Home
En français

Deutsche Ausgabe

Nederlands



Our offer of service

Clay pipes as a research topic

Work and aims of the Society

Research results

Cataloguing

Guidelines for preparing drawings

International terminology


Publications

Meetings

Exhibitions

Reactions / Press

Links - WWW

Books

Contact us
 

Guidelines for Preparing Drawings of Clay Pipes including Editorial Requirements for Publishing in KnasterKOPF - Fachzeitschrift für Tonpfeifen und historischen Tabakgenuss

von Ralf Kluttig-Altmann


1 Introduction

2 Description of clay pipes

3 Making the drawings
   3.1 Correct illumination and viewing of clay pipes
   3.2 Content and arrangement of a drawing
   3.3 Scale
   3.4 Line width and line type
   3.5 Shading
   3.6 Rubbings as a help in drawing
   3.7 Subjectivity: Should I add or omit anything?

4 Editorial requirements for publication in KnasterKOPF

5 Concluding remarks

Bibliography

 

 

1 Introduction

A drawing of an archaeological object should provide the viewer, who of course had never seen the object, with a "substitute", which can never be as good as the original but it can contain the relevant details. A drawing, in comparison with a photograph, is characterised by a considerable amount of subjectivity, which is not necessarily a disadvantage.
If a drawing is going to contain an optimal amount of (optical) information about the object, and if the viewer is going to be able to visualise the object, then certain drawing standards should be adhered to. It is not usual to draw up a set of guidelines for preparing archaeological drawings. Normally, they are a function of experience, rough standards, and what the drawer actually sees or how he interprets what he sees. The author, who is co-author of KnasterKOPF, feels that rules or guidelines on how drawings of small objects like clay pipes, which are full of detail, should be carried out are essential. They are particularly necessary to meet the need for accurate information mentioned above and to satisfy the requirements of the publication. These guidelines should prove to be a valuable help those scientists, local researchers and collectors who are confronted by the problem of making drawings of clay pipes for the first time. Editorial requirements stipulating how the drawings should be done for publication in KnasterKOPF are also included for those preparing a manuscript.




back

2 Description of clay pipes
Descriptions of clay pipes and the details on them should make use of the terminology worked out in 1987 by Martin Kügler (Kügler 1987, pp. 50-54; Kügler & Schmaedecke 1999) and already much used in KnasterKOPF and widely adhered to in scientific papers on clay pipes.



back

3 Making the drawings

3.1 Correct illumination and viewing of clay pipes

Even the best scientific draughtsman can only incorporate as much detail as he or she can see on the object. Since clay pipes exhibit small and often poorly moulded decoration and inscriptions, which are difficult to read on account of their often being printed around the stem, it is absolutely essential to use the optimal type, direction and amount of illumination. The recommended illumination is a strong light shining obliquely from top left (this is the illumination conventionally used in drawing archaeological material; see Section 3.5.). It is sometimes necessary to rotate the object under oblique light in order to make complicated designs and patterns visible. This often allows the smallest differences in relief to be seen. In addition, one can use a x3 or x5 lens. A x20 lens certainly helps to detect fine surface details, but it is not altogether suitable, on account of its high magnification, to use while drawing.

back

3.2 Content and arrangement of a drawing

A clay pipe or part of one including all or part of the bowl is best viewed from the side (Figs. 1 & 2)

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Fig. 1. Incomplete clay pipe: faint traces of burnishing on bowl; the stem design has been enlarged in the drawing and is skew, as on the actual stem.


Fig. 2: Incomplete clay-pipe bowl with part of stem; separate drawing of mark on back of bowl; auxiliary line suggesting missing part of bowl.

The pipe is drawn with the bowl on the left and the mouthpiece on the right. The stem is drawn in a horizontal position, unless the angle between bowl and stem is less than 90º; in this case the central axis of the bowl is placed up-and-down the page for drawing, i.e. upright (Fig. 3).
Certain details on a pipe that are not visible on the main drawing, or are too small, should appear as an enlarged drawing near where they actually occur on the pipe, e.g. the heel mark near the heel and a rolled-out drawing of the inscription on the stem should be above the stem (Figs. 1, 2, 5b, 6b, 7b). If a stem fragment that has no remnants of a bowl on it possesses an inscription that runs round the stem, then it is best drawn vertically. In this way the rolled-out inscription is more easily drawn and more easily read (Fig. 4). The figure should reproduce the actual orientations of details on the pipe; if, for example, a heel mark was originally stamped somewhat oblique or crooked, then it should be drawn like that (Fig. 1). When several drawings are arranged in a figure or on a page, then the positions mentioned above may be modified in a few cases in order to make optimal use of the available space.
It is worthwhile figuring a cross-section of the stem, since the thickness of the stem and the diameter and position of the hole can be recorded in this way. The cross-section does not need to be black as in the examples figured, but it should contain no shading, since it is a theoretical view, not a real one.

Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Fig. 3: Clay-pipe bowl with part of stem; bowl is drawn vertically on account of the small angle between bowl and stem.

Fig. 4: Stem fragment: decoration runs around stem; note that the design is not "cut" at the overlap but adjacent to it (left side).


3.3 Scale

The clay pipe itself is drawn natural size (1:1). Details, such as marks, and decorations or inscriptions on the bowl and/or stem, should be the subject of extra drawing(s) at a scale of 2:1.


back

3.4 Line width and line type

A preliminary sketch can be made in pencil on white paper, and the outline transferred to tracing paper. The final drawing should be done with a Rapidograph pen in black ink on tracing paper. A line width of 0.25 mm has proved to be best for the outline of the object, 0.18 mm for all normal details and 0.1 mm for the finest details, e.g. fine decorations, marks or scratches etc. made during production.
When an inscription or decoration on the pipe stem or bowl is "opened out" to make it more legible, then the auxiliary line along which it is "cut" to open it out should be a dash-dot line 0.25 mm wide. This type of line is normally used in archaeological drawings to denote a theoretical line or boundary, not a natural one (Figs. 4, 7b & 8c).

back

3.5 Shading

Shading is an important technique in drawing to portray a 3-dimensional object on paper, which of course is a 2-dimensional surface. Today, shading is done with dots and no longer with hachures or hatching. The object is shaded as if illuminated from the top left (actually or theoretically); hence shadows are towards the bottom right. The deeper parts of the object or depressions can be most clearly represented by shading them, even if they are quite well lit by the illumination used. Since clay pipes are relatively small objects, shading should be used sparingly so that it does not mask any decorations or production marks.

back

3.6 Rubbings as a help in drawing

The relief character of most of the decorations on clay pipes permits us to take rubbings of them rather than trying to draw them to scale freehand. A rubbing is made by fixing a piece of thin paper over the decoration or inscription, often around the stem, and rubbing gently over it with a hard pencil. One obtains a simple "negative" of the decoration on the pape (Fig. 8a). Care should be taken while fixing the thin paper to ensure that the line where the rubbing is "cut" to open it out does not coincide with the overlap produced when the design was rolled onto the soft, unfired clay-pipe stem (Fig. 4 left).
It is important to be able to see the overlap (if any) clearly, as it provides useful information about the rolling-on technique and the die used.
It is essential to realise that the rubbing is only a preliminary step, which possesses its own special errors. These must be corrected during the next stage, i.e. when making the drawing. In order to obtain an enlargement of 2:1 so that the fine details are clearer, the original drawing can be photocopied at twice the size (Fig. 8b). The outlines can then be traced in pencil from the photocopy onto a sheet of tracing paper. Constant care should be taken to compare the drawing with the original object to ensure that rubbing has captured all the details. If the pipe shows considerable differences in relief, e.g. seams between the moulds or high relief decoration, then sometimes any adjacent fine detail is not picked up by the rubbing and has to be subsequently added to the drawing by eye. In addition, the rubbing process is "blind" and tends to stress less important details like mould seams or scratches made during excavation to the same degree as the design itself. In such cases it is up to the discretion and judgement of the draughtsman to omit or suppress less relevant details and/or to stress more important ones.

Fig. 8

Fig. 8: Sequence of stages from the rubbing of a design around a pipe stem to the finished drawing.
a) a rubbing "cut open",
(b) x2 enlargement of the rubbing, and
c) drawing of the enlarged rubbing
- the left-hand part is shaded to demonstrate the advantages of shading,
and the right-hand part left unshaded.

back

3.7 Subjectivity: Should I add or omit anything?

Clay pipes are quite fragile objects, meaning that we normally have to deal with incomplete specimens. It is therefore important that a few auxiliary lines should be added to the drawing to give the reader an idea of the complete pipe may have looked like (or how the fragment is related to the original pipe). This is relatively simple in the case of a stem fragment; normally there are only two possible directions in which it extended. However, in the more complicated case of part of a pipe bowl, it is more difficult for the reader to visualise how the part was related to the original pipe as a whole.


