Nadja Melko
University of Zurich, Switzerland, Archaeologisches Institut, Graduate Student
- Prehistoric Archaeology, Classical Archaeology, Greek Archaeology, Ancient Greek Religion, Minoan Archaeology, Pottery (Archaeology), and 22 moreGreek Myth, Ceramic Technology, Pottery technology and function, Netzwerktheorie, Raumforschung, Netzwerkforschung, Archäologie der römischen Provinzen, Auswirkungen Von Netzwerken Auf Transaktionskosten, Sozialraumorientierung, Frauen und Göttinnen, Ancient Greek History, Aegean Archaeology, Social Archaeology, Material Culture Studies, Archaeology, Ancient History, Classics, Archaeological Method & Theory, Ancient Greek Iconography, Materiality (Anthropology), Ethnoarchaeology, and Roman Provincial Archaeologyedit
Research Interests: African Studies, Archaeology, Prehistoric Archaeology, Ethnography, Pottery (Archaeology), and 18 moreMobility/Mobilities, Material Culture Studies, Social and Cultural Anthropology, Cultural Theory, Archaeological Method & Theory, West Africa, Culture, Agency Theory, Neolithic Archaeology, Action Theory, Roman Pottery, Social Practice, Wetland Archaeology, Pottery technology and function, Pottery studies, Theorien in der Archäologie, Material Turn, and Roman Archaeology
Different pots - different province? The difficulty of identifying frontiers through material culture, in: P. Della Casa - E. Deschler-Erb (Hrsg.), Rome`s Internal Frontiers, Proceedings of the 2016 RAC session in Rome, Zurich Studies in... more
Different pots - different province? The difficulty of identifying frontiers through material culture, in: P. Della Casa - E. Deschler-Erb (Hrsg.), Rome`s Internal Frontiers, Proceedings of the 2016 RAC session in Rome, Zurich Studies in Archaeology 11 (Zurich 2016), 79-90.
Abstract:
Based on the ceramic material of the Roman Vicus of Kempraten (Rapperswil/Jona, CH), which is located close to the provincial border to Raetia, this article asks about a theory of frontiers explaining the almost invisible differences between the material culture of Germania Superior and Raetia. The following mapping of two vessel types regarding technological characteristics points to hidden patterns in distribution.
Abstract:
Based on the ceramic material of the Roman Vicus of Kempraten (Rapperswil/Jona, CH), which is located close to the provincial border to Raetia, this article asks about a theory of frontiers explaining the almost invisible differences between the material culture of Germania Superior and Raetia. The following mapping of two vessel types regarding technological characteristics points to hidden patterns in distribution.
Research Interests:
This article engages in the distribution of superordinate ideas of forms of common pottery ware. Therefore, pottery fragments from an archaeological context are judged as a mirror for past people’s value systems in crafts, which... more
This article engages in the distribution of superordinate ideas of forms of common pottery
ware. Therefore, pottery fragments from an archaeological context are judged as
a mirror for past people’s value systems in crafts, which influenced the body technique
of the producing potter via apprenticeship and acquisition. In return, the transformation
of body memory from apprentice to professional is reflected in the produced object.
When it is possible to identify value systems, superordinate shapes, individual hands of
a single potter, his / her skill-level or a workshop style, we will be able to generate distribution
patterns of culturally characterised ideas of forms on the basis of a more profound
data set. This would allow us to approach certain phenomena of mobility in a
second step: not the ´mobility of pots´, but the mobility of superordinate ideas of shapes.
For this, however, it is necessary to communicate intensely with representatives of
pottery craft in terms of ethnoarchaeology, with the aim of gaining a deepened understanding
of the acquisition processes of craftspeople in their environment. Roman
wheel-thrown pottery from the vicus Kempraten, Rapperswil / Iona (Canton of Saint-
Gall, CH) will be used as an archaeological example to elaborate.
ware. Therefore, pottery fragments from an archaeological context are judged as
a mirror for past people’s value systems in crafts, which influenced the body technique
of the producing potter via apprenticeship and acquisition. In return, the transformation
of body memory from apprentice to professional is reflected in the produced object.
When it is possible to identify value systems, superordinate shapes, individual hands of
a single potter, his / her skill-level or a workshop style, we will be able to generate distribution
patterns of culturally characterised ideas of forms on the basis of a more profound
data set. This would allow us to approach certain phenomena of mobility in a
second step: not the ´mobility of pots´, but the mobility of superordinate ideas of shapes.
For this, however, it is necessary to communicate intensely with representatives of
pottery craft in terms of ethnoarchaeology, with the aim of gaining a deepened understanding
of the acquisition processes of craftspeople in their environment. Roman
wheel-thrown pottery from the vicus Kempraten, Rapperswil / Iona (Canton of Saint-
Gall, CH) will be used as an archaeological example to elaborate.
