2018-Skyllis-17-Heft-1-Quark-6_2016-Skyllis-16-Heft-1-Quark1-91.qxd 05.03.

2018 19:19 Seite 1

17. Jahrgang 2017 · Heft 1 1

Inhalt

Vorwort 3

A Shipyard on Dana Island, Cilicia

Twohundred and seventy-four slipways recently discovered 4
Hakan Öniz

Moving across rivers and lakes in prehistory

Andrea Vianello 17

A Bronze Age underwater site near the islet of Ričul in northern Dalmatia (Croatia)
Martina Čelhar – Mate Parica – Mato Ilkić – Dario Vujević 21

A safe haven for ships

Recent underwater research in Mozia, Western Sicily 35
Francesca Oliveri – Antonina Lo Porto

Archaeological site survey using 3D sub-bottom profiler

A case study from Phanagoria 40
Sergey Olkhovskiy – Alexey Shmatkov – Andrey Verhnyatskiy

Byzantine maritime trade

based on underwater archaeological finds of the eastern Adriatic 46
Vesna Zmaić Kralj

The STORM Project and Coastal Erosion

The case of Tróia (Portugal) 62
Patrícia Brum – Inês Vaz Pinto – Ana Patrícia Magalhães – Filipa Santos - Johann Müller

Neolithische Fischsperren an der Neva

Die Fundstelle Okhta 1 in St. Petersburg 69
Petr E. Sorokin – Tatiana M. Gusentsova

Underwaterarchaeological report on Mozia, Sicily 2017

Tobias Pflederer – Max Fiederling – Daniel Neubauer – Detlef Peukert - Gerd Knepel 76
– Sebastiano Tusa – Francesca Oliveri
2018-Skyllis-17-Heft-1-Quark-6_2016-Skyllis-16-Heft-1-Quark1-91.qxd 05.03.2018 19:19 Seite 2

Stone sarcophagi as filling material of the breakwater of ancient Side (Turkey)

83 Hakan Öniz

Die FRIDERICIANIA ALEXANDRINA NAVIS (F.A.N.)

87 Nachbau sowie wissenschaftliche Erprobung und Einordnung der Replik von Oberstimm II -
Stand des Baus Anfang Februar 2018
Boris Dreyer

Early examples of the protection of underwater cultural heritage in Turkey

97 Osman Hamdi Bey and the Ottoman government in the 19th century
Hakan Öniz — Okay Sütçüoğlu

Im Meer versunken
105 Mathias Orgeldinger

110 Das Bücherbrett

Titelmotiv

Scientific divers of the BGfU with the

discovery of late Roman ceramic.

Aus: T. Pflederer et.al.,

Underwaterarchaeological report on
Mozia, Sicily 2017, Abb. 8.
2018-Skyllis-17-Heft-1-Quark-6_2016-Skyllis-16-Heft-1-Quark1-91.qxd 05.03.2018 19:19 Seite 3
Nachdem bereits im vorigen
SKYLLIS-Heft zehn Beiträge veröf-
fentlicht worden sind, die auf Re-
ferate oder Poster-Vorstellungen
während der 22. Tagung „In Posei-
dons Reich“ im März 2017 in Kob-
lenz zurückgehen, können hier
abermals sieben Arbeiten vorgelegt
werden. Weitere sind in Vorbe-
reitung, was zeigt, dass die von der
DEGUWA und dem Verein zur
Förderung der Unterwasser-archäo-
logie e.V. (FUWA) mit vielfältiger
Unterstützung seitens Koblenzer
und rheinland-pfälzischer Einrich-
tungen durchgeführte Tagung in
der internationalen Fachwelt als
wichtiger Ort des wissenschaftli-
chen Austauschs große Wertschä-
tzung gefunden hat.
Wie in dieser Zeitschrift üblich, sind
die Artikel annähernd nach der
Zeitstellung ihres Gegenstandes
geordnet. Zunächst begeben wir
uns in frühe Zeiten. H. Öniz be-
schreibt eine erstaunlich große
Zahl ins Felsufer der kleinen Insel
Dana vor der türkischen Südküste
geschlagener Hellinge und macht
sich ausführlich Gedanken über
deren Datierung und besonders
über die mögliche Identifizierung
der für die Seefahrt offenbar sehr
wichtigen Insel in altorientalischen
Schriftquellen. – A. Vianello reflek-
tiert über die soziale Bedeutung von
Wasserfahrzeugen und deren Be-
herrschung in prähistorischen Ge-
sellschaften. – Ergebnisse ihrer
Forschungen an einer unter Wasser
geratenen bronzezeitlichen Siedlung
in der Adria legen M. Čelhar, u.a. vor.
In historische Zeiten führen uns
die nächsten vier Beiträge, wenn
auch unter ganz verschiedenen
Fragestellungen. Über ihre Unter-
suchungen an einer infolge des
Meeresanstiegs heute unter Wasser
liegenden Mole oder Fahrstraße
zwischen der schon von den Phö-
niziern bzw. Puniern besiedelten
Laguneninsel Motya/Mozia und
17. Jahrgang 2017 ·
Vorwort
Sizilien berichten F. Oliveri und A.
Lo Porto. – Ebenfalls von der
Transgression betroffen ist die im
6. Jahrhundert v. Chr. gegründete
Stadt Phanagoria am Schwarzen
Meer. S. Olkhovskiy, u.a. geben
Einblicke in ihre mittels 3D Sub-
bottom Profiler betriebenen For-
schungen im Bereich dieser einst-
mals bedeutenden griechischen
Kolonie. – V. Zmaić Kralj behan-
delt anhand von Funden aus einem
Wrack in der Adria die Frage, wie
aus einer gemischten Fracht Han-
delsrouten erschlossen werden
können. – Tróia (Portugal) ist ein
lange bekannter, wichtiger Ort rö-
mischer Salzfischproduktion, des-
sen Ruinen stark von der fortschrei-
tenden Ufererosion bedroht sind.
P. Brum u.a. stellen die Ziele eines
internationalen Projekts zur Siche-
rung von Kulturerbe vor und
berichten über ihre Untersuchun-
gen des Ortes im Rahmen dieses
Projekts.
Sechs frei eingesandte Beiträge
schlagen unter wiederum mannig-
faltigen Aspekten einen Bogen von
der Steinzeit bis in die Gegenwart.
P.E. Sorokin und T.M. Gusentsova
liefern eine detailreiche Beschrei-
bung hölzerner neolithischer
Fischfangvorrichtungen, die im
heutigen Stadtgebiet von St. Peters-
burg entdeckt worden sind. – Der
anschließende Beitrag von T. Pfle-
derer u.a. führt uns noch einmal in
die Lagune von Mozia, wo außer
dem Damm weitere Bereiche per
Side Scan Sonar untersucht und
vielleicht ein römischer Ankerplatz
festgestellt wurden. – In spätanti-
ker Zeit wurde der Hafen der Stadt
Side an der Südküste der Türkei
mit einem langen Wellenbrecher
geschützt. H. Öniz berichtet über
einen Unterwasser-Survey, aus
dem sich ergibt, dass unter an-
derem antike Steinsarkophage ei-
nen Teil der Anschüttungen bilden,
die offenbar aus nahegelegenen
Nekropolen stammen. – B. Dreyer
Heft 1 3
stellt ausführlich ein interdiszi-
plinäres, auch Schüler, verschied-
ene Fachberufe und andere In-
teressierte einbeziehendes Projekt
des Department. Geschichte - Alte
Geschichte der Universität Er-
langen-Nürnberg vor. Es gilt, das
römische Wrack Oberstimm 2
nachzubauen und in jeder Hinsicht
praktisch zu erproben. Beachtliche
Ergebnisse konnten teils schon er-
zielt werden, teils darf man sie von
weiteren Tests erwarten. – H. Öniz
und O. Sütçüoğlu weisen anhand
alter Schriftstücke nach, dass die
Altertümerverwaltung des Osma-
nischen Reiches bereits viel früher
als anderswo ein Augenmerk auf
Funde aus dem Meer gerichtet
hatte. Von solchen Bemühungen
um den Schutz kulturellen Erbes
ist es nur ein kurzer Schritt zu ei-
ner demselben Geist verpflichteten
Ausstellung in Bonn mit dem Titel
„Im Meer versunken – Sizilien und
die Unterwasserarchäologie“, deren
wesentliche Aspekte M. Orgeldin-
ger schildert, indem er gleichzeitig
den Leser auf einen gedanklichen
Rundgang durch diese lehrreiche
und anregende Schau führt.
Der Kreis schließt sich mit zwei
Rezensionen zu Büchern, die von
Schiffen handeln. J. Daum be-
spricht ein Werk über ein Beispiel
der Experimental-Archäologie, näm-
lich den Nachbau einer römischen
sog. Lusoria, und R. Nawracala stellt
den Sammelband „Schiffe und ihr
Kontext“ vor, der 18 Beiträge eines
internationalen Kongresses mit
demselben Titel enthält.
Die Redaktion hofft, ihren Lesern
recht abwechslungsreichen Lese-
stoff dargeboten zu haben – dies
freilich nicht ohne die Hilfe der
Autorinnen und Autoren, denen
für ihre Beiträge ein herzlicher
Dank gesagt sei!
Die Redaktion
Februar 2018
2018-Skyllis-17-Heft-1-Quark-6_2016-Skyllis-16-Heft-1-Quark1-91.qxd 05.03.2018 12:51 Seite 46

46 Byzantine maritime trade · V. Zmaić Kralj

Byzantine maritime trade

based on underwater archaeological finds of the eastern Adriatic
Vesna Zmaić Kralj

Abstract – On the example of several shipwrecks of the eastern Adriatic underwater, like Maharac-Tatinica and
Cape Stoba sites on the island of Mljet as well as on the Lucnjak shallows near the islands of Korcula, Merara and
others, it is possible to follow the chronological and typological development of the Byzantine amphorae from the
end of the 7th until the 13th century and compare them to similar finds from the Aegean and the Black Sea, the Sea
of Marmara and the eastern Mediterranean in general, together with the amphorae found in Italy. One of the most
important merchant routes was passing by the east Adriatic coast, connecting the capital of the empire and the
Mediterranean to the Byzantine enclaves of great commercial importance in the northwest of the Adriatic like
Ravenna, Comacchio and Venice. Amphora finds were almost absent in areas belonging to the Duchy of the Croats,
however, some finds of Byzantine origin from the graves indicate that the trade and exchange between Byzantine
merchantmen, urban Dalmatian centres on the coast and other ethnic communities in its hinterland had also ex-
isted, but mostly in the circle of nobility.

