The Kelsey Blog – Page 34 – Behind the Scenes at the Kelsey Museum of Archaeology

Curator Favorites

Leave a Comment / Curator Favorites / June 24, 2014

When it comes to the Kelsey Museum of Archaeology’s collections, not all artifacts are created equal. Some call out to us intellectually, others emotionally. To that end, we asked our curators to name their favorite Kelsey artifact or object.

Attic lekythos with funeral scene. KM 2604.

BY CHRISTOPHER RATTÉ, Director and Curator of Greek and Hellenistic Collections, Kelsey Museum of Archaeology; and Professor, Departments of Classical Studies and History of Art, University of Michigan

Favorite Artifact: Attic lekythos with funeral scene. Clay, white ground. Greece. KM 2604.

Why. I have been captivated by Greek vases ever since I was 10 or 11 years old — perhaps (although I certainly didn’t know it at the time) for the same reason that inspired Keats to write the “Ode on a Grecian Urn”: because, as the “foster child[ren] of silence and slow time,” Greek vases conjure up such vivid sensations of an ideal past.

My favorite vase in the Kelsey is a 5th-century BC oil jar known as a lekythos, made as a grave offering. Vases of this type are often decorated with scenes of men and women leaving gifts in front of tombs, and in this way they are interestingly self-referential. But what I like most about them is their draftsmanship.

This vase shows two men standing on either side of a gravestone. Both the men and the monument they flank are drawn in outline on a white background, with details such as the men’s cloaks filled in with colored paint. In many ways this is a humble object — it was produced quickly for retail sale — but that is partly what makes it so appealing. Its simple line work seems perfectly in tune both with the function of the vase and with the solemnity of the scene it depicts.

Background. White-ground lekythoi, like this one, were usually associated with funerary rituals. Produced primarily in Attica during the 5th century BC, they were placed both inside and outside graves and filled with oil as an offering to the deceased or to the gods of the underworld.

The coating of white slip and delicate drawings are often fugitive, since much of the color was added after firing. This vase shows a typical image of a tomb encircled with ribbons. One of the figures may represent the departed, the other a visitor to the grave.

Find It. Locate the ancient Greece exhibit case, which faces the wall of windows on the first floor of the Kelsey Museum of Archaeology’s William E. Upjohn Exhibit Wing. Facing the exhibit case, turn right and walk to the end of the case, then turn left and left. You’ll be facing the end case, which holds two lekythoi, including Director Ratté’s favorite.

Learn More: Archaeology and the Cities of Asia Minor in Late Antiquity, edited by Ortwin Daly and Christopher Ratté, is available for purchase in our gift shop or online from our distributor.

Curator Favorites Read More »

News from the Conservation Lab

Leave a Comment / Conservation / June 18, 2014

BY SUZANNE DAVIS, Associate Curator and Head of Conservation

At the end of May, I attended the big professional conference for conservators in the United States — the annual meeting of the American Institute for Conservation. This was a special meeting for me because I was in charge of the program for the “Objects” group. This group has about 900 members, all of whom focus on the conservation of three-dimensional art and artifacts — in other words, objects.

Usually at a conservation conference, I attend the presentations about archaeological conservation because that’s what will help me most in my work for the Kelsey. But this year, because I was the program chair, I had to be there for ALL the papers. I wasn’t sure I’d enjoy it, but it was great!

Conservator Hiroko Kariya at work at Luxor Temple, Egypt. Photo from the University of Chicago/Oriental Institute Epigraphic Survey webpage.

I learned about conservation work at Luxor Temple in Egypt — that’s up my alley — but also about preservation of public art in the Modernist architectural mecca of Columbus, Indiana (who knew?) and about conservation of the Watts Towers in Los Angeles, California, a National Historic Landmark sculptural site created by Sabato Rodia between 1921 and 1954 that’s considered a masterpiece of “outsider art.”

View of the Watts Towers. Photo from the Watts Towers webpage.

I also heard about the National Air and Space Museum’s amazing research and conservation of a Nazi Bat Wing stealth fighter aircraft made out of plywood (you can read a recent post about this work here on the NASM blog) and about preservation of animation cels at the Walt Disney Animation Research Library. I learned about how conservators at the Arizona State Museum are treating pine-pitch–coated Native American baskets, and about how a team at the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago used CT scanning to virtually restore a skull from the Magdalenian Era.

