Chapter I

Ceramics and SocietY

Murray Eiland

Abbreviations employed in the text of this chapter

MU MiddleUrukICP InductivelY CouPled Plasma

TU Terminal UrukBK Sample subjected to ICP analysis but not

NS Ninevite 5 but not thin-sectionedLTM Later third millenniumIR Infra-redSM Second millennium

MineralsA1 AluminiumSm SamariumLa LanthanumCa CalciumTi TitaniumMn ManganeseDy DysprosiumZn ZincNd NeodYniumFe Iron

K PotassiumBa BariumSr StrontiumMg MagnesiumCe CeriumYb YtterbiumNa SodiumEu EuroPiumZr ZirconiumP Phosphorus

In this chapter I consider the wider questions of

ceramic technology and ancient society at Tell Brak'

The method, urrJ-.u* materials used to make the

ceramic items recovered from the site sPan an unu-

sualiy long period of time, and there are many dia-

chrorri. aria th"mutic issues that can be raised' The

muior questions will concern the kinds of changes

thrl"gh time that occurred to the ceramic recipes

and forming techniques.Distinit from technological considerations is

provenance. While many would consid,er this aspect

ihe most important pariof ceramic studies' there are

factors that make an easy appreciation of imported

versus local wares difficult' One of the most Perva-sive misconceptions is that many sites will have qutm-

tities of lmpoited wares. It may not be a surprise to

find a predominance of local ceramic production'

"rp".iuify given ethnographic observations that dem-

onstrate the ubiquity of potters in a- region that

spawned civilizationi builiwith clay' There are also

iher factors that offer resistance, as geography does

not make this region ideal for pilot studies' Previous

analysis of cerai.ics from thii region have shown

that unlike benchmark case studies in parts of Eu-

rope, a relatively homogeneous landscape offers few

startiing differences in iaw materials' It is relatively

difficuli to isolate one clay or temper source to a

distinct location, particularly on a small scale' The

,l.r"rr, with their aisociated wat erways' have worked

and reworked sand and clay from a number of

sources. At the same time, there has been little work

on the general geology of the region that does not

bear dir-ectly opot oi1. A11 these factors combine to

make a stuiy directed towards Provenance fraught

with difficutlty. fnut having been said, there are no-

table exceptions to this trend' Upper Mesopotamia

has mountain ranges of different composition that

punctuate the plains. There are localized basalt flows

Ld oth"t smill-scale differences that may not ap-

pear on a large-scale geological map' The situation'may not be aJhopeleti ut *uny have assumed' and

the small amount of recognized imports at Tell Brak

may rePresent a valid number'' In selecting samples of material for thin-section

and chemical airalysii, attention was paid to form-

ing a representative collection that included ceram-

ics" of typical form and fabric, and those that were

clearly different. Of the luxury wares, a mrmber were

found to contain distinct mineral temper' and ex-

hibit distinct chemical signatures' Cooking wares

are also carefully considered' While finely made ves-

sels with a distinctive fabric may stand out as irn-

ported wares, cooking wares are usually not'associated with distinctiie properties' Artistic shape

and fine fabric are lacking, but there is increasing

evidence to suggest that the fabric of some cooking

wares -u, .ut"-fully selected for thermal properties'

There is valid .orli"tr, as to the level of sophistica-

321

Chapter 8

tion attained by ancient potters, but there is littleargument against the force of tradition, and the an-

cient potter's ability to practise techniques thatworked. In several cases it can be reasonably pro-posed that cooking !\,'ares were imported.

Figure 8.1. Experimentill kiln constructed of locally

ar,t ail ttble m st erials, 1 9 9 5 .

This study utilized three primary methods ofanalysis. The first is careful examination by eye and

with lorv-powered hand lens' Important inJorma-tion about forming techniques can be obtained, and

in many cases features observed at this stage can be

reiated to analysis at other orders of magnitude' Pe-

trography, the second line of attack, is in many ways

the primary method. Using this technique a small

section of a ceramic sample is ground so thin that itcan transmit light under a microscope (0'03 mm).Inclusions, either minerai or the burned-out traces ofvegetable matter, can be identified. Unlike methodsof chemical analysis, information regarding produc-tion technology, such as organic temper or firingtemperatures, can be considered. In addition, a di-rect comparison between the ceramic material and

the hypothetical area of production can be made

without an exhaustive data base or the use of sophis-

ticated geochemical programs. As an importantindependent technique, particularly concerning prov-

".rur-t.", ICP (Inductively Coupled Plasma) is also

used. This method targets the smallest fraction ofthe sample to be analyzed: the clay. Larger (sand-

sized) inilusions are removed from the samples sub-

mitted for ICP. This sand-size frachon, which has

been examined optically, may seriousiy bias thechemical fingerprint of a smali sample. All three

methods, each focused upon a different size range inthe same sample, and with different but mutuallycomplementary data sets, were used to characterize

the ieramic materials from Tell Brak. In additioruduring rt:re 1996 field season at Brak a limited amount

of expLrimental firing of local clays was undertaken(Figs. 8.1-8.2).

For ease of reference, the following table con-

nects ai1 sherd sample numbers with excavated unit,trench, stratigraphic level and estimated typologicaldating of the sampled sherd'

Petrography (Tables 8.2-8.11, Figs. 8.5-8.10)

The tables have been ar-ranged so that informationabout the raw materials usedin forming the ceramic sam-ples can be rapidiy com-pared. Samples are arrangedhorizontally, using the abbre-

viations MU for MiddleUruk, TU for Terminal Uruk,NS for Ninevite 5, LTM forlater third-mi1lennium, and

Figure g.2. vessels and ob jects prodwced in experimental kiln, 1996.

322

Cerarnics and Society

Table 8.1. Sherd sample information

Sample no. Unit no.No no. A4108

Sherd datingMiddle UrukSecond millemiumSecond millenniumSecond millemiumI ermlnal UrukTerminal UrukMiddle UrukHalafLlbaidNinevite 5

HalafHalafEarly UrukUbaidEarly UrukEarly UrukEarly UrukEarly UrukEarly UrukEarly UrukEar1y UrukEarly UrukEarly UrukEarly UrukMiddle UrukMiddle UrukMiddle UrukMiddle UrukMiddle UrukMiddle UrukMiddle UrukMiddle UrukMiddle UrukMiddle UrukMiddle UrukMiddle UrukMiddle UrukMiddle UrukMiddle UrukLate UrukTerminal UrukTerminal UrukTermhal UrukI ermlnal UrukI errunal Urui<Terminal UrukI ermrnal UruKI ermlnal UrukTerminal UrukTerminal UrukLater thtd millenniumLate UrukLate UrukLate UrukTerminal Uruk-Ninevite 5

Terminal Uruk-Ninevite 5

Ninevite 5

Ninevite 5

Ninevite 5

CT1CT2CT3CT4cTs 42004L1b

DNJ

BK4BK 13MU1MU2MU3MU4MU5MU6\[u 7MU8MU9MU 10

MU 11

MU 12MU 13MU 14MU 15MU 16MU 17MU 18MU 19MU 20MU 21MU22MU 23MU 24N4U 25MU 26MU 27MU 28MU 29

TU1TU2TU3TU4TU5TU6TU7TU8TU9TU 10TU 11

TU 12TU 13TU 14TU 15

TU 15ru17TU 18TU 19TU 20

A8p-245

AZ70A2001

IrenchHS1HNHNHN]fszH52HS1HS6HS6HS4HNHNHS6HS6HS6HS6HS6HS6HS6HS6HS6HS6HS5HS6HS1HS1HS1HS1HS1HS1HS1HS1HS1HS1HS1HS1HS1HS1HS1HS3/HS5HS2HS2HS2HS2HS2HSzHS2}{SzHS2HS2HPHFHFHFHF1HF1HI1HF1HF1

LeveI61

3I1

1

1

1

44

7d3

35

56666678

1

45

44555

56

666

6

67

5

89

9

9

1

SurfaceSurfaceSurface

1

7444

A750A750A5520L)L1

A2?7A75747574759A777A785A7854787A797A800A800A811A815A.400044023A4027A4033,A'4033

44047,44051A4087A4087A4103p'4125

A4726A4132A,4L52A4155A504A2000A2003A20041'7004A2004A2012A7063A2065A2065PJ]69A3017A7009A7011A7048A8002A8003A8025A8029A8030

SM for second-millennium samPles. These catego-

ries should be considered broad. In particuiar, mate-

rial designated as iater third millennium may date

from a period of several centuries starting fromaround 24OO sc and be pre-Akkadian or earlyAkkadiaru or even late Akkadian, in date' Any sam-

ples ciearly from another Period, such as the Halaf I

NS1NTq ?

NS3N54NS5NS6NS7NS8NS9

Sample no. Unit no-Tl'J21 A8030TU 22 495L2

Trench LevelHF1 4

HL SurfaceHS2 1

HS4 7

HS4 7

HS4 8

HS4 9HS4 10

HS4 10

HS4 10

HS4 10

HS4 4

HS4 4HS3/HS5 7

HS4 5

HS4 5HS4 5HF Surface

HF SurfaceHF SurfaceHF Surface

HF4 2HL1 1

HL SurfaceHL Surface

Sherd datingNinevite 5Late UrukTerminal Uruk-Ninevite 5

Ninevite 5Nhevite 5Ninevite 5Ninevite 5Ninevite 5Ninevite 5Ninevite 5

Ninevite 5

Ninevite 5

Ninevite 5Later third millenniumNinevite 5Ninevite 5

Ninevite 5Ninevite s-later ihird

millemiumNinevite 5Ninevite 5Ninevite 5-1ater third

millenniumTerninal Uruk-Ninewite 5Ninevite 5NineYite 5Ninevite 5

Ninevite 5

Nine\.ite 5T,ater third miliemiumLater drird millenniumLater third millemiumLater third millemiumLater third millenniumLater third millemiumLater drird millemiumLater third millenniumLater third millenniumLater third millenniumLater third millemiumLater third millemiumLater third millemiumLater third millemiumLater third millenniumLater third millenniumLater third millemiumLater third millemiumNinevite 5Second millemiumSecond millemiumSecond millemiumSecond millenniumSecond millemiumSecond millemiumSecond millenniumSecond millemiumSecond millenniumSecond millermiumSecond millenniumSecond millennium

A2003A6013A602446037A6051A6057A6061A6061A6051

N5 10 A651+NS 11 A6514NS 12 A7L78NS 13 A6s40NS 14 A6s40NS 15 46540NS 16 A701L

NS 17 A7022NS 18 A7043NS 19 A7057

NS 20NS 21NS 22NS 23NS 24NS 25LTM 1

LTM 2LTM 3

LTM 4LTM 5

LTM 6

LT}'jTLTM 8

LTM 9

LTM 10

LTM 11

LTM 12LT]VI 13LTM 14LTM 15

LTM 16LIM 17LTM 18

I,TM 20

A91594.9500A9502A951549524A9540A1015A14L7A.1023A1070A1070A74744L074A1098A1103A1106A1135A7178A.1180A1180A1182A118647795A1195A9547A1A136L74Z,A.150

A166Al924202A/IJ4227L1)R

A2294254

HL1HL1

24

HS3/HS5 3

HS3/HS5 3HS3/HS5 3

HS3/HS5 5

H53i HS5 5HS3/HS5 5HS3/HS5 5HS3/HS5 5

HS3/HS5 5HS3/HSs 5

HS3/HS5 1

HS3/HS5 7

HS3/HS5 7HS3/HS5 7

HS3/HS5 7HS3/HS5HS3/HS5HS3/HS5HL1HN>IVI

SMSMSMSM5SM5SM7SM8SM9SM 10

SM 11

SM 12

HNHNHNHNHNHNHNHNHNHNHN

2b2b2c2c7c2c2c2d2c2c7d

LIbaid samples placed in the MU cate:..ory, are clearly

noted in ttre text. Inclusions are arranged vertically'The tables are not designed to give a detajled min-

eralogicai description of the samPles, but to break

the sampies into discrete groups on the basis of theirinciusions. Splitting the varieties of quafiz was notdiagnostic foi these samPles, so that monocrystalline

JZ3

Chapter 8

Table 8.2. Petrography of sherds from HE surface.

Sample TU 13 TU 14 NS 16 NS 17 NS 18 TU 1s NS 19

Mineralsquartz x xx xxx xxx

cslcitex&xx&&ooidsx&&x&xsndstanebasalt &

Inc.organic x xxxxxpellet & &

8r0gslrcLl

Size F lvled \T F VF Med VP

sand sand sand sand sand sand sand

Wheelxxxxxnox

and polycrystalline qlTartz are Placed together withchert. Feldspars are not considered in the tables'

After a thorough characterization of the samPles from

Tell Brak, it was apparent thai the presence of thecommon varieties (plagioclase, orthoclase and micro-cline) of feldspar were extremely variable' This wasoften directly related to grain size. Samples with finesand-sized inclusions, or smaller, may have no iden-tifiable feldspars. In the majority of cases this wasapparently not due to differences in the Parent rockof the temper. For example, samples with coarse

sand-sized inclusions may have a number offeldspars. But in this case there was also the problemof abundance. With such variability, and with space

limitations, feldspar was deemed not to be diagnos-tic enough to include on the chart alone, which is inkeeping with thin-section studies of other archaeo-logical ceramics (van der Plas & van Doesburg7987,74).There are cases where feldspar is mentioned inthe text, particularly when discussing arkose sand-stone and basalt, which are considered on the table.

In the minerals category there is another desig-

Table 8.3. Petrography of sherds flom HL surface.

.ITJ 22 NS 22 NS 23 MU 14 MU 13 MU 7 MU 8 MUg MU1O MU11 MU12 MU6 MU3 MU4 MUsSample

MineralsqlrsrtzcalciteooidssndstonebasqLt

Inc,organicpelletgrogshell

Size

Wheel

xX

&

& biotite

schisl

& biotite & biotite

&

& biotite

xxx

&

xxx & xxx &&s

X

&&&x&&&xx&xxxxxxx&

biotite

&

& biotite amphiboleamphibole

x

&xxx

&

FVFsand smd

Medsand

x

Fsand

no

&

VF Medsand sand

no no

&

Medsand

no

Medsand

no

&x&x

&xxx&&

xxxx

\T 1mmsand

xxxxR-

F Medsand sand

xxx

F

sand

no

F

sand

x

Table 8.4. Petrograplty of sherds from HS7 (Northern Middle Uruk)

Sample

MineralsquartzcalciteaoidssndstonebasElt

Inc-organicpelletgr0gsheLl

Size

Wheel

ldtJz4 MU2s MU25 MU27 MU?8 Mrulg MU17 MU20 MU21 MU23 MU22 MU16 MU18 MU19 MU15 CT5

&X

&X

&xx

x&xxx&&x&xxxxxxx&

&

biotite

&

&&Med F/vF F/VFsand sand sand

?xx

muscoYrteepidote

&

Medsand

no

xxxxxxx&

F

sand

x?

XX

F

sand

no

Medsand

no

FFsand smd

Fsand

x

Csand

no

&

F/VF F

sand sand

xno

F VF Medsmd sand smd

324

Ceramics and SocietY

nation that may cause some confusion' Under calcite

there is a voidi category' Because there is a range of

firing temperatures represented in this assemblage,

calclL is present in a number of states' Lower fired

wares have angular grains of calcite, while higher

fired wares may have no surviving grains' In cases

where it is clear that calcite was present it will be

noted in the voids category. Clear in this case means

Table 8.5. Petrography of sherds from HS2 (Terminal Uruk-Early Nineoite 5)'

TU9 TU1O TU11 TU8 TU7 TUz

xxxx&xxxx &x&&&&

&

Smple

MineralsquaTtzcalcitepoids

sndstonebasalt

muscovite

Inc.0rSantcpelletgrogshell

Size

Wheel

& biotite

xxx

CT4 TU3

&&g

&

g

CFsand sand

nox

NS 1 TU4

&xx&

xx

Silt Medsmd

xx

TU5 CTs

xxx&&&

Med Fsmd sand

xno

TU5

x&

&

x

Medsand

no

VF VFsand smd

no? no

Medsmd

x

x

MedFCsand smd smd

xxx

Table 8.6. Petrography of sherds from HS4 (Nineoite 5)'

Sample

Mineralsquartzcalcite

NS6 NS7 NS8

u&xxxxxx

NS9

&xx

NS5

&

&

NS4 NS2 NS3 NS13 NS14

&&xxx&x&&x

&&&

NS 15 NS 10 NS 11

x&x&&

&&&

pyroxene biotite

&

&

F sand

x

ooidssndstonebasalt

& biotite

Inc.arganicxxxxpellet

8ro8shell

Size Med smd F smd Med smd F smd

Wheelnox??

x

F sand F sand F sand Med sand Siit Med sand Sili

nonononox

&& biotite

ug &

silt

x

ruut" s.z. Petrography of sherds from HF14 and HL12 (Terminal L]ruk-Niner:ite 5).

Trench HF1-4TU 19 TU 20 TU 21 TU 17 TU 16 NS 20 Sample NS 25

Mineralsquartz ucalcite xxaoidssndstonebasalt

Inc.organic upelletgrogshell

Size F sand

Wheel x

LTM 20

xx

Trench HL 1-2NS 24 NS 21

Sample

Mineralsquertzcalcitexoidssndstonebasalt

Inc.organicpellet

shell

Size

Wheel

TU 18

gX&x&

&&

& &x&

&xx

&X

&

F sand

no

&xxx

F sand Med sand F sand Med sand F sand C smd

xxnoxxno

F sand Med smd F sand

?nono

325

Chapter 8

that there are voids with a diagnostic shape, and

with a region of greater melting (a reaction rim) toshow that calcite was present. This estimation, due

to many variables, can be taken as no more than a

guide,6ut is useful in explaining an otherwise per-piexing lack of calcite in a number of samples due to

firing conditions. The Presence of sandstone in thinsection is related to grain size, as larger grains pre-serve a composite texture. Sandstone constituentsand textures are Presented photographically byScholle (1978;7979). The presence of basalt is also

related to grain size, but occurs in few vessels- Or-

Table 8.8. Petrography of sherds ftom HS3 (later third millennium)'

Sample LTM 12 LTM 13 LTM 14 LTM 1s LTM 16 NS 12 LTM4

&&&

LTM 5 LTM 6

&

&

LTM 7

xx

hematite

xx&

F sand

x

Mineralsquartzcalciteaoidssndstonebasalt

Inc.organicpellet

shell

Size

Wheel

&

xx

x&

xx&&

x

Med sand C sand F sand

?nox

xx

VF smd F sa-nd

xX

&

Med sand

x

SilI

x

biotite

xx&

F sard

x

silt

x

Table 8.9. Petrography of sherds ftom HS3 (later third millennium)'

Sample LTMS LTM9 LTM10 LTM1

Mineralsquartz & x

LTM2 LTM3 TU1

&xxx&Hg

x

&&

xxx

VF/F snd F sand

xno

LTM 11 LTlNd17 LTM 18

&xxxxx x

biotite hematlte

xx&

&

C smd VF smd F sand

?xx

calciteooids

&

&u

sndstonebasalt

Inc.organicpellet

Srogshell

Size

Wtreel

F smd

x

x

F sand

x

F sand

no

x

C smd

no

silr

x

Table 8.10. Petrography of sherds ftom HN (second millennium)'

Trench HPSample TU 12

Mineralsquartz &calcite xooidssndstonebasalt

Inc,organicpellet

8ro8shell &

Size F smd

Wheel x

Trench HNSM 12

&ux

MU1

xx

muscoYite

x

&

C silt

MU2

x&

SM9

&&

CT3

&

C^T 2

x

5M4 SM5

x&xx

&

F sand

no

XX

&

VF sand

no

&

F sand

no

xx&

Med sand

x?

