III.3 Numbering the Objects
p. 63-64
Texte intégral
1The numbering or “ID-ing” process of pottery is a coding structure which requires a clear and well-defined systematic and it ties in perfectly with the respective excavation records (Orton et al. 1993, pp. 52-54). These coherent and consistently applied number codes in combination with the provenances form the base for successful research, storage (short and long) and management thereof as well as accessibility for further studies or researchers. Traditionally, a large variety of numbering systems are used by archaeological missions working in Sudan or elsewhere, the majority of which are very reliable if understood / decoded.
2Variances between the numbering of all sherds versus vessel units should be well thought out beforehand. Whilst the first would number each sherd from an excavation as a single item the second approach numbers all sherds belonging to one vessel as a single ID. Differences in numbering (that is, which sherd receives a number?) are often related to the method of pottery processing and should be systematically recorded either in a site manual or in the methodology section of the publication.
3Essentially, the finds number, vessel unit number, ID or code of ceramics (or other objects!) follows a certain interchangeable schematic (fig. 26) but can also vary slightly according to where the preference of the project is set and spaced, however the most common are:
Initials / diminutive of the archaeological site / project—year of excavation / or process— continuous number for the object, often starting with 001 for each year, as at Hamadab (see fig. 26 HVU-15-0058).
Initials / diminutive of the archaeological site—year of excavation / or process—sector of the site—context—continuous number for the object, as at Dongola (see fig. 26 D.19.1.1.1200).
Initials / diminutive of the archaeological site—continuous number, such as D001 although nowadays the latter is not recommended.
4The key reason for this process is to provide a unique ID to an object linked to a record of its provenance enabling location, tracking and reference thereto thus ensuring that it is not an anonymous item within a heap of sherds. Loss of such code numbers on sherds usually results in the loss of provenance and contextualisation, hence the use of the object for research purposes reduces it to a simply “pretty” or “interesting” item, but useless for further scientific analyses.
5As a final word, remember that:
Its provenance and contextualisation will be irremediably lost.
The most successful for the provision of the initial information is clearly the use of the provenance but this can result in long numbers which may cause practical issues in the field (e.g. the sherd is too small for number etc.).
Auteurs
PhD, Polish Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology, University of Warsaw, Poland.
Associated member, Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Berlin, Germany.

Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence Creative Commons - Attribution - Partage dans les Mêmes Conditions 4.0 International - CC BY-SA 4.0. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.
Rural-Urban Dynamics in the East African Mountains
Sylvain Racaud, Bob R. Nakileza, François Bart et al. (dir.)
2016
Kenya’s Past as Prologue
Voters, Violence and the 2013 General Election
Christian Thibon, Marie-Aude Fouéré, Mildred Ndeda et al. (dir.)
2014
Music and Dance in Eastern Africa
Current Research in Humanities and Social Sciences
Kahithe Kiiru et Maina wa Mũtonya (dir.)
2018
Where Women Are
Gender & The 2017 Kenyan Elections
Nanjala Nyabola et Marie-Emmanuelle Pommerolle (dir.)
2018
Le Kenya en marche, 2000-2020
Marie-Aude Fouéré, Marie-Emmanuelle Pommerolle et Christian Thibon (dir.)
2020
Kenya in Motion 2000-2020
Marie-Aude Fouéré, Marie-Emmanuelle Pommerolle et Christian Thibon (dir.)
2021