Ceramic Classification: Foreword

p. 20


Texte intégral

1This chapter addresses an inextricable issue for the ceramic specialist: how to sort the ceramics discovered? Many scholars have already approached the topic either in a theoretical frame (see Section II.1) or in more practical terms (ie. Shepard 1956. pp. 306-322; Orton et al. 1993, pp. 67-86; Santacreu et al. 2017). Here, we will describe several methods experimented in Sudan or in Egypt, each clearly related to a specific purpose: one can first opt for appropriate field sorting groups to address chronological issues (see Section ii.2) and then turn to fabric classification to question the provenance (see Sections ii.3 and ii.4) or to technological groups to approach the cultural aspects of the ceramic production (see Sections ii.5 and ii.6). It is important to keep in mind that none are ideal as each method provides specific information complementing the others. A generic form is proposed to illustrate the main attributes considered in each method. Most of them arc common to each form but differ in the hierarchical order selected. For instance, the field-sorting groups’ classification will favour external visual criteria while the fabric classification will be more concerned by internal characteristics using the support of laboratory analyses. The reader can adopt one of these forms or draw inspiration from them co define a personal file which will probably be better adapted to the ceramics to be studied.


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.