INTRODUCTION
A growing body of scholarly inquiry has successfully clarified that early use of the potter’s wheel in eastern Mediterranean archaeological contexts, especially during the Bronze Age, was complex and reflected pre-existing potting practices; intermediate potting practices were used before the wheel throwing technique was eventually developed though the timing of that development is as yet unclear. Previous experimental work done by the author provided, on the foundation created by Roux and her colleagues in several key publications, a comparative collection of material to aid with the identification of wheel coiling methods in archaeological material, specifically at the macroscopic scale and relying on the morphology of surface traces and topography.
This new experiment addresses several gaps in the previous work while also expanding its applicability. In particular, the present experiment compares side by side the suite of surface traces left by two different potting strategies, neither of which was described in Jeffra (2014). Additionally, the role played by inclusions is directly addressed by this experiment, as two different clay recipes were included. Lastly, the present experiment was designed to support further analytical work in the future at the meso scale.
As has been repeatedly stressed by Roux (most expansively in 2019) no single trace alone provides unequivocal proof that a vessel was formed using one technique over another, a point which was affirmed in the author’s previous work (Jeffra 2011). Instead, it is well supported that it is the recurrent grouping of specific traces which is best indicative of forming techniques. This report should serve as a reference to the experimental protocols followed to produce this type set, as well as a starting point for further experiments by others in the future. It should also serve to inform those interested in using the resulting type set as comparative material so that they might better understand the variables tackled within the experiment and assess its applicability to archaeological material. After all, the shapes produced within this experiment were selected to constitute a ‘generalized type set’, as outlined in Jeffra (2021). Lastly, these reports provide detailed descriptions of the specific gestures used by the author in producing wheel thrown pots in particular. This is an often overlooked aspect of experiment reporting, and transparency about the gestures used in particular may also shed light on similarity or difference in interpretation in the future.
OBJECTIVES
- To create a side-by-side comparison of macroscopic traces produced from a single wheel coiling forming method (Method 3) using a specific, previously neglected coil-attachment process (the ‘wedged coil’) against those produced from wheel throwing, while keeping the potter, clay type, tools, wheel, and firing constant.
- To compare and report on the macroscopic traces created for each of these forming strategies with both tempered and untempered clay.
- To create a generalized type set against which vessels from a variety of contexts may be successfully compared
BIBLIOGRAPHY
JEFFRA, C. 2011. The Archaeological Study of Innovation: An Experimental Approach to the Pottery Wheel in Bronze Age Crete and Cyprus. PhD, Exeter: University of Exeter.
JEFFRA, C. 2013. “A Re-Examination of Early Wheel Potting in Crete,” The Annual of the British School at Athens 108, 31–49.
JEFFRA, C. 2015. “Experimenting wheel-coiling methods,” The Arkeotek Journal 2.
JEFFRA, C. 2021. “Generalised type sets in experimental ceramics: widening applicability and maximizing cross-cultural assessments,” Interdisciplinaria Archaeologica 12(2): Online First.
ROUX, V. 2019. Ceramics and Society: A Technological Approach to Archaeological Assemblages. Springer.
ROUX, V. & M.A. COURTY. 1998. “Identification of wheel-fashioning methods: technological analysis of 4th-3rd millennium BC oriental ceramics,” Journal of Archaeological Science 25: 747–63.