Advertisement

Introduction to Ceramic Technology

  • Valentine Roux
Chapter

Abstract

Chapter 1 is an introduction to the book whose aim is to provide a cutting-edge theoretical and methodological framework, as well as a practical guide, for archaeologists, students, and researchers to study ceramic assemblages and their diachronic and synchronic variability. As opposed to the conventional typological approach, the proposed framework is based on a technological approach. Founding works in the domain of ceramic technology emphasize the anthropological dimension of techniques and the relevant features to identify them. However, up until now, no methodology for classifying archaeological assemblages in a systematic order has been developed to enable their sociological interpretation. The implementation of this methodology, based on the concept of chaîne opératoire, is at the heart of this book and governs the organization of the different chapters of this book. Their sequencing is ruled by the didactic need not only to explain how to study archaeological series but also why the study methods presented here are essential for approaching ambitious interpretations in a well-founded way.

Keywords

Ceramic technology Chaîne opératoire Interpretative procedure Sociological interpretation Ceramic variability 

References

  1. Ard, V. (2013). Ceramic traditions and cultural identities: West-Central France during the late Neolithic II period (c. 3400–2900 cal. BC). Oxford Journal of Archaeology, 32, 367–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arnold, D. E. (1985). Ceramic theory and cultural process. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Arnold, D. E. (2000). Does the standardization of ceramic pastes really mean specialization. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 7(4), 333–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arnold, D. E., Neff, H. A., Bishop, R. L., & Glascock, M. D. (1999). Testing interpretative assumptions of neutron activation analysis: Contemporary pottery in Yucatan, 1964–1994. In E. S. Chilton (Ed.), Material meanings: Critical approaches to the interpretation of material culture (pp. 61–84). Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.Google Scholar
  5. Balfet, H. (1965). Ethnographical observations in North Africa and archaeological interpretation: The pottery of the Maghreb. In F. R. Matson (Ed.), Ceramics and man (pp. 161–177). New York: Viking Fund Publication in Anthropology.Google Scholar
  6. Balfet, H. (1966). La céramique comme document archéologique. Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française, 63, 279–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Balfet, H. (1973). A propos du tour de potier. L’outil et le geste technique. In Collectif (Ed.), L’Homme, Hier et Aujourd’hui. Recueil d’études en hommage à André Leroi-Gourhan (pp. 109–122). Paris: Editions Cujas.Google Scholar
  8. Balfet, H. (1991). Observer l’action technique: des chaînes opératoires, pour quoi faire? Paris: Editions du CNRS.Google Scholar
  9. Balfet, H., Fauvet-Berthelot, M.-F., & Monzon, S. (1983). Pour la normalisation de la description des poteries. Paris: Editions du CNRS.Google Scholar
  10. Bowser, B. J. (2000). From pottery to politics: An ethnoarchaeological study of political factionalism, ethnicity, and domestic pottery style in the Ecuadorian Amazon. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 7(3), 219–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Boyd, R., & Richerson, P. J. (1985). Culture and the evolutionary process. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  12. Bril, B. (2002). L’apprentissage de gestes techniques: ordre de contraintes et variations culturelles. In B. Bril & V. Roux (Eds.), Le geste technique. Réflexions méthodologiques et anthropologiques (pp. 113–150). Technologies/ Idéologies/ Pratiques. Ramonville Saint-Agne: Editions érès.Google Scholar
  13. Brubaker, R., & Cooper, F. (2000). Beyond “identity”. Theory and Society, 29, 1–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cavalli-Sforza, L. L., Feldman, M. W., Chen, K. H., & Dornbusch, S. M. (1982). Theory and observation in cultural transmission. Science, 218, 19–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Creswell, R. (1976). Techniques et culture, les bases d’un programme de travail. Techniques & Culture, 1, 7–59.Google Scholar
  16. David, N., & Kramer, C. (2001). Ethnoarchaeology in action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Degoy, L. (2006). La variabilité céramique en Andhra Pradesh: regard sur des productions céramiques indiennes entre histoire, sociologie et transformations économiques. Nanterre: Université de Paris Nanterre. PhD.Google Scholar
  18. Degoy, L. (2008). Technical traditions and cultural identity: An ethnoarchaeological study of Andhra Pradesh potters. In M. T. Stark, B. J. Bowser, & L. Horne (Eds.), Cultural transmission and material culture. Breaking down boundaries (pp. 199–222). Tucson: The University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar
  19. Delage, C. (2017). Once upon a time… the (hi) story of the concept of the chaîne opératoire in French prehistory. World Archaeology, 49, 158–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dietler, M., & Herbich, I. (1994). Ceramics and ethnic identity. Ethnoarchaeological observations on the distribution of pottery styles and the relationship between the social contexts of production and consumption. In J. Courtin & D. Binder (Eds.), Terre cuite et Société. La céramique, document technique, économique, culturel (pp. 459–472). XIVe Rencontres Internationales d’Archéologie et d’Histoire d’Antibes. Juan-les-Pins: Editions APDCA.Google Scholar
  21. Dobres, M. A. (2000). Technology and social agency. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
  22. Flache, A. (2018). Between monoculture and cultural polarization. Agent-based models of the interplay of social influence and cultural diversity. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 4,996-1023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Flache, A., & Macy, M. W. (2011). Small worlds and cultural polarization. The Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 35, 146–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Foster, G. M. (1965). The sociology of pottery: Questions and hypotheses arising from contemporary Mexican work. In F. R. Matson (Ed.), Ceramics and man (pp. 43–61). New York: Viking Fund Publication in Anthropology.Google Scholar
  25. Fowler, K. (2017). Ethnography. In A.M.W. Hunt (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of archaeological ceramic analysis (pp. 469-486). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Franken, H. J. (1978). The analysis of ancient methods of potmaking. Acta Praehistorica et Archaeologica Berlin, 9-10, 77–78.Google Scholar
  27. Gallay, A. (2011). Pour une ethnoarchéologie théorique. Paris: Editions Errance.Google Scholar
  28. Gallay, A. (2012). Potières du Sahel: A la découverte des traditions céramiques de la boucle du Niger. Gollion: Infolio.Google Scholar
  29. Gardin, J.-C. (1980). Archaeological constructs: An aspect of theoretical archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Gelbert, A. (2003). Traditions céramiques et emprunts techniques dans la vallée du fleuve Sénégal. Ceramic traditions and technical borrowings in the Senegal River Valley. Paris: Editions de la Maison des sciences de l’homme, Editions Epistèmes.Google Scholar
  31. Gosselain, O. (1992a). Bonfire of the enquiries. Pottery firing temperatures in archaeology: What for? Journal of Archaeological Science, 19, 243–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gosselain, O. (1992b). Technology and style: Potters and pottery among Bafia of Cameroon. Man, 27, 559–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gosselain, O. (2000). Materializing identities: An African perspective. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 7, 187–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Gosselain, O. (2002). Poteries du Cameroun méridional styles techniques et rapports à l’identité.Monographie du CRA 26. Paris: CNRS Editions.Google Scholar
  35. Gosselain, O. (2008). Mother Bella was not a Bella. Inherited and transformed traditions in Southwestern Niger. In M. Stark, B. Bower, & L. Horne (Eds.), Cultural transmission and material culture. Breaking down boundaries (pp. 150–177). Tucson: Arizona University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Gosselain, O., & Smith, A. L. (2005). The source clay selection and processing practices in sub-Saharan Africa. In A. Livingstone Smith, D. Bosquet, & R. Martineau (Eds.), Pottery manufacturing processes: Reconstruction and interpretation (pp. 33–48). BAR international Series 1349. Oxford: Archaeopress.Google Scholar
  37. Haudricourt, A.-G. (1964). La technologie, science humaine. La Pensée, 115, 28–35.Google Scholar
  38. Hegmon, M. (1998). Technology, style, and social practice: Archaeological approaches. In M. T. Stark (Ed.), The archaeology of social boundaries (pp. 264–279). Washington, DC: Smithsonian University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Ingold, T. (2001). Beyond art and technology: The anthropology of skill. In M. B. Schiffer (Ed.), Anthropological perspective on technology (pp. 17–32). Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.Google Scholar
  40. Knappett, C. (2005). Thinking through material culture: An interdisciplinary perspective. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kramer, C. (1997). Pottery in Rajasthan. Ethnoarchaeology of two Indian cities. Washington and London: Smithsonian Institution Press.Google Scholar
  42. Latour, B., & Lemonnier, P. (1994). De la préhistoire aux missiles balistiques. L’intelligence sociale des techniques. Paris: Editions La découverte.Google Scholar
  43. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. van der Leeuw, S. (1977). Towards a study of the economics of pottery making. In Ex Horreo (Vol. 4, pp. 68–76). Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  45. Lemonnier, P. (1983). L’étude des systèmes techniques, une urgence en technologie culturelle. Techniques et Culture, 1, 11–34.Google Scholar
  46. Lemonnier, P. (1993). Technological choices: Transformation in material cultures since the Neolithic. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  47. Leroi-Gourhan, A. (1964). Le Geste et la Parole. Technique et Langage. Vol. 1. Paris: Albin Michel.Google Scholar
  48. Leroi-Gourhan, A. (1973). Evolution et techniques. Milieu et techniques. Vol. 2. Paris: Albin Michel.Google Scholar
  49. Livingstone Smith, A. (2000). Processing clay for pottery in northern Cameroon: Social and technical requirements. Archaeometry, 42(1), 21–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Longacre, W. A. (1991). Sources of ceramic variability among the Kalinga of Northern Luzon. In W. A. Longacre (Ed.), Ceramic Ethnoarchaeology (pp. 95–110). Tucson: The University of Arizona press.Google Scholar
  51. Longacre, W. A., Xia, J., & Yang, T. (2000). Ceramic materials, technology and the organization of production. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 7(4), 273–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Maget, M. (1953). Guide d’étude directe des comportements culturels. Paris: Civilisations du Sud.Google Scholar
  53. Mahias, M.-C. (1993). Pottery techniques in India: Technological variants and social choice. In P. Lemonnier (Ed.), Technological choices: Transformation in material cultures since the Neolithic (pp. 157–180). London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  54. Mauss, M. (1947). Manuel d’ethnographie. Paris: Payot.Google Scholar
  55. McElreath, R., Boyd, R., & Richerson, P. J. (2003). Shared norms and the evolution of ethnic markers. Current Anthropology, 44, 122–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Miller, D. (1985). Artefacts as categories. A study of ceramic variability in Central India. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Neupert, M. A. (2000). Clays of contention: An ethnoarchaeological study of factionalism and clay composition. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 7(3), 249–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Nicklin, K. (1971). Stability and innovation in pottery manufacture. World Archaeology, 3, 13–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Perlès, C. (2013). Tempi of change: When soloists don’t play together. Arrhythmia in ‘continuous’ change. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 20, 281–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Reed, E. S., & Bril, B. (1996). The primacy of action in development. A commentary of N. Bernstein. In M. Latash (Ed.), Dexterity and its development (pp. 431–451). Hillsdale: Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  61. Richerson, P. J., & Boyd, R. (2005). Not by genes alone. How culture transformed human evolution. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  62. Roux, V. (2003). A dynamic systems framework for studying technological change: Application to the emergence of the potter’s wheel in the southern Levant. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 10, 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Roux, V., Courty, M.-A., Dollfus, G., & Lovell, J. (2011). A techno-petrographic approach for defining cultural phases and communities: Explaining the variability of Abu Hamid (Jordan Valley) early 5th millenium cal. BC ceramic assemblage. In Y. Rowan & J. Lovell (Eds.), Culture, chronology and the chalcolithic: Theory and transition (pp. 113–132). CBRL Levant supplementary monograph series. Oxford: Oxbow Books.Google Scholar
