Connecting pots

Poterie et pratiques relationnelles dans le monde ancien.

Pottery and relational practices in the Ancient World.

Workshop 26 novembre 2021, Amphithéâtre de la Maison de l’Archéologie, Pessac, 14h-18h.

Workshop tenu dans les cadres des programmes CorPoWest (Département des Sciences Archéologiques Bordeaux) et NoStoi (Labex Laboratoire des Sciences Archéologiques de Bordeaux

Résumé:

La poterie, bien que très souvent réduite, en contexte archéologique, à l’état assez peu spectaculaire de tesson, était au cœur de pratiques relationnelles, et cela jusqu’à des époques récentes. Dans le monde ancien, elle fournissait un support matériel et technique pour la diffusion, la conservation et la consommation de denrées alimentaires. Dans bien des cas, toutefois, sa signification va bien au-delà. Sa forme, sa technique, permet d’identifier sa région de production et parfois même l’atelier dont elle est issue, et donc de mettre en évidence des connexions locales, régionales, ou interrégionales. Son éventuelle décoration peut avoir suscité la diffusion de trames narratives intégrées de façons différentes d’un endroit à l’autre. Sur les places de marché, ou n’importe où ou pouvaient avoir lieu des transactions, la poterie pouvait livrer par sa seule morphologie des informations sur l’origine et le volume des denrées. Dans les banquets, elle rend visible de tous la part réservée à chacun. Sa fabrication même, impliquant des acteurs issus de contextes différents et possesseurs de savoir-faire spécifiques, peut être considérée comme une activité relationnelle.

Cet atelier explorera les nouvelles méthodes d’approche qui permette de mettre en évidence et de caractériser le rôle relationnel de la poterie. L’utilisation de la poterie en contexte social, les problèmes liés à sa contenance (et les méthodes utilisées pour les aborder) seront au cœur de nos discussions.

Abstract :

Pottery, although often reduced in archaeological contexts to the unspectacular form of a sherd, was at the very heart of relational practices –until quite recent times-. In the ancient world, it provided technical means for distributing, storing and consuming foodstuffs. In many contexts, its meaning embraced a much wider field, though. Its shape, its technique, may allow tracing its origins all the way back to a specific workshop, and thus emphasize connections with remote places. Its decoration will disseminate narrative, which would be integrated in different ways from one place to another. On marketplaces or anywhere a transaction could happen, it could provide information about origins and volumes of foodstuffs or other products. In banquets, it would allow for making clear which portion is allowed to whom. Even its making, involving actors from different backgrounds and possessing different know-hows, can be considered as a relational activity.

This workshop will consider new paths of investigation that may emphasize and characterize this role of pottery as a relational medium. Pottery use in social contexts, problems related with capacities (and methods use to investigate them) will be at the core of our discussions.

Programme :

14h : Introduction, présentation du workshop. Alexis Gorgues, UMR 5607 Ausonius, Université Bordeaux Montaigne

14h10 :  Perspectives on Ancient Pottery: Some Thoughts from the Trenches. John Papadopoulos, Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, University of California Los Angeles.

14h40 : Corinthian Pottery at home and abroad. Relating production to spheres of consumption. Haley Bertram, Department of Classics, University of Cincinnati.

 15h10 : Eating, Feasting, or the Symposium? Can Pottery Help us Tell the Difference. Kathleen Lynch, Department of Classics, University of Cincinnati.

15h40 : pause.

16h : Faciès céramiques et dynamiques socio-culturelles au premier âge du Fer dans le sud-ouest de la France : trois illustrations.Antoine Dumas, UMR 5607 Ausonius

16h30 : Produciendo conectividad : las ánforas de la Contestania Ibérica en la Edad del Hierro. Pascual Perdiguero, Area de Arqueología, Universitat d’Alacant.

17h00 : L’atelier de potier comme cadre relationnel : quelques remarques à partir des fouilles du Mas de Moreno (Foz-Calanda, Teruel, Espagne). Alexis Gorgues, Charlotte Sacilotto (UMR 5608 TRACES, Université Toulouse 2-Jean Jaurès), Florent Comte.

17h : Le projet Nostoi et ses premiers résultats. Alexis Gorgues, Thibaud Poigt (projet NoStoi, UMR 5607 Ausonius-UMR 5608 TRACES) Florent Comte.

Multipolar necropolises and development of a new socio-political model in the Early Iron Age [PUBLISHED PAPER]

MULTIPOLAR NECROPOLISES AND DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW SOCIO-POLITICAL MODEL IN THE EARLY IRON AGE

SOME THOUGHTS BASED ON EVIDENCE FROM THE SITES OF THE CAMP DE L’ÉGLISE SUD (FLAUJAC-POUJOLS, LOT) AND THE CAMP D’ALBA (RÉALVILLE, TARN-ET-GARONNE)

[PUBLISHED PAPER]

Here we present a paper recently published in Gallia, investigating the links between the internal spatial organization of two Early Iron Age necropolises located in southwestern France and the typological signal of the material content of graves. In the first part, the focus is on the method of identification of spatial groups and typological analysis. In the second part, the results are used to propose a new interpretation of the Early Iron Age in socio-historical terms. In the perspective of the TIE team, this work provides a way to highlight ancient processes of information exchange and the rise of new cultural norms, here in the specific context of the funerary practices. The article has been written by Antoine Dumas.

Abstract (long)

This paper develops renewed interpretations pertaining to two necropolises located in Southwestern France: the Camp de l’Église Sud (Flaujac-Poujols, Lot) and the Camp d’Alba in Réalville (Tarn-et-Garonne), which date back to the early phase of the Iron Age, between 800 and 550 BC. Following a brief overview of the general contextual informations for these two sites (geographical and physical location, history of prior study, etc.), the first part of this work is dedicated to the internal analysis of each cemetery. Spatial analysis was performed following a five steps protocol, which included the creation of heatmaps (1), identification of dense areas of graves (2), the construction of concave hulls (3), buffer-zones (4) and a Delaunay triangulation designed to identify potential burial alignments (5). This allowed for the identification of several consistent spatial groupings of graves in both cemeteries. In order to confirm this spatial hypothesis, the typological and stylistic profiles of each group of graves were then compared, using specifically adapted typological tools and basic numerical methods. This led to the conclusion that each of the alleged groups indeed possessed its own morpho-stylistic profile. Although the specific ceramic shapes are important, it appears that the individual profiles are primarily determined by differences relating to decorative practice (i.e. overall quantity of decorative motifs per group, types, combinations, etc.). The chronological information may then be considered. The topographical development of each site is shown to be consistent with the hypothesis that several distinct groups of burials existed, meaning that both sites developed following a multipolar pattern. This would appear to imply that each of the groups constitutes a small and autonomous unit within a single cemetery. In at least one of the groups (in the Camp de l’Église Sud necropolis), the funerary features (stone circles) were well-preserved. In this particular sector, the anthropological data indicates that the dimensional variations of the stone circles (from 1 to 3 m in diameter) are related to variations in age of the deceased: the largest structures correspond to adult graves, while the smallest correspond to those of small children. Additionally, two of those graves, one belonging to an adult and the other a child, possesed a very similar set of ceramic material, identical in shape and decoration, but differing in size, with the large vessels being associated with the adult and the small ones with the child. It would, therefore, seem likely that each group of graves might be equated to different social units, either families or lineages. The following section draws on this important conclusion. In each cemetery, analysis of the discrepancies in the number of graves installed per generation indicate two things. Firstly, it demonstrated that on a largescale, an initial period of occupation (800-725 BC) was characterized by a marked increase in the number of burials being installed, followed by a second period (725-550 BC) marked by a reversal of this tendency. We can therefore conclude, that the number of people important enough to access the necropolis varied through time, with a second much more selective period than the previous one. Secondly, it appears that the individual behaviour of the distinct social units differs with respect to this pattern: in both necropolises, some groups evolve according to the main trends, while others follow a different path, either continuously increasing or decreasing. These varying numerical dynamics can be related to differences relative to the morpho-stylistic evolution of the material goods. Indeed, the social units with the highest number of deceased still being buried in the two necropolises during the final chronological phase (625-550 BC) correspond to the groups of tombs where the materials change in the most drastic manner, either with the adoption of completely new ceramic shapes, abandoning all types of decoration, or including new forms of funerary material culture, including bronze or iron torcs, bracelets or pins. In contrast, the latest graves of every other group, while changing according to some of the morpho-stylistic trends, continue to exhibit material characteristics which relate directly to the previous phases. This is illustrated by the persistence of archaic details on the material goods (such as the presence of foot-ringed or decorated ceramics), as well as by the complete absence of certain new types of objects (iron torcs, etc.). Two types of social units may thus be opposed: the “innovative” ones appear to be prone to change and willing to adopt new forms, practices and objects, while the “conservative” ones are far more reluctant to do so. The fact that, in both necropolises, the “innovative” burials are more numerous than the “conservative” ones during the final period (625-550 BC) would seem to suggest that the social units which are most prone to change also gain more visibility even within an increasingly selective funeral process, while the more reluctant ones decline. Given that, in the protohistoric world as in others, necropolises are to be considered places of ideological expression, this implies that, between the global crisis which marks the end of the Bronze Age during the 9th c. BC and the middle phase of the Early Iron Age, these two necropolises illustrate and reflect an existing social process, a sort of competition or symbolic struggle between different social units, both attempting to gain or maintain a dominant position within society. However, during this process, only some of the social units involved in the competition manage to remain themselves, while others don’t. The end of the period of activity for each cemetery does not in fact correspond to a total discontinuance of use, but rather it witnesses a displacement of the funeral spaces. Indeed, new funerary complexes are created during the 6th c. BC in the areas surrounding the ancient necropolis. These new sites are marked by deep structural changes: large tumuli or graves replace small burial pits, complex, rich and varied sets of ceramics, weapons and adornment replace the small assemblages of ceramics seen before. These profound modifications, occurring just after the demise of the previous necropolis, indicate changes in the funerary politics which correspond to a shift from dispersion to accumulation of goods within graves. In this process, the graves of the last phase of the ancient necropolis represent the precise moment when these changes take place. As an overall conclusion, the study of these two sites suggests that the Early Iron Age is characterized by two successive mutations between 800 and 550 BC, more than by a gradual transition, and they result in the construction of a new socio-political model in the second half of the Early Iron Age.

Keywords

Spatial analysis ; Typology ; Early Iron Age ; Bronze Age-Iron Age transition ; Protohistoric socio-political trends

Résumé (court)

À partir de l’analyse combinée des données spatiales et typologiques, cet article propose de nouvelles hypothèses sur le développement chronologique et topographique des nécropoles du Camp de l’Église Sud à Flaujac-Poujols (Lot) et du Camp d’Alba à Réalville (Tarn-et-Garonne). Dans chaque cas, l’identification de plusieurs groupes de tombes spatialement cohérents est confirmée par l’analyse des données morpho-stylistiques, qui montre que chaque groupe possède un profil spécifique. L’intégration de la variable chronologique permet de mettre en évidence dans les deux nécropoles un même mode de développement multipolaire, chaque groupe évoluant en parallèle entre 800 et 550 av. J.-C. Ces différents aspects sont mis en relation avec l’existence de groupes sociaux de type familial ou lignager, dont les trajectoires historiques différentes sont inscrites dans les deux sites.

Mots-clés

Analyse spatiale ; Typologie ; Premier âge du Fer ; Transition Bronze-Fer ; Processus socio-politiques protohistoriques

Antoine Dumas

How accurate was Bronze Age Weighing in Western Europe? [Published paper]

Very recently came out, in the Journal of Archaeological Research: Reports, a paper dealing with the sensitivity and accuracy of ancient balances. The paper has been written by two members of the TIE team (Thibaud Poigt et Florent Comte) and with the help of Louis Adam (IMT Mines, Albi, France).

after Poigt et al. 2021, fig. 14

 

Abstract

This paper aims to bring new insights about weighing practices and instruments during Late Bronze Age in Western Europe. Northern France and Southern England share the particularity of providing tiny balance beams and weights dedicated to weigh small quantities. It is traditionally accepted that most of the Bronze Age weights found in Western Europe correspond roughly to a same practice built around one metrological system. Nevertheless, the deviations observed between several weights which should correspond to the same values in the metrological system raise questions about the accuracy of the Bronze Age balances.

This paper synthetizes the general categories of weights and beams used during the Bronze Age in Northern France and Southern England and their main characteristics. Using new mathematical and digital protocols – sensitivity analysis, 3D modelling and simulation, and finite element analysis – we highlight the main mechanical features of the Bronze Age balances, the accuracy that should be expected with them and their resistance to use.

Our results show that ancient balances were way more accurate that what is generally estimated. They show that most of them should probably allow to see differences between the loading of the two pans less than 0.5 g in most of cases. These results also raise new interpretations about the use of metrological systems during the Bronze Age considering that certain weights, generally interpreted as the same value, would appear as completely different if they were put on each pan of such a balance. The resistance simulations also show that the bone beams were very robust and could support loading much heavier than the weights identified for the same period.

Keywords

Metrology; balance; Late Prehistory; 3D modelling; Finite Element Analysis

Résumé

Cet article vise à apporter de nouveaux éclairages sur les pratiques et les instruments de pesée au cours de l’âge du Bronze final en Europe occidentale. Le nord de la France et le sud de l’Angleterre partagent la particularité de fournir de petits fléaux de balance et poids dédiés à la pesée de petites quantités. Il est traditionnellement admis que la plupart des poids de l’âge du Bronze découverts en Europe occidentale correspondent à une même pratique construite autour d’un même système métrologique. Néanmoins, les écarts observés entre plusieurs poids qui devraient correspondre aux mêmes valeurs dans le système métrologique soulèvent des questions sur l’exactitude des balances de l’âge du Bronze.

Cet article synthétise les catégories générales de poids et de fléaux utilisées durant l’âge du Bronze dans le nord de la France et le sud de l’Angleterre et leurs principales caractéristiques. Grâce à de nouveaux protocoles mathématiques et numériques – analyse de sensibilité, modélisation et simulation 3D, et analyse par éléments finis – nous mettons en évidence les principales caractéristiques mécaniques des balances de l’âge du Bronze, la précision que l’on doit en attendre et leur résistance à l’usage.

Nos résultats montrent que les balances anciennes étaient bien plus précises que ce que l’on estime généralement. Ils montrent que la plupart d’entre elles devaient probablement permettre de constater des différences endes différences de charges entre les deux plateaux inférieures à 0,5 g dans la plupart des cas. Ces résultats soulèvent également de nouvelles interprétations sur l’utilisation des systèmes métrologiques pendant l’âge du Bronze, étant donné que certains poids, généralement interprétés comme la même valeur d’un système métrologique, apparaissaient comme complètement différents s’ils étaient placés sur les plateaux d’une telle balance. Les simulations de résistance montrent également que les fléaux en os étaient très robustes et pouvaient supporter une charge bien plus élevée que les poids identifiés pour la même période.

Mots clés

Metrologie; balance; âge du Bronze final; modélisation 3D ; Analyse d’éléments finis

 

Thibaud Poigt

Le retour de Malvieu

La campagne de fouilles de l’habitat fortifié de Malvieu (Saint-Pons-de-Thomières, Hérault) ont repris ce lundi 14 juin avec une équipe de 10 fouilleurs et sous la responsabilité d’Alexis Gorgues.

Situé dans la Montagne Noire, ce site d’habitat est installé sur le versant sud d’une colline calcaire dont il occupe le tiers sommital. En plus de défenses naturelles certaines, il est protégé sur trois de ses côtés par une muraille en pierre sèche. Le site est occupé depuis l’âge du Bronze Final 2/3b (v. 1150-800 av. J.-C.) et il semble abandonné aux alentours de la fin du VIe s. av. J.-C.

Le site de Malvieu est singulier en Languedoc car il représente l’un des rares exemples bien documentés d’une occupation continue s’étirant du Bronze Final jusqu’à la fin du Fer Ancien. Son emplacement original, sur un versant abrupt (aux pentes comprises entre 25 et 40%), ainsi que son état actuel (celui d’un maquis de chênes verts et de buis) illustre la nécessité pour les archéologues d’investir de nouveaux terrains d’étude afin de mieux comprendre les dynamiques de peuplement du Languedoc occidental.

La campagne de fouilles de 2021 se concentre sur deux zones récemment ouvertes et qui devraient documenter les phases les plus anciennes de l’occupation du site ainsi que de procédés d’occupation de l’espace interne et autres usages architecturaux.

Pour aller plus loin:

Gorgues A., 2021, La morphogénèse de l’habitat fortifié de l’âge du Fer en Languedoc occidental méditerranéen : nouvelles propositions. In: Espaces fortifiés à l’âge du Fer en Europe. Actes du 43e colloque international de l’AFEAF. (Le Puy-en-Velay, 30 mai-1er juin 2019), p. 297-316.

Gorgues A., 2009, De l’âge du Bronze à l’âge du Fer en Languedoc occidental : le cas du site de hauteur fortifié de Malvieu (Saint-Pons-de-Thomières, Hérault), In: De l’âge du Bronze à l’âge du Fer en France et en Europe occidentale (X e- VIIe siècle av. J.-C.). La moyenne vallée du Rhône aux âges du Fer. Actes du 30e colloque international de l’AFEAF, co-organisé avec l’APRAB. (Saint-Romain-en-Gal, 26 – 28 mai 2006), p. 513-525.

Thibaud POIGT

Pour une archéologie post-coloniale de l’économie

(spoiler alert : il ne s’agit pas de la colonisation à laquelle vous pensez)

Il y a des choses que l’on sait que l’on ne devrait pas faire et que l’on fait quand même. C’est bien ce qui se passe quand, pour décrire des conditions économiques anciennes, on utilise de façon impropre des termes issus de la vulgate contemporaine. Et c’est bien ce que je me disais lorsque, au cours des discussions qui suivaient un séminaire d’histoire et d’archéologie économique, j’utilisais pour ce qui me semblait être la centième fois (mais c’était sans doute un peu moins que ça) les termes d’« offre » et de « demande », agrémentés – en ces temps reculés d’interaction directe – d’air quote, ce signe que l’on fait avec les doigts et qui est censé représenter des guillemets, mais qui évoquent toujours chez moi la chorégraphie accompagnant une chanson de mon enfance parlant de lapins et de chasseurs. Je faisais ces petits signes des doigts pour montrer que j’étais conscient de l’inadéquation de ces termes à ce que je voulais vraiment dire, d’autant plus conscient qu’il s’agissait de défendre l’idée que certaines formes d’échange étaient extérieures aux processus de marché. Une sensation d’inconfort m’envahissait, qui n’était pas directement liée à ma gestuelle, mais plutôt aux mots que j’utilisais, dont j’étais obligé de contrebattre la charge sémantique par le biais de la communication non-verbale.

C’est mon collègue Christophe Pébarthe qui m’a permis de mettre des mots sur cette sensation. Encore plus tard, dans les discussions cette fois informelles qui suivent les discussions formelles qui suivent les séminaires, alors que je m’ouvrais à lui de ce sentiment d’inadéquation des concepts que nous utilisons aux situations que nous essayons de décrire, il me dit (en substance : à cette époque de communication pré-Zoom, Teams ou autres, on n’enregistrait pas tout) : « il faut sans doute se décoloniser l’esprit des concepts issus de l’analyse capitaliste ». Les termes qu’il utilisait décrivaient extrêmement bien la situation dans laquelle je me trouvais : confronté à un rapport de force idéologique, j’adoptais les codes de communication dominants, alors même que ceux-ci ne décrivaient pas tant la situation que j’analysais qu’ils en biaisaient les termes.

Ce petit moment de malaise intellectuel n’a été qu’une étape d’un combat maintenant plus que séculaire, d’une confrontation dialectique par laquelle les sciences humaines, en particulier l’histoire, essayait de se dégager des rets de l’économie classique pour bâtir un discours qui leur était propre, et qui permettait d’analyser les sociétés non-industrielles pour ce qu’elles étaient et non pas comme des versions primitives ou mal finies de la nôtre.

Autant le dire, ce combat n’est pas fini, et ne finira probablement jamais. C’est sans doute particulièrement vrai en archéologie des périodes postérieures au Néolithique pour lesquelles des analyses aussi remarquables pour leur finesse théorique que pour la richesse de leur base empirique, cohabitent avec une vulgate pleine de « marchés », de « concurrence », d’adéquation de « l’offre » à la « demande » (tiens tiens)… autant de termes qui ne sont pas forcément faux mais que l’on retrouve souvent utilisés comme s’ils tenaient de l’évidence, alors même que leur validité devrait être démontrée.

L’usage de cette vulgate peut se comprendre. Ian Hodder a bien montré qu’en archéologie, l’interprétation est une traduction. Si on veut être compris par son interlocuteur, il faut que cette traduction se fasse dans une langue qu’il comprenne. Mais une langue, ce n’est pas que des mots. C’est aussi, finalement, une ambiance : le contenu sémantique des mots évolue, se diversifie, parfois se raréfie, et l’essentiel des locuteurs de la langue ne retiennent d’une part que les mots qui leur sont le plus familier et d’autre part ne retiennent pour ces mots que le sens qui leur est le plus fréquemment associé. Analyser une structure sociale ancienne dans ce vocabulaire conventionnel peut donc conduire, si on n’y prend pas garde, non plus à la traduire, mais à la plier, la tordre, la casser pour la faire rentrer dans un cadre qui n’est pas le sien.

Se décoloniser l’esprit, c’est donc aussi déconstruire les concepts structurant nos idées, mais aussi déconstruire le vocabulaire. En finir avec cette version universitaire des air quote qui est la description préalable d’un terme pour en restreindre le sens à ce que l’on veut lui faire dire. Dans ce processus, le terme suivra inévitablement la trajectoire de la balle de flipper : il fera un parcours plus ou moins complexe, mais retombera toujours dans le trou central ; il finira toujours par être compris pour ce qu’il exprimait originellement.

À part à considérer que les universitaires devraient développer un métalangage différent de celui de la société qui les héberge – condamnant ainsi toute possibilité pour que nos recherches aient un impact sociétal (en bon universitaire, j’ai aussi des notions de novlangue) – cet enjeu est central. Pour ne prendre qu’un exemple, on peut définir à l’envie des catégories telles que monnaie primitive, pour dire qu’il ne s’agit en fait ni vraiment de monnaie telles qu’on les connait, ni qu’elles sont vraiment primitives. Et pour être honnête, en faisant cela, on essaie de ne pas faire table rase de quelques décennies de recherche. Mais à la fin, quand ce terme sera utilisé au-delà du cercle restreint des experts, il sera compris pour ce qu’il exprime : il désigne la monnaie d’un peuple primitif, aux pratiques d’échange rudimentaires par rapport aux nôtres. Il serait nettement plus efficace de définir le moyen de l’échange pour ce qu’il est vraiment : un étalon de valeur qui est mis en jeu dans des pratiques d’échange complexes, différentes des contemporaines : biens de référence pourrait être une proposition. De façon plus générale, il faudrait arrêter de prendre nos pratiques comme des points de référence, et d’accepter que ce qui est pré-quelque-chose, proto-quelque-chose ou péri-quelque-chose n’est pas cette chose, et n’a pas forcément de relation de cause à conséquence avec cette chose : la Préhistoire n’est pas la raison de l’Histoire. Si nos interprétations veulent rendre compte de la diversité de ce qu’est l’Humanité, de ses pratiques, il me semble crucial qu’elle évite d’exprimer la réalité comme une somme de variables de ce que nous sommes. Il est assez piquant de constater que mon petit être, issu d’une société urbaine, industrielle et monétarisée, travaillerait d’après la vulgate sur des sociétés proto-urbaines, préindustrielles et dotées de monnaies primitives. Ne sont-elles rien d’autre que cela ? Leur mode d’organisation sociale ne vaut-il que par leur proximité relative au modèle urbain ? Toute pratique d’échange doit elle être caractérisée en fonction de sa proximité au domaine monétaire ?

L’analyse archéologique doit à mon sens privilégier la description d’une réalité pour ce qu’elle est. Nos langues modernes ne manquent pas d’un vocabulaire permettant d’effectuer correctement cette traduction. C’est particulièrement vrai concernant le domaine économique. Il y a dans ce domaine une tendance puissante à présenter les mécanismes de l’économie contemporaine, et notamment les mécanismes de marché (dans leur version la plus simple) comme des processus qui s’imposeraient naturellement à l’homme. Comprendre la diversité de l’humanité, et l’expliquer, revient à secouer cette idée d’un déterminisme de l’activité humaine par des forces économiques de portée quasiment divine. Cela ne pourra pas se faire par le recyclage passif du vocabulaire dans lequel cette idée s’exprime.

Alexis GORGUES

What the hell is metrology?

Hypothetical restitution of an Iberian balance and its set of copper alloy weights, after POIGT 2021

What is metrology? The metrology represents one of the most important concept when dealing with trade, institutions and economics. Metrology can be defined as the science of measures, in other word, the ways humanity quantified his surrounded world. This need of quantification is not trivial.

Metrology can be understood as a language, the necessity to share a common ground for communicating information. It is composed by two main features: a metrological unit and a counting system (the same way language is composed by a vocabulary and grammatical rules).

The metrological units are arbitrary values to which one attributes the value one on an analogical scale in order to transform it to a numerical one. Historical and anthropological researches show that these units often derive from natural elements: body parts for length measures as the foot, seed for their mass as carat or grain, usual containers for volumes as the pint or the barrel, etc. Nevertheless, these units are first and foremost social consensus, cultural abstractions, and they consequently exist only in an certain sphere of acceptation.

The counting systems are closest to cognitive routines. If anyone understanding the arithmetical principles could theoretically count in any system (base 10, 20, 60 or others), it is truly extremely hard to do so. They represent cultural constructions of the mathematical knowledge and rules aimed to organize it. For this reason, even if most of us are mainly used to the decimal counting system, we still use binary system for digital applications and the sexagesimal system (basis 60) for expressing angles and time measures.

One of the most popular ideas is that metrological systems are first and foremost adopted in order to facilitate trade between foreign groups of people. From a certain point of view, it is true. We know many administrative and political actions aimed to unify metrological standards on larges scales to fulfilled this objective: the equivalences of the Hammurabi’s Code (18th c. BCE), the Solon laws (6th c. BCE) to define the ratio between minas and drachmas, Charlemagne attempt to define a common weighing standard (8th-9th c. AD), the Metric System wish to establish an universal metrological system (18th c. AD). We could even mention the claim to have a unique volumetric norm for the wine trading containers during the 19th c. in Europe. All these actions share the same will for metrological unity. All these attempts also failed to do so.

Why that? If sharing a common metrological system is so advantageous for trading, why so many political authorities have defined their unification a cornerstone of their agenda. In my opinion, it is probably because more than facilitate trade, the strong definition of measures units is a powerful administrative tool. It allows to objectively quantified the productions flows and stocks, the taxes and royalties to collect and to rationalise the redistributive processes. Adopting normative metrological systems can transform an analogical and approximative representation of the economy by a numerical and mathematical one.

Is that to say that the existence of metrological systems implies a strong administrated society? Clearly not. The most ancient metrological instruments of the continental Europe must be date to beginning of the Late Bronze Age (v. 13th c. BCE) at least. However, the humans groups who lived there probably had a very loose administrative structure until the end of the Iron Age (9th-1st c. BCE)  even if processes of taxes collects and redistributions could have exist. But we can observe that the societies developing a strong metrological practice, based on the production of many instruments and a daily use of them – as the ones from the Bronze Age Near-East or Aegean – are also the ones who produced evidences of a systemic administrative construction reinforced by the use of the written archives.

Metrologies are social consensus who exist only in a certain sphere of acceptation and their creation and use are the results of social, political and economical needs. They must not be perceived as a step in logical and evolutionist processes of progressive complexification of societies. At the opposite, they consist in the experimentations of social connexions proxies which can be adopted, adapted or rejected through time and space.

Thibaud Poigt

Differentiating things: the materiality of ancient economies-1.

First a short point of vocabulary: in this blog, the term “ancient” must be understood as referring to all coetaneous societies having developed through the 2nd and 1st millennium BCE in Europe, the Mediterranean or the Near East, regardless of their practice of writing.

Archaeology of ancient economies focuses on patterns, i.e. on repetitive behaviours, resulting in the replication of significant and meaningful aspects of the material record. As such, archaeological analyses has a predictable tendency to emphasize regularity in practices, rather than specific, local traits. Such widely spread and acknowledged practices can be referred to as “institutions”.

Institutions of trade have come, over the last decades, under thorough scrutiny by the archaeologists. Many hypothesis have been made around the possible use of money different in shape from the coins familiar to numismatics. The existence of large-scale weight-systems has long been hypothesized, and more recently demonstrated for different contexts. Metrology as a whole is a hot and enduring topic, especially regarding Near Eastern archaeology.

One significant trait allow for differentiating the different clusters which practices are submitted to our analysis into two different groups.

The first one would regroup policies where common rules, enforced by third-party arbitration, regulate trade. These rules are often explicitly formulated as laws. A common system of measurement –a standard metrology- allows for a swift process of evaluation by the protagonists of the transactions or by the authorities, often in relation with a tax-system. Retro-control, using official sets of weights or capacities, is possible in order to ensure the sincerity of the different protagonists. Complaints are submitted to authorities and processed by judges or courts. These formal institutions allow for anonymity in transactions. Trust proceeds from the capacity of the system to prevent or to punish fraud. In this blog, we will name this trust rooted on the existence of formal institution systemic trust.

The second group would regroup policies where commonly accepted social practices regulated trade. Social adequacy, a sense of honour or prestige, ensure for the sincerity of the protagonists. Social disapprobation and exclusion from trade networks may sanction insincerity. In that case, institutions of trade are informal and their legitimacy lays in shared practice. Trust lays in the reputation of the different protagonists: we will speak of interpersonal trust. Obviously, the substance of these two groups is rather theoretical. In reality, most trading systems were not that monolithic: interpersonal trust is often present even where formal institutions regulate trade, and metrology can exist even where written law is absent. Yet defining them as such allow for defining a range of possibilities, and archaeological analysis for defining the position of the different system observed between these two extremes.

Alexis GORGUES

Thinking economies during Covid-19 times

Since few weeks now, the world is facing a viral epidemic with various impacts on daily life and on our relationship with the surrounding and distant environments. The governments reacted differently with this situation, but one aspect seems to be now common to most of them: fixing the economic impact of the epidemic.

Working on times far far away, this preoccupation rises questions. The situation is portrayed as a one-way road where only a substantial increase in work and consumption can fix the problem.

Historians and archaeologists face a major issue when they try to rebuild ancient societies. They cannot completely break free from their own habits and social structures. From an economical point of view, the neo-liberal economy, which makes the Earth go round nowadays, is spreading to all levels of way of life: production, exchange and consumption of course, but also social structures, relationships between human beings, hierarchical constructions, etc.
Because of this heavy weight of neo-liberalism in our own societies, we tend to portray ancient societies with modern features. From one scholar to another, these aspects can change: an early use of money, a strong place of market in society, the ideas that values are acting as prices with a large and multilateral spread on material and immaterial goods, etc. Hidden behind all these proposals, there is, I think, the unbreakable idea that everything can be quantified, calculated, and monetised.

This state of research is at the origin of many debates about ancient economies and more particularly concerning the 1st millennium BCE which see the confrontation of populations coming from different regions of Mediterranean and Europe and animated by quite different goals.
But I think we see today another consequence of such a situation. As historians and archaeologists are so used to the neoliberal mechanisms, they injected during the last decades, willingly or not, capitalist and neoliberal aspects in the vision we have of ancient societies. And as everyone is now accepting that ancient societies have already adopted centuries ago such ways of life, it seems impossible to consider solutions to crisis that would not pass by an extreme financialization of the processes.

Thibaud Poigt

EXPERIENCING NETWORKS

26-30 August 2020 – BUDAPEST

Experiencing Networks

Practices of trade and value assessment through time and space

Session #336 of the 24th Annual Meeting of the European Association of Archaeologists

Organizers : Alexis Gorgues, Lene Melheim (Museum of Cultural History, Oslo) and Thibaud Poigt

Abstract

This session is a follow-up of sessions hosted by the same team at previous EAA conferences, which approached the many faces of values assessment (Maastricht 2017) and the reasons and consequences of value destruction in the ancient world (Barcelona 2018). Adding another level, this year’s session aims at exploring the materiality of the institutions surrounding all forms of exchange of goods. By institutions, we mean the various rules, whether formal or informal, enforced by law or based on common knowledge and practice, that allowed for transactions to happen. The term transaction itself encompasses a diversity of practices, ranging from competitive gift-exchange practices to the on-line shopping, but it has always at its core a notion of value assessment. The situation coinage allows for – optimal possibilities of measurement and comparison of value – is only the tip of the iceberg. Other dimensions of value measurement are to be found in the assessment of the volume or mass of a given product. But beyond these quantitative expressions, the values of a good can reside in its own biography : scarcity, crafting method involved in its making, changing of owner. As previous sessions showed, such value(s) can or cannot be measured, and can or cannot be commensurable. Often a shift from commodity to gift or vice versa occurs when objects move across cultural boundaries. This implies that gifts and commodities cannot be a priori separated, and also; that trade and gift exchange are intertwined and often coexistent. We would like to invite to this session any paper interested in exploring the diversity of value assessment and exchange practices and dealing about all archaeological periods and every part of Europe. All perspectives are welcome : archaeological or ethno-archaeological point of view, theoretical perspective or specific case-studies, and methodologies developed for exploring such topics.

Revamping value(s)

5-8 September 2018

Revamping value(s)

On the destruction of value during the Bronze and Iron Age in Europe and the Mediterranean

Session #687 of the 24th Annual Meeting of the European Association of Archaeologists

Organizers : Alexis Gorgues, Lene Melheim (Museum of Cultural History, Oslo) and Thibaud Poigt

Abstract

The Maastricht 2017 session “The Value of all Things” approached the many facets of value assessment in the Ancient World. At the EAA in Barcelona 2018, we would like to take this discussion a step further, and investigate the whys and hows of value destruction.
Indeed, one of the most noticeable archaeological phenomena in European and Mediterranean late prehistoric societies is the deliberate withdrawal of values from circulation: hoards that were never retrieved, depositions in wetlands, grave goods – sometimes ritually mutilated – and offerings made in sanctuaries. In other words, value – at least in its material form – was destroyed or alienated, as these artefacts could no longer be used, possessed, given away, exchanged or displayed.
Such behaviour can be explained in the context of power: performative artefact destruction, for instance, may be intended to emphasize the wealth and power of an individual; or a ritual offering may be aimed at obtaining the goodwill of the gods. We would like, however, in this session to consider an alternative approach, that artefact withdrawal, more than being a destruction of value, was a way of converting value: The conversion of a material value that could be measured, evaluated and negotiated, into a symbolic and incommensurable value.
We would like to invite papers based on specific case studies (whether at a local, regional or inter-regional scale) as well as more theoretical contributions, in order to encourage a comparative approach to the many seemingly contradictive aspects of the curation of valuables.

The Value of All Things

30 August – 3 September 2017

The Value of All Things.

Value expression and value assessment in the Ancient World (Europe, Near East and the Mediterranean)

Session #314 of the 23rd Annual Meeting of the European Association of Archaeologists

Organizers : Alexis Gorgues, Lene Melheim (Museum of Cultural History, Oslo) and Thibaud Poigt

Abstract

The idea that things have a value is probably almost universal. In contrast, as a social construction, value assessment may be very different from one place to another. Roughly, we can consider that the social “construction” of value can follow three different paths.
Firstly, value can be measured and expressed according to one or more standard units. Such behaviors are nowadays intensely investigated, mainly through the study of the various forms of money of through the materiality of measurement
Secondly, value may be related with the symbolic relevance of things: prestige transmitted through successive owners, provenience, uses… This dimension of value is mainly explored through the study of objects biography.
Thirdly, value may be linked with the labor related to the making of the object, with its quality. This labor value is indeed poorly investigated, but can be approached through technique studies, still fashionable nowadays.
Value is often assessed by taking more than one of these criteria into consideration, and actual scenarios are indeed numerous and complex. We would like to invite, in this session, contributions interested in dealing with the many faces of value and with value assessment practices in a long-term perspective, in Europe, Near East and Mediterranean, from Bronze to Iron Age, including the Classical world. Contributors may present papers or posters discussing one of the three aspects mentioned before, or cross-analysis taking into account different factors.

Norms, Standards, Routines : production and information during Late Prehistory in Europe and the Mediterranean

Search OpenEdition Search

You will be redirected to OpenEdition Search