F SANd

?

F smd F saad

XX

3lo

Ceramics and Society

ganic temper, or chaff, is consid-ered first in the inclusions category.While organic material is not fur-ther sub-divided in the charts, thetext will devote some discussion tothe issue, especially for the second-millennium samples, when there is

a shift in the source of the organictemper used in manY vessels.

Irre gularly occurring minerals,if any, are noted in the tables. A1-

Kaissi & Mynors (7987) subjectedthe ceramics from sixteen major sites

in Iraq from the Early DYnastic Pe-riod. (290V2400 ec) to petrographicanalysis. They found that the most productive ap-

proich to exarnining Mesopotamian wares from thesouth was by estimating the frequenry of epidote,

after Pettijohn et al. (1973), are not considered on the

chart, although they are noted in the text- The maior-ity of the samples, barring the Metallic Wares, have

subangular inclusions. Visual estimates of the rela-

tive abundances of inclusions use standard charts(Matthew et qI.7997).

The symbols are designed for rapid estimationof inclusion abundance:& denotes a small amount of several examples to

just under 5 per cent of the visual field;x is 5 per cent of the visual field.Visual observations of the entire sherd, made by eye

and with low-powered optical equipment, such as a

hand lens and binocular microscope (Stienstra 1986)

are compared with what was revealed by thin-sec-tion studies. ln some cases, particularly with mica-

ceous fabrics, examination of the surface of the sherd

revealed discrete differences- In the majority of cases,

thin-section analysis was required to elucidate thenature of the inclusions. It is very important, how-ever, to relate information that may be useful in the

field to discriminate between different wares so thatfuture studies of similar material may build uponthis research. One of the most important macroscopic

determinations is that of wheel forrning.

lMeel formingFor ttre purposes of this report, wheel forming is any

action that involves rotation in the final finishingphase. There are several examples of composite slab

Lr coil-built and then wheel-finished samples in thewritten descriptions. These cases are considered un-der the wheel category. In some cases a thick slip ora smoothed surface obscures forming marks' These

samples are left blank in the chart- There have been

several attempts to di{ferentiate wheel-formed fromhand-built pottery on the basis of microstructuresexamined in thin section (Courty & Roux 1995;

327

biotite and muscovite mica, amphibole, and pyro-xene. Two source regions were defined, on the pres-

ence/absence of these minerals. Sites from thesouthern region show quantities of pyroxene, epidote,

biotite and imaller amoults of muscovite, while pot-tery from the Diyala region has a high density ofangular quartz grains. Other mineral inclusions are

.*u itt the latter region, and sites can be character-

ized by the size and density of quartz grains' Al-though the region of Tell Brak is distinct geologically,rp".id attention is paid to these minerals for thisreport. The micas appear to be particularly diagnos-tiC for the Tell Brak assemblage, as local wares do

not have large amounts of mica. Some local wares

have biotite as isolated grains that are probably fromthe arkose sandstone' These are marked with '&'that distinguishes mica probably from this source

from mica that either occurs in large grains or ingreater abundance' Pyroxene and epidote occuriarely in the samples from Tell Brak. The angularqtartz grains identified from the Diyala region, iniontrasi to sub-angular inclusions from other areas,

may indicate a different raw material used for tem-

per, perhaps one requiring extensive grinding' An-gulaiity of quartz grains in the Tell Brak assemblage

is not diagnostic, as the majority of wares have sub-

angular grains from recently crushed sandstone' The

melallic wares, with a fine man-made paste of clay

with a 10 per cent quartz temper, and the basaltic

tempered *ut"t are exceptions to this rule, as bothgrorrps have angular grains. The difference between"grog-and,pelletJis

after Whitbread (1986,8O table 1)

and di Caprio & Vaughan (7993).

The iize range is according to ihe Udden'

Wentworthscale. Roundness and sorting, using a scale

Table 8.11. Petrography of shefis from HN (second millennium)'

Sample

I,Iir"rulsquartzcalciteooidssndstonebasalt

Inc.organicpellet

8ro8shell

Size

Wheel

SM5 SM7 SM8 SMlO SM11 SM2

&xx&&x&xxxxxxx

&&

SM3

&xx

CT1

x&

TM1

&xx

&

F smd VF sand F smd F sand C slt/VF Med sard F sand VF sand F sand

xxxxxx?xnox

Chapter 8

Whitbread 1996;Woods 1985)' As there is little con-

sensus as to what particular microstructures indi-

cate, and still much doubt as to the utility -of

ftt:*"tirod, this technique has not been used' The dif-

ferentiation between hand-built and wheel-built ce-

ramics is made primarily on the basis of careful

examination of the surface of the sherd' At times a

low-powered binocular microscope was used, and

in some instances a freshly-fractured surface gave

further information about the orientation of the grains

within the sample. ln the text the term striations is

used to co-rer either nail prints or impurity printsmade on the pot as a result of wheel forming at some

stage (Courty & Roux 7995, fig 3; Rye-1981,87-9)'

Noile of the ieramic material from Tell Brak showed

clear external signs of the coil technique (Courty &Roux 1995, fig.[), which may be due to the carefullysmoothed ,r"rfu""t found on many pre-fast wheel-

made vessels. Rilling is the term used to define the

spiral ridges (deeper than striations) on the sur{ace

o? th" shlrd that-were formed by lifting the clay'

Courty & Roux (1995,30, fig. 5) also note that some

rilling can be formed by coils of different thicknesses

*hi.f, have not been smoothed' They note that for

wheel-thror,rm ceramics, the edges of the ridges are

uneven, corresponding with the clay falling after

rising. It can be safely assumed that wheel-thrown

.".uii."pastes have more water than coil-formed

equivalerits, and that as a result, the vessel clay would

be more plastic' A11 examples of- riiling identified

here cleariy show where the paste has sagged before

drying.

Use wearAlthough not noted in the charts, wear was exam-

ined b/eye and with low magnification' There are

,".r"rui sherds that bear marks from use, apparently

received during the working life of the vessel (Hally

1983). Some *err occrrs around the lip, where an

implement was used to lever out the contents' Few

i.,ides of bodv sherds were examined, but several

examples also had wear consistent with tool use'

The major question here is why are so- few tools

,"pr"r"r,t"dln the archaeological record? Very few

reievant bone or ceramic utensils have been recov-

ered from Tell Brak. It seems that ceramic utensils

-"r" o.""rrional1y produced, as from NeolithicAchilleion in Greece fourteen ceramic sPoons were

recovered. They were perhaps cultic implements' as

they were frequently fbund near hearths associated

wiih figurin"q tooli, and pottery (Bjork 1995,727)'

In an aicident of survival, a wooden sPoon was re-

covered from Neolithic contexts at Qatalhoytik

(Mellaart 1964, 86, ftg. 37). As wooden spoons were

used in many parts of the pre-modern Near East for

food consumption, it is not unlikely that they were

used at Tell Brak, but do not survive'

Chemical composition (Table 8.12)

The Inductively Coupled Plasma (ICP) analysis was

performed at Royal Holloway, University of I9n-hon, Geology Department- The particulars of this

method will be found in many introductions to ar-

chaeological science (Pollard & F{eron 7996,3L-6)'

The table (Table 8.12) is arranged so that the samples

are aligned along the horizontal plane and dividedvertica-ily by element. Thin-section sample numbers(us aescilUed above) are generally followed, so that

the chemical data can be easily correlated with the

thin-section descriptions in the text and tables' Sam-

ples that have not been thin-sectioned have been

designated by the letters BK followed by-a sample

,l.r.rib"t assigned to chemical data' They have also

been described in the text.A major feature of the ceramic sherd is in the

next column. Samples are generally arranged accord-

ing to period rather than trench. The Metallic Wares

un? th" south Mesopotamian samples are placed

separately from theii period grouPs because they

arl easily categorized by material and shape- Clay

samples are also considered separately at the begin-

ning of the table. It was hoped that these wouldptoiridu a control SrouP so that a natural clay could

te correlated with a natural clay used for the ves-

sels.One of the difficulties when chemically charac-

ter:rzing archaeological ceramics from this region is

the geieral lack of comparative analytical studies'

Ther-e have been few chemical analyses of ceramic

materials from the Mesopotamian region (e'g' Al-Kaissi & Mynors 1987;Davidson & McKerrell 1980;

Eiland L996; Frcestone & Hughes 7989; NolL 7976;

Schneider 1994; Th'aesen et al' 1982), most of them

focusing uPon a particular luxury ware from a dis-

tinct peiiod. Coo^king wares in the Near East have

,"""i.rLd surprisingly little attention, despite evidence

that cooking *ut"i with distinctive low calcium fab-

rics were triaea from the Neolithic period (Le MiEre

& Picon 1994). Few studies have been directed at

characterizing the range of ceramic materials from a

number of peilods. There are also very few geologi-

cal investigations into sediments that do not bear

directly upln modem economic issues' Several prov-

"t un." ,todl"t of recent sediments in the Tigris and

Euphrates rivers (Berry et ql' 1970; Philip 1968) show

328

Ceramics and SocietY

that, while there is a similar suite of minerals through-

out the region, there are distinct differences in abun-

dance. Foi a study focused upon determining the

place of manufacture of a given ceramic vessel, this

is obviously not ideal, as production from a distinctgeological region can give unequivocal results' Be-

furrc"-th"t" ii so little known about the geology ofthe region, the variability noted in the geological

pup"tt'.uroot be linked to known deposits with a

dlstinct composition. Hopefully, with more analyses

of both sediments and ceramic materials, provenance

issues in this region will become clearer.

A major question to address when consideringchemical analysis is levigation' This term refers to a

process in which clay particles are separated intoheavier (larger) and lighter (smaller) fractions' It can

be accomplished in a pit filted with water and clay(also knotam as sedimentation: see Hamer & Hamer

7986,280) by allowing the fractions to settle natu-

rally. A channel can also be used' The ciay,/water

mixture is allowed to Pass down a baffled channel,

which traps sediments. The angle of the channei

determinei the amount of sediment that is retained(Hamer & Hamer 1986,195). Blackman (1992) con-

sidered the problem of levigation to determine if the

natural chemical signature of a clay canbe obscured'

He found that removal of the sand-sized fractionproduced concentration changes of less than 5 per

ient for 15 127 elements. Sodium, cobalt and zirco-

nium showed concentration differences greater than

10 per cent. The removal of the silt-sized fraction

"uri"t concentration changes in the range of 2040

per cent (barring rare earths). The elements chro-

mium, zirconium, hafnium, sodium, and calciumdecrease, while all others increase. Levigation of aclay produces a material that has a chemical signa-

ture within a natural range of a single productionevent as long as it does not remove the silt-sized

fraction.Temper added to a ceramic paste may also alter

its compoisition. Neff et at' (1988;1989) found thatadditional temper (below about 40 per cent) added

to a distinct clay does not attenuate its distinctive-ness. This is particularly the case when qtuarlz ot

calcite, relativLly inert tempers, are added, as they

are almost pure elements. These observations are

particularly applicable to the raw materials used by

ihe rel Brik po1t"rs, as these two tempers frequently

occur. Blackman et al. (1993,72) also analyzed wast-

ers from the Akkadian period at Tell Leilan to define

the chemical signature of a single production event'

The wasters reiembled each other to a high degree'

Ceramic samples from two village sites within a 10 km

radius of the mound could be discriminated fromthe waster group, which demonstrates the potentialsensitivity of chemical analysis.

The question of the continuity of clay sources

has been infrequently considered. Allas et nl' (1982)

considered a (rather limited) group of Lakonian pot-tery spanning c. 1200 rc to the Hellenistic period'They found that there were periods of continuity,with most chemical changes taking place slowly'There was one major source of clay exploited duringthe period 650-400 ec. While there were other sources

of clay exploited during other periods, the majority*"r" *or" closely related to the Lakonian clay than

any other. The analytical information from Tell Brak,

spanning a wide temporal range, offers a broad range

o? issr"t in addition to posing questions of prov-enance. Was clay levigated? Was clay obtained fromthe same source? The data, presented in chart form,

allow a number of significant observations to be

made.The results for AlrO-, FerO, MgO, CaO, NarO,

K-rO,TiO2, PrO, and MnO are quoted as weight per-

ceht oxides, whjle other elements are quoted as parts

per million ($g1il. The major elements are given to

two decimal places, while the trace elements are

quoted to the nearest whole number' In order tomake the results easily appreciated, the highest value

for each sample grouP (for each element) is bol4while the lowest value is underlined' Realistic detec-

tion limits are approximately 5-10 ppm for trace

elements (although theoretical detection limits are

lower). For rare earth elements (La, Ce, Nd, Sm, Eu,

Dy and Yb) the values quoted are, usually adequate

to give an approximate rare earth patterry but the

values quoted are {or rocks of normal compositions'High Ca, as is the case for some of the ceramic sam-

ple-s, may lead to unreliable results. This level ofuncertainty is expressed by the values for Zn, Zt,La,Ce and Nd in the standard samples (which have lowCa values). These standards should be as close to

homogeneous as possible and should ideally show

little variation. As is clear from the table, there islitt1e variability for most other elements beyond Znand Ba, the latter of which is variable not only be-

cause it is easily transported in ground water, and

therefore can contaminate samples, but also because

of problems associated with detection' Where there

is iignificant zircon (Zr), usuaLLy found in granitic

rockq the results may be low because zircon may

not dissolve completely in the HF/HC104used forthese samples. Although the standards show no vari-ation in Si, there are several extremely hlgh Sr val-ues that should be interpreted with caution' Because

329

Chapter 8

5 -NNO+6> 4r - - r F

> NNNN6A Nd d N d N

= alqal4 q q

@ -13-l- o o

E -l\\1aqO NI NNNO6

E-z Nli 5 i::

-q od N r,6 -v Nlo N o 6 6

! dF n: i j

! +r =5d+iN @IN 6 O N N

E mrm mrr, n n

a -lF - aN d

LdNbr <oNO - N 6l N 6 -

O --+-Fd

= d:-l o6N

NNNNCI 'O\NINrj-.j-jl rirJliN6iJ.i

N + NI4 N-il*l -il-j.i ^i ^i o

^r-; d -i 6 di

ooo30 :c3c-=ooo

---N$s<+6

xoo+6bor,h-INNNN -NN-IN^N^N

<l 6!-6 =N(

g-+Dr-{l<+s+ sY$N|666=6

Nlf_ o f -NINNNO NNN-I-,dN6N

-66NNt =f+:t+6?C6-66rd NNNdr6-6F

osr.*3 "-o:o3-cso

dol -Nh ++6loNTc-

- -l - - -

+6

rNa6cl

=9:l!L a!s|R:f9!!

Nd-Ncrjjj;;6i6i6jj

6t- q - 9 - a \ qNodao

\t\lN\ln \le n a-l 5docJ-i-o

nld d 6 d

d$sE6

NaN€6€6aiO

@ 3- n i 6 i i o c

$d6+l --a-

N:-@-oo!$-d6!6dd

il i---

{.?{i\aqna.!qn\

i] NNNd

ot ohNGdld d i i i i i d d o d j -i

Nlo N o o + $ $ r $ s $ + o

6I* - i + N N N N N i N N O

Nl< 6 6 S

--sl #N

6I €ONCN€T-NddON

-noN6aaoaSa-aO

E! NN*NNdNNNdNdN

Nl- - - F i r i F i F d: i

N N6 d6

{N6i6$O€*6F6 0il

d----

=====93199e3I*1

olr d N d + F N

nlN o - 6 6 6 +

++hF63d6-ii6i ci + $ + + {

<l o--NNdd

d+6900 $NnN o < + + $ 6

d@ - * + N N 6

d+o:dio++6:Ha6iN

ar.-*o-t

o5-9€:Nl6 d * r n i i

s6b6N6Nd

6l: -: - - - N

d=11=935

r3i6r,Cl66€i c NNCoNo 006+6$-F:NI-FHnH en-:n:li-i: 6ooi5 <6*-:3He

J o6doNo

.1 x a o= + +

.q N =

]rN 6 6

fi XFJR]RF59 *-*-, ^z - - - 5- o

50rn6 NlvNlN-J-b6

sl a-66-o'+6 - >

' 5 d6 - O € t : N t

-tN N $ - - d N -

N -IN i } O O O €

al > co-NNT O- dN6NNN6NN

Nl 6€

oc=co ci -coidii=

5 S e Ol +

rd!JdNddrd

6 6 Nl< c

*r -o€-

i6ol {5-N o

d6 N N -,

-*.8-3--6 d d o Nl6

Nrddirdsd

F 3ol o 3

4dPNN

\N56r-6 6 NNi.QQQq-.?-q-nnq

NN66dlr,Ns

ru^$*-o-o

:li r n i N 6 6

6@l -d6r66

dElodd+6

;l.riiid cl iddi jj--il i5:i<j iSdjjil =idd Cada-:jiSiSeioc;

- dh t N F c N d - 6+--l5na i1-ld.q qq99Ynq\-J 4Lqn1\r.e4\ I-?nNl:9q-.i*q.qn\tuN-ld6N NddldN --6dNNNNN-l i-oNN -NN-l-

N ,l @l -- -no€+-eNQN dD :]N-s N -a-aNiNN 9N N-N-+irl u oi Nl :Nl 3i 4.Qi-a\q{ nl ac.li4a-.ao.cl nqTn:\?.1 oqnaqL-r-lC5o=-3 cl-=i-- aifccaa--3 3=-aoc-ocF --aar?--?icoaol

iI

v

z

a 66',o-da, N-46N, -t-;.-(61 6 -:6r:N{NN1*, -e\6!-qe49!9S31 999t41-a+ € Eri=alz '-r9il !=l==9:Il = uH:::ar=r;l 8ln!^:::s::i;3:l RR=3*"*,Qia

: 2 dddJJ+ 6ddl+6 +dL+ 5 i+rs6 -ls-=-*6+NN;r' 3] o.=ooo qsrrN A-t€5F--N3 3l;;eS-R,>FR,?\S- e:"3-$$Bhs:: cl bl\^1144 -N.-F o Nl.sr+-r+-j q - ".,Iii

;l;;5;:;Nil ..1 J;i6d5(ild -ii +*.dr: idJddNdd gd;dddN66r'<+: zi -t -cNrcr\?e +sNp\^isd ,E

i i N'Nildd l:drr e=ljJ:i:di-;dj !lq1:i:didd-6 E9tS::;;";'* < )diit=: d=i- jF ,:i =:: 2=l--- J N€ =

dr---r-r

Ej t= =: *- - i' E r i.= i ., -, e- - E= E i-* =*-o;x-! \'=4-.'-: i ..Z+ep rs==5E ilEi=-E;iii ilirz=uitiai:=" fi?i=:;i;g i*in?=f E=g'== ila!:=nEEDieE* {-o^ir- i==-*.r i::\:i::11 l===osNge-, E**R-a^}!=ore-< !:;;;;;=;* s- -"tQ-- ???vil

