Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This article presents an uncertainty-aware, object-level framework for documenting inscription-bearing and inscription-like ceramics and applies it in a methodological pilot study of selected Changsha-related Chinese and Nishapur–Samanid/eastern Iranian objects. Ceramic inscriptions are examined not only as texts or secondary decoration but as visual and surface-organizing features. The analytical corpus comprises 14 object-level entries, 11 Level 1 vessels and three separately analyzed Level 2 entries, with two further contextual records. Drawing on museum photographs, catalogue images, and documentation, each entry was coded for script category and certainty, surface zone, placement structure, legibility, visual dominance, and evidential confidence, and inter-coder agreement was assessed for the initial and finalized coding sets. Among the Level 1 vessels, the primary inscription zone was the exterior body in four of five Changsha-related records and the rim in five of six Iranian records. Recurring inscriptional modes include body-distributed, scattered-interior, and sign-like writing in the Changsha-related material and rim-based, radial, panel-based, and multi-register arrangements in the Iranian vessels. These comparative observations are descriptive and not representative of either tradition. The study shows how placement, legibility, and evidential confidence can be recorded without forcing uncertain forms into secure categories.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rahmandoust et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: