2. Formal Analysis
The formal description of Roman pottery revolves around three methods:
references to widely used numbered type-series such as those constructed
by Dragendorff and others for samian ware and Dressel for amphorae, the
application of evocative terms such as ‘poppyhead beaker’ or ‘pie-dish’
that allude to a physical resemblance to an object or an induced function,
and description of the individual features of the rim, body, and other
attributes. The first and second methods are unsatisfactory, for the
former may imply a
|
|
similarity to a samian (for example) form which is fortuitous rather than
the result of copying, while the latter is subject to the corruption of the
terminology so that the terms mean different things to different people. The
third method can also suffer from such corruption, but is perhaps less prone
to it, the terms used being more specific. It is perhaps unfortunate that
the evocative terminology of the second method is firmly entrenched in the
archaeological literature, but the use of illustrations to clarify the terms
overcomes the major shortcoming of corruption.
|