=:J ),r_2)224 ;jJJJJJf:f ) .E!:44!L!!L!;!)!)y).!)!) i=i====trF.-q uJ )ier', =>>t=> z>>>>22>zz F---: - zzzzlzzzzzzzzzz rrrrrrJrr

ra € N N - x € N Nl -l- 6 N + $ a Nryi64da! .rlr,q4 qlqlantnynt ryll.!a9Eii-,n .!1-q.1 ala.1 nq^1.l:l .l^-N-s6N-4d-- =f-o-5==o oio=co :=o:3:oc3l ol33=3ooo

dc-o--i:

@ N $I N

-ioiil:oriJoi

d$€666€dil- r N n o 6 acld j d d i j F;

330

Ceramics and SocietY

z

U

N

N

:iiNI N

cl { qqq-l -

v

z

dl +

<:

I

2

2!, z

; il i i j i i: d

> d+o6!N:oO jldi6ioiNooo

5Z oto o =lRSl8 For ==li

5 xtpgEiSg$3 R9A3 EIE RSE

iertsR s8l =RRl:!tN;.r =]FRf,5€

of these Problems, the elements Ba, Sr, Zn,Zr'La'Ceand Nd will be carefully considered in the light of

analytical variability when considering provenance'gro*n stains, usualiy associated with Mg, were also

encountered on some sherds' Daniels (1981) notes

that a porous ceramic body could easily absorb or-

ganic materials that would provide nutrients to sus-

tain manganese-oxidizing microbes' Perhaps because

th" ,u*pi", were taken from the centre of the sherd'

tvtg ,rutrr", were relatively constant, suggesting that

thlre was little post-depositional contamination'

There are a number of statistical programs that

can generate cluster diagrams that express the rela-

tio.rships between ,u*pl"" (Wilson f9.7.8' 230-33)'

There are many problems associated with statistical

treatments of thii type. The first is that the Programis designed to separate samples into groups'-a task

that an"unthinking progranl will complete whether

there are reul groupi oinot' This has led to difficul-

ties in justifying ilusters (Roaf & GaLbralth 7994;

comments on Oites et al' 7977)' Without a detailed

rationale, based upon sound geological knowledge

of the variables, i chart with reiationships may be

misleading. In order to avoid the many problems

usso.iutei*ith this sort of treatment, the samples

*" urrurlg"d on the basis of the amount of clay (A1'

which is lenerally high in feldspar clays) they con-

tain. For t"h" T"11 B.uk assemblage, this was a diag-

nostic trait that rapidly led into a consideration of

the raw materials arrd th" methods used in their

freparatior,' The discussion of the chemical results

iut"t ptu." in the light of typology and thin-section

,oulysis to offer archaeologically so,und results'

One of the limitations of the ICP technique is

that silica (Si) cannot be detected' It is usually calcu-

tated by adding together all analyzed elements and

suftractlng thit vitue from 100 per cent' The as-

srmptio.tihat everything else is Si-usually holds'

trut ihls value will not be caiculated here' The sam-

pi"t ur" instead plotted by ihe amount of Al they

iontain. This value is a reflection of the amount of

clay present in the sample' This giveslmportant evi-

dence relatilg to ancient methods of clay ptepata-

tion. Some of ihe clay samples sPan a range of values

that maybe described as unlevigated' The oven trag-

ment, the kiln brick, the modern mud brick' and the

sling bullet all form a group' The laGrthird-millen-.,iuil brick and the figlrine, with similar character-

istics more in keeping with vessel fabrics' may have

t.rrrd"rgorr" "o*" iot* of sorting, perhaps simple pit

type levigation.The Halaf and Ubaid samples present a range

of values that are totally out of keeping with the clay

JJI

N ,ON!NNq1l- - 1a d d -

ol4 6 6 q .: q;l6i6rla-<6

+'6d6cdNN;jd-dd-

dNJ-,No\q-16, r, + e < 5 s

@Nl rd3-:d

3lg€R5bRS

gl3 € clN x N R

gR R R R X R R

Jl6i N.i

Gil + ri ,;

{l \\.i

R RlI]

IL N

+1 +

*,E = \ . il E G# Fl: s: E a F j

- 6ol 3+i6<

! - i 4N - N

u at={8il\3E Sasr

E garNRRxR *R=l s

d cl5ldl

ils s E *;; ! R 3 Uadl+ ri

= < 6 + 6

x!(=6?RS Riql €JtrJdri666 h6cLh

d sssRx&4,!lL' d-lda-a.d

o" 5.G,?.Bit qIn{ !Ei .4aa?5=dd ,--F

-NsR-=31 5€AlEdNi.i6i6i--l d$Nl$

>lP3SgF.-- EBl3l!Ja-aacaa iJ-lc

835?l a1R:Sir!l "RR-

=r 3R il ;, il.!=l A-d ;l ;l ii

= rRB$EA=Q Il=EE Hs EE;

r tst E ElEiI SHI H SIEER1=-I BRI FIEEJijil ad d3o

- >5R^3€a\c -l + 6

E =g=33=IB

NNI N

iln

U

:1 E

n>

Hd

dl 6i 6i

N>S

ao5l

P=

6 +l lne: *=lil3&

EO

> 2i:s=qa aiL)L

Chapter 8

sample SouP. There are two possibilities: either a

,r"ry .utfzut method of clay preparation was used on

local materials, or non-local clays were used to form

these (imported) vessels. Petrographic evidence sug-

gests thaithese vessels are not made on the site' MU

i hu, , large amount of biotite mica' MU 2 also has

pellets of ftay that are more consistent with a re-

irydrated natural clay rather than careful levigation'

Wttlt" all these samples could be imported, it is eas-

ily appreciated that MU 2 is the most distinctive

ri^pfl from the grouP. It has higher A1, Fe' Mg and

K which u." *ijo. elements denoting significant

differences in raw materials' A low value for Ca may

indicate a higher firing temperature'The Miltldle Urul samples present a range of

elemental concentrations thit are in keeping with

the Terminal Uruk samples, suggesting that during

,fr"r" *o periods there ivere no major shifts in meth-

oas of clay prepurution or source materials' The val-

,", fot eiut" only slightly above those of the natural

clay samples (Ci z, CT,6, BK 9, BK 13), suggesting

tt',ut if uny sorting of the clay was- taking place, itenriched ift" A1 ioncentrations only slightly' This

r""y i"ai"rte simple pit type-leviSafion although

experiments with iocaimaterials are clearly in order'

There are several vessels that may be imported' al-

though they too seem to employ similar methods of

ctay\reparation, assuming that local clays are of

,orgftty comparabte composition' A simple discrimi-

nati'on'by eye of the elemental concentrations sug-

g"r,t Mi ti, g, t+and 13 are distinctive chemically'

Th"r" u." also reasons for suspecting they are im-

ported on Petrographic and typological grounds'' In thin section MU 17 (a red-slipped nose lug

vessel) has a distinctive fabric, with a grain of epidote

and several grains of muscovite' Chemically it is the

lowest end riember of the grouP for Al and a number

of other (maior) elements' MU 9 (the wood-grained-

"t "tty *r"rr"i) has many 1ow values for a number of

elements. Because the iessel has been coated' thus

sealing what would be a very permeable fabric' itcanbe"considered a specialty ware despite the coarse'

low-fued fabric. MU i+ (tt"tettactt-slipped stone ware)

it "f

, vessel with a rare surface treatment' The sam-

ple contains several percent of mica, which indicates

a non-local centre of production' MU 13' the waster

sample, has a number of high values for trace ele-

^"*t that for the reasons above may not be diag-

,rostic. When the scale of the differences is considered'

however, they are generally consistent with the grouP

as u *hol". th" Jth"t waster, SM 9, is in a similar

situation as an end member' This is most likely due

io Jitr"r"r,.es in firing, or perhaps such distorted

vessels (that could apparently not be used) may have

travelled. This question must remain open'The Terminal Uruk period samples also have a

number of probable imports of distinctive vessels'

TU 10 (cooking ware with thumbnail impressions) is

chemically thJmost distinctive Terminal Uruk sam-

ple. Although it is crude technologicaily, fired toi. eoo-zoo'C, cooking wares cannot necessarily be

assumed to be locally made (for late Assyrian period

imported cooking *ut"t see Freestone & Hughes

ISSS)- in thin sec[on the dominant inclusion is ca1-

cite. Chemically the paste is consistent with an

unlevigated natural sorrc". This clay is out of keep-

ing wiih locally identified clay sources' It is probable

thlt this rr"rrui was imported' TU 17 (painted vessel

;ith, pointed lip) has a very high C3 value, which

also explains the buff body colour' In tlrin section

there are few grains of (visible) calcite and few voids'

This suggests that this low-fired sample contains a

sizablelitount of calcite that is too small to detect

.risrutty (perhaps it was groundvery fine)' The 1ow

.ruLres ioith" tt irrot elements indicate a distinct prov-

enance. TU L}(spouted vessel) would be a suspected

import on the basis of typology alone' The inclu-

sio'ns a." too fine for visuafanalysis, so that the high

and low values in a number of minor elements can

be considered diagnostic' TU 3 (buff medium-sized

bowl) has high rrJr"t for Mg and Ti (similar to TUqi r"i also hls high values for trace and rare earths'

In thin section this sample has inclusions that are too

fine for accurate identification, although the fabric is

distinct. fU 9 (a painted medium-sized bowl) has

high values for ttre majol elements A1, Fe' Na' aldTi] Most interesting is the very low Ca' which is

atypical, especially when considering the clay sam-

ptli. tr't thin section it contains a very large amount'of muscovite mica (5 per cent)' Both criteria easily

place it in the imPorted category

A sizable friction of the Ninevite 5 samples are

distinct chemically from the Middle-Terminal Uruk

,u*pl"r. The moit notable features are the low Al.ruLr", for samples NS 23-NS 12' While these are

consistent *lth the clay samples, they are not like

other vessel clay sampies' This indicates that these

vessels -"." *id" from a natural clay that has not

beenlevigated. The sample with the leastAlis NS 23

(ledge-hJndle cooking *-ut:)' This sample has a pre-

io#rrurr"" of crusheld shell as a temper (Fig' s'8)'

with no organic inclusions and apparently no added

-i."rrf teiper. The Al is so low in this case that one

*uy t"gg"ti that the sample represents a non-local

cluy souice, or perhaps that the paste is tempered

*iih siit or dust as an extender' It is hard to justify

ccz

Ceramics and Society

this vessel as an import at least from a great dis-tance, as similar shell-tempered wares make up asizable fraction of the assemblage. Of the other ves-sels made from this distinctive clay, there are fewsurprises. NS 25 (unique black burnished/incisedvessel) appeared to be natural clay on the basis ofvisual examination. NS 20 (thumbnail-impressed ves-sel) is a very coarse ware, as is NS 21 (basalt-tem-pered ware). It is interesting to compare the twobasalt-tempered samples that were analyzed. chemi-cally, as LTM 1 is of a distinctive fabric with higherAl (more clay). NS 12 (black-slipped and burniihedimitation stone vessel) is the biggest surprise, as onecould assume that it was a luxury ware on the basisof its surface, as it has little in common with theother low clay vessels. In this case the surface dis-guised its raw material.

The other samples, from NS 7 to NS 15, form atypical group that are broadly similar with the Mid-dle-Terminal Uruk samples. It is interesting to notethat the spout, NS 6, has some similarities to T'tJ 72,but when NS 6 is considered in the context of theNinevite 5 samples, the variability in chemical com-position appears nonnal within the group as a whole.Two samples of note are NS 22 (green hard fabricwith incised decoration) that has some notable traceelement.results, and NS 15 (large thick storage ves-se1). The latter sample differs particularly in traceelements. Neither are convincing imports, eitherchernically, petrographically or typologically. Sug-gesting NS 4 (Fig, 8.7: ledge-handle basaltic tem-p_ered vessel) is imported rests upon strongerchernical grounds. This sample has the highest AfI( Ti and Co, but the lowest Mg, Na and Mn inparticular. The very low Ca (it is the lowest barringthe Metallic Wares) is particularly interesting, as ahigh Ca body is not optimal for a cooking vessel.Similar low Ca cooking wares are recorded from theNeolithic period in north Mesopotamia (Le MiEre &Picon 1994) and from the Sasanian period at Nineveh(Eiland 1995, 254). While this low Ca clay sourcemay have had a very long period of productioryfurther work is required to identify the region. Inthin section this low Ca fabric basaltic-tempered ves-sel appears to have a large population of silt-sizedinclusions associated with the clay, so that one mayassume it was natural. It comes as a surprise thatthis vessel has the most clay of any sample in thisgroup. This is probably not due to crushed basaltinfluencing the analysis of the clay. The chemicalsignature is not that of plagioclase, and the otherbasalt vessels have elemental values that are dis-tinct. When this vessel is compared to other basalt-

tempered samples (NS 21, LTM 1), there is clearlymore than one centre of production represented inthe assemblage.

The later third-millennium samples are gener-ally homogeneous barring the end members. Thelow clay sample LTM 2 (ledge-handled calcite-tem-pered cooking ware) and LTM 11 (calcite-temperedcooking ware) are in keeping with the low clayNinevite 5 samples, and the samples with 10-13 percent Al are consistent with Middle-Terrninal Urukperiod samples. Taken along with forrning technol-ogy and thin-section analysis of vessels from theproceeding periods, there is continuify in the cook-ing and some of the plain wares. It must be notedthat in both thin section and chemical analysis thetypical hard green fabrics were not extensively sam-pled, as they show little variation. For the later third-millennium period in particular variation wassampled at the expense of the most ltequently occur-ring ceramic type. While these typical green fabricsform a distinctive group by eye, they are not incon-sistent with other wares on the basis of their rawmaterials. At the other end of the spectrum is LTM17 (fine red bowl). As it was the only sherd of thiswcrre recovered, there is little doubt that it was im-ported. In thin section it is almost pure clay, andchemically it appears the same.

The second-millennium samples show greatuniformity in their chernical composition, but in gen-eral have low AI fabrics that are consistent withnatural clay (SM 12-SM 10), or perhaps natural claythat has been slightly levigated (SM 6-SM 3). Thissignificant shift in composition from the later thirdmillennium period probably does not reflect a majordifference in raw materials. SM 12 (cooking plate)would at first appear to be distinct. Despite the veryhigh Ca and the number of notably low minor ele-ment values, SM 12 does not differ greatly from thevalues of the group as a whole. SM 6 (painted withconcentric circles) has considerably more iron thanthe group as a whole, which for this major elemen!rnay indicate a distinct provenance. SM 9, the waster,is last. Like the other waster, MU 13, it has high Cavalues, despite what was apparently a high fuingtemperature. Perhaps the slumping was due more toa rapid rise in temperature rather than a long firingat too hot a temperature. The other differences ap-pear to be slight. Could there be such changes in theoverall abundance of elements due to firing, or per-haps due to burial?

The Metallic Ware samples are a distinct ce-ramic industry that is best considered as a group.LTM 15 (with a red surface) has a surprisingly low

JJJ

Chapter 8

Al value, high Mg, and surprisingly high Ca. Whileone could assume that this sherd is a sample of a

mis-fired Metallic Ware, the chemical analysis sug-

gests that it was made with distinct raw materials'

Schneider (1989) analyzed about 200 Metallic Waresamples from north Mesopotamia and defined a cal-

.ur"ors Metallic Ware. This group is sirnilar to otherceramics from north Mesopotamia in its high Caand unlike the bulk of the Metallic Wares he analyzedfrom Tell Brak. It is interesting to note that the onlyexample of the high Ca Metallic Wares analyzgdforthis report had a distinctive surface. LTM 3 has a

coarser temper than the other Metallic Ware sam-

ples, perhaps relating to the size of the final vessel' Itil"o *uy belong to Schneider's group A (of non-

calcareous wares), which is characterizedby lowervalues (than group B) in iroo magnesium and potas-

sium, along with the geochemically related trace ele-

ments vanadium, zinc, rubidium and barium.Schneider found that most Metallic Wares from

Tell Brak belonged to group B, which could be rep-resented here by NS 16 and NS 19. The latter sample

has high values for A1, K and Co (among other ele-

ments), that may indicate another centre of produc-tion in the same region which produced low Ca

clays. While these few analyses can add little to the

buik of.schneider's results, it is interesting (and pos-

sibly significant) to note that the one calcareous sam-

ple had a distinctive red surface, while a probablegroup B sample was from a larger vessel with heavierte-pe.. Is it possible to engage in reverse engineer-

ing with Schneider's chemical data to determine an

arihaeological / typological basis for these groups?

The 'south Mesopotamian' samples are keptdistinct from the others on the basis of typologywhich is also supported by petrographic observa-

tions of their distinct nature. These vessels occurrarely at TeIl Brak, while they are well known fromthe south. They show a general similarity, althoughnot enough to suggest that they were made in the

same place.In summari zing thLe chemical data two distinct

issues must be kept in focus. In many ways the easier

to consid.er is the question of raw materials and howmethods of preparation changed over time' The ear-

liest samplei, tio* the Halaf period, are some of the

finest in tut-t of clay from any period at Tell Brak,

but as sample MU 1 demonstrates, with pellets of

clay, Halaf Potters may have exploited a distinct,orr." rather thao or as well as, using particularmethods of production. The Halaf sample BK 1 sug-

gests that ai least by this period the19 was trade inIeramics. The Middle and Terminal Uruk samples

may be considered one group on the basis of chemi-

cal composition. It is interesting to note that severalof the vessels in the imported category for these twoperiods are medium-sized bowls. MU 1.4, TU 3 andtU 9 ur" all bowls that do not seem ideal from thestandpoint of transport. While one can easily sug-gest that the spouted vessel (TU 12) was a containerthat travelled, medium-sized bowls would not have

their contents easily secured. Their size would also

factor against them being used as a lid. More likelyis that these vessels were traded on their own meritsalone. A11 the above bowls are also distinct in thinsection, as they had mica (as did the Halaf sampleMU 2).

A large shift in chemical composition takes place

in the Ninevite 5 period. A number of vessel shapes

are modified or introduced, and there is a shift intheir raw materials. During this period one findsvessels made from a low clay source that is consist-

ent with modern mud bricks' Does this perhaps in-dicate that there was an expansion of the Potter'scraft at this time, perhaps using materials that pot-ters of earlier periods did not use? Whatever thecase, vessels of the high clay type (perhaps levigated)were also made at this time. Heavy basalt-temperedvessels may not first occur during this period, butseveral samples indicate that there is more than one

production centre involved.The later third-millennium samples, in keeping

with their mass-produced generally wheel-mademethod of manufacture, have generally homogene-

ous fabrics. A cooking vessel made with a low clay

paste attests the survival of Ninevite 5 traditions,and a very fine red bowl indicates trade (interest-

ingly, as in the Middle-Terminal Uruk period, it is amedium-sized bowl) along with the potential tolevigate very Pure clay, assuming that such a pureclay does not occur naturally elsewhere' The second

miilermium, like the preceding later third-millen-nium 'age of empire', shows a standardized paste,

with one important difference. During this periodthere is u gt"it"t reliance upon low clay pastes' The

majority of these changes, especially considering the

huge numbers of ceramics at the site, are probablynoi due to significant changes in raw materials' In-stead, these changes argue for different methods ofclay preparation over time, althougJr admittediy thisis one irea of investigation that the archaeological

record is unlikety to preserve. In order to obtain amore detailed picture of this Process, quantities oflocal materials must be treated in a variety of ways

in replication experiments to obtain comparativechemical results.

