ArticlePDF Available

The Ghassulian Ceramic Tradition: A Single Chaîne Opératoire Prevalent throughout the Southern Levant

Authors:

Abstract

This study examines Ghassulian ceramic assemblages from sites located in various parts of the southern Levant using the chaîne opératoire approach. The goal is to assess whether the Ghassulian communities were loosely integrated or, on the contrary, closely connected to each other. Results show that a single chaîne opératoire was shared at the level of the whole of the southern Levant testifying to its transmission within the same social group. They also suggest interactions between the different communities, arguing in favor of a dense social network from which new shared norms may have emerged. In conclusion, we suggest that this highly connected society could be linked phylogenetically to the previous local groups—which would explain both the embeddedness at the population level and the regional differences developed over time.
JOURNAL OF EASTERN
MEDITERRANEAN
ARCHAEOLOGY AND
HERITAGE STUDIES
THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY PRESS VOL. 7 NO. 1 2019
JEMAHS
EDITORS
Ann E. Killebrew, e
Pennsylvania State University,
University Park (USA)
Sandra A. Scham, e Catholic
University of America (USA)
ASSISTANT EDITORS
Hanan Charaf, Lebanese
University (Lebanon)
Louise A. Hitchcock, University
of Melbourne (Australia)
Justin Lev-Tov, e Alexandria
Archive Institute (USA)
BOOK REVIEW EDITOR
Mitch Allen, Mills College (USA)
EDITORIAL ASSISTANT
Gabriele Faßbeck, University of
Alabama (USA)
JEMAHS
Salam Al-Kuntar, University
of Pennsylvania (USA)
Lorenzo d’Alfonso, New York
University (USA)
Jere L. Bacharach, University
of Washington (USA)
Reinhard Bernbeck, Freie
Universität Berlin (Germany)
Eric H. Cline, e George
Washington University (USA)
Anastasia Dakouri-Hild,
University of Virginia (USA)
Elif Denel, American Research
Institute in Turkey, Ankara
(Turkey)
Müge Durusu Tanriöver, Bilkent
University (Turkey)
Ioannis Georganas, Independent
Researcher (Greece)
Joseph A. Greene, Harvard
University (USA)
Matthew Harpster, Koç
University (Turkey)
Saleh Lamei, D. G. Centre for
Conservation of Islamic
Architectural Heritage (Egypt)
Mark Leone, University of
Maryland, College Park (USA)
omas E. Levy, University of
California, San Diego (USA)
Alexander Nagel, Smithsonian
Institution (USA)
Shelley-Anne Peleg, Independent
Scholar (Israel)
Susan Pollock, Freie Universität
Berlin (Germany)
Issa Jubrael Sarie, Al-Quds
University (Jerusalem)
Neil A. Silberman, University of
Massachusetts Amherst (USA)
Stuart Tyson Smith, University
of California, Santa Barbara (USA)
Sharon R. Steadman, SUNY
Cortland (USA)
Margreet Steiner, Independent
Scholar (e Netherlands)
Christopher A. Tuttle, Council
of American Overseas Research
Centers (USA)
James M. Weinstein,
Cornell University (USA)
Donald Whitcomb, e
University of Chicago (USA)
Naama Yahalom-Mack, e
Hebrew University of Jerusalem
(Israel)
EDITORIAL AND ADVISORY BOARD
Front cover photo: Women making pottery in Ramallah, Palestine, ca. 1905. (Photo from LOT 13744: Stereograph views of
Palestine, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and Egypt, Library of Congress [http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/2004671702/].)
JEMAHS 7.1_FM.indd Page i 09/03/19 12:00 AM
JOURNAL OF EASTERN
MEDITERRANEAN
ARCHAEOLOGY AND
HERITAGE STUDIES
VOL. 7 NO. 1 2019
Introduction: Ancient Technology in the Southern Levant
Amihai Mazar, Valentine Roux, and Naama Yahalom-Mack
ARTICLES
Dynamics of Change in Flint Sickles of the Age of Metals: New Insights
from a Technological Approach
Francesca Manclossi and Steven A Rosen
 e Ghassulian Ceramic Tradition: A Single Chaîne Opératoire Prevalent
throughout the Southern Levant
Valentine Roux
 Technological Observations on Two-Part Stone Jewelry-Casting Molds
of the Late Bronze Age in the Near East
Amir Golani
 Crucibles, Tuyères, and Bellows in a Longue Durée Perspective: Aspects
of Technological Style
Naama Yahalom-Mack
 Technological Insights on Philistine Culture: Perspectives from
Tell es-Safi/Gath
Aren M. Maeir, David Ben-Shlomo, Deborah Cassuto, Jerey R. Chadwick,
Brent Davis, Adi Eliyahu Behar, Suembikya (Sue) Frumin, Shira Gur-Arieh,
Louise A. Hitchcock, Liora K. Horwitz, Francesca Manclossi, Steven A Rosen,
Josephine Verduci, Ehud Weiss, Eric L. Welch, and Vanessa Workman
JEMAHS 7.1_FM.indd Page ii 07/03/19 1:57 AM
 Weaving in Iron Age Tel Reov and the Jordan Valley
Amihai Mazar
BOOK REVIEW ARTICLE
 Recent Publications on Archaeological Ceramic Analyses and their
Contributions to the Study of Ancient Pottery Technology
Ann E. Killebrew
JEMAHS 7.1_FM.indd Page iii 07/03/19 1:57 AM
    
    ()
is a peer-reviewed journal published by the Pennsylvania State
University Press. JEMAHS is devoted to traditional, anthropological,
social, and applied archaeologies of the eastern Mediterranean,
encompassing both prehistoric and historic periods. e journal’s
geographic range spans three continents and brings together, as no
academic periodical has done before, the archaeologies of Greece and
the Aegean, Anatolia, the Levant, Cyprus, Egypt, and North Africa.
As the journal will not be identied with any particular archaeological
discipline, the editors invite articles from all varieties of professionals
who work on the past cultures of the modern countries bordering the
eastern Mediterranean Sea. Similarly, a broad range of topics will be
covered including, but by no means limited to:
Excavation and survey eld results;
Landscape archaeology and GIS;
Underwater archaeology;
Archaeological sciences and archaeometry;
Material culture studies;
Ethnoarchaeology;
Social archaeology;
Conservation and heritage studies;
Cultural heritage management;
Sustainable tourism development; and
New technologies/virtual reality.
Appearing four times a year in February, May, August, and November,
the journal will engage professionals and scholars of archaeology
and heritage studies as well as non-practitioners and students, both
graduate and undergraduate.
In addition to combining traditional and theoretical archaeological
data and interpretation, the journal’s articles may range from early
prehistory to recent historical time periods. It also aims to publish
accessible, jargon-free, readable, color-illustrated articles that will be
informative for professional and non-professional readers. e journal
does not publish unprovenanced artifacts purchased on the antiquities
market or objects from private collections.
 
Digital submissions should be sent to: www.editorialmanager.com/
JEMAHS. All correspondence should be sent to: Dr.AnnE. Killebrew
(aek11@psu.edu). By submitting their work to JEMAHS, authors agree
to editorial modications of their manuscripts that are designed to
help JEMAHS fulll its mission.
Articles should be submitted as a MS Word le together with all
illustrations (1200 dpi for black and white; 600 dpi for grayscale;
andat least 300 dpi for color) referenced in the manuscript.
Permissions to use photographs and copyrights for all illustrations
are the responsibility of the authors and need to be included when
the manuscript is submitted. (For more information regarding
copyright issues for authors, go to: http://psupress.org/author/
author_copyright.html). Papers should be limited to not more than
20–25 manuscript pages or ca. 6,000–7,000 words. Shorter papersare
welcome, but authors wishing to submit a paper longer than
25manuscript pages (including endnotes, references, and appendices)
should consult with the editors in advance.
For complete author submission guidelines, please visit:
http://www.psupress.org/journals/jnls_JEMAHS.html
 
e Journal of Eastern Mediterranean Archaeology and Heritage Studies is
published quarterly by the Pennsylvania State University Press, 820 N.
