The Potter's Wheel. Craft Specialization and Technical Competence

158 Pages·1989·36.46 MB·English

by  Roux Valentine in collaboration with Daniela Corbetta

THE POTTER'S
WHEEL
CRAFT SPECIALIZATION
AND TECHNICAL COMPETENCE
Valentine Roux
in collaboration with
Daniela Corbetta
VALENTINE ROUX
in collaboration with
DANIELA CORBETTA
OXFORD & 1BH PUBLISHING CO. PVT. LTD.
New Delhi Bombay Calcuta
CONTENTS
Foreword : Ala in Gal lay v
Preface : Valent ine Roux xi
WHEEL-THROWING TECHN IQUE AND CRAFT SPECIAL IZAT ION 1
Valentine Roux and Daniela Corbeta
PART ONE : Contex t , Object ives and Strateg ies of Study 3
1. Context of study 3
1.1. Thematic choice 3
1.2. Theoretical framework 4
2. Objectives of study 4
2.1. Definition of objectives 4
2.2. Objectives 5
2.3. Craft specialization among poters 6
2.4. The Indus poters 6
3. Strategies of study 6
3.1. Working hypotheses 6
3.2. The field, or ethnographic investigation 8
PART TWO : Study of the Whee l -Th row ing Techn ique /
Craft Specia l izat ion Relat ionship 10
Observat iona l Data 10
1. Whel-throwing technique 10
1.1. Learning conditions 10
1.2. Learning proces 1
1.3. Aprenticeship of main motor controls 12
1.4. Aprenticeship in terms of number of fashioning operations 28
1.5. Aprenticeship in terms of manufacturing time 29
2. Coiling Technique 30
2.1. Tandurs 30
2.2. Hearths and silos 31
2.3. Coiled jars 37
Experimenta l Data 40
1. Two-handed strategies and experimental production 40
2. Perceptual motor tests of presure and two-handed pointing 45
2.1. Test of simultaneous symetrical presures 47
2.2. Test of simultaneous symetrical pointings 52
2.3. Two-handed test of combined presures in pointing 56
2.4. Test of asymetrical pointings 59
iv
D iscuss ion of the "Whee l -Th row ing Techn ique and
Craft Spec ia l iza t ion" Hypothes is 67
1. Characteristics of aprenticeship in whel-throwing technique 67
2. Characteristics of aprenticeship in coiling technique 69
3. Conclusions 69
PART THRE : Signif icant Mater ia l Study 71
1. Research procedure 71
1.1. Constitution of a significant ethnographic corpus 71
2. Descriptive system 72
2.1. Dimensions 72
3. Significant measures of technical difficulties arising during transit
from one stage to the next 75
3.1. Absolute and proportional dimensions 75
3.2. Index of shaping regularity 76
3.3. Index of standardization 84
4. Conclusion 84
PART FOUR : Conc lus ions 8
References 91
DEVELOPMENT OF A TAXONOMY TO MEASURE THROW ING
DIFFICULTIES OF PREH ISTOR ICAL AND
PROTOHISTOR ICAL CERAMIC VESELS 93
Valentine Roux
Introduct ion 95
1. Definition of a morphological series of containers 9
1.1. Restricted containers 9
1.2. Unrestricted containers 101
2. Reproduction and indigenous clasification of morphological series 102
2.1. Experimental procedure 102
2.2. Indigenous clasification 105
3. Development of a techno-morphological taxonomy 13
4. Pertinence of indigenous clasification 16
4.1. Margin between measurements of experimental production and
norms given in instructions 17
4.2. Manufacturing time 123
4.3. Thining and shaping: gestures, number and duration 124
4.4. Conclusion 139
5. Evaluation by French poters 139
5.1. Measures of throwing dificulties 140
5.2. Techno-morphological taxonomy 141
5.3. Technical gestures 142
5.4. Type of whel 142
6. Conclusions 143
References 145
Foreword
Since archaeo logy exists, prehistor ians and protohistor ians have turned
towards e thnography in an at tempt to unders tand better the mater ia l vest iges
d iscovered in excavat ions .
Most of the t ime, imperfect ly mas te red , th is confrontat ion has exper ienced
var ied success and has of ten been rightly cr i t ic ized. Born in the context of
the New Archaeo logy of the sixt ies e thnoarchaeo logy a imed at provid ing new
insights, permit t ing us lastly to get out of the sta lemate and to bui ld up a theory
of the past-present conf ronta t ion.
In spite of numerous studies, most archaeolog is ts are not conv inced by
the results. It is wor thwh i le to ana lyse the causes of this si tuat ion because
the study p roposed by Valent ine Roux and Danié la Corbet ta shows , in an
exemplary fash ion , the ways to fo l low in order to get out of the sta lemate.
Given the current state of research, e thnoarchaeology must cope with three
types of diff iculty:
1) The analys is of the present ought to lead to posi t ive proposi t ions
regarding the signi f icance of the vest iges of mater ia l cul ture. Go ing through
ethnoarchaeolog ica l l i terature, one notes that most of the studies come out
with negat ive sta tements . Mater ia l vest iges are, by their very nature,
ambiguous and their signi f icance is eminent ly var iab le ; most of the
interpretat ions of fered by archaeolog is ts are not just i f ied or are at least not
the only ones poss ib le .
These caut ionary notes are natural ly salutatory to the extent that prudence
is advoca ted . However , it is somewha t cur ious to observe a deve lopment of
this contest ing current even though the new archaeology c la ims to show the
way to reconst i tute the past tak ing into account all the cul tural aspects wh ich
have d isappeared .
However , it is nei ther possib le, nor des i rab le for a discipl ine to be based
solely on negat ive s ta tements and on invitat ions for caut ion . A l though the way
to resolve the s ta lemate is still to be found out.
2) Ethnoarchaeo logy must search for genera l izab le proposi t ions; the
transcul tural const i tu tes its f ie ld of act ion. Whi le confront ing the present , the
invest igator must in fact avo id two dangers wh i ch , like Charybde and Scyl la,
threaten to d rown him.
Concent ra t ing solely on the transcul tura l can give rise to plat i tudes on
human behav iour wh ich are devo id of heurist ic interest. By avoid ing this
approach, only local cul tural par t icu lar isms are highl ighted. Their actual f ield
of appl icat ion is never known and is probably l imi ted.
vj
This diff iculty is we l l k nown . Some scholars thought of get t ing out of the
impasse by adopt ing an intermediary posi t ion and by develop ing middle-range
theor ies neither too genera l nor too specif ic. But can one really mainta in such
a del icate ba lance on the razor 's edge wi thout fal l ing to side or the other?
To our mind, this quest ion still remains to be answered .
Ethnoarchaeolog ica l thought indeed has never been concerned wi th
def in ing in te rms of t ime and space the f ie ld of appl icat ion of the enunc ia ted
proposi t ions.
3) Most of the s ta tements of e thnoarchaeo logy are wha t we tend to cal l
regularit ies. The latter can be expressed in three different ways : mathemat ica l
correlat ions be tween two cont inuous or d iscont inuous var iables, typolog ies
associat ing intr insic character is t ics (nature or shape of objects) w i th extr insic
character ist ics ( local isat ion, tempora l at t r ibut ion, funct ion of the object) and
finally discurs ive proposi t ions of the type if Pi then Pi + 1 .
In most cases , these regular i t ies are not unders tood as nothing is known
about the " reasons" found ing the empir ica l reality highl ighted, even if the
proposed const ruc t ions w i tness a power of eff icient predict ion on reality.
We think that it is only by unders tand ing the mechan isms responsib le for
the observed regular i t ies that it shal l be possib le to de te rmine once the f ields
of appl icat ion of the p roposed transcul tura l rules.
Whi le we we re ask ing ourse lves these quest ions, w e got to know of the
present work . It w a s for us a ver i table revelat ion as it o f fered part ial response
to the quest ions asked .
We wou ld like here to demons t ra te how this work differs f r om many
previous ethnoarchaeolog ica l wo r ks and why we think it opens the way to the
emergence of a real sc ience of reference for archaeology.
1) Our first point might seem banal ; it is not however negligible. By choosing
to study the relat ionship wh i ch exists be tween the whee l - th row ing techn ique
and craft specia l izat ion, Valent ine Roux and Danie la Corbet ta are placed
explicit ly at the heart of a fundamen ta l archaeolog ica l p rob lem, namely that
of criteria al lowing the descr ipt ion and explanat ion of the urbanizat ion process
in the Near and Middle East.
The object ive of the research is thus def ined on the basis of archaeological
quest ions. A real crit ical analys is of archaeolog ica l d iscourse deve loped by
Valentine Roux in other publ icat ions, precedes the ethnoarchaeological enquiry
and specif ies the stakes invo lved.
Confronted wi th the difficulties of interpret ing vest iges, archaeologists have
always turned intuit ively to ethnography. However , they have not always
explicit ly fo rmu la ted the p rob lems to be so lved. The present study is one step
ahead ; it f inds its or ig in in a " logicist" analys is of the archaeolog ica l d iscourse
itself and a fundamenta l cr i t ic ism of the latter. This cri t icism enables the authors
to lay down the l imi ted object ive of the study : to demonst ra te that use of the
whee l necessar i ly impl ies a cer ta in craft specia l izat ion.