.-).)+

Ceramics and Society

Infrared (reflectance) examination of selectedsamples (Figs. 8.3-8.4)

As part of an ongoing research Program at the De-

partment of Earth Sciences at the University of Cali-fornia at Santa Ctuz, arange of ceramic samples was

examined from Tell Brak using IR (reflectance)' In-frared (IR) studies in archaeology have been appliedto a limited range of materials and are most oftenassociated with archaeological amber (Beck &Shenrran 1991; Beck et al. 1965).IR is increasinglyused to characterize geological materials (e.g. Williams& Cooney 1992;Williams & Knittle1996)- IR (reflect-

ance) has only recently become widely available, as

modern equipment can reduce analytical time to sev-

eral minutes per sample rather than anhour or more'With a minirnum of sample preparation and analy-sis time IR (reflectance) can be an important addi-tion. Because this technique has not been frequentlyapplied to archaeological cerarnics, a short introduc-tion is required to define its characteristics.

The area of the spectrum extending from 0.8 to200 pm (12,500-50.*-r) is known as the infrared (IR)

region. This region can be further subdivided intoregions that offer different analytical possibilities'Tlie three main regions are the near infrared (12,500-

4000 cm;1), mid-infrared (4000-650 cm 1) and far in-frared (650-50 cmr). IR analysis of minerals usuallyuses the region between 2.5-5A pm (4000-200 cmr).In contrast to X-ray analysis, IR is sensitive to short-range ordering. Absorption of IR by a mineral is

associated with the vibrational and rotational mo-tion of molecules (Williams 1995). For silicates, thespectral range from 500-1200 cm-1 is primarily sensi-

tive to the structure of the aluminosilicate frame-work of the ceramic: the degree to which silicatetrahedra are lilked to one another (an effect con-

trolled by the alkali and alkaline-earth concentra-

tion), and the aluminium content of the sample. Each

exercise controls the morphology of the spectra. As a

result, this technique cannot generate a precise chemi-

cal characterizahonof a sample, and is more akin tochemical fingerprinting. These fingerprints/ or spec-

tra, give information about the bonding environ-ments and functional groups present in the samples'What this means for ceramic materials is that thismethod gives an indication of both the raw materialsand the firing history. Samples require little prepa-ration for IR (reflectance) in that an unweatheredsurface is presented by the region that was sampledfor thin section. In other cases the surface of thesample can be scraped to remove weathered layers'This saves considerable time over other methods of

sample preparation for IR that involve powderingthe sample and moulding it into a pellet or suspend-ing it in a medium, and it is completely non-destruc-tive. The whole sample canbe positioned in open airwhile a beam is projected onto the region of interest'Most samples from Tell Brak; due to the reflectanceof the samples, required no more than several min-utes of analysis. Several analyses of the same sampleyield comparable results, and samples that werechemically distinct, on the basis of ICP analysis, also

generated distinct spectra. In effect, the reflectancetechnique provides a rapid method for fingerprint-ing the mineralogic make-up of a ceramic sample,and as such records a suPerposition of the samplematerial related to the firing history.

Figure 8.3 shows that the spectra are distinctivefor each sample. The upper spectrum is from LTM 9

(A1103: a rould base sherd) which was later chemi-cally characterized and found to be consistent withSchneider's group B. The middle spectrum is fromLTM 3, which has a composition that is consistentwith Schneider's group A. The last spectrum, whichmatches LTM 3 so closely it is within the range ex-

pected from the same sample, is the second-millen-nium faience sample, SM 7. It is clear that furtherwork - on a number of faience samples using sev-

eral analytical techniques - is required fully to de-fine the issues involved, but this similarity indicatesthat the raw materials and firing histories of the twosamples are comparable.

Figure 8.4 presents another significant compari-son. The top spectrum is a waster from the MiddleUruk period, MU 13. The bottom spectrum is fromthe later third-miliennium period, LTM 14 (beaker

with a hard green body). This is a very significantcomparison, as it bears out an observation that can

be made by eye, and taken little further. Both sam-ples appear to use the same raw materials. This isgeneratly bome outby the ICP analysis, which showsthat most elements are Present in comparableamounts barring calcite, which was not measured inthe spectra. The spectra also indicate that the twosamples have been fired to a similar temperaturerange which has been broadly indicated by colour'From the archaeological evidence, the Midd1e Urukwaster was clearly a mistake, but what of the laterthird-miilennium vessel? By this time there was a

large-scale production of waterproof vessels, firedto i high temperature. Perhaps by the later third-millerLrLium period those fuing the ceramics had mas-

tered temperatures that in earlier periods would have

led to a useless vessel. While further work needs tobe done to clariSr the role IR (reflectance) can ptay, it

335

Chapter 8

e

cq-

Cqo

1100 1000

Wavenumber cm-1

Figure 8.3. IR spectra. Top: Metallic Ware, LTM 9.

Middle: MetallicWare (aariant), LTM 3.

represents a significant advance over other tech-niques in its ability to characterize raw materialsand firing environment with a minimum of samplepreparation and analysis time.

Ceramics and society in Mesopotamia

An important consideration in appreciafing the so-

cial context of the ceramics from Tell Brak is thedistinction between a household industry and a

workshop industry. Examples of these two indus-tries can be found from all periods, but the majorquestion is when a transition occurred between thetwo modes of production. The concept of the freeartisary who moves from place to place, may not be

applicable in the span of time covered by these sam-ples. Zaccagnini (1983, 264) proposes that it is onlyduring the first millennium ec that this form of or-ganization begins to emerge:

What presumably existed at this time was a transi-tionai stage between all-embracing state organiza-tions which centralize and monopolize all avaTTable

Wavenumber cm-1

Figure 8.4. IR spectra. Top: Middle Urtrk'waster', MU13. Bottom: lqter third millennittm, LTM 74.

specialized skills within the realm of permanentdependence links, on the one hand, and a situationwhere (highiy) specialized craftsmen offer theirskills and bargain with the most suitable employerfor a defined span of time and/or for specific pro-fessional tasks, on the other.

With the first miiiennium BC taken as the somewhatarbitrary endpoint of pervasive state control, thereremains the question of the kind of organizaion thatexisted before this period. As defined by Peacock(1982,2+-6), household and workshop industries pro-duce distinctive wares. Ceramics produced in a sin-gle household can be characterized as products thatrequire little technology ald capital investment. Thisis where the problembegins. One can easily separate

the overall ceramic assemblage from Tell Brak intosimple categories. High-fired fine wares are clearlynot the product of a single family for its own use.But what of coarser wares? By definition a singlehousehold would produce hand-built pottery, madewithout the use of a wheel, which would have con-stituted a major investment. The range of firing tem-

100011001204

JJO

Ceramics and SocietY

peratures and environments would also be limited,is a single fr-tly would not support the cost of

building or operating a kiln. A determination must

be mad! reglrding early hand-built pottery fired

under controlled, but crude, conditions' The earliest

ceramics we have in quantity from Tell Brak from

the Middle Uruk period cannot simply be consid-

ered the products of a number of single homes, as

there areilear styles, distinct shapes, methods, and

materials. Uniik; the relatively abundant pictorialevidence for a variety of crafts found on ancient

Egyptian tombs, Mesopotamia offers little hard evi-

dlnie for the role various crafts played in the con-

text of the society as a whole, and, as a result, there

are a number of theories that explain the transitionbetween individual (household) and otganized(workshop) production.

Ntsenltgz+) proposes a hierarchically-organ-ized structure in existence by the Late Uruk period,

noting a centralized production of pottery and seals'

It was during this period that a specialized divisionof labour improved the efficienry of production and

effectively utilized unskilled labour' In contrast,

Wright & Johnson (1975), summarizing their worko., Jit", in the Susiana Plairu propose that by the

Middle Uruk period pottery and other goods were

produced in lirge workshops. They note that kilns-and

waste products from pottery manufacture were

centralized on larger mounds and are absent from

smaller settlements, In this system manufactured

goods moved from large settlements-torural settle-

irents, while agriculturalproducts and labour moved

to regional ..ttttu". Certain goods were produced at

few slites, and the administrative structure was prin-cipally concerned with exchange. Food-productionand tire mobilization of labour were divided into

units at the local, intra-community, and regional lev-

els. Adams (1981.), focusing on the sites in the Iraqiplains, found production debris on many sites span-

ning all sizes' He found evidence for specialized

prof,uction centres, but considered it to be primarilyLased on differences in local resources' Specializa-

tion within comrnunities played a lesser role' Ex-

change of goods took place among regionallyspecillized froducers, baied in households, rather

than under ientralized control. The critical point of

these rnodels - barring Adams' - is the time when

household production gave way to some form ot

centralized control.The status of the potter at this time is also an

important consideration. In many modern societies

*h"r" pottery is still made, potters and those who

practise othei crafts often have low status' Those

who do not have enough agricultural land to sup-

port themselves make pots, which offers less stabil-

ity than the relatively regular income from crops'

Potters also have the added difficulty of convertingtheir wares into food. In the case of medieval Britain,

where good documentary evidence exists, potters

often held insufficient land to farm, from 1-1'5 acres'

Above this threshold of property, the manufacture

of ceramics was abandoned (Le Patourel 1968, 110)'

The social status of potters is also indicated in the

lease of a pottery shop in Oxyrhynchus, Egypt, fromthe third ientury an. The document outlines that inexchange for space, pottery tools, kilns, clays, and

fuel, the pottei will supply the landlord with a set

number of lutt that would be used to contain wineproduced by the landlord. The potter would also

i'rire other labourers to work, perhaps to coincide

with periods of less activity on the land (Cockle

7gS7,b0-92). There is evidence to suggest that pot-tery in Mesopotamia was pursued as an adiulct to

ot(er labour. Waetzolt (797L) notes for the Ur IIIperiod that potters, described here as in earlier texts

as a specifii gtoup of specialists, also worked on

canals and in the fieids' It appears during periods oftemple administration that many aspects of daily,orfrttu were carefully otgantzed. It is therefore not

surprising that ceramic manufactur" Tuy have been

u ,"urorrull occupation, as least for a fraction of the

potters. Changes in decorative patterns are observ-

ublu fto- ethnographic observations of non-special-

ist potters compared to professional fi.rll-time speciaLists

(London 7ggi, 2oZ). A detailed exarnination of the

Tell Brak assemblage may reveal similar trends'The use of heavy organic temper, particularly

in Middle Uruk through Ninevite 5 periods, at TelI

Brak also has implications for the seasonal produc-tion of at least some pottery. Howard (1981,25) notes

that seed irnpressions in British ceramics from all

period.s, parti^cularly the early Neolithic, suggest thatiutumn was the preferred season for forming and

firing vessels throughout prehistory' Cluy and tem-

per irould have been prepared in th9 late summer,

and vessels would have been formed after harvest-

ing and threshing- While one could argue-that ves-

seis could be made at any time of year, when need

demanded, a seasonal production of vessels wouldcorrespond with an amenable climate for drying, an

abundance of organic material from farming and' as

noted in what little textual evidence there is to sup-

port the production of pottery, a time that is rela-

tvely ft"e o{ the burdeni of tending croPs that have

already been harvested. During the Syrian winterwith tire well-known extremes of rain, clay vessels

3J/

Chapter 8

would take considerable time to dry, and the storageof dry fuel would pose particular problems. Villag-ers near Tell Brak only make ovens, the one ceramiccraft to continue apparently unabated past the intro-duction of metal and plastic, at the end of the rainyseason. It was also clear that those who made ovensdid not depend upon their manufacture for theirsole means of supporf and that this seasonal occu-pation added to an income derived from agriculture.

The situation in antiquity may have been muchthe same in that the evidence for a ceramic industryis quite distinct from a Roman model of a profes-sional band of specialist potters who produce terrasigillata as their only means of support. By the Ur IIIperiod (at the latest) potters are recorded as serving,at least in some cases, under the direction of a super-visor in groups of between one and ten individuals(Waetzolt 1971,). At the same time these gangs ofpotters do not appear regularly in the cuneiformrecord. Out of some 17,000 documents from the Eblapalace archive, there are no references to potters as

palace dependants. References to potters occur rarelyin the palace and temple archives from mid-third-millennium south Mesopotamia (Crawford 1991, 131;

Stein & Blackman 1993, 53). While there may nothave been a centralized industry at this stage, thearchaeological record supports a relative conformityof type and technique over time and space. It is clearthat there are much larger questions than simply thedifference between a household and a workshop in-dustry in this case, as the transition from intermit-tent to full-time pottery production may also beassociated with larger trends in the society as awhole.

In modern ethnographic surveys, conducted ina number of different areas, a rise in capital entailsthe abandonment of pottery, as is clear from thenumber of areas in the Near East where traditionalpottery making is all but dead. Indeed, pottery isoften associated with isolated artisans' quarters, oreven separate villages, where the smoke from kilnswould be less disrupting to the population at large.Recent excavations on the Uruk period mound ofAbu Salabikh (Pollock et ql. 7996, 697) have gener-ated evidence to suggest thatpottery production wasconcentrated around the edges of the mound, at thecity wall. The authors assumed that this pattern wasdue to dumping of waste along massive construc-tions, but this disregards the spatial considerationsnecessary for craft communities. Isolation from resi-dential areas was ptobably more often the rule thanthe exception. One stimulus toward the separationof pottery manufachrre from residential areas would

have been the risk of accidental fire. At Ninevehduring the Parthian period there is evidence to sug-gest that some pottery was made in a graveyard(Eiland 7995,70), an area which would have a mini-mum of urban settlement and one that would likelyhave carried a stigma. The case at Nineveh cannotbeconsidered unique, as pottery kilns have a long asso-ciation with graveyards in the Near East (Matson7974,346). Appreciated as far less of an art form thanin the modern Wesf ceramics by their very naturemay have occupied one of the lowest rungs on a listof crafts during much of their history.

Defining a workshop industry, especially fromlater periods, is relatively simple. In this case thepotters derive their entire income from their wares.Ethnographic research in Sardinia also details thekinds of social organization that accompany a shiftto an urban workshop industry. Under the control ofa guild, potters give up certain individual freedomsfor cooperative efforts in raw material extraction andpreparation, as well as assistance during periods ofrnisfortune (Armis 1988, 53). Pottery of a certain quan-tity, quality, and price is produced, and it is herethat craft specialization comes into play. As the re-sult of producing wares of quantity and quality, therewould then be specialization. Wares from a particu-lar potter would be standardized and simplified, as

one would not expect pottery of a very wide numberof distinct shapes, decorative styles and materials,that may not appeal to the market (Rice 1984a, 47;Basalla 1988, 104t-5). As defined by Stein & Blackman(7993, 30), independent specialists produce goodsand services in response to economic, social, or po-litical demand. Attached specialists are dependentupon centralized institutions which provide materi-als, tools, ald sustenance. As a result, their effortsare highly controlled by a narrow 6litg rather thandriven by a larger demand. Based on modern obser-vations, one might expect a tendenry for certain in-dividuals to specialize in a particular kind of pottery.The potter who makes water jars would not nor-mally make the finest wares designed for decorativepurposes.

Another factor to be kept in mind, althoughdifficult to address directly with the Brak evidence,is the role of gender in the production of pottery.Cylinder seals of so-called Jemdet Nasr type fre-quently depict what may be pig-tailed women en-gaged in pottery productiory and there are numerousethnographic parallels to suggest that hand-madecooking vessels may oftenbe made by women withina purely household context, rather than within a

male-dominated f actory context (Gluck 1977 ).

338

Ceramics and Society

The potter's wheelOne of the most important technological develop-ments in cerarnic production was the wheel. Thisdevice is often associated with the development ofthe ceramic industry. New pottery forms that werenot previously possible could be made on a wheel.At the same time, as is clear in this report there is ashift in ceramic pastes that accompanies the use ofthe wheel. There have been few attempts to discussthe history of wheel forming in Mesopotamia.Moorey (7994) largely follows Edwards & Jacobs'(1986, 53-5) study of the use of the wheel in Syro-Palestine in assigning broad dates to the use of thewheel in forming ceramics. In the earliest phases,from the Early Neolithic to the Halaf period, potterycould be formed on mats or by using bowls as mouldsfor the base and as pivots for slow turning. From thelater Halaf period, pots could be made using se-quential slab construction and/or a toumette pow-ered by the potter. The Early Uruk period witnessedthe introduction of a pivoted wheel turned by anassistant to 15-20 rpm. At these speeds vessels couldnot be formed from the clay using centrifugal forcealone. From the earlier second millennium BC cen-trifugal force became a factor, as it was provided bya kick wheel powered by the potter's feet (Moorey7994, 748-9). A major difficulty in reconstructingancient forrning technologies is that there have beenfew wheels (stone pivots and sockets) recovered,and of those there is difficulty determining whatkind of platform was used to throw vessels. This hasa direct bearing upon how momentum was main-tained or charged, and ultimately upon the finalspeeds attained (Amiran & Shenhav 1984). For allperiods one cannot consider the introduction of a

new method of wheel formilg as quickly replacingprevious methods.

Vandiver & Lacovara (1985-86,60) found thatthe development of wheel technology in ancientEgypt was surprisingly siow. Both coarse and finewares were formed using sequential slab construc-tion from the Predynastic period to at least the OldKingdom. The rate of the change between hand andwheel construction lagged behind changes in shapeor decoratioru which may be more dependent upontaste than motor habits. In order to change the cra{tas a whole, new methods of organization had to beintroduced. Perhaps there was a transition from thesmall-scale production of pottery to meet immediateneeds, to the large-scale wheel forming and firing ofvessels for a more complex society. There is stillmuch debate as to the spread of wheel-forming tech-nology over time. Franken {7974, 3A) observes that

the large-scale use of the fast wheel in the Syro-Palestinian pottery assemblage can be correlated withthe Assyrian invasions of the seventh century nc. Ifone can suggest such a late date for the large-scaleuse of the wheel into this region, what of Mesopota-mia?

