i66 SECTIONAL ADDRESSES 



Here and there however, though almost confined to the work of only 

 a very small number of authors, there is some extraordinarily good reason- 

 ing. Dr. Frankfort in particular has shown that he is fully alive not 

 only to all the subtleties and intricacies of the subject, but also to the 

 peculiar traps which it constantly presents for the unwary. I will quote 

 one admirable piece of reasoning which only a skilled technologist could 

 have used. In pre-dynastic Egypt there occurs a very handsome and 

 well-known class of pottery of which the body is red and the upper margin 

 a lustrous black. In Anatolia and Cyprus a similar black-topped red 

 pottery is found. It would be most natural to suppose, and it has been 

 constantly assumed, that the Anatolian and Cypriote wares were derived 

 from those of Egypt. But Frankfort shows that though the results are 

 similar in the two wares the processes from which they were derived are 

 radically different. The Egyptian school, of which we know the entire 

 genealogy, is the result of evolution from a process of producing red ware ; 

 the Anatolian and Cypriote arise out of a black ware production. In spite, 

 therefore, of a very close fortuitous resemblance there is no dissemination 

 from a single source even in this highly specialised type of pottery. 



In dealing with pottery, especially in such early stages as the Neolithic 

 and the Chalcolithic, there is the same danger of reasoning in too general 

 terms that I have already pointed out in regard to primitive customs and 

 habits. Limitations of opportunity and knowledge, similar climatic 

 conditions, and even deep-lying similarities of temperament, may produce 

 an apparent uniformity of type over a wide area without necessarily 

 implying commerce or contact. It is generally agreed, for instance, 

 that the entire margin of the Mediterranean, throughout all its length 

 and breadth, was principally peopled by a uniform race called the 

 Mediterranean race. It is also an observed fact that in the Neolithic 

 and Bronze Ages a carboniferous black ware, so uniform in its general 

 character that I and others have been content to call it simply ' Mediter- 

 ranean black ware,' is found all over the same area. In the Iron Age it 

 becomes specialised into finer products of great beauty, such as the 

 bucchero especially associated with the Etruscans. Now it might naturally 

 be argued that the uniformity of this black ware, coinciding as it does so 

 nearly with the distribution of the Mediterranean race, was due to the 

 uniformity of the race. This, however, does not necessarily follow, and 

 the fact that black bucchero also appears as far away as Japan, without 

 any intermediate links to connect it with the Mediterranean, shows that 

 the inference would actually be false. The real explanation no doubt 

 is that all these peoples are living at just the same stage of technical 

 knowledge and limitation. They did not know the use of the kiln — they 

 were obliged to burn their pottery in open bonfires. Wherever this is 

 done the fire is smoky, and black smudges on the surface of the pot give 

 it an unsightly appearance. The easiest way of remedying this trouble 

 is to make an all-black ware on which the smoke-stains do not appear. 

 This is the simple and rational explanation of the occurrence of the 

 black carboniferous wares which occur almost literally from ' China to Peru . ' 

 Similarly in regard to form, primitive man is closely conditioned by the 

 material which he has around him. The smaller vessels used during the 



