Studi Miscellanei di Ceramografia Greca, vol. V, Ediarch, Catania 2019 (original) (raw)
Dialoghi di archeologia della Magna Grecia e del Mediterraneo, Atti III Convegno, 2019
Tra luglio e agosto 2016 ha preso avvio a Monasterace marina il progetto “Restaurando memorie”, workshop di disegno, rilievo e restauro finanziato con i fondi 8x1000 del bando 2015 della Tavola Valdese, realizzato dal Dipartimento SAGAS dell’Università di Firenze (responsabile per il Dipartimento I. Romeo; organizzazione e coordinamento attività. M.R. Luberto con la collaborazione di G. Spallino; rilievi C. Gira con la collaborazione di D. Panariti) in partenariato con il Polo Museale della Calabria (resp. R. Agostino) e il comune di Monasterace (resp. M. Marchione) e in collaborazione con l’allora Soprintendenza Archeologia (resp. A. Ruga). Le attività si sono concentrate nell’area di S. Marco nord-est posta in prossimità dell’ingresso nord del Parco Archeologico dell’antica Kaulon. Il sito, com’è noto, è stato indagato nel corso dell’ultimo decennio dalla missione dell’Ateneo fiorentino guidata da L. Lepore e ha restituito testimonianze relative a alcuni quartieri domestici dell’abitato dell’antica Caulonia cronologicamente collocabili tra la metà dell’VIII sec. a.C. e il V-VI sec. d.C. (Luberto 2015; Lepore et Alii 2013; Lepore 2010). Il progetto al quale si è dato ora inizio ha permesso di condurre per la prima volta nel settore in questione una campagna di rilievo fotogrammetrico, aereo e terrestre, volta a aggiornare e ottimizzare i dati raccolti in precedenza: si presenta di seguito una sintesi relativa alle metodologie e ai risultati preliminari.
HISTORY OF RESEARCHAND CURRENT PERSPECTIVES Research on ancient Greek mosaics, consisting of both articles and monographs, has reached an advanced state but is not yet considered to have been exhausted. What is still missing, above all, is an analytical study dedicated to one of the most significant cities: Athens. A large part of the existing body of research, moreover, suffers from the lack of new editions and the absence of a consistent methodology in data processing and common terminology, due partly to the absence of an AIEMA affiliated national branch such as those already formed in Italy, Spain, France, Portugal, the United Kingdom, Tunisia, Cyprus, Turkey, Canada and the United States. For this reason, the results of the research in this text are presented in accordance with the methods established by AIEMA (International Association for the Study of Ancient Mosaics) and AISCOM (Italian Association for the Study and Conservation of Mosaics), who operates through annual conferences and the online platform TESS, the most up to date system for digital cata- loguing of ancient pavements, used for recording all examples in Italy but which can also be used to collect data acquired from other nations. Recent monographs using this methodology have recently been produced by Francesca Rinaldi for the mosaics of Venice, Michele Bueno for those of Tuscany, Andrea Salcuni for the repertoire of Abruzzo, Giovanna Paolucci for the mosaic cul- ture of Emilia Romagna and recently by Francesca Ghedini, Marta Novello, Francesca Rinaldi and Michele Bueno for the mosaics of Aquileia. GEOGRAPHICAL CONTEXT AND CHRONOLOGICAL BOUNDARIES The study addressed various aspects of mosaic production, ranging from the more strictly technical to those relating to the choice of decorative themes and the relationship between mosa- ics and the architectural space within which they were employed. With regards to the chronological framework, four macro phases are utilised, consistent with the canonical chronological divisions for ancient Greek artistic/artisanal culture: a. Classical and proto-Hellenistic (500-300 BCE) b. Hellenistic (300-50 BCE) c. Roman (50 BCE-300 CE) d. Late Imperial/Paleochristian (300-600 CE) The urban area is divided into fourteen zones, which coincide with the selections made in the volumes of the Topografia di Atene of the Italian Archaeological School at Athens. The repertoire taken into consideration is composed of all the attestations referable to geo- graphical contexts with a distinct urban character and excludes rural areas. 168 Mosaici e pavimenti di Atene (V sec. a.C.