The Ceramics of the Silk Route: Parthia and China

TRANSACTIONS OF THE

ORIENTAL CERAMIC

SOCIETY

Reprinted from Volume 60.1995 - L996

THE ORIENTAL CERAMIC SOCIETY

Ceramics of the Silk Road:

Parthia and Chinal

THE SIXTH GEORGE DE MENASCE MEMORIAL TRUST LECTURE GI\EN BY

MURRAY LEE EIIAND ON 13TH FEBRUARY, 1996

1. y zhile the silk route is well-known as a conduit of luxury items moving from East

\ A / to West,2 there is growing evidence for a trade of luxury goods moving from

V Y west to east.3 Literary sources record emissaries bringing gifts and tribute tothe Chinese court, and further sources offer glimpses of what must have been a sizable

west-east trade. Previously little attention has been directed towards this question but

with recently accessible archaeological flnds, we may now ask if there is any trace of,western' ceiamics from the Parthian period (150 BC-AD 250) having been traded

along the silk route into Central Asia (fig. 1)?

There is ample evidence for trade in Sasanian (AD 250-650) glass from West to East'

Despite few giass finds in China, the Shoso-in Treasury in Nara, Japan, has a number

of exampler. A -orustic repository with material dating from the eighth century A.D.,

the collection is notable for the amount of material from Central Asia and even the

Roman world. Glass is well represented, as it was during the flrst century BC that this

craft underwent rapid development in the West. Rome and the eastern Mediterranean

1I would like to express my gratitude to many individuals and institutions for providing access and

valuable information on my trip to and from Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and western China'

There are some, however that deserve particular mention. In Ashgabat, Tatjana Majorova and Ogulsapar

Andakova provided invaluable logistical support, and in Merv the director of the museum, Yevgenya

Golubova, ailowed me to photograph material recovered from Margiana. The director of the Archaeo-

logical Museum in Almaty, Roza Bektoureeva, kindly allowed access to materials there. In China, Professor

Vlctor Mair provided an important bridge. None of these individuals are responsible for any inaccuracies

in this paper.,Foia'general introduction to the silk route see Vollmer, Keall & Nagai-Berthrong 1983. It would not

be out of place here to mention that Keyser 1993 postulates a new use for the famous Parthian Galvanic

Cells. Theie are ceramic vessels that contain both an iron rod and a copper sheet, sealed with an asphalt

plug. The author postulates that these devices could not have been used for electroplating, and that instead

in"! *"." used as an electrical analgesic. He flnds parallels for this practice in Chinese medicine, and

suggests that the Parthian practice may follow eastern prototypes'55arianidi 1994 details Aegean-Anatolian motifs in the Glyptic art of Bactria and Margiana in the second

millennium B.C. While the similarities in Glyptic art can be used to show a unity of culture (and perhaps

some degree of linguistic relation) between these two wideiy separate regions, more directly these similari-

ties indicate trade, even in this early period.


Fig. 1. A wall of a (restored) merchant's

house in Bukhara, dating from the late

nineteenth century. Did similar collections ofexotic metalwork and ceramics exist along the

silk route in antiquitY?

mass produced vessels using such techniques as casting, free-blowinB, and mould blow-

ing. pieviously, glass vesselJwere manufactured using more labour-intensive techniques

which limited the artistic scope of the medium.4 It is not surprising that western glass

was valued in the East,s though without the Shoso-in there would be sparse evidence for

this trade.6

a Grose 1-986.sHayashi (1975, fig.99) picrures a white glass carafe with a long handle and a pinched lip. It is well

paralleled bya the uJ.."t pi"trr."d opposite from Gilan in northwest lran' The author notes that the cobalt-

tlre glass vlssel with uppil"a "irculai

roundels (Hayashi 1915, fig. 16) may be placed in Greece, although

such a form may be moie at home further east. There are also two cut-glass faceted glass bowls' Vickers

1995 notes that cut glass vessels imitate rock crystal vessels. as glass and rock crystal are easily confused'

The latter observation may account for the value placed upon glass vessels in the East. Although many

times attributed to lran, Lany srrch vessels have been recovered from Mesopotamia' see Langdon &

Harden 7934, fig.4. lt would seem that the majority of material, despite dealers claims' originate from that

area. There is also a high-footed, wide-brimmed vessel of transparent glass (Hayashi 1975' fig. 52). The

latter form appears vefu western and similar examples were recovered from Dura-Europos on the

Euphrates (and now in the Yale University Museum)'uFo,- u.or,,,,ury of western glass flnds in Asia see Pinder-Wilson 1970.

