Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Pottery/Ceramics in India
Shivam Phogat
MS12028
Semester Project Report
April 22, 2016
Abstract
Pottery and Ceramics have played an important part in the study
ancient history. While the first ceramic vessels must have provided Stone
age hunter gatherers with several new chances for cooking and consuming
foods, we have almost no idea how early pots were used. In this report we
will discuss about various approaches and procedures towards studying
the pottery and then kind of show its problems or limitations. It also
contains the information about why pottery should be considered and
how India is an important part of the world to look for ancient pottery
and ceramics.
Introduction
Types of Pottery
There are three main kinds of ceramic ware: earthenware, stoneware and porcelain, categorized according to the clay used to make them, and the temperature
required to fire them.
Earthenware is the oldest and easiest type of pottery. It is also the
softest, being heated at the lowest temperature (typically between 1000
and 1200 degrees Celsius). It includes maiolica, faience, and delft.
Stoneware is a denser type of pottery that is fired at a higher temperature (between 1100 and 1300 degrees Celsius). In addition, stoneware is
typically coated with a glaze of powdered glass and fired again at a higher
temperature. This causes the glaze to fuse with the clay body, creating
a vitreous, impermeable surface. Where earthenware usually ranges in
colour from buff to dark red, stoneware varies from grey to buff, or even
green - as in the case of celadon.
Porcelain of which Chinese Porcelain remains the finest and most valuable variant - is finer than stoneware, makes a ringing tone when tapped,
and has a characteristic translucence when held up to the light.
Pottery in India
Neolithic pottery was being practiced in India no later than 5500 BC, during
the Mehrgarh Period II (5500-4800 BC), notably in present-day northwest
India and Pakistan. The Mehrgarh I culture (70005500 BC) was not ceramic
Pottery developed further during the Merhgarh Period III (4800-3500 BC), and
especially during the Indus Valley Civilization, which flourished along the
Indus and Ghaggar-Hakra rivers. Also called the Harappan Civilization,
after the type site Harappa, in the Punjab, this civilization lasted from about
3500 to 1300 BC, passing through five phases of ceramic production. In 1300
BC it was followed by the Iron Age Indo-Gangetic traditions of painted grey
ware and northern black polished ware
2
Why Pottery
There are atleast 4 reasons one can think of while researching an ancient site to
turn towards pottery. These are following
It was Common
Since its invention in the Neolithic period around 6000 BC. pots were
useful objects that everybody could own. Clay vessels found their way into
all aspects of life from everyday household use to trade to religious uses,
providing evidence of how a large spectrum of people lived out different
aspects of life. Rich or poor, all owned pottery so. unlike gold or silver,
there is plenty of it to be found and it reflects how ordinary people, not
simply the wealthy, lived. Almost every site in the Middle East that was
inhabited in ancient times is still marked by innumerous sherds scattered
about the area.
It broke easily and was not reused
When a vessel broke, it was thrown away and replaced rather than repaired. Though there is evidence that some pots were repaired, most were
simply cast on the ground, where they have remained to the present. Because pots are fragile, archaeologists can assume that they were broken
fairly soon after they were made and were not passed down from generation to generation. Unlike metal, hardened clay cannot be remolded into
other objects by later inhabitants of the site. For the ancients, a broken
pot was garbage to be thrown away, and a great deal can be learned from
people by studying their garbage. Imagine what you can tell about our
3
lives by the things that we cannot reuse and throw away, even in an era
when we are conscious of recycling.
It was durable
Once a pot broke, the individual sherds were durable enough to survive
indefinitely. Whereas wood tends to decay and metal corrodes, pottery
lasts. Unlike other materials, it is there for the archaeologist to find.
It changed form often
When a pot was replaced, it was not unusual for it to be replaced by a
slightly different vessel. Rims, bases, handles, and even the texture of the
clay used to make the pots changed over a period of tune. Certain shapes
and styles of decoration were popular at certain tunes but faded away at
others. In a sense, archaeologists look at potsherds the same way many
people observe automobile styles. You can tell when a car was made by its
grill, colors, or body style Likewise, you can tell when a vessel was made
by its shape, fabric, manufacture, and color.
The last reason, style change, is probably the most important one. Because
archaeological remains tend to be deposited on top of each other as time passes,
the pottery deepest in the ground is usually the oldest in an undisturbed site.
Tins shape and texture of sherds found at lower levels therefore represents die
style of relatively older pots.
6.1
Ethnoarchaeology
Ethnoarchaeology is currently used in different ways to interpret ceramic technology. The aim of this section is not to draw a detailed approach to the huge
amount of ethnoarchaeological studies focused on modern. The goal here is to
highlight the possibilities and limitations that may involve the use of data obtained from studies focused on contemporary societies in order to improve our
approaches to the past.
In recent decades, studies focused on ceramic productions undertaken by
modern societies have become widespread and tried to address several concerns. Ethnography demonstrates that cultural, social and economic factors are
also technological and that the technical aspects of the materials can be used
to address the people behind the pottery. Thus, ethnoarchaeological studies
improved the archaeologists sources to investigate past societies, since these
approaches represent the ideal framework to assess the close interrelationship
existing between structure and agency.
