The article relates the results of archaeometric and archaeological investigations of the relationships between some well-known types of Byzantine table wares and pottery manufacture in Thebes and Chalcis, focusing on the period from the twelfth to the fourteenth centuries ad.We currently accept that several twelfth–thirteenth century types, such as ‘Green and Brown Painted Ware’, ‘Fine Sgraffito Ware’ and ‘Aegean Ware’, form part of a single, main, long-lasting production of Byzantine ceramics, called here main ‘Middle Byzantine Production’ (MBP), which was distributed and diffused in the whole Mediterranean area, and especially in its eastern part. The discovery of kiln furniture and pottery wasters in rescue excavations in Thebes and Chalcis gave the opportunity to define chemical reference groups for the two cities, and to test the hypothesis of a potential origin of the MBP in Central Greece. The results point to Chalcis, then the harbour of wealthy Thebes with a strategic location on maritime trade routes, as the place of manufacture of the MBP. Chalcis, which is now seen as a main pottery production site, is envisaged within its historic context. The persistence of the MBP after the Frankish conquest, without noticeable morphological changes, questions the impact of this conquest on both trade networks and dining habits.The political fragmentation of the thirteenth century gradually changed the conditions that facilitated the predominance of the MBP, and led to the establishment of a number of regional workshops whose ceramics were mainly destined to cover local markets. While continuing earlier techniques, they introduced new types, prominent among which was the ‘Sgraffito with Concentric Circles’ (previously related to ‘Zeuxippus Ware’). Thebes was one of these new workshops probably appearing from the mid-thirteenth century and continuing at least to the early fourteenth century. Chalcis eventually followed the same course, and its production may have carried on well into the Ottoman period.

No abstract

No abstract

agrarian population that dwelled either in cities and villages of varying size or in small dispersed settlements. 3 Excavation data from middle Byzantine Nichoria 4 or late Byzantine Vasilitsi, 5 combined with the examination of the existing limited archival material, 6 revealed such permanent or temporary settlements. Inhabitants belonged to a handful of extended families engaged in the farming of the surrounding lands. They lived in humble dwellings of the typical 'monospito' (single-housed) type that were located around a small church which served their religious needs. 7 Conditions seem to have remained unaltered during the subsequent period of Ottoman rule and the early modern times, as manifested by the recent publications of Ottoman archival sources associated with the area of Pylos, 8 or the examination of nineteenth-century villages. 9 In the period between the thirteenth and fifteenth centuries, usually termed as late Byzantine or late middle ages, the function of defence prevailed. By and large, this came as the practical result of the need for self-preservation in the face of the constant dangers and invading enemies. Furthermore, an essential feature of medieval mentality was the distinction between defined and circumscribed areas of habitation and the countryside. 10 In this sense, walls not only protected their users but also acted to separate the walled cities from the dispersed settlements. This paper will not primarily ponder the relations and social structuring of the populations in the countryside and the cities of Messenia. Rather, its main aim is to examine the form, size and defensive features of fortifications. Subsequently, the paper will use these as pointers in order to shed more light on the significance of the populations under protection. In so doing, the fortifications in question may additionally provide an insight into the ways that populations were organised and transferred during this period.

No abstract