The Identity of Potters in Early States: Determining the Age and Sex of Fingerprints on Early Bronze Age Pottery from Tell eṣ-Ṣâfi/Gath, Israel

Fingerprint evidence for the division of labour and learning pottery-making at Early Bronze Age Tell eṣ-Ṣâfi/Gath, Israel

“…Fingerprints occur on both the exterior and interior surfaces of all closed vessel forms (holemouth, jar, wavy handled jar, jug, and juglet), and only on the interior of the open bowl (Table 1). Each print was classified by one of three ways that fingers were applied on vessels [3]: (1) surface prints result from fingers being applied directly to the surface of the vessel; (2) relief prints result from a dab of clay or plaster impressed on the surface with a clear impression of the print; and (3) linear prints are when print extends across the vessel surface, implying a wiping gesture involving a finger or thumb edge along the surface resulting in a partial "extended" print that has the same ridge and valley breadth and ridge density patterns as surface or relief prints. All three categories of prints are distinctively different from patterns left by implements, such as cloth, reeds or hard tools, used to finish vessel surfaces.…”

“…Applying these methods to a small sample of high-quality prints on EB III pottery at Tell eṡ-Ṡâfi/Gath, we concluded that "pottery production was not restricted to one gender during the EB III and production was organized with adolescent cooperative labour" [3]. Evidence for the inclusion of children in the manufacturing process was inconclusive.…”

“…Our recent study [3] reviewed methods of age determination and sex determination by forensic researchers and archaeologists to examine fingerprints on sherds from Early Bronze (EB) III (c. 2850-2500 BCE) levels in the urban neighbourhood at Tell eṡ-Ṡâfi/Gath in Israel. For age determination, we explored the further potential of Králík and Novotný's data set [4].…”

“…phalanxes on the interior and exterior of vessel surfaces at the plastic or leather-hard stages of drying, or on plaster during the post-firing treatment of vessels [3]. In the present analysis, we examine 115 partial fingerprints from 47 distinct vessels (Table 1).…”

“…It is not known if prints are actually rare on ceramics [2]. The preservation of prints likely results from a complex mix of factors: the use of surface finishing or decorative treatments, how objects were handled during manufacture, whether potters noticed or cared whether prints were on vessels, how objects were used, and a range of post-depositional conditions [3]. During manufacture, prints can be obliterated by wiping, smoothing, burnishing, polishing, painting, plastering or glazing wares, and are easily wiped off before an object has dried.…”