University Dr., USB 1, Suite C, University Park, PA 16802. Subscriptions,
claims, and changes of address should be directed to our subscription
agent, the Johns Hopkins University Press, P.O. Box 19966, Baltimore,
MD 21211, phone 1-800-548-1784 (outside USA and Canada: 410-516-
6987), jrnlcirc@press.jhu.edu. Subscribers are requested to notify the
Johns Hopkins University Press and their local postmaster immediately
of change of address. All correspondence of a business nature, including
permissions and advertising, should be addressed to the Pennsylvania
State University Press, journals@psu.edu.
e Pennsylvania State University Press is a member of the
Association of American University Presses.
  
JEMAHS is registered under its ISSN (2166-3548 [E-ISSN 2166-3556])
with the Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers,
MA 01923 (www.copyright.com). For information about reprints
or multiple copying for classroom use, contact the CCC’s Academic
Permissions Service, or write to the Pennsylvania State University
Press, 820 N. University Dr., USB 1, Suite C, University Park, PA 16802.
Copyright © 2019 by e Pennsylvania State University. All rights
reserved. No copies may be made without the written permission of
the publisher.
journal of eastern mediterranean archaeology
and heritage studies, vol. 7, no. 1, 2019
Copyright © 2019 e Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA
THE GHASSULIAN CERAMIC
TRADITION
A Single Chaîne Opératoire Prevalent throughout
the Southern Levant
Valentine Roux
e structure of the Late Chalcolithic (abbreviated LC,
and also called Ghassulian, see Gilead 2011) populations
in the southern Levant is still widely debated. Over the
last decade, two hypotheses have fueled discussions,
one suggesting that Ghassulian society was organized
in social ranks and hierarchies (Levy and Holl 1988; Levy
1998a, 1998b), the other that it was egalitarian (Gilead
1988). Both hypotheses have been challenged for some
time: the rst by the limited evidence for non-egalitarian
societies, the second by the rich copper nds of the Nahal
Mishmar hoard (Rowan and Golden 2009: 66). Now, there
are hints at increasing socio-economic complexity, such
as craft specialization, the high incidence of artifacts
manufactured from non-local materials found in contexts
such as caches, ritual deposits or group mortuary depos-
its, or the increased capability for storage. is has led
some authors to conclude that LC socio-economic orga-
nization was highly varied and loosely integrated, with
some regions witnessing ephemeral hierarchical forma-
tions but without any inuence on other areas (Rowan
and Golden 2009). Other authors suppose that religion
was the inclusive principle (Joe 2003). As a general
statement, societal dierentiation is now acknowledged.
In this article, the social links between the Ghassulian
communities and their potential inclusive role are revis-
ited by examining the ceramic technical traditions. ese
are ways of making transmitted from generation to
generation. As such, they are highly relevant proxies for
is study examines Ghassulian ceramic assemblages
from sites located in various parts of the southern
Levant using the chaîne opératoire approach. e goal
is to assess whether the Ghassulian communities were
loosely integrated or, on the contrary, closely connected
to each other. Results show that a single chaîne opéra-
toire was shared at the level of the whole of the southern
Levant testifying to its transmission within the same
social group. ey also suggest interactions between
the dierent communities, arguing in favor of a dense
social network from which new shared norms may have
emerged. In conclusion, we suggest that this highly con-
nected society could be linked phylogenetically to the
previous local groups—which would explain both the
embeddedness at the population level and the regional
dierences developed over time.
: Ghassulian communities, Late Chalco-
lithic, southern Levant, chaîne opératoire, ceramic tradi-
tions, technology, social networks

24 | THE GHASSULIAN CERAMIC TRADITION
tracing social links between sites and indicate whether
communities are connected to each other and belong to
the same social group. In the rst part of this article,
I will detail the methodology applied. In the second
part, the results will be presented. As we shall see, they
suggest that one and the same ceramic technical tradi-
tion predominated in the southern Levant during the
Ghassulian period, testifying to its transmission within
the same social group; they also suggest interactions
between the dierent communities, arguing in favor of
a dense social network from which shared norms could
have emerged, notwithstanding dierences between
communities.
Methodology and Material
Technical Traditions as Proxies for Linking Sites
Technical traditions are powerful proxies for signaling
whether individuals belong to the same social group
because learning craft techniques necessarily requires
a tutor who is usually selected from one’s own social
group. In the domain of craft techniques, guided trans-
mission of skills consists of educating the learner about
the information available in the environment, be it the
properties of the material, the tools used, or the eects
of the gestures employed (Reed and Bril 1996; Bril 2002).
is is done according to a “program” whose nal objec-
tive is for the learner to reproduce the “objects” that the
tutor himself can make (Bril 2002). is guidance not
only facilitates the learning process, but also directly
participates in the reproduction of the task (Tehrani
and Riede 2008). It is the key to the cultural transmis-
sion of ways of making things. At the end of the learning
process, the skills learnt are literally incorporated. Not
only does the learner build up motor and cognitive skills
for making objects according to the model used in his/
her culture, and only those; but he/she also uses this
model for building up a representation of the technical
act, a representation shared by all the members of his/
her social group (Foster 1965; Nicklin 1971; Arnold 1985;
Gosselain 1992; Dobres 2000). It is then very dicult for
the subject to conceive and manufacture objects other
than in the manner learned. From this point of view, the
learning process is a true “xer” of the current cultural
model. It contributes directly to forming and maintain-
ing traditions.
On a collective level, tutors are traditionally selected
within the learner’s social group (parents, neighbors,
elders, etc.). As a result, technological boundaries
conform to social boundaries, defined as the social
perimeter of transmitting the way to do things (Stark
1998; Ingold 2001; Knappett 2005; Degoy 2008; Roux
et al. 2017). The nature of the community in which the
same way of doing is passed on is variable. It may cor-
respond to a group, a tribe, a clan, a faction, a caste,
a sub-caste, a lineage, a professional community, an
ethnic community, an ethno-linguistic group, a popu-
lation, or to gender (exclusive transmission of women’s
or men’s ways of doing things). In archaeology, contex-
tual data should enable us to approach the nature of
these groups.
Let us note that within ceramic technological
traditions the longest stage to learn is the forming stage
because of the general diculty of mastering motor
skills (Ericson and Lehman 1996). Forming techniques
are taught with a tutor over years usually within pri-
vate spaces, while shapes of objects, decorative features,
or even clay recipes can be learned through individual
learning after seeing objects in public spaces and/or
discussing with retailers (e.g., interactions with shop-
keepers; see Roux 2015). As a consequence, forming
techniques tend to be more resistant to change than
easily transmissible traits such as style (shapes and
decor of objects; see Hegmon 1998; Gosselain 2000;
Stark, Bishop, and Miksa 2000; Gelbert 2003; Gallay
2007; Mayor 2010; Roux 2015). In this respect, forming
technique is a better variable to socially connect indi-
viduals/communities over time than shapes and decora-
tions whose evolutionary mechanisms make them more
subject to rapid changes even within the same social
group.
e Chaîne Opératoire
A chaîne opératoire is dened as “the series of actions
that transform raw material into nished product, either
consumption or tool” (Creswell 1976: 13). e ceramic
JOURNAL OF EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN ARCHAEOLOGY AND HERITAGE STUDIES 25
fashioning chaîne opératoire comprises a series of opera-
tions that transform the clay paste into a hollow volume.
It can be described in terms of methods, techniques,
gestures, and tools (Roux 2016). A method is dened as
an ordered sequence of functional operations carried
out by a set of elementary gestures for which dierent
techniques can be used. A technique is dened by the
physical modalities used to transform the raw material.
Fashioning chaînes opératoires are a unique combina-
tion of sequences, gestures, and techniques. is unique
combination enables us to distinguish between tradi-
tions linked through the transmission of information
and convergent solutions to specic situations (Shennan
2002: 73).
