Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Ceramic ecology session at AAA
The session will deal with current field and laboratory ceramic research from both the Old and New Worlds -- work that that includes the disciplines of archaeology, ethnoarchaeology, ethnography, archaeometry, and materials science.
Traditionally, the symposiasts have dinner after the session; to help with a head count please email Charles Kolb about interest in the dinner.
See our President Sandra López Varela and Bulletin contributor Charles Kolb during the session:
Program Number: 3-141
Session: CERAMIC ECOLOGY XXIII: CURRENT RESEARCH ON CERAMICS 2009
Session Sponsor: Archaeology Division
Session Date/Time: Sat., 1:45 PM-5:30 PM
Organizer: CHARLES KOLB (National Endowment Humanities)
Participants:
1:45 PM: INTRODUCTION: CHRISTOPHER POOL (University of Kentucky)
2:00 PM: JAMES SHEEHY (n/a) -- Potters, People, and Land in Bihar, India: a perspective from the 1961 Census of India
2:15 PM: RAHUL OKA (University of Notre Dame), CHAPURUKHA KUSIMBA (Field Museum, Chicago) -- Producing and Exporting “South Asian” Islamic Monochrome Glazed Wares: Import Substitution and Market Capture in the 16th and 17th centuries CE?
2:30 PM: TARA TETRAULT -- Tracing Variation in Vessel Manufacture and Cultural Identity through Ceramics in Ghana, West Africa
2:45 PM: JOHN ARTHUR (University of South Florida) -- Pottery and Caste Groups: Historical Archaeology of the Gamo Highlands of Southern Ethiopia
3:00 PM: JEROLYN MORRISON (n/a) -- Must Haves for the Minoan Kitchen, a Tripod Cooking Pot and a Cooking Dish
3:15 PM: MICHAEL SUGERMAN, JILL BIERLY (University of Massachusetts) -- Idalion: Ceramics and Identity at an Iron Age Border Town in Cyprus
3:30 PM: JAMES SKIBO -- Stone Boiling, Fire-Cracked Rock, and Nut Oil: Exploring the Origins of Pottery in the Upper Great Lakes
3:45 PM: BREAK
4:00 PM: ALEKSANDRA WIERUCKA (University of Gdansk, Poland) -- The Disappearing Art: the Ceramics of Quichua along the Napo River
4:15 PM: AMY HIRSHMAN (West Virginia University) -- Petrographic Analysis of Paste Variability in Tarascan Fine Ware Ceramics: a Preliminary Assessment
4:30 PM: SANDRA LOPEZ VARELA (U Autonoma Estado de Morelos) -- Institutional Imagining of Development: new inquiry field for ethnoarchaeology
4:45 PM: JIM WEIL (Science Museum of Minnesota), ANAYENSY HERRERA VILLALOBOS (Asesores Arqueologicos) -- Archaeological and Ethnohistorical Inferences Based on the Manufacture of Three Ceramic Pieces by Contemporary Artisans on Costa Rica's Nicoya Peninsula
5:00 PM: CHARLES KOLB (National Endowment Humanities) -- From the Field and Laboratory: Current Research in Ceramic Studies
5:15 PM: DISCUSSANT: CHRISTOPHER POOL (University of Kentucky)
Thursday, June 4, 2009
Magnetic properties abstracts from AGU
The last few abstracts from these two session on geophysics and archaeology, looking at magnetic properties at two type of archaeological materials.The image is unrelated, other than it is a cool representation of magnetic properties of thin films.
