-
JOANNA SOFAER
POTS, HOUSES AND METAL: TECHNOLOGICALRELATIONS AT THE BRONZE AGE
TELL ATSZZHALOMBATTA, HUNGARY
Summary. At the Bronze Age tell of Szzhalombatta, Hungary,
techniquesused for making pottery echo those used in other media.
Pottery andarchitecture have a close relationship. Not only were
both made of clay, butmethods of making pots echo those used for
building. Similarly, pottery and metalwork share common themes and
technologies for working with clayand bronze. Since choices made by
potters are not solely confined to theenvironment, raw materials
and tools, but are also socially and culturallydefined, by
implication the transfer of know-how must be situated within
socialnetworks between people. This paper considers how the
identification oftechnical relationships between different media at
Szzhalombatta can be used to explore social relations in Bronze Age
society, thereby suggestingrelationships that work on both
technical and social levels.
introduction
Approaches to the technology of prehistoric pottery often tend
to focus on the technicalparameters of production. In Hungary, as
elsewhere, technological studies of potterymanufacture have
concentrated on the composition of ceramic artefacts and on
provenance(Varga et al. 1989; Ilon and Varga 1994; Szakmny 2001;
Szakmny and Kustr 2000; Gherdnet al. 2002). Firing techniques and
the determination of firing temperatures have also receivedsome
attention (Maniatis and Tite 1981; Varga et al. 1988; Nagy et al.
2000). Similarly,examinations of metalworking technology frequently
concentrate on the composition of bronzesand their provenance
(Mozsolics 1967; Szab 1998; Bertemes and Heyd 2002).
Theinvestigation of house building technology forms part of an
established Hungarian concern withthe archaeological and
ethnographic study of local domestic architecture, where the main
focusis on building techniques (Kovcs 1977; Bna 1982; Mth 1988;
Meier-Arendt 1992; Cseriand Fzes 1997; Poroszlai 2003a).
Such studies have been of great importance in highlighting the
complexity andsophistication of Bronze Age craftsmanship. They
have, however, led to an emphasis onmanufacturing processes and
individual objects as the outcome of craft production, rather
thanhighlighting craftspeople. Furthermore, while technological
developments or productiontechniques have previously been studied
in archaeological contexts within the confines ofindividual crafts,
objects are rarely made or used in isolation. A range of studies
have pointedOXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 25(2) 127147 2006 2006
The AuthorJournal compilation 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 9600
Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UKand 350 Main Street Malden, MA
02148, USA. 127
MaganHighlight
-
out formal, metaphorical, and technical relationships between
different crafts. For example, theproduction of skeuomorphs plays
on the formal qualities of objects, moving between differentmedia
in order to deliberately evoke an object made in one material in
another (Knappett 2002;2005; Vickers and Gill 1994). Symbolic
relationships between craft production activities andother aspects
of human life may underpin belief systems, being used as a means of
explainingthe world (e.g. Gosslain 1999; Barley 1984; 1994; Herbert
1993; Sillar 1996; Mahias 1993;Leopold 1983). Craftspeople may also
face common technical problems. Thus control over heatis a common
theme in the production of pots and metal, and the pyrotechnology
involved inpottery making and metalworking is closely related
(Friedman 1998; Kaiser et al. 1986). Thereare, however, important
differences between these three kinds of relationship. The first is
iconicrather than indexical (Knappett 2002) since it does not
necessarily imply contiguity or causality,although given sufficient
contextual evidence these may be explored (Knappett 2005).
Thesecond relates to the materialization of symbols and mutual
understanding of a coherent beliefsystem that links a wide range of
potential actions. Only the third implies direct knowledge
ofproduction processes involved in the other craft and a real
transfer of know-how between craftsand craftspeople.
In this paper I want to focus primarily on the last of these
three different kinds ofrelationship, as the social implications of
the transfer of principles and techniques between craftshave been
less frequently addressed in archaeological settings. In
particular, I want to explorethe social implications of the
transfer of know-how between pottery, houses and metalwork inthe
Early and Middle Bronze Age using the rich ceramic assemblage from
the tell site ofSzzhalombatta, Hungary. At Szzhalombatta the
methods used for making pots in clay echothose used in other media.
Since the choices made by potters are not solely confined to
mediatingcomponents of the environment, raw materials and tools,
but are also socially and culturallydefined (van der Leeuw 1993,
241), by implication the transfer of know-how must be
situatedwithin social networks between people (Bromberger and
Chevallier 1999). The identification oftechnical relationships
between different media can be used to consider social relations
inBronze Age society, thereby suggesting relationships that work on
both technical and sociallevels.
the tell at szzhalombatta
The site of Szzhalombatta is situated on the right bank of the
Danube, 30km south ofBudapest (Fig. 1). The site is one of the
largest and best preserved Bronze Age temperate tellsettlements in
Central Europe, being 200 by 100m in area, excluding the south and
south-westparts of the site, which may represent up to one-third of
the original area and which weredestroyed during clay extraction by
a local brick factory and erosion by the River Danube(Poroszlai
2000). Deposits of cultural material at the site are up to 6m deep
and date from theHungarian Early Bronze Age to the Iron Age (Varga
2000). The excavated Bronze Age layersdate from the transition from
the Classic Nagyrv (Szigetszentmikls) to Late Nagyrv (Kulcs)phase
of the Early Bronze Age, with continuity in use of the site through
the following MiddleBronze Age Vatya tradition (Vatya IIII) and
Vatya-Koszider phase at the end of the MiddleBronze Age
(20001500/1400 BC), until a hiatus in the use of the site that
lasted until theUrnfield period (Kristiansen 2000; Poroszlai
2000).
The site has been the subject of three excavation campaigns: the
first in 1963 by T.Kovcs of the Hungarian National Museum (Kovcs
1969), the second in 198993 by I.
POTS, HOUSES AND METAL
OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY
128 2006 The Author
Journal compilation 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
MaganHighlight
-
Poroszlai of the Matrica Museum (Poroszlai 1996; 2000), and most
recently from 1998 an on-going international excavation (the SAX
Project), involving teams from the MatricaMuseum, Gothenburg
University, Cambridge University, and Southampton University.1These
excavations have resulted in a substantial, well-preserved ceramic
assemblage belongingto the Nagyrv, Vatya, and Vatya-Koszider
traditions of the Early and Middle Bronze Age. The Vatya phase
represents a typological development from the Nagyrv and
contemporaryKisapostag traditions (Bna 1975; 1992; Poroszlai 2000;
2003b; Vicze 2001) and there is astriking increase in the range of
vessel forms at the start of the Vatya phase (Vicze 2001).However,
while the range of vessel forms then seems to stabilize, as the
period progresses there is a noticeable elaboration and
exaggeration of existing forms (Vicze 2001) (Fig. 2ae).Wasters
found at Szzhalombatta dating to the Vatya-Koszider phase indicate
that pottery was made at the site (Poroszlai 1996). Bronze objects,
fragments of bronze, moulds, and slagattest to metalworking at the
site from the Early Bronze Age (Mozsolics 1967; Horvth et al. 2000;
Poroszlai 2000; Srensen and Vicze in press). The rectangular houses
discoveredso far at Szzhalombatta are approximately 8 15m, with a
series of other smaller surroundingstructures (Poroszlai 2000).
There is continuity in house building techniques throughout the
Early and Middle Bronze Age at the site (Poroszlai 2000). In common
with other Vatya tells, it was fortified with a rampart and ditch
during the Vatya phase (Poroszlai 2000; 2003b).
JOANNA SOFAER
OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 2006 The AuthorJournal compilation
2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 129
Lake BalatonDan
ube
Szzhalombatta
Tisza
0 100km
Figure 1Location of the site of Szzhalombatta, Hungary.
1 The SAX Project forms part of the wider EC-funded Emergence of
European Communities Project.
