GHEORGHE POPILIAN AND THE ROMAN POTTERY FROM OLTENIA
<p align="left">Gheorghe Popilian’s monograph <em>Ceramica romană din Oltenia</em> is the main reference textbook for southern Romania, at least. The work is now pretty old – more than four decades – and although still very useful, it is obviously the product of its age....
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Mega Publishing House
2019-10-01
|
| Series: | Journal of Ancient History and Archaeology |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://jaha.org.ro/index.php/JAHA/article/view/407 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850042279709900800 |
|---|---|
| author | Eugen Silviu Teodor |
| author_facet | Eugen Silviu Teodor |
| author_sort | Eugen Silviu Teodor |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | <p align="left">Gheorghe Popilian’s monograph <em>Ceramica romană din Oltenia</em> is the main reference textbook for southern Romania, at least. The work is now pretty old – more than four decades – and although still very useful, it is obviously the product of its age. For instance, the information connected to fabrication, constantly retrieved in general commentaries or in catalogue’s descriptions, is rather sketchy (‘fine’ or ‘coarse’). More than that, the relationship between the classes and types of pots and the fabrication classes – including the colour – is not always crystal clear, without a thorough analysis.</p><p align="left">This study is not a review; it is rather an attempt to turn the book in a handy database. The enterprise is not targeting the whole collection of artefacts, but those suspected to be mainly to result of the local production, as an expression of the local taste and demand, as jars, beakers, flagons, cups, censors, bowls, dishes, lids. I paid a special attention to the types made of many items, because in these cases the presumption of the local manufacture is stronger.</p><p align="left">Criteria used by Popilian in drawing his typology are not even, therefore the analysis has to perform along all possible benchmarks: general morphology, terminations (rims, bases, handles), fabrication, colour, decoration, size, when not even ethnographic references. Such details could prove useful when handle fragmentary pottery.</p><p align="left">A certain limitation comes from the way in which the collection of study was provided, as the overwhelming majority of the pots were discovered in cemeteries. The distribution of the main types of recipients could prove quite different in civilian settlements or military garrisons.</p> |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-dddce5feaf8d4a3eaf9936e27432b57a |
| institution | DOAJ |
| issn | 2360-266X |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2019-10-01 |
| publisher | Mega Publishing House |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Journal of Ancient History and Archaeology |
| spelling | doaj-art-dddce5feaf8d4a3eaf9936e27432b57a2025-08-20T02:55:36ZengMega Publishing HouseJournal of Ancient History and Archaeology2360-266X2019-10-016310.14795/j.v6i3.407261GHEORGHE POPILIAN AND THE ROMAN POTTERY FROM OLTENIAEugen Silviu Teodor0Romanian National History Museum, Bucharest<p align="left">Gheorghe Popilian’s monograph <em>Ceramica romană din Oltenia</em> is the main reference textbook for southern Romania, at least. The work is now pretty old – more than four decades – and although still very useful, it is obviously the product of its age. For instance, the information connected to fabrication, constantly retrieved in general commentaries or in catalogue’s descriptions, is rather sketchy (‘fine’ or ‘coarse’). More than that, the relationship between the classes and types of pots and the fabrication classes – including the colour – is not always crystal clear, without a thorough analysis.</p><p align="left">This study is not a review; it is rather an attempt to turn the book in a handy database. The enterprise is not targeting the whole collection of artefacts, but those suspected to be mainly to result of the local production, as an expression of the local taste and demand, as jars, beakers, flagons, cups, censors, bowls, dishes, lids. I paid a special attention to the types made of many items, because in these cases the presumption of the local manufacture is stronger.</p><p align="left">Criteria used by Popilian in drawing his typology are not even, therefore the analysis has to perform along all possible benchmarks: general morphology, terminations (rims, bases, handles), fabrication, colour, decoration, size, when not even ethnographic references. Such details could prove useful when handle fragmentary pottery.</p><p align="left">A certain limitation comes from the way in which the collection of study was provided, as the overwhelming majority of the pots were discovered in cemeteries. The distribution of the main types of recipients could prove quite different in civilian settlements or military garrisons.</p>https://jaha.org.ro/index.php/JAHA/article/view/407gheorghe popilianpotterytypology |
| spellingShingle | Eugen Silviu Teodor GHEORGHE POPILIAN AND THE ROMAN POTTERY FROM OLTENIA Journal of Ancient History and Archaeology gheorghe popilian pottery typology |
| title | GHEORGHE POPILIAN AND THE ROMAN POTTERY FROM OLTENIA |
| title_full | GHEORGHE POPILIAN AND THE ROMAN POTTERY FROM OLTENIA |
| title_fullStr | GHEORGHE POPILIAN AND THE ROMAN POTTERY FROM OLTENIA |
| title_full_unstemmed | GHEORGHE POPILIAN AND THE ROMAN POTTERY FROM OLTENIA |
| title_short | GHEORGHE POPILIAN AND THE ROMAN POTTERY FROM OLTENIA |
| title_sort | gheorghe popilian and the roman pottery from oltenia |
| topic | gheorghe popilian pottery typology |
| url | https://jaha.org.ro/index.php/JAHA/article/view/407 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT eugensilviuteodor gheorghepopilianandtheromanpotteryfromoltenia |