Magdalenian Era skeleton, with subsequent virtual facial reconstruction. Photo from University of Chicago Radiology webpage. See a Field Museum video about this project, featuring conservator JP Brown, here.

I gained a surprising amount of useful information about the treatment of complex, composite objects from these papers. This is knowledge that I can, actually, apply to my work at the Kelsey. Continuing education rules!

News from the Conservation Lab Read More »

“This Quintessence of Dust”: Micro-Debris Analysis at Olynthos

1 Comment / Archaeological Research, Fieldwork / June 5, 2014

BY ELINA SALMINEN, PhD student, Interdepartmental Program in Classical Art and Archaeology, University of Michigan

Enthusiasm #2 Photo taken my Matt, from whom I sha — Processing of the residue from wet-sieving on site.

This summer, the University of Michigan will be starting a new archaeological project at Olynthos in northern Greece in collaboration with the 16th Ephorate of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities, the British School at Athens, and the University of Liverpool. The goal of the project is to excavate two 4th-century BCE houses and improve our understanding of ancient domestic spaces as well as northern Greek cities. In preparation for the summer, I traveled to Charlottesville, Virginia, to learn about micro-debris analysis, a technique we will be using at our excavation. It was a busy two days with Lynn Rainville, a micro-debris expert based at Sweetbriar College. We discussed the potential of the technique and devised a plan for how to apply it in the field.

In short, micro-debris consists of the small inclusions that are present in the dirt we excavate but are rarely noticed by the excavator. These inclusions can range from beads to small bones (especially from animals like rodents or fish) to very small fragments of pottery. Even though these finds seem mundane, they are worth studying for several reasons, especially in a domestic context. Imagine sweeping a compact dirt floor. What will be removed, and what will stay put? Research has shown that small fragments are more likely to remain where they fall, and can therefore give us a more accurate picture about the use of spaces when they were inhabited instead of after abandonment (which is when most of the bigger “finds” are deposited — archaeologists are often quite literally excavating through trash pits!). The technique can also allow us to see activities that might not otherwise be visible because they left little evidence, and to accurately compare the density of finds in different areas due to the careful counting and measuring involved.

The method itself can be quite tedious! After an excavator collects a soil sample for analysis of an area that seems interesting, the dirt is literally washed in a barrel to get rid of small grains of sand — in archaeological lingo this is known as flotation or wet-sieving.

29714238471 — View of the flotation barrel.

In the process, botanical remains like burnt seeds will float to the surface and will be collected for analysis by specialists. The rest of the sample will be carefully picked through and searched for archaeological materials. The finds will then be sorted by type, counted, and weighed.

It is only after all this that analysis can begin.

Despite the slow and often boring sorting that is involved, it will hopefully be worthwhile in the end. We have come a long way from removing dirt by the cartful to expose monumental buildings with little regard to their contents and the people who used them. Using micro-debris analysis alongside multiple other methods, the project at Olynthos aims to study how different spaces were used in ancient houses, and even how these uses changed depending on the time of day or the season. Even though it might not look like much at first glance, micro-debris can help us get at the hustle and bustle of ancient houses behind the stone wall foundations that are visible to the visitor now.

“This Quintessence of Dust”: Micro-Debris Analysis at Olynthos Read More »

My Favorite Artifact

Leave a Comment / Staff Favorites / May 27, 2014

When it comes to the Kelsey Museum of Archaeology’s collections, not all artifacts are created equal. Some call out to us intellectually, others emotionally. We wondered, “Which artifacts move our staff?”

Curator T. G. Wilfong and Conservator Claudia Chemello prepare the child mummy for installation in its simulated tomb.

BY TUNICIA ROSS, Custodian, Plant, Buildings and Ground Services, Kelsey Museum of Archaeology, University of Michigan. A 24-year employee of the university and mother of two, Ross has been taking care of the Kelsey for the past two years.

Favorite Artifact: Mummy of a child. Human body, cloth, resin, wood. Roman period (1st century AD). Fayum region (?), Bay View Collection 1971. KM 1971.2.179.

Why. When I thought about ancient times before I came to the Kelsey, I imagined adults living then, not children. So the mummy of a child was very eye-catching to me when I first saw it. As I cleaned the glass (Plexiglas) panel in front of the exhibit, I realized it was not just an ancient mummy. But a real child who had lived more than 2,000 years ago. As a mother, I connected immediately.

