Assyrian palace ware definition and chaîne opératoire: Preliminary results from Nineveh, Nimrud, and Aššur

Assyrian palace ware definition and chaîne opératoire: Preliminary results from Nineveh, Nimrud, and Aššur Alice M.W. Hunt Center for Applied Isotope Studies, University of Georgia, ahunt@uga.edu Abstract - Palace ware, an 8 th 7 th century BC drabware, is used as an indicator of Neo-Assyrian imperial elite contact and occupation, despite the lack of an established definition. Definitional criteria must incorporate formal characteristics, such as shape, and manufacture behaviours, such as raw material processing, in order to facilitate the distinction between imported or Assyrian produced vessels and imitations from the imperial provinces. This paper presents eleven preliminary definitional criteria for palace ware based on petrographic analysis and scanning electron microscopy of 24 sherds, radiography of 9 vessels, and typological analysis of 75 vessels from the Neo-Assyrian imperial heartland: Aššur, Nineveh, and Nimrud. 1. Introduction Palace ware, a late 8 th 7 th century BC drabware, was first identified as a ware by Rawson (1954) during Mallowan's excavation of Nimrud, and has since become synonymous with the Neo-Assyrian empire and elite (cf. Ohtsu 1991; Hausleiter 2008). Archaeologists working in peripheral regions of the Neo-Assyrian Empire consider the presence of Assyrian palace ware (APW) evidence of Assyrian contact and occupation (cf. Engstrom 2004; Na'aman & Thareani-Sussely 2006; Singer-Avitz 2007). Despite its importance, APW has not been comprehensively studied or defined since Rawson's research. This paper provides preliminary definitional criteria for APW as a ware from the Assyrian imperial heartland, Aššur, Nineveh, and Nimrud, facilitating a better understanding of palace ware and Neo-Assyrian ceramic technology in general, and providing concrete tools for assessing whether APW from the imperial provinces is imported, produced locally by an Assyrian trained potter, or an imitation of APW forms using local technology. Every technological choice of the potter is imprinted on the completed vessel. Therefore, when defining a ware, it is important to understand the sequence of behaviours which created it, in addition to formal characteristics, such as shape and decoration. Rawson (1954) published a series of technical observations based on macroscopic examination, summarised as follows: sloppy, wheel-made pottery, probably thrown in one piece from the hump. This paper uses archaeometry to refine these observations and define central polity palace ware typologically and technologically. Petrological and radiographic methods are used to determine the chaîne opératoire of palace ware, from raw material acquisition and processing through firing and decoration. Metric and formal analyses establish the range of APW forms and shapes in the Neo-Assyrian heartland and provide a quantitative typology. 2. Materials and methods The entire assemblage of complete and repaired palace ware vessels from Aššur, Nineveh, and Nimrud/Kal hu housed in the Vorderasiatisches and British Museums, and UCL Institute of Archaeology collections were analysed (Table 1). Aššur APW, excavated by the Deutsche Morgenländische Gesellschaft (DMG) between 1903 and 1913 (cf. Andrae 1909), comes from elite burials dated to the late 8 th 7 th centuries BC (Haller 1954). Contextual information for Nineveh APW housed in the British Museum and UCL Institute of Archaeology is not available. Nimrud APW, excavated by Mallowan between 1949 and 1957, housed in the British Museum and UCL Institute of Archaeology, comes from palatial and administrative contexts dated to the 8 th 7 th centuries BC: specifically the NW Palace, Nabu temple, Governor's Palace, 49 Palace, and Fort Shalmaneser (Mallowan 1966). The typological analysis of all complete palace ware vessels from Aššur, Nineveh, and Nimrud is based on the following attributes: rim type and diameter; neck/collar length and diameter; shoulder angle and diameter; minimum and maximum diameter; capacity, measured as the sum of successive truncated conic sections or frustums; body height; base type and diameter; wall thickness; Cite this article as: Hunt AMW (2014). Assyrian palace ware definition and chaîne opératoire: Preliminary results from Nineveh, Nimrud, and Aššur. In M Martinón-Torres (Ed.), Craft and science: International perspectives on archaeological ceramics. Doha, Qatar: Bloomsbury Qatar Foundation http://dx.doi.org/10.5339/uclq.2014.cas.ch15 UCL Qatar Series in Archaeology and Cultural Heritage