In this respect, ethnoarchaeology enable us to test the viability of certain
theoretical approaches and archaeological interpretations. Its use revealed in
practice the complexity of the processes and phenomena involving ceramics, especially regarding technological variability, change processes and the dynamics
of cultural transmission. Also this discipline has focused on the link existing
between technological traits and social issues related to the organization of production, allowing us to realise the way pottery features are the consequence of
the social interaction between groups of potters and other individuals. Thus,
ethnoarchaeology has been used to examine the processes of pottery manufacture and use, as well as the distribution of ceramics and its relation to social
factors.
The study of materiality and ceramic technology in contemporary societies
can be very effective for archaeological purposes. However, the interpretation
obtained from these works may be partial and even counterproductive without
a proper framework of understanding between ethnography and archaeology.
Many researchers agree with this sentiment.
Processual archaeology stated from the beginning the serious limitations
involved in interpreting the significance of the ceramic technology exclusively
through deductive approaches of the past and theories solely centred in ancient pottery productions. The final aim of these studies is to draw general
5
laws. These universal laws permit us to interpret the past through comparisons
and direct analogies based on contemporary practices. These models advocate
unilinear social and technological evolution, where change is understood as a
process closely linked to environment and economy.
These foundations do not consider either the opinions of the individuals under study or the vision of their own culture. It is assumed that the data obtained
from people do not really corresponds to reality. Rather, their viewpoints respond to fictions created by the individuals, who intend to preserve a specific
image of themselves.
The contextual disciplines highlighted that technological choices made by
individuals do not always correspond to natural laws and universal predictable
models. They also emphasised the inadequacy of certain ceramic descriptions
and classifications often carried out in archaeology, since they may be far from
the concepts and ideas used by people in their daily lives.
In contrast, ethnoarchaeological observations of different social, cultural and
environmental contexts, as well as the careful use of this discipline through a
deep contextual analysis, has thrown light upon the cultural complexity involved
in the technological choices of the individuals along the life cycle of ceramics.
Thus, it has been emphasised that social practices and material culture are
strongly determined by the context in which individuals live, where ceramics
interact in complex ways with multiple aspects of culture. In this way, not all
hand-made vessels are manufactured, perceived, understood and used in the
same way, and thus also involve multiple and varied meanings.
In this sense, any culture relates to certain historical processes involving
different individuals as agents. In this framework, different interactions with the
social and natural environment are produced and diverse historical dynamics
are generated. Thus, it is risky to make universal generalizations regarding
technology based on models that have a low level of universality, since the
transmission of technological knowledge always takes place in specific contexts
and through concrete language and situations.
In short, although the possibilities of ethnography to enrich our explanations
about the past are suggestive, their use in terms of direct analogies related to
extinct prehistoric cultural practices is quite dangerous. The rationality patterns of modern societies do not necessarily fit with the rationale and concerns
of ancient communities. It is therefore necessary to admit the limitations of
ethnoarchaeology in archaeological interpretation.
6.2
Ethnoarchaeometry
6.3
Historical Anthropology
6.4
Summary
The discovery of pottery on an archaeological sight is a discovery of great importance. Pottery tells many stories of how it was made and who made it. It also
goes further than this and can tell a great deal about the people involved in its
production. Recent developments have transformed archaeology from closets
of curiosity to a viewing hole into the past. Without the existence of pottery
in the archaeological record that transformation would not have been possible.
Pottery holds an endless supply of information all which may not have been
tapped into.
India is a place of huge resources for ancient pottery and ceramics. Pottery
was one of the important part in daily household life in India. So, it is obvious
that an archaeologist would look at the wide variety of ancient works from
India out of curiosity. There are a lot of methods to study ancient pottery and
alongwith them are the current challenges and problems in the study of Pottery
in India. The methods and approaches were discussed and there limitations and
problems were also pointed out.
In conclusion, the possibilities and limitations of various methods in the
study of ceramic technology, we can summarise that the ultimate goal should
not be to reproduce prehistoric manufacturing techniques but rather to analyse
the qualitative and quantitative aspects of materials and techniques that could
be relevant in the potters technological choices in the societies under study. In
this way, the data obtained from experimental research become relevant once
related to the social context in which the materials and techniques are used.
For me, the current methods are not that sufficient and more should be done
in order to develop these methods. A method which accounts for materiality as
well as symbolism should be researched. With the increasing works in the area
of pottery, I hope the problems and challenges in the study of pottery would be
reduced and new technology will bring in less limitations.
References
Progress and Prospects of Pottery Industry in India - KC Gupta
The role of ethnoarchaeology and experimental archaeology in the study
of Ceramics - Daniel Albero Santacreu
Current issues in Ceramic Ethnoarchaeology MT Stark
Ceramic ethnoarchaeology in Indian Subcontinent Carol Kramer
A study of Ceramic variability in central India Daniel Miller
An article about Ceramics by James H. Pace, Elon University
Wikipedia.org (ethnoarchaeology, chalcolithic, Indian Pottery)
www.visual-arts-cork.com/pottery.html
arthistorysummerize.info/Art./ceramic-and-pottery-in-india-in-ancient-times
www.essay.uk.com/coursework/the-archaeological-importance-of-the-studyof-pottery.php