106

CERAMICS OF THE SILK ROAD: PARTHIA AND CHINA

Also of interest at the Shoso-in is an agate leaf-shaped drinking cup'7 Although the

exact substance used to manufacture the iumo,'s vasa murrina of antiquity remains in

Oisf,rt", it is clear that such vessels were made from a natural substance (such as agate

or possibly fluorspar) obtained from southern Iran during the Parthian period'8 Though

literary references io stone vessels have yielded little consensus as to the murrina

material, it may not be out of place to suggest that the cup in the Shoso-in has some

affinity to western murrina vesiels. The laiter point raises an important issue' Would

western ceramic vessels have had any value in the East? It is notable that there are a

variety of other western objects in thL shoso-in, including metal vessels, musical instru-

ments, a wooden mask, *d fubri"., but there are no western CeramiCS' DOeS thiS

,.rgg"rt that only 'luxury goods" excluding potter!, were retained? whatever the case,

one must look elsewhere to find ceramic evidence'

what do we mean by 'western' ceramic technology?e Archaeological evidence sug-

gests that Mesopotamiun type soda-lime-alkali green glazed wares that came to be

associated with Parthiun occupation had a precedent in earlier archaeological materials'

The glazed pottery of the AchaemeniO perioO (530-300 B.C) and the Seleucid period

(530:330 BC) remain little known; they appear to lange in color from blue-gfeen to

y"ffo* and wirite; ii is only the Parthian p"tioO that can be easily characterized by a

Lrpric green glaze that continues into the Sasanian period and lasts well into the

sererrth"""ntui, Isla;; period.1o Mesopotamian green glaze wares are also found in

western Iran, but, u, i, ni"ropotamia, gi"".t glaze does not occur in quantity before the

Parthian period'The picture from other regions is unclear, in part due to the patchy nature of

excavations in the Caucasus and Central Asia. Regarding the geographical co-nnections

between Turkmenistan and Mesopotamia, it is interesting to note the range of ceramics

dating to the Partho-sasanian period emerging from that region' A number of unglazed

vessels demonstrate the similurity of mateiial culture between the two regions (figs 2

and 3) while as a general rule it appears that glazing does not emerge till the later

Sasanian period in firis area, supporting the hypothesis that the technique was brought

from Mesopotamia, there are indicatiois that this region had its own distinctive glazed

wares during the Partho-Sasanian period (f,g' a)'

During a lecent trip to Armenia anO'Ciotgia, I noted that what few green glazed

vessels were recov"r*d'fro* archaeological sitei followed trade patterns' In Armenia, at

the site of Artashat near modern Yerevan, there were quantities of greet glazed wares

found in association with coins struck in Mesopotamia. In Georgia small numbers of

THayashi t975,fig.51.sloewental & Harden, 1949.,The term .Mesopotamian,will be used here to describe what has often been associated with the Partho-

Sasanian period. Distinctive Parthian shapes also occur in other regions' particularly eastern Iran' These

vessels bear little similarity to their western Parthian counterparts, see Haerinck 1983' The term Mesopo-

tamian will also be used in order to place a non-chronotogically limiting term to a particular industry' For

typi"ul *".t".n Parthian pottery see Debevoise 1934a' and Toll 1943'

10For analysis of Parthian green glazed wares see Hedges & Moorey 1975; Hedges 1976; McCarthy'

vandiver & Gibson 1gg5. The author also has analyzed Pirthian and Sasanian glazes; the results will be

presented fullY elsewhere.

107


Fig. 2. Unglazed vessei recovered from Margiana in Turkmenistan, excavated by v.I- Sarianidi' This

ue-srel beais a number of applied ceramic "bosses" that resemble metallic decoration' Note the

similarity of decorative elements with fig. 3.