Hunt Table 1. Table of palace ware analysed from Aššur, Nimrud, and Nineveh. Excavation Museum Reg. No Typology Ref. No. Object location Form Scientific analyses Aššur VA Ass.505 AA Vorderasiatisches Museum jar Aššur VA Ass.176 AB Vorderasiatisches Museum cup Aššur VA Ass.2 AC Vorderasiatisches Museum jar Aššur VA Ass.435 AD Vorderasiatisches Museum jar Aššur VA Ass.379 AE Vorderasiatisches Museum jar Aššur VA Ass.143 AF Vorderasiatisches Museum cup Aššur VA Ass.163 AG Vorderasiatisches Museum jar Aššur VA Ass.126 AH Vorderasiatisches Museum jar Aššur VA Ass.561 AI Vorderasiatisches Museum jar Aššur VA Ass.174 AJ Vorderasiatisches Museum jar Aššur VA Ass.166 AK Vorderasiatisches Museum jar Aššur VA Ass.171 AL Vorderasiatisches Museum cup Aššur VA Ass.542 AM Vorderasiatisches Museum cup Aššur VA Ass.169 AN Vorderasiatisches Museum jar Aššur VA Ass.433 AO Vorderasiatisches Museum jar Aššur VA Ass.840 AP Vorderasiatisches Museum bowl Aššur VA Ass.1424 AQ Vorderasiatisches Museum bowl Aššur VA Ass.849 AR Vorderasiatisches Museum bowl Aššur VA Ass.1585 AS Vorderasiatisches Museum bowl Aššur VA Ass.1481 AT Vorderasiatisches Museum bowl Aššur VA Ass.1397 AU Vorderasiatisches Museum NA Aššur VA Ass.848 AV Vorderasiatisches Museum bowl Aššur VA 842 AW Vorderasiatisches Museum bowl Aššur VA Ass.1483 AX Vorderasiatisches Museum bowl Nimrud 1992-3-2-66 KA British Museum bowl Nimrud 1992-3-2-64 KB British Museum bowl Nimrud 1992-3-2-62 KC British Museum bowl Nimrud 1992-3-2-239 KD British Museum bowl Nimrud 1992-3-2-237 KE British Museum bowl Nimrud 1994-11-5-148 KF British Museum bowl Nimrud 1992-3-2-238 KG British Museum bowl Nimrud 1992-3-2-143 KH British Museum cup Nimrud 1992-3-2-186 KI British Museum N/A Nimrud 1932-12-12-37 KJ British Museum cup (Continued) Craft and science: International perspectives on archaeological ceramics 136

Assyrian palace ware definition and Chaîne Opératoire: Preliminary results from Nineveh, Nimrud, and Aššur Table 1. -continued Excavation Museum Reg. No Typology Ref. No. Object location Form Scientific analyses Nimrud 1992-3-2-187 KK British Museum cup Nimrud 1992-3-2-191 KL British Museum cup Nimrud 1992-3-2-192 KM British Museum cup Nimrud 1992-3-2-190 KN British Museum cup Nimrud 1992-3-2-524 KO British Museum cup Nimrud 1992-3-2-182 KP British Museum cup Nimrud 1992-3-2-184 KQ British Museum cup Nimrud 1992-3-2-525 KR British Museum cup Nimrud 1992-3-2-188 KS British Museum cup Nimrud 1992-3-2-526 KT British Museum cup Nimrud 1992-3-2-477 KU British Museum cup Nimrud 1992-3-2-522a KV British Museum cup Nimrud 1992-3-2-522b KW British Museum cup Nimrud 1992-3-2-484 KX British Museum cup Nimrud 1992-3-2-494 rim KY British Museum N/A Nimrud 1992-3-2-494base KZ British Museum bowl Nimrud 1992-3-2-522.1 British Museum N/A X Nimrud 1992-3-2-522.2 British Museum N/A X Nimrud 1992-3-2-522.3 British Museum N/A X Nimrud 1992-3-2-522.4 British Museum N/A X Nimrud 1992-3-2-522.5 British Museum N/A X Nimrud 1992-3-2-522.6 British Museum N/A X Nimrud 1992-3-2-522.7 British Museum N/A X Nimrud 1992-3-2-522.8 British Museum N/A X Nimrud 1992-3-2-522.9 British Museum N/A X Nimrud 1992-3-2-522.10 British Museum N/A X Nimrud 1992-3-2-522.11 British Museum N/A X Nimrud 1992-3-2-522.12 British Museum N/A X Nineveh 1932-1212-859 NA British Museum jar Nineveh 1992-3-2-188 NB British Museum cup Nineveh 1932-12-12-37 NC British Museum cup Nineveh 1992-3-2-143 ND British Museum cup Nineveh 1992-3-2-182 NE British Museum cup (Continued) 137 Ed. Marcos Martinón-Torres