Identication of the dierent technical operations
carried out during the fabrication process of a recipi-
ent (the chaîne opératoire) implies examining the sherds
with two complementary and inseparable observation
scales: on one hand, the macroscopic scale and on the
other, the microscopic scale. e rst includes observa-
tion with the naked eye or at low magnications. e
second includes observation with the stereomicroscope
(from 1 to 40 x magnication) and the microscope.
e reconstruction of the chaînes opératoires is more
detailed and reliable when it is based on both of these
observation scales. e analysis grids are based on the
same principle: the parameters and variables used are in
a position to record the deformations and transforma-
tions that the paste goes through when wet or leather-
hard and dry. Macroscopic observation precedes the
microscopic scale and the rst examination of a sherd is
carried out with the naked eye.
e macro- and microscopic traits are interpreted by
reference to signicant surface features and microfab-
rics highlighted during the course of experiments and
ethnographic observations. Experiments are designed
to test hypotheses about ancient ceramic manufactur-
ing techniques. We detail below an experiment aimed at
highlighting surface features indicative of nishing tech-
niques (smoothing) and surface treatments (clay coat-
ing) (Roux 2017b). e goal is to provide well-founded
reference data to interpret the Ghassulian surface treat-
ments. e experiments were conducted changing one
parameter at a time.
Attributes indicative of smoothing and clay coating:
Smoothing is a nishing technique aimed at evening the
supercial layer of the clay vessels (Ionescu et al. 2015). It
can be achieved on wet or leather-hard clay surfaces, with
soft or hard tools, dry or wet tools.
Clay coating, also called stuccoing (Schier et al.
1994), is a surface treatment aimed at covering wall sur-
faces. It is made of a thick grainy slip obtained by adding
water to the clay paste. It diers from slip, which has
a “liquid cream” viscosity and is obtained from nely
sieved clay materials mixed with water and possibly
with oxides. It diers also from clay slurry, which is a
clayey material obtained from nely sieved clay material
with the viscosity of “thick cream” and used for favoring
the adhesion between coils. Clay coating can be applied
on wet, leather-hard, or bone-dry surfaces before r-
ing, although there are ethnographic examples of clay
coating applied after ring (Heidke and Elson 1988).
Clay coating is smeared on with soft or hard tools. One
eect is to hide any traces left by the roughing out and/
or the shaping operations. Another eect is to dimin-
ish thermal spalling and cracking (Schier et al. 1994:
208). Identication of clay coating may be dicult when
it is made with the same clay material as the clay paste.
Indeed, unlike colored slip, even at high magnication
no discontinuity is visible in section, that is, no visible
clear-cut grainy slip layer. It is then easily confused with
smoothing operations.
Table 1 indicates the main parameters tested. ree
technical operations were carried out: smoothing wet
clay, smoothing leather-hard clay, and clay coating.
ey were carried out on clay pastes presenting three
sizes of coarse temper (small [200–500µ], medium
[500µ–1mm], large [1–2 mm]) with two types of tools
(hard, soft), combined with two hydric states (dry,
wet). Granularity of the coating material was coarse
or ne and its degree of viscosity thick or semi-liquid.
Smoothing and coating hard tools included: int, wood,
calabash, stone, and bone. Smoothing and coating soft
tools included: ngers, cloth, leather, horsehair, and
paint brush.
Experiments were conducted on complete vessels as
well as on briquettes for the sake of replicating the results
obtained. In total, 104 pieces were obtained.
26 | THE GHASSULIAN CERAMIC TRADITION
TABLE 1 MAIN VARIABLES TESTED FOR HIGHLIGHTING ATTRIBUTES SIGNIFICANT OF SMOOTHING WET CLAY, SMOOTHING
LEATHERHARD CLAY, AND CLAY COATING
e results are as follows (for the details and illustra-
tions, see Roux 2017b):
1. Depending on whether smoothing is done on wet
or leather-hard clay paste, with tools loaded or
not with water, clay surfaces are characterized
by irregular/uid or compact microtopography,
threaded or ribbed striations, thickened or
scalloped overthicknesses.
2. Clay-coated surfaces are characterized by lumpy
topography combined with clusters of oating
grains and uid microtopography.
Analysis of ceramic assemblages based on the chaîne
opératoire concept: e classication of assemblages
using the chaîne opératoire concept is an original approach
in that artifacts are no longer classied by shape and/or
fabrics, but rather in terms of technical processes and
objects (shape and decoration; see Roux 2011, 2017a).
Ideally, the classication includes three succes-
sive sorting stages: sorting by technical groups; by
techno-petrographic group (by petrographic groups
within each technical group); by techno-morphological
and stylistic groups (by morphological and stylistic
types within each techno-petrographic group). e rst
two sorting stages reveal the dierent chaînes opératoires
present in the assemblage. e last sorting stage reveals
the potter’s intention, which can be claried by the
functional analysis of the vessels. e combined analy-
sis of the chaînes opératoires and the potter’s intention
leads to the characterization of ceramic assemblages in
terms of technical traditions, that is, in terms of inher-
ited ways of making a given functional range of contain-
ers. is is a prerequisite for evaluating the sociological
complexity underlying the techno-stylistic variability
of assemblages. ere are two types of scenarios: either
the function of the vessels determines the variability
of the chaînes opératoires; or by default this variability
is determined by social factors. In other words, when
a chaîne opératoire is associated with a single type of
recipient (e.g., culinary vessels) and when the function
Smoothing wet clay Smoothing leather-hard clay Clay coating
Clay paste Fine ¸ ¸ ¸
Medium ¸ ¸ ¸
Coarse ¸ ¸ ¸
Smoothing tool Hard ¸ ¸
Soft ¸ ¸
Dry ¸ ¸
Wet ¸ ¸
Coating grain size Fine ¸
Coarse ¸
Coating viscosity Semi-liquid ¸
Thick ¸
Coating tool Hard ¸
Soft ¸
JOURNAL OF EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN ARCHAEOLOGY AND HERITAGE STUDIES 27
of the recipient accounts for the dierence in the chaîne
opératoire, in this case variability can be interpreted in
functional terms as opposed to variability created by
social boundaries.
Now, how can we presume that a set of sherds was
made using the same chaîne opératoire when only several
sherds bear diagnostic surface features? e postulate
is that all the sherds within an archaeological ceramic
assemblage that present the same attributes were made
under the same conditions. Although the same traces
can be produced using dierent techniques, methods,
or tools, groups of sherds with sets of analogous traits
within the same assemblage, on the inner surface, the
outer surface, or in cross-section, are necessarily related
to analogous technical actions, given physical and cultural
constraints. On the one hand, vessels of the same type
of clay that are produced in the same manner will fea-
ture comparable deformations and marks. On the other
hand, the number of ways vessels are manufactured at a
given site is generally limited. us, we can legitimately
progress from statements about several specimens to an
interpretation that applies to all the sherds comparable
to these specimens (Roux 2016).
As for sampling, we used an empirical approach; that
is, not statistical sampling based on random distribution,
but a reasoned selection in view of the technological aim,
which is to characterize the technical traditions repre-
sented. is reasoned selection consists on the one hand
of examining and classifying batches of sherds and stop-
ping when the proportions from the dierent technical
groups cease to change (for a given excavation context),
and on the other of examining all the dierent types of
vessels (dierent shapes and size) considered as repre-
sentative of the assemblage (the ones published). is
procedure ensures that the dierent technical practices
observable at the site are recorded.
Body of Data
e Ghassulian assemblages include vessels made with-
out and with rotary kinetic energy (abbreviated RKE).
e former include the whole range of mundane vessels
whose function may have been well diversied (consump-
tion, service, transport, storage). e latter include open
vessels, among them mainly small bowls (V-shaped
bowls), whose function has been interpreted as ceremo-
nial (Roux 2003).
e vessels here examined are the ones formed
without RKE. ey are supposedly made on a domestic
scale and are therefore good candidates for identifying
transmission between individuals linked by close social
relationships.