Fig. 3. Unglazed shard from Parthian Nineveh (in

-od"- Iraq) now in the British Museum (BM 1932

12-12,7333.38979). Dimensions three by four cm'

108

green glazedwares appeared to be limited to sites near the Black Sea coast. Sites in the

interior of the "orrrtiy,

although conquered by Rome, appeared to have retained very

distinctive ceramic traditions aithe e*p"nt" of foreign wares. While the wares recovered

from Armenia could be locally made,lhe green glazed wares in Georgia appear distinct

enough from the bulk of ceramics recovered from the region to be considered imports.

It ii in the persian Gulf, however, that the most overwhelming evidence for the trade

in Parthian pottery can be found. This region, with few exceptions, is very poor in clay

suitable for the manufacture of ceramics. As a result, much of the pottery is imported,

and the Parthian period site of ed-Dur (Umm al-Qaiwain, U.A.E.) is littered with

typical Mesopotamian pottery of classic Parthian shape (fig' 5)." Did trade in Parthian

pott"ry, moOelleO perhaps upon expolts of Parthian pottery to Georgia and the Gulf,

also extend Eastwards? Ii ttrere any evidence for the Chinese reaction to such trade?

lrparthian shards were particularly common on the surface of the excavated site. For illustrations of

classic shapes see Haerinck, Metdepenninghen & Stevens t992, figs. 19 and 20.


Fig. 4. Glazed vessel recovered from Margiana

in Turkmenistan, excavated by V'I. Sarianidi.

The glaze of this vessel is heavily weathered,

but appears light yellow with dark blue spots.

This colour scheme is not encountered during

the Partho-sasanian period in Mesopotamia.

Clearly further work is needed to place this

industry into context. Height 12cm.

109


Fig. 5. Typical example of Parthian green glazed pottery ftom Mesopotamia' Recovered from Nineveh' and now in the

Birmingham City Art G^ll.;G;.;m n;ber ilt'atj.In form thii vessel follows bronze prototypes' Height22 cm'

Evidence for early green lead glaze in China is sparse: it seems that the tradition had

been established uy ine fourth & earlier third century BC; but it was only during the

first century BC, during the Han dynasty (206 BC-AD 220), that further evidence is

available. It is also notable that lead glazed green vessels were found in tombs near

;;;i,d-;i,i"r.l; it," latter indicates that the tEchnology used to produce these vessels

was suitable for large workshops, and eviden"" ,rppotting a large scale manufacture of

gl*",rather than iidividual preparation of glaze in small batches, can be seen amongst

modern Central erian potteis. 'ihe village Jt Girtdrruan near Bukhara offered import-

ant information regarding ceramic manlfacture. Central Asia, like many areas of the

Near East, has undergonE rapid change within the last decades, So very few traditional

potters remain. I was"surprisea to flnd one of the last, Narzullaev Alisher Ibdullaevich'

still working in a wortstrop that has been active for (at least) three generations' and is

alleged to follow tr;;iii;; dating much further into ihe past' One of the most surpris-

ing features was a large glaze griider,.resembling a small grain mill turned by a donkey'

rhar produces so *rEt, !tur" it ut it is only useld several times a year (flg' 6)' Such a

capital investment, once f,uilt, could easily supply tremendous amounts of glaze'

while today the -[iir",

used at trris pottery are lead based, with lead obtained from

used batteri"r, on"-*uy appreciate that similar glaze grinders may have existed in

antiquity, perhaps supplying iarge pottery workshops' While glazed clay vessels may not

have compared to Uiorr. In cost, th"y may be considered a technological level above

unglazed vessels, and may have shared moie than appealance with their metallic coun-

terparts. The close .orr"rporaence between ceramii ind metal vessels' in both Chinal3

t2Watson 1970, P- 41.13An analysis and comparison of elemental compositions of chinese metalwork and ceramics is one that

is clearly called for here.

