year 5, Issue 15 (6-2021)
Parseh J Archaeol Stud 2021, 5(15): 73-93 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Masjedi-Khak P, Khazaei M, Aarab A, Beheshti S I. (2021). Study of the Early and Middle Bronze Ages Pottery Making in Kelardasht Through Petrography. Parseh J Archaeol Stud. 5(15), 73-93. doi:10.30699/PJAS.5.15.73
URL: http://journal.richt.ir/mbp/article-1-284-en.html
URL: http://journal.richt.ir/mbp/article-1-284-en.html
1- Assistant Professor, Department of Archeology, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Neishabour University, Khorasan Razavi, Iran. , parastomasjedi@yahoo.com
2- Ph.D. in Archeology, Freelance Researcher, Iran.
3- Ph.D. student in Archeology, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
4- M.A. in Geology, Research Institute for Conservation and Restoration of Cultural Heritage Organization, Tehran, Iran.
2- Ph.D. in Archeology, Freelance Researcher, Iran.
3- Ph.D. student in Archeology, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
4- M.A. in Geology, Research Institute for Conservation and Restoration of Cultural Heritage Organization, Tehran, Iran.
Abstract: (4273 Views)
Abstract
Due to the long lasting durability of pottery, they remain unchanged and plays an important role in archaeological researches. Aside of its difference usage in archaeological research such as dating, artistic and subsistent and communications and exchanges among people of different regions, is used in technology level. Archaeological site of Tape Kelar Hill, situated near Hasankif city, in Kelardasht, is one of the most important prehistoric sites in southern coast of Caspian Sea, which includes cultural materials from the Late Chalcolithic from the fourth millennium B.C. to the Islamic era. The significance of this site has become twofold considering the previous views issued about prehistoric cultures in western Mazandaran and Gilan provinces. The Early Bronze Age potteries of this site are of Kura-Araxes. These are the most important finds of this site. The main research question of this article pertains to the structure of the pottery in this area in two periods and aims to see whether or not the initiation of Kura-Araxes pottery has resulted from external factors and there is difference between Early and Middle Bronze Ages? In this study, 15 pieces of pottery from Early and Middle Bronze ages were studied via petrography method in order to compare in terms of composition and mineral tissues. Research has shown that the pottery of this site, in spite of experiencing some changes in the tissues, is local production. Therefore, it is rebutted to claim that the pottery of this culture is simulated by indigenous potters.
Keywords: Kura-Araxes, Middle Bronze Ages,Tape Kelar, Petrography.
Introduction
Petrographic study of Kura-Araxes pottery, despite its prevalence outside of Iran, has not received much attention from Iranian archaeologists. The first petrographic study of Kura-Araxes pottery in Iran was also conducted by Western archaeologists. The study of Kura-Araxes pottery in areas far from emergence region of this culture in Iran requires data from sites that had a stratigraphic-chronology continuity that was not available until the excavation of Tapeh Kelar.
In terms of the location of the sites studied by the petrographic method prior to the present study, two general classifications can be proposed: first, the sites that were within the geographical area of the origin of the Kura-Araxes culture, and second, the area- Those who are far away and outside the region of origin and only in the second stage of the development of the Kura-Araxes culture reached this culture.
This classification can be useful in analyzing the existence of trans-regional connections with the Caucasus or northwestern Iran, along with comparing the minerals of Tapeh Kelar pottery with the petrology of Kelardasht region. In this research, the authors have studied Kura-Araxes pottery obtained from the excavations of Tapeh Kelar site based on petrographic method.
This research is based on two questions. The first question of this research is that according to the minerals in Kura-Araxes and Middle Bronze Age pottery, what are the similarities or differences between them? And the second question includes the question that based on the petrographic study of the pottery samples of Tapeh Kelar, which of the ideas on how to spread the Kura-Araxes culture can be considered more logical for the emergence of this culture in the site? Based on visual evidence and cultural materials that show major changes in the transition from the Late Chalcolithic period to the Early Bronze Age, it can be expected that major changes have occurred in the field of process of pottery making and heating.
