Published in

Book note, “Recueil de timbres sur amphores romaines (1987-1988), by M.-B. Carre, V. Gaggadis-Robin, A. Hesnard, and A. Tchernia”, American Journal of Archaeology, 100, p. 638, 1996.

 

Les Amphores du Sado (Portugal): prospection des fours et analyse du matériel, by Françoise Mayet, Anne Schmitt, and Carlos Tavares da Silva. Pp.230, figs. 84, tables 14. De Boccard, Paris 1996.  ISBN .

 

                               The study of amphorae has been developing fast in the last thirty years, with several specialized branches, some scholars paying special attention to specific amphora types, others to production or consumption centres, all of these studies implying at least some use of typological, epigraphical, and petrographic analyses. Archaeological surveys of amphora producing areas is a particularly important research avenue, and probably the survey of the Guadalquivir valley, in southern Spain, carried out by Michel Ponsich, publishing in four volumes hundreds of sites, comprising potteries, uillae, towns and others, is the most comprehensive catalogue of sites, amphorae, inscriptions and other artefacts.

 

                               This book by French and Portuguese archaeologists follow this lead and is the result of a long-standing research mission, part of a series of books on the archaeological exploration of the River Sado basin, in southern Portugal. The book is divided in five main parts, beginning with an overall introduction to the aims of a project looking for the study of fish-sauce production in the lower valley of the Sado, around seven sites close to the river. There is also a brief introduction to the amphora types produced in the area, namely Dressel 14, Almagro 50, Beltrán 72,  Almagro 51a-b, Almagro 51c, Keay LXXVIII, and to the geographic setting. The authors emphasize that  warm waters,  fish abundance, and the presence of salt mines led to an environment favouring the installation of an “industrial district” (p.27).

 

                               The bulk of the book is the publication of the results of the archaeological survey of seven sites (29-119).  Good maps, kiln plans and stratigraphic sections, lists of artefacts and a comprehensive publication of amphora drawings enable the reader to become well acquainted with the whole area. Abul (Alcácer do Sal), originally a Phoenician site, witness the earliest amphora production in the Sado valley dated probably of the period of Augustus and Tiberius, for with Claudius the mass production is already in place (p. 57) and it continues active up to mid fifth century AD. The mass production implied that there were kilns just for  Dressel 14 lids at Pinheiro, even though some sites produced amphorae in family units (p.38), like Barrosinha, whilst others, like Enchurrasqueira, produced a number of graffiti, indicating that several workers were active at the same time (p. 50). At the conclusion of the survey, the authors suggest that, as the kilns were at the banks of the river, it was possible to send empty vessels to be used in the fish-sauce workshops at Tróia and Setúbal. The kilns are smaller than those known in Baetica but they continued exporting fish-sauce for hundreds of years (mid first to mid fifth centuries AD). It is interesting to note that the differences in settlement pattern between the Baetis and Sado valleys are explained by several reasons, not least the fact that the olive oil and fish-sauce productions follow different constraints. What is remarkable though is that both settlement patterns are due to large scale exportation.

 

                               The petrogaphic analysis was carried out with a sample of at least ten artefacts per site (pp. 121-165). The results indicated that is not possible to distinguish the fabrics of the different sites, as the clay and fillings are quite the same all over the area.  However, the petrographic study can be useful to distinguish amphorae from different regions, being possible to differentiate six petrographic groups.

 

                               The authors also studied a consumption site, São Cucufate, a country settlement with a lot of amphora sherds, samian pottery and thus linked to an  urban market economy (p. 167).  The uillae at São Cucufate are at the Alentejo, some one hundred kilometres from fish-sauce producing Setúbal and Tróia, fifty kilometres from Lisbon and sixty kilometres from the Algarve, being thus well located to study the consumption pattern in the hinterland.  Lusitanian amphorae are in a clear majority, the most important imported amphora being the well known Dressel 20 olive-oil vessel from Baetica. It is emphasised that they found 994 sherds of fish-sauce amphorae, and only 45 sherds of wine and olive-oil vessels, implying that a “uilla in the hinterland could thus have as varied a diet as a uilla in the coast or in a river bank. These sea products came from different provinces” (p. 169), mostly from Baetica and from North Africa. Lusitanian amphorae came as expected mostly from the Tagus and Sado valleys, areas not far from São Cucufate. Concluding this section, the authors propose that in the late period, that is from the third century onwards, amphorae continued to be produced in Baetica and exported as empty vessels, to be used in the fish-sauce industries of Lusitania, an interesting suggestion, but whose acceptance would depend on a better understanding of Baetica and the dynamics of exchanges in the late Empire.