Abb. 5
 
5 a)
5 b)



Abb. 6
 
6a)
6 b)




Abb. 7
 
7a)
7b)

Figs. 5-7: Several bowl and stem fragments
(a) without auxiliary lines, and
(b) with auxiliary lines suggesting the shape of the original pipe.


back

4 Editorial requirements for publication in KnasterKOPF
Apart from the above guidelines, there are still a few special editorial requirements. It is advantageous if the originals of all drawings are kept by the author and clear copies are sent to the editor of KnasterKOPF, who finds copies more convenient during planning of the layout. The editor would be most grateful if pure white paper is used for the copies, not recycled paper, however beneficial it may be for the environment! Drawings may also be sent by electronic mail; however, before sending them, this should be discussed with the editor.
Should you have a relatively large number of figures and wish to set out the plates yourself, then this can be done, bearing in mind that the print-face of KnasterKOPF is 23 x 17 cm. The plate edge should be at least 1 cm from the edge of the print face. Figure numbers should not be put on the original plate, but should be written in pencil on a copy or sketch of the original and enclosed with the original. Long specimens of pipes are doubtless a source of joy for the archaeologist, but when drawn tend to be larger than the page. Thus, drawings of very long pipes are often best reduced - however, this should be discussed with the editor first.


back

5 Concluding remarks
Drawings are an essential element in any publication dealing with archaeology, which is a science that depends heavily on the study of objects. Drawings possess certain advantages over photographs, by which they are unlikely to be superseded in the foreseeable future. However, poor drawings can considerably reduce the quality of a good scientific paper. In order to ensure that the quality of the papers in KnasterKOPF is maintained, the editors reserve the right to refuse any drawing that does not meet the required standard. The editors nevertheless will gladly advise or recommend drafting services but regret that they cannot undertake any drafting services themselves.
Anyone who contemplates publishing in KnasterKOPF and who cannot draw sufficiently well or find anyone to do it for them, can always photograph the material. Naturally, in this case certain standards must be maintained too. We are currently preparing guidelines on photographing clay pipes - these guidelines can be supplied on request.


back

Bibliography

Clay-pipe terminology

Kügler, Martin: Tonpfeifen. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Tonpfeifenbäckerei in Deutschland. Quellen und Funde aus dem Kannenbäckerland. Höhr-Grenzhausen 1987.

Kügler, Martin & Schmaedecke, Michael: Hinweise für die Erfassung von archäologischen Tonpfeifenfunden. In: Tonpfeifen in der Schweiz. Ed. by Michael Schmaedecke. (Archäologie und Museum, vol. 40). Liestal 1999, pp. 124-132.



Examples for drawings

Kluttig-Altmann, Ralf: Tonpfeifen in Leipzig - Erster Vorbericht über die Neufunde seit 1990. In: Knasterkopf - Mitteilungen für Freunde irdene Pfeifen. No. 12, 1999, pp. 74-82.

Kluttig-Altmann, Ralf: Tonpfeifen in Leipzig - Zweiter Vorbericht über die Neufunde seit 1990. In: Knasterkopf - Mitteilungen für Freunde irdene Pfeifen. No. 13, 2000, pp. 10-28.

Kluttig-Altmann, Ralf: Beobachtungen zur Technologie manueller Stielverzierungen an Tonpfeifen. Mit einem Beitrag von M. Kügler. In: Knasterkopf - Mitteilungen für Freunde irdene Pfeifen. No. 14, 2001, pp. 32-49.

 

Drawings

by the author, except Figs. 6a & b by Frau H. Gross, Landesamt für Archäologie Dresden.

back

Home
KnasterKOPF
Society
Sitemap
Search
Impressum

last update: 08/05/01
Kein Teil dieses Werkes darf ohne schriftliche Einwilligung der Herausgeber in irgendeiner Form (Fotokopie, Mikrofilm oder ein anderes Verfahren), auch nicht für Zwecke der Unterrichtsgestaltung, reproduziert oder unter Verwendung elektronischer Systeme verarbeitet, vervielfältigt oder verbreitet werden.