Hunt Table 1. -continued Excavation Museum Reg. No Typology Ref. No. Object location Form Scientific analyses Nineveh G 1441 NF UCL Institute of Archaeology cup Nineveh ND 883 NG UCL Institute of Archaeology bowl Nineveh ND 1312 NH UCL Institute of Archaeology cup Nineveh ND 3066 NI UCL Institute of Archaeology cup Nineveh ND 6662 NJ UCL Institute of Archaeology cup Nineveh 3/1030-122 UC Berkeley Excavation N/A X Nineveh 3/1316-22 UC Berkeley Excavation N/A X Nineveh 1058 UC Berkeley Excavation N/A X Nineveh 3/1307-15 UC Berkeley Excavation N/A X Nineveh 1129 UC Berkeley Excavation N/A X Nineveh 3/1278-17 UC Berkeley Excavation N/A X Nineveh 1129(2) UC Berkeley Excavation N/A X Nineveh 3/1390-50 UC Berkeley Excavation N/A X Nineveh 3/1031-65 UC Berkeley Excavation N/A X Nineveh 3/1059-2 UC Berkeley Excavation N/A X Nineveh 3/1065-3 UC Berkeley Excavation N/A X Nineveh 1219 UC Berkeley Excavation N/A X weight-height ratio (complete vessels only); interior and exterior fabric colour; and decorative element type and height from base. Attribute pairs were plotted on a Cartesian coordinate system using SPSS to detect latent patterns, and multiresponse permutation procedure (MRPP) analyses were run to confirm the validity of the observed grouping behaviour. MRPP tests the significance of sample groups by comparing intragroup and intergroup Euclidean distance, and was selected as an analytical tool because it does not require conditions, such as homogeneity of variance, which cannot be met by an assemblage of archaeological artefacts (for a detailed description see Mielke and Berry 2001). Scientific analyses of APW were conducted on diagnostic and body sherds from the UC Berkeley excavation of Nineveh (1987 1990), area MG22, and Mallowan's excavation of the NW palace at Nimrud. Petrological analyses were conducted using a Leica DMRX petrographic microscope and Hitachi S3700N scanning electron microscope (SEM). SEM micrographs were taken by C.R. Cartwright at 15 kv and are published here courtesy of the Trustees of the British Museum. Petrographic descriptions use terminology and methods outlined by Whitbread (1995). Digital radiographs were collected using Varian Viva software (revision K3, build 45), a tungsten X-ray source (X-tek 160 kv gun), and Varian PaxScan 4030 detector, at 40 kv, 400 A, and 20 frames per image (approximately 10 minutes run time). 3. Results Typology Every attribute of a ceramic vessel results from intentional human behaviour; however, not all of the relationships among attributes are typologically useful. Attributes can correlate naturally, for example wall thickness and weight: as wall thickness increases, so does the weight of the vessel. These intrinsic relationships between attributes display linear or horizontal asymptotic behaviour (the flattening of a curve with respect to the y-axis as it approaches infinity on the x-axis), easily distinguished from the noncontinuous or cluster behaviour of intentional attribute relationships. Attributes were considered definitional of palace ware when 90% or more of the assemblage consistently formed a cluster or non-continuous pattern. These definitional clusters are reported in Table 2 as value ranges, two endpoints, and a mode. Mode more accurately describes definitional attribute clusters than mean, because mode is a measure of frequency which is not affected by end behaviour. Outliers are defined as vessels falling outside Craft and science: International perspectives on archaeological ceramics 138