After two years at the Kelsey, this child mummy still draws me. It also draws a lot of children! Museum rules caution visitors against touching any exhibits, but children leave more fingerprints on the child mummy’s viewing glass than any other exhibit case (except for the Djehutymose coffin).

This means I am often at the child mummy’s side, cleaning the glass. To clean Plexiglas, we use a special cleaner that doesn’t leave scratches. I first spray cleaner onto a cotton cloth before using it to wipe off fingerprints. We never spray cleaner directly onto museum glass because some exhibit panels have open spaces between them. If we sprayed directly, the cleaner would squirt between the open spaces and damage ancient artifacts.

One of my position’s perks is the opportunity to catch up with ancient history as I work. And when the curators and staff work on a new exhibition, it’s kind of exciting to see their preparations and the artifacts up close before the opening.

About Artifact. The anonymous child mummy probably dates to the early Roman period (1st century AD). We know nothing of the circumstances of its burial or discovery. The mummy came to the Kelsey from the former Bay View Collection, where it had been since the 1890s.

This mummy is displayed with pottery from roughly the same period (from the U-M excavation at Terenouthis, Egypt) to approximate what the burial — perhaps made in a pit grave — might have originally contained. In doing so, we hope to have struck a balance between respecting the wishes of ancient Egyptians while accommodating visitors’ interest in learning from this mummy.

Child mummy about to undergo CT-SCAN. — Child mummy about to undergo CT scan.

In 2002, an undergraduate engineering student undertook a project that led to a new investigation of this mummy through CT scan, undertaken at the University of Michigan Hospital. The resulting images revealed the enormous amount of linen used to bandage the small child’s body, a wooden framework used to stabilize the body during embalming, possible postmortem damage of the skull, and the surprising fact that the child’s left hand had six fingers.

The CT scan images were further used to construct a virtual 3D model of the body beneath the bandages and an actual polymer resin model of the mummy skull. The technology has allowed scholars to investigate this mummy in a non-destructive and respectful manner.

Background. The anonymous child’s mummy hints at the sometimes harsh realities of life in ancient Egypt: child mortality was high, and children who did survive lived in a world that could be dangerous. Many artifacts from the University of Michigan excavations in Egypt (1924–1935), including dolls, toys, and images, show aspects of children’s lives: how they looked, dressed, played, ate, and learned — and died.

Find It. Look first for the Djehutymose coffin in the center of the first floor of the William E. Upjohn Exhibit Wing of the Kelsey Museum of Archaeology. While facing the coffin, turn slightly to the left, then slightly to the right. Now walk straight back to the wall where you’ll find a discreet glass panel built into the wall behind which the mummy of a child rests in a simulated cave burial.

Learn More. Life, Death and Afterlife in Ancient Egypt: The Coffin of Djehutymose, by T. G. Wilfong, is available in our Gift Shop or online at https://www.isdistribution.com/BookDetail.aspx?ad=34777.

My Favorite Artifact Read More »

Burning Questions about Greek Sacrifice

1 Comment / Archaeological Research, Fieldwork / May 19, 2014

BY DAN DIFFENDALE, PhD student, Interdepartmental Program in Classical Art and Archaeology, University of Michigan

Archaeologists study the (often-broken) material remains of human behavior in hopes of answering questions about human life in the past. We cannot directly access the past; we are constrained to form hypotheses and narratives on the basis of materials that exist in the present and are observable through excavation or surface survey. One category of hypothesis creation and testing is that of experimental archaeology (sometimes included among “actualistic” approaches). Archaeologists attempt to replicate past human behaviors in order to observe the resulting material signature, which can be compared with the archaeological record.

As a member of the Mt. Lykaion Excavation and Survey Project in Greece, I helped to excavate an ancient Greek mountaintop altar. This “ash altar” was built up over centuries by the accumulation of many thousands of animal bones burned by Greek worshipers in honor of the god Zeus. Although specialist studies of the bones and of the altar sediments have told us a great deal about the sacrificial practice at Mt. Lykaion in antiquity, many questions remain open.

Since 2012 I have collaborated with Jacob Morton of the University of Pennsylvania to create an experimental ash altar in Athens, Greece, built up out of the remains of dozens of sheep thighbones and tails, burned according to current hypotheses about Greek sacrifice. In mid-May we will carefully excavate the accumulation of one and a half years of experimental burning, in order to compare the material record of these processes with the observed archaeological record at Mt. Lykaion. In addition to this goal, the “Burning Questions” project, as we call it, includes observation of the sensory experience of the burnt offering part of Greek sacrificial ritual as well as the behavior of burning tails, which the Greeks observed as omens.

Burning Questions about Greek Sacrifice Read More »

Analyzing an Egyptian Textile Fiber

Leave a Comment / Conservation / May 12, 2014

BY BRITTANY DOLPH, Graduate Conservation Intern, UCLA/Getty Conservation Program

Here in the conservation lab, we’ve been busily preparing for the upcoming exhibition Ancient/Modern: The Design of Everyday Things. One of the objects in the exhibition is this child’s garment, excavated from the site of Karanis, Egypt, in the 1920s and ’30s. The dry Egyptian desert creates excellent preservation conditions — so much so that even fragile organic materials like this textile can survive for 2,000 years.

Last month, Kate Carras wrote about her favorite textile fragment from Karanis. Her favorite fragment was made differently from the garment shown above, but the materials are the same: wool yarns. You might wonder, how do we know for sure what kind of yarn it is? How do we know that it’s not linen or cotton?

In the case of this garment, there was a meticulous analysis of the weave pattern and yarn structure in the object’s records but no identification of the fibers present. Knowing the fiber type is important for conservators because it helps us make good decisions about how to care for the textile. When we want to identify the fibers that make up a yarn, we carefully take a tiny sample of the fiber to examine with a microscope.

tunic2-3 — (left) Photo-documentation of the blue warp sample location. (right) The labeled sample temporarily mounted on a glass slide with water.

We mount the sample on a glass microscope slide by placing a drop of water over it and a glass coverslip atop the water. The water serves both to improve the optical properties during examination and to hold the fiber in place.

What are we looking for? Different types of fibers have different surface clues, or morphological features, that tell us whether they are wool or hair (from an animal), cotton, linen (from the flax plant), or another type of bast fiber (also from plants). In this case, it looks like the samples are all wool.

(left) Dark blue warp fiber, magnified at 200x. (right) Fiber sampled from a pink weft, also magnified at 200x. The scales suggest that the fibers are both wool.

A beige weft sampled from the proper right sleeve, magnified at 50x, also wool.

The first clues that the fibers are wool are the small, jagged lines (called scales) visible on the surface. The second clue is a feature called the medulla — the central air space that travels the length of the fiber shaft.

In this image, the medulla is faintly visible as a slightly darker column traveling down the center of the fiber (50x).

Though time did not permit us to investigate further, other methods can be used to narrow down the source even further, to a class of animals — for example, goats or camelids.

Identifying the fibers used in a textile contributes to archaeological research, determines what conditions are best for a textile’s preservation, and helps direct future conservation treatments.

Analyzing an Egyptian Textile Fiber Read More »

We Call It the Silo Building Complex

Leave a Comment / Fieldwork / May 5, 2014

BY RICHARD REDDING, Research Scientist, Kelsey Museum, blogging from Giza, Egypt

We discovered an Old Kingdom mud-brick building two years ago while clearing sand. It is located just south of the Khafre Valley Temple and separated from the tombs and pyramids by a large stone wall. As we cleared away the sand from the tops of the walls, one of the first things we found was a series of five silos — hence, the Silo Building Complex (SBC). Due to lack of time in 2012 we did not get to really excavate into the building except in two rooms on the eastern edge. We filled the area with clean sand and left it for the future.

This season (2014) we decided to explore this building. We had several questions:

How old was it? Did it go back to the reign of Khafre? We did have one seal impression from Niuserre, a 5th Dynasty pharaoh.
What was the building used for, and who occupied it?
Is the depression to the west really a harbor?
Could the SBC access the area to the north?

To answer these questions we excavated in four areas of the SBC. The first was two of the silos, which we knew would contain information on diet.

redding1 — The SBC on Saturday, 19 April. The large silos are very visible, and two have been excavated. To the right (east) are two rooms excavated in 2011. To the left (west) is a room excavated this season (photo R. Redding).

redding2-3 — Two photos of the silos. Note how high the walls still stand. The small semicircular cut in one is the remnant of the access door (photos R. Redding).

We also excavated a room on the western edge of the building. We wanted good floor deposits and to check on a blocked doorway that led to the west from the SBC.

redding4 — Excavated room. Note the Meidum bowl set in the floor (photo R. Redding).

The third excavation was a trench from the western room down into the depression we thought might be a harbor. The excavation revealed three terraces that stepped down to an elevation of about 14.5 meters above sea level (m asl). Coring in the west of the water-filled trench revealed a layer of black clayey silt at about 13 m asl. In the Old Kingdom the Nile flood plain at Giza was about 12 m asl, and the flood would have reached about 14 m asl. We have a harbor.

redding5 — Excavation into harbor from western room. Terraces marked (photo R. Redding).

The last area we have excavated is around the stone wall forming a border between the SBC and the area to the north. We found a doorway that was plastered that led through the wall from the SBC.

Finally, we excavated an area of the stone wall to establish the relationship between the SBC and the northern boundary wall. Which was built first?

redding6 — The stone boundary wall. Note doorway in lower left that allowed access from the SBC to the area to the north. The doorway is nicely plastered, and you can see the plaster line (photo R. Redding).

We are finishing the excavations, and we will begin the laboratory analyses soon. A team of ceramicists, a faunal analyst, a lithics analyst, botanist, and objects team will soon start work. In a few weeks I will send out another blog describing what they found.

We Call It the Silo Building Complex Read More »

Teaching with the Help of Ancient Objects

Leave a Comment / Holdings / April 29, 2014

mogetto — Left: fragment of marble entablature, attributed to the *Templum Gentis Flaviae* in Rome (KM 2424, photomodel by Ariel Regner). Right: fragment of composite capital from Pozzuoli (KM 3049, photomodel by Evan Timm).

BY MARCELLO MOGETTA, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Kelsey Museum of Archaeology, University of Michigan

As college teachers we are often encouraged to enhance pedagogy by engaging students in materially different ways. We are also reminded that University of Michigan museum collections represent an invaluable resource for teaching and learning. During my postdoc year based at the Kelsey Museum, I taught an undergraduate course on “Roman Imperial Architecture” for the Department of Classical Studies, so I had the unique opportunity to put these principles into practice. It worked!

At the beginning of the semester I decided to create a course assignment using Kelsey objects. Each student was asked to select an architectural ornament from the Kelsey collection (whether capital fragments, stone moldings, or stucco decorations), take pictures of it, produce a 3D model from photogrammetry (with the expert assistance of IPCAA’s Matt Naglak), and write a short catalog entry that should include an analytical description and interpretation of the piece. All the class participants signed up for this project, responding enthusiastically to the idea.

Perhaps what made the photomodeling assignment particularly exciting to the students was that they would be granted privileged access to areas of the museum that are otherwise restricted to normal visitors. Or that they had the chance to physically interact with archaeological materials from up close (by the way, thanks to Sebastián Encina and Michelle Fontenot for making this possible!), while at the same time experimenting with cutting-edge digital visualization methods. Whatever the reason, the results proved very rewarding. Using the Kelsey Museum database, the students extracted some basic information about provenance and dating, and in some cases were able to compare their objects with similar ones displayed in the galleries. Most importantly, they all tried to relate the artifacts to the lecture material seen in the conventional class.

Teaching with the Help of Ancient Objects Read More »

My Favorite Artifact

1 Comment / Staff Favorites / April 22, 2014

BY KATHRYN (KATE) CARRAS, Entrance Monitor, Kelsey Museum of Archaeology, University of Michigan. A self-confessed “fiberholic” with two degrees in textile studio art from Eastern Michigan University, in her spare time Carras spins, knits, weaves, crochets, embroiders, and knits dolls from her own patterns. She is currently learning rug-hooking and Japanese braiding (kumihimo).

Favorite Artifact. Small fragment of woven wool tapestry. Roman period (1st–4th century AD). Karanis, Egypt. KM 10534.

Why. “I first saw this textile fragment when I worked on a Karanis textile cataloging project for former Kelsey curator Thelma Thomas. The image — which may be a lion or some other creature — looks more like something out of a Pac-Man game. As a spinner and weaver, I appreciate all the textiles in the museum, but this little cartoon character is special.”

About Artifact. This small tapestry fragment features the motif of an animal that appears about to eat a red/purple object. The design is somewhat oval with an outer ring of yellow crested wave motif on the red/purple backgrounds.

The ancient weaver used light brown wool for the warp (set of vertical threads) and the weft (set of horizontal threads), along with a lighter yellow, red/purple, and blended yarn of red/purple and blue. Although the weft in the plain brown weave shows damage on the fragment’s edges, the colors remain vivid and still show luster.

This piece was one of approximately 3,700 textile fragments excavated by University of Michigan archaeologists during their 1924–1935 Karanis expeditions. Historic textiles from the Roman period and later antiquity are rare in many parts of the world, but Egypt’s dry climate fortunately preserved great quantities of them.

Background. Museum namesake Professor Francis W. Kelsey began a series of excavations in Egypt that were intended to find artifacts and documents in an archaeological context to illustrate daily life in the Greek and Roman world. These excavations began with the site of Karanis (modern Kom Aushim), extensive ruins of an abandoned town of the Greek and Roman periods. The University of Michigan spent eleven seasons at Karanis, where the team unearthed a wealth of material of everyday life. Thousands of these objects were given to the University by the Egyptian government, and the artifacts are now housed at the Kelsey and the papyri at the Papyrology Collection at the University of Michigan Library.

Find It. Currently not on exhibit, this fragile textile is protected in our climate-controlled collections storage. Scholars should contact Kelsey Collections Manager Sebastián Encina at [email protected] for further information.

Learn More. The book Textiles from Karanis, Egypt, in the Kelsey Museum of Archaeology: Artifacts of Daily Life, by Thelma K. Thomas, is available for purchase in our gift shop or online from our distributor, ISD.

My Favorite Artifact Read More »

Sequencing Ancient Pottery from Northern Afghanistan

Leave a Comment / Archaeological Research / April 15, 2014

Bactrian bowl (left) and Greek bowl (right).

BY CHARLOTTE MAXWELL-JONES, PhD student, U-M Interdepartmental Program in Classical Art and Archaeology

Pottery is one of the most common archaeological finds. This is because unlike cloth, wood, food, even human remains, pottery doesn’t chemically break down, and almost everyone in the ancient world used it for storage, transportation, and dining. Archaeologists use pottery as evidence for daily behaviors, trade and travel patterns, cultural contact, and dating.

I have been lucky enough to work on a large corpus, or collection, of pottery from northern Afghanistan for almost four years. All of the pottery is from the capital of ancient Bactria, the easternmost frontier conquered by Alexander the Great in the late 4th century BCE, and right now it is stored in Kabul, Afghanistan. I am studying this pottery to create a chronological sequence for the city it comes from. This will help us date the deposits the pottery is found in and help us determine how the capital interacted with neighboring cities.

There are two types of “chronologies”: relative and absolute. Relative chronology will tell you what is before and after something, but it doesn’t give you a date. Absolute chronology will tell you the date of an object, either specifically (October 1957) or generally (late 3rd century BCE). Both types are useful, but I started with a relative chronology. To do this, I first looked at all the pottery I was studying, from about 600 BCE to 600 CE, and figured out what pottery shapes were present (turns out, a lot!). Then I went through and wrote down how many examples of each shape I found in each archaeological deposit. Usually pottery shapes come into use, grow in popularity, and then decline — a lot like fashion trends. So I look for these trends in pottery and then make a list of what order the shapes show up in. Jeans are a perfect example: bell-bottom jeans came before ripped, stonewashed jeans, which came before wide-legged jeans, which came before low-rise jeans. Pottery was just as much a part of people’s daily lives as clothing, and although the trends may not have changed as quickly as jeans in the late 20th century, they are just as recognizable.

Studying this pottery, I’ve been able to see big changes in pottery types. In the Achaemenid Persian period, right before Alexander the Great came to Bactria, undecorated, peach-colored pottery is popular. After the Persian Empire is conquered, there is a huge growth in the number of shapes and decorations in use. Some of these shapes and decorations are so similar to what has been found in Greece and the Near East that if they were side by side, it would be hard to tell them apart. Although it’s not the globalization that we have today, this shows that despite distance, people in the ancient world were connected to one another.

Sequencing Ancient Pottery from Northern Afghanistan Read More »