A number of important issues are raised by theinkoduction of the wheel into forming ceramic ves-sels. One of the most obvious relates to shape. It isclear that there are certain vessel forms that are char-acteristic of wheel forming and not of hand building.That this should be so may relate to the physicalproperties of forming clay using rotation, but thereare other factors that may play a role. Why are somebowl forms similar to lathe-turned wooden vessels?There is the possibility that wooden vessels mayhave served as a model, or perhaps that both thepotter's wheel and lathe have sirnilarities that influ-ence the final product. It is easily appreciated that a

Iathe for turning wood is little different from a pot-tery wheel, and once the basic concept of using rota-tional power was realized, both industries would beinfluenced. This was made particularly clear when Iobserved modern wooden bowls being turned inAleppo and Damascus. Although wood is archaeo-logically nearly invisible, wooden vessels were usedin Syria -

particularly in rural areas - during thelast century (Kalter 1982, ftg. 257) and are still com-mon. Modern techniques of turning wood havechanged little, so that many shapes with angular lipsand feet, which are familiar from ceramic forms, arecurrently produced in wood (Ditmer 7994, 6A).Mod-ern reconstructions of Roman lathe technology dem-onstrate that vessels of metal, glass and soft stonecould be successfully fashioned on a lathe (Brown7976, 34-5, figs. 33-4). In replication experiments,the rotation was generated by an assistant turning a

crank, but other methods of powering the lathe, us-ing weight, are also possible. There is sparse mate-rial evidence for a relationship between wood andceramic industries for any period. At Tell Brak, onlyMU 9 bears a wood-grained finistu and there are nocontemporary wooden vessels available for compari-son to vessels that have a lathe-turned appearance.One is left to speculate about how methods of turn-ing wooden bowls related to contemporary ceramictechniques.

Samples subjected to thin-section analysis werecarefully examined by eye and with a low-poweredbinocular rnicroscope. As part of this examination a

determination of wheel forming has also been made(see the section on Petrography for more details). Asthere is no way reliably to tell the difference between

339

Chapter 8

Period MU TUWheel-formed 11 13

Not wheel-formed 13 8

vessels that have been formed on a wheel and those

that have been finished on a wheel, these two cat-

egories are considered together' The results from the

petrog.aphic tables are surrunarizedby period in the

chart below. Applied elements such has handles andspouts are not included, as even today modern stu-dio potters may not use a wheel to form these parts.

Of the Halaf and Ubaid samples, two Halaf sherds

were wheel-formed (MU 1, BK 3), while the otherwas hand-made (MU 2). MU 4 and BK 4, the Ubaidsherds, show evidence for turning-

with sharp inclusions (Annis & ]acobs 1990, 109)'

This being said, there are clearly optimal pastes forwheel forming that require minimal time on thewheel, and no finger protection. On the basis of thisstudy it seems that the Tell Brak potters did not need

to use an implement to Protect their fingers.There is a clear cfuonological order in the oc-

currence of riliing, which is found in the followingsherds: TIJ 1.2, NS t NS 7, NS 14, LT}l 4, LTM 10,

LTM 14, LTlll{ 17, and SM 1. Despite differences intime, all the wheel-thrown pastes that show evi-dence of rilling have small amounts of fine-grainedmineral temper. None have mineral temper above

the fine sand-size tarrge, and many have very finesand or silt-sized inclusions. They also tend to have

a small amount of organic material. For the laterthird-millennium period in particular rilling is com-

mon, indicating that an optimal wheel-forming paste

was achieved at this time. There is a tendency formineral and organic inclusions to decrease irt size,

particularly in the plain wares, over tirne.Wheel-thrown vessels, particularly during ear-

lier periods, tend to have a smaller size range ofmineral inclusions. Organic inclusions in paste reci-pes vary considerably over time. Mixtures with largeamounts of organic material, over 10 per cent, werenot thrown on a wheel until the exceptional sample

SM 10, which aPpears to use a different kind oforganic inclusion. Pastes with 10 per cent organic

-it".iul could either be thrown or not. During thelater third-millennium period all vessels with 10 percent organic material were thrown, barring vessels

with a .or"tu mineral-tempered paste- The paste mix-ture of hand-built vessels also underwent a change

over time. There are vessels made from very fineclay/temper mixtures amenable to wheel formingthat were apparently made using other means (TU

18 for example). This suggests that some potteryworkshops either used wheel and hand forming tech-

niques for different vessels at the same place, or thatopiimal wheel-forming pastes were provided tohind-building workshops. For instance, if a largestorage ,r"rsel *ut required, it could be made in the

samJplace, and using the same Paste, as wheel-thrown vessels, but formed by using slabs or coils'This transition from hand-built vessels to the large-

scale production of wheel-thrown pottery occurs over

time, but is predominant by the later third-millen-nium perioa. ft-tit is much later than many have

urr.r*"d, and the transition to large-scale wheel-

formed production was much more thal a suddentechnological development that swept all other meth-

ods aside, This transition required the production of

340

NS LTM SM13 13 10

931

As is clear, there is a steady trend towards wheelmade vessels through time, even when sample bias

is taken into consideration. For the Ninevite 5 and

later third-rnillennium periods, there was an effortto concentrate upon coarse vessels and cooking w;Ires

that tend not tb be formed on a wheel. There isevidence to suggest tha! in the Early and MiddleUruk periods, vessels were largely finished using aslow wheel. For the Late Uruk period there is evi-dence ihat jar rims were finished using a wheel,while large body sherds show evidence of hand-modelling (Fielden 1987, 757). By the later third-millennium period most vessels were made using a

fasi wheel. ninittg rnay be the most diagnostic fea-

ture of forming on a fast wheel- Modern studio pot-ters have found that the spacing of the ridging can

be varied by varying the speed of the wheel or the

rate the hands' rise. In addition, one of the most

important factors regarding the depth of the ridgesis the index finger. If the end of the index finger-is

used alone there wlti be deeper ridges than if the

entire side of the finger is used (Colbeck 1975,96)'

Barring the question of the position of the fingers inantiquity, riliing indicates the use of a distinct form-ing metirod that involves greater rotation than thatrequired for finishing a vessel. Its expression is cer-

tainly determined by the consistenry of the clay/temper mixture, as is clear from the petrographiciable. This is not to say that some other fabrics are

impossible to throw on a wheel. The use of grog or

,urrd t"^p"rs is possible on a wheel, as they are

pushed into the body of the vessel during forming'bepending upon the amount of water being used, a

seli stp t Lpiaty formed that makes forming a roughpaste easier. Modern potters in Sardinia use a flat,

iound wooden rib on the outside of the pot to pro-tect the fingers from scratches while throwing a paste

Ceramics and SocietY

suitable pastes, perhaps the organization of space

for large-icale workshops, and, even more difficult,overcoming the innate conservatism of potters'

Part o"f this conservatism could be due to the

ease of making pottery in moulds. South American

potters continue to make pottery ":ilg- two piece

moulds. Pottery can be made in moulds by an indi-vidual with little or no experience with clay' Produc-

tion time is decreased from several hours for many

forms of hand-built pottery, such as coil or paddle-

forming, to about ten to twenty minutes using amould, or 36 to 42 vessels in a sevenhour day (Arnold

7g8g,204-6). The largest amount of time required is

for drying as while ilay in a mould dries, no other

pottery can be made with that mould. In contrast, a

,rery simple mould, such as aregalarized hole in the

ground, iould be duplicated with little-thought or

Iost, so that drying time is not a problem' Wheel

forming offers the possibility of making hundreds of

pieces if various thup"t in a day (Curtis 7962, 493)'

but, in order for this number of vessels to be pro-duced, there would have to be a steady supply ofraw materials, space to dry the vessels, kilns and

fue1. The transition to wheel forming may then in-volve much more than a change in vessel formingtechnology. Organization along the lines of an in-dustry is requiied to make full use of the wheel's

potential.

Organic temperBelause a number of vessels from the Middle toTerminal Uruk periods make extensive use of or-

ganic temper, if is critical to understand the role

Srganic miterials play in a ceramic paste- The firstani perhaps the mbstcritical aspect of adding chaff,

a term rrt"d hut" to denote organic temPer of a small

size as opposed to straw, to a clay, particularly the

clay avaiiible from the region of the telf may hav-e

been workability' In a number of experiments at Tell

Brak using clay recovered from the Wadi Raad and

surroundirg ateas, it was clear that the clay needed

temper in oider to render it less sticky' Chaff was an

imptrtant addition to the paste to prevent sticking

to ihe hands and to the working surfaces' If a dust-

ing of chaff was not applied to the working surface,

sla'bs of clay or vessels would often adhere' Stress

during fuing may also encourage the use of organic

temper. Vessels fired in a bonfire experience great

differences in temperature that in untempered clay

vessels led to fracturing'Organic temper also directly effects the proper-

ties of tle ressel ifter it has been formed and fired'Modern scientific studies record organic temper be-

ing used in various cultures for very different rea-

sons. The most obvious post-firing applicability of

organic temper is to create vessels with very perme-

able walls that will be suitable for cooling water' Inthis case the voids left by the organic material willcreate a surface that allows water to pass with some

resistance, so that the surface of the vessel will have

a thin film of water that evaporates and cools the

vessel and its contents. Schiffer (1988,27) notes thatin many cases a potter will seiect a clay/temper thatis less permeable. Experiments have found that once

a threihold of permeability has been passed, and

more than a thin film of water is on the surface of the

vessel, performance is not increased.It is clear that the use of organic temper in a

vessel is governed by a number of factors and, forurry -."ss"1 of a particular function, the potter could

rely upon any one or combination of a range offeatures. In the case of the ceramics from TelI Brak,

there was probably less concern for the post-firingproperties of organic materials. Many-of the heaviest-orgit

i.-t"*pered vessels were from the Middle and

Terminal Uruk period and were clearly not for waterstorage. Because of their characteristic shape, and

not infrequent carbon stains, they were almost cer-

tainly ,t"d fo, cooking. Voids left by burned-outorganic inclusions can, like aplastic inclusions such

as-rock fragments, arrest the development of cracks,

which is important in a cooking vessel that is regu-

larly heated. Unlike a mineral-tempered vessef an

orgrrri.-t"-pered vessel can be considerably lighter,utt"d u ,l.rtttbe. of nomadic grouPs have used or-

ganic-tempered vessels apparently b-ecause of theiriighter *eight (Skibo et a\.1989,123). The latter studyalio noted that organic-tempered vessels were un-

suitable for boiling water, but is this to mean thatthey are also unsuitable for cooking? It is clear thatfrom Tell Brak there are a number of the so-called

casseroles that, from all appearances/ were cooking

vessels. Bumed-out organic material also leaves a

surface that is inherently uneven, and unless the

vessel is coated it will not have good abrasion resist-

ance,Heawy organic-tempered vessels from Tell Brak

are not .out"d with bitumen, as they are in south

Mesopotamia (Forbes 1964,88)- In this case bitumenis taken to embrace a wide range of petroleum prod-ucts. Unlike the south, where petroleum was rela-

tively common, and could therefore be used as an

inexpensive coating, the north relied upon the use of

slips and paint, and later glazing, to insure that liq-uid contents of a vessel would remain intact' At the

site of Hacrnebi, Stein ef ql. (7996) record bitumen

347

Chapter 8

residue on 54 sherds, and in most cases it appears to

be used as a waterproofing agent on the interior ofthe vessel. Bitumen has rarely been reported fromlocal Late Chalcolithic sites in southeast Anatolia,

although it is common in south Mesopotamia. It could

be eittrer traded from that region, or have been a

packaging material. Preliminary chemical analysis

suggests that it is from the Hit source in Mesopota-mli(Stein et al. 1996, 217). Yan As & jacobs (1992,

541-3) also note the use of crude oil as a fue1 formodem pottery kilns in northern Baghdad' The onlyevidence for bitumen at TeIl Brak was a small frag-ment recovered from Middle Uruk levels (Aa108:3)

that was probably a basket lining. Due to limitationsof supply, and perhaps tradition, this fuel was ap-

parently not used at ancient Tel1 Brak.

Ceramic technology through time at Tell Brak

The H al af I Ub ai d p er io ds

Work on Halaf ceramics has so far focused largelyon the finer wares, with little consideration of the

coarser wares. Tell Aqab in northeast Syria shows 40

per cent plain wares (Davidson & Watkins 1981,7),

whlle Giiikihacryafl in southeast Turkey had87 per

cent plain wares (Watson & Le Blanc 1990, 68)' Allthe Halaf /Ubaid samples from Tell Brak are cleariyof the finer fabric. No coarser wares from this periodwere identified. As a result it is too early to begin a

comparison between the ceramic technology of thisand later periods, but some general comments on

the fabric of th" fio"t wares can be made' By eye the

fabric of these samples is most sirnilar to the ceram-

ics from the finer Ninevite 5 period wares, although

the shapes of the latter are very different' Petro-

graphicilly the two Halaf samples (MU 7-and2) ate

distinct. MU Z has pellets of clay and is hand-built,and has a paste with few fine sand-sized inclusions'

MU t has striations from wheel turning at some

point in its formation' It has finer inclusions in the

iorrt" silt size range, but there are considerably more

aplastics. It has no trace of clay pellets,-but has fine

rir-d-tlr"d fragments of grog instead of clay pellets'

ICP analysis indicates that these two samples are

quite distinct, as MU 2 is the most distinctive sample

of tmr small group, with high Al, Fe, Mg and Kamong other elements. The Ubaid sample (MU 4)

differJ from the main, chemically defined, group ofsamples (MU 1, BK 3, 4).In thin section it has amajority of calcite grains in the fine sand size range/

and has a grain of amphibole, that suggests al igne-

ous rock t6rrt." for a flaction of the temper' There is

also a trace of shell. For such a small group of sam-

ples, this group shows a divergence from the local

ilay control group, along with petrographic and

chemical variabilitY.Hala{ ceramic production has been investigated

chemically to determine the nature of productionfrom several sites, and to define the extent of trade.

At the site of Arpachiyah (Davidson & McKerrell1980) three clay types were represented, which cor-

respond with a stylistic analysis based on early, mid-dle and late periods. During the Ubaid period therewas another major shift in chemical compositior;and the majority of samples resemble each otherrather than earlier wares. The Middle Halaf compo-sition is consistent with a mud brick sample fromthe site. The ceramics from this site were found to be

variations on a local source. The situation for Tepe

Gawra is distinct. The majority of sherds of the Halafand Ubaid periods examined from this site belong to

a single compositional group. The change in stylebetween the Halaf and Ubaid periods was not ac-

companied by a change in clay source. A group ofArpachiyah-like sherds, making up 30-40 per cent

of the painted pottery from that site, is composi-

tionally consistent with material from that site, prob-ably from the later phase of the Haiaf period' There

is no evidence for pottery imported earlier than then

at this site, and the pottery vessels for everyday use

were not Arpachiyah imports (Davidson & McKerrell7980,163). This evidence supports the presence of alarger ceramic industry at Arpachiyah, as proposedby-Mallowan & Rose (1935,705-6) on the basis of

"rrid"t." for a potter's shop, with shelves, bone tools,

and red ochre. During this period, Halaf ceramic

industries could be of household production, where

pottery was made for the use of one household, or ofa household industry, where pottery was made for a

group larger than the family or even the community'itr"ri difierent kinds of industries may exist at the

same time in one place or, as the chemical evidence

suggests, may be site-specific- The major question is

-h"tl't", this irnplies any change in social organiza-

tion.If the archaeological evidence is confusing, an-

thropological evidence may clear some of the uncer-

tainty. As an industry that survived until recently, at

least urttil the late L970s, al Iranian example pro-vides many important parallels (Gluck 1977)'Intheprovinces of Seistan and Baluchistaru the village ofkalporegar,, aboui 35 km south of Saravan, produced

potiery lhat ,ese-bled wares of the fifth to thirdmillennia ec. A locally obtained hard clay was

crushed and sieved and mixed with twice that

amount of similarly prepared soft ciay' The mixture

342

Ceramics and Society

was left in water overnight. Pottery was formed on awooden board or dish about 30 cm in diameter, us-ing a tournette. Small pieces of clay were rolled andapplied, or added to the body wall in sheets thatwere finished with a paddle and scraped. There areseveral pictures of women making pottery that isbeing formed by turning the unfinished vessel in abowl (Gluck 7977, M). Although the turning speedsare not high enough to form a vessel from a lump ofclay, the turning can smooth the surface of the ves-sel, leaving characteristic marks. The vessels wereburnished and left to dry. Each woman would make40 or 50 pots before communally firing them in apalm trunk and palm waste fue. Pots were not gradedaccording to differences in colour, and were madewith no makers' marks. Despite the lack of theseidenti{zing marks, pots were sold by the makers onthe spot.

This kind of ceramic industry may reflect Halafforming methods and organization. The clay wasmixed in surprisingly small batches, and left to soakfor a short period of time, with no real preparation.This is consistent with the distinctive pellets foundin MU 1. At the same tirne there would be traditionsto promote some consistency in cerarnic productioryand there would be no factory environment to pro-vide standard raw materials or impose particularforming techniques. The composite forming methodalso sounds a warning, as a seemingly labour-inten-sive method was used to produce a vessel that wouldbear marks from turning, but would not be wheelformed (for a modern tournette from the BomboretValley, Pakistan see Rye & Evans 1976, pl. 1). Aproper tournette is not required, although aboard,another vessel, or even a mat can be used.

Unpatterned mats are traditionally used in Syriaas work surfaces in the household, or for makingpottery (Kalter 1.982, L08). There is also the questionof vessel identification. While the Iranian vessels werenot marked to designate the owner, many of the finewares from the Halaf period are painted, makingaccurate identification of the maker easier. A signifi-cant difference between the ethnographic descrip-tion of the recent Iranian material and the Halafperiod pottery is that the latter was fired in kilns.Halaf period kilns have been recovered from severalsites, including Yarim Tepe (Merpert & Munchaev7973) and Tell Hassan (Quarantelli 1985, 31-3). Thesurfaces and probable degree of vitrification of theTell Brak samples are consistent with kiln firing.

One cannot assume that this kind of produc-tion operated for all ceramic types or in all areas. Itshould also be noted that a change in pottery tech-

nology may not correspond with a shift in socialstructure, or at least one that can be identified thou-sands of years after the event. Without makers'marks, as for the Iranian example, one cannot rea-sonably postulate a communal firing. There is alsothe question of how one defines a workshop. Does itrefer to a space where a number of workers areengaged in making pottery, does it refer to the socialorganization of the potters, or does it more fullydescribe pottery of a similar style and technique?One wonders how the ethnographic evidence fromIran would be interpreted archaeologically. Clarityis not added by textual references, sparse as theyare, or well-published Mesopotamian pottery work-shops (Moorey 1,994,748; Postgate 7990,10H).

The Middle Uruk periodIt may not be out of place to begin a discussion of thepottery from this period by making several generalobservations about all ceramics recovered from theexcavations. This period can be characterizedby alarge number/ over 50 per cent of the corpus, ofreddish undecorated wares. While the surfaces oftenshow some attempt at smoothing that obscures iden-tification of inclusions by eye, thin-section studiesshow that the majority are predominantly organic-tempered. A number bear carbon stains that indicatethey were used for cooking. The surfaces of tl-re ves-sels are generally more finished than the TerminalUruk/Ninevite 5 ceramics, excepting fine wares,where a number of examples show finger model-ling. Shell-tempered wares are common. Lime andshell can be calcined, so that it fractures easily, atlow temperatures that are obtainable in a simpleopen fire (Wingate 1985, 10). It is interesting to specu-late on where this temper was obtained. There arefew snail shells represented, with the majority frombivalves. Shells can be obtained in quantity from thelocal wadi, and some of the workmen noted thatshells are easier to collect when the water is lower.This corresponds to the dry suruner months andlends further support for the seasonal production ofat least some of the pottery. The large amounts ofshelly-tempered ware may also suggest it was a foodsource. Due to the Islamic prohibition against eatingritually unclean animals, such as clams, they are notused as a food today. Large-scale irrigation usingcanals may have offered the perfect environment forraising large numbers of clams.

