For this first lab you will each be given a pottery sherd that was collected from the archaeological site of Fustat which was the early Islamic period foundation for the modern city of Cairo in Egypt. With this borken piece of ceramic you will begin to develop a description using as many senses as you can. Think about the categories that you would want to use for its description. This might include everything from measurements to how it tastes.
Following the lab session I ask that you return to this page and post your description and what you think that you have learned from this archaeological object. What has it told you about any of the archaeological subjects that we have talked about in class (e.g. systems, historical naratives, cultures, our relationship with things, yourself).
The password for this forum is "islamic"
Posted at Sep 16/2007 02:51PM:
elisa foster: the vessel I examined was a small ceramic container (4 -5 inches in diameter) with a significant break in the body of the vessel. While the vessel possessed a narrow opening, the body was wide and perhaps was intended to hold some sort of liquid, likely oil. The rings between the neck and the body of the object indicated to me that it was likely assembled in multiple pieces before it was fired. There also appears to have been a handle attached to one side of the vessel body, continuing up to the neck, marked now by a large circular break. The vessel itself sits upon a small base whose bottom is unglazed and somewhat unfinished. The glaze is multicolored - predominately a white/green slip painted with alternating, unsymetrical strokes of blue and deep purple. The clay itself seems rather crude, however the fact that this vessel was decorated (albeit in a somewhat simple manner) may have indicated some aesthetic intention outside of its utilitarian function.
Posted at Sep 16/2007 11:05PM:
karl su: My piece was the remains of what was once a medium-sized bowl. It was very ornately painted and glazed on the inside, with a floral motif in blue, white and green. What was immediately striking was the islamic script painted on the 'petals' of the flower which extended from the cetnre of the bowl. Its highly intricate design suggests that it had some decorative usage, possibly religious, although it also could simply have been a bowl used by the wealthier segment of society (or did everyone have such ornate bowls to eat out of?). What remains of the islamic words were not sufficient to translate -("mu wAa bat"?). If anything we can be sure it was from an Arabic culture and also the maker would most likely been literate. Interestingly the attention to detail on the outside was less than on the inside, there were several spots on the exterior where the glaze had simply lumped together. Possibly its use could have justified the maker's focus on the interior, that the user of the bowl only saw the inside. The base of the bowl (about 2 inches wide and about 1 cm in height) was left unfinished and had a small hole drilled into the side. Possibly it could have been for hanging the bowl up to dry? Finally, the clay itself seems rather stony and hard, and not very fine, which suggests that this bowl could have been more cheaply made?
Posted at Sep 17/2007 06:28AM:
Sebastian Gallese: I examined a fragment of pottery.
Size: 2-3 inches in diameter.
Color: Earthy- cream mixed with brown.
Composition: Ceramic
Design: Rounded fragment with multiple "square" shaped holes punched around Kufic calligraphy.
Fragment: Looks to be a part of two larger pieces, one an open faced container on top of the piece, and the second, a closed face container on the bottom of the piece.
Use: Perhaps used as a strainer of some sort? Displayed in the dining/public room? Holes are crude on one side of the piece (I assume this a "face-down" side) and neat on the other side ("face-up" side).
Social Class: Looks commonplace. Hasty craftsmanship shows holes were punched in the clay while clay was still wet. Done thoroughly but quickly.
What struck me about this piece was the fact that my piece looked so commonplace. It is like somebody in 1000 years examining the forks I eat with at the Ratty. There is a thrill in touching something so old; however, it is not the same thrill of holding a piece of ancient culture as portrayed by the Indian Jones movie or Relic Rush [link]. Still, I am enticed to learn more about the artifact- I wish to know more about HOW people used it and translate the Arabic written on the side of piece.
Posted at Sep 17/2007 09:43AM:
vgorra:
The ceramic piece is from a vessel made of red-ceramic and decorated lustre-ware glaze. There are no visible signs of metallic paint, or the use of a metallic oxide in the glazing process. The weight of the piece is fairly light. It is multi-colored with bright greens, yellow and brown. The decoration consists of structured lines on right versus splattered lines on left. Perhaps the more haphazard decoration is meant to resemble a vegetal decoration. Both styles of decoration seem to have been done rather quickly, and although there are structured lines on the right side of the bowl there is no evidence of identifiable Islamic motifs, such as calligraphy, intricate vegetal scrolls or geometric shapes. The lack of iconography shows that there was not an aesthetic adoption of or adaptation to Sassanian or Byzantine aesthetic traditions.
The structure of the piece seems to have a shallow base. If one imagines the piece in its entirety it is possible that sides fan outward. The lack of depth to the bowl reduces its functionality. Furthermore, the lack of decoration on the outside of the bowl, suggests that this piece was used more for presentation. There are a few spots of brightly colored green glaze splattered near the base, one the outside of the piece, which leads me to believe that this piece was not for formal presentation or for exportation. It is possible, that this piece was not even intended for presentation and instead could have been used as a test for various colors of glazes and glazing techniques.
Posted at Sep 17/2007 11:52AM:
Aaron Isham: I examined a broken section of what appeared to be a large ceramic bowl. Judging from the cross-section, it appears that sand and perhaps other pieces of broken ceramics were introduced into the ceramic mix before the bowl was fired. The cermic material is much coarser and darker than some of the other pieces that appeared to be pure clay.
The vessel was glazed, and there is evidence that metallic oxide was used in the glazing process. the inside of the vessel is decorated with golden designs which do not appear to have any symbolic significance. The outside of the vessel is glazed but not decorated.
The craftsmanship of the bowl suggests that it was used as a decorative piece in the residence of common people. The outside of the bowl has numerous pits and holes which suggests quick production and cheap price.
Posted at Sep 18/2007 10:29AM:
aviad: I examined a piece pottery which was most likely the base of something. The bottom half of it was unglazed and curved down in such a way that it balanced well, leading me to beleive that that was the base of the object. The base was roughly 1-2 inches in diameter, and the upper part extended farther out suggesting that the object was a plate or bowl of sorts. The top section was covered with a green/yellow glaze and a design in brown that created geometric shapes similar to leaves or curvy triangles. While my knowledge on Islamic art is greatly lacking, the geometric pattern did remind me of other Islamic art I've seen, suggesting that it is in fact an Islamic work. Also, given that the top section was both glazed and designed, this was probably an open structure (bowl or plate) because if it was closed no one would have been able to see into it or paint into it. Finally, I thought the object looked classy or elegant, but I don't know enough yet to say whether it was in the home of the extremely rich or a general item most people had.
The questions this object led me to raise were: Where is it from? How old is it? Who produced it? Who used it? What was it? What was it used for? Why put the designs on it? How was the design made?
Posted at Sep 27/2007 02:55PM:
Gareth: I examined what I think is a fragment of a ceramic bowl. Judging by the ‘flare’ of the remaining edges, it seems that the bowl was once quite shallow, however as it is shattered it is hard to be certain of anything. The colors seem worn out and they are drab enough to assume that this may not have been a very fanciful decoration in its prime. The composition of the clay seems to be of good quality and there is an almost pinkish tinge to the visible portions. However, the glazing (light and clear, on both the inside and out) and the embossed bird (a peacock?) suggest that the bowl was perhaps more ornamental than I had thought.