Reviews
This is a daring and challenging new book that bravely takes up the task to examine and reassess CP pottery in the longue durée.The Classical Review
New Light on Canaanite-Phoenician Pottery
Dalit Regev [+–]
Israel Antiquities Authority
Dalit Regev studies aspects of Canaanite-Phoenician culture, especially trade, pottery, Aegyptiaca and ancient DNA. She received her PhD in 2006. Having worked in the past at research centers at the Hebrew University and for the Harvard Excavations at Ashkelon, she currently works for the Israel Antiquities Authority. Her main publications are on Phoenician Amphorae (2004), the Phoenician Hellenistic pottery from Akko-Ptolemais (2009), Egyptian Stone Objects (2013 and 2016), the Phoenician Origins of Eastern Sigillata Ware A (2014), and The Power of the Written Evidence: a Hellenistic Burial Cave at Marisa (2019).
This book follows a continuous line of development from Canaanite pottery to the Phoenician pottery corpus. Phoenician pottery typically is considered to have first emerged in the Iron Age, and most research is limited to the first half of the first millennium BCE. The current analysis, however, shows the Canaanite predecessors as well as the ongoing continuity of Phoenician forms and techniques during the Hellenistic and Roman periods. There are two areas of focus, both of which will be illustrated from materials drawn primarily from the Levant. The first is Phoenician container products, especially amphorae and bottles, although other coarse ware forms are included. The second is red-slip pottery, which was a constant feature of the Phoenician assemblage. These were mainly open vessels that did not contain other products and were valued for their ritual attributes.
Table of Contents
Preliminaries
List of Figures [+–] x
This book follows a continuous line of development from Canaanite pottery to the Phoenician pottery corpus. Phoenician pottery typically is considered to have first emerged in the Iron Age, and most research is limited to the first half of the first millennium BCE. The current analysis, however, shows the Canaanite predecessors as well as the ongoing continuity of Phoenician forms and techniques during the Hellenistic and Roman periods. There are two areas of focus, both of which will be illustrated from materials drawn primarily from the Levant. The first is Phoenician container products, especially amphorae and bottles, although other coarse ware forms are included. The second is red-slip pottery, which was a constant feature of the Phoenician assemblage. These were mainly open vessels that did not contain other products and were valued for their ritual attributes.
List of Photos [+–] xi-xii
This book follows a continuous line of development from Canaanite pottery to the Phoenician pottery corpus. Phoenician pottery typically is considered to have first emerged in the Iron Age, and most research is limited to the first half of the first millennium BCE. The current analysis, however, shows the Canaanite predecessors as well as the ongoing continuity of Phoenician forms and techniques during the Hellenistic and Roman periods. There are two areas of focus, both of which will be illustrated from materials drawn primarily from the Levant. The first is Phoenician container products, especially amphorae and bottles, although other coarse ware forms are included. The second is red-slip pottery, which was a constant feature of the Phoenician assemblage. These were mainly open vessels that did not contain other products and were valued for their ritual attributes.
Preface
Preface [+–] xiii-xiv
This book follows a continuous line of development from Canaanite pottery to the Phoenician pottery corpus. Phoenician pottery typically is considered to have first emerged in the Iron Age, and most research is limited to the first half of the first millennium BCE. The current analysis, however, shows the Canaanite predecessors as well as the ongoing continuity of Phoenician forms and techniques during the Hellenistic and Roman periods. There are two areas of focus, both of which will be illustrated from materials drawn primarily from the Levant. The first is Phoenician container products, especially amphorae and bottles, although other coarse ware forms are included. The second is red-slip pottery, which was a constant feature of the Phoenician assemblage. These were mainly open vessels that did not contain other products and were valued for their ritual attributes.
Introduction
Introduction [+–] 1-6
The main concepts and terms used in the book are presented as well as what is included and excluded. There are discussions of the adjective Canaanite-Phoenician, pottery forms, and two main issues related to Canaanite-Phoenician pottery: the longue durée and the ware.
Chapter 1
The primary focus is on pottery groups and the general labels used in the field of ceramics, after which an overview of the Phoenician assemblages and distribution is presented.
Chapter 2
The Phoenician Amphorae [+–] 19-54
The general characteristics, use, and importance of amphorae, and what characterized the Canaanite-Phoenician amphora over 2,000 years from the Early and Middle Bronze Age to the Late Roman/Byzantine period.
