Key Pages:
Home
Joukowsky Institute for Archaeology & the Ancient World
Brown University
Box 1837 / 60 George Street
Providence, RI 02912
Telephone: (401) 863-3188
Fax: (401) 863-9423
[email protected]
For this first lab you will each choose and object from the collection examined in class. We will begin to develop a description using as many senses as you can. Think about the categories that you would want to use for its description. This might include everything from measurements to how it tastes.
Following the lab session I ask that you return to this page and post your description and what you think that you have learned from this archaeological object. What has it told you about any of the archaeological subjects that we have talked about in class (e.g. systems, historical narratives, cultures, our relationship with things, yourself).
The password for this forum is "islamic2011"
Ethan:
The vessel was used to store some kind of thin liquids such as water or alcohol, because its narrow neck made it hard to wash the internal wall.
It was designed to be portable, because 1) its bottom is not flat and it can’t stably sit on a table or floor; 2) its handle is on top part, next to its mouth, whereas putting the handle in the middle could have made pouring much easier; 3) its neck is narrow. It might be intentionally designed in this way to be convenient to carry by hand or by hanging on a string.
It was designed to be round 1) to avoid scraping its carriers, human beings or animals such as camels; 2) to maximize the capacity with limited material.
The vessel is made of terracotta.
It was handcrafted and produced on a medium or large scale. Since the patterns on both sides of the vessel are absolutely identical, I assume the artisan used templates to craft the pattern to speed up production.
If it is a portable liquid container, the choice of clay as its material is not ideal. Clay vessels are heavy and fragile. There are two potential reasons why the craftsman chose clay: 1) clay is cheap and affordable for the mass production; 2) they didn’t have the technics for leather vessel.
The vessel is clearly not a boutique, with its uneven wall and asymmetric patterns. It might be a household utensil. It is pretty and simple.
It has no funereal functions.
Laila Handoo
General Description: From what I can tell, my object is a broken clay piece with a bright blue ceramic glaze. It is 8 cm deep and it has a circular shape with Arabic inscription on the inside of it.
Form, Function: I think that the artifact was a piece of décor that was adorned on the wall of a house. This conclusion is being made after noticing the hole in the base of the object. Additionally, I think its circular shape lends itself to being a decorative vase or pot type of vessel. The decorative function of the piece can be understood when looking at the type of work on the piece. Rather than it being plain and simple, the object carries a certain type of intricacy as one looks at the flower, Arabic, and leave like designs.
Material, Manufacturing: The pot or vase artifact is made of clay and it then coated with a ceramic type of glaze. However, the availability of complex glazes during that time is unclear so there is a possibility of natural inks used to decorate the piece. Crushed blueberries could have produced blue ink that was used in the intricate design. After a ceramic glaze of some sort was used, blue ink must have been coated because it looks like it’s on as a separate layer. Additionally, the ink must have been done either in a rush or without careful attention. This is because it was not perfected as there are runny stains ran as it was not perfectly kept in shape.
Association, Taphonomy: Because there is Arabic inscription on it, I believe that this could have had either religious or Islamic culture relevance. Perhaps it served as a decorative symbol of their faith to God. If I was able to see all of the Arabic, it could have revealed something about the content inscribed on the piece.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Steph Parker:
Mine was a very small vessel, made of what seems to be glass. It could only hold very small amounts of liquid or whatever may have been put inside of it. It is fairly plain, no detailing except for where the glass had been cut. After some research the only objects I could find that looked similar to mine were from Syria and used as a medicine vessel sometime during the 3rd or 4th century or from somewhere in the Byzantine empire. The other vessels that looked similar also has an iridescent look on the inside and outside similar to what was on my object. There were also markings where it looked as though your fingers may fit on these vessels which looked somewhat like the way the glass was cut on my vessel.
I think that the vessel may have been used to hold some form of liquid because inside there was some residue that was somewhat silver and brown in color and iridescent. It may have been used by an apothecary to hold remedies and medicines because it can only hold a very small volume of anything. The cuts on the glass made perfect impressions for my fingers, making it easier to hold. This leads me to believe it may have been kept on a shelf and the impressions make it easier to grab.