Discussion
In this study, 15 sample of potsherds obtained from excavations at Tapeh Kelar were selected. Samples were selected from Early Bronze Age (Kura-Araxes) and Middle Bronze Age contexts. Of these, 10 samples belonged to the Early Bronze Age and 5 samples belonged to the Middle Bronze.
10 samples of the Early Bronze Age were selected for the study. Samples can be divided into two main categories based on texture: samples with porphyry (coarse-grained) texture and samples with silty (fine-grained) texture. 9 samples have porphyry and coarse-grained texture and only sample number 4 has silty texture. 5 samples of pottery belong to the Middle Bronze Age. The samples have a dark background and a dark color.
Two types of silty tissue (samples 2, 4 and 5) and porphyry can be seen in the samples. Minerals detected in the samples are: quartz (clear and cloudy), plagioclase, amphibole and pyroxene, iron oxide, mica, Intrusive and extrusive volcanic rocks, silt and shale, chalcedony, agate and nepheline.
In the studied samples, some minerals are interesting. Nephline is rare in Iran. In Iran, due to the scarcity of alumina and other items that required nepheline, this mineral was importef from other countries due to its scarcity. Since the 1960s, several sources of nepheline have been reported in the northwest, such as Kalibar, Razgah, Bozqush, and Azarshahr.
Two other regions, namely the north of Shahroud and the central Alborz region, also have this mineral. In the north and northeast of Shahroud city in the Sultan Meidan area, the presence of nepheline mineral has been reported. However, due to the fact that the spread of Kura-Araxes culture was not to Shahroud city, the existence of Shahroud nepheline mineral has no role in the subject of this article. The third region, which is the central Alborz, is important in two ways: first, this mineral has been reported in it, and second, the Taph Kelar site is also located in the same region. As mentioned, in the geological map of Marzanabad sheet, the existence of nepheline mineral is mentioned.
Conclusion
The results of this study, as well as studies conducted elsewhere; show that each region has a regional diversity that itself indicates the local production of Kura-Araxes pottery. If that Kura-Araxes pottery was produced in one or more workshops in the motherland of the culture and then shipped to other areas, these potteries should not be so different and heterogeneous.
Nevertheless, two points should be considered: First, the studied site (Tapeh Kelar) may not be the oldest Kura-Araxes site in Alborz. In addition, ripple in the stream theory must be considered. The time difference between the region of origin of culture and distant regions has lasted for more than two hundred years.
In this theory, the spread of Kura-Araxes culture has been gradual and in several waves and stages, so it is possible that this expansion, even if it is due to migration from the Caucasus, is different from the Caucasus region in terms of mineralogical structure. This study shows that long-distance and direct exchange in the spread of Kura-Araxes culture to the Kelardasht area is not approved.
For better results, it is necessary to obtain more information, especially in archaeological site that transition from the Late Chalcolithic period to the early Bronze Age is uninterrupted, and also genetic studies on human remains of such sites to genetic changes in the inhabitants of the areas in the transition from the Late Chalcolithic Period to the Early Bronze Age Evaluated.
Due to the long lasting durability of pottery, they remain unchanged and plays an important role in archaeological researches. Aside of its difference usage in archaeological research such as dating, artistic and subsistent and communications and exchanges among people of different regions, is used in technology level. Archaeological site of Tape Kelar Hill, situated near Hasankif city, in Kelardasht, is one of the most important prehistoric sites in southern coast of Caspian Sea, which includes cultural materials from the Late Chalcolithic from the fourth millennium B.C. to the Islamic era. The significance of this site has become twofold considering the previous views issued about prehistoric cultures in western Mazandaran and Gilan provinces. The Early Bronze Age potteries of this site are of Kura-Araxes. These are the most important finds of this site. The main research question of this article pertains to the structure of the pottery in this area in two periods and aims to see whether or not the initiation of Kura-Araxes pottery has resulted from external factors and there is difference between Early and Middle Bronze Ages? In this study, 15 pieces of pottery from Early and Middle Bronze ages were studied via petrography method in order to compare in terms of composition and mineral tissues. Research has shown that the pottery of this site, in spite of experiencing some changes in the tissues, is local production. Therefore, it is rebutted to claim that the pottery of this culture is simulated by indigenous potters.