Research Interests:
This poster was presented at the EAA Conference 2015 in Glasgow. As part of my doctoral thesis it descibes the perspective of the producer and some of my experiments in a modern school for pottery apprentices. Fascinated of the theories... more
This poster was presented at the EAA Conference 2015 in Glasgow.
As part of my doctoral thesis it descibes the perspective of the producer and some of my experiments in a modern school for pottery apprentices. Fascinated of the theories about embodied knowledge or knowledge transfer, I try to recognise traces of this knowledge in an object and to differentiate intentional marks and processual marks in ancient sherds.
As part of my doctoral thesis it descibes the perspective of the producer and some of my experiments in a modern school for pottery apprentices. Fascinated of the theories about embodied knowledge or knowledge transfer, I try to recognise traces of this knowledge in an object and to differentiate intentional marks and processual marks in ancient sherds.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Content: The interplay between archaeology, (neuro-)anthropology, ethnology and sociology brought new approaches into focus as for instance what we call the field of implicit knowledge, embodiment of knowledge or what has been more... more
Content: The interplay between archaeology, (neuro-)anthropology, ethnology and sociology brought new approaches into focus as for instance what we call the field of implicit knowledge, embodiment of knowledge or what has been more recently discussed as extended mind. As a consequence archaeological objects were given two new levels of consideration: One the one hand things could show us an ongoing or completed process of appropriation of materials and tools by a craftsperson, who acts within a knowledge system. On the other hand things reflect the practices of the consumers and thus also the habitualized activities guided by their body knowledge. Therefore our sensual experience with things as a source for relevant information revealed itself. This session seeks not only to discuss the theoretical background but most of all tries to take the next necessary step-the application in the archaeological routine. Our interpretations of objects are usually (and understandably) generated from drawings, photographs and description but the information pool of the sensory dimension is still neglected. A focused discussion on the process of acquisition in crafts or on the daily usage of things could open another level of consideration, which will enrich our previous interpretations. An intensive exchange with craftspeople helps to understand how things are made within a system of values and well directed experiments may replace the selective use of existing ethnological studies. Will we recognise which marks of an object are culturally bound and which are an effect of a law of nature expressed during the process of making? Contributions presenting the cooperation with craftspeople/schools of craft are welcome. Process-based or experimentally/ethnoarchaeologically supported methods and their application to archaeological material will be discussed with their advantages or disadvantages. Also welcome are contributions regarding chances and challenges within the interdisciplinary exchange between the different mentioned sciences and crafts.
Research Interests:
Ziel der Veranstaltung (9. - 23. August 2015) ist es, Bildhauerei und Archäologie in größerer Gruppe zusammentreffen zu lassen. Zwei Blickwinkel sollen dabei voneinander profitieren: Während Archäologen mit zeitlicher Distanz das... more
Ziel der Veranstaltung (9. - 23. August 2015) ist es, Bildhauerei und Archäologie in größerer Gruppe zusammentreffen zu lassen.
Zwei Blickwinkel sollen dabei voneinander profitieren: Während Archäologen mit zeitlicher Distanz das fertige Objekt im Fokus haben, nehmen Künstler direkte Einflussnahme auf den Entstehungsprozess. Als verbindendes Element steht die Erschaffung eines Zeitgeistes. Künstler verbildlichen ihn als ihre persönliche Gegenwart, Archäologen beschreiben ihn retrospektiv und interpretativ. Die Verantwortung gegenüber der Gültigkeit dieses starken Bildes teilen sich beide Gruppen.
Wir bieten 27 eingeladenen Personen ein Forum, sich bei der Arbeit am Material (Laaser Marmor, Basaltlava, Pappel, Esche, Ton, Raku und Bronze) auszutauschen und bestimmten Forschungsfragen zu Werkspuren, Wissensverkörperung im Handwerk, Enstehung von Werksplätzen, etc. nachzugehen.
Zwei Blickwinkel sollen dabei voneinander profitieren: Während Archäologen mit zeitlicher Distanz das fertige Objekt im Fokus haben, nehmen Künstler direkte Einflussnahme auf den Entstehungsprozess. Als verbindendes Element steht die Erschaffung eines Zeitgeistes. Künstler verbildlichen ihn als ihre persönliche Gegenwart, Archäologen beschreiben ihn retrospektiv und interpretativ. Die Verantwortung gegenüber der Gültigkeit dieses starken Bildes teilen sich beide Gruppen.
Wir bieten 27 eingeladenen Personen ein Forum, sich bei der Arbeit am Material (Laaser Marmor, Basaltlava, Pappel, Esche, Ton, Raku und Bronze) auszutauschen und bestimmten Forschungsfragen zu Werkspuren, Wissensverkörperung im Handwerk, Enstehung von Werksplätzen, etc. nachzugehen.