Ceramic assemblages from sites located in dierent
parts of the southern Levant have been examined.1 ey
all belong to well-established Late Chalcolithic horizons
even though the chronological span can cover a few hun-
dred years from 4500 BC to 3900 BC. ey are found
in the Jordan Valley and the Dead Sea basin (Tuleilat
Ghassul, Fazael, Abu Hamid, Pella, Tel el-Far‘âh [North,
cave U], Neve Ur), in the Negev (Abu Matar, Safadi, Grar),
in the Shephelah (Modi’in), in the coastal plain (Azor),
in the Galilee (Kafr Kanna, Levels 112–115; Megiddo,
Stratum 5), in the Hulah Valley (Tel Teo, Turmus) and in
the Golan (Rasm Harbush) (Fig. 1). Except for Kafr Kanna
and Megiddo, all the ceramic assemblages are published.
Each main type of vessel illustrated in the publications
has been examined. Batches of sherds served to verify
the general scope of the observations made on the types
of vessels.
Results
First, we describe the surface treatments and then the
manufacturing chaînes opératoires.
Ghassulian Surface Treatments
Vessel surface treatments were examined macroscopi-
cally and at dierent levels of magnication. e main
result is that all the mundane Ghassulian ceramics made
without RKE are clay coated, whatever their shapes and
sizes. e general use of clay coating all over the southern
Levant is unmistakable.
Clay coating has been systematically identied on the
outer walls of a wide range of vessels. ey are charac-
terized by an irregular topography, a lumpy surface cre-
ated by clusters of oating grains covered with a clay
FIG. 1
Location of the sites cited in
the text from which ceramic
assemblages were examined.
(Courtesy of Centre de recherche
français à Jérusalem.)
JOURNAL OF EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN ARCHAEOLOGY AND HERITAGE STUDIES 29
layer, oating grains and overthicknesses overlapping
smoothed surfaces or corresponding to successive lay-
ers of coating (Fig. 2). Clay coating has been identied
on both closed and open vessels. e former are coated
on their outer face only, the inner face is smoothed. It
is usually applied with vertical or oblique gestures, from
the rim or from below the rim, down to the base. When
it is applied from the rim, a small overthickness may be
visible on the inner side of the rim. It can also be applied
with a rotary motion (with or without rotary instru-
ment). e open vessels are coated on the outer and inner
faces, with horizontal gestures on the inner face. e
type of striation suggests that clay coating was applied
with the ngers.
FIG. 2
Examples of clay-coated surfaces: (a) overthickness below the rim indicating the start of the coating (Fazael);
(b) holemouth showing vertical overthicknesses left by successive vertical passages of coating (Fazael);
(c) lumpy surface and clusters of floating grains (Safadi); (d) coating applied on a previously smoothed
surface (Abu Hamid). (Photos courtesy of V. Roux.)
30 | THE GHASSULIAN CERAMIC TRADITION
e clay coating material can be semi-liquid or viscous.
It is made with the clay material used for manufactur-
ing clay vessels, which, as a general rule, includes coarse
grains larger than 1 mm in size. However, the coarseness
of this clay material can vary depending on the size of the
vessels. For small vessels and small-size grain paste, the
clay coating is ner than that applied on bigger vessels
and its identication requires high magnication (Fig. 3).
Lumpy clay-coated outer walls contrast with the evenly
smoothed inner walls (Fig. 4).
Ghassulian Chaînes Opératoires
e question is whether clay coating is a surface treat-
ment proper to a social group or shared between
dierent social groups, that is to say, whether it is
related to a single chaîne opératoire or several chaînes
opératoires. Clay coating is not indeed sucient to
assess the degree of connection between sites, because
it could have been copied through indirect interactions
(e.g., Roux 2015).
FIG. 3
Dierent coating grain sizes characterized by floating
grains and clusters of floating grains covered with a fine
layer of clay (Fazael). Above: fine grainy coating (20x);
below: coarse grainy coating (10x). (Photos courtesy of
V. Roux.)
JOURNAL OF EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN ARCHAEOLOGY AND HERITAGE STUDIES 31
Our results show that all the LC ceramic vessels testify
to the same chaîne opératoire. e following description
is valid for all the mundane ceramic types made without
RKE and for all the ceramic assemblages that have been
examined:
Clay paste is generally tempered with coarse min-
eral inclusions (even when vegetal material is present
as in the potteries of northern Negev sites) whose size
depends on the thickness of the walls. eir quantity is
around 20–30% (Fig. 5). Petrographic studies show local
production at almost all sites studied, even though move-
ments of vessels between sites are acknowledged (Gilead
and Goren 1989; Rowan and Golden 2009).
e bases are modeled into a disk shape from a lump
of clay whose edges were raised up over around 1–2 cm in
order to start the body. A peripheral coil is then placed on
FIG. 4
Contrast between clay-coated outer wall (above) and
smoothed inner wall (below) (Modi’in). The clay-
coated wall is characterized by a lumpy topography
and a fluid microtopography, whereas the smoothed
wall is characterized by a regular topography, threaded
striations and an irregular microtopography. (Photos
courtesy of V. Roux.)
FIG. 5
Examples of coarse inclusions in
LC pastes from dierent sites:
(a)Fazael; (b) Tuleilat Ghassul;
(c)Rasm Harbush; (d) Kafr Kanna;
(e) Safadi; (f) Modi’in. (Photos a,
c, d, e, f courtesy of V. Roux; photo
b courtesy of the Pontifical Biblical
Institute.)
JOURNAL OF EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN ARCHAEOLOGY AND HERITAGE STUDIES 33
the disc, against the raised edges, and joined to the base
by discontinuous pressures. Diagnostic features: at high
magnication, bases are characterized by sub-parallel
elongated voids and alignment of the inclusions (Fig. 6);
the raised edges are visible in the continuity of the poros-
ity system and the alignment of the coarse inclusions at
the junction between the base and the body; the adding
of an internal peripheral coil is visible in the void and
inclusion pattern of the body section. It is characterized
by a vertical pattern related to the raising of the edges,
contrasting with the elongated oblique voids of the inner
peripheral coil against the raised edges (Fig. 7). To the
naked eye, ssures at the junction between the inner
base and the body indicate the placing of a peripheral coil
on the base (Fig. 8).
The next successive coils are fixed internally
by spreading against the inner face; the joints are
oblique. The coils are quite small (between 1 and 2 cm).
Their size depends on the thickness of the vessels:
their height is around one and a half times the thick-
ness of the vessels. Diagnostic features: at high magni-
fication, in section, fissures indicate oblique joints of
coils whose direction is inward (from the outer face to
the inner face); the strong sub-parallel oblique poros-
ity running from one side of the wall to the other sug-
gests a strong compression of the coil, which is the
effect of the coiling-by-spreading technique (Fig. 9).
To the naked eye, the apposition of the coils on the
inner face is sometimes visible in the form of concen-
tric overthicknesses (Fig. 10).
Once the body is formed, the rim is shaped with a wet
soft tool (ngers or piece of cloth) with or without rotary
motion. Diagnostic features: At high magnication, uid
microtopography and ribbed sub-parallel striations indi-
cate the use of water (Fig. 11).
After the shaping of the rim, the wet inner faces
of vessels are smoothed with dry or wet soft tools
( fingers or piece of cloth). Diagnostic features: At high
magnification, on inner face of closed vessels, irregular
microtopography, threaded striations, and inner-body
striations overlapping inner-rim striations indicate a
smoothing operation with a dry soft tool after shap-
ing of the rim (Figs. 11 and 12). Fluid microtopography
and ribbed striations indicate smoothing with a wet
tool (Fig. 13).
FIG. 6
Examples of modelled bases characterized by subparallel elongated voids
and alignment of the inclusions: (a) Fazael; (b) Safadi; (c) Turmus. (Photos
courtesy of V. Roux.)
34 | THE GHASSULIAN CERAMIC TRADITION
e vessel is then left to dry until its consistency is
leather-hard. Elements are applied at that point: decora-
tive bands, handles, and—for all the vessels—an extra
peripheral coil around the external base. is coil prob-
ably reinforced the junction between the base and the
body. us, potters employed three dierent means to
render the junction solid: they raised the base’s edges,
and added an inner as well as an outer peripheral coil.
