Most of my publications are now listed on Research Gate.
My research focuses on the social mechanisms underlying the formation, adaptation and expansion of the early Neolithic cultural entities in Europe. My work relies on the characterization of ceramic production systems as identity markers: by reconstructing ceramic manufacturing sequences, I approach the early Neolithic pottery production in terms of technical traditions, transmission of know-how, and thus in terms of social ties.
By implementing an interdisciplinary approach combining whole technical system, economic and environmental data and a systematization of analytical protocols, I aim to contribute in the following aspects:
• Revealing learning networks, which mirror communities of practice;
• Identifying interactions between communities of practice;
• Analysing socio-economic structures and their transformation;
• Understanding the spatial and temporal trajectories of human groups.
Address: Maison de l'Archéologie et de l'Ethnologie
UMR8215 Trajectoires
21, allée de l'Université
92023 Nanterre Cedex
My research focuses on the social mechanisms underlying the formation, adaptation and expansion of the early Neolithic cultural entities in Europe. My work relies on the characterization of ceramic production systems as identity markers: by reconstructing ceramic manufacturing sequences, I approach the early Neolithic pottery production in terms of technical traditions, transmission of know-how, and thus in terms of social ties.
By implementing an interdisciplinary approach combining whole technical system, economic and environmental data and a systematization of analytical protocols, I aim to contribute in the following aspects:
• Revealing learning networks, which mirror communities of practice;
• Identifying interactions between communities of practice;
• Analysing socio-economic structures and their transformation;
• Understanding the spatial and temporal trajectories of human groups.
Address: Maison de l'Archéologie et de l'Ethnologie
UMR8215 Trajectoires
21, allée de l'Université
92023 Nanterre Cedex
less
InterestsView All (31)
Uploads
Books by Louise Gomart
Papers by Louise Gomart
The questions asked involve the issue of archaeological recognition of ceramic traditions and their interpretation in terms of social and cultural identity: does the morpho-dimensional unity of LBK ceramics go hand in hand with a uniformity in technical behaviours spanning the various stages of the operational sequence? How is ceramic production organised within settlements? How are the dif- ferent distribution networks organised? Do Linear Pottery vessels and Limburg vessels involve shared know-how? The identi cation of clay recipes and their correlation with various forming methods offers a complex vision of the ceramic production contexts. In fact, this approach allows us to understand the dynamics of persistence versus transformation of technical practices and also sheds light on knowledge exchanges between groups of producers.
The analyses carried out on both sites have not revealed a clear-cut relationship between clay recipes and pot-forming methods. The spatial and temporal variations identi ed suggest that within the same apprenticeship network, producers maintain their habitual practi- ces in terms of the forming of vessels, but may change or adjust their clay recipes depending on the production site or the type of vessel that they intend to produce. While actions associated with pot-building are stable over time, the stages of clay preparation appear to vary depending on the interactions between producers.
This investigation also offers new elements for understanding the social structure of the LBK communities. For the site of Cuiry-lès-Chau- dardes (Picardy, France), analysis of the spatial distribution of LBK technical traditions, de ned on the basis of forming processes relative to the distribution of temper types, suggests a domestic production carried out by several groups of producers with complex settlement dynamics throughout the occupational sequence. For the site of Rosmeer (Limburg, Belgium), data regarding the LBK and Limburg vessels do not allow analysis at a house scale. Nonetheless, cross-analysis of clay-mixes and forming processes has allowed us to identify mechanisms of stylistic imitation and technical transfer between a group of producers, whose production is spread out among the various houses in the village, and who were engaged in the manufacture of Linear Pottery-style ware, and a group of produ- cers who where essentially making Limburg vessels distributed within a particular sector of the village.
In the first model of the site’s development, five pottery style groups were distinguished on the basis of stylistic elements such as shape and decoration. These style groups show a spatial pattern within the settlement. Their major characteristics are easy to correlate with traditional typochronological units of the LBK in the western Carpathian Basin. Although chronological relevance can be attributed to the groups, certain typological and stylistic attributes had a long duration and appear in different style groups.
For the purposes of this study, eight houses and their associated features were selected. The ceramics from these features are characteristic of each style group. The aim was to examine the technology of ceramics, in particular choices in raw materials and intentionally added tempers, as well as building techniques.
During a previous analysis of ceramics from the settlement, 461 sherds were chosen for macroscopic analysis, from which 131 samples were selected for further petrographic thin section analysis. Of these samples, 99 come from the eight houses and pits examined in this study. These features produced a total of 9,161 sherds. As part of the analysis of vessel building techniques, all the available material
from the examined houses was assessed, out of which 109 vessels could be attributed to a forming method.