Another significant question to address early isthe general lack of lids from this and later periods.From a purely practical standpoint, this is an oddomission. Both food and water would be susceptible

343

Chapter 8

to contamination from dust and insects without be-ing covered. Lids may have been made of wood andtherefore do not survive in the archaeological record.There is also the possibility that a number of vessels

with lugs were designed to secure a lid of leather orother pliable material, or that the lips on a number ofvessels had a waist in order to secure a leather lid.Cerarnic plugs (see CT 4 and CT 6) are an option forlong-term storage, but it is unlikely that they wouldbe used for items that require regular access, such as

a water jar. More likely is that vessels served a

number of functions. A good example is providedfrom Iran. The village of Kalporegan (Gl:uck 7977)

once again offers possible parallels' Shapes from thisvillage include various jugs and bowls, and manyinclude covers that can also be used as vessels. Forinstance, a drinking bowl can cap a water jar- An-other form is a goblet-stemmed bowl on a large jarthat contains nuts and dried fruits, which is served

to guests in its goblet cover. If these vessels werefound separately, as in an archaeological context,there would be almost no chance of their relation-ship being established.

The evidence for the use of vessels as lids maybe deterrnined from wear. Sherds MU 23 and MU 24

both have wear that is consistent with the use of a

lid, and \[IJ 26, with a washed sutface, shows thischaracteristic wear clearly. It is unlikely that a leather

or cloth lid, or one made of wood, would be able towear down the surface of the sherd over time. It willprobably be very difficult to detect wear on the out-ilde of a vessel such as a small bowl" that is a likelycandidate for use as a lid' As the assemblage fromthis period is better documented, tI'rere may be ves-

sels that cal be identified as having dual use.

While the section explaining the chemical analy-

sis has already detailed the salient features of the

paste recipes during this period, there are furtherobservations that can be made about their physicalproperties. In this case these point to the ljmitationsof tt'r" Tell Brak potters. The sample of the handlerecovered from the Middle Uruk period (MU 11)

and the handle from second-millennium levels (SM

8) show differences in the raw materials, but suggest

that the potters did not understand how to counter-act the pioblem of drying shrinkage. As practised byu .rrrrrb", of traditional potters today, when appiy-ing an element to a vessel, different states of hydra-tio*n must be considered. A leather hard vessel, thatcan withstand handles or lugs being added withoutdistortioru is dryer than an element made of the

same paste. As a result, the applied element, if made

from the sarne material, will dry and shrink more

than the vessel, leading to cracking and structuralweakness. In order to counteract this problem, a

potter must add more temper to the applied ele-

ment.This lack of understanding is also evidenced in

other applied elements. The Ninevite 5 vessel spout(NS 6) separated from the body of the vessel. Al1

these applied elements, the handles and the spout,have clay and inclusions that are in keeping withnormal vessel fabrics. Sample NS 6 allowed a directcomparison between spout and vessel fabric. Theywere identical. The Middte Uruk spout that surriveson a vessel intact (TU 12) had been attached whilethe vessel was still wet. In this case, the problem ofdifferential shrinkage has been solved, leaving theproblem of vessel distortion. Differential shrinkage,leading to the separation of applied elements fromthe vessel body, was also a problem at other Urukperiod sites. At Hacrnebi in Turkey, vessels withapplied elements were recovered in small numbers.Few twist handles were found, but none were at-

tached to rim sherds. Droop and conical spouts wereusually separate from vessels (Stein et aI.1996,236).

There is also evidence of composite forrningtechniques, along with different paste recipes, usedto fashion vessels from this period' MU 3 is a goodexample. The base appears to have been pressed in amould, while the upper section of the vessel was

formed by pulling the clay upwards. This techniqueis still used in Pakistal, where the base of largevessels are placed into a mould that is on a wheel.The body of the vessel is added as a coif and is thendrawn up using the rotation to form this section ofthe vessel (Rye & Evans 7976,33).In the case of MU3, it is unclear if this was done using a wheel -perhaps the base was put into a bowl that was usedas a slow pivot - or if the vessel body was mouldedand then built up, by adding coils and pulling theclay upwards, to form the body without using rota-tion. The lip was formed from a single coil/slab ofclay that was wrapped around the vessel- The pastefrom this section was apparently finer than that usedfor the body. MU B is an uncorunon example of a

vessel that was certainly made using sequential slab

construction. Unlike most of the other vessels thatappear to have standardized shapes, pastes, andforming techniques, this vessel could have been madein a home environment. The same is true of the

unbaked vessel found in A4LA8:7. Large numbers ofthese temporary vessels could have been manufac-tured. This sample does not have a paste that is

consistent with vessel fabrics from this period. Theywould leave little trace in the archaeological record

344

Ceramics and Society

of a home industry that may have played a veryimportant part in the everyday lives of most of thetell's inhabitants.

Bevelled-rim bowls were not sampled in quan-tity from the site. One sample (TU 1) was exarnined.It was clearly intrusive into a later third-millenniumlevel. In thin section the small amount of mineraltemper places it in a distinct category from otherUruk wares. It is basically clay, with a natural com-ponent oI quartz mixed with fine sand-sized, andabove, calcite grains and 15 per cent organic temper.Although bevelled-rim bowls could be fired in thesame kilns as other vessels (Killick 1988, 39) thissample suggests that their pastes were distinct. Therelatively large amount of coarse organic temperwould make wheel forming very difficult. Replica-tion experiments suggest that forming such a pasteusing a mould is relatively simple. It is interesting tonote that the sul-dried vessel recovered in unit 44108apparently had all natural mineral temper, with nocalcite, and contained rounded pebbles up to 3 mmlong. Bevelled-rim bowls probably do not rePresenta home production of vessels that have been fired,and are best considered a distinct class of mass-

produced vessel designed for a specific Purpose.More thin sections illustrating this relationship wouldbe most instructive.

There are several vessels from this period thatare distinct enough petrographically and chernicallyto be considered as imports at Brak' While the pres-ence of biotite mica may not be an inJallible guide, itis significant to note that all the vessels that are

distinct chernically from this period contain amountsof biotite mica. There are some samples that appearto be exceptions to this rule, but they contain trace

amounts of mica.Chemically and petrographically the following

samples are considered as imPorts:MU 9 (painted wood-grained surface)' In thin sec-

tion contains biotite. A number of distinctelemental values demonstrated by ICP analy-sis.

MU 14 (black slip). Distinct fabric with biotite' HighFe and Na among other elements.

MU 17 (red-s1ip nose lug). Fabric contains largegrains of muscovite mica and epidote. Lowvalues for many elements'

Several samples are distinct petrographically, buthave not been subjected to ICP analysis:}y'.rJ 24 (very thick rim sherd). There was one grain

of micaceous schist.MU 26 (black wash). Contains 3 per cent biotite.MU 12 (Fig. 8.5: typical Uruk shape) has what ap-

pears to be small grains of biotite on thesurface of the vessel, but in thin section thefabric does not contain any visible biotite,and is consistent with other local samples.

The T erminsl Uruk perio dThere are several general comparisons that can be

made between the wares from this and the MiddleUruk period. Middle Uruk common ware can be

characterized as having a medium rather than a

heavy organic or mineral temper. There are a numberof new shapes, but they increasingly demonstrateevidence of mass production. Fielden (1981, 158)

notes the production of coarse, wheel-made vesselswhose sides flare out from a string-cut base, termedflower pots, from Tell Brak during the Uruk period.A number of bases, from vessels representing a

number of distinct shapes, bear evidence of beingcut from a larger quantity of clay (such as TU 6).

There is good evidence for centralized productionduring the Uruk period- A potters' quarter was exca-vated at Ur. Shallow kilns were found, as well as a

large cerarnic disk 75 cm in diameter, 5 cm thick, andweighing about44kg (Simpson 7997, hg.1). Similarwheels are still used (Orton et aI.1994, fig 10.3). Thewheel had pivot holes on its edge, and would havespun at a slow rate. It would be suitable for formingor finishing the kinds of vessels encountered duringthis period, but one would not expect such a deviceto generate a rilled surface.

Wheel forming of both vessel bodies and bases

is attested by the Terminal Uruk period at Brak. Thetwo following examples should be appreciated as

atypical of the whole Tell Brak assemblage, as thereare few vessels with large bases that have been re-

covered from any period. Both examples were re-covered from trench HS 2 level 1. One large base(A2005), 11.5 cm in diameter, was made of a lightorganic-tempered paste. It was formed on a wheel,as was the vessel body, which was not securely at-tached to the base. There is a separation gap of about2 mm between the two pieces, indicating that con-struction of the vessel took place in stages. The base

appears to have been made first. The vessel was

moulded to fit the base using a paste that containedmore water than the paste used to form the base.

Another base (4.2004.1), originally 8 cm in diameter,is made differently. While both parts are wheel-madewith a similar fabric (by eye), the join between thevessel body and base has received special attention.Instead of an unreinJorced seam, which led to break-age as in the previous vessel fragment, this smallerbase had a quantity of clay wrapped about the seam.

345

Chapter 8

The result was a stronger seam that has not broken.It is interesting to appreciate two examples, appar_ently from one period, in which reinforcement led toa._successful joir! while an unreinforced join failed.When other elements such as handles are consid_ered, one suspects that there was a low level of un_derstanding of how to combat differential dryir"rgghrilkage, and that tradition shied away from joinling leather-hard with wet clay.

Hand-built ceramics are also made. TIJ 7 ap_pears to have a body formed by using coils or slabgbut it also shows striations from finishing on a wheel.Vessels were also cut down, apparentllito decreasewidth.-Cutting was not limited io this period, as thebase of MU & a handmade vessel, upp"r., to be cutt"*i. Sample TU 2 is a good

"*r-pi* Judging fromsherds such as this one, the rough ,rrfu." was notperceived as a negative factor. A suitable tool wasrecovered from Terminal Uruk-Ninevite 5 materialat 470625.It is a small vessel fragment (63 mmlong) possibly even a lid, that has beeir sharpened byconchoidal fractures_ along the curved cutting edge.The rim acts to stabilize the cutting surface. fhere"iswear along the outer surface that is consistent withdrawing across a rough surface. When drawn acrosswet clay, the tool leaves similar marks to those en_countered on ancient vessels. Flowever, not allstriations on the bases of these vessels may be due tocutting. TU 4 is particularly interesting, ai the markscould be due to cutting, or they could arise fromlaytng a finished vessel in a bed of grass to dry. Avessel with a pointed base would be difficult to sup_port when wet. Grass or another suitable materialwould offer support while leaving a minimal amountof scarring.

Because kiln structures from this period arenot well documented, there is little hope o1 making adirect correlation between body colour and type"ofkiln. However, there is a significant shift in colourevidenced in the sampled material. During the Mid_dle Uruk period the majority of samples were Mod-erate Reddish Orange. Black-cored samples were nextin abundance. For the Terminal Uruk period LightOlive Brown predorninates, while Moderate Red-dish Orange and samples with a black core are evenlydivided in number. This introduction suggests agreater use of enclosed kiln structures that can gen-erate reducing conditions. Chemical characteristicsof calcite are also exploited, as the reddish bodycolour of the fabric, particularly when fired in ireducing atmosphere, is counteracted as iron is in-corporated into calcium silicate compounds.

Unlike the sou*u where bitumen was used to

render vessels impermeable, there is sparse evidencefor bitumen in the north.TlJ 79 is a good example ofa vessel with a plaster lining. The iniide of the sherdhas been scored so that the plaster would adhere

llt: Two jar stoppers from this period (CT 4 andCT 5) had paste recipes that were consistent withvessel fabrics and unlike the brick samples. The pasteused for these jar stoppers was not simply obtiinedfrom a ditch.

Possibly imported vesselsChemically and, in some cases, petrographically thefollowing samples are imports:TU 3 (grey medium-sized bowl). Only fine sand_

sized inclusions, distinct ICp results.TU 9 (painted medium-sized bowl). 5 per cent mus_

covite and highest AI for period.

ry 10 (cooking pot). Lowest Al ind high Ca.

TLI 72 (spouted vessel). Distinct ICp relults.TU 17 (painted medium-sized bowl). Distinct ICp

signature.The following samples are petrographically distinc!but have elemental concent utions that are not in-consistent with local samples:TU 11 (red vessel with incised decoration). 1 per cent

biotite.TU 14 (nose-lug body sherd). Trace amounts of ba_

saltic glass.There are also several vessels that are distinctpetrographically, but have not been subjected to ICpanalysis:TU 2 (small buff bowl). Traces of basalt temper.The question of imported vessels is one that can bedivided along two separate lines. For vessels such asmedium-sized bowls, with distinctive fabrics or sur-face treatments, one can understand that the vesselitself may have been the focus of trade. Relying upondistinctive properties, such as decoration/r-rrir.utreatments, hardness, and impermeability to liquids,vessels could be made using a distinctivetechnologythat would defy easy imitation, even if particula*rraw materials were available. The same technologi_cal considerations are true of the cooking wares,which may rely upon special raw materials to offerresistance to thermal shock. In contrast, vessels of amore utilitarian nature suggest the contents werethe focus of trade. The Uruk spouted bowls are agood example. These vessels may have been con_tainers for wine or oil (Algaz e 7993, 74).It is interest_ing to note that the evidence for imported vessels forthis period is biased towards vesseir that were prob-ably traded on their or,rm merits. Medium-sized bowlsare particularly well represented. Does this surpris_

346

Ceramics and SocietY

ing conclusion indicate a higher status of ceramic

materials for this Period?

The Nineaite 5 PeriodEven a cursory examination of the pottery from this

period demonstrates that there has been a signifi-

iant shift in the shapes, materials, and methods used

to form vessels. A number of wares now have littleor no organic temper' There are quantities of bur-

nished, jlpped, painted and incised vessels, and the

ring foot upp"*t in quantity' At the same time there

are"a fracion of vessels that are made with littleconcefft for decoration. The colours of the thin-sec-

tioned vessels continue the same general categories

as the Terminal Uruk period with no wide scale use

of a new colour. The change is in the range of dis-

tinct colours that do not conform to a category' This

may indicate that there is a wider range o{ firings

represented in the assemblage from this period' Does

this indicate that there was a wider production of

vessels by those who were not primarily potters?

Schwafiz (1985, 53) noted that the Ninevite 5

assemblage can be divided into five broad wares'

Two of tie most significant from a technological

standpoint are the incised and painted categories'

the painted wares can be characlerized as straw or

,o-"tit r"t grit tempered, while the incised wares

were high-ired, thin-walIed (3-5 mm), with occa-

sional fine grit or straw inclusions' This indicates an

important Jiff"r"t." between the two types' For the

Tell Brak assemblage, this division is also apparent

when one compares the painted ware with several

incised wares. While the painted ware has a paste

that is typical of many wires from the period, the

incised *ut"t have reieived special attention' Their

fabrics can be characterized as almost pure clay, inmany cases clearly levigated, with little if any added

temper. This shows that the ancient potters Plu"rrgqfor incised vessels by preparing a paste that wouldhave the following considerations: A: it would not

have temper to drag across the surface of the vessel

when it was incised-- B: organic temper would make

the surface of the vessel difficult to smooth, and the

incised decoration would be difficuit to discern' C:

after firing, a heavily organic-temperedvessel tends

to have a delicate surfacJthat canbe easily scratched'

There is particular attention paid to the decora-

tion of much Ninevite 5 fine ware' In contrast to

many of the common wares produced during this

period, decoration of incised/excised wares arc par-

iicularly labour intensive. The surface of NS i-0' simi-

lar to NiS 11, offers a good illustration' Experimental

reconstructions of tlre use of the poin! gouge, and

knife are presented by Shepard (1956, h'gs' 14-15) inreplicating the surfaces of New World pottery' Fur-

thu, "*p"t:i*ents

in reconstructing the tools and tech-

niques used on Ninevite 5 pottery were made by the

urrihor. The first line of decoration was probably

made while the pot was still on a wheel, as it appar-

ently wraps around the circumference of the vessel'

It is usuil for decoration to be applied when the

vessel is in a leather-hard state, but it is possible that

the line was made while the vessel was still wet' Itwas made with a point tool with a working surface

of about 4 mm. Ttrere is evidence that the surround-

ing clay was pushed away from ft9 *t: which has

itJef U-een invaded by later decoration' The excised

space between the bunches of lines has been made

-lttr u blade, about 12 mm long' This tool had

striations on the cutting surface, which are visible inthe trough of the cut- T[e tool was also sharp enough

not to dlsplace any of the surrounding clay, urrlike-

the previous tool, and it may have-been a flake of

obsidian. The beginning of the cut shows where the

knife entered the vessel fabric to a depth of about 2

mm. The end of the cut, which is at the top of the

vessel, is free of the heel that would arise from the

use of the point, as is the case for the next tool'

Instead, the clay was left to break off, probably as

the knife was removed with the tail of clay, leaving a

raggededge on the top of the cut' In considering this

,.f,"o.r it iJ unlikely ihat the potter would be level

with the pot for cutting, and would instead be over

the pot prttittg the tcnlfe ,rp t-h" -surface

of the pot

rathlt than pushing it up (which due to pressure

may also disiort a leather-hard vessel)' The fine lines

be#een the excised spaces, averaging five with one

bunch of six, ur" .rli with a sharp point, with an

effective surface abottt2 mm thick' The angle of the

cut suggests that the tool was held in the right hand'

There are clear areas at the begirming and end of the

stroke that denote lighter Pressure than in the mid-

d1e of the stroke.In sumrnarizing these actions, one can conclude

that there were a mimber of tools used to make the

incised/excised design on this vessel' The potters

may have needed to change their positions' When

using the knife they would need to be over the pot

Uut#hile making thebunches of fine lines they would

need to see the excised space so as not to overlap'

and they must be level with the region of interest' As

this schlme has been executed with great regularity(NS 10 & 11), one can also assume that the maker

was a specialist' While these two sherds share a

..rrrt*o^ decorative scheme, differences emerge in

thin section. NS 10 has no mineral inclusions' while

347

Chapter 8

NS 11 has fine quartz and calcite inclusions (withhematite) and trace amounts of mica that may indi-cate it was imported. While a larger sample sizeneeds to be obtained, a study of the tools and tech-niques used to make these fine-ware vessels couldindicate the distribution of motor habits as opposedto fabric types. From observations of pueblo pbttersin the 7920s, it appears that the great majority ofwork is produced by duplicating favourite designsover and over (Bunzel 1972, 62). X similar designmay not necessarily indicate a factory environmenfand may pertain to the potter's preference for a par-ticular design, perhaps based upon customer de-mand.