  64. Roux, V. (2007). Ethnoarchaeology: A non historical science of reference necessary for interpreting the past. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 14, 153–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Roux, V. (2017). Not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. A response to Gosselain’s article. Archaeological Dialogues, 24, 225–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Roux, V., Bril, B., Cauliez, J., Goujon, A.-L., Lara, C., Manen, C., de Saulieu, G., & Zangato, E. (2017). Persisting technological boundaries: Social interactions, cognitive correlations and polarization. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 48, 320–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Rye, O. S. (1977). Pottery manufacturing techniques: X-ray studies. Archaeometry, 19, 205–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Rye, O. S. (1981). Pottery Technology. Principles and Reconstruction. Manuals on archaeology 4. Washington, DC: Taraxacum Press.Google Scholar
  69. Rye, O. S., & Evans, C. (1976). Traditional pottery techniques of Pakistan: Field and laboratory studies. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press.Google Scholar
  70. Saraswati, B., & Behura, N. K. (1964). Pottery techniques in peasant India. Calcutta: Anthropological Survey of India.Google Scholar
  71. Scheans, D. J. (1977). Filipino market potteries. Vol. 3. Manila: National Museum of the Philippines.Google Scholar
  72. Schiffer, M. B., & Skibo, J. M. (1987). Theory and experiment in the study of technological change. Current Anthropology, 28, 595–622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Schiffer, M. B., & Skibo, J. M. (1997). The explanation of artifact variability. American Antiquity, 62(1), 27–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Schiffer, M. B., Skibo, J. M., Boelke, T. C., Neupert, M. A., & Aronson, M. (1994). New perspectives on experimental archaeology: Surface treatments and thermal response of the clay cooking pot. American Antiquity, 59, 197–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Shennan, S. J. (2002). Genes, memes and human history: Darwinian archaeology and cultural evolution. London: Thames & Hudson.Google Scholar
  76. Skibo, J. M. (1994). The Kalinga cooking pot: An ethnoarchaeological and experimental study of technological change. In W. A. Longacre & J. M. Skibo (Eds.), Kalinga ethnoarchaeology: Expanding archaeological method and theory (pp. 113–126). Washington, DC: Smithsonian University Press.Google Scholar
  77. Skibo, J. M., & Feinman, G. M. (1999). Pottery and people: A dynamic interaction. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.Google Scholar
  78. Stark, M. T. (2003). Current issues in ceramic ethnoarchaeology. Journal of Archaeological Research, 11, 193–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Stark, M. T., Bishop, R. L., & Miska, E. (2000). Ceramic technology and social boundaries: Cultural practices in Kalinga clay selection and use. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 7, 295–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Stark, M. T., Bowser, B. J., & Horne, L. (Eds.). (2008). Cultural transmission and material culture. Breaking down boundaries. Tucson: The University Arizona Press.Google Scholar
  81. Stark, M. T. (Ed.). (1998). The archaeology of social boundaries (Smithsonian series in archaeological inquiry). Washington/London: Smithsonian Institution Press.Google Scholar
  82. Testart, A. (2012). Avant l’histoire: l’évolution des sociétés, de Lascaux à Carnac. Paris: Editions Gallimard.Google Scholar
  83. Tite, M. S., Kilikoglou, V., & Vekinis, V. (2001). Strength, toughness and thermal shock resistance of ancient ceramics, and their influence on technological choice. Archaeometry, 43, 301–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Tixier, J. (1967). Procédés d’analyse et questions de terminologie dans l’étude des ensembles industriels du Paléolithique récent et de l’épipaléolithique en Afrique du Nord-Ouest. In Background to evolution in Africa (pp. 771–820). Chicago/London: The University Press of Chicago.Google Scholar
  85. Wylie, A. (1985). The reaction against analogy. Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, 8, 63–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Valentine Roux
    • 1
  1. 1.Préhistoire & Technologie, UMR 7055French National Centre for Scientific ResearchNanterreFrance

Personalised recommendations