It is also through the examina t ion of archaeolog ica l reality and its
confrontat ion wi th the present that the centra l hypothes is of the adopted
procedure was "discovered". The tempora l evolut ion of ceramic shapes at sites
vii
in the process of urbanizat ion is not wi thout analogy to the evolut ion of shapes
obta ined at the t ime of learning whee l - th rown ceramics . Such an analogy is
not based on any identi ty be tween phy logenes is and ontogenes is but on the
constra ints assoc ia ted wi th a progress ive mastery over the work of a specif ic
mater ial .
2) Finding its origin in a discourse of ext reme complexi ty , the present study
manages nonethe less to clear ly def ine its l imits and is therefore contro l lable.
The wi l l to restrict the object ives must be emphas ized as it is rare in the f ield
of social sc iences. It const i tutes never the less one of the necessary condi t ions
for progress in know ledge .
In the present case , the object ives are clear ly def ined and l imited : to
demonst ra te first that the appearance of craft specia l izat ion is l inked to the
diff icult ies encounte red in learning the whee l - th row ing techn ique and
subsequent ly to fix, at the level of the morpholog ica l propert ies of ceramic,
the threshold beyond wh ich it is poss ib le to infer that mastery over the whee l -
throwing techn ique has been acqu i red .
3) For the first t ime , an e thnoarchaeo log ica l study at tempts to go beyond
the f ramework of typolog ica l regular i t ies by trying to search for their
foundat ions. Binford was one of the first archaeolog is ts to ask himself this
quest ion wh i le s tudy ing the Mask Esk imo site. Only the unders tand ing of the
mechan isms can ensure a cer ta in val idi ty to t ranscul tura l models . Too many
are the studies of the kind under taken by the Yel len on Boch iman camps wh ich
deal only wi th corre la t ions be tween var iab les; the camp size, the quant i ty of
vest iges, the number of occupan ts , the occupat ion t ime without being
preoccup ied wi th analys ing what , in the natural env i ronment , the techno-
economic and social structure, justif ies such an empirical ly perceived structure.
Studies deal ing wi th such issues we re unfor tunate ly too rare. The first part
of the present study clear ly takes up the cha l lenge. The relat ionship be tween
whee l - th rown ceramic (Pi) and specia l izat ion (Pi + 1) f inds its or ig in in the
diff icult ies inherent in learning the whee l - th row ing techn iques, in other wo rds
in acquir ing a certain mastery over the mater ial . This mastery br ings two poles
into play, on the one hand the phys ica l character is t ics of the mater ia l (in the
present case clay) and on the other hand the perceptua l motor structures of
Homo sapiens sapienswhich are mater ia l ized in acqui red automat ic "chaînes
opératoi res".
The same type of approach is tes ted in the second part of the study. Here
the regulari t ies are p resen ted in the fo rm of a typo logy l inking an ind igenous
classif ication of the degrees of th rowing difficulty (OX, extr insic character is t ics
of the F type, funct ion) wi th the comple ted ceramic shapes (Ol , intrinsic
characteristics of the G type, geometr ical shapes). The mechanisms discovered
are the same but the perspect ive has been decent red . The first part
emphas izes the nature of the perceptua l motor process whe reas the second
part insists more part icular ly on the constra ints arising out of the physica l
propert ies of the wo r ked mater ia l .
We shall also note that in th is latter case the explanat ion proposed by the
scientist has been sugges ted by Indian and French pot ters who themse lves
possess a more-or- less explicit technical knowledge. We invite epistemologists
viii
and logicians to reflect upon the operat iona l know-how of the art isans and
the necessar i ly new formula t ions const ruc ted by the anthropologist when
recount ing facts. Valent ine Roux 's second work has the merit of implicit ly
raising this quest ion even though the g iven answer , to our mind , is still not
very clear.
However , the procedure fo l lowed is beyond cri t ic ism. In sc ience, the
progress of know ledge occurs through the sole way of descr ipt ion of "what
is happening" .
It is thus necessary to clear ly dist inguish be tween this type of funct ional
explanat ion and any " funct iona l ism" wh ich expla ins observed structures by
their finality.
4) A scienti f ic approach is recogn ized as such by the links wh ich can be
set towards other f ields in sc ience. All isolated knowledge developing in c losed
circle is suspect . Here the open ing towards other bodies of knowledge is
particularly conv inc ing. We have apprec iated the l inkage establ ished be tween
an eminent ly "soc ia l " character is t ic , the specia l izat ion, and quest ions deal ing
with the maturat ion and perceptua l motor contro l of the movement .
Hav ing sa id this, in no way we wan t to assert that the social can and rriust
be reduced to the psycho log ica l , rather an unders tand ing of the social does
not exclude the descr ip t ion of cer ta in componen ts in te rms of exper imenta l
psychology and perceptua l motor funct ion .