110


I'j;i;,'*',"-'lx1;.T#:."1T::-x',llXX,'#l;[lff

"il:l";':X:,,Stonecanbemodifiedbyplacingshimsintheverticalslotinthebase.

and the Near East, may also extend to aspects of glaze. while the origin of lead glazing

in the West during thl early Islamic peliod is unclear, many have assumed-that the

Chinese and Islamic industries are interconnected because of the number of parallel

stylistic developments that occurred at about the same time'ta Perhaps a close correla-

tion between Iran and China existed at an earlier time'

As is clear from the microphotograph (flg. 7), this Parthian green glaze sample is not

only coloured, but has a varilty otlnctusions that effect the visual characteristics of the

14This hypothesis was proposed by Debevoise 1934b, who notes that there is a particular relationship

between parthian ano Han iiazes. il,arlier observations of Parthian giazes assumed that they were lead

based, and that the HanglazZappeared'...almost simultaneouslywith the opening of trade and communi-

cation with the Parthian Empir"',lo"uevoise 1934b, p. 300). The author-goes on to note that as Han glazes

contain lead, they ur. p-tuuty a local invention, possibly related to the accidental glazing of a crucible'

While the two industrie, -uy 'hur"

more that u foitritous resemblance, it is clear that they have techno-

iogical differences.

ttr

THE ORIENIAL CERAMIC SOCIETY

Fig.T.MicrographofatypicalParthiangreenglaze.ThissampleisfromDura-Europos(obtainedfrom the yale University Lt Cattery;. The large air bubble is 1 mm. long. The white grains in the

glaze ate qtsartz.

glaze. Glazes fall into two basic types. The first is transparent: light scatter is low

compared to absorption, so that if -tie

glaze is applied- ovel a colour the glaze contri-

butes no colour to the final product (applied over tblack body the glaze appears black)'

Translucent glazes have a larger amount of light scattef, -which

in this sample is due to

bubbles and quartz g.uins toln tne body (as huch as 0.5 mm. in diameter)' The glaze

colour, the air bubbies and quartz grains in the glaze, and the colour of the ceramic

body, gives this vessel a sulprising spectral charactit, foggy or three dimensional'15

ctre?ticat analysis provides ot[ei clues as to the origin of the colouring agents used

in Mesopotamian glazes. In a number of samples, there can be tiny flecks of tin in the

glaze, several percent iron, and up to two perient copper'tu While there is considerable

variation in the elemental compositio, of tt. gLaies, it appears from the. metallic

content that components of the flaze could be related to metalworking' It would appeal

fitting that a green glaze desigrr"l to imitate bronze may contain metal, as the colouring

agent may be extraJted from'ground slag.17 Metalworking and pottery firing are often in

i5These characteristics have been outlined in Johnston & Feller 1965' Parthian green glazed wares as

recovered from the field often have a chalky white weathering crust and an abundance of micro-cracks'

Alkali glazes are particularly susceptible to watel damage. vessels recovered from graves at Dura-Europos

(examples now at the Yale Univeisity Art Gallery) r#ain particularly bright and demonstrate how the

glazes must have appeared in antiquity't6These results are being prepared for publication'lTDayton 1993, proposel that glazing and glass technology spread from Europe to the East' While his

archaeological evidence may be open to re-interPletation, his eiperiments regarding the interrelationships

between metals, glazing, and glass warrant careful consideration'

112


close proximity. Both metals and ceramics generate amounts of smoke that place both

activities in an artisans quarter or industrial district away from the bulk of habitation'

The close connection tetrveen Iran and China may relate less to trade than to parallel

or ,cross-pollinated' technological developments in the,combined industries of metal-

work, glass, and glazing; indristries which, because of their similar reliance upon flre'

,ruy iro:r" been co=nducied using similar techniques, if not material.l8 The urban centers

of Iran and China may have been progressing towards similar goals (glazed ceramics)

using different technologies.M"any are familiar wilh the famous mummies recovered from the edge of the Tarim

basin.le"While the mummies themselves reveal the spread of Indo-European groups into

western china, they also give indications of the kind of ceramic vessels used in the

region from 200 gb-ZOO LD, roughly contemporary with the Parthian period. I was

able to examine a number of vesselJ in the Institute of Archaeology in Xinjiang. Vessels

of broadly similar shape have been published.zO However, the biological material w3s

very important in this case, u* u n.r-b"r of the vessels accompanying the mummies bore

u ,irorg resemblance to wooden vessels recovered from the same glaves'" Both the

wooden'and (unglazed) ceramic vessels had similar thick bodies, and the handles on a

number of wooden cups wele very similar to those on their ceramic counterparts'

