Editorial Notes
Texte intégral
1This volume originated in the workshop Serialising, standardising, specialising: Investigating a techno-social nexus underlying social complexity, held at the 13th ICAANE in Copenhagen in 2022. Conceived as a collaborative effort between the three editors, each bringing diverse methodologies and contextual expertise in the realm of mass production and of its relationship with specialization and standardization, the workshop—and the resulting discussions with a wider community of colleagues who ultimately agreed to contribute to this volume—set out to revisit one of archaeology’s long-standing assumptions: that serialisation, standardisation, and specialisation are linear markers of socio-economic complexity. Our purpose was not to affirm but to test this correlation by drawing on diverse materials and objects across a wide chronological and geographical range.
2The guiding questions were deliberately broad. How should serial production be defined across different contexts? To what extent does it relate to craft specialisation and product standardisation? What role do raw materials, chaîne opératoires and end functional objects play in shaping the possibility of serialisation? And finally, which socio-economic and political conditions foster or constrain these modes of production? By convening specialists from varied fields, the workshop sought to move beyond isolated case studies and towards a comparative, interdisciplinary conversation.
3The collective discussions made clear that serialisation, standardisation, and specialisation must be treated as relational rather than linear phenomena. A first point of agreement was the plurality of definitions: no single vocabulary for “mass production” can capture the diversity of ancient crafts, though comparative categories remain essential. In fact, not only do the quantitative standards that define whether or not production is on a large scale generally depend on the type of product or artefact under consideration, but sometimes it is even necessary to distinguish between “serial” and “mass” production. A second theme was methodological. Traditional metrics such as coefficients of variation were reassessed alongside morphometric, digital, and experimental approaches, with consensus that only a multi-method perspective can do justice to the complexity of production. Equally important were material constraints, each imposing distinct limits and opportunities, from the mobilisation of large workforces for mudbrick construction to the intimate expertise required for seal cutting. Cross-craft perspectives further highlighted the value of comparing polymaterial productions such as glazed bricks, while debates on the organisation of labour asked whether “specialisation” should be understood as individual expertise, segmentation of tasks, manufacturing aimed at a single specific product, or broader organisational frameworks. Above all, participants stressed that serialisation is never a purely technical achievement: it is embedded in economic strategies, political control, and ideological display, while also reshaping daily practices and social identities.
4The papers gathered in this volume take up these themes through a series of focused case studies. Pottery receives particular attention, as a craft long regarded as a privileged marker of mass production. Two contributions address the nexus between bowls and commensality. Baldi re-examines the 5th-millennium Coba Bowls and the 4th–millennium Bevelled-Rim Bowls, showing that they embody distinct operational sequences and functions, and arguing for a conceptual distinction between “serial” and “mass” production. Balossi Restelli and colleagues analyse diachronic bowl production at Arslantepe, from the Late Chalcolithic to the Early Iron Age, demonstrating that while mass production is evident at several moments, its social implications varied—sometimes signalling communal integration, sometimes institutional inequality.
5Methodological innovation is at the centre of the paper by Cardarelli and colleagues, who introduce a novel way to quantify morphological standardisation through binary matrix analysis. Applied to the Late Chalcolithic assemblages of Arslantepe, this approach reveals subtle patterns of producer choice and shaping sequences that complement and refine traditional statistical indices. Padovani, meanwhile, directs attention to the workshops themselves. Her comparative study of ceramic production sites in northern Iraq emphasises the importance of spatial analysis and labour organisation, showing that the presence of numerous kilns alone does not equate to “large-scale” production.
6Other contributions broaden the scope to additional crafts and materials. Paladre examines proto-Elamite glyptic production, comparing the classic style with mechanically produced seals. Her analysis reveals distinct modes of organisation and raises the critical issue of craftspeople’s independence versus elite sponsorship, highlighting seals as quintessential “technologies of power.” Dardeniz and Akalın investigate the production of Egyptian blue in the Urartian kingdom, situating pigment-making around Lake Van and arguing that colour technologies, too, involved specialised knowledge, long-distance resources, and political display. Luciani presents the case of a clay pendant from Qurayyah, a skeuomorph of gold star-shaped pendants. She interprets it as part of a broader “corporate design” linked to Qurayyah Painted Ware, showing that serialisation could serve as a cultural branding strategy and a means of shaping identity rather than purely economic efficiency.
7Taken together, these papers demonstrate the multiplicity of techno-social nexuses underlying serial production. Bowls link food redistribution to labour organisation and social inequality; workshops reveal spatial and organisational logics often overlooked; seals materialise the relationship between administration, elites, and craftspeople; pigments connect chemistry, ideology, and regional resources; and jewelry illustrates branding and symbolic identity. Serialisation is thus not one phenomenon but many. In different periods and regions of South-West Asia, depending on the historical, social and organisational circumstances underlying political economy, it may emerge from efficiency, from political power, from ritual or ideology, from identity construction—or from combinations of these.
8Beyond the organisational and economic dimensions of serialisation, several contributions in this issue invite us to consider how repetition itself shaped human experience. Serial production does not only produce objects, but also craftspeople and consumers, forging new temporalities of work and new forms of social identity.
9Looking ahead, several avenues of research stand out. First, the development of shared yet flexible vocabularies is needed to allow comparison without erasing specificity. Second, methodological pluralism—statistical, morphometric, archaeometric, and digital—should be pursued more systematically. Third, cross-craft and cross-regional studies are essential to trace parallels and divergences. Finally, the focus must remain on the people behind production: their skills, their labour organisation, their social roles, and their lived experiences.
10Some of the cases presented remind us that serialisation is never a unilinear process of technical improvement. It oscillates between efficiency and improvisation, between cohesion and fragmentation of communities of practice. What appears as homogeneity at the level of objects often conceals diversity at the level of production—of recipes, gestures, and learning paths. By bringing together pottery, seals, pigments, and jewelry, this collection demonstrates that serialisation, standardisation, and specialisation are not simply technical markers. They are windows into the ways societies structured labour, organised power, and crafted identities. In tracing these patterns across time and crafts, we are reminded that serialisation is not merely the multiplication of things but the multiplication of relations—between people, materials, and meanings. We hope this volume will stimulate further comparative and interdisciplinary work, deepening our understanding of the complex entanglements between technology and society.
Pour citer cet article
Référence papier
Pamela Fragnoli, Francesca Balossi Restelli et Johnny Samuele Baldi, « Editorial Notes », Paléorient, 51 | 2025, 5-6.
Référence électronique
Pamela Fragnoli, Francesca Balossi Restelli et Johnny Samuele Baldi, « Editorial Notes », Paléorient [En ligne], 51 | 2025, mis en ligne le 25 novembre 2025, consulté le 11 avril 2026. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/paleorient/5490 ; DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/15api
Haut de pageDroits d’auteur
Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont susceptibles d’être soumis à des autorisations d’usage spécifiques.
Haut de page