A simi lar type of l inkage cou ld undoubted ly be estab l ished be tween the
typology of degrees of th rowing diff iculty and sol id-state physics al lowing for
a more rigorous approach of the dynamics of clay subject to a movement of
rotat ion. Thus an art iculated body of knowledge is const ruc ted gradual ly ,
consis tency coup led wi th eff ic iency be ing a sign of relative truth.
5) Valent ine Roux and Danié la Corbe t ta offer us a funct ional (but not
functional ist) exp lanat ion of reali ty. The facts brought to light thus escape
cultural cont ingenc ies . They are based on the biological nature of Homo
sapiens sapiens and on phys ica l proper t ies of matter. Here , one cou ld cry
scandal and we can already see anthropologists suggest ing that one thus turns
a bl ind eye to the very essence of cul ture(s) . However , it is not a quest ion
of miss ing the target but s imply that the object ive is di f ferent. The way chosen
is the only possible one because one stands explicitly in the transcultural realm.
Such an approach does not el iminate the cul tural by contest ing its ex is tence;
it considers it as a different type of reality. Ethnoarchaeology does not at tempt
to unders tand the constant ly renewed original i ty of cul tures; it seeks to
construct genera l izab le proposi t ions about the latter.
6) We wou ld like to under l ine final ly the utility of present ing the results
of the enquiry in the fo rm of a logicist scheme . This latter highl ights the fact
that the acqui red body of knowledge only const i tutes a smal l f ract ion of reality,
which in no way devo ids it f r om its solidity, rather it enhances it.
It also shows that the mobi l izat ion of knowledge acqui red at the t ime of
an archaeologica l demonst ra t ion impl ies recourse to a who le new series of
other proposit ions : to study the appearance of craft special izat ion necessitates
for example to f ind out the means to demonst ra te the non-craft special izat ion
ix
in the earl ier per iods. Nowadays , many of these proposi t ions are not demon -
strated (neither demons t rab le ?). We spoke of the integrat ion of
ethnoarchaeology wi th other scient i f ic disc ip l ines. Here w e f ind ourse lves in
the field of integrat ion and art iculat ion of bodies of ethnoarchaeo log ica l
knowledge. The logicist explanat ion of demonst ra t ions proves to be ext remely
helpful in research ing and explor ing new spaces of analys is.
Finally, logicist schemat iza t ion enables the discovery of the condi t ions
required for establ ish ing the networks of pyramida l demonst ra t ions and
avoiding fan order construct ions wh ich only lead to equivocal conclus ions. This
appears, to otir mind , to be the necessary condi t ion for the creat ion of an
efficient body of archaeolog ica l know ledge .
One point wi l l retain us aga in . We dealt w i th it lastly as it does not relate
to the necessary and sufficient character ist ics of ethnoarchaeological approach
as is the case, to our m ind , for the prev ious points. We wan t here to talk about
the link estab l ished in the present work between observat ion and
exper imentat ion.
These last years, exper imental archaeology has made great strides in many
fields. We think especia l ly to the study of mic rowear t races (traceology) or
the reconst i tut ion of chipp ing techn ique of chert . From a formal and
epistemologica l point of v iew, exper imenta l archaeology is not distinct f rom
ethnoarchaeology. Both discipl ines work indeed towards an external reference
knowledge sys tem wh ich can be used in the interpretat ion of archaeolog ica l
vest iges. We wou l d like to under l ine here the interest of the joint use of both
approaches in the resolut ion of a specif ic p rob lem. Perhaps in the future it
will be useful to bet ter integrate both discip l ines an example of wh ich we have
here and as is al ready pract ised by certa in archaeolog is ts . Exper imenta l
archaeology proposed by a ci t izen of the 20th century indeed runs the risk
of be ing led astray on an unreal ist ic way if it is not constant ly conf ronted wi th
data given by tradi t ional popu la t ions. But this is another matter.
As we wro te at the very outset , Valent ine Roux and Danie la Corbet ta 's
work came to us as a revelat ion. Af ter its read ing, one quest ion never theless
remains, brutal ly asked , to wh i ch we still do not have answers . We wan t here
to speak of midd le- range theor ies . If w e are conv inced of the advisabi l i ty and
the great use of t ranscul tura l approaches , we do not see how to deve lop a
useful approach wh ich takes into account cont ingenc ies and cultural
variabil i t ies. Such studies indeed a lways come up against one unreso lved
quest ion : how to del imit in an explicit , sol id and formal manner the tempora l
and geograph ica l f ield wi th in wh ich the proposi t ions highl ighted (be they
regularit ies or mechan isms) are appl icable. We have thus to ask ourse lves
the quest ion whe the r e thnoarchaeo logy ought to be limited to a sc ience of
the species Homo sapiens sapiens or whe the r it can be also a sc ience of
diverse cul tures?
One of the main meri ts of this beaut i fu l study, and not the least, is in f i l igree
to raise this essent ia l ques t ion .
June, 1 9 8 9 ALAIN GAL LAY