Diagnostic features: to the naked eye, overthickness
on the lower outer face and around the external base
(Fig. 14). In some cases, the overthickness of the outer
peripheral coil is folded either against the body, or
FIG. 7
Examples of bases showing poral pattern significant of modelled bases with raised edges and internal
peripheral coil: (a) Kafr Kanna; (b) Fazael; (c) Rasm Harbush; (d) Safadi. (Photos courtesy of V. Roux.)
JOURNAL OF EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN ARCHAEOLOGY AND HERITAGE STUDIES 35
against the surface of the outer base (Fig. 15). Let us note,
however, that when the outer coil is strongly smeared
against the wall and covered by a thick coating, the over-
thickness on the lower outer face is hardly visible.
Next, the clay coating was applied. As said above, it
was applied on the outer/inner face of the vessels using
vertical/oblique gestures (or in some cases with a rotary
motion), from below the rim—or from the rim itself—
down to the base, probably with ngers serving as tools.
Diagnostic features: to the naked eye, lumpy and irregu-
lar topography; at high magnication, oating grains;
on closed vessels, edge of the rim coating visible on the
edge of the inner rim; on the body, coating overlapping
the smoothing striations of the rim; coating covering the
applied elements (Fig. 16).
e decoration of the bands by nger impression is
made after the coating, as is the perforation of the han-
dles. Other decorations are also made at this stage (slip,
painting, incision, impression). Diagnostic features: to the
naked eye, thickened overthicknesses around the perfo-
rations/incisions/impressions testify to these operations
on wet clay coating (see Fig. 16).
Once dried, the vessels were red in an oxidized
atmosphere, probably in an open re (no kiln has
been found and some vessels feature dierent colors).
ey were possibly left to cool in the ring structure.
Diagnostic features: the surfaces of the pottery are pale;
in radial section, the two outer margins are oxidized;
the core may be oxidized or reduced, showing a variabil-
ity in the oxidation process which is expected in open
ring structures. e often-oxidized cores and the well-
red vessels may suggest a long exposure within the r-
ing structures.
ere are variants to this chaîne opératoire. One of the
most salient is the use of red slip. It is applied onto the
coating using the ngers as seen at Kafr Kanna, Turmus,
and Rasm Harbush (as well as at Marj Rabba, Y. Rowan,
pers. comm.). e red slip is a variant found exclusively in
the north. It is applied on most of the vessels, no matter
their shapes or sizes. It may also be applied on the outer
bases, which in this case are clay-coated. Diagnostic fea-
tures: multidirectional ribbed striations (Fig. 17).
Other regional variants exist like the forming sup-
port of the bases (use of matt at Tuleilat Ghassul) or the
co-occurrence of organic and mineral inclusions in the clay
paste (e.g., at Safadi and Grar; Gilead and Goren 1989).
Discussion
e analysis of the chaînes opératoires of the southern
Levant LC ceramics aimed at assessing whether the
same or dierent chaînes opératoires were carried out
for making mundane vessels. By reference to anthro-
pological models, the use of the same chaîne opératoire
FIG. 8
Fissure at the junction between the base and the inner wall indicating an
inner peripheral coil placed against the raised edges of the base. (Above:
Ghassul, courtesy of the Pontifical Biblical Institute; below: Fazael,
courtesy of V. Roux.)
36 | THE GHASSULIAN CERAMIC TRADITION
for the same range of vessels may indicate a wide learn-
ing network and therefore strong social links between
the communities. On the contrary, the use of dierent
chaînes opératoires for the same range of vessels may
indicate dierent social groups.
Our results show that the Ghassulian communities
shared the same chaîne opératoire. It is characterized by
the following successive steps: tempering clay paste with
20–30% coarse mineral grains; modeling the base from a
lump of clay in the form of a disc whose edges are raised
FIG. 9
Oblique porosity
marked by
elongated voids
orientated inward
indicating coiling by
internal spreading:
(a) Kafr Kanna;
(b)Fazael; (c)
Safadi; (d) Tel Teo.
(Photos courtesy of
V. Roux.)
FIG. 10
Concentric overticknesses on the inner walls indicating the internal
spreading of the coils (Safadi). (Photo courtesy of V. Roux.)
FIG. 11
Rim with fluid microtopography and ribbed striations indicating finishing
with a wet soft tool (Fazael). The inner face is smoothed after the rim, as
shown by the overlapping of the smoothing striations over the ones of the
rim. (Photo courtesy of V. Roux.)
FIG. 12
Irregular microtopography and threaded striations signifying smoothing of
a wet surface with dry fingers (10x) (Fazael). (Photo courtesy of V. Roux.)
FIG. 13
Rim and inner wall with fluid microtopography and ribbed striations
indicating smoothing with wet tool (Safadi). On the rim, the
concentric striations suggest the use of a rotary motion (with the
help, or not, of a rotary device). (Photo courtesy of V. Roux.)
FIG. 14
Overthicknesses on the lower part of the outer wall and around the outer base indicate the adding of an outer
peripheral coil: (a) Fazael; (b) Kafr Kanna; (c) Modi’in; (d) Turmus; (e) Safadi; (f) Grar. (Photos courtesy of V. Roux.)
JOURNAL OF EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN ARCHAEOLOGY AND HERITAGE STUDIES 39
up to start the body; reinforcing the junction between
the wall and the base by applying an inner peripheral
coil; forming the walls by spreading coils along the inner
face; shaping and smoothing the rim with a wet soft tool;
smoothing inner wet walls with a soft tool; drying until
leather-hard; applying an extra peripheral coil around the
base; coating the outer face of the vessels while includ-
ing the applied elements (outer peripheral coils, handles,
decorative bands); decorating; and at last ring under
open ring conditions and oxidized atmosphere.
is chaîne opératoire contrasts with those used dur-
ing the fth to fourth millennium BC by the neighboring
populations. In Egypt, the clay paste was tempered with
animal dung, the bases were made from spiraled coils, the
bodies were made with horizontally superimposed coils,
the external faces were burnished (main chaîne opératoire
observed on Egyptian lower culture assemblages from
Tell el-Iswid and Samara). To the north of the southern
Levant, in the central Levant, several traditions were cur-
rent, including shaping by modeling or by adding large
coils. Slip was the main surface treatment and smooth-
ing the main nishing technique. None of them used clay
coating (Baldi 2017). ese dierent traditions do not
stem from temporal and/or spatial factors: there are no
similar technical elements that might signal a common
origin. In this respect, the technological analysis of the
ceramics indicates a population structure distinguishing
the southern Levantine population from its neighbors
who passed along other methods of production.
If we now consider the anthropological rule accord-
ing to which the transmission of a craft requires direct
social learning between learner and tutor, and tutors are
generally selected within the learner’s group, then the
sharing of the same, single ceramic chaîne opératoire all
over the southern Levant testies to a wide learning net-
work and enables us to view the dierent communities
of the southern Levant as parts of a single social group.
Variants such as red slip, matt or shapes are grouped
spatially suggesting preferential spatial connections and
therefore probably social sub-groups (e.g., such as dier-
ent clans of the same tribe).
ere remains a question as to whether these socially
connected communities were interacting at the popula-
tion level in order to assess whether social links were
an inclusive principle. A techno-petrographic study of
ceramic assemblages belonging to sites distributed all
over the southern Levant shows that there are three
main categories of assemblages: (a) homogeneous
assemblages (ceramic production made with local clay
sources) testifying to interactions between producers at
the scale of the village; (b) simple heterogeneous assem-
blages (ceramic production made with clay sources
from a meso-region) testifying to interactions between
individuals at the regional scale—they are found in
shrines or burial sites (e.g., Gilat, En Gedi, Azor; see
Goren 1995; Roux and Courty 2007); and (c) complex
heterogeneous assemblages (ceramic production made
with clay sources from a macro-region) testifying to
interactions between individuals at the population
scale. is is the case of one site only, Abu Hamid in the
Middle Jordan Valley. e techno-petrographic analysis
FIG. 15
The outer peripheral coil is folded against the outer base (Fazael). (Photo
courtesy of V. Roux.)