Keywords: Kura-Araxes, Middle Bronze Ages,Tape Kelar, Petrography.
Introduction
Petrographic study of Kura-Araxes pottery, despite its prevalence outside of Iran, has not received much attention from Iranian archaeologists. The first petrographic study of Kura-Araxes pottery in Iran was also conducted by Western archaeologists. The study of Kura-Araxes pottery in areas far from emergence region of this culture in Iran requires data from sites that had a stratigraphic-chronology continuity that was not available until the excavation of Tapeh Kelar.
In terms of the location of the sites studied by the petrographic method prior to the present study, two general classifications can be proposed: first, the sites that were within the geographical area of the origin of the Kura-Araxes culture, and second, the area- Those who are far away and outside the region of origin and only in the second stage of the development of the Kura-Araxes culture reached this culture.
This classification can be useful in analyzing the existence of trans-regional connections with the Caucasus or northwestern Iran, along with comparing the minerals of Tapeh Kelar pottery with the petrology of Kelardasht region. In this research, the authors have studied Kura-Araxes pottery obtained from the excavations of Tapeh Kelar site based on petrographic method.
This research is based on two questions. The first question of this research is that according to the minerals in Kura-Araxes and Middle Bronze Age pottery, what are the similarities or differences between them? And the second question includes the question that based on the petrographic study of the pottery samples of Tapeh Kelar, which of the ideas on how to spread the Kura-Araxes culture can be considered more logical for the emergence of this culture in the site? Based on visual evidence and cultural materials that show major changes in the transition from the Late Chalcolithic period to the Early Bronze Age, it can be expected that major changes have occurred in the field of process of pottery making and heating.
Discussion
In this study, 15 sample of potsherds obtained from excavations at Tapeh Kelar were selected. Samples were selected from Early Bronze Age (Kura-Araxes) and Middle Bronze Age contexts. Of these, 10 samples belonged to the Early Bronze Age and 5 samples belonged to the Middle Bronze.
10 samples of the Early Bronze Age were selected for the study. Samples can be divided into two main categories based on texture: samples with porphyry (coarse-grained) texture and samples with silty (fine-grained) texture. 9 samples have porphyry and coarse-grained texture and only sample number 4 has silty texture. 5 samples of pottery belong to the Middle Bronze Age. The samples have a dark background and a dark color.
Two types of silty tissue (samples 2, 4 and 5) and porphyry can be seen in the samples. Minerals detected in the samples are: quartz (clear and cloudy), plagioclase, amphibole and pyroxene, iron oxide, mica, Intrusive and extrusive volcanic rocks, silt and shale, chalcedony, agate and nepheline.
In the studied samples, some minerals are interesting. Nephline is rare in Iran. In Iran, due to the scarcity of alumina and other items that required nepheline, this mineral was importef from other countries due to its scarcity. Since the 1960s, several sources of nepheline have been reported in the northwest, such as Kalibar, Razgah, Bozqush, and Azarshahr.
Two other regions, namely the north of Shahroud and the central Alborz region, also have this mineral. In the north and northeast of Shahroud city in the Sultan Meidan area, the presence of nepheline mineral has been reported. However, due to the fact that the spread of Kura-Araxes culture was not to Shahroud city, the existence of Shahroud nepheline mineral has no role in the subject of this article. The third region, which is the central Alborz, is important in two ways: first, this mineral has been reported in it, and second, the Taph Kelar site is also located in the same region. As mentioned, in the geological map of Marzanabad sheet, the existence of nepheline mineral is mentioned.