Inhalt – Anhand der Beispiele etlicher unter Wasser liegender Wracks in der östlichen Adria wie sowohl von den
Fundstellen Maharac-Tatinica und Kap Stoba der Insel Mljet als auch auf den Lucnjak-Untiefen bei der Insel
Korcula, Merara und anderen kann man die chronologische und typoloische Entwicklung der byzantinischen
Amphoren vom Ende des 7. bis zum 13. Jh. verfolgen und Vergleiche mit ähnlichen Funden aus der Ägäis und dem
Schwarzen Meer, der Marmaris und dem östlichen Mittelmeer allgemein sowie mit den in Italien gefundenen zie-
hen. Eine der wichtigsten Handelsrouten führte an der östlichen Adriaküste entlang und verband die Hauptstadt
des Reiches und das Mittelmeer mit den byzantinischen Enklaven großer wirtschaftlicher Bedeutung in der
Nordwest-Adria wie Ravenna, Comacchio und Venedig. Amphorenfunde fehlen fast völlig in zum Herzogtum der
Kroaten gehörenden Gebieten, jedoch einige Funde byzantinischer Herkunft aus Gräbern zeigen, dass Handel und
Austausch zwischen byzantinischen Händlern, städtischen dalmatinischen Zentren an der Küste und anderen
Ethnien im Hinterland ebenfalls existierten, wenn auch meistens im Kreise des Adels.

Introduction
Maritime trade of the mediaeval
period along the eastern Adriatic
and the Mediterranean in general
can be traced on the basis of ship-
wreck finds with the remains of
Byzantine amphorae and the spo-
radic finds of the same provenance.
Unlike the roman or late roman-
containers characterized by a wide
range of shapes used during the
short period, the Byzantine con-
tainers emerged in the limited
number of shapes and could main-
ly be recognized by their globular,
oval and piriform bodies, later
more elongated or spindle-shaped
with lower capacity. The neck
became smaller, and massive han-
dles raised more above the less
obvious rim. The base of the ves-
sels was mostly oval or straight
with concave centre, because the
long foot used as the third handle
was no longer needed due to the
lower capacity of the vessel1. It was
compensated by the horizontal ribs
on the outside, which gave addi-
tional stability to the vessels during
the transport, and that became one
of the basic characteristic of the
Byzantine amphorae. All the finds
of the Byzantine amphorae from
the eastern Adriatic can be com-
pared to similar finds from firmly
dated stratigraphic layers of the
inland archaeological sites and
architecture, or shipwrecks, mostly
from the eastern Mediterranean
and Black Sea area under Byzan-
tine rule with Constantinople as
the administrative, cultural and
commercial centre (Fig. 1). How-
ever, some finds can be compared
to the amphorae produced in the
south of Italy, which was con-
firmed by the discovery of several
sites with the ceramic kilns for
their production2. On the basis of
general development of their shape
during the mediaeval period, the
eastern Adriatic Byzantine am-
phorae can be divided into three
basic groups with numerous types
and varieties (Fig. 2):
1. Early Byzantine Amphorae
(EBA): 7th/8th - 9th c.
2. Middle Byzantine Amphorae
(MBA): 10th/11th - 12th c.
3. Late Byzantine Amphorae
(LBA): 12th - 13th/14th c.
The second part of the 7th and the
beginning of the 8th century is at
the lower chronological border of
this division, when LRA began to
transform into the EBA ones, and
in that form could be traced until
the 9th century. The middle phase is
determined by the changes in
2018-Skyllis-17-Heft-1-Quark-6_2016-Skyllis-16-Heft-1-Quark1-91.qxd 05.03.2018 12:51 Seite 47
Fig. 1: Map of the Byzantine archaeological sites in the eastern Mediterranean, Black and the Adriatic Sea: 1. Yassi Ada shipwreck,
7th c.; 2. Bozburun shipwreck, 9th c.; 3. Serçe Limani shipwreck 11th c.; 4. Çamaltı Burnu shipwreck, 13th c.
shapes after the period of stagna-
tion during the 9th/10th century,
when a new impulse of amphorae
production and active Byzantine
maritime trade of the 11th and 12th
century had arrived. The upper
chronological border is represent-
ed by the period of the 13th and 14th
centuries, when no more traces of
economic and political presence of
the Byzantine Empire on the
Adriatic, and the remains of LBA
cargos suggest commercial con-
tacts related probably to the local
wine production in the last Byzan-
tine possessions on the Pelopon-
nese and Apulia, thus maintaining
the last hints of amphorae trade
along the eastern Adriatic mar-
itime route.
Transition from Late Antique shapes
(LRA) to EBA during the 7th and 8th
centuries
The lower chronological border of
the research represents the end of
great LRA production, together
with the emergence of amphorae
which showed the obvious process
of transition from the LRA shapes
to the EBA ones during the second
17. Jahrgang 2017 ·
half of the 7th century. The dimen-
sions became smaller as well as less
carrying capacity, the shapes and
details were simpler, while the
bulges at the bottom disappeared
in favour of stability, and the hori-
zontal belly ribs became more dis-
tinguished (Fig. 2.1). Those innova-
tions were caused by new models
of maritime trade in the Mediter-
ranean that emerged as the reflec-
tion of new tendencies and changes
in the Byzantine Empire.
This period is preceded by the rule
of emperor Justinian, when the
Empire was the indisputable ruler
of the whole Mediterranean, and a
basic connection between Con-
stantinople and the distant parts of
the Empire was made by a network
of maritime routes protected by a
fortress chain with a well-organ-
ised communication system for
safer navigation. The remains of
the fortifications positioned on the
Dalmatian islands, witness the
importance of the eastern Adriatic
maritime route with urban centres
(Fig. 4), harbours and anchorages
with continuity from the antique
period, used as logistic support for
trading goods from the rich lati-
Heft 1 47
fundia of the south and east Me-
diterranean, whose major destina-
tions were the ports in the north-
west Adriatic, primarily Ravenna
with its harbour district Classe3.
The end of Justinian’s reign was
marked by a crisis in the Empire
that caused serious social, political
and economic changes. Major
changes on the commercial plan
were caused by the Arab forces,
who reached the Mediterranean
shores of Syria and Egypt in the 7th
century, and through the 8th centu-
ry added North Africa and Spain to
their domination, which stopped
the production and trade of many
latifundia4. The danger and sus-
pense on the sea, the narrower
trading space and diminished
amount of the goods involved in
maritime commerce, induced the
production of cheaper, low status
ships of less capacity, suitable for
shorter trading routes, fast and
agile enough to be easily managed
and manoeuvred5. The lateen sail
replacing the antique square sails
also contributed to that fact, to-
gether with the innovations in hull
construction and ship’s equipment
(Fig. 5). The medieval Rhodian Sea
2018-Skyllis-17-Heft-1-Quark-6_2016-Skyllis-16-Heft-1-Quark1-91.qxd 05.03.2018 12:52 Seite 48

48 Byzantine maritime trade · V. Zmaić Kralj

Fig. 2: Three basic groups of the byzantine amphorae: 1. Early Byzantine amphorae (EBA): 7th/8th - 9th c.; 2. Middle Byzantine
amphorae (MBA): 10th/11th - 12th c.; 3. Late Byzantine amphorae (LBA): 12th - 13th/14th c.
2018-Skyllis-17-Heft-1-Quark-6_2016-Skyllis-16-Heft-1-Quark1-91.qxd 05.03.2018 12:52 Seite 49

17. Jahrgang 2017 · Heft 1 49

Law (Nomos Nautikos, Lex Rhodia)

represents regulations governing
commercial trade and navigation
in the Byzantine Empire beginning
in the 7th century, and suggests that
ships’ owner, captain, and merchant
often were the same person6.