40 | THE GHASSULIAN CERAMIC TRADITION
of the LC ceramic assemblage shows that all the recipi-
ents come from all over the southern Levant (Roux
and Courty 2007). Abu Hamid has been interpreted as
a gathering/pilgrimage site, that is to say, a place fre-
quented by people from all over the southern Levant.
In this respect, the ceramic assemblage of Abu Hamid
suggests that Ghassulian sites were connected at the
population level at a given point in time, and therefore
that the Ghassulian population was a homogeneously
mixing population (every individual can interact with
an other).
ese results argue in favor of a dense social net-
work during the LC period. It might explain how new
norms were shared between the Ghassulian communi-
ties despite regional dierences as shown by the goods
belonging to dierent regional networks and found side
by side in three pivotal burials, Peqi’in, Nahal Qana, and
Givat HaOranim (Chasan and Rosenberg 2018).
FIG. 16
Lumpy topography on applied elements: (a) and (b) decorative bands (Fazael); (c) base (Tuleilat Ghassul);
(d)handles (Fazael). (Photos a, b, d courtesy of V. Roux; photo c courtesy of the Pontifical Biblical Institute.)
JOURNAL OF EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN ARCHAEOLOGY AND HERITAGE STUDIES 41
Conclusion
is article discussed whether the dierences between the
Ghassulian communities signify their loosely integrated
organization. In order to assess the social links between
the communities, the concept of chaîne opératoire was
applied to ceramic assemblages of sites located in dierent
parts of the southern Levant. Results show that a single
chaîne opératoire was used for making mundane ceramic
containers. is single chaîne opératoire testies to social
links between the Ghassulian communities: a single way
of making ceramics was taught—suggesting individu-
als belonged to the same social group. ese social links
might be the inclusive principle, considering also that the
Ghassulian communities interacted at the population level
as shown by the ndings at the site of Abu Hamid.
e roots of such a dense social network may be
found in the previous periods as technological evidence
provided by the Tel Tsaf and Beth Shean XVIII ceramics
suggests (Silvain 2015). e ceramic chaîne opératoire is
comparable to the Ghassulian one. If such a phylogenetic
link between the populations of the early and late fth
millennium BC proves correct, it could explain the coher-
ence of the Ghassulian culture and shed new light on the
formation of regional dierences within a highly socially
connected society.
FIG. 17
Slip applied on
clay-coated wall and
base: (a) Kafr Kanna;
(b)Turmus; (c) Rasm
Harbush. (Photos
courtesy of V. Roux.)
42 | THE GHASSULIAN CERAMIC TRADITION
  is director of research at the Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS), France. She is a
worldwide leader in ceramic technology whose groundbreaking method has been published in numerous articles and more
recently in her book Des céramiques et des hommes: décoder les assemblages archéologiques () (Ceramics and Society: A Tech-
nological Approach to Ceramic Assemblages, Springer, ). She conducts research on the evolutionary trajectories of ceramic
traditions in the southern and northern Levant between the fifth and third millennia BC. She also works in India on elaborat-
ing reference data aimed at enhancing the anthropological interpretation of archaeological assemblages. Her latest research
has focused on social networks and craft expertise so as to define the contexts that favor the diffusion of techniques and style.
(CNRS, UMR , Maison de l’Archéologie et de l’Ethnologie,  allée de l’Université,  Nanterre cedex, France; valentine.
roux@cnrs.fr)
Notes
is article is dedicated to Nava Panitz-Cohen, an unfailing sup-
port to the diusion of ceramic technology and a dear friend.
Most of the collections studied are stored at the IAA. We would
like to warmly thank Galit Litani for her help in accessing these
collections. We are very grateful to Shai Bar for giving us the
opportunity to study the ceramics from Fazael, to Edwin van den
Brink to study the ceramics from Kafr Kanna and to Matt Adams
to study the ceramics from Megiddo. We thank also Fr. Joseph
Bria for his kindness to let us examine Tuleilat Ghassul material.
1. Successive studies have been carried out among which the
rst was published in Roux and Courty 2005, 2007; the
second in Roux, van den Brink, and Shalev 2013; the others
were carried out in 2016–2017 within the framework of my
appointment at the Centre de recherche français à Jérusalem.
References
Arnold, D. E. 1985. Ceramic eory and Cultural Process. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Baldi, J. S. 2017. Collections céramiques du Musée de Préhistoire
Libanaise: une étude technique. ArchéOrient - Le Blog.
May 5, 2017. https://archeorient.hypotheses.org/7431
(accessed November 14, 2018).
Bril, B. 2002. L’apprentissage de gestes techniques: ordre de
contraintes et variations culturelles. In Le geste technique:
réexions méthodologiques et anthropologiques, ed. B. Bril and
V. Roux, 113–50. Ramonville Saint-Agne: Éd. érès.
Chasan, R., and D. Rosenberg. 2018. Basalt Vessels in Chalcolithic
Burial Caves: Variations in Prestige Burial Oerings during
the Chalcolithic Period of the Southern Levant and eir
Social Signicance. Quaternary International 464:226–40.
Creswell, R. 1976. Techniques et culture: les bases d’un programme
de travail. Techniques & Culture 1:7–59.
Degoy, L. 2008. Technical Traditions and Cultural Identity: An
Ethnoarchaeological Study of Andhra Pradesh Potters. In
Cultural Transmission and Material Culture: Breaking down
Boundaries, ed. M. T. Stark, B. J. Bowser, and L. Horne,
199–222. Tucson: e University of Arizona Press.
Dobres, M. A. 2000. Technology and Social Agency: Outlining a
Practice Framework for Archaeology. Oxford: Blackwell.
Ericson, K. A., and A. C. Lehman. 1996. Expert and Exceptional
Performance: Evidence of Maximal Adaptation to Task
Constraints. Annual Review of Psychology 47:273–305.
Foster, G. M. 1965. e Sociology of Pottery: Questions and
Hypotheses Arising from Contemporary Mexican Work.
In Ceramics and Man, ed. F. R. Matson, 43–61. New York:
Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research.
Gallay, A. 2007. Les jarres de mariage décorées du delta intéri-
eur du Niger (Mali): essai de délimitation archéologique
d’un territoire ethnique. e Arkeotek Journal 1(1).
http://www.thearkeotekjournal.org/tdm/Arkeotek/fr/
archives/2007/1Gallay.xml (accessed November 12, 2018).
Gelbert, A. 2003. Traditions céramiques et emprunts techniques dans
la vallée du euve Sénégal—Ceramic Traditions and Technical
Borrowings in the Senegal Valley. Paris: Éd. de la Maison des
sciences de l’homme.
Gilead, I. 1988. e Chalcolithic Period in the Levant. Journal of
World Prehistory 2:397–443.
. 2011. Chalcolithic Culture History: e Ghassulian
and Other Entities in the Southern Levant. In Culture,
Chronology and the Chalcolithic: eory and Transition, ed.
J. L. Lovell and Y. Rowan, 12–24. Oxford and Oakville: CBRL
and Oxbow Books.
, and Y. Goren. 1989. Petrographic Analyses of Fourth
Millennium B.C. Pottery and Stone Vessels from the
Northern Negev, Israel. Bulletin of American Schools of
Oriental Research 275:5–14.
Goren, Y. 1995. Shrines and Ceramics in Chalcolithic Israel: e
View through the Petrographic Microscope. Archaeometry
37:287–305.
Gosselain, O. P. 1992. Technology and Style: Potters and Pottery
among Baa of Cameroon. Man 27:559–86.
. 2000. Materializing Identities: An African Perspective.
Journal of Archaeological Method and eory 7:187–217.
Hegmon, M. 1998. Technology, Style, and Social Practice:
Archaeological Approaches. In e Archaeology of Social
Boundaries, ed. M. T. Stark, 264–79. Washington, D.C.:
Smithsonian Institution Press.
Heidke, J., and M. D. Elson. 1988. Tucson Basin Stucco-Coated
Plain Ware: A Technological Assessment. Kiva 53:273–85.
JOURNAL OF EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN ARCHAEOLOGY AND HERITAGE STUDIES 43
Ingold, T. 2001. Beyond Art and Technology: e Anthropology of
Skill. In Anthropological Perspectives on Technology, ed. M. B.