It seems to have been made of glass that was blown because of the small imperfection on the bottom where the blow-pipe may have been. The glass was also cut, but the cuts seem to be more for function than looks. It looks as though it was made by a craftsman, but one who does not make aesthetically pleasing vessels.
The vessel does not seem to be for decoration because it is not especially beautiful or intricate. It was probably kept in a kitchen or in a medicine cabinet in the home or was used by a doctor and kept in a shop or and office type setting.
This kind of object can tell us about medicine and health at that time. Were medicines kept in the house or only with the doctor? It also may tell us what kind of socio-economic classes were able to afford medicine.
Madeline Ritaccio:
My object was a shard of green pottery. Physically the piece resembles the bottom of a dish or bowl judging by the bottom base and the angle and extension of the remaining edge. The artifact is made from a dark material and glazed to be light green. The glaze itself is very even with visible crazing on the underside. The piece is fractured and so the full detailing cannot be accounted for, but it appears as though the basin portrays a carving of a flower. Of what can be seen from this piece, the craftsmanship is expertly executed (as seen in the detailing of the flower, the evenness of the glaze, and the secure structure of the base). It was most likely made by molding the sides out from the base--evidence of this can be seen in the thickness of clay where the base meets the side. Aside from what has already been stated I observed no other evidence as to how it was made and no evidence of use.
Working with the clue given to me from Professor Straughn that the piece was from China, my conjecture is that the piece is an example of “Longquan” celadon. The simplicity of the piece in its design and color is unlike most other styles of decoration seen in Chinese pottery. Moreover, its unique green glaze and its darkish purple clay material mark Longquan celadon. If you google image "Longquan ceramics" you will see a vast amount of pottery with the same stylistic features as well as the same glaze color of my piece. I would venture to say that this object was produced before the Ming Dynasty (1368-1644) because at that time trade was prohibited. During the Yuan Dynasty (1271-1368), maritime trade was prolific and resulted in lesser quality pieces, so although this may have been the time when it was transported to the Muslim world, it may not have necessarily been the time when it was produced. Most likely the piece was made and traded during the late Song Dynasty (1127-1279) when floral designs, exceptional artistry, and monochromatic glazes were most common. Also during this time, trade with the Islamic world was at it's height. Trade of this sort of good would have been reserved for Islamic elites seeing as this type of ceramic was highly valued, specific to the Longquan area, and would not have been used in everyday life. As I said earlier, my piece, fragmented as it may be, shows no sign of use and its raised floral design would not have yielded for utilitarian purposes. I am inclined to believe that the motivation behind this trade was either an elite's assertion of their monetary power or was given as a declaration of alliance between the two worlds.
Posted at Feb 10/2011 09:57PM:
#Santiago:
Shape: It is approximately 12cm x 2cm x 0.5cm. Material: The piece is made of wood. The wood is smoothened on all sides and appears well maintained. The tone/shade/color of the wood is not constant: there are two seperate tones of color. It is not apparent whether this was intentional, whether it was a byproduct of the wood extraction/manufacturing process or due to the taphonomic processes it underwent. Other than that it appears in a very good condition.
Form: It is apparent that one end of the piece broke off of a larger piece: this is but a fragment of that larger piece. On this fragment there are 9 carved character inscriptions. The inscriptions are deliberate, clear, and smoothened. The inscriptions follow a sequence of 3 repetetive characters, for example: ABCABCABC. The existence of this pattern suggests that the same pattern would have continued on the entirety of the object.
Function: This object has a nice finish and an aesthetic quality to it. It appears to have a decorative purpose. The repetetive nature of the inscriptions and the fact that it is part of a bigger object makes me think it was part of a frame and the inscriptions on it were related to what it was framing. Resources, literacy and craft would have been needed to make such an object. This makes me believe it was not an object found in ordinary homes, rather in the houses of the wealthy/powerful.
Posted at Feb 10/2011 11:03PM:
#Aniqa:
Manufacture/materials: My object was a fragment of what seems to be a wide bowl or platter. It is made out of clay and its base color is white-beige and has been glazed. It is smooth and only under a microscope can some bumps and small holes be detected. It seems that these just developed over time and were not intentionally made as part of the piece.
Style/aesthetics: The design on the fragment includes a small goldish-brown duck that is inscribed in a circle of the same color. Traces of other patterns are visible, but because the fragment is so small it is hard to distinguish what they are. The piece also has what appears to be a poly-chrome glaze, because it shines pink and yellow under light. The duck on the piece is well drawn but not exceedingly detailed and the designs around the duck are clearly hand drawn but intricate. This indicates that effort and dedication went into making this piece but it was not of an extremely high caliber; perhaps it was made by some kind of craftsman, but not an amateur.
Form/ Function: The underside of the fragment reveals that it is the base of something: it is circular and elevated like the bottom of a decorative bowl or platter. Hence it would be stable on a table-top or other flat surface. The fragment is too wide/shallow for the original to have been a vase. There is no indication that it was hung on a wall in the fragment, but it is possible that it could have been. It was meant to be decorative and immobile—there is no evidence that it was portable, especially because the fragment is of a reasonable weight and it can be assumed that the original piece was quite heavy. The diameter of the base is approximately 10 centimeters, indicating that the entire piece must have been of a rather large size. The poly-chrome glaze, with its added aesthetic appeal, also suggests that this piece was for mainly decorative purpose and aesthetic value. There are no inscriptions and seemingly no religious value associated with this piece. In many Islamic societies, animals are strictly not associated with anything related to religion, which could indicate that the piece was meant for home use and not anything ritualistic.
Use/ Consumption: The condition of the fragment (e.g. that it looks clean, and only contains visible scratches when examined underneath a magnifying class) suggests that it was not used everyday and supports the idea that it was decorative.
Radhika:
Description/Material: My object is circular ceramic seal. It has the image of a turbaned man painted on its surface.
Why I chose this object: I found this object displayed along with other artifacts such as ceramic bowls and plates. I chose this object because of its simplicity as compared to other artifacts on that particular tray. Also the painting of the turbaned man caught my attention. My object is chipped at the bottom hence only the face of the man along with a tiny portion of his upper body is visible. This imagery gives us a glimpse into how people dressed in the area where this object was found/belongs. Furthermore the depiction of the man and his facial features seem very similar to some of the early Mughal paintings that I have been exposed to in earlier courses.
Function/Use: In terms of the function of this object, I found myself quite baffled. At first I thought it was merely a decorative piece/weight of sorts. However when I examined the object closer I noticed that although the surface is smooth its bottom has slight projections as if they are grips, which got me thinking perhaps my object was a sort of a cover for vases/water vessels. However I have my reservations about this function simply because of the beauty of the painting on its surface and if this is the case that the object is indeed a cover of sorts then it speaks volumes about the value of beauty in the society that used it.
Another possible use could be a stand or simply a decorative item.
Posted at Feb 11/2011 10:11AM:
#Brendan Burke:
The object is a small, round vessel which may have been used to hold oil, or some other form of liquid coming from a larger reserve. It stands about four inches high, and four inches in circumference. It is made of a ceramic such as clay, and appears to have been glazed or painted in its original context. The coloring is reddish brown, and is very faint in most areas. The ceramic material is a grey. Presumably, the object would have been thrown on a wheel, and there are markings to suggest this. The object has an impressive amount of Arabic script. There are two registers of writing, one above the other, the top being slightly larger than the lower. The script is very intricate, and includes what appear to be short vowels or smaller writings in the spaces between letters.
Zahid JethaniThe object I have chosen was a cup. Although this cup looked rather ordinary I felt as though it was the subtle details that really brought out its beauty.
Physical Form –
The cup was made out of ceramic and probably fired in some sort of kiln to make its final project. Although it did not have any glaze on it, it was definitely thrown on some type of wheel. The precise carvings on the base and the lip of the cup indicate maybe that lots of time was put into the construction of this cup with a lot of care. The only odd part of this cup is on the handle. The handle itself is made beautifully, but the paste used to attach it to the cup it self seems to be placed on very sloppy. It is very patchy and uneven, which confuses me because everything else on the cup is flawless.
Functionality –
The cup it self could have been used for water, tea, or even wine. Taking in the physical form, the cup was probably purchased by someone, so the owner might have been of a higher socioeconomic class. As well, the handle is so small the cup would have had to be held very delicately which may suggest that it was used very elegantly.