 

                               The general conclusion of the volume touches three main issues. The first one refers to the the typology of so-called Lusitanian amphorae, as the authors are keen to emphasize that they are not necessarily copies of amphorae produced elsewhere, notably in Baetica. Dressel 14 amphorae from Lusitanian kilns were being produced as early as the principate of Tiberius and they were soon to overcome fish-sauce amphorae from Baetica in a distant market as Ostia.  The authors warn against typological classification grounded solely on criteria relating to shape, as they can be misleading, and reject the use of the adjective “Lusitanian” to describe these amphorae (p. 194). However, the common use of names of Roman provinces as adjectives to amphorae should not be discarded, as it is a useful way of precising the producing area, with the possible proviso that it should add a specific reference to the precise region, like in this case, the Sado valley (cf. a most recent discussion of the subject by Carlos Fabião, “Sobre a tipologia das ânforas da Lusitânia,” Actas das Primeiras Jornadas sobre Romanização dos Estuários do Tejo e do Sado (Lisboa 1996, 371-390). Another contentious issue raised by this typological question is the importance of shape of amphorae to identify the contents to the ancient users themselves. The fact that so many shapes had been continously imitated, producing new local forms, indicate that the shape of amphorae was strongly associated to the contents, enabling tradesmen, officials and consumers in general to read in the form the product inside the vessel (cf. P.P.A. Funari, As transformações tipológicas das ânforas oleárias béticas do Tipo Dressel 20, Diss.  University of São Paulo 1985 reviewed by Fanette Laubenheimer, Dialogues d’Histoire Ancienne 12, 1986: 524-5; the same point is found in Carlos Fabião and Amílcar Guerra, “Sobre os conteúdos das ânforas lusitanas”, Actas do II Congresso Peninsular de História Antiga, Coimbra, 1996:  998).

 

                               The second issue is also a terminological one, as the authors do not accept the use of  kiln as a reference to the producing place, preferring to call it atelier (workshop) in its general meaning of  “producing place” (p.195). It is not always easy to distinguish sites and at the Sado basin the potteries are part of a “producing centre”, as was the case with the workshops at the Tagus valley and at the Bay of Cadix. It is a research strategy probably appropriate to amphora producing areas with no stamps, but it should not be used when dealing with those areas where epigraphic evidence is available. When there are stamps, it is possible to study the exchange between consuming and producing areas, from specific kilns to specific consumer sites, producing social, economic and cultural data to interpret the Roman society as a whole. José Remesal’s La annona militaris y la exportación de aceite bético a Germania (Madrid 1986) led to the adoption of this approach and his and others’ studies are now used as main sources for discussing the character of the Roman society and economy, as Juliette Baudoux’s Les amphores du Nord-Est de la Gaule (territoire français). Contribuition à l’histoire de l’économie provinciale sous l’Empire romain (Paris 1996) proves beyond dispute (cf. P.P.A. Funari, Dressel 20 inscriptions from Britain and the consumption of Spanish Olive oil, Oxford 1996; Baudoux’s and Funari’s books are reviewed by Fanette Laubenheimer, Dialogues d’Histoire Ancienne 22, 2, 1996: 261-279).

 

                               The third issue refers to the development of the valley of the Sado. The authors propose a three phase scheme, beginning with introduction of fish-sauce production in the lower Sado in the first quarter of the first century AD, first modestly, and then, from mid century, large-scale production develops at Tróia, site opposite Caetobriga (Setúbal). Dressel 14 amphorae production spread to the right bank of the Sado estuary, with big workshops at Abul and Pinheiro. This patters changes from the end of the second century, as some workshops discontinue amphora production, as are the cases of Barrosinha and Bugio, both linked to Salacia (Alcácer do Sal), as they produced building material used in the town, in decline from this period. The latest amphora producers are Abul, Pinheiro and Quinta da Alegria, which continued to produce amphorae for fish-sauce prepared at Tróia and Setubal up to the fifth century. The authors think that the exports in the late empire continued unabated (quasi-industrielle, p. 197). Even though accepting the importance of late exportations, it is noticeable a clear change in the settlement pattern, as the early empire witnessed a much wider influence of market in the area.

 

                               In summary, this book provides useful and accessible data on the settlement of the Sado valley. This is an invaluable merit, as the publication of archaeological evidence is an important task in itself. The reader should perhaps gain from an anthropological stress on the overall context of fish-sauce production, as there are several issues relating to social habits (fishing, workshop activities, consumption of sauces and so on) which would interest the general reader too. As it is, this book, as most archaeological reports, is probably too descriptive to be read by non specialists, in this case, amphora students. But the purpose of the book was first and foremost the publication of the evidence and it is successful in doing so, furnishing data to be used by scholars interested in the Roman economy and society.                           

 

 

Pedro Paulo A. Funari

Departamento de História

Instituto de Filosofia e Ciências Humanas

Universidade Estadual de Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil

C. Postal 6110, Campinas 13081-970, SP

pedrofunari@sti.com.br