Ceramic petrographic results show that there is a clear change in ceramic technology at household level. The earliest houses of the site show little variability in choices of raw materials and tempers, while houses of Style groups 2–5 show increased choice in raw materials and purposefully added tempers. As far as vessel fashioning is concerned, an opposite trend can be observed. Style group 1 ceramics show considerable variety in technical practices, with at least three forming methods, while ceramics in Style groups 2–3 and 5 are characterized by only one or two forming methods. Thus it seems that variability in building methods slightly decreased towards the end of the settlement.
Ceramic technological changes could be identified on a household level, providing an insight into settlement dynamics. These patterns in the use of raw materials/tempers and building methods may be related to the fact that producers came from different learning networks and had different conceptions of how to build a culturally appropriate vessel. The strength of analysing ceramic technologies on a household level is that we are able to model where ceramic technological changes first appeared within a given settlement and we can assess the nature of these changes. In turn, these patterns can be correlated with typochronology and the analysis of other types of material culture from the part of the site where the changes appeared. In this way we can improve our understanding of settlement dynamics and social changes.
The questions asked involve the issue of archaeological recognition of ceramic traditions and their interpretation in terms of social and cultural identity: does the morpho-dimensional unity of LBK ceramics go hand in hand with a uniformity in technical behaviours spanning the various stages of the operational sequence? How is ceramic production organised within settlements? How are the dif- ferent distribution networks organised? Do Linear Pottery vessels and Limburg vessels involve shared know-how? The identi cation of clay recipes and their correlation with various forming methods offers a complex vision of the ceramic production contexts. In fact, this approach allows us to understand the dynamics of persistence versus transformation of technical practices and also sheds light on knowledge exchanges between groups of producers.
The analyses carried out on both sites have not revealed a clear-cut relationship between clay recipes and pot-forming methods. The spatial and temporal variations identi ed suggest that within the same apprenticeship network, producers maintain their habitual practi- ces in terms of the forming of vessels, but may change or adjust their clay recipes depending on the production site or the type of vessel that they intend to produce. While actions associated with pot-building are stable over time, the stages of clay preparation appear to vary depending on the interactions between producers.
This investigation also offers new elements for understanding the social structure of the LBK communities. For the site of Cuiry-lès-Chau- dardes (Picardy, France), analysis of the spatial distribution of LBK technical traditions, de ned on the basis of forming processes relative to the distribution of temper types, suggests a domestic production carried out by several groups of producers with complex settlement dynamics throughout the occupational sequence. For the site of Rosmeer (Limburg, Belgium), data regarding the LBK and Limburg vessels do not allow analysis at a house scale. Nonetheless, cross-analysis of clay-mixes and forming processes has allowed us to identify mechanisms of stylistic imitation and technical transfer between a group of producers, whose production is spread out among the various houses in the village, and who were engaged in the manufacture of Linear Pottery-style ware, and a group of produ- cers who where essentially making Limburg vessels distributed within a particular sector of the village.
In the first model of the site’s development, five pottery style groups were distinguished on the basis of stylistic elements such as shape and decoration. These style groups show a spatial pattern within the settlement. Their major characteristics are easy to correlate with traditional typochronological units of the LBK in the western Carpathian Basin. Although chronological relevance can be attributed to the groups, certain typological and stylistic attributes had a long duration and appear in different style groups.
For the purposes of this study, eight houses and their associated features were selected. The ceramics from these features are characteristic of each style group. The aim was to examine the technology of ceramics, in particular choices in raw materials and intentionally added tempers, as well as building techniques.
During a previous analysis of ceramics from the settlement, 461 sherds were chosen for macroscopic analysis, from which 131 samples were selected for further petrographic thin section analysis. Of these samples, 99 come from the eight houses and pits examined in this study. These features produced a total of 9,161 sherds. As part of the analysis of vessel building techniques, all the available material
from the examined houses was assessed, out of which 109 vessels could be attributed to a forming method.
Ceramic petrographic results show that there is a clear change in ceramic technology at household level. The earliest houses of the site show little variability in choices of raw materials and tempers, while houses of Style groups 2–5 show increased choice in raw materials and purposefully added tempers. As far as vessel fashioning is concerned, an opposite trend can be observed. Style group 1 ceramics show considerable variety in technical practices, with at least three forming methods, while ceramics in Style groups 2–3 and 5 are characterized by only one or two forming methods. Thus it seems that variability in building methods slightly decreased towards the end of the settlement.
Ceramic technological changes could be identified on a household level, providing an insight into settlement dynamics. These patterns in the use of raw materials/tempers and building methods may be related to the fact that producers came from different learning networks and had different conceptions of how to build a culturally appropriate vessel. The strength of analysing ceramic technologies on a household level is that we are able to model where ceramic technological changes first appeared within a given settlement and we can assess the nature of these changes. In turn, these patterns can be correlated with typochronology and the analysis of other types of material culture from the part of the site where the changes appeared. In this way we can improve our understanding of settlement dynamics and social changes.
Presentations will be streamed following this link: https://zoom.univ-paris1.fr/j/96335607819?pwd=OUVreDBsK3RHdDNjVTBqZ0JJQjZ1dz09