Reflections on the Human Condition - Api-fellowships.org

4
SESSION I
percentage, probably about a third, is paddle
impressed. Two major subdivisions of the paddle
impressions are carved-paddle and bound-paddle
impressed. The carved-paddle impression is
a lattice work of squares. The bound-paddle
impression is either from cord bound-paddles
(cord-marked,) or from paddles with basket weaves
of several varieties woven over their surfaces.”
“A few years ago I was dividing basket-marked into
two varieties—heavy and light. With the recent
experience of working on the Gua Sirih earthenware
pottery I came to realize that some sherds which I
have called heavy basket or light basket and some
heavy, parallel ribs may have been made with a
paddle wrapped in some sort of narrow vine such
as rattan. These ‘ribs’ are broad, usually 3-4 mm and
have rounded edges. The ‘ribs’ from a carved-paddle
are sharp and narrow and extend slightly above
the surface of the vessel. The ‘ribs’ from a paddle
wrapped with a narrow vine result from the spaces
between the vines which, on using the paddle,
impress the surface of the vines leaving the parallel ribs
in between. Both this type of paddle and basketmarked
are made with something like rattan so it
is likely there could be both a basket weave on a
paddle or simply the vine wound around the paddle.”
From the research that I had done before (Solheim,
2003a-b) I stated: “I have hypothesized that Bau-Malay
carved-paddle-impressed ware descended from the
geometric pottery of western South China which
expanded to coastal South China well before 1000 BC”.
(Solheim: 2003a, 18) I must have assumed this as the
carved-paddle pottery had been found at several ancient
port sites on the east coast of India (Ibid., 18; Ray,
1996) considerably earlier than it was first noted in the
Philippines. From this I assumed that it originated in
southwestern China.
I checked this with William Meacham in August 2005
and he informed me that it had never been reported as
originating in western China (personal communication).
This has been gone into by Meacham in articles of his
and others in the Journal of the Hong Kong Archaeological
Society.
I quote one of Meacham’s (1974: 76-77) statements:
“It is in the origins of the geometric impressed
pottery [C-P] itself that one may perhaps perceive,
in broad outline, the process which eventually gave
rise to the double-f style. There is a growing body
Ref lections on the Human Condition: Change, Conflict and Modernity
The Work of the 2004/2005 API Fellows
of evidence to indicate that geometric pottery was
an autonomous development in Southeast China,
constituting an elaboration on the earlier pottery
technology. Both carved stamp and cord-wrapped
paddle decoration were used in the cultures which
preceded the Geometric Horizon (e.g. in the lower
levels at Sham Wan, and the ‘Yuan-shan’ culture
in Taiwan). And in the opinion of Tseng and Yin
(1963), geometric impressed pottery originated in
the S.E. costal region and the lower reaches of the
Yangtze.
A recently reported C-14 date from a site in
northwestern Kiangsi province has strengthened
the theory of a pre-Shang origin for the stamped
ware of South China. From a habitation structure
in Pao-ma-ling, a carbon sample yielded an age
determination of ca. 2300 B.C. In association were
a coarse paste red pottery and crescent-shaped
polished stone knives of basically Lungshanoid
affinities, stepped adzes and shouldered adzes of a
more southern tradition, and a small quantity of
sherds with impressed geometric patterns.”
To be a bit more specific I had this to say (Solheim:
1975, 110-111):
“The geometric pottery of Southeast China appears
to have evolved in the coastal area of ‘… eastern,
northern, and central Kwangtung, Fukien, and
southern Chekiang’ (Shih: 1974, 84) sometime
in the middle and late fifth millennium B.P.
(Meacham: 1974, 77) Assuming that I am correct
in saying that the people who carried this kind
of pottery, and method of pottery manufacture,
around Southeast Asia were the late-moving Malay
it would seem reasonable not only that their
Nusantao ancestors came from South China but
likely that the people who developed geometric
pottery along the coast were also their ancestors,
and Nusantao as well [people of the southern
islands]. It does not necessarily mean that all
peoples and cultures that made geometric pottery in
South China were also Nusantao.”
The latest published information that I have from
Meacham (1994, 16-17) includes a photo of Late
Neolithic Geometric pottery (reproduced here Fig. 1)
from a site close to Sham Wan Tsuen. Note the
overlapping diagonals and herringbone patterns in the
top row right, similar to Plate I b and a from Gua Sirih.
He states: “The Late Neolithic (3000-1500 B.C.) was
represented by fine paste pottery decorated with
geometric patterns”.