1. What is the main purpose of the lecture?
- A. To explain how archaeologists identify broken pottery
- B. To explain why Mayan pottery is more difficult to classify than other types of pottery
- C. To discuss different systems for classifying the shape of ancient pottery
- D. To explain why new methods of classifying Mayan pottery are necessary
2. According to the discussion, what can be learned by analyzing ancient pottery?
- A. Time periods of contact between different cultures
- B. Time periods when certain cultures thrived
- C. Locations where pottery was mass-produced
- D. Ways of mending broken pottery vessels
3. What is the professor’s opinion about classification systems?
- A. Many of the current classification systems are confusing.
- B. Using only one system could result in an incomplete or inaccurate analysis.
- C. New classification systems are needed to replace the current ones.
- D. Archaeologists will likely never agree on the best system to use.
4. What point is the professor trying to make when he mentions skiing?
- A. Archaeologists must compare the shapes of pottery found at different sites
- B. Identifying similarities between objects is important in archaeological research.
- C. Digital photography will soon help archaeologists to document their discoveries.
- D. Surface finish is considered an important part of classifying pottery.
5. What does the professor imply about broken pieces of pottery?
- A. They can provide more information than unbroken pottery.
- B. They are often identified improperly.
- C. They are not useful if they are very small.
- D. They are usually not worth documenting.
6. According to the professor, why is it often difficult for archaeologists to compare the shapes of vessels from different locations?
- A. The surface of a lot of pottery is in bad condition.
- B. Many ancient pots have never been drawn.
- C. Some archaeologists do not share the results of their work.
- D. Drawings of pottery do not always contain all the significant details.