-VI sec. d.C.) ORGANISATION OF THE TEXT The research presented in the text consists of the study of the mosaics, which have been surveyed and analysed according to execution techniques following the criteria of the separation into distinct components of the floor (edge/field). This typological study constitutes Part I of the text, which con- siders pebble, chip and irregular tessera mosaics, cement, opus tessellatum, opus vermicolatum, opus sec- tile and terracotta mosaics. The study of each class of mosaic is introduced by a brief synopsis of the history of studies and current state of research. This is followed by a brief description of the repertoire under examination and a detailed investigation of the floor treatments and decorative motifs of the edges, the composition of the fields, and the figurative repertoire. Each motif and decorative pattern is accompanied by an alpha-numeric code consisting of the acronym DM (Mosaic Decoration) and a number referring to the table of the volumes of the Le décor géométrique de la mosaïque romaine. If a decorative motif is not present in the volumes, only the name of the motif or composition is indicated. Comparisons with other specimens within the Greek territory accompany each decoration, as well as, in cases of particularly significant examples, other areas of the Mediterranean. Part II of the volume is dedicated to the reconstruction of data derived from the analysis of the mosaics. Chapter 1 reports the quantitative data, which constitutes the documentary basis of Chapter 2, in which a historical-topographical synthesis of the mosaic culture of the macro-peri- ods under examination is presented. This section of the study offers useful indications for recon- structing the evolution of the repertoire, the relationships between various micro/macro-regional areas, and the development of local workshops or, alternatively, the involvement of non-local craftsmen brought into the city. Each chronological-topographical section is accompanied by a section dedicated to the relation- ship between the mosaic and the architectural context for which they were produced, useful for un- derstanding the role of mosaics in the broader context of the decorative system of ancient buildings. Part III consists of the catalogue of identified specimens, each accompanied by a numerical code consisting of a Roman numeral and an Arabic number. The Roman numeral indicates the chrono- logical context: I: Classical and Proto-Hellenistic; II: Hellenistic; III: Roman; IV: Late Imperial/ Paleochristian. The Arabic number represents the division of the territory under study into the ur- ban macro-areas mentioned above. A specific section of the catalogue is reserved for mosaics with an unidentified chronological and topographical context (identified with the abbreviation EX), as well as for sectilia pavimenta and polychrome marble paving (identified with the abbreviate OS). The numerical code is also reported alongside each mosaic mentioned in Parts I, II, III and IV of the text. Each catalogue entry consists of the following information: numerical code; name of the building and relevance; the pages where the mosaic is mentioned in the text; the table number in which the sample image appears; L: location of conservation; A: environment; S: scan of the floor covering; I: layout type; CL: colour scheme and lithotypes; DM: dimensions; P: subfloor prepara- tion; ECA: complimentary decorative elements; D: short description; C: chronology and dating elements (if a new proposal for dating is advanced the pages of the text in which it is discussed is indicated); B: basic bibliography. Finally, Part IV presents the tables in which the mosaics are collected inserted, where possible, into the plan of the relevant architectural complex. The plans were drawn up in detail using all avail- able published and unpublished data. The archaeological drawings were created through scientific reconstructions resulting from the study conducted in the manner described below. The plans of the buildings are presented in grey, including those resulting from reconstruction. The preserved sections of the mosaics are presented in black or red while the reconstructed examples are presented in grey or blue. An exception was made for intact or largely preserved mosaics with published zenith photos or high quality drawings. In these cases, the image was mounted inside the plan (for example in the balaneion of the Serangeion [I.68-69], the Odeion of Herodes Atticus [III.24-25, OS.4], in the House of the National Gardens [IV-36-42], and the Church of Hag. Petros Stavromenos [EX.2]). Finally, the graphical section is equipped with a collection of maps, consisting of aerial satellite pho- tos made with Google Earth Pro, which identified the location of all mosaics under examination, recognisable thanks to the catalogue number presented as well in an introductory synoptic table.
The topic of this paper is the G 2-3 pottery from Lemnos. This poorly studied class of ceramics has been found in different areas of the archaic settlement of Hephaestia, in its necropolis and in the Kabeirion of Chloi. An abundant quantity, which is being prepared for publication, came from the sanctuary of the archaic acropolis of Hephaestia, in particular from the building with votive deposit (the so-called "Edificio con stipe"). The study aims to contribute to the debate on the production, forms and diffusion of G 2-3 pottery in the North Aegean, and to reconstruct ceramic production on the island of Lemnos between the Early Iron Age and the Archaic period.