A
Excavations at the site of prehistoric Akrotiri, on the coast of the Aegean Sea, have revealed much about the technical aspects of pottery manufacture—indisputably one of the basic industries of this Greek city. However, considerably less is known about the socio-economic context and how production was organised.
B
The bulk of pottery found at Akrotiri is locally made and dates from the late fifteenth century BC. It clearly fulfilled a vast range of the settlement’s requirements: more than fifty different types of pots can be distinguished. The pottery includes a wide variety of functional types—such as storage jars, smaller containers, pouring vessels, cooking pots, and drinking vessels—all of which relate to specific activities and would have been made and distributed with those uses in mind.
Given the large number of shapes produced and the relatively high degree of standardisation, it has generally been assumed that most, if not all, of Akrotiri’s pottery was produced by specialised craftsmen in a non-domestic context. Unfortunately, neither the potters’ workshops nor kilns have been found within the excavated area. This may be because the ceramic workshops were located on the periphery of the site, which has not yet been excavated.
In any event, the ubiquity of pottery and the consistent repetition of the same types in different sizes suggest production on an industrial scale. The Akrotirian potters seem to have responded to pressures beyond their households—namely, the increasing complexity of regional distribution and exchange systems. We can imagine them as full-time craftsmen working permanently in a high-output craft such as pottery manufacture and supporting themselves entirely through the proceeds of their work.
In light of this, one can begin to speak in terms of mass-produced pottery and the existence of organised workshops during the period 1550–1500 BC. Yet how pottery production was organised at Akrotiri remains an open question, as there is no real documentary evidence. Our entire knowledge comes from the ceramic material itself and the tentative conclusions drawn from it.
D
The invention of units of quantity and a numerical system to count them was of critical importance for an exchange-oriented society such as that of Akrotiri. In spite of the absence of written records, archaeological evidence reveals that concepts of measurement—both of weight and number—had been formulated. Standard measures may already have been in use, such as those evidenced by a graduated series of disc-shaped lead weights found at the site. The existence of units of capacity in Late Bronze Age times is also supported by the notation of liquid measures for wine on excavated containers.
E
It must be recognised that the function of pottery vessels plays a very important role in determining their characteristics. The intended use affects the choice of clay, the production technique, and the shape and size of the pots. For example, large storage jars (pithoi) would be needed to store commodities, whereas smaller containers would be used for transport. In fact, the length of a man’s arm limits the size of a smaller pot to a capacity of about twenty litres—that is also the maximum a man can comfortably carry.
F
The various sizes of containers would therefore represent standard quantities of a commodity, which is fundamental in exchange. Akrotirian merchants handling a commodity such as wine would have been able to determine easily the amount they were transporting based on the number of containers carried on their ships, since the capacity of each container was known to be 14–18 litres. (We could draw a parallel here with the current practice in Greece of selling oil in 17-kilogram tins.)
G
We may therefore assume that the shape, capacity, and sometimes decoration of vessels are indicative of the commodities they contained. Since individual transactions would normally involve different quantities of a given commodity, a range of standardised vessel types would have been needed to meet traders’ requirements.
H
In attempting to reconstruct systems of capacity by measuring the volume of excavated pottery, a rather generous range of tolerances must be allowed. It seems likely that potters of the time had specific sizes of vessels in mind and attempted to reproduce them using specific types and amounts of clay. However, without mechanical means to regulate symmetry and wall thickness, achieving exact sizes every time would have been difficult—and some potters would have been more skilled than others.
Additionally, variations in type and size may have resulted from unforeseen circumstances during the throwing process. For instance, if the clay in the rim contained a piece of grit, the potter might simply cut off the rim rather than discard the entire pot, resulting in a smaller vessel. Even when there is no noticeable external difference between pots intended to contain the same quantity, variations in capacity can reach one or two litres. In one case, the deviation from the required size appears to be as much as 10–20 percent.
I
The establishment of regular trade routes within the Aegean led to increased movement of goods. Consequently, the regular exchange of local, luxury, and surplus goods—including metals—became feasible, largely due to advances in transport technology. The increased demand for standardised exchanges, closely linked to commercial transactions, may have been one of the main drivers of pottery standardisation. Thus, the entire network of ceramic production and exchange would have depended on specific regional economic conditions and reflected the socio-economic structure of prehistoric Akrotiri.