چکیده:
Two vessels from different sites of the Iranian Plateau, dating to the late 4th or early 3rd millennium BCE are presented as palaeotechnological case studies. In the fractures of the vessels’ walls, interfaces left by added clay parts (enhanced in the two illustrations) are quite recognizable. It is proposed that in both cases potters, in order to construct the bases, used to make bowls comparable with two types of finished containers common in their repertories (respectively, a moulded bevelled rim bowl and a coil-built truncated-cone shaped one with a distinctive pointed rim). As a working hypothesis it is suggested that making open vessels to build on the rest of the vase was a technical template, possibly shared in the late 4th millennium across different regions of the Iranian Plateau. Scholars are encouraged to record the sections of their vessels showing joins among coils and other interfaces, as this palaeotechnological evidence is potentially very useful in assessing the historical meaning of wide "interaction spheres" traditionally considered only in terms of traditional ceramic morphological comparisons.
خلاصه ماشینی:
"The collection, in fact, includes hundreds of fragments of bevelled rim bowls and coarse oval trays, single-handled globular pots, a few carinated vessels with nose-like lugs, several specimens of tall conical "flowerpots", and other forms with meaningful similarities with the western ceramic assemblages (Desset & Vidale, ongoing research).
Moving towards the Iranian Plateau, these flowerpots are found at Tepe Farukhabad (Wright 1981: Fig. 45 e), and particularly at Tall-i Malyan (Sumner 2003: Fig. 22, Pl. XV a-c), but strangely enough are not recognizable in other important contemporary assemblages like those of Choga Mish (Delougaz & Kantor 1996: 39-91; only two vaguely similar vessels, respectively in Pl. 81, R and 83, EE), Tall-i Ghazir (Witcomb 1971), Godin Tepe (Badler 2007-2008), Arisman (Vatandoust et al.
These vases are not always clearly distinguished, in the published reports, from other types, for example from coarser bevelled rim bowls of tall size (like in Gopnik & Rothman 2011) or from simple conical cups bearing extensive wheel marks on the walls and either string-cut, or concave bases.
On the other hand, in the ceramic complexes of the so-called Proto-Elamite period, for example at Godin Tepe and Seh Gabi (Young 1969, Young & Levine 1974, Weiss & Young 1975), as well as at Tepe Yahya (Potts 2001: 1-54) the vessels are more restricted, biconical or carinated with a short cylindrical neck rather than globular or ovoid, lugs are nose-like, and the designs are more often incised than painted and generally quite different (see also Delougaz & Kantor1996: 112-123; Wright 1981: 91-135 and others)."