Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Tables
- Figures
- Maps
- Acknowledgments
- Introduction
- 1 A Model of the Life Cycle of Roman Pottery
- 2 Background Considerations
- 3 Manufacture and Distribution
- 4 Prime Use
- 5 The Reuse of Amphorae as Packaging Containers
- 6 The Reuse of Amphorae for Purposes Other than as Packaging Containers
- 7 The Reuse of the Other Functional Categories of Pottery
- 8 Maintenance
- 9 Recycling
- 10 Discard and Reclamation
- 11 Modeling the Formation of the Roman Pottery Record
- Appendix: Amphora Classes Referred to in the Text
- Maps
- Endnotes
- Bibliography
- Index of Ancient Texts Cited
- General Index
7 - The Reuse of the Other Functional Categories of Pottery
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 06 August 2009
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Tables
- Figures
- Maps
- Acknowledgments
- Introduction
- 1 A Model of the Life Cycle of Roman Pottery
- 2 Background Considerations
- 3 Manufacture and Distribution
- 4 Prime Use
- 5 The Reuse of Amphorae as Packaging Containers
- 6 The Reuse of Amphorae for Purposes Other than as Packaging Containers
- 7 The Reuse of the Other Functional Categories of Pottery
- 8 Maintenance
- 9 Recycling
- 10 Discard and Reclamation
- 11 Modeling the Formation of the Roman Pottery Record
- Appendix: Amphora Classes Referred to in the Text
- Maps
- Endnotes
- Bibliography
- Index of Ancient Texts Cited
- General Index
Summary
This chapter considers the evidence for the reuse of the functional categories of Roman pottery other than amphorae, including dolia, cookwares, utilitarian wares, and tablewares. Because these functional categories were not manufactured with the idea that they would serve their prime-use applications for a limited number of episodes, the category of Type A Reuse is not relevant to the consideration of their reuse. All of the reuse applications for which they were employed can thus be classified as Type B or Type C applications, that is, reuse involving an application different from the vessel's prime-use application without any physical modification, and reuse involving an application different from the vessel's prime-use application involving physical modification, respectively.
The evidence for the reuse of vessels belonging to these functional categories is far less abundant than that for the reuse of amphorae, and it is clear that they played a substantially less significant role in the reuse of Roman pottery than did amphorae. The reasons for this are fairly clear. First, with the exception of dolia, the vessels belonging to these functional categories were substantially smaller than even the smallest amphorae, and for this reason could not be employed for many of the reuse applications for which amphorae were regularly utilized. Second, many of the vessels belonging to these functional categories remained in use for their prime-use applications for several years and were generally retired from prime use in small quantities and at irregular intervals.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Roman Pottery in the Archaeological Record , pp. 193 - 208Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2007