Chapter 3
Decorated Ware [+–] 55-126
The five main styles of decoration in the Canaanite-Phoenician corpus are described: Bichrome, used ritually and domestically, Banded Ware, used during the Late Iron Age-Persian period, Black-on-Red ware, used commercially, the Black Slip group, and the most popular, Red-Slip. The final group began to be produced in the Bronze Age and enjoyed standardization in the Iron Age before evolving subsequently into Eastern Sigillata A and later groups of Terra Sigillata. There were standard forms that comprised a mrzh/Symposion set, used in a religious ceremony that functioned for centuries as a Canaanite-Phoenician religious and civil system.
Chapter 4
Canaanite-Phoenician Coarse Ware [+–] 127-160
Canaanite-Phoenician coarse ware includes large and small vessels in open and closed forms used in domestic, industrial and ritual settings. Domestic vessels include jugs with four basic shapes (Ridge-Neck, Wide Spouted, Trefoil Mouth and Mushroom Rim) and cooking pots in two shapes (Neckless and Sharply Dropping Rim). Commercial vessels include juglets, bottles in two shapes (“Samian” and Bulbous), and amphoriskoi. Ritual vessels include kraters, urns, small jars, oil-lamps and tripod bowls. Although the Canaanite-Phoenician coarse ware produced in the Levant was not distributed outside Levantine sites, all these forms were locally produced in Canaanite-Phoenician sites in the west, with some variations and local preferences at times.
Chapter 5
Special Cases [+–] 161-180
This chapter presents pottery groups that have not been included before in the Canaanite-Phoenician corpus: Late Bronze Age Red Lustrous Wheel-Made Pottery (RLWm), small jars of Hittite form that were introduced into the Canaanite-Phoenician corpus in the late Middle Bronze Age-early Late Bronze I Age, and bent bottles. The first two groups had direct connections to the Canaanite-Phoenician trade networks.
Chapter 6
Conclusions [+–] 181-186
This book follows a continuous line of development from Canaanite pottery to the Phoenician pottery corpus. Phoenician pottery typically is considered to have first emerged in the Iron Age, and most research is limited to the first half of the first millennium BCE. The current analysis, however, shows the Canaanite predecessors as well as the ongoing continuity of Phoenician forms and techniques during the Hellenistic and Roman periods. There are two areas of focus, both of which will be illustrated from materials drawn primarily from the Levant. The first is Phoenician container products, especially amphorae and bottles, although other coarse ware forms are included. The second is red-slip pottery, which was a constant feature of the Phoenician assemblage. These were mainly open vessels that did not contain other products and were valued for their ritual attributes.
End Matter
Endnotes [+–] 187-188
This book follows a continuous line of development from Canaanite pottery to the Phoenician pottery corpus. Phoenician pottery typically is considered to have first emerged in the Iron Age, and most research is limited to the first half of the first millennium BCE. The current analysis, however, shows the Canaanite predecessors as well as the ongoing continuity of Phoenician forms and techniques during the Hellenistic and Roman periods. There are two areas of focus, both of which will be illustrated from materials drawn primarily from the Levant. The first is Phoenician container products, especially amphorae and bottles, although other coarse ware forms are included. The second is red-slip pottery, which was a constant feature of the Phoenician assemblage. These were mainly open vessels that did not contain other products and were valued for their ritual attributes.
References [+–] 189-217
This book follows a continuous line of development from Canaanite pottery to the Phoenician pottery corpus. Phoenician pottery typically is considered to have first emerged in the Iron Age, and most research is limited to the first half of the first millennium BCE. The current analysis, however, shows the Canaanite predecessors as well as the ongoing continuity of Phoenician forms and techniques during the Hellenistic and Roman periods. There are two areas of focus, both of which will be illustrated from materials drawn primarily from the Levant. The first is Phoenician container products, especially amphorae and bottles, although other coarse ware forms are included. The second is red-slip pottery, which was a constant feature of the Phoenician assemblage. These were mainly open vessels that did not contain other products and were valued for their ritual attributes.
Index [+–] 218-223
This book follows a continuous line of development from Canaanite pottery to the Phoenician pottery corpus. Phoenician pottery typically is considered to have first emerged in the Iron Age, and most research is limited to the first half of the first millennium BCE. The current analysis, however, shows the Canaanite predecessors as well as the ongoing continuity of Phoenician forms and techniques during the Hellenistic and Roman periods. There are two areas of focus, both of which will be illustrated from materials drawn primarily from the Levant. The first is Phoenician container products, especially amphorae and bottles, although other coarse ware forms are included. The second is red-slip pottery, which was a constant feature of the Phoenician assemblage. These were mainly open vessels that did not contain other products and were valued for their ritual attributes.
The Classical Review
