίζων. A Colloquium on the Prehistory of the
Cyclades (Cambridge, McDonald Institute Monograph Series, McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research), 85–95.

32
 List of tables

Table 1. Catalogue of the ceramic vessels analysed and discussed in this paper.
Context Phase Vessel Shape Inv. No/ Sample No. Macroscopic Group Petrographic Group

SO-NW gerichtetes Mauer Heraion II Beaked jug HR15/148 Blue/Purple Phyllite Coarse/Dark Phyllite
(E8/51-55)
Küchenbau (F6/77) Heraion II Beaked jug HR15/155 Blue/Purple Phyllite Coarse/Dark Phyllite
West of EB II fortification Heraion III Collared jar HR15/192 Blue/Purple Phyllite Coarse/Dark Phyllite
wall (4820/5630)
West of EB II fortification Heraion II-III Collared jar HR15/220 Blue/Purple Phyllite Coarse/Dark Phyllite
wall (4820/5630)
House deposit (4820/5630) Heraion II-III Collared jar HR15/295 Blue/Purple Phyllite Coarse/Dark Phyllite
Beneath destruction level Heraion II-III Collared jar HS13.28.39 Blue/Purple Phyllite n/a
west of HS13:10 house wall
(4820/5630)
Beneath destruction level Heraion II-III Collared jar HS13.28.54 Blue/Purple Phyllite n/a
west of HS13:10 house wall
(4820/5630)
Schicht unter den Hausern Heraion III Collared jar Milojčić 1961, pl. 40:17 Blue/Purple Phyllite n/a
(G7/79)
Küchenbau (F6/77) Heraion II Collared jar Milojčić 1961, pls. 16:3, 44:3 Blue/Purple Phyllite n/a
Mauerteil (F6/16) Heraion II Collared jar n/a Blue/Purple Phyllite n/a
Hera Temple area (unclear) Heraion II-III Collared jar n/a Blue/Purple Phyllite n/a
Hera Temple area (unclear) Heraion II-III Collared jar n/a Blue/Purple Phyllite n/a
Hera Temple area (unclear) Heraion II-III Collared jar n/a Blue/Purple Phyllite n/a
Hera Temple area (unclear) Heraion II-III Collared jar n/a Blue/Purple Phyllite n/a
Hera Temple area (unclear) Heraion II-III Collared jar HR15/278 (Milojčić 1961, pl. 24:1) Blue/Purple Phyllite Red Phyllite
House deposit (4820/5630) Heraion II-III Collared jar HS13.44.96 Red Phyllite n/a

33
Table 2. Catalogue of Aegean and Anatolian sites with evidence of transport jars and
potential Amorgian fabric imports during the EB II.

Site Phase(s) References

Markiani-Amorgos II, III, IV Karantzali 2006, 106, 128, figs. 7.2: 6-8, 7.12:2-3;
Birtacha 2006, 135, fig. 7.14:4, 6, pl. 33f; Eskitzioglou
2006, 149, fig. 7.22:1-5, 9-11, pl. 36d
Panormos-Naxos EC II late Angelopoulou 2003, fig. 26; 2008, 151, 155, 157, figs.
16.5:5-6, 16.7; 2014, 203-218, figs. 3.52-3.57, e.g.
BII.α.8 and BII.α.29, 223, fig. 3.65: BIV.12 and 16
Zas Cave-Naxos IV Zachos and Dousougli 2008, 86, fig. 10.7:267
Kavos Special Deposit North- B? Broodbank 2007, 211, figs. 6.9:79-82, 6.15:201-202,
Keros 6.16:203, 6.32:200-203
Vathy-Astypalaia EC II late Angelopoulou forthcoming
Phylakopi-Melos A2 Renfrew and Evans 2007, 150-151, 153, figs. 5.7:13-14,
5.8:7-8
Skarkos-Ios II (early-developed EC Marthari 2008, 79, fig. 9.18
II)
Ayia Irini-Kea II, III Wilson 1999, 36-39, pls. 9, 10 and 50:II-196–II-204, II-
215–II-218, II-221, 85, pl. 70:II-757, 111-12, pl. 78:III-
155–III-157, 139, pl. 91:III-502; Day and Wilson 2016,
tab. 1
Akrotiri-Thera EC II late Vaughan 1990, 479; Sotirakopoulou 1999, 167-170:K-B,
2, fig. 57α, pls. 188-196; Angelopoulou 2008, 162, figs.
16.22, 16.24
Panagia Koimisis-Therasia EC-MB Kordatzaki et al. 2018, 12-13, fig. 7:l
Poliochni-Lemnos Blue-Green, Yellow, Bernabò Brea 1964, pls. LXXVIII:f, g, CXXIV:a-e,
and Brown CXXX:e; CLIb, CLXII:a; 1976, 331, pls. CCVI:e, f,
CCXI:a-e, CCLXXX:i
Mytilene-Lesbos Avgerinou 1997, footnote 104
Emporio-Chios V, IV, II, I Hood 1981, 402, fig. 182, pl. 73:1233, 417, pl. 78a:4;
1982, 434, 460, 468, fig. 206:1717, 498:2046, 542:2412,
pls. 88b, 90:1718, 1720; some in off-island micaceous
wares
Troy Ib and II Blegen et al. 1950, pl. 236:27; Blegen et al. 1951, fig.
401, 35:479
Liman Tepe EB II late (LTV2) Şahoğlu 2011, 138-139, cat. nos. 108-109
Gümüldür Prof. Koray Konuk, personal communication
Halasarna-Kos EB II Georgiadis 2012, 64, 88, 138, fig. 18:Kt.Lh10

