Ceramic Ethnoarchaeology
Ceramic Ethnoarchaeology and its applications
-Dr. Alok Shrotriya
Introduction: Ethnoarchaeology includes a joint approach of archaeology and anthropology to understand the past and present cultures. It is a branch of ethnography, which deals with the behavioral correlates of material remains. Gould (1968) termed it as ‘living archaeology’ and Kleindienst and Watson (1956) defines it as ‘action archaeology’. Stiles defines ethnoarchaeology in more comprehensive perspective as, ‘encompassing all the theoretical and methodological aspects of comparing ethnographic and archaeological data, including the use of ethnographic analogy and archaeological ethnography’ (1977, p.88). In other words, it is a living archaeology in which archaeologist does his field work among living communities for the analysis of unearthed artifacts and material remains. It is assumed that contemporary primitive societies represent examples of past stages of human culture. Analogies between living societies and ancient societies can yield important information to construct realistic models of ancient societies and their functions. The practice of this discipline provides a great understanding about ancient artifacts and the people who made them. It is not only the recording of material remains but also the interpretation of them by quantitative analysis, sampling strategies and observations (London 2000, pp.1-2). Therefore, this approach gives extremely valuable insight into prehistoric and protohistoric human behavior. In this respect Ethnoarchaeology makes a live link between human and their artifacts (David1992, p.352). This approach is mainly used by archaeologists for the explanation of pottery, stone tools and architectural remains, but it is also useful for the reconstruction of cultural system.
Significance of ceramics and Ceramic Ethnoarchaeology
Ceramics are very important material remains, which are abundantly found in archaeological investigations. These
-Dr. Alok Shrotriya
Introduction: Ethnoarchaeology includes a joint approach of archaeology and anthropology to understand the past and present cultures. It is a branch of ethnography, which deals with the behavioral correlates of material remains. Gould (1968) termed it as ‘living archaeology’ and Kleindienst and Watson (1956) defines it as ‘action archaeology’. Stiles defines ethnoarchaeology in more comprehensive perspective as, ‘encompassing all the theoretical and methodological aspects of comparing ethnographic and archaeological data, including the use of ethnographic analogy and archaeological ethnography’ (1977, p.88). In other words, it is a living archaeology in which archaeologist does his field work among living communities for the analysis of unearthed artifacts and material remains. It is assumed that contemporary primitive societies represent examples of past stages of human culture. Analogies between living societies and ancient societies can yield important information to construct realistic models of ancient societies and their functions. The practice of this discipline provides a great understanding about ancient artifacts and the people who made them. It is not only the recording of material remains but also the interpretation of them by quantitative analysis, sampling strategies and observations (London 2000, pp.1-2). Therefore, this approach gives extremely valuable insight into prehistoric and protohistoric human behavior. In this respect Ethnoarchaeology makes a live link between human and their artifacts (David1992, p.352). This approach is mainly used by archaeologists for the explanation of pottery, stone tools and architectural remains, but it is also useful for the reconstruction of cultural system.
Significance of ceramics and Ceramic Ethnoarchaeology
Ceramics are very important material remains, which are abundantly found in archaeological investigations. These
Bibliography: Allchin, B. 1994. Living Traditions: Studies in the Ethnoarchaeology of South Asia. Oxford and IBH Publishing, New Delhi, India. Arnold III, Philip J. 1998. “Ceramic Ethnoarchaeology : Caught between Coming of Age and Showing its Age”, Reviews in Anthropology, 27: 17-32. _______. 2000. “Working without a Net: Recent Trends in Ceramic Ethnoarchaeology”, Journal of Archaeological Research, 8 (2) :105-133. Arnold, Dean E. 1993. Ecology and Ceramic Production in an Anden Community. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Ashmore, Wendy and Robert J. Sharer. 2000. Discovering our past: a brief introduction to archaeology Bala, Renu. 1997. "Ethnography and Archaeology: A Case Study of Earthen Wares" (pp.150-176) in P.C Behura, N.K. 1964. "Sociology of Pottery Among Certain Groups of Potters in South India", Bulletin of the Anthropological Survey of India, 13:19-38. ________. 1978. Peasant Potters of Orissa. Sterling Publishers, New Delhi. Bose, Pradip Kumar. 1982. "Production, Organization and Market Relations of Potters of Gujarat", Man in India, 62: 246-270. Costin, C.L. 2000. “The use of ethnoarchaeology for the archaeological study of ceramic production”, Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 7 (4): 377-403 _______. 1940. “Some Censor Type from Palestine, Israelite period”, Palestine exploration Quarterly, 72:150-53. David, N. 1992. “Integrating ethnoarchaeology: a subtle realist perspective”, Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 11: 330-359 David, N. and C. Kramer. 2001. Ethnoarchaeology in action. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Fewkes, J. W.1900. “Tusayan Migration Traditions”,Bulletin of American Ethnography Report (1897/98), 19:577-633. Ghosh, A. K. and S.Bhattacharya. 1997. “Potteries of tribals in India: Some arguments” ( pp Glassie, Henry H. 2000. The Potter’s Art. Indiana University Press, Bloomington and London. Gupta, S.P. 1969. "Sociology of Pottery: Chirag Dilli, A Case Study"(pp.15-24) in B. P. Sinha, Department of Ancient Indian History and Archaeology, Patna. Hankey, V. 1968. “Pottery making at Beit Shebab, Lebanon”, Palestine Exploration Quarterly, 100: 27-32. Hegmon, M. 2000. “Advances in ceramic ethnoarchaeology”, Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 7(3): 129-37. Huyler, S. P. 1994. “Tulasi: A survey and case study of ritual terracotta planters for Tulasi, the goddess incarnate as a basil bush, in coastal Orissa” (pp ———. 1994. “Carnelian bead production in Khambhat, India: an ethnoarchaeological study” (pp. 281-306) in B. Allchin, Oxford and IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. Kenoyer, J.M Kolb, C.C. 1985. “Demographic estimates in archaeology: contributions from ethnoarchaeology in Mesoamerican peasants”, Current Anthropology, 26(5):