Jugs (Oinochoe)

Vessels of Identity and Exchange: The Cypriot Iron Age Jug

The pottery jug, a common find in archaeological contexts across the ancient Mediterranean, often serves as a silent witness to daily life. In Iron Age Cyprus, however, certain jugs, particularly the pouring vessels known as oinochoai, speak more volubly than most [1, p. 28; 2, p. 28; 3, p. 28]. From approximately 1050 to 312 BCE, Cypriot potters produced a remarkable variety of these vessels, which became key indicators of the island's evolving cultural landscape [4, p. 53; 5, p. 224]. These jugs were not simply containers; they were canvases for distinct decorative styles, products of specialized regional workshops, and valuable commodities in a trade network that stretched from the Levant to the Aegean. Their study reveals the complex interplay of local tradition and foreign influence that defined Cyprus during a transformative period in its history.

This article will examine the Cypriot Iron Age jug as a diagnostic artifact that illuminates the island's production methods, artistic preferences, and commercial connections. It will begin by outlining the foundational typological system that continues to shape modern analysis, before investigating the principal decorative wares, such as Bichrome and the much-debated Black-on-Red. The discussion will then turn to the scientific methods that allow for the identification of regional production centers, challenging earlier notions of a unified island-wide style. Finally, it will explore the forms, functions, and distribution of these jugs, tracing their journeys across the Mediterranean and their role in ritual, trade, and daily life.

A Framework for Study: Typology and Chronology

Any study of Iron Age Cypriot pottery must begin with the monumental work of the Swedish Cyprus Expedition (SCE) and the resulting classification system established by Einar Gjerstad [6, p. 38; 7, p. 38; 8, p. 38]. Published in The Swedish Cyprus Expedition, Vol. IV, Part 2, Gjerstad's typology provided the first systematic framework for the island's ceramics from the end of the Bronze Age to the Hellenistic period [9, p. 34; 10, p. 519; 11, p. 518]. He divided the Iron Age into seven chronological phases, grouping them into three main periods: Cypro-Geometric (CG) I-III (c. 1050–750 BCE), Cypro-Archaic (CA) I-II (c. 750–480 BCE), and Cypro-Classical (CC) I-II (c. 480–310 BCE) [12, p. 3].

Within this chronological structure, Gjerstad classified pottery into a series of "Types," numbered I through VII, with each Type corresponding roughly to a chronological period [13, p. 49; 12, p. 3]. A vessel's Type was determined primarily by its shape and its decorative technique, or ware [14, p. 240]. For example, a jug in White Painted ware belonging to the CG I period would be classified as White Painted I [12, p. 3]. This system created a direct, though sometimes rigid, link between chronology, ware, and form [14, p. 240]. Gjerstad's typological descriptions for White Painted ware often served as the reference for other wares of the same Type, based on his perception of strong similarities in shape [15, p. 240].

While this system remains foundational, subsequent research has revealed its limitations [16, p. 87]. The typology was based almost exclusively on material from mortuary and sanctuary contexts, as well-stratified settlement evidence was scarce [16, p. 87; 6, p. 38]. This has made it difficult for survey projects to apply the typology to fragmentary surface finds, which often lack the distinctive features of whole vessels from tombs [16, p. 87]. The system also assumed the existence of an island-wide cultural koine, presenting Cypriot pottery production as largely homogeneous [14, p. 241]. Gjerstad himself acknowledged that future work would likely identify local pottery styles, allowing the "complexity of cultural pattern... [to] stand out with all lucidity" [14, p. 243; 15, p. 243].

