Manufacturing Techniques

Type of temper used (Chapter 3.4.1): Untempered Number of molds used (Chapter 3.4.2): Double-molded Condition of mold: Somewhat used (though figurine has also seen some post-depositional surface damage)

Solid or hollow: Hollow

Presence of vents (Chapter 3.4.3)? Too fragmentary to tell Presence of separate base? Not preserved; however, comparison with A2429, the mold sibling of this piece, suggests that A2525 also would have rested atop a circular base (see Chapter 4 4 4)

Presence of visible fingerprints? No Evidence of reworking (Chapter 3.4.3)? Some retooling Handmade applique elements present (Chapter 3.4.2)? No Method of attachment of head, limbs, etc. (Chapter 3.4.2): Entire figurine comes from the same double mold

Evidence of “bubbles” created by plaster mold (Chapter 3.4.2)? No Appearance of back of figurine: Not preserved

Presence of preserved slip, self-slip, and/or limewash (Chapters 3.4.4, 3.4.5)? Minute traces of limewash Presence of preserved paint (Chapter 3.4.5)? No

Evidence for repair: No evidence for repair in antiquity. Modern restorers have glued the figurine back together from two broken pieces • Other: Mold sibling of A2429

Previous Publications: Laumonier (1956: 277-278, pl. 99, no. 1328)

Height: 51. 7 mm

Iconographic type: Sothic dog (Chapter 4.2.3)

Archaeological Context: Uncertain (Chapter 5.10.3)

Fabric Typ e: Reddish “Cycladic” fabric, untempered, unlevigated (Chapter 2.5.3)

Manufacturing Techniques:

•  Type of temper used (Chapter 3.4.1): Untempered

•  Number of molds used (Chapter 3.4.2): Double-molded

•  Condition of mold: Fairly good, with some slight wear

•  Solid or hollow: Hollow

•  Presence of vents (Chapter 3.4.3)? Too fragmentary to tell. However, the coroplast added a blob of soft clay to the interior of the figurine after the joining of the two halves, suggesting either that there was indeed a vent, or that the figurine had an open base

•  Presence of separate base? Too fragmentary to tell

•  Presence of visible fingerprints? No

•  Evidence of reworking (Chapter 3.4.3)? No

•  Handmade applique elements present (Chapter 3.4.2)? No

•  Method of attachment of head, limbs, etc. (Chapter 3.4.2): Head and limbs come from the same double mold as body

•  Evidence of “bubbles” created by plaster mold (Chapter 3.4.2)? No

•  Appearance of back of figurine: Appears to have been modeled, but very little of the back is still preserved

•  Presence of preserved slip, self-slip, and/or limewash (Chapters 3.4.4, 3.4.5)? Limewash

•  Presence of preserved paint (Chapter 3.4.5)? No

•  Evidence for repair: No

Photograph: Figs F5, D39