Schier, 17–31. Dragoon, AZ: Amerind Foundation.
Ionescu, C., V. Hoeck, O. N. Crandell, and K. Šarić. 2015.
Burnishing versus Smoothing in Ceramic Surface Finishing:
A SEM Study. Archaeometry 57:18–26.
Joe, A. H. 2003. Slouching toward Beersheva: Chalcolithic
Mortuary Practices in Local and Regional Context. In e
Near East in the Southwest: Essays in Honor of William
G. Dever, ed. B. Alpert-Nakhai, 45–67. Annual of the American
Schools of Oriental Research 58. Boston: American Schools of
Oriental Research.
Knappett, C. 2005. inking through Material Culture: An
Interdisciplinary Perspective. Philadelphia: University of
Pennsylvania Press.
Levy, T. E. 1998a. Archaeology of Society in the Holy Land. Leicester:
Leicester University Press.
. 1998b. Cult, Metallurgy and Rank Societies—Chalcolithic
Period (ca. 4500–3500 BCE). In e Archaeology of Society
in the Holy Land, ed. T. E. Levy, 226–43. London: Leicester
University Press.
, and A. Holl. 1988. Les sociétés chalcolithiques de la
Palestine et l’émergence des cheeries. Archives Européennes
de Sociologie 29:283–316.
Mayor, A. 2010. Ceramic Traditions and Ethnicity in the Niger
Bend, West Africa. Ethnoarchaeology 2:5–48.
Nicklin, K. 1971. Stability and Innovation in Pottery Manufacture.
World Archaeology 3:13–48.
Reed, E. S., and B. Bril. 1996. e Primacy of Action in
Development. In Dexterity and Its Development, ed. M. L.
Latash and M. T. Turvey, 431–51. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
Associates.
Roux, V. 2003. A Dynamic Systems Framework for Studying
Technological Change: Application to the Emergence of
the Potter’s Wheel in the Southern Levant. Journal of
Archaeological Method and eory 10:1–30.
. 2011. Anthropological Interpretation of Ceramic
Assemblages: Foundations and Implementations of
Technological Analysis. In Archaeological Ceramics: A
Review of Current Research, ed. S. Scarcella, 80–88. Oxford:
Archaeopress.
. 2015. Standardization of Ceramic Assemblages:
Transmission Mechanisms and Diusion of Morpho-
Functional Traits across Social Boundaries. Journal of
Anthropological Archaeology 40:1–9.
. 2016. Des céramiques et des hommes: décoder les assemblages
archéologiques. Nanterre: Presses Universitaires de Paris
Ouest.
. 2017a. Ceramic Manufacture: e Chaîne Opératoire
Approach. In Oxford Handbook of Archaeological Ceramic
Analysis, ed. A. Hunt, 101–13. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
. 2017b. Smoothing and Clay Coating: Reference Collections
for Interpreting Southern Levant Chalcolithic Finishing
Techniques and Surface Treatments. e Arkeotek Journal 2.
http://www.thearkeotekjournal.org/tdm/Arkeotek/
fr/ articles_originaux/1Roux.xml (accessed November 13,
2018).
, B. Bril, J. Cauliez, A. L. Goujon, C. Lara, C. Manen,
G. de Saulieu, and E. Zangato. 2017. Persisting Technological
Boundaries: Social Interactions, Cognitive Correlations
and Polarization. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology
48:320–35.
, and M.-A. Courty. 2005. Identifying Social Entities at
a Macro-Regional Level: Chalcolithic Ceramics of South
Levant as a Case Study. In Pottery Manufacturing Processes:
Reconstruction and Interpretation, ed. A. Livingstone Smith,
D. Bosquet, and R. Martineau, 201–14. BAR International
Series 1349. Oxford: Archaeopress.
, and M.-A. Courty. 2007. Analyse techno-pétrographique
céramique et interprétation fonctionnelle des sites: un
exemple d’application dans le Levant Sud Chalcolithique.
In La mesure du passé: contributions à la recherche en
archéometrie (2000–2006), ed. A. Bain, J.-B. Chabot, and M.
Mousette, 153–67. BAR International Series 1700. Oxford:
Archaeopress.
, E. C. M. van den Brink, and S. Shalev. 2013. Continuity
and Discontinuity in the Shephela (Israel) between the
Late Chalcolithic and the Early Bronze I: e Modi’in “Deep
Deposits” Ceramic Assemblages as a Case Study. Paléorient
39 (1):63–81.
Rowan, Y. M., and J. Golden. 2009. e Chalcolithic Period of
the Southern Levant: A Synthetic Review. Journal of World
Prehistory 22:1–92.
Schier, M. B., J. M. Skibo, T. C. Boelke, M. A. Neupert, and
M. Aronson. 1994. New Perspectives on Experimental
Archaeology: Surface Treatments and ermal Response of
the Clay Cooking Pot. American Antiquity 59:197–217.
Shennan, S. 2002. Genes, Memes and Human History: Darwinian
Archaeology and Cultural Evolution. London: ames &
Hudson.
Silvain, M. 2015. Tel Tsaf et les sociétés de la vallée du Jourdain
dans la première moitié du 5e millénaire: une approche tech-
nologique des assemblages céramiques. PhD diss., University of
Paris-Nanterre.
Stark, M. T., ed. 1998. e Archaeology of Social Boundaries. London,
Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press.
, R. L. Bishop, and E. Miksa. 2000. Ceramic Technology
and Social Boundaries: Cultural Practices in Kalinga Clay
Selection and Use. Journal of Archaeological Method and eory
7:295–331.
Tehrani, J. J., and F. Riede. 2008. Towards an Archaeology of
Pedagogy: Learning, Teaching and the Generation of
Material Culture Traditions. World Archaeology 40:316–31.
... De acordo com Roux (2016;2019), em uma escala individual, o processo de aprendizagem implica a presença de um tutor e de um modelo, além do aprendiz. Independente da maneira segundo a qual o aprendizado acontece, o tutor garante que a reprodução daquele modelo aconteça. ...
... Já as receitas de argila, as formas dos objetos e os elementos decorativos podem ser aprendidas individualmente. Neste sentido, Roux (2016;2019) considera que as técnicas de façonagem são mais persistentes e resistentes às mudanças, quando comparadas a outros elementos, como o estilo. Por este motivo, as técnicas de façonagem tendem a ser elementos mais consistentes na costura social dos indivíduos às suas comunidades, tanto numa visão diacrônica, detectando continuidades e mudanças, quanto numa visão sincrônica para perceber as fronteiras das tradições técnicas. ...
Article
Full-text available
Inseridos numa área de grande diversidade cultural, os abrigos da Cidade de Pedra têm tipos de cerâmicas variados. Essa mistura oculta diferentes situações socioculturais de interação entre as culturas arqueológicas. Nosso interesse é reconstituir a história dessas ocupações, num intervalo entre 1.900 ± 40 e 205 ± 40 BP, buscando as distinções culturais e as relações estabelecidas entre os grupos. O método empregado é a análise tecnológica de coleções vindas de cinco sítios arqueológicos. Identificou-se dois intervalos de ocupação. O mais antigo é marcado por uma cerâmica façonada por roletes. Por volta de 1.060 ± 40 BP, estabeleceu-se um grupo portador de uma cerâmica façonada sobre massa de argila e por roletes. Nota-se a circulação de objetos vindos do alto Paraguai e do cerrado. O Holoceno recente da Cidade de Pedra fica assim caracterizado pela sucessão gradual de diferentes grupos culturais e uma etapa final mais evidente de interação entre grupos vizinhos.
... In the Ghassulian culture, there are two fields of production in which there is a great deal of centralization, both in terms of access to tools and technology, and in terms of access to knowledge itself: metalworking (Gošić, 2008;Golden, 1998;Ackerfeld et al., 2020), and the use of a potter's wheel (Roux, 2010(Roux, , 2019Roux & Miroshedji, 2009). Researchers in the field define this knowledge and use of tools as exclusive, but the products are found at many sites. ...
