Ceramics and positivism revisited

A frequent topic of debate over the past decade has been the monetary value of archaic and classical Greek finewares and, a related topic, their epistemic value for the archaeology of trade. ¹ Considerable attention has been paid to the ancient, commercial significance of the fineware trade, while less attention has been paid to the question of whether finewares, expensive or cheap, ever provided detailed archaeological evidence for the study of trade after c. 550 bc. ² A brief review can highlight why finewares are poor indicators of patterns of trade. The dominance of Athens in exported finewares beginning c. 550 limits the visibility of trade involving other cities. ³ The role of Athenians themselves in the process of trade remains uncertain (Johnston 1993, 216–22, 1972, 1985; cf. Gill 1994, 100–1). Furthermore, fineware production involved a limited segment of the labour force and resource base of the polis. ⁴