Analytical Study of Ethno-Archaeological Ceramic

International Journal of Humanities and Social Science

© 2020 by SSRG - IJHSS Journal

Volume 7 Issue 5

Year of Publication : 2020

Authors : Al-Thamari, Faeza, Al-Zedjali, Zahra, Al-Mamari, Badar

10.14445/23942703/IJHSS-V7I5P101

How to Cite?

Al-Thamari, Faeza, Al-Zedjali, Zahra, Al-Mamari, Badar, "Analytical Study of Ethno-Archaeological Ceramic," SSRG International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, vol. 7,  no. 5, pp. 1-5, 2020. Crossref, https://doi.org/10.14445/23942703/IJHSS-V7I5P101

Abstract:

The recent decade witnessed a remarkable development in the field study of ethnoarchaeological ceramic, as more sophisticated reading has been presented with the framework of social theories and analyses and held multiple variables and different levels of mutability as a way to present a thoughtful understanding of social boundaries. The progressive stage of sequential development is included in the perception of ceramic changes, attached to technological changes, ceramic use, distribution, and social limitations. A number of Malaysian and Southeast Asian studies have coupled with culture and technical framework to examine manufacture variability, the dynamics of culture transformation among generation, and from another hand, the articulation between ceramic technology and social networks.
The present article is a theoretical review of ethnoarchaeological issues conducted mainly to remedy ceramic issues within the cultural view. Such a study is an interactive part reflecting on the previous studies presented in the scope of ethnoarchaeology. The course aims to review several cultural issues that emerged in the ceramic field and link them to the influential external factors that cause the formation of several ceramic technologies. The current study contributes to the present social understanding of material culture and society from ethnoarchaeological perspective.

Keywords:

Ceramic, ethno-archaeological ceramics, ethno-archaeology, social identity, ethnoarchaeological theories.

References:

[1] A. H. Jones, “Wealth of a nation to be: The American colonies on the eve of the Revolution”. Columbia University
Press New York. 1980.
[2] A. J. LaViolette, “Ethno-archaeology in Jenné, Mali: craft and status among smiths, potters and masons”, British Archaeological Reports. 2000.
[3] B. Bartel., “A historical review of ethnological and archaeological analyses of mortuary practice”. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 1(1), Pp. 32-58. 1982.
[4] B. A. Nelson., “Ethnoarchaeology and paleodemography: A test of Turner and Lofgren's hypothesis”, Journal of Anthropological Research, Pp. 107-129. 1981.
[5] C. T. Bourges., “Ceramic ethnoarchaeology and historical process: the case of Grea, North Cameroon: Archaeology”, University of Calgary. 1996.
[6] C. L Costin., “The use of ethnoarchaeology for the archaeological study of ceramic production”, Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 7(4), Pp. 377-403.2000.
[7] D. E. Arnold, and A. L. Nieves., “Factors affecting ceramic standardization. Ceramic Production and Distribution”, Pp.93-113.1992.
[8] D. P. Braun., “Pots as tools. In: Archaeological Hammers and Theories”, New York: Academic Press.1983.
[9] G. L. Cowgill, J. H. Altschul, and R. Sload. “Spatial analysis of Teotihuacan: a mesoamerican metropolis”. Intrasite spatial analysis in archaeology, Pp. 154-195. 1984.
[10] H. M. Wobst, “Stylistic behavior and information exchange”, Research essays in honor of James B. Griffin, Pp. 317-342. 1977.
[11] J. M. Aronson, and M. T. Skibo, “Stark. Production and use technologies in Kalinga pottery. Kalinga Ethnoarchaeology”, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC. Pp. 83-112.1994.
[12] J. H. Blitz, “Big pots for big shots: feasting and storage in a Mississippian community”. American Antiquity, 80-96.1993.
[13] K. M. Cleland, and I. Shimada, “Paleteada Potters: Technology, Production Sphere, and Sub-Culture in Ancient Peru”. MASCA Research Papers in Science and Archaeology, 15(1), Pp. 111-152. 1998.
[14] K. Krishnan, “Scientific analysis of pottery. Ancient Ceramics”, Historical Enquiries Scientific Approaches, Pp. 177-196. 1997.
[15] K. L. Kvamme, M. T. Stark, and W. A. Longacre, “Alternative procedures for assessing standardization in ceramic assemblages”, American Antiquity, Pp. 116-126. 1996.
[16] L. Cronk, “That complex whole: Culture and the evolution of human behaviour”, Westview Press. 1999.
[17] M. C. Berns. “Art, history, and gender: Women and clay in West Africa”. African archaeological review, 11(1), Pp. 129- 148. 1993.
[18] M. Hegmon, “Archaeological research on style”. Annual Review of Anthropology, 21(3), Pp. 517-536. 1992.
[19] M. Porr., “Archaeology, Analogy. Material Culture, Society: An Exploration, in: Owen, LR/M. Porr (Hgg.): Ethno- Analogy and the Reconstruction of Prehistoric Artefact Use and Production”, Urgeschichtliche Materialhefte, 14, Tübingen, Pp. 3-15. 1999.
[20] N. David, “Integrating ethnoarchaeology: a subtle realist perspective”, Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 11(4), Pp. 330-359. 1992.
[21] N. David, “Lois et propositions ethno (archéo) logiques: le cas du projet archéologique Mandara'”. Ethnoarchéologie: Justification, Problèmes, Limites, Actes Des Rencontres. Pp.17-19. 1991
[22] N. Davidand, and C. Kramer, “Ethnoarchaeology in action”,Cambridge Univ Pr. 2001.
[23] O. P. Gosselain, “Bonfire of the enquiries. Pottery firing temperatures in archaeology: What for?”, Journal of archaeological science, 19(3), Pp. 243-259. 1992.
[24] P. J. Arnold III., “Ceramic ethnoarchaeology: Caught between “coming of age” and “showing its age”. Reviews in Anthropology, 27(1), Pp. 17-32. 1998.
[25] P. J. Arnold, “Working without a net: Recent trends in ceramic ethnoarchaeology”. Journal of Archaeological Research, 8(2), Pp. 105-133. 2000.
[26] P. Kosso, “Method in archaeology: Middle-range theory as hermeneutics”, American Antiquity, 621-627. 1991.
[27] P. Wiessner., “Style and Social Information in Kalahari San Projectile Points”, American Antiquity, 48(2), Pp. 253-276. 1983.
[28] R. Krause, “Pottery Ethnoarchaeology in the Central Maya Highlands, by Michael Deal”, American Antiquity, 64(1), Pp. 559-559. 1999.
[29] George Malaperdas, "Practical Methods of GIS for Archaeologists: Spatial Division in a Large Area" SSRG International Journal of Geoinformatics and Geological Science 6.1 (2019): 1-6.
[30] R. H. McGuire, M. B. Schiffer, “A theory of architectural design”, Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 2(3), Pp. 277-303.1983.
[31] T. R. Pauketat, and T. E. Emerson, “The Ideology of Authority and the Power of the Pot”, American Anthropologist, 93(4), Pp. 919-941. 1991.
[32] W. A. Longacre., “Kalinga pottery making: The evolution of a research design”, Frontiers of Anthropology, Van Nostrand, New York, Pp. 51-67. 1974