"The poor quality of the craftsmanship suggests the potter was simply a novice, or perhaps a young child."
Humans in 100 years when they find my git repo:
Ahw hell na, we burying that thing in Cheyenne Mountain under the elephants foot and other radioactive waste.
It obviously shows how limited they were at the time
Remember, due to undersampling biases we can expect any feature we notice on preserved remains to be actually much worse at the general population.
I have even heard the argument that only abnormal people were buried in the neolithic. Following this logic we can assume that remains that appear normal are abnormal in ways that are not preserved (like the skin or behavior)
I heard a argument about swords comparing to clothes.
Useful clothes you use daily and later recycle it. Wedding dress you preserve. Swords was probably the same thing, the useful one is used in battles and the metal recycle, the special ones was preserved.
That pot got stashed safley away in some corner, while the rest where actually used and eventually broken over time.
There he goes again... giving all proud, actually skilled Ubaid potters a bad name.
Of course it had to be his jar that survived intact.Luckily for him, you wouldn't expect it to look that great after 4000 years.