Assyrian palace ware definition and Chaîne Opératoire: Preliminary results from Nineveh, Nimrud, and Aššur Table 2. Table summarising the metric characterisation of palace ware forms. Bowls Cups Jars Rim diameter Neck length Neck diameter (mouth) 8.5 13cm 12cm mode 0.2 1cm 1cm mode 8 12cm 11cm mode 4 10cm 7cm mode 2.5 6.7cm 3cm mode 4.5-7.5cm 5cm mode Shoulder angle 25 58 45 mode Maximum diameter Body length Wall thickness Vessel capacity Total height Base diameter 9 14cm 12cm mode 1.6 3cm 2.8cm mode 0.2 0.4cm 0.3cm mode 190 750 cc 478 cc mean 2.5 5.5cm 3cm mode 2 7.5cm 4cm mode 4 10cm 7cm mode 4.4 10cm 8cm mode 0.15 0.3cm 0.2cm mode 300 800 cc 658 cc mean 7.6 13.6cm 12.4cm mode 0 2.5cm 0.9cm mode 6.5 11.5cm 8.5cm mode 2.5 7.5cm 4.6cm mode 5.5 8.5cm 5.7cm mode 28 57 45 8.8 11cm 10.5cm mode 8 14cm 13.5 mode 0.2 0.4cm 0.3cm mode 1250 1840 cc 2350 3049 cc 1450 cc mean 2700 cc mean 10 20cm 20cm mode 0 1.6cm 1.5cm mode the cluster clouds of more than one attribute and are not considered palace ware. Five diagnostic typological criteria were detected for the entire palace ware assemblage: maximum diameter is 6 14cm; capacity is discontinuous and forms three clusters around 500, 1500 and 3000 cc.; the wall thickness range is 0.15 0.4cm with a mode of 0.2cm; rim diameter ranges from 6 to 14cm; and base diameter ranges from 0 to 8cm. Three form clusters were also identified in the assemblage, differentiated by neck/ collar length and capacity (Fig. 1): bowls, cups, and jars. Palace ware bowls (Fig. 2) occur in two related forms. Type I bowls are prevalent in the bowl assemblage and have everted collars and rims extending from a sharp shoulder carination and thinned lips. Their bases are rounded to flat, with no visible basal element such as a disk, ring, or knob. Type I bowls are unequally biconical and the ratio of collar to body height is between 1:3 and 1:6. Type II bowls are equally biconical, with flat disk bases and everted rims with rounded lips. Both type I and II bowls can be decorated with engraved circumferential lines; however, only type I bowls are dimpled. Palace ware bowl capacity ranges between 200 and 700 cc. (500 cc. mode), regardless of type; however, a small group of thick walled outlier bowls have capacities between 967 and 1119 cc. (1000 cc. mode). These vessels (Fig. 2) are equally biconical, have stepped bases and bodies, bow tie or triangular lips, thick walls (0.6 1cm), and, while they may represent the thick palace ware described by Rawson (1954), these bowls are probably typical Neo-Assyrian tableware (Anastasio 2010). Palace ware cups also occur in two shapes (Fig. 2). Type I is characterised by short, wide necks (mode 3cm long and 6cm wide) and slightly truncated body height (4.4 8.2cm). The second cup shape (type II) has longer (mode 4.5cm), narrower (mode 5cm) necks and an elongated body (mode 8cm). Despite these subtle differences, palace ware cups are remarkably consistent in shape. They are unequally biconical, with pronounced v-shaped bodies and carinated shoulders. Cup necks are trumpet shaped, with everted, horizontally flattened rims and thinned or rolled lips. APW cup bases are typically flat, although pointed, knob, ring, and elevated ring bases are also represented in the Figure 1. Scatter plot of palace ware vessel capacity against neck/collar length. Three distinct form clusters are visible: bowls, cups, and jars. 139 Ed. Marcos Martinón-Torres

Hunt well-rounded (almost spherical) mineral inclusions. Given the alluvial origin of the palace ware matrix and the energy of the Tigris river system, it is reasonable to assume that natural levigation took place. However, the marked difference in inclusion frequency between APW and typical Neo-Assyrian tableware, and the sharp truncation of palace ware grain size distribution are probably indicative of human behaviour. Palace ware fabrics are intentionally and consistently finer than other Assyrian fine wares, either through mechanical processing of the raw material or exploitation of natural processes, such as seasonal acquisition or sediment beds out in the flood plain. Figure 2. Neo-Assyrian palace ware typology. Note that due to the thinness of vessel walls, in order for vessel profiles to print, they could not be drawn to scale, except for the outliers. Bowls: (a) Type II; (b) Type I. Cups: (a) and (c) Type I; (b) Type II. Cup and Jar base shapes: (a) ring; (b) flat; (c) knob; (d) elevated ring; jar (a) pointed. assemblage (Fig. 2). Palace ware cup capacity is slightly larger