GP11I-03
Magnetic Susceptibility of Ancient and Modern Potsherds Using a Fast, Cheap and Portable Probe
Glover, P W (paglover@ggl.ulaval.ca), Université, Département de géologie et de génie géologique, Québec, QC G1V 0A6, Canada
It has been estimated that there exist over 100 million ancient potsherds in various collections worldwide, many of which have never been studied and for which the provenance is ambiguous or unknown. Indeed, many collections are extremely badly catalogued or completely mixed-up. We have been using a novel portable probe to measure the magnetic susceptibility and electrical conductivity of potsherds in the hope that this fast, cheap and portable measurement can provide data that will help to sort similar looking potsherds into sets in a manner which may help to define their provenance. The probe, which resembles a firearm, uses the Hall effect to make a non-destructive measurement on the potsherd. The probe is attached to an Dell Axim X51 PDA, which runs software that allows the measurement to be carried out and logged. Each measurement, which is made by pressing a button on the gun, takes only a few seconds. We have made measurements on three suites of ancient potsherds as well as a suite of modern potsherds that were created by using a garden centre and a hammer! In each case a set of 5 stacked measurements were taken on the inside and outside faces of the potsherd in two perpendicular directions. Potsherds which were either (i) so flat that the inside and outside could not be distinguished, (ii) so curved (radius of curvature less than 5 cm) that the probe tip could not approach the surface sufficiently closely, or (iii) smaller than the probe tip, were excluded from the suite of measurements. Each suite contained over 50 measureable potsherds. All measurements were completed within one day. In this pilot study we found that (1) each suite was represented by a normal distribution of magnetic susceptibility values, (2) the four different suites could be distinguished statistically on the basis of their magnetic susceptibility measurements, but (3) the distinction was not sufficiently powerful to separate all potsherds (i.e., there was a significant overlap of the susceptibility distributions). This seems to confirm that the method may be used to give additional information that can be used to help to provenance a potsherd, but the susceptibility measurement is not sufficient on its own. In addition, we found that (4) the electrical conductivity measurements depended upon the local conditions (mainly humidity) and was of no use in distinguishing between suites of potsherds. However, most interestingly, we found that (5) there is a statistically significant difference between the magnetic susceptibility measured on the inside face and that measured on the outside face for all three ancient suites of potsherd, but not for the modern potsherds. The reason for this is not currently known. One hypothesis is that the difference is due to the manufacturing style. Further studies are being planned to extend our database.
http://www.ggl.ulaval.ca/personnel/paglover/Home.htm
GP11I-04
Magnetic Fingerprinting of Central Mediterranean Obsidian Source Groups
Weaver, I (isaacweaver@alumni.fandm.edu), Department of Earth and Environment, Franklin & Marshall College, PO Box 3003, Lancaster, PA 17604-3003, United States
Sternberg, R (rob.sternberg@fandm.edu), Department of Earth and Environment, Franklin & Marshall College, PO Box 3003, Lancaster, PA 17604-3003, United States
Tykot, R H (rtykot@cas.usf.edu), Department of Anthropology, University of South Florida, 4202 East Fowler Avenue, SOC 107, Tampa, FL 33620-8100, United States
The Central Mediterranean islands of Lipari, Palmarola, Pantelleria, and Sardinia are known to be the only sources of obsidian in that region (Tykot, 2002). The obsidian on each source island has a unique chemical composition (i.e., a fingerprint) that has allowed Tykot (2002) to provenance Neolithic obsidian artifacts from archaeological sites throughout the Central Mediterranean to these four sources. Thus, Tykot (2002) revealed material distribution patterns otherwise inaccessible to archaeologists. An exploratory study by McDougall et al. (1983) demonstrated the potential use of magnetic properties to distinguish Central Mediterranean obsidians. If each obsidian source group has a unique magnetic fingerprint, magnetic provenancing might serve as a quick, inexpensive, and non-destructive alternative to chemical provenancing. Our research continues the work started by McDougall et al.; we set out to characterize the Central Mediterranean obsidians and search for magnetic fingerprints that distinguish them. Our preliminary study of the magnetic properties of 30 geologic obsidian specimens from Sardinia A, B, and C subgroups and the three other Central Mediterranean island sources suggests that each source has a unique combination of magnetic properties that could allow magnetic provenancing of archaeological obsidians. For example, the combination of natural remanent magnetization (NRM; median [med] = 2.46 x 10-4 Am2/kg, interquartile range [IQR] = 9.77 x 10-4 Am2/kg) and magnetic susceptibility (low field, low frequency magnetic susceptibility [χlflf]: med = 27.0 x 10-6 m3/kg, IQR = 75.9 x 10-6 m3/kg) seems to have good potential to discriminate the groups. However, statistical analysis shows that there is significant overlap in the confidence intervals of these variables, a limitation which appears to be partially imposed at this point by the small sample size. Discriminant analysis of several magnetic variables also shows potential to assist in classification (i.e., provenancing) of Central Mediterranean obsidians. We have obtained discriminant functions that correctly classify over 80% of the obsidian specimens in leave-one-out cross validations using as few as three log- transformed magnetic parameters: NRM, χlflf, and saturation isothermal remanent magnetization (SIRM; med = 7.59 x 10-3 Am2/kg, IQR = 2.85 x 10-2 Am2/kg). Backfield coercivity of remanence, median destructive field, percent frequency effect, and saturation coercivity seem to contribute the least to group discrimination, yet their effects are statistically significant. Even though initial tests of discriminant analysis look promising, it should be noted that the small sample sizes and relatively large number of variables used in the discriminant analyses violate the test's assumptions and may make the resulting discriminant functions unusable; this will be addressed in future research. The results from our preliminary study suggest that the Central Mediterranean sources of obsidian might have characteristic and distinguishable magnetic fingerprints. However, many more geologic obsidian specimens must be measured to define the ranges of the source groups' magnetic properties and to further test this hypothesis.
Saturday, March 28, 2009
SAS-sponsored symposium at the SAA - I
At the Society for American Archaeology meeting in Atlanta, April 22-26Friday afternoon, April 24
Session 110
SYMPOSIUM BEYOND PROVENANCE: CERAMIC PETROGRAPHY AND CERAMIC TECHNOLOGY
Room: M103
Time: 1:00 PM–4:45 PM
Organizer: Maria Masucci
Image at right from ceramic petrography web site of Robert Mason, University of Toronto
Participants:
1:00 Maria Masucci—Fabric and Culture: Technological Change in Ecuadorian “Finger-Painted” Pottery
1:15 George Pevarnik—Not Everything that Glitters is Gold and not Every Whitish Aplastic is Quartz: Theoretical and Methodological Implications for Pottery Analyses and Interpretations
1:30 Patrick Quinn and Margie Burton—Ceramic Petrography, Craft Technology and Cultural Identity in Pre-Contact Southern California
1:45 Yukiko Tonoike—Beyond Style: Petrographic analysis of Dalma ceramics in two regions of Iran
2:00 David Hill—Regional Mobility and the Sources of Ceramics Recovered in Southeastern New Mexico and West Texas
2:15 Thomas Charlton and María Eugenia Guevara Mendoza—Petrographic and INAA Studies of Teotihuacan Period Ceramics from Rural Sites
2:30 Sophia Kelly, Gordon Moore, David Abbott and Christopher Watkins—Technological Choices Related to Sand Temper Selection in Perry Mesa Plainware Pottery
2:45 Jerolyn Morrison and Mara T. Horowitz—Studies in Replicating Bronze Age Cooking Fabrics from Two Mediterranean Sites
3:00 Miriam Cantor—Petrographic and Microprobe Analysis of Plain Ware from Chogha Sefid to Determine Cultural Origin
3:15 Sandra Lopez—New routes for characterization studies: analyzing the process of modernity
3:30 Anabel Ford, Frank Spera and Brianne Catlin—Nothing Is Simple: Identifying The Source of Late Classic Maya Volcanic Ash
3:45 Evangelia Kiriatzi—Beyond Provenance: Ceramic petrology as Tool in the Reconstruction of Technological Landscapes
4:00 Marie-Claude Boileau—Integrating macro-feature analysis to ceramic petrography for the identification of technological traditions
4:15 John Hoopes—Discussant
4:30 Charles Kolb—Discussant
Saturday, March 7, 2009
Ceramics for the Archaeologist online
When I was a grad student in geophysics, working on the paleointensity of Hohokam ceramics, one of my great finds was Anna Shephard's Ceramics for the Archaeologist. That monograph explained so much to me about pottery, with a scientific/engineering bent about materials and processes that I could relate to. Along with the work of Harold Colton, it gave me some of the information I needed about temperatures, redox conditions, etc., for traditional ceramic technology.Later, I bought Prudence Rice's Pottery Analysis: A Sourcebook, but it was stolen from my office by a book re-seller.
I'm doing ceramics now in my Archaeometry class, and while browsing online a couple of days ago, I found that you can download the entire text of Shephard's book. It is on the website of the Carnegie Institution of Science. That would surprise you from the home page of that organization and its present-day emphases, but it was her publisher.
Download, read, learn, enjoy! You can download Shepard's Notes from a Ceramics Laboratory as well. I'm actually not familiar with that one.
Mission statement of the Carnegie:
Andrew Carnegie established a unique organization dedicated to scientific discovery “in the broadest and most liberal manner.” The philosophy was and is to devote the institution’s resources to “exceptional” individuals so that they can explore the most intriguing scientific questions in an atmosphere of complete freedom. Carnegie and his trustees realized that flexibility and freedom were essential to the institution’s success and that tradition is the foundation of the institution today as it supports research in the Earth, space, and life sciences.I'm not a fan of great wealth (see where our economy is today, and why), but at least Andrew Carnegie gave some of it back.