Modern scholarship has taken up this challenge, identifying distinct regional workshop traditions in centers like Salamis, Amathous, Kition, and Paphos [6, p. 38; 9, p. 34]. This regional approach has demonstrated that variations in pottery are not always chronological, as Gjerstad’s system implies, but can also reflect geographic and cultural diversity within the island [15, p. 245]. Furthermore, the chronological boundaries of the Types are not absolute; significant overlap exists between them, with Type I continuing into CG II and Type II into CG III [13, p. 49; 17, p. 139]. The introduction of certain wares, such as Black-on-Red and Bichrome Red, has also been shown to occur earlier than Gjerstad initially proposed [14, p. 240]. Despite these necessary revisions, Gjerstad's work provides the essential vocabulary and structure for discussing the development of Iron Age pottery, including the jug.

The Potter's Palette: Decorative Wares and Techniques

The visual identity of Cypriot Iron Age jugs is defined by a range of distinctive painted wares. The most common decorative techniques throughout the Iron Age were White Painted, with black decoration on a pale background, and Bichrome, which added red paint to the black-on-pale scheme [12, p. 6]. The Bichrome technique, which had Levantine roots, flourished particularly in eastern Cypriot workshops, such as those at Salamis [12, p. 6; 11, p. 338]. There, potters used red paint not merely for filling geometric motifs but also for outlining them, creating a vibrant decorative effect [11, p. 339].

The production of Bichrome ware reflects a significant technological choice by Cypriot potters. X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) analysis of pigments on Cypriot ceramics has revealed a clear chronological pattern in the creation of black decoration [18, p. 6]. From the Neolithic to the Middle Bronze Age, black was achieved using iron-rich pigments fired in a reducing atmosphere, a method known as the "iron reduction technique" [19, p. 5; 18, p. 6]. However, during the Late Bronze Age, potters began using manganese-based pigments (umbers) to produce black [19, p. 5]. This shift appears to have been driven by the desire to create a Bichrome effect. While producing red and black separately with iron-based pigments was possible, achieving both on the same vessel required very precise control of firing temperatures and kiln atmosphere [20, p. 5]. Using manganese for black and iron for red was a more convenient method to produce the desired bichrome decoration [20, p. 5; 21, p. 8]. This practical innovation, introduced to facilitate Bichrome production, was retained for monochrome black decoration from the end of the Late Bronze Age onwards [18, p. 6].

During the CG III period (c. 900–750 BCE), two new wares appeared, both based on a red-slipped surface: Red Slip, which was undecorated, and Black-on-Red (BoR) [22, p. 126; 12, p. 6]. BoR ware is a distinctive class of pottery with black-painted geometric decoration on a shiny red or orange slipped surface [11, p. 365]. Due to its quality, it became one of Cyprus's most popular and widely exported ceramic products, especially during the 9th and 8th centuries BCE [11, p. 365]. Its origin, however, has been the subject of considerable debate.

The widespread distribution of BoR pottery in both Cyprus and the Levant, coupled with stylistic similarities to Phoenician ceramics, led some early scholars to use the term "Cypro-Phoenician" to describe the ware [23, p. xx; 24, p. 28]. This term implied that the pottery was either a product of Phoenician commercial enterprise, perhaps made by Phoenicians in Cyprus, or that it represented a "Phoenician and Cypriote Mischkultur" [23, p. xx]. The chronological evidence was also complex; initial dating based on Palestinian stratigraphy suggested that BoR appeared in the Levant nearly two centuries before its accepted appearance in Cyprus, lending weight to a mainland origin [24, p. 28; 17, p. 173].

However, current research and scientific analyses now point strongly to a Cypriot origin for the vast majority of BoR pottery [12, p. 6; 24, p. 28]. Archaeometric studies confirm that BoR was a Cypriot product, although the initial stimulus for its manufacture may have come from imported Phoenician pottery [23, p. 232]. Recent research suggests the ware was an invention of workshops in the Paphos region during CG III [12, p. 6]. The chronological discrepancy with Levantine sites is also being reassessed, with new analyses from Megiddo suggesting that the Cypriot absolute chronology for BoR may need revision [25, p. 23]. While Phoenician influence on forms and styles is undeniable, BoR is now understood as a distinctly Cypriot innovation that found a receptive market abroad [24, p. 28; 25, p. 23].

From Clay to Kiln: Production, Provenance, and Regionalism

The production of Cypriot Iron Age jugs involved a combination of traditional and innovative techniques. From the 11th century BCE onwards, Cypriot pottery became an "exclusively fast-wheel standardised product," indicating a move towards more industrialized mass production compared to the preceding Bronze Age [26, p. 18]. The adoption of the potter's wheel on the island was not, however, a simple linear progression. It appeared as a "fully formed package" around 1650 BCE but was not adopted by all potters, with handmade and wheelmade traditions co-existing for centuries [27, p. 13]. Studies of Late Cypriot ceramics show a significant diversity of manufacturing strategies (chaînes opératoires), with potters experimenting with different combinations of hand-building and wheel-forming techniques while maintaining consistency in the final vessel forms [28, p. 220]. This suggests that Cypriot potters adapted the new technology opportunistically to fit established local traditions [28, p. 220].

The fabric of Iron Age jugs often consisted of finely-levigated clay with small black or white inclusions [23, p. 4]. Vessels in White Painted or Bichrome wares were typically covered with a thick, whitish, and well-smoothed slip [22, p. 127]. Scientific analyses have been crucial in moving beyond such macroscopic descriptions to pinpoint the geological origins of the clays used. Provenance studies rely on the principle that different clay sources have distinct geochemical signatures [29, p. 2]. A range of analytical techniques, including petrographic analysis, Neutron Activation Analysis (NAA), and X-ray Fluorescence (XRF), can identify the elemental composition of a ceramic sherd and compare it to known clay sources or reference groups of pottery [30, p. 44; 31, p. 10]. More recent studies have also employed lead isotope analysis to distinguish between the four major geological zones of Cyprus, allowing for more precise sourcing of raw materials [32, p. 1].

These scientific methods have confirmed the existence of distinct regional production centers, effectively ending the notion of a single Cypriot pottery koine [33, p. 162]. For example, analysis shows a clear regional preference for Bichrome ware in the workshops of Salamis, while Paphian workshops produced very little Bichrome but were strongly associated with the increased production of high-quality Black-on-Red ware [11, p. 338]. Research by Anna Georgiadou has identified the individual styles of regional workshops across the island, demonstrating that craft production took place within specific politico-economic regions [26, p. 18; 34, p. 14]. This regionalism is a key feature of the Iron Age political landscape, which was characterized by autonomous territories organized around resources and access to the sea [35, p. 284]. Sourcing studies have also been instrumental in identifying Cypriot exports abroad and distinguishing them from local imitations, such as the Cypriot-style figurines made from local Samian clay found at the Heraion on Samos [36, p. 297].

Form, Function, and Mediterranean Journeys

The typical Iron Age pouring jug, or oinochoe, is a small- to medium-sized vessel, often with a globular or barrel-shaped body, a handle from rim to shoulder, and a pinched or trefoil rim that facilitates pouring [1, p. 28; 17, p. 180]. The Iron Age repertoire, however, included a wide variety of jug and juglet forms. One of the most characteristic shapes of the CG II period is the barrel jug, created after Levantine prototypes [22, p. 126]. Another prominent type, particularly in Black-on-Red ware from the CG III period onwards, is the small juglet with a ridge on its neck, often called a "handle-ridge" or "neck-ridge" juglet [15, p. 243]. These juglet forms were likely inspired by Phoenician prototypes and became one of Cyprus's most successful exports [12, p. 7; 23, p. 232]. The shapes of some jugs also show the influence of metal prototypes, suggesting that potters were imitating more valuable bronze or silver vessels [37, p. 11; 17, p. 56].