than that of bowls (550 cc. mode), although the cluster clouds for both vessel types are similar. Palace ware cups are decorated by dimples, circumferential engraved lines, appliqué ridges, and basal steps. Palace ware jars are morphologically similar to cups, with increased body height (13.5cm mode) and total height (20 cm mode) to accommodate their larger capacities (1500 cc. and 3000 cc. mode) (Fig. 2). The majority of APW jars have capacity clusters around 1500 cc., triple the volume held by cups and bowls. Like cups, jars are unequally biconical, with pronounced v-shaped bodies and trumpet necks. Most palace ware jar bases are pointed, however flat and rounded bases are also represented. Jars are decorated with engraved circumferential lines, appliqué, and dimples. Chaîne opératoire Forming and shaping Scarring, parallel to the base, on the internal and external surface of palace ware vessels indicates rotary processing, leading Rawson to conclude that the vessels were wheelmade. Radiography of palace ware cups (types I and II) revealed diagonal orientation of voids and inclusions on the surface of the vessel and the subtle variation in wall thickness resulting from drawing the paste upwards using rotative kinetic energy (cf. Middleton 1995; 1997; Berg 2008), confirming that APW was wheel formed (Fig. 4). The lack of obvious joins also seems to confirms Rawson's assertion that palace ware was thrown in one piece. Further work on a larger sample set including all three forms is needed to confirm this observation. Firing Determination of firing temperature is difficult without conducting experimental firing of the raw material in question. Colour, while a useful guideline for calcareous clays, can be altered by depositional and post-depositional environments. Quantifying the vitrification of a ceramic body can also be used to estimate firing temperature (cf. Tite et al. 1982; Wolf 2002). Palace ware fires buff (10YR) to green-grey (2.5YR, 5YR), indicating a firing temperature above 900 C (Nicholson and Patterson 1989). Moderate vitrification visible in palace ware sherds also suggests a relatively high firing temperature (850 900 C) for an intermediate soak time (Freestone 1982) (Fig. 5). Firing temperature is important for the determination of the palace ware production cost, therefore, further work including experimental firing of raw material from the Tigris is planned. Raw material acquisition and processing Fabric characterisation of APW reveals an extremely finegrained fabric, < 2% inclusions, and no inclusions larger than 0.05 mm. Petrological analysis of Neo-Assyrian tableware, selected for comparison because tableware does not contain the chaff temper common in most Assyrian ceramics, reveals the fine-grained nature of Assyrian fabrics in general (inclusions < 2 mm). Comparison of grain size distribution profiles for APW and non-apw vessels shows significant truncation, suggestive of levigation (Fig. 3). Differentiation between alluvial and artificial levigation is difficult and subjective. The proximity of Aššur, Nimrud, and Nineveh to the Tigris suggests an alluvial origin for the matrix material, a suggestion supported by the rounded/ Figure 3. Grain size distribution plot for palace ware fabrics from Nimrud, Nineveh, and non-palace ware ceramic bowls from Nimrud. Note the pronounced truncation indicative of levigation. Craft and science: International perspectives on archaeological ceramics 140