Several of the wooden -bowls

were difficult to tell apart from pottery at a distance' It

seems that glazed wares imitating metal forms may be indicative of a more urbanized

society. Theie are other vessel forms, however, that may have a different origin'

Kazakhstan provided a particular surprise. It was here that I found the best evidence

for the origin of the 'piigrim flask'. These vessels are wide but narrow, with two

suspension loop. o. "uiryi"rg

handles on either side. While there are large examples

designed to be carried Uy aiimats, the majority of pilgrim.flasks of Parthian date are

,*uil, apparently designed to carry liquid more valuable than water, which may have

(then as in the iecent"past) been iarri,ed in leather sacks. Although this type of vessel

is known from a variety of contexts, from Medieval Europe through the Parthian period,

this vessel type is u "i"u,

cultural marker of the Parthians (fig' 8)' The shape clearly

derives from a leather original. Some Parthian vessels, usually unglazed, have a pattern

reminiscent of stitching irictay (fig. 9). Floral forms of decoration are common, particu-

larly wide leaf pattern.I Wnit" i could find no evidence of leather vessels from the Near

East or Turkmenistan today, in Kazakhstan vessels of animal stomachs are still being

made (fig. 10). They are of'pilgrim flask' shape but in this case the necks (where they

ur" .riplrraei; ur" longer. bo*puring figs. 8 and 9 with flg. 10, the similarities are

clear, but for the long nJck. Whil; or"iorrld easily see that a long neck on such a vessel

is not a functional rJquirement and one could imagine a leather form exactly like the

lsFor,partho-Sasanian'silver see Pfrommer 1993; Gunter &Jett1992 and Harper 1981' It is notable that

few pottery shapes are reflected in what can be identifled as Parthian silver. Partho-Sasanian (and post-

Sasanian) silver vessels were known to chinese potters, as there are a number of distinctive 'foreign' forms

(Melikian-chirvani 1970) Bronze vessels from,the Partho-sasanian period in lran, particularly Susa' offer

close parallel shapes (now in the Iran Bastan Museum, Tehran)',rFor a popular description and colour photographs of these mummies see Mair 1995'

20 See Xinjian g 1994,figs. 36, 38, 39, 49 ior illustiations in colour' AII date to about the flfth century BC'

,, Similar wooden ,"r.""1, from Yuli from the third century AD are illustrated in Xinjiang 7994, fig' 306'

tl3


Fig. 8. Pilgrim flask from Parthian Nineveh, now in the British Museum

(B"M 56, i-tl,tts.92821). This is rypical of Parthian occupation throughout

Mesopotamia. The leaf decoration occurs on select vessels' Height 1i'5 cm'

Fig.g.Pilgrimflask,Parthian(?)Nineveh,nowintheBritishMuseum(PM92823N'1606).The stippled region denotes u tio*n wash. The pattern on this vessel is clearly related to

stitching in leather. Height 9'5 cm'

clay forms of pilgrim flasks such a long neck would place stress upon a ceramic vessel

that would quickly lead to breakage. th" fot- of Parthian pilgrim flask is .thereforesuitable for clay, but are there furthel reasons for the populality of this form during the

Parthian period? . __. _ ^t L

The fact that no similar vessel has been found in Turkmenistan may not be acct-

dental, as that region has had a long tradition of semi-sedentary nomads' Kazakhstan'

however, still has a sizable population of nomads who may not be dissimilar to the

Parthians in their lifestyle; as toth groups prided themselves on their nomadic past'

even if day to day realities may differ. fhere ls then a link between the Partho-Sasanian

pilgrim flasks and the Tang aynasty (618-906 AD) of china that is expressed in pilgrim

flasks; at times metamoiph"oseO into itigt tty different shapes, but maintaining a relation-

ship with their leather originals (figs' 11 and 12)'