The incised decoration of these vessels may re-late to basketry. This is particularly the case as theweave of a basket, using wide and narrow strips ofplant material, is imitated by incised and excisedlines. These archaeologically rare containers mayhave played a significant role in food storage. Therehave been few baskets recovered frsm Near Easternexcavations. Excavations on the Deh Luran plainrevealed some good examples of twined baskets(Hole ef al. 7969, pl. 37b-c), and coiled baskets (Holeet al. 1969, pls.37a,39h,220-23). At this site coiledbaskets appear around 5500-5000 sc. The Newari ofNepal ,although they also use ceramic containers,use baskets as transport containers because of theirlightness and strength. They are also used to storedry goods, such as grain and flour, apparently be-cause of air circulation afforded by some baskets'woven structure (Birmingham 7975, 385). In socie-ties where there are no ceramic industries (such asthe Pomo Indians of California: James 7972, g6-lAn,baskets occupy a number of different roles, fromwater-tight cooking containers (using hot rocks), toelaborate ceremonial vessels. Small finely wovenbas-kets, particularly using the labour-intensive coiledtechnique, were used as currency. Considering theamoult of work required for some examples, ceram-ics are much easier to form. Clay sealings from sev-eral phases of occupation at Brak, including theNinevite 5 period (Chapter 5), show marks of bas-ketry on their reverse faces, indicating the commonuse of baskets at Brak through the ages.

Stein & Blackman (7993, 434) note that there isa shift in the ceramic shapes, as well as the status ofceramic materials, during the Ninevite 5 period. Finewares from the early third millennium can haveelaborate decoration, incised, punctuated, excised,and the most common fine-ware forms have closedor restricted rims, which are difficult to stack in akiln or to transport. The bases are also predomi-

nantly pointed, and they tend to be tall and there_fore more visible. By the mid-third millennium finewares tend to be utilitarian. Surface decoration isrestricted to a few vessels, and open unrestrictedforms, that permit vessels to be stacked in a kiln oreasily tuansported, now predominate (lltce 19g7,202_3). Pointed bases, with their inherent problems withstability, give way to flat bases.

Basalt-tempered samplesWhile basalt-tempered wares do not fust appear dur-ing this period (see TU 2 and TU 14) they certainlyform a more significant part of the ceramic assem-blage. Visual examination would at first suggest thatbasalt temper is used exclusively in coarse cookingvessels, but a number of samples of other fabricscontain basalt. Vessels with this rock temper wereparticularly selected for analysis, as it was hopedthat there would be a correlation between temperand clay source, which could be revealed by petrog-raphy and ICP analysis respectively. It is unlikelythat basalt would be chosen as a temper when thereare sandstones or calcite that can be easily crushed.Basalt temper may be the result of the manufactureof basalt vessels, which would generate quantities ofwaste that could be used. There were a number ofbasalt vessels recovered from the site. The vast ma-jority were apparently functional, as there were fewexamples that had been polished. Many of the ves-sels bore wear from continued use that is consistentwith grinding seeds. The large-scale production ofhard stone vessels may relate to the use of tubularcopper drills, used with abrasives (for replicationexperiments see Stocks 1986). While archaeologicalevidence for the drills themselves is lacking, there isa boom in stone-vessel production around 3000 ec(Moorey 7994,58).

With the production of large numbers of basaltvessels, perhaps in a centralized factory environ-men! there would be a steady supply of basalt tem-per that would be impractical to generate for its ownsake. This inclusion in ceramics may be an exampleof industrial waste being used for another purpose.This is ali the more plausible given that crafts areoften practised in artisans' quarters. By the Ninevite5 period there appears to be more than one centre ofproduction for these vessels. This is indicated bysample NS (Fig. 8.7), which is almost certainlyimported, and sample NS 21, which from the chemi-cal analysis is consistent with local wares. Cobbles ofbasalt occur infrequently in the region of Tell Brak,while larger quantities are available from basalticflows that are scattered in the region.

348

Ceramics ald Society

Possibly imported vesselsNS 4 (Fig. 8.7: ledge-handled cooking vessel). Ba-

salt temper with the highest Al for the period.NS 15 (thick storage vessel). Pyroxene (basalt?) tem-

per. Distinct ICP results.NS 11 (body sherd with incised decoration). Con-

tains biotite, but has not been subjected toICP.

NS 12 (artificial Metallic Ware with black slip).Plagioclase feldspar that may be from basalt.ICP results are local.

NS 22 (green incised ware). The fabric is too fine toexamine visually, but it is the highest Mg forthe period and there are several other differ-ences in elemental concentrations.

Atypical vessels:NS 23 (Fig. 8.8: shell-tempered ware). Shell temper

predorninates. This ware is commonly encoun-tered during this period, but has a number oflow elemental values. It should be kept dis-tinct from other wares, but is probably not animport.

Unlike the proceeding Terrninal Urukperiod, wherea number of imported vessels were disfinct tyPo-logically, petrographically, ar-rd chemically, samplesfrom this period are more difficult to assign. Differ-ences in elemental concentrations were prorninentin two end members (NS 23 for the low Al samplesand NS 4 for the high Al samples).

The later third millenniumThe most striking aspect of the ceramic productionfrom this period is the large number of vessels of asimilar colour and fabric. Visual examination of thesurfaces of all the material recovered from this pe-riod shows that the colour averages Yellowish Gray(5y 7 l2). Only about 5 per cent of the assemblage are

Moderate Reddish Orange (10R 6/6). In thin sectionsamples with this green colour are Moderate YellowBrown (10 YR 514) and Light Olive Brown (5Y 516).

The ubiquitous green fabric wares of this perioddiffer in many respects from other wares. One of themost notable features is that these wares have a veryfine body fabric with a thin body wall' With such a

fine fabric, with no organic temper, a thin body wallis required. During hring, water can escaPe in earlystages, and other gasses can pass through the thinbody at higher temperatures. Vessels with a sirnilarfabric continue into the seventh century rc, and are

referred to as Palace Wares. Many of these vesselswere not cut down to reduce thickness before fuing,and many bear distortions from finger pressure when

they were removed from the wheel (Rawson 1954,

168). In contrast, cutting a vessel down in widthwhile it is in the leather-hard state generates a thinvessel with little concern for distortion. Both of theseluxury wares were fired in a reducing atmosphere.

In contrast to the oxidized-fired wares, with a

red colour, these vessels were fired in a reducingatmosphere. Reduction firing in a kiln requires morefuel, as combustion is incomplete, but vitrificationoccurs at a lower temperature. Because of the largeamount of finely ground calcite added to these ves-sels, which is attested by low-fired samples such as

LTM 4,74 and 19, this temperature would have beenlowered yet further. Calcite is not first added topaste recipes at this time, but it is during this periodthat there appears to be regular amounts of fine-grained calcite added to a standardized paste recipe.Because of the fine-grained nature of the calcite, onecan conclude that the potters understood that finergrains would melt and influence the melting pointand colour of the cerarnic body.

Another advantage of firing in a reducing at-mosphere is that vitrification is better conkolled overa wider temperature range. This means that there isa wider window of tolerance, from 850-1050'C(Maniatis & Tite 1931). Without accurate means ofdetermining temperature, this wide window of tol-erance is very important. Most later third-millen-nium vessels were fired to a high enough temperatureto reduce porosity. At this critical Point, it would beeasy to overfire a batch of vessels iJ there were notconsiderable latitude in fuing temperature. The greenfabric, characteristic of this region and period, wasgenerally fired to 950-1050"C (Schneider 1989,42).

As noted in the section on wheel forming thisperiod witnessed the wide-scale use of the wheel informing vessels. An important question to ask iswho used the wheel? Was it simply adopted by TellBrak potters on a large scale at this time, or did thisceramic industry develop along distinct lines, usingmethods adapted to local materials? While this ques-

tion cannot be answered archaeologically, there isgood evidence for the introduction of new ceramicforming methods in Guatemala. Flere, the traditionalhand-built ceramic household industry, practised byfemales, continues alongside a male-dominatedworkshop industry based on the wheel (Arnold 1989,

237). The force of traditional motor patterns was so

strong that wheel forming could notbe incorporatedinto traditional techniques, and had to develop a

new social structure. This demonstrates that therecan be two simultaneous very different types of ce-

ramic productiorL perhaps focused upon different

349

Chapter 8

vessels. The household industry may produce cook-ing wares, while a new workshop industry may pro-duce its own distinctive wares. While one can easilysee that the divisions between these two industriescould arise from conques! the example from Guate-mala sounds a cautionary note, as here the two-tierindustries were based upon internal social issues.Traditional potters in Egypt also maintain the divi-sion between men, who form vessels on a wheel,and women, who make different vessels using otherforming methods (Nicholson & Wendrich n.d.).

At this juncture it may also be appropriate toraise the question of what particular ceramic assem-blages mean beyond issues of chronology. Drawingupon ethnographic research in west Kenya, Hodder(797 9) noles that certain archaeological ceramics maybe considered as representing group identities. Se-

lected shapes are characteristic of a particular group,while some designs on pottery localize productionto particular families. It is clear that large-scale work-shop industries would have an impact on the natureof the ceramic assemblage. Assemblages with work-shop ceramics may obscure household-scale repre-sentation, and may signal a change in the way ceramicshapes may be appreciated as ethnic indicators. Thisblurring of local ceramic traditions into a nationalstyle has been observed in Mexico, where a recentintroduttion on the village level of foreign stimulusis being assirnilated into a new style with particularattributes of its own (Lackey 1982, 147). This transi-tion has been influenced particularly by the intro-duction of large-scale factories. Are the products of a{actory, with a more limited range of shapes, moreor less representative of the culture, or is there es-

sentially no change in the utility of the method?An important consideration for vessels of this

period is whether they were made on the site. Thereis good evidence for the large-scale production ofceramics at this time. The site of IJmm al-Hafriyatnear Nippur offers some of the best evidence. Atleast 500 kilns (and bread ovens) from the Akkadianthrough Old Babylonian periods were uncovered.The kilns were located next to the beds of canals,and were associated with pits for levigation (Moorey1994, 144). This large site for ceramic manufacture,alongwith the allied trade of bakin& was dependentupon these industries. The large-scale production ofAkkadian green vessels is also attested at Tell LeilaruSyria. Fused, nested stacks of 50-65 fine-ware bowlswere common on the surface of the tell. Blackman ef

ol. (1993) examined a group of wasters to character-ise the raw materials and methods of manufacture.They found that the clay used to make the wasters

was from the same clay source, which showed littlechemical variation. The bowls were formed on a

wheel, removed for drying, thinned and trirnmed,smoothed and fired. Stretch marks suggest that arapid forming on a fast wheel was used, and anyvariation in wall t[rickness, due to rapid forming,could be corrected by tuimming. Spacers were notused to separate the vessels from one another. Thebowls were tightly nested together for firing. Theonly support appears to have been provided byneighbouring stacks. Stacks 2 m high with 60-100bowls were recovered, requiring a high degree ofuniformity.

This kind of workshop production is consistentwith the homogeneous nature of later third-millen-nium period vessels recovered from Tell Brak, yetfew wasters have been recoyered from this period.Perhaps the particular site of manufacture of thesevessels was not near the region of habitation. Due tothe smoke from kiln firings, not to mention the avail-ability of clay, the potters' quarter for such large-scale production could be located in a small site onthe periphery of TelI Brak.

Possibly imported vesselsMetallic WaresThese vessels first appear during the Ninevite 5 pe-riod, and continue into the later third millennium.Their distinctive form and fabric have warrantedmuch attention archaeologically. Somewhat surpris-ingly, these distinctive wares did not spawn a wide-scale class of local imitations. NS 12 is a sample witha paste that is consistent with the majority of waresrecovered from the site, but has a black slip thatwhen fresh must have appeared sirnilar to the Me-tallic Wares. Perhaps one of the greatest difficultiesof imitation was not the surface alone, but the veryhard body. Not only would it be relatively imperme-able to liquids, it would enable the potter to produceforms with very angular lips that would be less likelyto suffer breakage than their softer imitations.

One of the most important questions to con-sider is if the vessels should be considered as luxuryor utilitarian. Some anthropologists (Peregrine 7997,2) note that there is often a correlation between therise of 6lites and advances in craft specialization.Under such a system there is direct control of labourand a drive towards technical sophistication to pro-duce certain ornaments, which are controlled by le-gitimate political authority. Goods manufacturedfrom materials obtained from distant sources, or us-ing special technology, are particularly valued. Craftspecialization may then develop out of political strat-

350

Ceramics and Societv

egies, rather than exclusively environmental or eco-nomic forces.

If ceramic evidence indicated such a situation,one would expect to find 1uxur1, \,rares made w'ith a

\rery distinctive technolos)r. There are fineiv madevessels from every period, but there is no indicaticnthat there is a consistent poiitical strategv that isseparate from environmental or economic forces thatdrives technological sophistication. The N1etallicWares do not appear to be beyond the realm offunctional concerns, as they occuleYen in iarge utili-tarian forms (LTM 3). Their context may also sug-gest their status, as their distribution is apparentl,vlimited to larger houses or palatial contexts.

The distinctive surface of Metallic Wares has

received previous attention. Schneider (7989, 45-6)proposed three hvpotheses: A) after thiorving, orperhaps in a ieather-hard state, the potter could use

saity water to smooth the surface of the vessel; B)

sait could effloresce from the r,vet ceramic paste dur-ing drving; C) during firing, ash could eruich thevessel surface r.t,itl-i a1kali. Although there coulcl be

more than one factor contributing to the drstinct sur-face, obserr.ations in thin section, particuiarir. usingplane-polarized 1ight, demonstrate that areas of blackgloss show preferred grain olientation consistent iniithsmoothing.

Modern firings of studio potterv -w'ith similarcharacteristics to the non-calcareous Metallic Wares(not including NS 12) demonstrate r,rrhv ancient pot-ters paid particular attention to the kiln em-ilon-ment. The firing condltions suggest that thisspccialized ware required large amounts of fr"re1 toproduce. With such a fine c1at, containing no iargeinclusions, gas generated during firing -wil1 oni,v

slowl1, escape. It is for this reason that modern stu-dio pots r'l'ith similar paste recipes are taken throughthe temperature range 650-1000"C very sior,r'iv. Re-

ducing the pottery within this temperature rangecan lead to difficultv. Reduction converts the rediron oxide (hematiie) in the bod1, inio black ironoxide (magnetite). Magnetite is a vigorotis t-1ux whichquick11, brings about ear1y, and often localized, vitri-fication. This can seai in some of the gases and cause

bloating. Reoxidation ai this stage ma)'be on11' par-tia11y effective (Fraser 7995,62). All the Metallic trVare

samples from Te11 Brak have quantities of Fe r'r'hich

may react the same way rvhen taken to 1100-1300'C.This suggests that the ancient potters must have keptpottery in the kiln for long periods of time to coun-teract the development of gas r,vhich may result ir-r

bloating. Schneider notes that fern" Meiallic lVare sam-

plesl,vere exposed to an oxidizing atrr,osphere, and

of those that i,l,ere, they rvere probably not exposedto oxvgen for a long period of time (Schneider 1989,,16). It is interesting to note that here, as for manv ofthe Ca Metallic V,/are samples examined bi, Schnei-der, the sample w'ith the red outer layer is LTM 15.

This stiggests that lr,ith more flux, and a lor'ver tem-perature range, less attention needed to be paid tothe firing atmosphere. Were the potters risking bloat-ing and ihe possibility of failure .r,r hen they used a

reducing atmosphere to generate a very hard bodyfabric in the iorv Ca NIetallic Wares? Onlv replica-tion experiments lrrith the as t,et unknown source forthis clay rvill be instructive.

'South ivlesopotamian' vesselsLT}{ 7, LTM 18. Both these samples are petro-graphically similar. They have distinct fatrrics n ithcomparaiively. large numbers of hematized grainsthai have been altered from firing. It is no longerpossibie to identifv the minerals, but as no othersamples frorn Te11 Brak have this distinctive fabricthe,i, are easilv placed in a dlstinct category. Chemi-ca11v they are broadlt consistent u,ith one another,but the differences could indicate distinct centres ofmanufacture. The,v are most 1ike1v imports.LTM 1 (cooking vessel). Profusion of basalt grains.

ICP analysis reveals distinct clav source.LTM 2 (cooking vessel). Profusion of calcite grains.

ICP ana11.sis suggests it is from a distinct(lclt A1) clav source.

LTM I (incised / painted bod,v sherd). Trace amountsof basalt. ICP anallrsis suggests a distinctciay sor-rrce.

LTL,I 16 (1arge jar n ith gre), slip). Cne grain of alkalibasalt (disiinct from basaltic glass as in LTM13: Fig. 8.10). The ICP analysis suggests a

iocal c1ay.

LTM 17 (fine red bowl). The fabric of this sample istoo fine to examine under a iight microscope,bui the ICP analysis confirms it is an import.

Several samples are distinct petrographically, buthave not been subjected to ICP analysis:LTM 13 (Fig. E.10: coarse iip fragment). Basaltic glass.LTM 5 (red fabric vessel). Distinct fabric r,r.'ith 2 per

cent biotite.

T lte s e co t ttl rn iLle ru r"itmt

As noted previously,, there have been fer,l' potters'rvorkshops excavated in Mesopotamia. Evidence ismuch better from S,vro-Palestine, rvhere a l'vorkshopin a car.e iras been found at Lachish dating to iheLate Bronze Age (1200-1150 ec). If forming technolo-gies r,r.ere comparable, there is good evidence for the

351

Chapter 8

use of a fast wheel at the site. A basalt pivot wasrecovered, which could have supported a kick_wheel(Magrill & Middleto n 1997, 73).

While it is difficult to standardize atypical fab_ric from this period, there are trends thai quicklyseparate second-millenrrium samples from latei *Lird_millennium samples. The most notable feature is thelack of stand Ndized, very high-fired fabrics. Instead,there is a range- of fabrics firea to a lower tempera-ture. Calcite is the mineral temper of choice (5M24,SM 6, SM 8, SM 12). It can be low fired and notinfluence the matrix (SM 12) or higher fired andinteract with the clay (SM 8). Oniy Snl S ana SN4 S(the waster) were green like many of the later third-qnl:dg samples. Only SM t had any quantity ofshell, and this was in addition to calcitefrom a min-eral source. No sample had fine to medium sand_sjze grains used as a temper. This is a significantdeparture from the general arkose sandstone parentrock used for so long by Tell Brak potters. Itis alsoclear that the plant material used for temper was

-much finer during this period, barring SM 5, which

had coarse inclusions. Of wares that can be placedinto the imported category, the faience *ur" (SU Z;and the Metallic Ware (SM 11) may also have had afine organic temper. Although identifying organicmaterials in all but special circumstances involvesthe study of a lack of evidence, in that the originalorgaftr! material has perished, further work is clearlyneeded towards identifying the source of the oi-ganic temper. It is likely that the plant material usedhere was reed fluff (or cattail tops). Modern pottersnortheast of Baghdad continue to use reed fluff as atemper in their pottery (van As & Jacobs 79g6, hg.3).Because organic materials such as chaff or choppedstraw retain water longer than clay or nrineral inclu-sions, drying time is slowed, allowing the internalpressures that would otherwise distort or crack thevessel to adjust. This is particularly the case for ves-sels that are thrown on a wheel although, as notedabove, a hear,y organic paste cannot be wheel thrown.A major problem in wheel-made ceramics from Meso-potamia during the second millennium rc was thelack of coherence in the clay (van As pers. comm.).When pulting and moulding the clay,iharacteristicclacking develops. In order to prevent this crackingchaff, for smaller vessels, or chopped straw, for largeivessels, was used to reinforce the clay and prolongdrying. It may be that during the second millenniuman organic paste, using finer organic material thanprevious recipes, was used. This may have been par-ticularly important given that the second-millenniumsamples contained less Al (clay) than their later third-

millennium green counterparts. Organic temperwould stuengthen this otherwise weak-mixture.