But despite the apparent break of

trade relations, the archaeological
researches showed a certain conti-
nuity of trade between the
Byzantine Mediterranean and the
northwest Adriatic, primarily in
Ravenna’s port Classe, where the
LRA were found in the same con-
text with the early Byzantine ones7.
But, during the 8th and 9th centuries
the less circulation of merchandise
in Ravenna was noticed, in relation
to the newly established Byzantine
emporiums: Comacchio, Venice
and Cervia together with the
restored antique centres of Rimini
and Grado8 (Fig. 4), with the im-
portant role of mediations between
the Mediterranean and European Fig. 3: Map of the Adriatic Sea with Byzantine amphorae finds: 1. Tatinica-Maharac
markets9. (Island of Mljet), 7th/8th c.; 2. Cape Stoba (Island of Mljet), 11th c.; 3. Lučnjak shallows
(Island of Korčula), 12th/13th c.; 4. Islet of Merara, 13th c.; 5. Sv. Petar (Island of Ugljan),
One recently discovered shipwreck, 13th c.; 6. Ždrijac, Nin, 12th c.; 7. Grebeni near the Island of Silba, 13th c.; 8 Pijan Bay,
on the island of Mljet (Tatinica- Savudrija, 12th/13th c.
Maharac)10 (Fig. 3/1) represents
remains characteristic for that
period, with globular amphorae
cargo, ship’s equipment in the form
of several incrusted iron anchors
of type ‘T’ (or Type D according to
Kapitän’s typology)11, and movable
metal and ceramic finds from the
galley inventory12. A similar find-
ing with many analogies was dis-
covered in the 1960’s on Yassi Ada
site in Turkey (Fig. 1/1). Extensive
underwater researches of the sites
gave us much knowledge of the
maritime trade during the 7th cen-
tury and a wider picture of the
organization of navigation, the
appearance of the merchant ships,
their cargo, equipment and con-
struction in the early Byzantine
period13 (Fig. 5/1).

Considering the fact that the

research on the Island of Mljet is at
its beginning, the data gained from
the Turkish researches can partly
illustrate the appearance and the
equipment of the ship. The Yassi
Ada ship was 18,6 m long, 5 m Fig. 4: Map of the Adriatic Sea with the major maritime routes in the Roman and
wide, with 40 tonnes carrying Byzantine periods.
2018-Skyllis-17-Heft-1-Quark-6_2016-Skyllis-16-Heft-1-Quark1-91.qxd 05.03.2018 12:52 Seite 50
50 Byzantine maritime trade
Fig. 5: Hull remains on the Byzantine shipwreck sites and their reconstruction: 1.Yassi Ada; 2. Bozburun; 3. Serçe Limani; 4.
Contarina I.
capacity, equipped with eleven iron
anchors of type ‘T’, and the cargo
of over 900 amphorae. The analo-
gies between the two ships are also
demonstrated in numerous ceram-
ic and metal dishes from the galley
inventory, among which the re-
searches of Yassi Ada recovered
coins from the time of Emperor
Heraclius (610-641) dating the
shipwreck to the year 625/614.
Thirty amphorae in the cargo
belonged to Yassi Ada type 1, a
cylindrical body vessel with round
base, known as the later version of
LRA 1 type or LR 1B amphorae,
dated to the 6th and 7th centuries.
· V. Zmaić Kralj
Seven hundred amphorae be-
longed to the globular Yassi Ada 2
type, known as the LRA 13 am-
phorae, Pieri LRA 2B-2C or LRA
2/13 variants, produced in various
parts of the Mediterranean, mainly
in the Aegean area from the 7th to
the 9th centuries. (Fig. 2.1/1,2).
The rest of the amphora cargo was
composed of mostly individual
types of LRA belonging to the peri-
od of 6th and 7th centuries. The
cargo of Tatinica-Maharac is com-
posed of vessels that belong to the
LRA 2B type, several versions of
globular LRA 13 amphorae and
several amphorae of small dimen-
sions with flat bottom. Similar
globular amphorae have been dis-
tributed on the wider area of the
Mediterranean: on the islands of
Aegina and Crete, as well as in the
Saraçhane15 and Yenikapi16 excava-
tions in Istanbul and in the cargo
of the Bozburum shipwreck17 in
the southwest coast of Turkey. The
same shapes have been found at
excavations in Butrint18, at an early
Byzantine shipwreck near Otranto
in Apulia19, and in the north part of
the Adriatic, in Comacchio and in
Venice (Fig. 2.1/3-5)20. They started
to appear from the 7th to the 9th cen-
2018-Skyllis-17-Heft-1-Quark-6_2016-Skyllis-16-Heft-1-Quark1-91.qxd 05.03.2018 12:52 Seite 51

17. Jahrgang 2017 · Heft 1 51

tury, and many variants in forms

indicate different production cen-
tres: from the island of Chios or the
coastal part of Anatolia, the Büyük
Menderes River estuary to Cyprus
and Crete21. Through the shape of
LRA 2/13 we can follow the devel-
opment of forms and some kind of
link and continuity between the
LRA 2 types and globular middle
Byzantine vessels like type Günsenin
I, produced from the 9th to the 11th
century on the Byzantine territory.