LL4

CE,RAMICS OF THE SILK ROAD: PARTHIA AND CHINA

Fig.i0.Stitchedanimalstomach.pilgrimflask,fromKazakhstan.The

**:X'l*ffil'";Ti?:fifiJ'ssers bore norar motirs sim,ar to

There is a very good example of a pilgrim flask in the archaeological museum in

xrroir"," tt i. ,rruOJ of buff ciay (26 cm. high), of characteristic Partho-Sasanian form'

with a short neck and looped hindles and several faint concentric circles on either side

of the body of the vessel where each half fitted into a mould' Like Mesopotamian

examples, a seam runs down the side of the vessel, and the handles were applied over

the seam. It is dated to the eleventh century AD, a date which without further context

would appear suspect.23 The method and materials of manufacture are so close to

Mesopotamian examples as to suggest that it is an import' Of the ceramics the author

analyzedfrom Parthian Nineveh, Iie pilgrim flask was iound to be imported'24 It is with

this information in mind that one looks at the popular series of ethnographic terra

22Illustrated in color, Xinjiang 1994, fig' 54',.This is particularly the"casi as no similar examples were encoxntered in the ceramic collection from

Medieval Oirar in Kazakhstan, for published examples see Otrar 1991' p' 154'

2oEiiand 1995, pp. 197-199.

115


Fig. 11. Tang green glazed pilgrim flask with lily palmett

This example bears a resemblance to the pilgrim flask in

fig. 8. Adapted from Hobson 1976, plare 13 fig' 1,

Koechlin collection' Height 7.5 inches

cottas of 'Iranian' grooms or merchants.25 Upon

traders that must have passed through western

Fig. 12. Tang green glazed sepulchral amphora'

Tang period wares also followed metallic

prototypes. This vessel may share a prototype with

ihe Parthian green glazed vessel on fig' 5 Adapted

from Hobson 1976, plate 14 fig. 2, Schneider

collection. Height 19.25 inches.

considering the number of IranianChina, it would be surPrising if an

imported pilgrim flask were not identified'br" ini"rEsting observation that can go little further without a more rigorous typo-

logical examinati6n is that of vessel colour as one moves eastwards' It is notable that

ylTfo*, or 'gold' glazed vessels, are not encountered in Parthian Mesopotamia, and

there are few examples of fine ware vessels with a golden slip' Starting in Iran.(flg' 13)'

one begins to encounter vessels that clearly derive inspiration from gold vessels, and at

the site of Samarkand (Afrasiyab) on the border with the Chinese empire, there is a

frevalent class of delicaiely foim"O footed goblets with a fine, often burnished' golden

,fip 1ng. 14). It appears that these vessels are a Greek introduction, replacing coarser

table wares of a very different shape.26 Could these vessels attest a time when Samar-

kand was the centre of a booming trade, and Roman gold was traded for chinese silk?27

Today, however, archaeologists aie only left with red on red painted pottery' The same

,, There is an example of such a figure published in Xinjiang 1994, fig- 392, dated to the seventh to ninth

century AD.tu Shishkina 1994, fig. 3.rTSogdian contacts with Tang China are well attested during the seventh century; particularly interesting

is that the earlier Greek inspired coinage gave way to coins minted with square holes' In Samarkand the

house of a sogdian official bears a painting that even copies a stamp (klebno) that is found on chinese silk

painting (Shishkina 1994, P. 93).

176


Fig. 13. Iranian,vellow glazed bowl from Susa. now in Iran Bastan

Museum (number 7537). Vessels that imitate gold become more

common in the east. Length 12 cm.

Fig.14.Footedred/goldwashedandburnishedfinervarevesselsfromSamarkand(Afrasiyab). These two examples date from the first to second centuries AD. These

carefutiy made ceramic vessels appear to follorv prototypes of gold Height 9 and

13 cm.

117

THE ORIENIAL CERAMIC SOCIETY

model may be applied to a number of ceramic industries, from Indian red gloss pottert,

to Gaulish sigillata.zs

Gaining information about western ceramics in western China was hampered by

current archaeological practice in the region. I learned from archaeologists at the

Institute of Archaiology in Urumchi that shards were not saved from excavations, but

only complete vessels.-it is with the latter point in mind that one considers a typical

*"rt"r, vessel form in the archaeological museum in Khotan. Unfortunately I was

unable to record (or photograph) this green glazed vessel, but in form the vessel bore

a close relationship to bronie -ounterparts familiar from the Partho-sasanian period in

Iran. Under the giaze it bore floral motifs.2e Unfortunately, no one at the museum had

any further information, and there were no other similar examples in the museum. This

tantalizing piece offers glimpses as to what remains to be uncovered.

