Aims
To what extent is the visual variation within and between the “Buff Ware”, “Brittle Ware” and “Mercury Jars” at both sites also evident in their microstructure and elemental composition?
Can we infer differences in production (raw material, quality control, techniques) from these variations?
To what extent can we observe variation in ceramic fabrics and compositions between 12th–14th century Kota Cina and 14th–15th century Singapore on any of these levels, and infer differences in stoneware production and trade dynamics, vis-à-vis Chinese ceramic industries?
Can we discern if “Mercury jars” contained mercury, by identifying traces of mercury on their interior surfaces?
In addition to these research questions, the lack of previous study of stoneware on this resolution suggests a need to develop a framework to enable further research concerning ceramic production and distribution on this overlooked body of material. This may prove useful not merely for the wealth of stoneware currently stored within the NUS-NTU Archaeological Laboratory, but for numerous other contemporary vessels and sherds which generally are only broadly classified as “trade wares”.