Assyrian palace ware definition and Chaîne Opératoire: Preliminary results from Nineveh, Nimrud, and Aššur. Restricted vessel capacities: bowl and cups approximately 500 cc.; jars approximately 1500 or 3000 cc.. Maximum diameter: 6 14 cm.. Rim diameter: 6 14 cm.. Base diameter: 0 8 cm.. Wall thickness: 0.15 0.4 cm, with a mode of 0.2 cm.. Fine-grained levigated fabric: < 2% inclusions; no inclusion larger than 0.05 mm.. Wheel thrown formation.. Fired colours: buff (10YR) to greenish-grey (2.5YR, 5YR).. Estimated firing temperature: 850 900 C.. Decoration applied when vessels were leather-hard, often using rotary motion. 5. Archaeological implications and further work In light of these definitional criteria inferred from artefacts from the Neo-Assyrian central polity, it becomes possible to evaluate the movement of palace ware as object (trade) and as idea (local non-assyrian manufacture), in contrast to the movement of Assyrian potters throughout the empire (local Assyrian manufactured APW). During the next phase of this research, chaîne opératoire and provenance of palace ware in the Neo-Assyrian imperial provinces of Syria, Turkey, and Israel will be evaluated to assess mechanisms of palace ware diffusion throughout the empire. Figure 4. Radiograph of a palace ware cup from Nineveh (ND1312). Gradation between the base and shoulder reflects subtle variations in wall thickness introduced as the paste is pulled during formation on the wheel. Voids diagonal to the basal plane are also indicative of processing using rotary motion. Decoration The elegance of palace ware decoration, circumferential engraving, appliqué, and dimples, is deceptive in its simplicity. The perfect execution of these techniques, the symmetry and regularity of the engraving and consistent spacing of the dimples, reflects the mastery of the potter. Engraved lines and appliqué bands were created when the vessel was leather-hard, using rotary motion and probably a tool to ensure even spacing and placement. Dimpling methods are currently under investigation and will be the subject of a future publication. However, experiments replicating APW dimpling reveal the difficulty of creating dimples on a leather-hard surface without rupturing the vessel wall: deformation and dendritic cracking visible behind the dimple are evidence that dimpling was conducted during the leather-hard stage. While dimples are unique in the Neo-Assyrian ceramic corpus and restricted to palace ware, engraving and appliqué are widely used. None of the APW decorative styles are unique to any particular form, although dimpling on bowls is less common. 4. Conclusions Typological and scientific analyses identified 11 definitional criteria for palace ware in the Neo-Assyrian heartland:. Three basic forms: bowl, cup and jar, described above and in Figure 2. Another implication of this study is the potential use and social significance of palace ware. Palace ware is expensive and technically difficult to produce. At least in the Neo- Assyrian central polity, palace ware forms are not unique, occurring in Middle Assyrian assemblages as early as the 13 th century BC (cf. Duistermaat 2008) and, in the Neo-Assyrian period, as contemporary thicker forms (cf. Hausleiter 1999). Therefore, it is likely that the value of these vessels was related to the palace ware fabric itself and vessel capacity. The specific capacities of palace ware vessels, 500, 1500 and 3000 cc., suggest that these vessels Figure 5. SEM-BSE micrograph of palace ware fabric from Nineveh (1129). The spongy or honeycomb texture of the matrix is indicative of moderate vitrification at high firing temperatures (850 900 C). Note the almost spherical quartz grain. Image reproduced courtesy of the Trustees of the British Museum. Image: C.R. Cartwright. 141 Ed. Marcos Martinón-Torres

Hunt were used together, probably as a drinking set. Planned future work includes investigating the Neo-Assyrian drinking culture and rituals, and liquid measurements listed in the cuneiform texts to refine this hypothesis. Experimental firing of raw material from the Tigris and raw material sources in Syria, Turkey, and Israel is also planned, to provide a quantitative baseline for firing temperature determinations and a better understanding of production cost, particularly with regard to fuel. References Anastasio S., 2010, Atlas of the Assyrian Pottery of the Iron Age, Subartu 24, Brepols, Turnhout. Andrae W., 1909, Der Anu-Adad-Tempel in Assur, J.C. Hinrichs, Leipzig. Berg I., 2008, Looking through Pots: Recent Advances in Ceramics X-Radiography. Journal of Archaeological Science, 35, 1177-1188. Duistermaat K., 2008, The Pots and Potters of Assyria: Technology and Organization of Production, Ceramic Sequence, and Vessel Function at Late Bronze Age Tell Sabi Abyad, Syria, Papers on archaeology of the Leiden Museum of Antiquities 4, Brepols, Turnhout. Engstrom C., 2004, The Neo-Assyrians at Tell El-Hesi: A Petrographic Study of Imitation Assyrian Palace Ware. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, 333, 69-81. Freestone I.C., 1982, Applications and Potential of Electron Probe Micro-Analysis in Technological and Provenance Investigations of Ancient Ceramics. Archaeometry, 24, 99-116. Haller A., 1954, Die Gräber Und Grüfte Von Assur, Gebr. Mann, Berlin. Hausleiter A., 1999, Neo-Assyrian Pottery from Kalhu/ Nimrud: With Special Reference to the Polish Excavations in The Central Building. InIron Age Pottery in Northern Mesopotamia, Northern Syria and South-Eastern Anatolia, (eds. A. Hausleiter and A. Reiche), 17-60, Ugarit-Verlag, Münster. Hausleiter A., 2008, Nimrud in the Context of Neo-Assyrian Pottery Studies. In New Light on Nimrud: Proceedings of the Nimrud Conference 11 13th March 2008, (eds. J. Curtis, H. McCall, D. Collon and L. Al-Gailani Werr), 215-224, British Institute for the Study of Iraq in association with The British Museum, London. Mallowan M.E.L., 1966, Nimrud and Its Remains, Collins, London. Middleton A.P., 1995, Integrated Approaches to the Understanding of Early Ceramics: The Role of Radiography. In The Cultural Ceramic Heritage European Ceramic Society Fourth Conference, (ed. B. Fabbri), 63-74, Gruppo Editoriale Faenza, Faenza. Middleton A., 1997, Ceramics. In Radiography of Cultural Materials, (eds. A. Middleton and J. Lang Cornwall), 76-95, Butterworth - Heinemann, Oxford. Mielke P.W.Jr and Berry K.J., 2001, Permutation Methods: A Distance Function Approach, Springer, New York. Na'aman N. and Thareani-Sussely Y., 2006, Dating the Appearance of Imitations of Assyrian Ware in Southern Palestine. Tel Aviv, 33, 61-82. Nicholson P.T. and Patterson H.L., 1989, Ceramic Technology in Upper Egypt: A Study of Pottery Firing. World Archaeology, 21, 71-86. Ohtsu T., 1991, Late Assyrian Palace Ware - Concerning Dimpled Goblet. In Essays on Ancient Anatolian and Syrian Studies in the 2nd and 1st Millennium B.C., (ed. H.I.H. Prince Takahito Mikasa), 131-154, Bulletin of the Middle Eastern Culture Center in Japan 4, Harrassowitz, Wiesbaden. Rawson P.S., 1954, Palace Ware from Nimrud: Technical Observations. Iraq, 16, 168-172. Singer-Avitz L., 2007, On Pottery in Assyrian Style: A Rejoinder. Tel Aviv, 34, 182-203. Tite M.S., Freestone I.C., Meeks N.D. and Bimson M., 1982, The Use of Scanning Electron Microscopy in the Technological Examination of Ancient Ceramics. In Archaeological Ceramics: Papers Presented at a Seminar on Ceramics as Archaeological Material, Held at the National Bureau of Standards and the Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C., 29 September 1 October 1980, (eds. J.S. Olin and A.D. Franklin), 109-120, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC. Whitbread I.K., 1995, Greek Transport Amphorae: A Petrological and Archaeological Study, British School at Athens, Athens. Wolf S., 2002, Estimation of the Production Parameters of Very Large Medieval Bricks from St. Urban, Switzerland. Archaeometry, 44, 37-65. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Trustees of The British Museum and Dr. J. Curtis; Dr. C.R. Cartwright, The British Museum; Freie Universität Berlin, T. Sheh Hammad Project and Prof. H. Kühne and Dr. F.J. Kreppner; Dr. A. Middleton, The British Museum; Prof. C. Orton, UCL Institute of Archaeology; Dr. R. Sparks, UCL Institute of Archaeology; Prof. Th. Rehren, UCL Institute of Archaeology; UC Berkeley Excavation, Nineveh and Dr. S. Lumsden and Dr. E.B. Wilkinson; UCL Medical Physics and Prof. R. Speller, Dr. C. Reid and Dr. B. Price; Vorderasiatisches Museum and Stellvertretender Direktor Dr. R-B. Wartke. Craft and science: International perspectives on archaeological ceramics 142