In summiry, a number of points can be derived from the above description. Although

there is evidence for the trade in a number of goods from textiles to glass from West to

East, there is sparse evidence that ceramics were traded East, although considering the

vicissitudes of time this question may remain open. A number of vessel forms common

to both Parthian and Chinese potters (barring perhaps the pilgrim flask) may have been

stimulated more by the prevailing metalwork of the period. While there seems to be

some connection between the glazed wares of east and west, superficial similarities are

not borne out by chemical anilysis. There is some evidence to suggest, however, that

both Parthian and Chinese glazingwas heavily influenced by local metal working indus-

tries. Ceramics, like all other aspects of material culture, may best be viewed in a

cultural context. One can easily eiplain the prevalence of 'gold' ceramics in many large

cities, such as Samarkand;just as orre can understand why, in a remote area on the edge

of the Tarim basin, ""ru*i"

shapes appear to follow wooden examples. Perhaps what

the ceramics are telling us is thaf evidence for the trade between the two great empires

of China and Iran ma! not be found along the silk route, and that goods destined for

these two centres had a distribution limited to a sophisticated urban elite.

TVickers 1994.,rThere is a roughly similar vessel depicted in Xnjiang 1994, fig.58, also recovered from Khotan' In form

it is identical to green glazed two tranateO amphora recovered from Parthian graves at Dura-Europos'

However, there are u ,u-b", of features that are distinct. The leaf pattern about the shoulder of the vessel'

and applied floral bossess, appear particularly foreign to Mesopotamia. Perhaps like the three handled

pottery vase (Xinjiang tSS+, fg.55, iecovered from Khotan and now in Berlin) this vessel originates from

it" tndiu, ,pir"r". There are a-number of classical floral motifs on both vessels, such as the palmette, that

share a common Hellenistc ancestry with Parthian vessels. In form both jars imitate bronze vessels,

although neither is glazed.

118


BIBLIOGRAPHY

Dayton 1993

J. E. Dayton, The Discovery of Glass: Expeiments in the Smelting of Rich, Dry Silver Ores, and the

Reproduction of Bronze Age-rype Cobalt Blue Glass as a Slag, Harvard, 1993'

Debevoise 1934a

N.C. Debevoise, Parthian Pottery ftom Seleucia on the Tigris, Ann Arbor' 1934'

Debevoise 1934b

N.C. Debevoise, 'The History of Glaze and its Place in the Ceramic Technique of Ancient Seleucia on

the Tigris', Bulletin of the Ameican Ceramic Socie$ vol. 13:2, 1934, pp' 293-300'

Eiland 1995

M.L. Eiland, Parthian Nineveh, unpublished D.Phil Thesis, Odord, 1995'

Grose 1986

D.F. Grose, 'Innovation and Change in Ancient Technologies: The Anomalous Case of the Roman

Glass Industry', in W.D. Kingery ed. Ceramics and Civilization vol. Iil High Tbchnologt Ceramics, Ohio,

1986.

Gunter & Jett 1992

A.C. Gunter and P. Jett, Ancient lraninan Metalwork in the Arthur M. Sackler Gallery and the Freer

Gallery of An,Washirtgtot, 1992.

Haerinck 1983

E. Haerinclq La Ceramique En lran Pendant La Peiode Pafthe, Ghent'

Haerinck, Metdepenninghen & Stevens 1992

E. Haerinck, C. Metdepenninghen, and K.G. Stevens, 'Excavations at ed-Dur (Umm al-Qaiwain,

U.A.E.): preliminary Report on the Third Belgian Season', Arabian Archaeologt and Epigraphy vol- 3'

1,992, pp. 44-63.Harper 198L

P.O. Harper, Silver Vessels of the Sasanian Peiod Volume One: Royal Imagery, New York, 1981.

Hayashi L975

R. Hayashi, The Silk Road and the Shoso-in, New York, 1975'

Hedges 1976

R.E.M. Hedges, 'Pre-Islamic Glazes in Mesopotamia-Nippur,' Archaeometry vol. 18:2, 1976,

pp.209-211.Hedges & Moorey 1975

R.E.M. Hedges and P.R.S. Moorey, 'Pre-Islamic Ceramic Glazes at Kish and Nineveh in Iraq',

Archaeometry vol. L7 : L, !97 5, pp. 25-43.

Hobson 1976

R.L. Hobson, Chilrcse Pottery and Porcelain, first edition London, 1915, reprinted New York, 1976.

Johnston & Feller 1965

R.M. Johnston and R.L. Felier,'Optics of Paint Films: Glazes and Chalking', in W.J. Young ed' The

Application of Science in the Examination of works of Art, Boston, 1965, pp. 86-95.

Keyser 1993p.T. Keyser, ,The Purpose of the Parthian Gaivanic Cells: A First Century A.D. Electric Battery Used

for Analgesia', Joumal of Near Eastetn Studies vo1. 52, 1993, pp' 81-98'

Langdon & Harden 1934

S. Langdon and D.B, Harden, 'Excavations at Kish and Barghuthiat 1933', Iraq vol. l, 1934, pp. 1-136'

Loewental & Harden 1949

A.I. Loewental and D.B. Harden, 'Vasa Murrin a', Joumal of Roman Studies 39, 1949, pp- 3l-37.

Mair 1995

V.H. Mair,'Mummies of the Tarim Bastn', Archaeologt vol' 48 : 2, 1995, pp 28-35'

779


McCarthy, Vandiver & Gibson 1995

B. McCarthy, P.B. Vandiver, and M. Gibson, 'Innovation and Continuity in the Technoiogy of SouthwestAsian Monochrome Blue Glazes', in P. Vincenzini ed. The Ceramics Culnral Heitage, Faerua, 1995,pp.201-2L8.

Melikian-Chirvani 1.97 0

A.S. Melikian-Chirvani, 'Iranian Silver and its Influence on T'ang China', in W. Watson ed. Pottery andMetalwork in T'ang China. Colloquies on Art and Archaeologt in Asia l, L970, second edition 1976,

London, pp. 12-18.Otrar 1991

Ceramics of Medieval Otrar, Cultural Monuments of Kazakhstan, Alma Ata, i991.Pinder-Wilson 1970

R. Pinder-Wilson, 'Glass in Asia During the T'ang Period', in W. Watson ed,. Pottery and Metalwork inT'ang China. Colloquies on Art and Archaeologt in Asia 1, 1,970, second edition 1976, London, pp. 68-7. (

Pfrommer 1993

M. Pfrommer, Metalwork from the Hellenized East, Ma]ibu (CA), 1993.

Sarianidi 1994

V.I. Sarianidi, 'Aegean-Anatolian Motifs in the Glyptic Art of Bactria', Bulletin of the Asia Institutevol.8. 1994. pp.27-36.

Shishkina 1994

G.V. Shishkina, 'Ancient Samarkand: Capital of Soghd', Bulletin of the Asia Institute vol. 8, 1994,

pp. 81-99.Toll 1943

N. Toll, 'The Green Glazed Pottery', in M.L Rostovtzeff, A.R. Bellinger, F.E. Brown and C.B. Wells(eds.) The Excavations at Dura-Europos, Final Repoft IV, New Haven, 1943.

Vickers 1994

M. Vickers, 'Nabataea, India, Gaul, and Carthage: Reflections on Hellenistic and Roman Gold Vessels

and Red-Gloss Pottery', Ameican Joumal of Archaeologt vol. 98, pp. 231-248.Vickers 1995

M. Vickers, 'Rock Crystal: The Key to Cut Glass and the Diatreta in Persia and Rome', Joumal ofRoman Archaeologt vol. 9, pp. 48-65.

Vollmer, Keall & Nagai-Berthrong 1983

J.E. Vollmer, E.J. Keall, E. Nagai-Berthrong, Silk Roads China Ships: An Exhibition of East- West Tiade,

Toronto, 1983.

Watson 1970

W. Watson, 'On T'ang Soft-Glazed Pottery,' in W. Watson ed. Pottery and Metalwork in T'ang China.

Colloquies on Art and Archaeologt in Asia 1, 1970, second edition 1976, London, pp. 4L-47.Xinjiang 1994

Xinjiang, The Ancient Art in Xinjiang, China,Urumchi,7994.

120

The Ceramics of the Silk Route: Parthia and China

Documents

Transcript of The Ceramics of the Silk Route: Parthia and China