Middle Byzantine amphorae in

the Eastern Adriatic

The following period, which takes

place from the 9th to the 11th cen-
turies, shows some kind of gap in
circulation of the Byzantine am- Fig. 6: Cape Stoba shipwreck: complete 3D virtual model with amphoras of 2009-2015
seasons.
phorae and trade relations in the
eastern Adriatic. This coincided
with the general political state of
the Empire, where the Iconoclast
emperors of the 8th century turned
to overland trade, thus enabling
Italian, Arab and Armenian traders
to intermediate and to control
maritime trade in the Black Sea
and in the western Mediterranean22.
In 826 the Arab fleet conquered
Crete, and later the Balearic Is-
lands, Sicily and parts of southern
Italy leaving the Byzantine Empire
no control over the West. The
power ratio in the market turned
in favour of Venice, where the finds
of middle Byzantine amphorae
from the 10th and 11th centuries
were recorded, unlike in Coma-
cchio, that had shown a fall in
trade. Trade in the Po River valley
would lose its significance, while
Venice would become the sole
provider for the Carolingians and
transalpine market23, taking the
role of the leading maritime trade
power in the Adriatic. But, in the
second half of the 10th century the
Byzantine Empire had another ter-
ritorial expansion.24 Byzantine rule
over southern Italy and Crete was
re-established, restoring the Byzan-
tine maritime trade in the Adriatic.
Fig. 7: Cape Stoba shipwreck.
A re-launch of maritime trade
awakened the production of new
forms of Byzantine amphorae by One of the most important ship- from this period is the Cape Stoba
the Aegean, Marmara and the wrecks for establishing the typolo- site, located on the seabed off the
Black Sea coastal workshops. gy and chronology of amphorae island of Mljet25. There, on the area
2018-Skyllis-17-Heft-1-Quark-6_2016-Skyllis-16-Heft-1-Quark1-91.qxd 05.03.2018 12:52 Seite 52
52 Byzantine maritime trade
Fig. 8: Cape Stoba, amphora of group I closed by stopper.
of approximately 100 square me-
ters, over 200 middle Byzantine
amphorae and numerous pieces of
luxurious glass objects, equipment
of the ship and galley inventory
were discovered. The wooden con-
struction of the hull wasn’t pre-
served, but two iron anchors re-
mained partially preserved. Both
anchors belonged to the type ‘Y’ or
Type E according to Kapitän’s ty-
pology26 (Figs. 6, 7), the typical
Byzantine ship’s equipment in the
period from the 10th to the 13th
century27. Similar anchors with
arms that slant downward, with the
obtuse angle between the shank
and the arms, were discovered in
the shipwrecks at Serçe Limani
(Fig. 1/3) and Camalþ Burnu I in
Turkey28 (Fig. 1/4), while in the
seabed of the eastern Adriatic they
were recorded near the island of
Korcula, in the waters of Palagruža
and Šæedro near Hvar, and in
Sustipan bay on the island of Brac.
Galley inventory consisted of a
small ceramic two-handled vessel,
a ceramic flask and various dishes
for storage and preparing food. So
far over 200 amphorae were recov-
ered from the site, belonging to
over ten different types with many
variants (Fig. 9).
Over 60 amphorae belonged to
group I (Fig. 9/1), a vessel wide in
shoulders slightly narrowing
towards the base with concave cen-
tre and 11 litres capacity, which
· V. Zmaić Kralj
would be equivalent to 3,7 mina,
the most common Byzantine
weight measure for the wine
trade29. The funnel neck ends with
wide profiled rim, shaped inside as
a slot for a cork stopper. Many of
Group 1 amphorae were closed by
stoppers made of cork oak (Quer-
cus suber L.) covered with a layer of
resin30. According to the classifica-
tion made on the basis of Bodrum
Museum amphorae31, they belong
to group 8, dated to 9th -11th cen-
turies, after the amphorae embed-
ded in the buildings in Mangala
(Istanbul), built during the reign of
Emperor Basil I (867-886)32 and
related examples from the Agora of
Athens dated to the layers from the
9th and 10th centuries33, Sarachane
in Istanbul, from the first half of
the 11th century34, and from the
Serce Limani shipwreck cargo in
Turkey, dated in 102535. The place
of their production hasn’t been
determined so far, but their shape
resembles one of the versions of
early Byzantine LR 2/13 amphorae,
produced in the territory of nowa-
days Tunisia during the second half
of the 7th century (Fig. 2.1./10)36.
Eleven amphorae belonged to
group II (Fig. 9/2). They have a
short neck, simpler rim and body
of slightly rhomboid form, with
round or conical bottom without
standing surface. The capacity of
the vessel is 9 litres, which would
be a weight measure equivalent to
around 3 mina. Their shape, like
from the previous ones, came from
the early Byzantine globular LR 13
amphorae of Aegean provenance.
According to Garver’s classifica-
tion37, they belong to group 1 and
to the period of the 9th to 11th cen-
turies. Sixteen examples from the
Museum of underwater archaeolo-
gy in Bodrum indicate they be-
longed to the east-Aegean produc-
tion that could have emerged from
the production centres of the earli-
er period. Similar examples had
been found in Istanbul38, in Cher-
sonese in the southwest coast of
Crimea39, in Sarkel on the Don
River, in Preslav in Bulgaria40,and
embedded in the vault of 11th cen-
tury church of St. Sophia in Ohrid
in Macedonia41.
More than 84 examples belonged
to group III (Fig. 9/3). They can be
divided into several versions on the
basis of their size and capacity
ranging between 4,8 (1.6 mina) to
7 litres (2.3 mina), and their vari-
ous deviations in appearance and
production methods. These vessels
have a characteristic body shape
that tapers in a cone shape, there-
fore they entirely have a form of an
elongated rhombus, like the earlier
Late Roman ‘carrot’ or Agora M334
amphorae. The most similar speci-
mens were discovered embedded
in the dome of the 9th/10th century
church of St. John the Baptist in
Kerch42, in Preslav and in the mon-
astery near Karnaach Teke in Bul-
garia, dated to the 10th and 11th cen-
turies43. Their form indicates they
could have derived from one ver-
sion of late antique Agora M334
amphorae produced around Ac-
con44. As in the case of the ampho-
rae of group I, a large number of
these vessels were found closed
with wooden cork stoppers soaked
with resin.
Six small piriform amphorae with
a stubby neck and oval handles
reaching from the rim belong to
group IV (Fig. 9/4). Their capacity
is only 1.8 litres, which would be
equivalent to 18 Byzantine litrai.
According to Günsenin’s classifica-
tion, they belong to the Byzantine
amphora Type XI dated to the 10th
2018-Skyllis-17-Heft-1-Quark-6_2016-Skyllis-16-Heft-1-Quark1-91.qxd 05.03.2018 12:53 Seite 53
Fig. 9: Distribution of various types of amphorae discovered in the cargo of Cape Stoba site.
and 11th centuries45. The closest par-
allels had been discovered in Serçe
Limani ship’s cargo, in the Agora of
Athens and in Preslav and Kar-
naach Teke monastery, in the layers
dated to the 10th and 11thcenturies46.
Two globular amphorae with wide
piriform body belong to group V,
and unlike the previous ones they
can be linked to the place of pro-
duction (Fig. 9/5). According to
Günsenin’s classification, they
belong to Type I Byzantine ampho-
rae, dated from the 10th to 12th cen-
turies. She linked them to the pro-
duction of wine at the Ganos mo-
nastery in the Marmara region,
which was founded in the 10th cen-
tury47. Their quantity and the wide
distribution in the territory of the
entire Mediterranean and the Black
sea, up to Ukraine, Russia and Swe-
den show us a widespread trade
network of the wine production.
Surveys in the 1990s located several
17. Jahrgang 2017 ·
amphora kiln sites at Ganos, on the
north-west coast of the Sea of Mar-
mara, at Chora, and on Marmara
Island, that produced this type of
amphorae48.The same amphorae
can be found within the cargos of
shipwrecks in almost all parts of
the Byzantine Empire, including
the most significant one, the Serçe
Limanþ shipwreck49. Although they
appeared frequently in numerous
sites of the eastern Mediterranean,
the Black Sea, lower Danube region
and Balkans, amphorae from Cape
Stoba are the only two such speci-
mens recorded so far in the Adria-
tic. A ceramic ball with diameter
fitting the rim of group V amphora
was found on the site, which coin-
cides with finding from Silistra site
in Bulgaria, where a stone ball was
found in situ, stuck in the mouth
of an amphora, used as a stopper50.
Twenty-four piriform vessels with
rounded base and short neck
Heft 1 53
belong to group VI. They can be
divided into several versions on the
basis of their diameter and capacity
ranging between 6.7 litres (2.2
mina), 15 litres (5 mina) and 21
litres (7 mina) (Fig. 9/6). Together
with the previous group, this is the
best represented type of Middle
Byzantine amphora, and while the
Ganos type is mostly distributed
on the eastern Mediterranean, the
amphorae of group VI amphorae
are more specific for the western
region. In Bakirtzis’ typology they
represent the Type 1 of Byzantine
amphorae, which were dated to the
late 9th to 11th centuries51. According
to Garver’s classification they be-
long in Class 5 and are dated to the
period from the 9th to the 13th cen-
turies. Their shape suggests they
could have derived from the widely
distributed LRA 1 type of the east-
ern Mediterranean provenience,
which was used during the Late
Roman and early Byzantine period
2018-Skyllis-17-Heft-1-Quark-6_2016-Skyllis-16-Heft-1-Quark1-91.qxd 05.03.2018 12:53 Seite 54

54 Byzantine maritime trade · V. Zmaić Kralj

and established in the whole of

Mediterranean affecting the ap-
pearance of many MBA variants.
Similar amphorae have been found
in pottery kilns dating to the end of
9th and 10th centuries in Chersonese,
an important commercial Byzan-
tine centre on the northern coast of
the Black Sea, suggesting their
provenance52. But other areas of
production cannot be excluded,
given their widespread distribution
across the Aegean Sea, in Bulgaria
and Romania, and on the Balkans
inland sites, while in the Adriatic
they were discovered in many ex-
amples and variants: on the Ždrijac
site in Nin, and like sporadic finds
near the islet of Ošljak in the Zadar
Channel, in the Port of Hvar, Split
and Umag53. Their presence had
Fig. 10: Cape Stoba, fragments of the glass objects from the ship’s cargo.
also been recorded in San Fran-
cesco del Deserto and on Torcello
Island in the Venice Lagoon, testi-
fying another rise of the Byzantine
maritime trade and restored con-
nections54.