- The carefully slipped (apparently self_slipped)

surfaces characteristic of cooking vesiels of thi, p"_riod raise a number of interesting points. Cookingvessels from earlier periods usually exhibit Ismoothed surface, but there is no effort tt make sucha thick and presumably impermeable layer. The ma_jor question at this juncture is why would a vessel beslipped? It is often assumed that vessels would soonbe fouled by foods absorbed by porous cerarnic bod_ies, and that vessels were either disposed of at aregular rate, or that certain vessels *ere used for

"q":fi: foods. Oetgen (1984) studied the absorptionof foods by porous pottery, using fired clay withsurface treatments inspired by Roman modeh. flain,burnished, and slipped surfaces were soaked in so_lutions of honey, milk, starch, olive oi1, and red wine.He found little difference in permeability betweentreated and untreated surfaces. Olive oil was an ex_ception, as it could be blocked from permeating theceramic matrix by a slip. Surfaces of all the test ilabscould be easily cleaned with a damp cloth, and evenafter the soaked slabs were placed in a warm, humidroom there was no adverse odor.

- This experiment may explain why the majorityof vessels from earlier periods were not usuallyslipped, but it raises questions about the eating hab-its of the second millenlium. Were there pe-rhapsfewer oily foods consumed at this time, or were tirevessels' slipped surfaces effective in providing a bar-rier to oil and other foodstuffs? Residue analysis isclearly called for here.

, Perhaps the best sherd to exemplify luxury waredesigned for inter-palatial trade is the faience sam-ple, SM 7.

Possibly imported vesselsAny imports from this period are very difficult todefine. Most samples are of a similar fabdc, andmany have a thick wash or slip that obscures theinclusions. Beyond the faience sample, which didnot require scientific analysis to place it into an im-ported category, there are a few vessels that meritattention.SM 3 (gray plate). In thin section this sample is con-

sistent with the other samples, but ICp analy-sis suggests that it has high Ca and low valuesfor other elements. It could be an end memberin this small group of samples, or it may be animport.

SM 6 (painted vessel). There are many vessels fromthis period that are painted. In thin section it

352

Ceramics and SocietY

is much like the other samples, but ICP analy-

sis shows it has very high Mg (among other

differences in elemental ioncentrations)' This

element has been diagnostic in other samples

from this site.

SM 12 (plate). This sample differs chemically from

tire others in that it is lower in Al and most

other elemmts (barring calcite)' It could be an

end member of the group, but it should be con-

sidered different enough to warrant attention'

Summary

There is a pressing need for archaeologists and his-

torians to interpret an ever wider range of informa-

tion that is emerging from ceramic analysis' With

the increasing .rt" of analytical techniques for de-

scribing various aspects of ceramic manufacture in

ur",Uq"i1ty, issues beyond the traditional concerns of

""rtii shape must be integrated into an understand-

ing of .ritoru, a term which seems to fade like a

*-rug" in the distance as one carefully considers the

minritlae of ceramic techlology' Yet one must not

lose sight of the end result of ceramic archaeology'

whichis to understand the Past'As with many technological studies' there are

more questions raised than answered' Attempting

to define points at which various transitions took

p?ur., from household industry to workshoP pro-

duction for instance, may not lead one to propose a

fi""a aur" when this tooi place, but rather to rede-

fine the question- While it is clear that the ceramic

erldence does not offer proof for the introduction of

"t tlr"fy new technologies, there are.significant shifts

in ceramic industries. This is particularly the,case

when one considers the large-scale use of methods

and materials during a given period that previously

-"." r"pr"rented in only a minorityo-f-samples' One

of the most interesting isthe Terminal Uruk/Ninevite

i tt*titio". Both petographic and chemical analy-

,t a"rrrortrtrates that tGt" u'u a variety of imported

medium-sized bowls attested for the Middle Urukperiod. The Ninevite 5 period imported vessels ap-

pear to include, perhaps surprisingly:.to:ki'g wares'

brrir,g this lattlr p"ilod one also finds a two-tier

indusiry. Finely tt id" it"it"d/excised vessels were

,r.rduced at the same time as crudely made vessels'*irLt io* c1ay. While this trend is evident in all peri-

rii n o par'ticularly noticeable at this juncture' The

fine wares are cleaily the result of organtzed pro-

Jr.tio., from the clay and ornamentation to the fir-ing techniques. The .outt"t vessels aqpeat to be a

ste"p backwards. They are crudely made and primi-

tively fired. Were they the result of some new form

of otgaruzation, perhaps relying upon non-profes-

sionai potters, oi ala they fill a specific need (or

p"rhup, both)? At this time of nascent cities' there is

ilttl" t"rt rul evidence as a guide, but what has been

deciphered suggests that the production of at least

some wares was undertaken by labourers workingin sanss under the direchion of a supervisor'

" FL the later third-millennium period the evi-

dence becomes clearer. There are mass-produced ves-

sels of standardized raw materials and forming

techniques made at this time' It is during this period'

o, p"rhup, a little earlier, that one finds a predomi-

,ruot ,t" of wheel forming, and the production of

iurg" u*o*rnts of optimai wheel-forming clay/tem-

per" mixtures' The use of reduction firing entails

greater cost from increased fue1 consumption' but

6ff"r, u wider range of tolerance in firing, and also

influences the body colour of the ceramic vessel' The

Lite, polnt is often overlooked, but colour may have

be", on" of the incentives leading towards develop-

ing reduction firing techniques' One.is on firmg.;rod proposing that ceramic workshops on an

J^pur,a"a scale existed at this time' The evidence for

the second millennium is of a continuation of the

workshops, but a significant shift in-the wares'Why

would. well-fired v6ssels, apparently impermeable

to water, give way to the production of wares which

appear inierior? During this period there was a wide-

,ijt" ,r" of hear,ry slipsl whiih may have blocked the

porous ceramic body fto- absorbing foodstuffs' It is'there that the quesiion of food must be raised' as

without an understanding of the foods consumed in

antiquity, one cannot appreciatethe ceramics using

the ciiteria that may have been of the utmost impor-

tance to the Tell Brak Potters'One of the most ihportant lessons to be learned

from examining such alottg sequence- of pottery is

that potters may not have understood how to coun-

teract basic p.obl"*t of shrinkage during drying'

Applied elements, including bases, apPear to cause

sr;t difficultv. Vessels with applied elements are

in.o-^on in the repertoire, and when they occur'

;h;t "t" often broke.,' Whit" this could arguably be

du" to preservation, the fact that they are not more

;;**; may indicate that they had a high rateof

failure in aniiquity. From a modern viewpoint the

Iack of such basic information may apPear very pe-

culiar. When one considers the intense conservatism

of many artists, perhaps Potters in particular' such

omissions aPPeat,,ndlrsiandable' There may have

been little r,L"a fot such things as ring handles and

tall bases, as the function these elements perform

353

Chapter 8

may not have been deemed important or may havebeen- served by other means. This offers yet anothervalidation for appreciating pottery as a viluable cul_tural indicator, as the material is essentially boundwith tradition and not innovation. At the same timewe may find ourselves pondering the very processof assessing culture through pottery. In thl end thelargest question of all is teft openr just what does ashift in the ceramic assemblage repiesent?

Acknowledgements

There are a number of individuals that have pro_vided important support during this project. While

ut 911k. Dr Roger Matthews, Dr Wendy Matthews

and Helen McDonald provided invaluable informa_tion about pottery typology. professor M.S. Tite andChris Doherty at the Research Laboratory for Ar_chaeology and the History of Art at Oxford Univer_tit p_rry]dgd a space to work and logistical support,and Dr Nick Walsh at the Department of Geology atRoyal Holloway College at the University of Loridonkindly showed me the facility where the Brak mate_rial was analyzed. Finally, professor euentinWilliams at the Department of Earth Sciences at theUniversity of California, SantaCruz, provided spaceto work and support for the final phases of thisproject.

354

Ceramics and Society

3s5

Chapter 8

o

,b*"'S \\s: * ! n.u -tr lI c4'- iYr= \= '! *N*:=SH-!ssa;sSs I St=.dEJ€

=s.S U*.S T S:9.F-:

= = s

.=i*o*'roE ilt lS:LUFe!>^>d!

- Fr .= * s {h<O\F=

*"g"HE:iS'I s s

= i- ::t = -.,< rJ

Xq,*'- - =I c"o$: b -G

3'5 o; d t.:F:UUFUs€sr:r{ l";sE!s'FS u lS=i S \* 3p s*rcoiEE i: SEcs '- u o Q U*d ?'=.*

='-+ " = = i^".

.^ i I < L- :J*i I ss\t a.:F- o -^.r uF F!i cs P X c.:,oS-'i- ."1 .- _ e *\S*\:iLF-v iF S c.oB \-1 L =;-

!>-ur\*\vu-= S.<S o ll{r - :\t S !o -

v ^. !)

\ s.s = '' s ut-iEixS{E\.\DA^CL€es.^-i:,s=\cqr::\'.-u--u E-Y S*\.-= ;'-'= : dl'B.-sts { sEsLB--s\:ts-:=\a-F u c,'.: e U' SlSEirsEs'S'= P > e'.=u.^:{vt^* €:'s \.! i=-s; us 3 ts

:fL!;3); ( r,.- .T.S := S

sst: b.i:= Fs SS F *aui:FiuPSSEs gcf

= T::SIEa

=E i a; s

-upLus( FH3trj >F *, E >-F* sE b r S iE S:3 S* SoD i i: ts s--s {E SS;':-= E

356

Ceramics and Societv

N*s:s!I:{=qi S:=

=.= 5F s.-;\ +s -

=,, SiS sEES5-S+Loi$i-.--srui-s\.o'3* r'^- = >,i S \,LssrsEEs!F= : s -

= =J = -I \ I "i < s V =E:_^.s-Uq-SlU^VsY*';.S*ii-t 6\lH-hwh,^90] *-=

=-= - iJ 4-L -

- !.\'\''*\t4S;i-!s-

= s n-.= L: o.= IC'- u ,, U a !" { gSs='= !- e !:"&.+;*=IE*I.e'S ftb-S S { S=i s;"s s i i*sE I -d-i.E SC.:S S : ='l = E S lt; X ! S+ lrEeFWL+^.HS.=:: s-C- 3 s G SE s-:**8i&E--r.:St:i-5:i--.\f >=: o S 3---- l=-S"; u =-s)SrI.;::€ F SL L u.i L:-q ^-^o=.:'\to -,v

.i \ -F.iU F}=ES J.. U L r { \ = - \

!- a * =

E 3: S Er r,'E- ,ir q.

= = d * e- = Ii ..u-: i - ^:.:,: - !*: s i.=*: \: lSE--.i->=\*<s{ho-*L=!<\

+ s iE i * sE i ts iS i

= S; ed

='>-aF s.= = {,\ . =u u *E-*:-\-S'-tES'=e!N:sE'5u\x.j--Vl\;^h=o=iE :.i.

= + S: = s r

-ca':stSHSS,!o - - --= 6 - '-1= FSi=:F=t-i-*-ocSuE'Sri'i:FstisE'{-F: F C : = i: i EiSS ! !S'E S'RxS''= '' <\ - -.s * sJ <.: s'Sm{ ^- ". S'*'

iJ-I= rStS S S

I lt{ S u}Es=.e'i 6 re.S_F J;=-S S s-5''' i = l=.\!---!:.r=*.*

-:i';^\ic-tSSs f ;i t r s E t S:{ = u.: ='--t:CaF

qJ:uar---vBG.SEES:SE53 v = i: - == e s

:=i i =EE

Hs =

N s: { = e il- i s s

.si- X a,=*.: lrE-r:.!*::sssrS.-::<\ E: <:'= - -I .! .- i i : =LE ': '-*St,::E+=i5i =: B r.e.I P 5 SA: s=i =E =; S;i-; i-= h>- s:^=

=r'J\<.\'j<-rJ\{

.15 /

Chapter 8

Ceramics and Society

Figure 8.7 (on left). NS 4 (A6037:7). This is a rimlbodylhsndle sherd. The rim is simple, in line with the body, andterminqtes in s broad (5 mm) semi-circular edge. The ledge handle is solidly attached to the -oessel. By eye theinclusions nre large, up to 3 mm, grains of basalt. This type of cooking aessel has a wide distribution both spatially andtemporally. Similsr examples Tuere recoaered from the Portho-Sasanian periods at I'Jirueaeh (Eiland 1995, 263). Theoessel from I'{ineaeh had deoeloped a number of cracks on the bady, apparently due to thermal stress from use as acooking pot. By eye the fabric of NS 4 is distinct, qs it hqs q dominant organic component. Only the sides of the oesselare darklbuff, while the interior is a sooty blqck. The exterior of the rsessel has fire clouds consistent with lrcating ooeran open flame. The surface of the aessel is smolth, but shows no striations, as it Llas most likely paddle formed. ln thinsection the matrix of this sample is most like NS 2. Both sides of the sample are red (1-2 mm) while the core is black.There sre distinct inclusions in this sample, the most striking being setseral isolated grnins of basalt (11 m long). Theyare msde up of a majority of plagioclase feldspar, clinopyroxene, and small amounts of hematite. The ooerall texture issubophitic in that the pyroxene does not surround the grains of plagioclase (for similar see MacKenzie et al. 1982, 38).In this case the term 'basalt' raas chosen qnd is used here. It is technically a medium-grained basic hypabyssal igneousrock zohich is mineralogically and chemically the same as gabbro and dolerite (lMitten E Brooks 7972, 731). One ofthe most significant aspects of this inclusion type is that it is not encountered in most samples, and that, eaen ifcrushed, the indir:idual components zpould be recognized for grains in the medium sand-size range and abozte. In thissample there qre seoeral isolsted lnths of plagiocl&se thqt indicste the bqsqlt hss been crushed. There qre I large (1-3mm long) grains of mineralic cqlcite. The other minerql inclusions are in the fine sand range. The majority are ofctLlcite (7 per cent) ruith quartz (3 per cent) and a fraction of mica. Organic uoids are particularly large, zuith theaoerage betrneen 7 and 2 mm long (about 70 per cent of the slide). llS 2 contains arkose, this sample has grains ofbasqlt. This clau, unlike samples such as NS 1, ls almost certainly natural usith no leoigation. The elementalconcentrations from ICP analysis are striking, and this oessel is probably imported.

359

Chapter 8

ca*-^-_:€i<tr'=X { -r{ r 7

!-:i!

ri.:.!:=lo-roF

"-':.= s = i:'*=:.i-!i.<,Y'.i =fF!:::.:-s i i.i:ii=ttz.i.\\?,-,'l-=-=+.:1,-

F^ra-EE\

=.=.:=ii:=+<!.'-.-L=r^):+-=ss;i

L JJIE-I\ q

: o = l- r;

= i =Er, E

-3'<5:o)==!---.ii\-r--

.!..r= = :- = L

't-i-i=r_::- d E ! trr !-lldj=-<i--:

='=->= L = =---!-;i=-;;-= - r

.- J

=:--:=

- --::-+.:

!: i,:- > \

::.'^-i-i -.-.-:,rJ<I-

--^F.J:

-i^r c,\.3.rF-==c. P ^- !.Z:'-\-^L!..* ?,-:- tr:{

- \ <l

==:EEli>.e i.i -= =.!!!..-h^:=;=:--s.r

.:':/..?;:Ff:,! z i: ^--i=s{r-,:iE=-]T€i:?:>.=_=:..

-i^<::7,i:r-,: _ _ ^^! - iu

i=:ES=-i\:* -l:.ts!-i:-o.:-.-.

^'.-*>-= f S x-< i ri!={lLrr '--<--=: i =Es.+ e =:,-- ^-'l--:: -::-.:r !.a.:lr-i:!=F<Lc::3.=;i?,r=_= ^ _ .- =

-,!:^<P--ei i:S -7.r'-: i6>.-:^-!>: r =-: =-=<.s--^-L'.]\cD ! "-:

='-.i_s=i;:'=--!=o-..:it+=L

- .- ! - 1, r,

^:-j-tD 2 i =s !

!.iL*.-p-

360

Ceramics and Societl'

u*l

,i

.{:>.Q:.

i''i = v-

.l r l/-, i-l-'r-

=-e-:.1<>--FLr.{-.!.= l- I: t-= .-s^r.-r=.,:._:EJ+{:Fc.r<J.-

.:!=.:

.s ,-=,qs,1rr,'!-r,-.4i6s* 3 q

-EE\i Yi=Str--=*:'>{ti

= r-,"=

!- : -: 'J'

I E I'=.L\E-

< =

-: ar.=-<'<* r/ c:.: =.:*T-E

i = i-i* =

B=:f,^:

"] i =.3!=." v

==ri,!\ !-=-=., +EF'1"e. -: r, .. .<

JJs.! \

'.-^:^-:- !i- *: ",

!LI^H

\.. tr- ---<V,S+\F t'>

l>^\q:,=+-!_*-_

^loLt c'-. -sr>'-+!>-E

= =L=*.: = =<E,--

-+-<=ai.=-*TU-=:;Fi:'n!-F-:a!

U r.'* l-

i^:>!w!9N)

rrr .3-= a

Chapter 8

^q\i -; i =tg r ti o e r,F.!:!S SS =l= 6 '- t1"S c,s.S S * sdrXE u F^t \+-rFsr.B-ha .i n, s -- o ba,.s=S*-!S.=!i : f-. I € y,-:<

N u =

l'L=^ r Ji $ \ .-

^-

: = =

i 3E€r:i-rS3'tE=",=:S.r.,LS-N.:-=\..-u+Els'\vp(s i €.! 3 \';.n(.^=Xl{s:-:5: s sss"="X-oSiLF -= .*-: 3 'il.E oo

--Y =+s E ='.=

-tr o s q o l*+oqrs,'\s!'il^..-F

=f i S i-E N- =

+\'r'J_L'I \'\.:FE<F('*i--<:*-*.*-u-.Iulr -'I i.r,x Ii'=* sH F i5

+i *\r tl -. ii !si =

s i:;s-*Ea 3 Ff :-F*Urrr-r<Y{E-LE1 HN,il

s s - oE.= 3 >iP - * e i*-cltsSSS = st H

ft:,o= - s{ !D !!s'i:.:'= sS U{q,n.i{ue>- ls !-D 5.-= P = s:!Bih,FSE

- I - v :) rs e U S rn* ! -FEi:=S:E

tisE{.s =+Vl F.S :pi E s F-

i. It:ES€EEf : st sS s'E $E: S.F.s .=cs >,F S ! o:-iss-r 'r s s.^ s+iI t,,'= %:E R Fs

= 1 : S 8E fE i- rS F'ts Ss \rir = b{," u *

*,Bs s p'$S t-cs -l!'=r: s s S

\i-U S b.. '{S

sSi s Ue: I<SSIEEef-.utsFp\^--:E

= EtSE SS

vJ'EE*Fvlu.^

S:iE]E:u{-! E P"s..E qa

Xla*.EFSd*: s s\ i^N =L:!b.'r9=iu-jt. i5 i lFa

=dt'EEil*=iF50:aLH\)

? E S H S E S**!e*(--!S*iS

f"stEsSgS362