34
 Table 3. Summary of information from the macroscopic analysis. 3
Macroscopic Colour Clay Body Inclusions Firing
Group
Blue/Purple Phyllite Reddish brown to Coarse to medium- Set in order of abundance from Moderate to high-
reddish grey clay paste, coarse, medium fired, complete
dark red core hardness, soapy feel, dominant to very few: oxidation?
smooth-fine texture,
rare voids • purple/red inclusions, a-sa, el,
probably phyllite
• white-light grey transparent,
hard felsic inclusions,
occasionally fractured texture,
sa-sr, probably quartz
• dark grey, hard, crystalline, a-
sa, probably feldspar
• silver/grey a-sa, el, probably
metamorphic rock fragments
(mica schist)
• silver, sparkling inclusions, a-
sa, probably muscovite mica
• very rare chalky-white rock
fragments, sa-sr, probably
limestone
Red Phyllite Red/reddish brown clay Medium-coarse, Set in order of abundance from Moderate to high-
paste medium hardness, fired, complete
soapy feel, fine texture, dominant to very few: oxidation?
very rare voids
• silver/grey a-sa, el, probably
metamorphic rock fragments
(mica schist)
• red inclusions, a-sa, el,
probably slate or phyllite
• white-light grey transparent,
hard felsic inclusions,
occasionally fractured texture,
sa-sr, probably quartz
• dark grey, hard, crystalline, a-
sa, probably feldspar
• silver, sparkling inclusions, a-
sa, probably muscovite mica

35
Captions of illustrations

Figure 1. Map showing Heraion and selected sites mentioned in the text (by S.
Menelaou).

Figure 2. Beaked jugs with a two-stage neck profile from Heraion on Samos
(illustrations by C. Kolb and photographs by C. Papanikolopoulos).

Figure 3. Beaked jugs with a two-stage neck profile from Panormos on Naxos (top
modified after Angelopoulou 2007, fig. 5; bottom modified after Angelopoulou 2014,
fig. 3.68:BI.α.3).

Figure 4. Transport collared jars with incised or slashed handles from Heraion (top after
Milojčić 1961, pls. 16:3 and 44:3, no scale).

Figure 5. Transport collared jar with incised or slashed handles from Panormos on
Naxos (modified after Angelopoulou 2007, fig. 25).

Figure 6. Macrographs of selected samples (A-B taken with a USB Handheld Digital
Microscope and C-D taken with a stereoscope): A. HR15/220; B. HR15/192; C.
HR13.28.39; D. HR15/295.

Figure 7. Micrographs of samples of the Coarse/Dark Phyllite Petrographic Fabric from

Heraion and comparative sites. A. Heraion 15/155; B. Heraion 15/192; C. Akrotiri
03/128; D. Panormos 03/30. All images taken in crossed-polars.

Figure 8. Micrographs of samples of the Red Phyllite Petrographic Fabric from Heraion
and comparative sites A. Heraion 15/278; B. Panormos 03/16; C. Akrotiri 03/134; D.
Akrotiri 03/133. All images taken in crossed-polars.

List of appendices
Appendix 1. Petrographic fabric descriptions.

36
1
The information about the presence of stray EB transport jar incised handles southeast of

Gümüldür was provided by Prof. Koray Konuk (University of Louvain) in June 2019 and we

thank him for permission to make reference.

2
One amphora sample likely corresponds to Ware Group 42, that is petrographically ascribed

with a local provenance and is characterised by a metamorphic (mainly mica schist) petrology

(Röcklinger and Horejs, 95-96, fig. 11).

3
For explanation of the abbreviations see the supplementary material in the Appendix.

37