This paper considers the processes that contributed to the creation of an Athenian red-figure rhyton in the form of an Amazon, signed by the potter Sotades, which was excavated in Nubia in 1921. Despite its secure archaeological provenance, the rhyton has not played a significant role in studies of trade or intercultural interaction because its unusual form and iconography – it features images of Persians defeating Greeks in battle – seemingly make it exceptional. Yet these features are best explained as the result of a feedback loop of information between Sotades and his Persian customers, relayed by merchants. This information was distorted, translated, and perhaps even manipulated in the course of transmission, which contributed to the rhyton’s unusual appearance. Thus the rhyton does not represent a special circumstance, but rather is the culmination of a sustained period of tenuous yet persistent links between Sotades’ workshop in Athens and Persians living in Egypt.

This deconstruction of how Apulian red-figure pottery came to be termed Tarentine has implications for archaeological methodology far beyond the Mediterranean. The author shows how the assumptions of great authorities, themselves rooted in a colonial world, led to a highly resistant model of core and periphery for pottery production that may have no basis in fact. It is a fine example of the process that has left us with so many unsuitable and immovable names for material from Samian to Gothic.