The functions of these jugs were varied. Their primary role was as containers for liquids. Ethnographic studies of traditional Cypriot pottery show a repertoire dominated by jugs and storage containers of all sizes, reflecting the basic needs of a rural economy [38, p. 88]. Small, fine ware jugs like the oinochoe would have been used for serving wine at meals or ritual feasting events, which were an important component of elite social life in the Early Iron Age [39, p. 127; 40, p. 18]. The many juglets found in both Cypriot and foreign contexts are strongly associated with the trade in valuable liquids, such as perfumed oils or unguents [12, p. 7]. Some scholars have also revived the theory, first proposed for Late Bronze Age Base-Ring juglets, that these small containers may have transported liquid opium [41, p. 14; 33, p. 126]. Organic residue analysis on prehistoric Cypriot pottery has been attempted, but the contents of these Iron Age vessels remain a subject of inference [42, p. 12].

Jugs are found in a wide range of archaeological contexts. While they were certainly used in settlements, the best-preserved examples come from tombs and sanctuaries [43, p. 121; 6, p. 173]. As burial gifts, they were deposited with the deceased, perhaps containing provisions for an afterlife or as items used during funeral ceremonies [43, p. 121; 44, p. 40]. In the Aegean, for example, imported Cypriot BoR juglets are found almost exclusively in funerary contexts, suggesting their contents were used for anointing the dead [11, p. 381]. Larger jugs found in rich Greek burials may have been associated with elite wine consumption [11, p. 381]. In sanctuaries, jugs may have been used for libations or other rituals before being deposited as votive offerings [36, p. 297]. The Bichrome Red jugs of the late Archaic and Classical periods, which feature an attached terracotta female figurine holding a miniature oinochoe, clearly had a special ritual function and flourished in western Cypriot workshops [12, p. 8].

The distribution of these vessels demonstrates the extensive reach of Cypriot maritime trade. From the 9th and 8th centuries BCE, Cypriot pottery, particularly BoR ware, was exported in significant quantities to the Levantine coast, with finds at sites like Megiddo and Tell Keisan, and to the Aegean, where it is found at coastal sites in Crete, the Dodecanese, and Euboea [11, p. 365; 45, p. 17]. Small BoR juglets with a neck-ridge and a few trefoil-lipped oinochoai are the most common shapes found in Greek contexts, indicating a specialized demand [11, p. 381]. This trade was not a one-way street. Cypriot potters absorbed foreign influences, and foreign potters imitated Cypriot wares. In the Dodecanese, a short-lived series of Late Geometric jugs mixed Cypriot and Phoenician morphological and decorative elements [11, p. 380]. In Crete, local potters at Knossos produced numerous imitations of Cypriot BoR juglets [15, p. 223]. Conversely, Athenian potters in the 6th century BCE produced black-figure oinochoai that clearly imitate a Cypriot metal prototype, several examples of which have been found at Marion and Amathus [37, p. 13; 39, p. 129].

Conclusion

The Cypriot Iron Age jug, in its many forms and decorative styles, provides a detailed record of the island’s artistic, technological, and economic life for over seven centuries. The foundational typological system developed by Gjerstad, while requiring revision, still provides the essential framework for charting the vessel’s evolution. Through the study of its characteristic wares, from the vibrant Bichrome of the eastern workshops to the sophisticated Black-on-Red of the west, we can see the development of strong regional identities. Scientific provenance studies have confirmed this regionalism, tracing pots back to their geological origins and allowing us to map the output of different production centers with increasing precision.

Ultimately, the story of the Cypriot jug is one of connection. Its forms show a creative synthesis of local traditions with influences from the Levant and the Aegean. Its function as a container for valuable liquids placed it at the center of a thriving Mediterranean trade network, making it a familiar object in tombs and settlements from Syria to Crete. As an object of both daily use and ritual importance, it was deeply embedded in the social fabric of Iron Age Cypriot society. The ongoing study of these vessels, combining stylistic analysis with advanced scientific methods, will continue to refine our understanding of Cyprus not as an isolated island, but as a dynamic and influential center of production and exchange in the ancient world.