1996
DOI: 10.2307/4200416
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Further Investigations as to the Relationship of Samarran and Ubaid Ceramic Assemblages

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

1
1
0

Year Published

2001
2001
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Based on evidence from basal Tell es-Sawwan, she also suggests that classic Samarra directly derived from Proto-Hassuna and then developed as a distinct entity although sharing similarities with adjacent cultures (Oates 2013). This idea is in agreement with an analysis of fabric and paint compositions of sherds from Oueili, which shows that Samarran and Ubaid 0 wares were similar and that they might have been stylistic variants of a common ceramic tradition although both locally produced (Blackham 1996: 13) 5 . Moreover, at Chogha Mami similarities among fabrics and paints of the Samarran, CMT, and Ubaid wares suggest a single locale for their production (Oates 1984).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 86%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Based on evidence from basal Tell es-Sawwan, she also suggests that classic Samarra directly derived from Proto-Hassuna and then developed as a distinct entity although sharing similarities with adjacent cultures (Oates 2013). This idea is in agreement with an analysis of fabric and paint compositions of sherds from Oueili, which shows that Samarran and Ubaid 0 wares were similar and that they might have been stylistic variants of a common ceramic tradition although both locally produced (Blackham 1996: 13) 5 . Moreover, at Chogha Mami similarities among fabrics and paints of the Samarran, CMT, and Ubaid wares suggest a single locale for their production (Oates 1984).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 86%
“…More recently, however, she has suggested that CMT is equivalent to late Samarran, indicating a transition from Samarran to Ubaid 0 (Oates 2013: 411). Thus, owing to the fact that ceramics of these two periods are stylistically rather indistinguishable, their chronological position is still ambiguous (Blackham 1996; Lebeau 1985; also see discussion below). Nevertheless, we may divide the Samarran phenomenon into two sub-phases: early/classic and late/CMT phases.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%