Conclusion
The results of this study, as well as studies conducted elsewhere; show that each region has a regional diversity that itself indicates the local production of Kura-Araxes pottery. If that Kura-Araxes pottery was produced in one or more workshops in the motherland of the culture and then shipped to other areas, these potteries should not be so different and heterogeneous.
Nevertheless, two points should be considered: First, the studied site (Tapeh Kelar) may not be the oldest Kura-Araxes site in Alborz. In addition, ripple in the stream theory must be considered. The time difference between the region of origin of culture and distant regions has lasted for more than two hundred years.
In this theory, the spread of Kura-Araxes culture has been gradual and in several waves and stages, so it is possible that this expansion, even if it is due to migration from the Caucasus, is different from the Caucasus region in terms of mineralogical structure. This study shows that long-distance and direct exchange in the spread of Kura-Araxes culture to the Kelardasht area is not approved.
For better results, it is necessary to obtain more information, especially in archaeological site that transition from the Late Chalcolithic period to the early Bronze Age is uninterrupted, and also genetic studies on human remains of such sites to genetic changes in the inhabitants of the areas in the transition from the Late Chalcolithic Period to the Early Bronze Age Evaluated.
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Interdisciplinary
Received: 2020/01/23 | Accepted: 2020/06/8 | Published: 2021/04/30
Received: 2020/01/23 | Accepted: 2020/06/8 | Published: 2021/04/30
References
1. - آجرلو، بهرام، (1383). «بررسی هنر کورا ارس». پیام باستانشناس. سال اول، شمارۀ 2، صص: 60-43.
2. - ارزانی، کاوه؛ سرپولکی، حسین؛ و قهرمانی، داوود، (1387). «تغییرات فازی و رفتاری نفلین سینیت کلیبر در مقایسه با فلدسپات هندی در ترکیب انگوب کاشی مونوکوتورا». مجلۀ بلورشناسی و کانیشناسی ایران، سال 16، شمارۀ 1، صص: 78-67.
3. - اسماعیلی، داریوش؛ خلج، مرضیه؛ و ولیزاده، محمدولی، (1386). «شواهد شیمی کانی و ژئوشیمی سنگ کل در آلودگی، دگرنهادی و اختلاط ماگمایی تودۀ گرانیتوئیدی اکاپل (جنوبغرب کلاردشت، البرز مرکزی)». مجلۀ بلورشناسی و کانیشناسی ایران، شمارۀ 1، صص: 192-169.
4. - آقاجانیمرسا، سهیلا؛ امامی، محمدهاشم؛ لطفی، محمد؛ قلیزاده، کاظم؛ و قاسمیسیانی، مجید، (1395). «منشأ رگههای پلیمتال اپیترمال در منطقۀ نیکوییه (باختر قزوین) براساس مطالعات کانیشناسی، دگرسانی و میانبار سیال». مجلۀ علومزمین، سال 25، شمارۀ 99، صص: 168-157.
5. - برنی، چارلز؛ و لانگ، مارشال، (1386). تاریخ اقوام کوهنشین شمالغرب ایران. ترجمۀ هوشنگ صادقی، تهران: انتشارت نگاه.
6. - پترسون، سارا، (1395). «پتروگرافی مقطع نازک مواد سرامیکی». ترجمۀ مهدی رازانی و حکیمه افشارینژاد، دوفصلنامۀ تخصصی دانش مرمت و میراثفرهنگی، سال 4، شمارۀ 7، صص: 73-57.
7. - جعفریان، عبدالرضا؛ امامی، محمدهاشم؛ و وثوقیعابدینی، منصور، (1388). «پترولوژی و ژئوشیمی عناصر اصلی مجموعۀ بازالتی سلطانمیدان». فصلنامۀ زمینشناسی کاربردی، سال 5، شمارۀ 4، صص: 284-266.
8. - حاجعلیلو، بهزاد؛ وثوق، بهرام؛ رضویزاده، نورالله؛ و مؤید، محسن، (1391). «بررسی کانیسازی اسکارن علمکوه در منطقۀ کلاردشت (شمال ایران) با تأکید بر بررسیهای میانبارهای شاری». مجلۀ بلورشناسی و کانیشناسی ایران، سال 20، شمارۀ 4، صص: 633-626.
9. - حیدریان، محمود، (1390). «چگونگی سیر تحول فرهنگهای پیشازتاریخ غرب مازندران براساس کاوشهای باستانشناسی تپهکلار و پناهگاه صخرهای راشک کلاردشت». رسالۀ دکترای باستانشناسی دانشگاه تربیتمدرس (منتشرنشده).
10. - دوروزی، رقیه؛ و مسعودی، فریبرز، (1391). «زمینشیمی پتروژنز و محیط تکتونیکی تودۀ گابرویی ترالیتی و تشنیتی کمربن (البرز مرکزی)». مجلۀ پترولوژی، سال 3، شمارۀ 12، صص: 102-89.
11. - سازمان زمینشناسی کشور، نقشۀ مرزنآباد ورقۀ 6262، مقیاس 100.000/1.
12. - طلایی، حسن، (1385). عصرمفرغ ایران. تهران: انتشارات سمت.
13. - علائیبخش، ناهید؛ و شمعانیان، غلامحسین، (1394). «کانیشناسی، ژئوشیمی و زایش رگههای مسدار سازند نسن، جنوبغرب آمل، پهنه البرز مرکزی». مجلۀ ژئوشیمی، دورۀ 4، شمارۀ 2، صص: 103-99.
14. - علائیبخش، ناهید؛ شمعانیان، غلامحسین؛ شفیعی، بهنام؛ و مسعودی، سیدمسعود، (1392). «کانیشناسی و ژئوشیمی رگههای مسدار نسن، البرز مرکزی». پنجمین همایش انجمن زمینشناسی اقتصادی ایران، صص: 31-26.
15. - علیزاده، کریم، (1389). «فرهنگ کورا-اراس، ماوراءقفقاز قدیم یا فرهنگ یانیق». مجلۀ باستانشناسی، شمارۀ 1، صص: 85-69.
16. - فردوسی، رسول؛ مؤید، محسن؛ و کمالی، امینالله، (1394). «بررسی سنگنگاری و سنگشناسی تودۀ نفلین سینیتی استان آذربایجان شرقی». مجلۀ علومزمین، سال 24، شمارۀ 4، صص: 40-29.
17. - کریمیان، حسن، (1376). «گزارش گمانهزنی و تعیین حریم تپهکلار کلاردشت». ساری: مرکز اسناد سازمان میراثفرهنگی مازندران (منتشرنشده).
18. - موسویکوهپر، سیدمهدی، (1387). «گزارش کاوشهای باستانشناختی در تپهکلار کلاردشت: فصل دوم». تهران: مرکز اسناد سازمان میراثفرهنگی، پژوهشکدۀ باستانشناسی (منتشرنشده).
19. - موسویکوهپر، سیدمهدی؛ و عباسنژاد، رحمت، (1386). «گزارش کاوشهای باستانشناختی در تپهکلار کلاردشت: فصل اول. 1385». تهران: مرکز اسناد سازمان میراثفرهنگی، پژوهشکدۀ باستانشناسی (منتشرنشده).
20. - نجفزاده، علیرضا، (1371). «زمینشناسی اقتصادی کانسارهای نفلین سینیت رزگاه و کلیبر آذربایجانشرقی و بررسی امکان تولید آلومینا از این ذخائر». پایاننامۀ کارشناسیارشد زمینشناسی اقتصادی دانشگاه شهیدبهشتی (منتشرنشده).
21. - نورزهی، زینب؛ آجورلو، بهرام؛ باقرزادهکثیری، مسعود؛ و ابراهیمی، قادر، (1395). «باستانکانیشناسی سفالینههای عصرمفرغ کولتپه عجبشیر، شرق دریاچۀ ارومیه». نشریۀ پژوهه باستانسنجی، سال 2، شمارۀ 2، صص: 17-1.
22. - وحدتی، ف.، (1355). نقشۀ زمینشناسی قزوین-رشت با مقیاس 1:250000. تهران: سازمان زمینشناسی و اکتشافات معدنی کشور.
23. - وهابزاده کبریا، قربان؛ برسان، یزدان؛ و مسعودی، سیدمسعود، (1393). «بررسی اثر واحدهای زمینشناسی بر توزیع فلزات سنگین در رسوبات رودخانۀ حوزۀ سردآبرود». مجلۀ پژوهشنامۀ مدیریت حوزۀ آبخیز، سال 5، شمارۀ 9، صص: 118-107.
25. - Abay, E., (2005). “The Expansion of Early Transcaucasian Culture: cultural interaction or migration?”. Altoriental, Forsch, No. 32, Pp: 115-131.
26. - Angle, M.; Morbidelu, P. & Palmieri, A. M., (2002). “Pottery from arslantepe (Malatya, Turkey): Petrographic features and archaeological data”. Periodico di Mineralogia, No. 71, Pp: 43-71.
27. - Basso, E.; Capelli, C.; Pia Riccardi, M. & Cabella, R., (2008). “A particular temper: mineralogical and petrographic characterisation of ceramic fabrics with glauconitic inclusions”. ArcheoSciences Revue d'archéométrie, No. 32, Pp: 93-97.
28. - Batiuk, S., (2005). “Migration Theory and the Distribution of the Early Transcaucasian Culture”. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Toronto.
29. - Batiuk, S., (2013). “The fruits of migration: Understanding the ‘longue duree’ and the socio-economic relations of the Early Transcaucasian Culture”. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, No. 32, Pp: 449–477.
30. - Edgar, D, A., (1984). “Chemistry, Occurrence and Paragenesis of Feldspathoids: A Review”. ASIC, Vol. 137, Pp: 501-532.
31. - Esse, D., (1991). Subsistence, trade and social change in Early Bronze Age Palestine. SAOC, No. 50. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
32. - Fabbri, B.; Gualtieri, S. & Shoval, S., (2014). “The presence of calcite in archeological ceramics”. Journal of the European Ceramic Society, No. 34(7), Pp: 1899–1911.
33. - Hojabri Nobari, A.; Khazaie Kouhpar, M. & Motarjem, A., (2016). “Petrographic analysis of early Transcaucasian potteries from Tepe Gourab, Western Iran”. International Journal of Humanities.
34. - Ionescu, C. & Hoeck, V., (2011). “Firing-induced transformations in Copper Ageceramics from NE Romania”. European Journal of Mineralogy, No. 23 (6), Pp: 937-958.
35. - Ionescu, C. & Hoeck, V., (2017). “Electron microprobe analysis (EMPA)”. In: The Oxford Handbook for Archeological Ceramic Analysis (Hunt, A.M.V., editor), Oxford University Press. Pp: 288–304.
36. - Braekmans, D. & Degryse, P., (2017). “Petrography Optical Microscopy. chapter 15”. In: The Oxford Handbook for Archeological Ceramic Analysis (Hunt, A.M.V., editor), Oxford University Press, Pp: 233-265.
37. - Iserlis, M.; Goren, Y.; Hovsepyan, I. & Greenberg, R., (2015). “Early Kura-Araxes Ceramic Technology in the Fourth Millennium BCE Site of Tsaghkasar, Armenia”. Paléorient, No. 41(1), Pp: 9–23.
38. - Jantzen, C. M., (2003). “Characterization and performance of fluidized bed steam reforming (FBSR) product as a final waste form. Environmental Issues and Waste Management Technologies in the Ceramic and nuclear industries IX”. Edited by John D. Vienna and Dane R. Spearing. Proceedings of the science and technology in addressing environmental issues in the ceramic industry and ceramic science and technology for the nuclear industry symposia at the American ceramic society 105th annual meeting & exposition held april 27-30 in Nashville Tennessee. Published by the American ceramic society, Pp: 319-330.
39. - Khazaie Kouhpar, M.; Aarab, A.; Masjedi Khak, P.; Panahi, A. & Kohansal Vajargah, H., (2015). “Petrography analysis of Fourth Millenniuμ B.C. potteries at Kul Tepe (NW Iran)”. (Greece) Mediterranean Archaeology & Archaeometry. Vol. 15, No 3, Pp: 277-288
40. - Kibaroglu, M.; Satir, M. & Kastl, G., (2009). “Petrographic and Geochemical analysis on the provenance of the middle Bronze and Late Bronze/Early Iron Age ceramics from Didi Gora and Udabno I, Eastern Georgia”. Journal of Archaeological Science, No. 36, Pp: 2463-2474.
41. - Kiguradze, T. & Sagona, A., (2003). “On the origins of Kura-Araxes cultural complex”. In: Archaeology in the Borderlands: Investigations in Caucasia and Beyond, edited by A. T. Smith & K. Rubinson, Pp: 95-110. Los Angeles: The Cotsen Institute of Archaeology at UCLA.
42. - Kohl, P., (2009). “Origins, homelands and migrations: situating the Kura-Araxes Early Transcaucasian Culture within the history of Eurasia”. Tel Aviv, No. 36, Pp: 241-265.
43. - Mason, R. B. & Cooper, L., (1999). “Grog, petrology, and early transcaucasians at Godin Tepe”. IRAN, Vol. 37, Pp: 25-31.
44. - Middleton, A., (1997). “CERAMIC PETROGRAPHY”. Rev. do Museu de Arqueologia e Etnologia, São Paulo, Suplemento 2, Pp: 73-79.
45. - Montana, G., (2017). “Ceramic raw materials”. In: The Oxford Handbook of Archaeological ceramic analysis, Pp: 87-100, Edited by: Alice, M. Hunt, W., Oxford university Press.
46. - Nesse, W. D., (2000). Introduction to Mineralogy. Oxford University Press, London.
47. - Rothman, M. S., (2003). “Ripples in the Stream: Transcaucasia-Anatolian Interaction in the Murat/Euphrates Basin at the Beginning of the Third Millennium B.C.”. In: Archaeology in the Borderlands: Investigations in Caucasia and Beyond, A. Smith & K. Rubinson, eds., Pp: 94-109, Los Angeles: Cotsen: Institute of Archaeology, UCLA.
48. - Sean Quinn, P., (2013). Ceramic Petrography: The Interpretation of Archaeological Pottery and Related Artefacts in Thin Section. Archaeopress, Oxford.
49. - Shepard, A. O., (1956). Ceramics for the archaeologist. Carnegie Institution of Washington.
50. - Stoltman, J. B., (2015). Ceramic petrography and Hopewell interaction. University of Alabama Press.
51. - Tite, M., (1969). “Determination of the firing temperature of ancient ceramics by the measurement of thermal expan-sion: a reassessment”. Archaeometry, No. 11, Pp: 131-143.
52. - Velde, B. & Druc, I., (1999). Archaeological Ceramic Materials, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.
53. - Wang, Y. & Enrique, M., (1990). “Self-organizational origin of agates: Banding, fiber twisting, composition, and dynamic crystallization model”. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, No. 54 (6), Pp: 1627–1638.
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |