Revisiting Old Friends: The Production,Distribution and Use of Peterborough Ware in Britain

Peterborough Ware is now recognized as the dominant ceramic tradition of the middle Neolithic in southern Britain during the period 3400–2800 BC, part of a wider north European family of Impressed Wares. Drawing on an extensive inventory of 600 recorded assemblages constructed by enriching previous lists with the results of development‐driven research carried out over the last 20 years or so, this paper reviews the production, distribution and use of Peterborough Ware. Support is found for the traditional sub‐division of the Peterborough Ware series into three sub‐styles: Ebbsfleet, Mortlake and Fengate Wares on the basis of the materials used, forms, and the decorative schemes preferred in each. The overall distribution of Peterborough Ware focuses on south‐eastern Britain although there are important assemblages from areas to the west and north, especially those composed of Mortlake Ware. The range of contexts in which Peterborough Ware was deposited is wide, but suggests a backward‐looking attitude in which the users of this style of pottery were trying to connect with their past.     

Khat: Chewing on a bitter controversy (Respond to this article at http://www.therai.org.uk/at/debate)

When the slender green succulent leaves of the khat tree are chewed, a mild natural amphetamine called cathinone is gradually released, and absorbed into the bloodstream through the mouth and cheek tissues. The effects, which last for several hours, include the softening of one's temper, increased gregariousness, and a piqued sexual appetite, while at the same time inhibiting hunger, anxiety, and feelings of fatigue. In the Arabian peninsula and the Horn of Africa, where khat is autochthonous, men have been chewing it recreationally for hundreds of years. Khat chewing has recently burgeoned to a global and pointed controversy, however, featuring in academic ethnopharmacology journals, the official publications of neoliberal development organizations, and worldwide in popular news media outlets. Khat has thus received multitudinous accusations of it being: an obstacle to economic growth; a pernicious narcotic; a positive mediator of political discourse in the public sphere; a public health concern; and a barrier to national development. Of these ambiguous tensions, Klein et al. (2012: 1) say that ‘Khat provides a unique example of a herbal stimulant that is defined as an ordinary vegetable in some countries and a controlled drug in others’, fingering khat as an exemplar of a globally contested object of concern – constituting different political stakes when viewed from distinct situated perspectives – and ready prey for anthropological critique. This essay interrogates some of the divergent formulations that khat has taken across the distinct political arenas that orchestrate the ‘controversy’. Following a Latourian actor‐network approach, I argue against a universal ontology of khat, suggesting instead that khat might be more meaningfully traced and apprehended through the political work it achieves in its various contexts and situated deployments. This critical reading of khat as a ‘thing in movement’ should therefore speak to the anthropology of controversy more broadly.