Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-xtgtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T13:28:16.044Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ceramic Standardization and Intensity of Production: Quantifying Degrees of Specialization

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Valentine Roux
Valentine Roux*
Affiliation:
Laboratoire de Préhistoire et Technologie, CNRS, 92023 Nanterre cedex, France
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The aim of this study is to examine the relationship between metric variability of ceramic vessels of a single type and intensity of production. This relationship is examined on the basis of vessels made by Indian and Spanish potters whose rates of production vary from low to high. Results are compared with Filipino data to embrace different cultures and therefore possibly different emic conceptions of standardization. We conclude that rate of production affects the degree of standardization. However, only in a high-rate production situation do we have motor habits that transcend emic conceptions of standardization. Indeed, factors like size classes, emic conception of size classes, and skill may induce a certain variability despite similar rates of production. Indexing degrees of standardization needs, in other respects, to take into account the cumulative effect of production events that play on the CV (Coefficient of Variation) values. Applied to Mesopotamian data, our results suggest that third millennium ceramic production can be compared to low-rate production observed ethnographically.

Résumé

Résumé

El propósito de este estudio es analizar la relación entre la variabilidad mé trica de las vasijas de un solo tipo cerámico y la intensidad de la producción. Esta relación se estudia a partir de una serie de piezas manufacturadas por alfareros de la India y de España cuya producción puede variar en cantide de baja a alta. Los resultados se comparan con datos de los filipinos para abarcar diferentes culturas y, por lo tanto, posibles diferencias en conceptos émicos de estandarización. Concluimos que la tasa de producción incide en el nivel de estandarización. Sin embargo, solamente en case de una tasa alta de producción hay habitos de manufactura que transcienden los conceptos émicos de estandarización. En efecto, factores como las clases de dimensiones, los conceptos émicos del tamaño y la destreza del artesano producen cierta variabilidad a pesar de que haya tasas similares de producción. Para medir los grades de estandarización se requiere, entre otros aspectos, tomar en cuenta el efecto acumulativo de los eventos de producción sobre los valores del CV (coeficiente de variación). Al aplicar estos resultados a los datos de Mesopotamia, se cuenta con bases para plantear que la producción de ceramica en el tercer milenio puede ser comparada con una producción de nivel bajo tal como se lo ha observado en contextos etnográficos.

Type
Reports
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 68 , Issue 4 , October 2003 , pp. 768 - 782
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for American Archaeology 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References Cited