... A constant flow of ideas and information reassured and strengthened cultural identity in the Ghassulian sphere. This reflected in the long-term trading relationships presented above; in the basic package of V-shaped bowls, cornets and churns that appear again and again at the sites; in the uniformity of the two main ceramic technologies-hand-made and wheel-shaped (Roux, 2019)-and the distinctive artistic expressions (Harney et al., 2018). There are strong cultural ties within the Ghassulian sphere, within which the various levels of the settlements are located, in addition to the set of economic ties reviewed above. ...
Chapter
Full-text available
To a large extent, our understanding of the socio-economic system of the Chalcolithic period in the southern Levant is based on excavations of sites in Israel’s northern Negev. While hundreds of sites are known, discoveries from excavations of less than ten large villages are those that have outlined the socio-economic conclusions currently drawn regarding Chalcolithic cultural entities.Discussions in the 1980s regarding the level of complexity in Chalcolithic society ranged from seeing it as a broad egalitarian society to perceiving it as a localized chiefdom. Small excavations in the following decades did not change these perceptions. Recent excavations of several large Chalcolithic villages, however, have now provided much-needed quality data that has changed the status of research and analysis. Information from excavations conducted during the last decade at the Chalcolithic sites of Tel Sheva, Agamim and Kuseife enable a better reassessment of the socio-economic complexity in this period.KeywordsChalcolithicLevantSocietyEconomyGhassulianChiefdom
... The Chalcolithic pottery of Nahal Patish exhibit the typical Ghassulian ceramic techniques (Gilead and Goren 1995;Commenge et al. 2006;Roux et al. 2013;Roux 2019). Some of the small bowls exhibit wheel striations, suggesting the utilization of a tournette to manufacture small bowls, or for smoothing and finishing purposes. ...
... This is indicated by the rough, uneven base surface and traces of excess clay in some of the bowls. Other bowls, jar types, were handmade, made of segmental pieces of coils, straps, or slabs, and then clay coated (Commenge et al. 2006: 403-405;Roux et al. 2013;Roux 2019). ...
... Above all, the conservatism of pottery-forming techniques is stressed (e.g. Nicklin 1971;Arnold 1985;Gosselain 2000;Wallaert-Pêtre 2001;Mayor 2011;Roux 2019bRoux , 2020). An interdependence of the individual phases of the technological process is another aspect contributing to the stability. ...
Article
Full-text available
This study focuses on the introduction of pottery-forming methods employing rotational motion in relation to social and economic conditions and their transformations during the La Tène period in Central Europe. It explores the diversity of technological practices on a broader geographical scale in several regions of the Czech Republic with various demographic, social, and environmental conditions during this period. The study is based on the idea that a technological process is a cultural trait whose adoption is the result of a cultural selection. These interactions are facilitated by the performances of the technological process and its products. The technological analysis relies on a recently developed quantitative analytical technique based on calculating the orientation of components of the ceramic body supplemented by qualitative classification of diagnostic features observed on X-ray images and CT reconstructions. By applying the methodology to an extensive collection of pottery samples, we have obtained a robust picture of the adoption and spread of different variants of the application of rotational motion. Based on this evidence, we proposed evolutionary scenarios that show the unique interplay of the performances of the individual variants of this general innovative idea with specific local socio-cultural conditions.
... In recent decades, a scholarly impetus was stimulated by developments of analytical approaches combining, inter alia "chaîne opératoire" based studies, ceramic petrography, and chemical analyses since they are of prime chronological and cultural significance and as sensitive markers to evaluate technological and social changes (Spataro & Villing 2015;London 2016;Ben-Shlomo et al. 2008;Ben-Shlomo 2019a). In the same way, the study of manufacturing techniques of ancient pottery in the Southern Levant gained popularity in scholarly research, especially for the Chalcolithic and Bronze Age periods (Franken 1969;Roux 2003;2017;2019a and2019b with references therein; Roux & Courty 2005;Roux & Miroschedji 2009;Roux & Rosen 2009;Roux et al. 2013;Roux & Harush 2022;Kleiman 2020). In parallel, advances in radiography techniques allow the study of pottery forming (Berg 2022;Thér 2020). ...
Article
Full-text available
The study presented here deals with the manufacturing technologies of cooking pots in Iron Age II Judah (ca. 1000–586 BCE). Two aspects were studied on an assemblage of ca. 500 cooking pots: paste preparation with a highlight on temper analyses as well as fashioning and finishing techniques. The research is conducted as a part of a substantial multi-disciplinary study of cooking ware in Iron Age Judah, combining technological, typological, petrographic, and chemical aspects. New cooking pot types appeared during the Iron Age II, with the apparent existence of regional production centers for cooking pots in this period. The results indicate that the cooking pots were made following three technical groups, reflecting a stable technical and technological continuity alongside the rise of specialized production in various regional production centers. Temper analysis carried out through petrography shows a slow shift from calcite-calcareous tempering towards quartz tempering (which may be partly or entirely naturally present in the clay selected). These results will also be discussed in relation to the morphological typology of the vessels and petro-fabrics identified in the more extensive study. Resting on several analytical methods, this paper aims to characterize the cooking pot production system, thus providing insights into Iron Age Judah’s pottery craft organization.
Chapter
This chapter explores what it is that archaeology and archaeologists make, returning us to the idea of archaeology as a craft first introduced in Chap. 1. What archaeology makes is not limited to understandings of the past, presented in reports and other written and drawn outputs, but also new ways of thinking about our own present and the construction of futures. It also creates categories of person and notions of time, as well as ideas of how humans relate to the material world which we inhabit. Archaeology is thereby shown to be a philosophical discipline in the fullest sense.
Article
Full-text available
The Late Chalcolithic of the southern Levant is in part characterized by increased formalized ritual behavior, specifically in the form of burial caves. These caves feature a high variety of utilitarian and prestige grave goods. One of the notable finds in some of the burial caves are basalt vessels, which are considered a hallmark of the Chalcolithic period. Despite their ubiquity in domestic context and likely status as prestige goods produced at specialized production sites, basalt vessels are absent from most burial caves, and the overall frequency of basalt vessels in the caves is highly variable. This paper reviews the phenomenon of basalt vessels in Chalcolithic burial caves and discusses the variability noted. The fact that these labor-intensive prestige goods were found in caves used as arenas for rich symbolic and ritualistic mortuary behavior suggests that while basalt vessels had an important role in Chalcolithic mundane context, the cultic significance of these vessels also entered the spectrum of beliefs concerning death and the afterlife. Moreover, the discrepancies noted in their presence in burial caves suggest that this significance was probably not shared among all Chalcolithic communities in the southern Levant.
Article
This article presents results obtained from experiments carried out in 1998 and 2002 at the Historical-Archaeological Center of Lejre (Denmark). The scope was to provide comparative reference data to interpret the finishing techniques and the surface treatments of the southern Levant Late Chalcolithic ceramics (2nd half of the 5th millennium BC). http://www.thearkeotekjournal.org/tdm/Arkeotek/fr/articles_originaux/1Roux.xml
Article
In this paper, we address the question of the conditions for persistence of technological boundaries. We use field studies to test the predictions generated by a theoretical model in analytical sociology and examine the micro-processes at stake in the non-diffusion of techniques: to which extent techniques contributes to a sharp disagreement between groups and promote polarization? The ultimate goal is to provide archaeologists with an empirically tested model to explain spatial distribution of technological clusters and maintenance of technological boundaries. Field studies examine ethnographic situations in four countries where social groups using different ceramic techniques for making utilitarian vessels live in close geographical proximity. Two situations enable us to examine the conditions under which technological boundaries persist, while two others enable us to analyze, through a boundary-making perspective, how differences in craft techniques contribute to polarization. Our data suggest that in a context where different techniques are used for different types of object there is a cognitive bias which fosters technological polarization. This cognitive bias develops in the course of interactions between actors living in close geographical proximity. Polarization increases when technological standards are used by different social groups, thereby favoring negative influence and persistent technological boundaries. https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1VxFl_6L9ZmkPJ