4.2 Article

Aspects of Zulu Ceramic Traditions in the Upper and Lower uThukela Basin, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa

期刊

AFRICAN ARCHAEOLOGICAL REVIEW
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10437-022-09510-9

关键词

Lower and Upper uThukela Basin; Zulu pottery; Ethnoarchaeology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article explores the social and technical decisions in ceramic production among the Zulu peoples in southern Africa, focusing on production stages, design, style, and functional components. The study reveals that the social and operational attributes can be utilized as potential sources to bridge the gaps between the technology and style approaches in the archaeological study of Iron Age ceramics.
In southern Africa and elsewhere, the archaeological study of ceramics largely relies on two approaches that tend to be treated separately: technology and style. While the emphasis of Iron Age archaeology has been on the range of shapes and decorative characteristics of pots and how these are determined or illustrative of cultural identities, little is known about the technological processes of ceramic production. This article uses ethnoarchaeological methods to examine the chaine operatories of ceramic production in specific sociocultural contexts among the Nguni-speaking (Zulu) peoples in the Upper and Lower uThukela Basins in KwaZulu-Natal. The study focuses on social and technical decisions for ceramic production and documents production stages and attributes, design, style, and functional components. Moreover, the social characteristics of production stages are used to understand various techniques, processes, tools, and materials involved in ceramic production, including distribution and apprenticeship. The social and operational attributes of ceramic production discussed in this article are potential sources for developing models that would bridge the gaps between the technology and style approaches in the archaeological study of Iron Age ceramics in southern Africa.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据