MaganHighlight
MaganHighlight
-
POTS, HOUSES AND METAL
OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY
130 2006 The Author
Journal compilation 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Nag
yrv
2000
BC
Vat
ya
1700
/185
0BC
Vat
ya/
Kos
zide
r
1400
/150
0BC
Figure 2aMajor fineware bowl and jug forms in the Early to late
Middle Bronze Age at Szzhalombatta (drawing S. Budden
after Bna 1975; Poroszlai 2000; Vicze 2001).
Nag
yrv
2000
BC
Vat
ya
1700
/185
0BC
Vat
ya/
Kos
zide
r
1400
/150
0BC
Figure 2bMajor cup forms in the Early to late Middle Bronze Age
at Szzhalombatta (drawing S. Budden after Bna 1975;
Poroszlai 2000; Vicze 2001).
pots and houses
The start of the Bronze Age saw a move towards the increased use
of wood inarchitecture (Mth 1988). At Szzhalombatta there is
significant evidence for the use of woodin the construction of
houses and other features. Ground stone tools, metal objects and
mouldsfor bronze tools that could have been used for woodworking
have been found at the site (Horvthet al. 2000; Poroszlai 2000).
Post-holes indicate the use of substantial vertical timbers
forbuilding, along with large base-timbers laid in foundation
trenches. A wood-lined pit wasdiscovered in 2004. Houses and other
structures at the site are also made with clay, which wasused
particularly for walls made of wattle and daub applied in layers,
and floors which weremade of beaten earth or plastered. Clay ovens
are frequently associated with the houses. Claywas an important
resource for building both pots and houses as both were made of the
samelocal material, albeit with different mixes and tempers. Use
and control over clay were vital
MaganHighlight
MaganHighlight
MaganHighlight
-
to everyday life. The site is situated on a substantial local
clay deposit and although the termage of clay has been applied to
the Neolithic (Stevanovic 1997), here too people were
literallysurrounded by clay. The overwhelming use of local clay,
while clearly practical and expedient,may also have bound people to
the site through a close relationship between place and
materialexpression, and control over desirable local resources.
Both pots and houses at Szzhalombatta are composite
constructions that exhibit a mixof building techniques. For
example, studies of storage vessels and urns suggest a
tripartitecomposite construction (Kreiter et al. in press). The
bases of many storage vessels were madewith a flat disc-shaped
slab. The body of the pot was then made using a slab building
technique.In some cases, the first vertical slab was added starting
from the middle of the base disc andsqueezed outwards, allowing
better cohesion between the vessel wall and the base. As a
result,the bases of storage vessels in cross-section often exhibit
two layers of clay. Since the use of
JOANNA SOFAER
OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 2006 The AuthorJournal compilation
2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 131
Nag
yrv
2000
BC
Vat
ya
1700
/185
0BC
Vat
ya/
Kos
zide
r
1400
/150
0BC
Figure 2cMajor domestic storage/cooking bowl forms in the Early
to late Middle Bronze Age at Szzhalombatta (drawing
S. Budden after Bna 1975; Poroszlai 2000; Vicze 2001).
Nag
yrv
2000
BC
Vat
ya
1700
/185
0BC
Vat
ya/
Kos
zide
r
1400
/150
0BC
Figure 2dMajor domestic storage/cooking jar and strainer forms
in the Early to late Middle Bronze Age at Szzhalombatta
(drawing S. Budden after Bna 1975; Poroszlai 2000; Vicze
2001).
MaganHighlight
MaganHighlight
MaganHighlight
-
heavy slabs on the upper parts of bi-conical vessels may lead to
vessel collapse, this techniqueis particularly suited to building
the lower parts of such vessels. Coil joins were observed
incross-sections of necks and rims of urns indicating that this
technique was used for the moredelicate parts of these vessels and
to facilitate abrupt changes in vessel curvature. This
tripartitestructure of pots mirrors that of houses, which can be
divided into floor, wall and roof. In anotherprehistoric context,
Jones (2002, 1612) has argued for a metaphorical relationship
between potsand houses on the basis of symmetry in their
construction. What is particularly striking atSzzhalombatta,
however, is the similarity in the principle of composite technology
used forpottery forming and house building, reflecting expediency
in techniques that allow pots andhouses to be made in particular
ways.
In addition to similar principles of construction, there are
commonalities betweentechniques involved in building houses and
vessel-making techniques. Clay storage bins insidehouses were made
by coiling. Woodworking involves scraping and smoothing, techniques
that are evident on a large number of sherds. The majority of
vessels at Szzhalombatta aretreated and/or decorated and the wide
range of decorative elements includes carved or incised motifs
(Poroszlai 2000; Sofaer et al. 2003). Potters may also carve wood
or bone toolsfor pottery making and there is a range of bone tools
from the site including a number of workedbone scrapers and
perforators (Choyke 2000), some of which may have been used in
theproduction of pottery. In addition, while there is no direct
evidence for wooden vessels at the site, vessels made of wood have
been found at a range of European Bronze Age sites(Harding
2000).
Pots may be incorporated into houses. Sherds have been found
placed in the foundationsof walls, while grog was mixed with daub
and used for clay ovens. There are also decorativesimilarities
between pots and houses. At the Nagyrv site of Tiszaug-Kmnytet
house wallswere covered with geometric designs (Csnyi 2003).
Similar complex geometric motifs arefound on Nagyrv pots over the
entire Nagyrv distribution area (Csnyi 2003), including thosefound
at Szzhalombatta. Furthermore, at Szzhalombatta there is a more
prosaic, but alsostriking, resemblance between the visual impact of
the vegetable matter included in daub andthe surface treatments of
pots made using grasses, reeds and twig tools.
o"
POTS, HOUSES AND METAL
OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY
132 2006 The Author
Journal compilation 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Nag
yrv
2000
BC
Vat
ya
1700
/185
0BC
Vat
ya/
Kos
zide
r
1400
/150
0BC
Figure 2eMajor urn forms in the Early to late Middle Bronze Age
at Szzhalombatta (drawing S. Budden after Bna 1975;
Poroszlai 2000; Vicze 2001).
-
pots and metalwork
Clay and metal are both extremely plastic media that can be
bent, shaped, twisted, anddecorated. While these materials have
different potentials, this common property lends itself to the
construction of iconic relationships between pottery and metalwork.
The influence ofmetalwork on Bronze Age pottery forms has long been
recognized in Hungary, as well aselsewhere, in terms of the formal
characteristics of vessels such as shape, sheen and
decoration(Friedman 1998; Kovcs 1977; Trachsler 1966; Childe 1949;
Knappett 2005). In Hungary, thisinfluence can be seen as early as
the late Copper Age in the high looped handles of Baden cups(Kalicz
1970).
At Szzhalombatta, the highly exaggerated, angular and complex
shapes of somevessels, which reach their height in the Koszider
(Rkospalota) phase at the end of the MiddleBronze Age, suggest the
influence of metalworking (Fig. 3). Although there are some
simpleshapes, mainly for open vessels such as fish plates, sieves
and some types of bowls as well assome of the cups and deep
vessels, particularly in the early part of the Vatya phase (Vatya
I)(Vicze 2001), there is a clear preference for discontinuous
profiles, with pots displaying cornersrather than curves, sharp
angles separating the body from the neck, carination and everted
rims(see Hnsel 1968; Bna 1975). Fineware bowls, jugs and cups are
commonly strongly burnished
JOANNA SOFAER
OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 2006 The AuthorJournal compilation
2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 133
Figure 3Koszider jug (photograph J. Sofaer).
-
on the outside. The high gloss produced by burnishing is
reminiscent of the sheen on polishedbronze.
In addition to the formal similarities between pottery and
metalwork at Szzhalombatta,the techniques used to make ceramic and
bronze objects display a number of parallels. Pottersand
metalworkers need to be familiar with soils and minerals, since
they crush and grind theirmaterials to a powdery state and then
remove the impurities by vanning (tin) or sieving andlevigating
(clay) (Herbert 1984; Friedman 1998). Experimental work at
Szzhalombatta usinglocal clays has emphasized the importance of
adequate clay preparation through sieving andwedging. Research on
fabrics from the site indicates that thermodynamically inefficient
amountsof well-crushed grog (510 per cent) were systematically
added to temper storage vessels(Kreiter 2005). Petrological
examination of this grog has revealed pieces of grog within
grogindicating the reuse of pots with a similar temper and clay
(Kreiter 2005). This recycling of potsis analogous to the reuse and
recycling of metal.
The techniques of hammering and beating are shared by potters
and smiths (Trachsler1966, 145). From the Early Bronze Age Nagyrv
phase onwards, some vessel types are madeby assembling separate
pieces together and joining them with a hammering technique.
Thesimilarity between potters and metalworkers techniques can be
seen, for example, in ClassicNagyrv one-handled jugs. These are
made out of a number of separate pieces: a pinched andsometimes
coiled base, a conical neck, and the handle. The vessel is
assembled with the baseand the neck joined together by hammering
(Fig. 4). Use of moulds is another technique oftenused by potters
and smiths (Friedman 1998). Anvil moulds may have been used for
forming thebases of some large storage vessels, although analysis
of thin sections from Szzhalombatta andother contemporary sites has
shown that the paddle and anvil technique for the initial shapingof
vessels was employed in a limited way for pottery found at
Szzhalombatta and was in wideruse at other contemporary sites of
the Ottomny and Gyulavarsnd traditions (Kreiter et al. inpress).
Paddling was more frequently employed as a finishing technique for
some slab-builtstorage vessels such as urns (Kreiter et al. in
press).
The incised triangle and punched dot decoration on Koszider pots
parallel those ofmetalworking incising, embossing and repouss
decorative techniques seen on CarpathianMiddle and Late Bronze Age
metalwork including axes, daggers, sword hilts, belt fittings
andornaments (see Mozsolics 1967; Kilian-Dirlmeier 1975; Kovcs
1977). There are also strongiconographic links between pots and
metalwork. Though relatively rare, anthropomorphicvessels are known
from the Vatya tradition (Kovcs 1973). Female vessels have hands
andbreasts, while male vessels depict hands and metalwork. The
metalwork, which may be a daggeror an axe, is applied in relief and
depicted in detail suggesting that the makers of pottery musthave
been familiar with them (Kovcs 1973, 24). Sherds of female and male
vessels are knownfrom Szzhalombatta, the gender of the male example
being indicated through the depiction ofa dagger (Poroszlai
2000).
the transfer of know-how: pots, wood, and metal
Where materials are used in conjunction with each other, such as
clay and wood inhouses, or where materials have similar decorative,
plastic or transformative potentials as in thecase of clay and
metal, or where basic forming or shaping techniques are shared
between media,these may allow borrowings and exchange of ideas with
common spheres of knowledge betweencrafts. At Szzhalombatta, one
particular aspect of pottery vessel forming techniques a
POTS, HOUSES AND METAL
OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY
134 2006 The Author
Journal compilation 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
MaganHighlight
MaganHighlight
MaganHighlight
MaganHighlight
-
common method of attaching handles suggests just such a real
transfer of know-how betweencrafts and craftspeople.
At Szzhalombatta, handles are attached onto Early and Middle
Bronze Age cups, bowlsand jugs by piercing a hole in the vessel
body from the vessel exterior while the clay is leather-hard,
resulting in a sharp, raised margin in the vessel interior. A peg
or pin made from the endof the handle is slotted through this hole
(Fig. 5). The end of the peg may then be flattenedinside the pot to
provide anchorage. In a few cases, the end of the peg is split and
bent back ina similar manner to a butterfly clip. If a finer finish
is desired the inside of the pot is smoothed.On many occasions,
however, on pots which are otherwise well-finished, the interior
finish islacking or poorly executed. In cups and jugs the bottom
part of the handle was probably attachedfirst, being fixed from its
base and attached to the rim. This would facilitate the making of
thecharacteristic ansa lunata handle of the Koszider phase of the
late Middle Bronze Age (Budden2005). The top of the handle is
joined by smoothing the clay of the handle onto the body.
This method of fixing the handle is strikingly similar to the
principles involved in theuse of pegs and posts through
cross-timbers, or mortice and tenon joints in wood (cf.
Piggott1935; Bradley 1978), and rivets for joining metal. Although
relatively little well-preserved wood has so far been found at
Szzhalombatta, prohibiting a detailed study of woodworking
JOANNA SOFAER
OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 2006 The AuthorJournal compilation
2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 135
Figure 4Nagyrv one-handled jug (photograph J. Sofaer).
-
techniques, at other contemporary Hungarian sites with a range
of different architecturaltraditions, particularly those of the
Middle Bronze Age Gyulavarsnd group (Vargha 1955;Csnyi and Trnoki
1992; 2003), and at Bronze Age sites elsewhere in Central Europe
(Harding2000; Arnold 1982; Menotti 2004), woodworking techniques
used for building houses have beenstudied in more detail. At the
Gyulavarsnd site of Trkeve-Terehalom, for example, uprightposts
were anchored in and through base-timbers laid in the foundation
trenches of the walls(Csnyi and Trnoki 1992; 2003). The mortice and
tenon joint was widely known throughoutBronze Age Europe. Riveting
is a technique that can be identified in metalwork contemporarywith
the pottery from Szzhalombatta (Mozsolics 1967; Kemenczei 1988;
1991; Hnsel 1968).The dagger on the Vatya anthropomorphic pot from
the site clearly shows riveting (Poroszlai2000).
The attachment of handles in clay in this manner is not simply
imitative of wood ormetal in the sense of wanting to give the
formal effect of these materials. Nor is it a symbolicdevice
designed to speak to members of the community through use or
display of the vessel.While this method of attaching handles may be
clearly seen on the inside of broken vessels, itis not visible from
the outside of the vessel or on whole pots. In addition, it is not
the mostfunctionally adept or practical method of making and
joining handles as it does not fully exploitthe plastic qualities
of clay. In clay, this method of attaching handles might actually
be said tointroduce weakness into the vessel as there is less
surface area where the handle adheres to thepot.2 In the
Szzhalombatta assemblage there is a recurring pattern of breakage
with numerousexamples of vessels where the handle and its
surrounding area have come away from the restof the pot.
In other media, however, this kind of joint is extremely strong
and secure. Joints aredesigned to withstand particular kinds of
stresses which may be tension, compression or torsion(Weeks 1982).
In wood, mortice and tenon joints are particularly useful for
resisting lateraltension and compression (Weeks 1982). In metal, a
rivet acts as a clamp that holds two or morepieces of material
together. Rivets will resist tension to a certain degree, but their
primary jobis to transmit loads along the piece of material, not at
a major angle away from it. Given the
POTS, HOUSES AND METAL
OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY
136 2006 The Author
Journal compilation 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Figure 5Peg method of attaching handles at Szzhalombatta
(photograph A. Kreiter).
2 I am grateful to Sandy Budden for discussions on this
point.
-
usefulness of mortice and tenon joints in wood, and rivets in
metal, perhaps Early and MiddleBronze Age potters thought that they
were strengthening their vessel by attaching handles inthis way. If
so, this emphasis is intriguing because relatively small vessels
such as cups or bowlsshow this feature, although in functional
terms they do not necessarily demand extreme strengtheven if lifted
by the handle.
potters, woodworkers, and metalworkers
Solving the technical problem of how to fix a handle onto a pot
represents a distinctchoice made from a universe of possibilities
(Lemonnier 1986, 153). Pottery manufacture isstrongly influenced by
its social, cultural and political context, as well as by
constraints imposedby the natural environment (van der Leeuw 1989).
The sharing or borrowing of technicalknowledge between crafts
implied by the ceramic handles at Szzhalombatta indicates the
waythat technology was socially situated in Bronze Age society (cf.
Pfaffenberger 1988; 1992) andtherefore has implications for close
social relations between craftspeople.
Traditional models of the Early and Middle Bronze Age in Europe
see it as a period ofincreasing social complexity with the
development of prestige-based social hierarchy and
craftspecialization, particularly in metalworking (Harding 2000;
Kristiansen 1998; Primas 1997;Shennan 1986; 1993). Woodworking and
pottery production are less frequently discussed withregard to
craft specialization. They are often implicitly regarded as being
situated within thedomestic sphere, although in Aegean contexts
arguments have been advanced for highly skilledand specialized
woodworkers based largely on the existence of carpentry tools,
grave offeringsand monumental architecture (Downey 1996). Even if
the construction of houses was a familyor communal affair as their
size would suggest, this does not exclude the possibility
ofcontributions from specialist craftspeople in the erection of
major structures (cf. Waterson 1997;Leggett and Nussbaum 2001). In
terms of ceramics, at Szzhalombatta the technical complexityand
proficiency with which finewares and some large ceramic vessels
were made stronglysuggest specialization in the production of some
vessel types.
A focus on individual crafts, however, implicitly seems to
separate and fragmentsociety. In order for knowledge transfer to
take place, such as that seen in the pottery atSzzhalombatta, there
have to be channels for the transmission of know-how
betweencraftspeople (cf. Layton 1989). These channels take the form
of social networks whosecharacteristics allow the pooling of
resources, knowledge, techniques and human potential(Faure-Rouesnel
2001; Bromberger and Chevallier 1999). Networks allow the transfer
andcirculation of knowledge from one industry to another. For
example, spectacle-makers in theFrench Jura learned to cut the arms
of spectacles from the technique which watchmakers use tocut clock
hands, through a locally anchored network (Barbe and Lioger 1999).
Transfer ofknowledge is quicker and more easily assimilated when
the social relations are closer betweenpeople (Rice 1984). Thus
potters moving into new communities, such as wives moving intotheir
husbands community, may rapidly adopt the practices of their new
home, albeit withmodifications (David and Hennig 1972; Rice 1984).
Gosselain (2000) has shown how potteryforming techniques are
generally acquired at a young age from close relatives. Tracing the
flowof information between followers of different strategies
requires mapping communicationnetworks in a society, including the
institutions of kinship, moiety, fraternity and guild, whichserve
to exchange information between those who have experience in a
certain matter and thosewho do not (van der Leeuw 1989, 324).
JOANNA SOFAER
OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 2006 The AuthorJournal compilation
2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 137
MaganHighlight
MaganHighlight
MaganHighlight
MaganHighlight
MaganHighlight
-
In a hierarchical society concerned with prestige such as in the
European Bronze Age,one form of network where exchange of knowledge
can take place is a caste-like system. Oftenapplied to the Indian
sub-continent, Barth (1960) argues that caste is a local term given
to auniversal form of social stratification. Castes are commonly
associated with traditional or craftoccupations where the system as
a whole is concerned with prestige, especially of those at thetop
of the hierarchy (Coningham and Young 1999). They are endogamous
with restrictions on commensality between members of different
castes. However, caste systems may also bemore flexible than is
often suggested, with communities rising or falling within its
rankings(Coningham and Young 1999, 92), thereby allowing for the
possibility of social change.
There are a number of ethnographic examples where the
organization of craft activitiestakes place along clearly defined
social networks, and potters and metalworkers form part of
acaste-like group with close social relationships. Some of the best
known of these are among theBiu-Mandara-speaking peoples of West
Africa (see David 1990; ern et al. 2001; Wade 1989;Vaughan 1970).
Among the Fali, for example, a craft caste-like group known as the
meehintypically form 58 per cent of the community. The meehin
practise a range of crafts includingwoodworking, leather working,
basketry, the manufacture of musical instruments, iron smeltingand
smithing, brass casting and potting (Wade 1989). The division of
skills is strongly gendered,with the men responsible for
metalworking and the women responsible for pottery
manufacture,divining and serving as ritual specialists (Wade 1989).
The meehin are frequently ostracized,despised or have an ambiguous
status related to their role as morticians (Wade 1989). The
statusof the meehin as a craftsperson is ascribed but within the
confines of gender roles, there isflexibility of choice as to which
craft is practised and the degree of specialization (Wade
1989).Craftspeople may concentrate almost exclusively upon a single
artefact type, a single craft, ormay practise several crafts.
Because they are endogamous, craftspeople will always haverelatives
who can teach them the skills required in a chosen craft. This
provides an effectivestructure for the learning, transmission, and
use of technical knowledge (Wade 1989, 2323),as well as control
over access to knowledge by others. A method of attaching handles
to potsthrough a hole in the vessel wall, in a manner similar to
that seen at Szzhalombatta, isdocumented in ethnographic studies of
the Mende in Sierra Leone (Colonial Film Unit 1937).The Mende are a
strongly hierarchical society with gendered craft specialization
and a caste-like social organization (Wolfe 1969; Aronson
1991).
The use of ethnographic data to create a model for Bronze Age
society raises genderissues, particularly in terms of the
allocation of metalworking, house building, and potting to
aparticular gender group (see Srensen 1996). Based largely on
ethnographic observations, thereis a widespread assumption that
metalworkers in the Bronze Age were male and that potterswere
female (Srensen 1996). Earlier in this paper I pointed to the use
of metalwork as a malesignifier on anthropomorphic pots. However,
identifying metal as a male signifier in thisparticular context
does not necessarily imply that all metal was made by men, or
converselythat pottery was made by women. Indeed, there are large
numbers of female ornaments madeof bronze. In a discussion of
gender and metalworkers in north-west Europe, Srensen (1996)has
pointed out that in these contexts moulds for bronze casting are
often made of clay and that applying different gender scenarios to
these has contrasting consequences for how weunderstand both
pottery and metalworking. Thus a traditional gender association
betweenwomen and clay technologies might in fact suggest that women
shaped the appearance of bronzeobjects. On the other hand,
suggesting that men made the moulds would imply that they mayhave
been active in pottery production. A third permutation considered
by Srensen (1996)
yC
POTS, HOUSES AND METAL
OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY
138 2006 The Author
Journal compilation 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
MaganHighlight
MaganHighlight
MaganHighlight
-
that clay technologies and therefore metalworking are not
necessarily gender-exclusive makesfor a richer and more complex
model. She points out that evidence for metalworking in the formof
moulds and crucibles has been increasingly demonstrated from
settlement contexts andmidden refuse rather than from spatially
distinct or marked locations. Being a local and regularactivity,
Srensen (1996, 49) suggests that this means that metalworking would
impinge oneveryone in the settlement. Members of different gender
groups may therefore have beeninvolved in different stages of the
production process or in negotiations surrounding it,particularly
in terms of its planning and its relationship to a range of other
unrelated, butpotentially interfering, activities.
Unlike Early Bronze Age and Middle Bronze Age sites in
north-west Europe, at Vatyatell sites, most moulds for bronze
casting are made of sandstone, although clay moulds areoccasionally
found (Mozsolics 1967; Horvth et al. 2000). Recent petrological
work suggeststhat the number of Bronze Age clay moulds in Hungary
may be greater than hitherto thought(Pterdi et al. 2002). Other
objects made of clay involved in the casting process, such as
tuyres,have also been found. There is evidence for a bronze-casting
workshop set apart from the mainsettlement in an area of workshops
at the Vatya tell of Lovasberny-Mihlyvr (Kovcs 1977;Petres and Bndi
1969). At Szzhalombatta the spatial organization of the settlement
is a keyquestion for ongoing excavations (Vicze 2004), but moulds,
slag and bronze fragments havebeen found in settlement contexts,
midden, and fill (Poroszlai 2000; Srensen and Vicze inpress).3
The exchange of knowledge between metalwork and pottery at the
site, seen in themethod of attaching handles to ceramic vessels,
suggests that social boundaries between the twocrafts were rather
fluid. If one accepts a gendered model of craft production, this
would, in turn,imply that while aspects of craft production
activities may have been highly gendered, they alsoinvolved
negotiation and co-operation between gender groups (Srensen 1996;
Sofaer andSrensen 2002; 2006). Such negotiation between gender
groups is visible in ethnographic filmof groups with strongly
gendered roles (David 1990; Nicholson and Wendrich 1994),
suggestingthat the gender dynamics of craft production may be more
complex than is often acknowledged.Even where craft production is,
on the whole, strongly gendered there may be a range of
localtraditions permitting men and women to participate in
different stages of the production process,from collection of raw
materials and production of tools, to aspects of the production
processitself (see David 1990; Brown 1995; Nicholson and Wendrich
1994).
The model proposed in this paper also raises questions about the
status of craftspeoplein the Bronze Age hierarchy. While
metalworkers are frequently regarded as having specialstatus or
roles within Bronze Age society on the basis of the transformative
magic involvedin the production of metal (Budd and Taylor 1995),
and the status of woodworkers is at bestambiguous, potters are
often seen to have low socio-economic status. More generally, it
hasbeen argued that as socio-economic differentiation increases,
potters may, in fact, movedownward on the socio-economic ladder
(Rice 1984). In addition, potters are often said to beconservative
because of their low socio-economic status (Rice 1984). Such a
ranking of craftsis inconsistent with the formal and technical
links between pottery, house building and metalmaking, including
those that result in material transformations (cf. Vitelli 1995,
62). The transfer
JOANNA SOFAER
OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 2006 The AuthorJournal compilation
2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 139
3 This pattern is consistent with archaeological studies of the
spatial distribution of craft waste in known castesystems. Craft
activities are not necessarily spatially distinct and spatial
divisions seen today in such societiesare a relatively recent
phenomenon (Coningham and Young 1999, 92).
MaganHighlight
-
of knowledge between crafts allowed by the emergence of a caste
system argues for paritybetween craftspeople with a range of
specializations, reflecting a degree of social cohesionbetween
specific occupationally defined members of the community.
If, as is often argued, metal objects are prestige items
restricted to a limited number ofpeople who form an elite
(Kristiansen 1998), and some woodworking tools are made of
bronze(Arnold 1982), then by extension this suggests that
woodworkers were able to tap into highstatus. Although there are
relatively few bronze tools in Hungary compared to
surroundingcountries, a range of axes, adzes, and chisels are known
from Vatya sites (Mozsolics 1967). Ofthe two hoards from
Szzhalombatta, one contained two shafthole axes dating to the Vatya
IIIphase (Poroszlai 2000), while the other, dated to the
Vatya-Koszider phase, contained rimmedchisels (Poroszlai 1998;
Kemenczei 2003). Elsewhere, strong arguments have been made
forskeuomorphs as prestige symbols (Wade 1989; Knappett 2002; 2005;
Vickers and Gill 1994).While the vessels at Szzhalombatta are not
necessarily direct imitations of metal vessels, theinfluence of
metalworking on the formal characteristics of Early and Middle
Bronze Agefinewares argues for their enhanced value. In relation to
the Early Bronze Age Maros ceramicsfrom south-east Hungary,
Michelaki et al. (2002, 317) argue for the role of pottery vessels
insocial display activities focused around the display of
subsistence wealth and consumption offood and drink. At
Szzhalombatta display included, but was not confined to,
consumption. Inthe Vatya-Koszider phase in particular, finewares
were meant for display even when not in use,the bases of so-called
Swedish helmet bowls being decorated in such a way that they
couldbe seen when hung on the wall of the house. The use of
fineware for display was a practice thatwas also employed at
Hungarian Middle Bronze Age sites of the Fzesabony
tradition(Szathmri 2003).
The use of pottery with metallic characteristics in the display
arena, for special depositsof groups of pots in pits (sometimes in
association with grain) (Poroszlai 2000), and with theSzzhalombatta
hoard, suggests that the desirability of these ceramic objects may
have beensignificant, just as metalwork was a desirable commodity.
Poroszlai (2000) has argued thatfinewares were linked to
high-status individuals, while Vicze (2001) has suggested that a
declinein the quantity of metalwork buried with the dead in the
middle of the Vatya phase (Vatya II),contemporary with the
increased elaboration of pottery, represents the transfer of a
prestigeideology from one medium to the other (Vicze 2001, 174).
Furthermore, the relatively rapidchanges in shape along with the
exaggeration seen in jugs, bowls and cups in the 500 yearsfrom the
Nagyrv to the Vatya-Koszider periods suggest confident, creative,
craftspeople ratherthan retiring, conservative ones. The potters of
Szzhalombatta produced an extended repertoireof valued display
prestige items which must have been reflected back in the enhanced
socialvalue of craftspeople as a group (cf. Wade 1989, 238). In
turn, the increased emphasis on socialdifferentiation presented by
possibilities in craft production placed craftspeople at the heart
ofBronze Age social dynamics. It was a crucial part of the
processes of centralization in settlementand production (cf. Wade
1989), and the development of hierarchy and stratification
oftenproposed for this period in Hungary (Shennan 1993; Poroszlai
2000; 2003b), further reflectedin the fortification of strategic
sites during the Vatya phase, and a potentially more
restrictedrange of finds in contemporary unfortified settlements
(Poroszlai 1988).4
POTS, HOUSES AND METAL
OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY
140 2006 The Author
Journal compilation 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
4 Although the existence of a settlement hierarchy has been
established for the Vatya period, to date relatively fewsmall
single-layer settlements have actually been investigated. The
on-going Benta Valley project (Vicze et al.2005) seeks to redress
this imbalance by exploring the hinterland around the Szzhalombatta
tell.
MaganHighlight
MaganHighlight
MaganHighlight
-
conclusion
At Szzhalombatta, techniques used for other materials informed
those used to makepottery. Pottery and architecture have a close
relationship. Not only were both made of clay, butmethods of making
pots echo those used for building. Similarly, pottery and metalwork
sharecommon themes and technologies for working with clay and
bronze. The transfer of knowledgebetween different media is
particularly evident and interesting with regard to the means by
whichhandles were attached to fineware vessels. While Early and
Middle Bronze Age pottersdemonstrated incredible technology, skill
and finesse in other areas (Budden 2002), the way inwhich they
applied handles suggests a borrowing of techniques that is somewhat
at odds withthis, since it does not fully exploit the plasticity of
clay.
I am not arguing that the people of Szzhalombatta saw pots,
houses and metalwork asthe same, or that they deliberately set out
to create one out of the other. As Knappett (2005)points out, there
are many ways in which things can have meaning without being
symbols.Rather, I am suggesting that there were relationships and
borrowings between craftspeople at anumber of levels that are
revealing in terms of the perception of the materials with which
peopleworked and the social context of craft production.
Technological conceptual relationships tiedthese materials together
and allowed people to borrow and transfer the techniques that they
usedin one medium to another, while a social network between
craftspeople in this case a caste-like system provided the avenue
for the communication of technologies and techniques. Asvan der
Leeuw (1993, 240) puts it, Techniques cannot be studied in
isolation, but should beseen as the arena of mediation between what
is materially possible or impossible and certainaspects of social
organization. Techniques lend insights into society because the two
are inconstant symbiosis (van der Leeuw 1993; Lemonnier 1980; 1986;
1993). Technology thus takesa central role in understanding the
organizational principles of the society which uses them (vander
Leeuw 1993, 240).
Acknowledgements
This article has benefited from discussions with a number of
students and colleagues in Hungaryand Britain. I would particularly
like to thank Sandy Budden, Alice Choyke, Attila Kreiter, Marie
LouiseStig Srensen and Magdolna Vicze. Sandy Budden also gave
generously of her pottery drawings for Figure2. This paper is
dedicated to the memory of the late Ildik Poroszlai, director of
the Matrica Museum andfounder of the Szzhalombatta Archaeological
Park.
ArchaeologySchool of Humanities
University of SouthamptonAvenue Campus
HighfieldSouthampton SO17 1BF
references
arnold, b. 1982: The architectural woodwork of the Late Bronze
Age Village Auvernier-Nord. InMcGrail, S. (ed.), Woodworking
Techniques before A.D. 1500 (Oxford, BAR Int. Ser. 129),
11128.aronson, l. 1991: African women in the visual arts. Signs:
Journal of Women in Culture and Society16(31), 55074.
JOANNA SOFAER
OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 2006 The AuthorJournal compilation
2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 141
MaganHighlight
MaganHighlight
MaganHighlight
-
barbe, n. and lioger, r. 1999: Du jouet en bois en plastique.
Permanence et innovation technique danslArc jurassien. In
Bromberger, C. and Chevallier, D. (eds.), Carrires dObjets.
Innovation et Relances(Paris, Editions de la Maison des Sciences de
LHomme, Collection Ethnologie de la France Cahier 13),4358.barley,
n. 1984: Placing the West African Potter. In Picton, J. (ed.),
Earthenware in Asia and Africa(London, Percival David Foundation),
93105.barley, n. 1994: Smashing Pots. Feats of Clay from Africa
(London).barth, f. 1960: The system of social stratification in
Swat, north Pakistan. In Leach, E.R. (ed.), Aspectsof Caste in
South India, Ceylon and North-West Pakistan (Cambridge),
11346.bertemes, f. and heyd, v. 2002: Der bergang
Kupferzeit/Frhbronzezeit am Nordwestrand desKarpatenbeckens
kulturgeschichtliche und palometallurgische Betrachtungen (The
Transition CopperAge/Early Bronze Age at the North-Western Edge of
the Carpathian Basin Culture-Historical andPalaeometallurgical
Considerations). In Bartelheim, M., Krause, R. and Pernicka, E.
(eds.), Die Anfngeder Metallurgie in der Alten Welt, Euroseminar
Freiberg/Sachsen, 18.20. November 1999(Rahden/Westfalen),
185229.bna, i. 1975: Die Mittlere Bronzezeit Ungarns und ihre
Sdstlichen Beziehungen (Budapest, AkadmiaiKiad).bna, i. 1982: Alpr
bronzkori rtegei. In Bna, I. and Novki, Gy., Alpr bronzkori s
rpd-kori vra.Cumania 7, 17117.bna, i. 1992: Bronzezeitliche
Tell-Kulturen in Ungarn. In Meier-Arendt, W. (ed.), Forschungen in
Tell-Siedlungen an Donau und Theiss (Frankfurt am Main).bradley,
r.j. 1978: The Prehistoric Settlement of Britain
(London).bromberger, c. and chevallier, d. (eds.) 1999: Carrires
dObjets. Innovation et Relances(Paris, ditions de la Maison des
Sciences de LHomme, Collection Ethnologie de la France Cahier
13).brown, j. 1995: Traditional Metalworking in Kenya (Oxford,
Oxbow Monograph 44, CambridgeMonographs in African Archaeology
38).budd, p. and taylor, t. 1995: The faerie smith meets the bronze
industry: magic versus science in theinterpretation of prehistoric
metal-making. World Archaeology 27(1), 13343.budden, s. 2002: Black
is Beautiful. The Technology and Social Practice of Producing Black
BurnishedKoszider Wares at Szzhalombatta, Hungary (Unpublished M.A.
dissertation, University of Southampton).budden, s. 2005: Renewal
and Reinvention: Innovation and Tradition at Szzhalombatta,
Hungary(Seminar presented to the Department of Archaeology,
University of Southampton).
ern , v., gauthier, j-g., br ek, j., gronenborn, d., velemnsk ,
p. and budil, i. 2001: Mezi Saharoua Tropick mi Pralesy (Between
the Sahara and the Tropical Rain Forests) (Prague, National Museum
inPrague).childe, v.g. 1949: The first bronze vases to be made in
Central Europe. Acta Archaeologica 20, 25764.choyke, a. 2000:
Refuse and modified bone from Szzhalombatta-Fldvr. In Poroszlai, I.
and Vicze, M.(eds.), Szzhalombatta Archaeological Expedition Annual
Report 1 (Szzhalombatta, Archaeolingua),97102.colonial film unit
1937: Mende Potmakers (Video).coningham, r. and young, r. 1999: The
Archaeological Visibility of Caste: An Introduction. In Insoll,T.
(ed.), Case Studies in Archaeology and World Religion. The
Proceedings of the Cambridge Conference(Oxford, BAR Int. Ser. 755),
8493.csnyi, m. 2003: Tiszaug-Kmnytet : A Bronze Age settlement in
the Tiszazug. In Visy, Z. (ed.),Hungarian Archaeology at the Turn
of the Millennium (Budapest, Department of Monuments of theMinistry
of Cultural Heritage), 1434.
o"
yyzuoyc
POTS, HOUSES AND METAL
OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY
142 2006 The Author
Journal compilation 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
-
csnyi, m. and trnoki, j. 1992: Trkeve-Terehalom. In Bna, I.
(ed.), Forschungen in Tell-Siedlungenan Donau und Theiss (Frankfurt
am Main).csnyi, m. and trnoki, j. 2003: The Middle Bronze Age
population of the Beretty-Krs region: theGyulavarsnd culture. In
Visy, Z. (ed.), Hungarian Archaeology at the Turn of the Millennium
(Budapest,Department of Monuments of the Ministry of Cultural
Heritage), 15860.cseri, m. and fzes, e. (eds.) 1997: Hungarian Open
Air Museum Szentendre (Szentendre, HungarianOpen Air Museum).david,
n. 1990: Vessels of the spirits: pots and people in North Cameroon
(Video) (University of Calgary).david, n. and hennig, h. 1972: The
ethnography of pottery: a Fulani case study seen in
archaeologicalperspective (Reading, Mass., Addison-Wesley Module
21).downey, c. 1996: Prehistoric tools and the Bronze Age
woodworking industry (Paper presented at theGreek Society for
Archaeometry 3rd Symposium, Athens).faure-rouesnel, l. 2001: French
anthropology and material culture. Journal of Material Culture
6(2),23747.friedman, e. 1998: Technological Style in Early Bronze
Age Anatolia (Chicago, Oriental InstituteResearch Archives).gherdn,
k., szakmny, g., weiszburg, t. and ilon, g. 2002: Petrological
Investigation of Bronze and Iron Age Ceramics from West Hungary:
Vaskeresztes, Velem, S, Gr. In Kilikoglou, V., Hein, A. and
Maniatis, Y. (eds.), Modern Trends in Scientific Studies on Ancient
Ceramics. Papers Presented at the 5th European Meeting on Ancient
Ceramics, Athens 1999 (Oxford, BAR Int. Ser. 1011),
30512.gosselain, o.p. 1999: In Pots we Trust. The Processing of
Clay and Symbols in Sub-Saharan Africa.Journal of Material Culture
4(2), 20530.gosselain, o.p. 2000: Materialising Identities: An
African Perspective. Journal of Archaeological Methodand Theory
7(3), 187217.hnsel, b. 1968: Beitrge Zur Chronologie der Mittleren
Bronzezeit im Karpatenbecken (Bonn).harding, a. 2000: European
Societies in the Bronze Age (Cambridge).herbert, e. 1984: Red Gold
of Africa: Copper in Precolonial History and Culture
(Madison).herbert, e. 1993: Iron, Gender and Power. Rituals of
Transformation in African Societies (Bloomington).horvth, t., kozk,
m. and pet , a. 2000: Complex analysis of stone industry on the
Szzhalombatta-Fldvr (Early and Middle Bronze Age). In Poroszlai, I.
and Vicze, M. (eds.), SzzhalombattaArchaeological Expedition Annual
Report 1 (Szzhalombatta, Archaeolingua).ilon, g. and varga, i.
1994: Bauxit a Ks Bronzkori Kermiban? A Nmetbnya Felserdei Dli
Temet s Kistelep Kermiinak Vizsglata. Veszprm Megyei Mzeumok
Kzlemnyei 1920,13340.jones, a. 2002: Archaeological Theory and
Scientific Practice (Cambridge).kaiser, t., franklin, u. and
vitali, v. 1986: Pottery and pyrotechnology in the late Neolithic
of theBalkans. In Olin, J.S. and Blackman, M.J. (eds.), Proceedings
of the 24th International ArchaeometrySymposium (Washington D.C.),
8594.kalicz, n. 1970: Clay Gods. The Neolithic Period and Copper
Age in Hungary (Budapest).kemenczei, t. 1988: Die Schwerter in
Ungarn I (Mnchen, Prhistorische Bronzefunde IV.6).kemenczei, t.
1991: Die Schwerter in Ungarn II (Stuttgart, Prhistorische
Bronzefunde IV.9).kemenczei, t. 2003: Bronze Age metallurgy. In
Visy, Z. (ed.), Hungarian Archaeology at the Turn of theMillennium
(Budapest, Department of Monuments of the Ministry of Cultural
Heritage), 16774.kilian-dirlmeier, i. 1975: Grtelhaken, Grtelbleche
und Blechgrtel der Bronzezeit in Mitteleuropa(Mnchen, Prhistorische
Bronzefunde XII, Band 2).
o"
JOANNA SOFAER
OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 2006 The AuthorJournal compilation
2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 143
-
knappett, c. 2002: Photographs, Skeuomorphs and Marionettes.
Some Thoughts on Mind, Agency andObject. Journal of Material
Culture 7(1), 97117.knappett, c. 2005: Thinking Through Material
Culture. An Interdisciplinary Perspective (Philadelphia).kovcs, t.
1969: A szzhalombattai bronzkori telep. The Bronze Age Settlement
at Szzhalombatta.Archaeologiai rtest 96, 1619.kovcs, t. 1973:
Representations of Weapons on Bronze Age Pottery. Folia
Archaeologica XXIV, 731.kovcs, t. 1977: The Bronze Age in Hungary
(Budapest).kreiter, a. 2005: Preliminary Report of Middle Bronze
Age Ceramic Analyses from Szzhalombatta,Northern Hungary. In
Poroszlai, I. and Vicze, M. (eds.), Szzhalombatta Archaeological
Expedition ReportII (Szzhalombatta, Matrica Museum), 18794.kreiter,
a., sofaer, j. and budden, s. in press: Early and Middle Bronze Age
Storage Vessel BuildingTechniques in Hungary. srgszeti Levelek
(Prehistoric Newsletter).kristiansen, k. 1998: Europe Before
History (Cambridge).kristiansen, k. 2000: The emergence of European
communities: household settlement and territory inlater prehistory
(2300300 BC). In Poroszlai, I. and Vicze, M. (eds.), Szzhalombatta
ArchaeologicalExpedition Annual Report 1 (Szzhalombatta,
Archaeolingua), 711.layton, r. 1989: Pellaport. In van der Leeuw,
S.E. and Torrence, R., Whats New? A Closer Look at TheProcess of
Innovation (London, One World Archaeology 14), 3353.leggett, e. and
nussbaum, s. 2001: Raising the Roof A Time-Honored Tradition. Amish
HeartlandAugust 2001.lemonnier, p. 1980: Les Salines de lOuest:
Logique technique, logique sociale (Paris/Lille, ditions dela
Maison des Sciences de LHomme).lemonnier, p. 1986: The study of
material culture today: toward an anthropology of technical
systems.Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 5, 14786.lemonnier,
p. 1993: Introduction. In Lemonnier, P. (ed.), Technological
Choices: Transformation inMaterial Cultures since the Neolithic
(London), 135.leopold, r.s. 1983: The shaping of men and the making
of metaphors: the meaning of white clay in Poroand Sande Initiation
society rituals. Anthropology 8(2), 2142.mahias, m-c. 1993: Pottery
techniques in India: Technical Variants and social choice. In
Lemonnier, P.(ed.), Technological Choices: Transformation in
Material Cultures since the Neolithic (London).maniatis, y. and
tite, m.s. 1981: Technological Examination of Neolithic-Bronze Age
Pottery fromCentral and Southeast Europe and from the Near East.
Journal of Archaeological Science 8, 5976.mth, m. 1988: Bronze Age
tells in the Beretty valley. In Kovcs, T. and Stanczik, I., Bronze
Age TellSettlements of the Great Hungarian Plain I (Budapest,
Magyar Nemzeti Mzeum, Inventaria PraehistoricaHvngariae),
27122.meier-arendt, w. (ed.) 1992: Forschungen in Tell-Siedlungen
an Donau und Theiss (Frankfurt am Main).menotti, f. 2004: Living on
the Lake in Prehistoric Europe (London).michelaki, k., minc, l. and
oshea, j. 2002: Integrating typological and physico-chemical
approaches toexamine the potters choices: a case study from Bronze
Age Hungary. In Kilikoglou, V., Hein, A. andManiatis, Y. (eds.),
Modern Trends in Scientific Studies on Ancient Ceramics. Papers
Presented at the 5thEuropean Meeting on Ancient Ceramics, Athens
1999 (Oxford, BAR Int. Ser. 1011), 31322.mozsolics, a. 1967:
Bronzefunde des Karpatenbeckens. Depotfundhorizonte von Hajdsmson
undKosziderpadls (Budapest, Akadmiai Kiad).nagy, s., kuzmann, e.,
weiszburg, t., gykeres-tth, m. and riedel, m. 2000: Oxide
TransformationDuring Preparation of Black Pottery in Hungary.
Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry246(1), 916.
O"
o"
POTS, HOUSES AND METAL
OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY
144 2006 The Author
Journal compilation 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
-
nicholson, p.t. and wendrich, w.z. 1994: The Potters of Deir
Mawas: A Village in Middle Egypt(Video).pterdi, b., kovcs, t.,
szakmny, g. and bir, k. 2002: Petrographical Investigation of
Bronze andIron Age Casting Moulds from the Collection of the
Hungarian National Museum (Abstract of paperpresented at the 33rd
International Symposium on Archaeometry, Amsterdam, the
Netherlands, 2226April, 2002, p. 46).petres, f. and bndi, g.. 1969:
Archaeologiai rtest 96, 1745.pfaffenberger, b. 1988: Fetished
Objects and Humanised Nature: Towards an Anthropology ofTechnology.
Man (N.S.) 23, 23652.pfaffenberger, b. 1992: Social Anthropology of
Technology. Annual Review of Anthropology 211,49156.piggott, s.
1935: Handled Beakers. Antiquity IX, 348.poroszlai, i. 1988:
Preliminary report about the excavation at Nagyk rs-Fldvr (Vatya
culture):stratigraphic data and settlement structure.
Communicationes Archaeologicae Hungariae, 2939.poroszlai, i. (ed.)
1996a: satsok Szzhalombattn. Excavations at Szzhalombatta
19891995(Szzhalombatta, Matrica Museum).poroszlai, i. 1996b: satsok
a szzhalombattai bronzkori fldvrban (19891993). Excavations in
theBronze Age earthwork in Szzhalombatta between 1989 and 1993. In
Poroszlai, I. (ed.), satsokSzzhalombattn. Excavations at
Szzhalombatta 19891995 (Szzhalombatta, Matrica Museum),
515.poroszlai, i. 1998: The Bronze Age. In Poroszlai, I. and Vicze,
M. (eds.), History of Szzhalombatta.Guide to the Exhibition
(Szzhalombatta, Matrica Museum).poroszlai, i. 2000: Excavation
campaigns at the Bronze Age tell site at Szzhalombatta-Fldvr.
InPoroszlai, I. and Vicze, M. (eds.), Szzhalombatta Archaeological
Expedition Annual Report 1(Szzhalombatta, Archaeolingua),
1373.poroszlai, i. 2003a: The conservation and exhibition of
archaeological remains: archaeological parks andexperimental
archaeology. In Visy, Z. (ed.), Hungarian Archaeology at the Turn
of the Millennium(Budapest, Department of Monuments of the Ministry
of Cultural Heritage), 4325.poroszlai, i. 2003b: Fortified centres
along the Danube. In Visy, Z. (ed.), Hungarian Archaeology at
theTurn of the Millennium (Budapest, Department of Monuments of the
Ministry of Cultural Heritage),1515.primas, m. 1997: Bronze Age
economy and ideology: central Europe in focus. Journal of
EuropeanArchaeology 5(1), 11530.rice, p. 1984: Change and
conservatism in pottery-producing systems. In van der Leeuw, S.E.
andPritchard, A.C. (eds.), The Many Dimensions of Pottery. Ceramics
in Archaeology and Anthropology(Amsterdam), 23188.shennan, s. 1986:
Central Europe in the third millennium BC: an evolutionary
trajectory for the beginningof the European Bronze Age. Journal of
Anthropological Archaeology 5, 11546.shennan, s. 1993: Commodities,
transactions and growth in the central European Early Bronze
Age.Journal of European Archaeology 1(2), 5972.sillar, b. 1996: The
Dead and the Drying: Techniques for Transforming People and Things
in the Andes.Journal of Material Culture 1(3), 25989.sofaer j.,
budden, s. and barthorpe, t. 2003: Interim report on the pottery
assemblage fromSzazhalombatta (Unpublished report, Matrica Museum,
Szzhalombatta, Hungary).sofaer, j. and srensen, m.l.s. 2002:
Becoming cultural: society and the incorporation of bronze. In
Ottaway, B. and Wager, E.C. (eds.), Metals and society: papers from
a session held at the European Association of Archaeologists sixth
annual meeting in Lisbon 2000 (Oxford, BAR Int. Ser.1061),
11721.
o"
o"
JOANNA SOFAER
OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 2006 The AuthorJournal compilation
2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 145
-
sofaer, j. and srensen, m.l.s. 2006: Technological change as
social change: the introduction of metalin Europe. In Bartelheim,
M. and Heyd, V. (eds.), Continuity- Discontinuity: Transition
Periods inEuropean Prehistory (Rahden (Westf.), Forschungen zur
Archometrie und Altertumswissenschaft).srensen, m.l.s. 1996: Women
As/And Metalworkers. In Devonshire, A. and Wood, B. (eds.), Women
inIndustry and Technology from Prehistory to the Present Day
(London, Museum of London), 4551.srensen, m.l.s. and vicze, m. in
press: Household Activities on a Bronze Age Tell. In Poroszlai, I.
andVicze, M. (eds.), Szzhalombatta Archaeological Expedition Report
III (Szzhalombatta, Matrica Museum).stevanovic, m. 1997: The Age of
Clay: The Social Dynamics of House Destruction. Journal
ofAnthropological Archaeology 16, 33495.szab, g. 1998: Evaluation
of Late Bronze Age Carpathian tinbronzes based on the alloying
content. InKlt , L. and Bartosiewicz, L., Archaeometrical Research
in Hungary II (Budapest, Hungarian NationalMuseum), 15973.szakmny,
g. 2001: Felsvadsz-Vrdomb Neolitikus s Bronzkori Kermiatpusainak
PetrogrfiaiVizsglata. A Miskolci Herman Ott Mzeum vknyve XL,
10725.szakmny, g. and kustr, r. 2000: Untersuchung von
Keramikproben aus dem SptbronzezeitlichenHgel von Isztimr-Cspuszta.
Alba Regia 29, 5560.szathmri, i. 2003: The florescence of the
Middle Bronze Age in the Tisza region: the Fzesabony culture.In
Visy, Z. (ed.), Hungarian Archaeology at the Turn of the Millennium
(Budapest, Department ofMonuments of the Ministry of Cultural
Heritage), 1567.trachsler, w. 1966: The influence of metalworking
on prehistoric pottery: some observations on IronAge pottery of the
Alpine region. In Matson, F.R. (ed.), Ceramics and Man (London),
14051.van der leeuw, s.e. 1989: Risk, perception, innovation. In
van der Leeuw, S.E. and Torrence, R. (eds.),Whats New? A Closer
Look at the Process of Innovation (London, One World Archaeology
14), 30029.van der leeuw, s.e. 1993: Giving the potter a choice:
conceptual aspects of pottery techniques. InLemonnier, P. (ed.),
Technological Choices: Transformation in Material Cultures since
the Neolithic(London), 23888.varga, a. 2000: Coring results at
Szzhalombatta-Fldvr. In Poroszlai, I. and Vicze, M.
(eds.),Szzhalombatta Archaeological Expedition Annual Report 1
(Szzhalombatta, Archaeolingua), 7681.varga, i., molnr, z., n. czak,
i. and ilon, g. 1989: Nmetbnya Ksbronzkori Kermii
aTermszettudomnyos Vizsglatok Tkrben. Ppai Mzeumi rtest 2,
3948.varga, i., svegh, g. and n. czak, i. 1988: Egy Ksbronzkori
Kermia Komplett Vizsglata. PpaiMzeumi rtest 1, 315.vargha, l. 1955:
Archaeologiai rtest 82, 1516.vaughn, j.h. 1970: Caste systems in
the Western Sudan. In Tuden, A. and Plotnicov, L. (eds.),
SocialStratification in Africa (New York), 5992.vickers, m. and
gill, d. 1994: Artful Crafts: Ancient Greek Silverware and Pottery
(Oxford).vicze, m. 2001: Dunajvros-Duna-d l . The Early and Middle
Bronze Age cemetery of Dunajvros-Kosziderpadls (Unpublished Ph.D.
thesis, Etvs Lornd University, Budapest).vicze, m. 2004: Excavation
methodology on the Szzhalombatta Project. In Kisfaludi, J. (ed.),
Rgszetikutatsok Magyarorszgon 2002 (Archaeological Investigations
in Hungary 2002) (Budapest, Ministryof Cultural Heritage and the
Hungarian National Museum), 13146.vicze, m., earle, t. and
artursson, m. 2005: Bronze Age site gazetteer: Benta Valley,
Hungary. InPoroszlai, I. and Vicze, M. (eds.), Szzhalombatta
Archaeological Expedition Report II (Szzhalombatta,Matrica Museum),
23750.vitelli, k. 1995: Pots, Potters and the Shaping of Greek
Neolithic Society. In Barnett, W.K. and Hoopes,J.W. (eds.), The
Emergence of Pottery. Technology and Innovation in Ancient
Societies (Washington),5563.
o"o"
o"
o"
POTS, HOUSES AND METAL
OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY
146 2006 The Author
Journal compilation 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
-
wade, j.a. 1989: The context of adoption of brass technology in
northeastern Nigeria and its effects onthe elaboration of culture.
In van der Leeuw, S.E. and Torrence, R. (eds.), Whats New? A Closer
Look atthe Process of Innovation (London, One World Archaeology
14), 22544.waterson, r. 1997: The Living House. An Anthropology of
Architecture in South-East Asia (Oxford).weeks, j. 1982: Roman
carpentry joints: adoption and adaptation. In McGrail, S. (ed.),
WoodworkingTechniques before A.D. 1500 (Oxford, BAR Int. Ser. 129),
15768.wolfe, a.w. 1969: Social Structural Bases of Art. Current
Anthropology 10(1), 344.
JOANNA SOFAER
OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 2006 The AuthorJournal compilation
2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 147