Arcelin-Pradelle, C., and Laubenheimer, F. 1982 Une Mission d’Archéo-Ethnologie: les Ateliers de Potiers Traditionnels dans les Provinces de Valencia et de Castellén (Espagne). Techniques et Technologies. Sources Documentaires 5:27-52. Institut de Recherches Méditerranéennes, Université de Provence.Google Scholar
Arcelin-Pradelle, C., and Laubenheimer, F. 1985 La Notion de Série de Production en Céramique Tournée. Techniques et Technologies. Sources Documentaires 7:129-139. Institut de Recherches Méditerranéennes, Université de Provence.Google Scholar
Arnold, D., and Nieves, A. L. 1992 Factors Affecting Ceramic Standardization. In Ceramic Production and Distribution: an Integrated Approach, edited by Bey, G.J. III and Pool, C.A., pp. 113-214. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado.Google Scholar
Benco, N. 1988 Morphological Standardization: An Approach to the Study of Craft Specialization. In A Pot for All Reasons: Ceramic Ecology Revisited, edited by Kolb, C. and Lackey, L., pp. 57-72. Temple University, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Blackman, M. J., Stein, G. J., and Vandiver, P. B. 1993 The Standardization Hypothesis and Ceramic Mass Production: Technological, Compositional and Metric Indexes of Craft Specialization at Tell Leilan, Syria. American Antiquity 58:60-8.Google Scholar
Bril, B., Roux, V., and Dietrich, G. 2000 Skills Involved in the Knapping of Chalcedony Beads: Motor and Cognitive Characteristics of a Complex Situated Action. In Cornaline de l’Inde: Des pratiques techniques de Cambay aux techno-systèmes de l’Indus, edited by Roux, V., pp. 207-332. Editions de la MSH, Paris (English CD-Rom enclosed).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coren, S., Ward, L. M., and Enns, J. T. 1994 Sensation and Perception. 4th ed. Harcourt Brace, Fort Worth, Texas.Google Scholar
Costin, C. L. 1991 Craft Specialization: Issues in Defining, Documenting and Explaining the Organization of Production. In Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, Vol. 3, edited by Schiffer, M. B., pp. 1-56. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
Costin, C. L. 2000 The Use of Ethnoarchaeology for the Archaeological Study of Ceramic Production. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 7:377–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costin, C. L. and Hagstrum, M. B. 1995 Standardization, Labor Investment, Skill, and the Organization of Ceramic Production in Late Prehispanic Highland Peru. American Antiquity 60:619-639.Google Scholar
Eerkens, J. W., and Bettinger, R. L. 2001 Techniques for Assessing Standardization in Artifact Assemblages: Can We Scale Material Variability? American Antiquity 66:493-504.Google Scholar
Feinman, G. M., Upham, S., and Lightfoot, K. G. 1981 The Production Step Measure: An Ordinal Index of Labor Input in Ceramic Manufacture. American Antiquity 46:871-884.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallay, A. 1986 L’archéologie Demain. Belfond, Paris.Google Scholar
Kvamme, K. L. Stark, M. T., and Longacre, W. A. 1996 Alternative Procedures for Assessing Standardization in Ceramic Assemblages. American Antiquity 61:116-126.Google Scholar
London, G. A. 1991 Standardization and Variation in the Work of Craft Specialists. In Ceramic Ethnoarchaeology, edited by Longacre, W. A., pp. 182-204. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
Longacre, W. A. 1991 Sources of Ceramic Variability among the Kalinga of Northern Luzon. In Ceramic Ethnoarchaeology, edited by Longacre, W. A., pp. 95-11. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
Longacre, W. A. 1999 Standardization and Specialization: What's the Link? In Pottery and People, edited by Skibo, J. and Feinman, G., pp. 231-267. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
Longacre, W. A., Kvamme, K. L., and Kobayashi, M. 1988 Southwestern Pottery Standardization: An Ethnoarchaeological View from the Philippines. Kiva 53:101-112.Google Scholar
Rice, P. 1989 Ceramic Diversity, Production and Use. In Quantifying Diversity in Archaeology, edited by Leonard, R. D. and Jones, G. T., pp. 109-117. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Rice, P. 1991 Specialization, Standardization and Diversity: a Retrospective. In The Ceramic Legacy of Anna O. Shepard, edited by Bishop, R. L. and Lange, F. W., pp. 257-279. University Press of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado.Google Scholar
Roux, V., and Corbetta, D. 1989 The Potter's Wheel: Craft Specialization and Technical competence. Oxford and IBH Publishing, New Delhi.Google Scholar
Roux, V. 1999 Ethnoarcheology and the Generation of Referential Models: The Case of Harappan Carnelian Beads. In Ethno-Analogy and the Reconstruction of Prehistoric Artefact Use and Production, edited by Owen, L. and Porr, M., pp. 153-17. MoVince Verlag, Tübingen.Google Scholar
Saraswati, B., and Behura, N. K. 1964 Pottery Techniques in Peasant India. Anthropological Survey of India, Vol. 13, Calcutta.Google Scholar
Sinopoli, C. 1988 The Organization of Craft Production at Vijayanagara, South India. American Anthropologist 90:580-597.Google Scholar
Stark, B. L. 1995 Problems in the Analysis of Standardization and Specialization in Pottery. In Ceramic Production in the American Southwest, edited by Mills, B. and Crown, P., pp. 231-267. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar