Abstract
Pyrotechnology for the prehistoric pottery has been an important subject for the study of ancient production technology and technological styles. However, heterogeneous characteristics in chemical and mineralogical compositions and massive amounts of ceramic sherds at most archaeological sites make it difficult to identify production technologies. In this study, SEM-EDS/WDS, XRD and transmittance and reflectance FT-IR techniques were employed step by step, in order to overcome these limitations. The serial combination of each method covers a macro-, meso- and micro-scale and it enabled us to identify the relationship between firing temperature, reducing or oxidizing atmosphere and thermally induced mobility of Ca and Fe. Numerous ceramic pottery sherds from two archaeological sites in the North Caucasus, Ransyrt 1 (Middle-Late Bronze Age) and Kabardinka 2 (Late Bronze/Early Iron Age) were investigated and compared to the ceramics found at Levinsadovka and Saf’janovo around the Sea of Azov, Russia (Late/Final Bronze Age) for this purpose. Morphological changes by sintering and transformation of indicator minerals such as calcite, hematite, spinel, gehlenite, quartz and cis/trans-vacant 1M illite provide temperature thresholds at 675, 700, 750, 950, 1050, 1100, 1300 °C. With the laboratory based FT-IR, vibrational changes in shape, wavenumber and intensity corresponding to Si-O stretching bands yield an order and classification of the ceramics with regard to firing conditions between the samples as well as the unraveling of temperature profiles within a single sample in a 100 µm scale. With this approach, the number of archaeological ceramics could be classified according to the pyrometamorphic transformation of heterogeneous ceramic composite materials. Combined with the archaeological contexts of each site, these results will contribute to the reconstruction of local technological styles.
Highlights
Pyrotechnology in the prehistoric society has been an important topic in the archaeological ceramic studies
It is expected that firing temperature ranges and atmospheric conditions of heterogeneous archaeological ceramics can be identified for the reconstruction of local technological styles in the daily ware production
According to the local chronology defined by the construction phases and 14C data, Ransyrt 1 is dated to 1800–1500 BC, the Middle Bronze Age (MBA) to the Late Bronze Age (LBA) and Kabardinka 2 to 1600–800 BC, which belong to the LBA and Early Iron Age (EIA)[5]
Summary
Pyrotechnology in the prehistoric society has been an important topic in the archaeological ceramic studies. Average firing conditions estimated from macro-scale observations as well as more precise pyrometamorphic state within a sample from a meso-/micro-scale can be compared to each other, so that the more precise categorization and interpretation are possible In this study, this serial combination of the various methods and measurement scales will be employed for the daily ware ceramics excavated in the high plateaus of the North Caucasus in the Bronze Age and the Iron Age. It is expected that firing temperature ranges and atmospheric conditions of heterogeneous archaeological ceramics can be identified for the reconstruction of local technological styles in the daily ware production. Soil development of Kabardinka 2 is more progressed than Ransyrt 1 These mountain ceramics were compared to the other archaeological ceramics from Levinsadovka (47°10′9.9′′N, 38°30.17′′E) and Saf ’janovo (47°15′59.7′′N, 39°26′30.1′′E), located on the coast of Mius peninsular and on the lower area of the Don river. Corresponding to the radio carbon data, the both cultures were overlapping between 1600–800 BC
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