Two ovoid amphorae with a stubby

neck, highly placed handles and
capacity of 6 litres (2 mina) belong
to group VII (Fig. 9/7). In Gün-
senin’s classification these belong
to type XV, based on specimens
found in the Agora of Athens dat-
ing to 11th and 12th centuries55.
According to other findings, from
the construction of the 11th century
church of St. Barbara in Trogir
(Central Dalmatia)56, in Albania,
Aegean islands and in Apulia (Mo-
la di Bari, Brindisi, Capo San Vito,
Taranto), these amphorae gravitate
towards central and west Mediter- Fig. 11: 1. Glass bottle from Serce Limani ship’s cargo; 2. Ždrijac in Nin 9th c.: glass
ranean. Excavations at Otranto and bottle from grave no 322.
in the site of Quattro Macine, An-
tifano, the monastic sites of S. One fragment of neck with a base Athens. On the basis of chemical
Giovanni Malcantone and Le Cen- of the handles and distinctive broad analysis of the fabric and compari-
toporte as well as surveys of the angular rim (Fig. 9/8) suggests that son with clay and other ceramics
underwater sites around Apulia it belonged to a type of piriform from the sites of Middle Greece,
during 1980’s and 90’s have re- amphora with bowed handles, well Thebe, Chalkida and Evvoia, the
vealed an abundance of amphorae represented on the eastern Medi- production of Günsenin II ampho-
made from a distinctly local terranean and the Black Sea basin rae can be assigned to Chalkida,
Apulian fabric and ceramic kilns from the 10th to the 12thcenturies, the important Byzantine harbour
for their producing, in contexts but a very rare find in the western in the Aegean Sea, an area famous
dating from the 10th/11th to the 13th region. According to the Günsenin for its wine and olive oil produc-
centuries57. Therefore, a future ana- typology it belongs to the group tion60.
lysis of the clay of the Cape Stoba IIB58, and in the Bakirtzis classifica-
amphorae and a comparison with tion in Type IV59. Westernmost One example of a small amphora
the clay from local deposits could similar examples were discovered with wide, round or slightly polyg-
indicate these origins. in Thessaloniki and at the Agora in onal body of 6 litres capacity (2
2018-Skyllis-17-Heft-1-Quark-6_2016-Skyllis-16-Heft-1-Quark1-91.qxd 05.03.2018 12:53 Seite 55
Fig. 12: 1. Ždrijac in Nin:.Amphorae and other finds from the site; 2. Amphorae from the bay of Pijan (Savudrija) in Istria; 3.
Ceramic clay recipients from the bay of Pijan.
mina), a profiled neck with a fun-
nel shaped rim and a base with a
concave centre belongs to group IX
(Fig. 9/9). Top and the bottom of
the handles are decorated with four
horn-like bulges, hence the analogy
for this vessel has not been found
yet, but according to its dimension
and shape, there are certain simi-
larities with amphorae produced in
Apulia, on the Mitello site with
ceramic kilns discovered in the area
of Otranto (Fig. 2.1./7,9)61.
Many amphorae of group I, II, III,
V and VI in addition with stamp of
the manufacturer have graffiti in-
scribed on the upper part of the
body which may be related with
trade regulations and standardiza-
tion of merchandise and container
for trade during transportation
and distribution (Fig. 8). They
appear in the form of single-mark
or multiple-mark in Greek letters
or runes, as well as geometric, pic-
torial symbols or numerals62. The
most common symbols are X, M,
and A and appears in multiple
character marks, including liga-
tures: XM, AX, MAX, ΧMΛ, XMD
or NX, and the M appears in liga-
tures as well: XM, AM, MD, MP,
MF, MFT, XMD. There are plenty
parallels of amphorae with similar
graffiti found on sites around the
Black Sea basin, as well as from
Byzantine shipwrecks, especially
17. Jahrgang 2017 ·
from Serçe Limanþ site, with almost
identical forms of graffiti63.
The next connection between Cape
Stoba and Serçe Limanþ shipwrecks
is a cargo of precious glassware in
the Islamic tradition, produced in
the eastern Mediterranean. It was
made in a complex glass blowing
technique which combined cobalt
blue and greenish glass decorated
with undulating or spiral applica-
tion of glass in different colour and
with a stylised concentric ‘eye’
motif, imprinted on the hot glass
surface, a characteristic of Levant’s
glass production, dating back to
the second half of the 9th or the 10th
centuries (Fig. 10)64. The discovery
of manufactured goods far from
their place of origin reflects the
reputation of these products and
interconnectedness of Mediterra-
nean trade. It can be assumed that
such luxurious items were intend-
ed for the market in Venice or
other urban Byzantine centres in
the Adriatic, but some Byzantine
finds in the early Croatian period
graveyard show an interest of the
early Croatian nobility for import-
ed luxury items.
This is clearly evident from graves
with Byzantine and Carolingian
imported items, including a grave
(n.º 322) of an early Croatian
nobleman’s family in the Ždrijac
Heft 1 55
graveyard in Nin with findings of a
bottle and a cup of the Levantine
glass production (Fig. 11/2). The
bottle has an elongated neck deco-
rated with three wavy glass applica-
tions and round body made from
yellow green glass in a blowing
technique, with a decoration of a
stylized × motif65. The decoration
and shape are quite similar to the
glass bottle from Serce Limani
ship’s cargo (Fig. 11/1), while the
neck decoration is analogue to
those from the Cape Stoba site.
Therefore, we can assume that the
bottle found in that grave had been
produced in Levantine glass work-
shops, and it came into the family’s
possession like a purchase or as a
political gift, through the media-
tion of the Byzantine merchant-
men, like those found at Cape
Stoba or at Serce Limani. Latter
one was dated by the glass weights
used for weighing coins belonging
to the Fāṭimid Dynasty, dated to a
year of 1024/1025, which gave us a
chronological benchmark for the
ship’s foundering.
Serce Limani glass items take us
into relation with another middle
Byzantine shipwreck in the eastern
Adriatic discovered in the Ždrijac
Bay in 1966 (Fig. 12/1). A mer-
chantman was carrying a number
of iron tools, amphorae, ceramic
and bronze dishes, roof materials
2018-Skyllis-17-Heft-1-Quark-6_2016-Skyllis-16-Heft-1-Quark1-91.qxd 05.03.2018 12:53 Seite 56
56 Byzantine maritime trade
Fig. 13: Lučnjak shallows: Günsenin Type III amphora,
12th/13th c.
and glass objects of which one
globular bottle with wide horizon-
tal rim is analogue to the one from
the Serçe Limani cargo (Fig.12.1/7).
A Byzantine ship from the 11th/12th
century, is not entirely preserved,
nevertheless, diverse Byzantine
cargo, and its position in the vicin-
ity of Nin, one of the centre of the
Duchy of the Croats, clearly show
the trade relations between the
Byzantine merchants and the local
early Croatian population.
Late Byzantine amphorae in the
Eastern Adriatic
In the second half of the 11th centu-
ry the influence of the Byzantine
Empire started to decline. The
Normans had conquered their
lands in the south of Italy, while
Italian cities had managed to
become the leading maritime and
commercial force in the Mediter-
ranean66. Also, in the beginning of
the 12th century, the Kingdom of
Hungary emerged as the major
rival of the Byzantine in the
Adriatic and Balkans. The Empire
responded by a military campaign
which ended with re-conquering of
Dalmatia which briefly renewed its
domination and trade contacts
between 1165 and 118067.
This brief period left a trace in
material culture and is also reflect-
· V. Zmaić Kralj
Fig. 15: 1. Amphora from the Sobra bay on the island of Mljet;
2. Amphora from Hvar town harbour.
ed in Byzantine amphora finds,
especially in the piriform amphora
characteristic for this time, with
narrow elongated neck, small ring-
shaped rim among massive high-
bowed handles and densely ribbed
wide belly (Fig. 13). According to
Günsenin, it belongs to Type III of
Byzantine amphorae, dated from
12th to 13th centuries, and it can be
traced along the Anatolian coast,
Aegean, Marmara and Black Sea, to
the south of Italy, so it appears they
were a part of one widespread
trading network. So far, their pro-
duction has been connected to var-
ious areas; from the Anatolian
coast to the Crimea or Boeotia in
Greece, but the latest analysis of the
fabric connects them to the ceram-
ic production of Chalkida, an im-
portant harbour for the distribu-
tion of agricultural products from
middle Greece. Considering the
existence of transition variants
between Günsenin type II and III,
made from the same fabric, it
appears that type III gradually
emerged from the previous type,
probably in the same ceramic
workshops68.
Several sporadic finds of these
amphorae appeared in the eastern
Adriatic: from the port of Hvar,
Porec69, and from the seabed off
Mljet island (Fig. 14)70. An example
of this amphora was discovered in
2008 on the shallows of Lucnjak
near Korcula (Fig. 13), together with
late Byzantine finds, like small pear-
shaped clay recipients, filled with
pale grey sediment and the frag-
ments of spindle-shape amphorae71.
Clay recipients, 9 cm high and 7cm
wide, probably represented flam-
mable projectiles or grenades, used
in the Byzantine Empire from the
middle of the 8th century. They had
emerged from the well-known
Byzantine invention called ‘Greek
fire’, a flammable substance used in
naval battles to great effect, as it
could continue burning while
floating on water72. Small clay or
glass recipients in a form of hand
projectiles filled with similar flam-
mable substance were a simpler
version of this weapon. Chemical
analysis of the sediment from the
projectile, showed it had 91, 31%
of calcium carbonate (CaCO3) and
other trace elements suggesting the
recipients were filled with quick-
lime. In the chemical reaction with
water the lumps of quicklime break
down to a dry fine white powder
known as hydrated lime or lime
hydrate (Ca(oH)2), and during the
long contact with moisture and
carbon dioxide in the air, it forms
calcium carbonate (CaCO3)73.
Similar recipients have been dis-
covered in 1995 on the seabed of
Pijan Bay near Savudria (Fig. 12./3),
in the context with an almost
entirely preserved amphora of
2018-Skyllis-17-Heft-1-Quark-6_2016-Skyllis-16-Heft-1-Quark1-91.qxd 05.03.2018 12:54 Seite 57

17. Jahrgang 2017 · Heft 1 57

in the Sobra Bay on the island of

Mljet (Fig. 15/1)76. The full profile
of the last-mentioned vessel was
preserved giving us its dimensions
and a capacity of 2,5 litres, clearly
indicating the tendency for smaller
forms of clay containers in the later
period. This is obvious in the shape
of another type of late Byzantine
amphora found at the shallows of
Lucnjak. It is a spindle-shaped am-
phora covered with horizontal
grooves with a little toe at the bot-
tom, convex, sloping shoulders,
short neck and elongate handles
arising from the rim in high arches
above the vessel. A site with con-
centration of these amphorae shards
was discovered near Merara islet
(Fig. 16/1) in Central Dalmatia77,
and similar remains of cargo were
recently discovered near St. Petar
Bay on the island of Ugljan in the
Zadar archipelago78. In both cases
amongst a large field of fragments
of the same type, there was not any
Fig. 14: Günsenin’s Type III amphora finds in the eastern Adriatic.

ribbed piriform body with concave

base, small neck with ring-shaped
rim and high bowed handles (Fig.
12.2/1)74. It belongs to the late vari-
ant of Byzantine amphorae of Ba-
kirtzis’s Type 1, with obvious dif-
ference in the handles, which are
higher positioned than in the pre-
vious, early variants of these am-
phorae. They were characteristic
for the 12th/13th centuries in varied
forms, particularly along the east
Adriatic coast, and can be traced in
the Ždrijac-Nin shipwreck, and as
the sporadic finds in Umag, in
Trogir’s harbour, near the island of
Žuthet, islands of Silba and Ošljak
near Zadar, on the island of Hvar,
and embedded in early mediaeval
churches, like St.George on the
island of Vis75.

In the context of the mentioned

finds from the Pijan Bay, upper parts
of two smaller amphorae were
found (Fig. 12.2/2,3). According to
their necks and high raised hand-
les, these probably belong to nar-
row, elongated amphorae, most
similar to the amphora discovered Fig. 16: 1. Fragments of the Merara site amphorae; 2. amphora from the Franciscan
in Hvar harbour (Fig. 15/2), in Vela monastery collection on the island of Krapanj; 3. Amphorae from Agios Stephanos in
Arta near the island of Murter and the south of Peloponnese; 4. amphora from Torre dell’Orso in Apulia.
2018-Skyllis-17-Heft-1-Quark-6_2016-Skyllis-16-Heft-1-Quark1-91.qxd 05.03.2018 12:54 Seite 58
58 Byzantine maritime trade · V. Zmaić Kralj
complete specimen of amphora,
therefore the real dimensions of
the vessel couldn’t have been estab-
lished until a comparison to the
amphorae from the Franciscan
monastery collection on the island
of Krapanj (Fig. 16/2)79. Although it
misses a little fragment of the bot-
tom, when compared to other frag-
ments the basic dimensions could
have been established: it was
around 40 cm long, with the dia-
meter from 15-17 cm, therefore it
had a same capacity as the previous
types. This amphora was a gift
from Krapanj sponge divers in the
1960s, without any data about the
location of discovery.
An interesting fact is that the
Museum of the city of Šibenik pre-
serves a large bronze bell, found by
Krapanj spongers in 1960’s in the
vicinity of the island of Silba. In the
notes on the circumstances of the
finding is stated that the bell was
discovered on the seabed together
with amphorae, marble tiles and an
iron anchor. The bell gives a plenty
of information because of an en-
graved inscription that mentions
that it was casted by Jakob from
Messane and Andreot from Pisa at
Accon (Syria) in 1266, therefore,
the ship with the bell could sank
between 1266 and 1291, when
Accon fell under the invasion of
the Muslims, before which the
Christian immigrants, Templars
and members of the other Orders
gradually started to leave their pos-
sessions in Syria and Palestine80.
The assumption that the Krapanj
amphora comes from the same site
as the bell is probable, if we take
into consideration that both arte-
facts were at the same time donat-
ed by the Krapanj sponge divers,
and the fact that notes about the
location mention amphorae81. Also,
the bell was dated to the period
during which there were no other
types of amphora in the Adriatic.
In Bakirtzis’s classification this is
Type 7, the final type, after which
the amphorae meant for trade and
transportation were no longer pro-
duced82. It was dated to the 13th/14th
century, based on the similar am-
phorae that were discovered during
a renovation of the church of
Afendiko of the Brontochion
Monastery at Mistra on the Pelo-
ponnese.83 During the church re-
storation two small amphorae were
discovered in the central dome,
embedded during the church’s
construction, between 1310 and
1320, suggesting that these am-
phorae had been used as transport
containers earlier, during the 13th
century. Analogue examples were
found in Corinth and Agios Ste-
phanos in the south of the Pelo-
ponnese, embedded in the archi-
tectural buildings or in the layers
dated to the 13th and 14th century
(Fig. 16/3), along with Frankish
coins of the early 14th century, and
large quantities of Archaic Majoli-
ca and ceramics of local produc-
tion, made by the clay of similar
composition like amphorae.84 An-
other similar amphora was found
overseas, on the Torre dell’Orso
site in Apulia (Fig. 16/4)85, one of
the rare provinces in medieval Italy
with a vital production and trade
connections with other remaining
Byzantine provinces.
Otranto, the major harbour of
Apulia, had a trading and food
supply contract with Venice to
Christian towns in Syria since
1104, which fits into the archaeo-
logical picture of the late Byzantine
amphorae sites in the eastern
Adriatic and puts the shipwreck
with bell from Accon in the same
context. At the same time, coins
and Archaic Majolica of the Italian
workshops found in the Pelopon-
nese confirm the close relations
and trade connections between
Apulia and the Peloponnese. Ac-
cording to the evidence of the
finds, the trade took place from
Otranto across Butrint in present-
day Albania to the Byzantine pos-
sessions in the Peloponnese and
backwards, and along the eastern
Adriatic, the unavoidable route to
Venice86.
Traces of spindle-shaped amphora
along the eastern Adriatic could be
linked also to the trading of wine
called ‘Malvoise’ originally from
the region of Monemvasie in the
south of the Peloponnese and to
the events during the 13th century
when William of Villehardouin in
1248 in the name of the French
kingdom occupied the last By-
zantine possessions in the southern
Peloponnese, conquered Monem-
vasia and built a city-fortress
Mistras, where spindle-shaped am-
phorae were found87. According to
some authors88, after the French
had taken over Monemvasia, local
wine called ‘Malvoisie’ became
popular in Europe and started to
be exported under the anglicised
name of ‘Mamsley’, northwards
across the Adriatic coast and
Venice to the European market.
So, from the fall of the Byzantine
Empire in 1204, their relations
with the Western market became
so weak and almost non-existent.
On one hand, the Croatian-Hun-
garian rule was established and on
the other hand Venetian traders
took over most of the Adriatic
trade. Although the barrels took a
leading role in trade, the clay con-
tainers had still retained in the
form of spindle-shape amphorae
and were still used in certain areas
as late as in the 13th and the 14th
centuries, after which late Byzan-
tine amphorae trade along the
Adriatic completely disappeared.
Notes
1 Günsenin 2009, 145.
2 Arthur – Auriema 1996, 14-17; Im-
periale 2004, 327-342; Auriema – Quiri
2007, 31-64; Vroom 2012, 354-391; Vroom
2017, 285-310.
3 Cirelli 2014, 541-552.
4 Laiou – Morrisson 2007, 24.
5 van Doorninck 1972, 139.
6 van Doorninck 1972, 140-141; Raut-
man 2006, 150.
7 Gelichi – Negrelli 2008, 307.
8
ibid. 310.
9 From Comacchio through the Po River
valley route the supply of the Kingdom of
the Lombards took place, while the supply
of the Carolingian dynasty and transalpine
market in Europe took place through
Venice (Negrelli 2007, 458).
2018-Skyllis-17-Heft-1-Quark-6_2016-Skyllis-16-Heft-1-Quark1-91.qxd 05.03.2018 15:52 Seite 59

17. Jahrgang 2017 · Heft 1 59

10 Discovered during archaeological sur- 36 The finds from Chios, Saracane in 67 Goldstein 1999.
vey of the seabed of Mljet in 2015 (I. Istanbul, Crypta Balbi in Rome, S. Antonio
68 Waksman et al. 2016. Article in press.
Miholjek, Department for underwater di Perti in Liguria, in Marseille and
Archaeology, Croatian Conservation Tarragona show us the widespread of 69
Tunisian LRA 2/13 along the entire Brusiæ 2010, 247-248.
Institute).
11
Mediterranean (Reynolds 2016, 147). 70 Zmaiæ Kralj 2015a.
Kapitän 1984, 43.
37 Garver 1993, 57-60.
12 Zmaiæ Kralj 2015. 71 Zmaiæ – Miholjek 2012, 162-166.
38 Ibid.
13 72 Roland 1992, 657-664; Shavit 2008,
Bass – van Doorninck 1982.
39 Jakobson 1951, 333, fig. 6/25-27. 101-103.
14 bid. 145.
40Doncheva-Petkova 1977, 193-4, pl. 73 Zmaiæ – Miholjek 2012, 166.
15 Hayes 199.2, 15-18. XXX:356.
74 Brusiæ 2010, 249.
16 Kocabaý 2012, 25-30. 41 Aleksova 1960, 202-203; Brusic 1976, 39.
75 Ibid. 248. Fig.9/2.
17 Hocker – Scafuri 1996, 5. 42 akobson 1979, 75.
76 Ideal reconstruction of the lower parts
18 Vroom 2012, 371-373. 43 Todorova 2012, 18-9, 23. of two amphorae from Pijan Bay (Brusiæ
19 44 Agora M334 amphora was found on 2010, 246. Fig.5/2.3.) doesn’t indicate the
Auriemma – Quiri 2007, 42-43.
Yassi Ada shipwreck, at Crypta Balbi site in noted types of amphorae, but on the other
20 Gelichi – Negrelli 2008, 307. Rome, in Arles and Marseille and near the hand their upper parts match the elongat-
islet of Veliki Maslinovac near Mljet, so ed amphorae from Hvar, Vela Arte-Murter,
21 Auriemma – Quiri 2007, 41 during the 7th/8th centuries they were wide- and Sobra Bay.
22 van Doorninck 1972, 146. spread along the whole Mediterranean 77 Zmaiæ 2010, 238-240.
(Reynolds 2008, 68).
23 Gelichi – Negrelli 2008, 326. 78
45
Kaleb – Bekiæ 2016, 50-53.
Günsenin 1990, 39.
24 Laiou – Morrisson 2007, 44. 79
46 Brusiæ 1976, 48.
Todorova 2012, 19, 23.
25 The first survey was carried out in 1975 80 Bach 1972, 47.
by the Institute for Protection of Cultural 47 Günsenin 2009, 147.
Monuments and the Maritime Museum in 81 Zmaiæ Kralj 2013, 85.
48 Günsenin 1999, 19.
Dubrovnik (J. Luetiæ, Z. Brusiæ and A.
Kisiæ) and between 2010 and 2015 excava- 49 Günsenin 2001, 117-133.
82 Bakirtzis 1989, 74-75.
tions have been carried out by Department
83 Sanders 1989, 196.
for Underwater Archaeology of the Croa- 50 Todorova 2011, 133.
tian Conservation Institute (I. Miholjek), 84
51 Bakirtzis 1989, 74-77. Sanders 2008, 397-402.
joined by the Department of Studi Uma-
nistici of the Universita Ca’ Foscari of 52
85 Arthur – Auriemma 1996, 16.
Jacobson 1979, 75.
Venice from 2012 (C. Beltrame).
86 Vroom 2012, 353-355.
53 Brusiæ 2010, 246.
26 Kapitän 1984, 43. 87 n 1259 the Nicaean emperor Michael
54 Toniolo 2007, 103.
27 Beltrame 2012, 222-223. VIII Palaeologus reconquered Mystras, and
55 two years later after conquering Consta-
28 van Doorninck 2004, 235; Kocabaý Günsenin 1990, 308 pl. 84/3; 313 pl. 86/1.
ntinople he restored the Byzantine Empire,
56 Brusiæ 2010, 249; Jurkoviæ – Turkoviæ
2009, 227-237. and Mystras became the seat of the gover-
29 Due to the policies of trade control and 2012, 137. nor of the Byzantine territories in the
regulation of the Byzantine State, potters 57 Peloponnese.
Arthur – Auriemma 1996, 16.
trading within the Empire were attempting 88 Sanders 1987, 191; Harris 2007, 249
58 Günsenin 1990, 31-34.
to follow a new standard of amphora regu-
lation based upon the Byzantine litra. 1
59 Bakirtzis 1989, 74-75.
mina = 30 Byzantine litrai (1 Byzantine
litrai = 320 g.) measure was known as the 60 Waksman et al. 2016. Article in press.
thalassion metron or “sea measure”
Bibliography
61 Imperiale 2015, 428-430; Vroom 2012,
(Scafuri 2002, 29).
373-374. Aleksova, B. 1960: Srednovekovna kera-
30 Zmaiæ Kralj et al 2016, 51-52. mika od crkvata Sveta Sofija vo Ohrid.
62 Collins 2012, 95. Glasnik na Institutot za nacionalna histori-
31 Garver 1993, 152. ja 1-2/IV (Skopje) 199-216.
63 Garver 1995, 68-74; Collins 2012, 138.
32 Demangel – Mamboury 1939, 148-149.
64 Han – Brusiæ 1978; Ferry in: Zmaiæ Arthur, P. – Auriemma, R. 1996: A Search
33 Robinson 1959, 120, T. 34,58. for Italian Wine, Middle Byzantine and
Kralj et al. 2016, 51-52.
34
Later Amphoras from southern Puglia.
Hayes 1992, 75. Fig. 25,15. 65 INA Quarterly 23, 14-17.
Peroviæ 2010, 39; Brusiæ 2010, 251.
35 van Doorninck 2002, 902. 66 Laiou – Morrisson 2007, 143. Auriemma, R. – Quiri, E. 2007: La circo-
lazione delle anfore in Adriatico tra V e
2018-Skyllis-17-Heft-1-Quark-6_2016-Skyllis-16-Heft-1-Quark1-91.qxd 05.03.2018 19:20 Seite 60
60 Byzantine maritime trade · V. Zmaić Kralj
VIII sec. d. C., in: S. Gelichi – C. Negrelli
(edd.), La circolazione delle ceramiche nel-
l’adriatico tra Tarda Antichità ed Alto-
medioevo. 3° Incontro di Studio Cer.am.Is
sulle ceramiche tardoantiche ed altome-
dievali – Venezia 2004 (Mantova) 31-64.
Bach, I. 1972: Zvono iz XIII. Stoljeća u
muzeju grada Šibenika, Prilozi povijesti
umjetnosti u Dalmaciji, Izdanje region-
alnog Zavoda za zaštitu spomenika kulture
u Splitu (Split) 47-57.
Bakirtzis, Ch. 1989: Byzantine amphorae,
Recherches sur la Céramique Byzantine.
Bull. de Correspondance Hellénique,
suppl. XVIII (Paris) 73-77.
Bass, G.F. – Matthews, S.D. – Steffy, J.R. –
van Doorninck, Jr., F.H. 2004: Serçe
Limani, An Eleventh-Century Shipwreck,
vol. I. (College Station, TX).
Beltrame, C. – Costa, E. 2018: 3D survey
and modelling of shipwrecks in different
underwater enviroments. Journal of Cul-
tural Heritage 29, 82-88.
Bass, G. F. – van Doorninck, Jr., F.H. 1982:
A Seventh-Century Byzantine Shipwreck
Vol. I (Texas A&M University press).
Beltrame, C. 2012: Archeologia marittima
del Mediterraneo. Navi, merci e porti dal-
l’antichità all’età moderna (Rome).
Brusić, Z. 1976: Byzantine amphorae (9th-
12th century) from eastern Adriatic under-
water sites. Archaeologia Iugoslavica 17
(Beograd) 37-49.
Brusić, Z. 2010: Ranosrednjovjekovni na-
lazi iz hrvatskog podmorja. Archaeologia
Adriatica IV (Zadar) 243-255.
Castro, F. et al. 2008: A Quantitative Look
at Mediterranean Lateen-and Square-
Rigged Ships (Part I). International Journal
of Nautical Archaeology 37(2), 347-359.
Cirelli, E. 2014: Typology and diffusion of
Amphorae in Ravenna and Classe between
the 5th and the 8th centuries AD, LRCW 4
Late Roman Coarse Wares, Cooking Wares
and Amphorae in the Mediterranean,
Archaeology and archaeometry. The Me-
diterranean: a market without frontiers,
Vol. I. BAR International Series 2616
(I)2014, (Oxford) 541-552.
Collins, C.A. 2012: Amphora Graffiti from
the Byzantine Shipwreck at Novy Svet,
Crimea.
Demangel, R. – Mamboury, E. 1939: Le
quar tier des Manganes et la première
region de Constantinople (Paris) 148-
149.
Doncheva-Petkova, L. 1977: Bulgarska
bitova keramika prez rannotosrednove-
kovie (Sofia).
van Doorninck Jr., F. 1972: Byzantium,
mistress of the sea: 330-641, in: G.F. Bass
(ed.), A History of Seafaring based on Un-
derwater Archaeology (London) 133-158.
van Doorninck Jr., F. 1988: The Glass
wreck at Serçe Limani, The Glass wreck: an
11th Century Merchantman, INA News-
letter 15 no. 3.
van Doorninck Jr., F. 2002: Byzantine
Shipwreks, The Economic History of
Byzantium: From the Seventh through the
Fifteenth century (Washington) 899-905.
Garver, E.L. 1993: Byzantine amphora’s of
the ninth through thirteenth centuries in
the Bodrum Museum of Underwater
Archaeology (Thesis, Texas A&M Uni-
versity).
Gelichi, S. – Negrelli, C. 2008: Anfore e
commerci nell’alto Adriatico tra VIII e IX
secolo. Mélanges de l’Ecole française de
Rome 120(2), 307-326.
Goldstein, I. 1999: Bizantska vlast u Dal-
maciji od 1165. – 1180. godine, Between
Byzantium, Venice and Central Europe, in:
Croatia in the early middle ages: a cultural
survey (London/Zagreb) 169-180.
Günsenin, N. 1990: Byzantine Amphoras
(Xth-XIIIth centuries): Typology, Produc-
tion and Circulation based on Turkish
Collections (Doctoral thesis, Université de
Paris).
Günsenin, N. 2001: L’épave de Çamaltı
Burnu I (Ile de Marmara, Proconnèse):
Résultats des Campagnes 1998-2000. Ana-
tolia Antiqua 2, 117-33.
Günsenin, N. 2009: Ganos wine and its
circulation in the 11th century, Byzantine
Trade, 4th-12th Centuries (Oxford) 145-153.
Han, V. – Brusić. Z. 1978: Une Découverte
Sous-Marine du Verre Médiéval dans
l’Adriatique, in: Annales du 7e Congrès
International d’Étude Historique du Verre,
271-82.
Harpster, M. 2005: A re-assembly and re-
construction of the 9th century AD vessel
wrecked off the coast of Bozburun, Turkey
(Dissertation of Graduate Studies of Texas
A&M University).
Harris, J. 2007: More Malmsey, your
grace? The export of Greek wine to
England in the Later Middle Ages, in: Eat,
Drink and be Merry (Luke 12:19) - Food
and Wine in Byzantium: Papers of the 37th
Annual Spring Symposium of Byzantine
Studies 249-254.
Hayes, J. 1992: Excavations at Saraçhane
in Istanbul, vol. 2: The Pottery (Princeton).
Hocker, F.M. – Scafuri, M.P. 1996: The
Bozburun Byzantine Shipwreck Excava-
tion: 1996 Campaign, The INA Quarterly
23.4, 3-9.
Jakobson, A.L. 1951: Srednevekovije am-
fori severnogo Pricernomorja. Sovjetskaja
arheologija 15, 325-344.
Jakobson, A.L. 1979: Керамика и
керамическое средневекой таврики
(Leningrad).
Jurković, M. – Turković, T. 2012: La Croa-
tie médiévale: état des lieux, Archéologie
du son. Les dispositifs de pots acoustiques
dans les édifices anciens (B. Palazzo-
Bertholon – J.-C. Valière), Supplément au
Bulletin monumental n. 5 (Paris) 133-139.
Kaleb, M. – Bekić, L. 2016: Istraživanja
Brodoloma Sv. Petar kod Ugljana, Poto-
pljena baština. Godišnjak MCPA u Zadru
br. 6 (Zadar) 50-53.
Kapitän, G. 1984: Ancient anchors – tech-
nology and classification. International
Journal of Nautical Archaeology 13/1, 33-44.
Kocabas, U. 2009: Camaltı Burnu I ship-
wreck, in: Bockius, R. (ed), Between the
Seas: Transfer and Exchange in Nautical
Technology (Proceeding of the Eleventh
International Symposium on Boat and Ship
Archaeology, 2006 (Römisch-Germanisches
Zentralmuseum, Mainz) 227-237.
Kocabaş, U. 2012: The old ships of the
‘New Gate’ 1, Yenikapi shipwrecks vol. 1
(Istambul).
Laiou, A.E. – Morrisson, C. 2007: The
Byzantine Economy (Cambridge).
Leo Imperiale, M. 2004: Otranto, cantiere
Mitello: un centro produttivo nel Medi-
terraneo bizantino; Atti dwlV Congresso di
Archeologia Medievale (Roma, CNR, 26-
27 Novembre 2001), Quaderni di Archeo-
logia Medievale VI, Firenze, 327-342.
Leo Imperiale, M. 2015: Anfore globulari
dal Salento. Produzione e circolazione
nell’Adriatico meridionale durante l’Alto-
medioevo, in: P. Arthur, M. – Leo Imperiale
(eds.), VII Congresso Nazionale di Ar-
cheologia Medievale (Lecce, 9-12 settem-
bre 2015), Vol. 1. 426-431.
Negrelli, C. 2007: Produzione, circola-
zione e consumo tra VI e IX secolo: dal ter-
2018-Skyllis-17-Heft-1-Quark-6_2016-Skyllis-16-Heft-1-Quark1-91.qxd 05.03.2018 15:52 Seite 61
ritorio del Pado vetere a Comacchio, in: S.
Gelichi (ed.), Comacchio e il suo territorio
tra la Tarda Antichità e l’Alto Medioevo
(Comacchio), 437-471.
Perovic , Š. 2010: Osvrt na staklene priloge
iz starohrvatskog groblja na Ždrijcu u
Ninu. Archaeologia Adriatica 4, 37-52.
Rautman, M. 2006: Daily Life in the By-
zantine Empire (London).
Reynolds, P. 2008: Linear Typologies and
ceramic evolution. FACTA 2 (Pisa/Roma)
61-87.
Reynolds, P. 2016: From Vandal Africa to
Arab Ifriqīya: Tracing Ceramic and
Economic Trends through the 5th to the 11th
Centuries, in: S. Stevens – J. Conant (eds.),
North Africa under Byzantium and Early
Islam (Washington D.C.) 129-171.
Robinson, H. 1959: The Athenian Agora,
vol. V, Pottery of the Roman period (New
Jersey).
Roland, A. 1992: Secrecy, Technology, and
War: Greek Fire and the Defense of
Byzantium. Technology and Culture 33
(4), 655-679; doi:10.2307/3106585, JSTOR
3106585
Sanders, G. 1987: An assemblage of
Frankish pottery at Corinth. Hesperia 56,
159-195.
Sanders, G. 1989: Three Peloponnesian
Churches and their Importance for the
Chronology of Late 13th and Early 14th
Century Pottery in the Eastern Medi-
terranean, in: Recherches sur la Céramique
Byzantine, Bull. de Correspondance Hel-
lénique Suppl. 18 (Paris), 189-199.
Sanders, G. 2008: Chapter 7: The Medie-
val pottery, in: W.D. Taylour – R. Janko
(eds.), Ayios Stephanos. Excavations at a
Bronze Age and Medieval Settlement in
Southern Laconia (London) 389-410.
Scafuri, M.F. 2002: Byzantine Naval Power
and Trade: The Collapse of the Western
Frontier (thesis Texas A & M. University).
Shavit, J. 2008: The sphero-conical ves-
sels, Paneas, Vol. II: Small finds and other
studies, Iaa Reports No 38 (Jerusalem),
101-113.
17. Jahrgang 2017 ·
Todorova, E. 2011: The Medieval Am-
phorae (Ninth to Fourteenth Centuries
AD) from Excavation at Silistra in 2007
(Preliminary Report), Patabs II. Produc-
tion and trade of amphorae in the Black
Sea; Acts of the International round table
held in Kiten, Nessebar and Sredetz, Sep-
tember 26-30, 2007 (Sofija) 131-140.
Todorova, E. 2012: Byzantine Amphorae
from Present-day Bulgaria (7th - 14th centu-
ry AD) (PhD thesis, Sofia).
Todorova, E. 2015: Policy and trade in the
northern periphery of the eastern mediter-
ranean: amphora evidence from present-
day Bulgaria (7th-14th centuries). Inter-
national Congress On Medieval Pottery In
The Mediterranean, ACTAS DO X Con-
gresso Internacional A Ceramica Medieval
No Mediterraneo, Silves 22 a 27. out-
ubro’12, 2015, 637-648.
Toniolo, A. 2007: Anfore dall’area lagu-
nare, in: S. Gelichi – C. Negrelli (eds.), La
circolazione delle ceramiche nell’adriatico
tra Tarda Antichità ed Altomedioevo. 3°
Incontro di Studio Cer.am.Is sulle cera-
miche tardoantiche ed altomedievali –
Venezia 2004 (Mantova) 91-106.
Vroom, J. 2012: From one coast to anoth-
er: Early Medieval ceramics in the southern
Adriatic region, in: S. Gelichi – R. Hodges
(eds.), From One Sea to Another. Trading
Places in the European and Mediterranean
Early Middle Ages, Proceedings of the
International Conference Comacchio, 27th-
29th March 2009 (Turnhou) 353-392.
Vroom, J. 2017: The Byzantine Web:
Pottery and connectivity between the
southern Adriatic and the eastern Medi-
terranean. In: Gelichi S., Negrelli C. (red.)
Adriatico altomedievale (VI-XI secolo).
Scambi, porti, produzioni . nr. Studi e Ri-
cerche 4 Venice: Edizioni Ca’ Foscari. 285-
310.
Waksman, S.Y. et al. 2016: Investigating
the origins of two main types of Middle
and Late Byzantine amphorae. Journal of
Archaeological Science: Reports (2016),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2016.12.
008
Zmaić, V. 2010: Rekognosciranje podmor-
ja srednje Dalmacije, Izdanja HAD-a vol.
26, Hrvatsko arheološko društvo (Zag-
reb/Split) 227-244.
Heft 1 61
Zmaić Kralj, V. 2013: Late Byzantine Am-
phorae. SKYLLIS 13, 2013, Heft 1, 81-88.
Zmaić Kralj, V. 2015a: Izvješće o provede-
noj 1. fazi zaštitnog arheološkog rekognos-
ciranja podmorja otoka Mljeta u 2015.g.
Hrvatski arheološki godišnjak 2015/12,
unpublished.
Zmaić Kralj, V. 2015: Izvješće o provede-
noj 2. fazi zaštitnog arheološkog rekognos-
ciranja podmorja otoka Mljeta u 2015.g.,
Hrvatski arheološki godišnjak 2015/12,
unpublished.
Zmaić Kralj, V. et al. 2016: A Byzantine
shipwreck from Cape Stoba, Mljet, Croatia:
an interim report. International Journal of
Nautical Archaeology 45.1, 42-58.
Zmaić, V. – Miholjek, I. 2012: Srednjovje-
kovne amfore 13. i 14. stoljeća na istočnom
Jadranu. Portal 3/12 (Zagreb) 157-170.
Credits of figures
Figs. 1, 3, 4, 9, 14: V. Zmaiæ Kralj; Fig. 2: 1.2
from Bass - van Doorninck 1982; 5-10
from Reynolds 2016; 3 drawing V. Zmaiæ
Kralj; Fig. 5,1: from Bass – van Doorninck
1982; Fig. 5,2: from Harpster 2005; Fig. 5,3:
Bass et al. 2004; Fig. 5,4: Bonino 1978; Fig
6: C. Beltrame – E. Costa, Journal of
Cultural Heritage 29 (2018) 87, fig. 9; Fig.
7: photo J. Macura; Fig. 8: drawing V.
Zmaiæ Kralj, photo I. Miholjek; Fig. 10: M.
Ferry, from Zmaiæ Kralj, V. et al. 2016; Fig.
11,1: Brusić 2010 fig. 12; Fig. 11,2: Peroviæ
2010; Fig. 12 Brusiæ 2010, fig.2, 5, 6; Fig. 13:
drawing S. Čule, photo R. Moskoviæ; Fig.
15,1: drawing V. Zmaiæ Kralj; Fig. 15,2:
from Brusiæ 2010, fig. 9; Fig. 16,1: drawing
V. Zmaiæ Kralj, photo R. Moskoviæ; 16,2:
drawing V. Zmaiæ Kralj, photo I. Miholjek;
16,3: Sanders 1987; 16,4: Arthur –
Auriemma 1996.
Address
Vesna Zmaiæ Kralj
Croatian Conservation Institute
Dept. for Underwater Archaeology
Cvijete Zuzori 43
10 000 Zagreb
Croatia
vzmaic@h-r-z.hr