rice 1999 on the origins of pottery

5/26/2018 Rice 1999 on the Origins of Pottery

1/54

Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, Vol. 6, No. 1,1999

On the Originsof PotteryPrudence M. Rice1

Renewed research interest in the originsof pottery has illuminated an array ofpossible precipitating causes and environmental contexts in which pottery beganto be made and used. This article is an attempt at synthesizing some of thesedata in hopes of stimulating further research into this intriguing topic.Following a reviewof theories on the originsof pottery, discussion proceeds toa survey of geographic and cultural contexts of low-fired or unfired pottery,highlighting the role(s) of pottery among contemporary hunter-gatherers andsummarizing data pertaining to varied uses of pottery containers. It isarguedthat objectso f unfired and low-fired clay werecreatedaspart of early prestigetechnologies of material representations beginning in the Upper Paleolithicand arepart of an early software horizon. Clay began to be mo re widelymanipulated by nonsedentary, complex hunter-gatherers in the very LatePleistocene and early Holocene in areasof resource abundance, especially intropical/subtropical coastal/riverine zones, aspart of more general processes ofresource and social intensification (such as competitive feasting orcommunal ritual). Knowledge of making and using pottery containers spreadwidely as prestige technology and as practical technology, the kind andtiming of its adoption or reinvention varying from location to locationdepending on specific needs and circumstances.

1Department of Anthropology, Mailcode 4502, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale,Illinois 62901.

KEY WORDS:pottery origins; ceramic technology; intensification; complex hunter-gatherers.No innovation springs full-blown out of nothing; it must haveantecedents,and these are always traceable . . .

H. G. Barnett (1953,p. 181)

l072-5369/99/0300-0001$16.00/0 c 1999Plenum PublishingCorporation


2/54

INTRODUCTIONPottery and its origins have been crucial tropes in cultural histories

since ancient times. Pots and the raw materials and tools of their manu-facture contributed rich imagery and metaphors for the ineffable experi-ences ofhumankind, including theBiblical creation ofhumans from clay,birth, life, death, and sexual experience (for a review of examples in theNear Eastern literature, see Foster, 1991). Myths of many contemporarySouth American groups refer to clay, pots, and potters, along with birdsand vines (especially squash vines), in association with earthly creation andcosmic struggles (Levi-Strauss, 1988, especially p. 1821). Similarly, in thePopol Vuh, the book of the "dawn of life"of the Quiche Maya inhighlandGuatemala, gods Tzakol and Bitol made the earth and its plants and crea-tures. Glossed as "Maker" and "Modeler," these gods' names come fromverbs indicatingthe makingof shapes, suchaspottery vessels, out of form-less, pliable materials like clay (Tedlock, 1985, pp. 347-348). While these"deep structures" reveal the perduring significance of pottery in humanhistory,they contribute precious littleto scientific analysesof how and whypottery containers initially began to be made. An understanding of the ori-gins and use of early pottery requires that we move beyond correlationsan d observations to explanations:notsimply "How was pottery used?" but"Whatwaspottery's function? Was itspractical container usage foremost?Or was itsinceptiona development out ofsome other function(s), perhapssymbolic, related to ritual and/or status? How and why did pottery cometo be present in early material assemblages? Most fundamentally, we mayask, Why pots?

During the last decade, there has been rising interest in the anthro-pology of technology and material culture (e.g., Lemmonier, 1986, 1993;Pfaffenberger, 1988, 1992; van der Leeuw and Torrence, 1989), and in thiscontext questions about the origins and spread of early pottery have ree-merged as legitimate research foci (Brown, 1989; case studies in Barnettand Hoopes, 1995; Hoopes, 1994; Pavlu, 1996; Wang, 1995). Not surpris-ingly, given that the origin of pottery is embedded in a "complexmix ofecological, historical, economic, and social factors that differed greatlyamong past human societies" (Hoopesand Barnett, 1995, p. 7),researchershave approached these topics from diverse viewpoints. It is evident thatmultiple locations and multiple causes are implicated in the origin/inventionof pottery around the world. Nonetheless, certain circumstancesparticu-larly ecological/environmental settings and socioeconomic processesseemto be involved inthis phenomenon,and these warrantfurther scrutinyandsynthesis. My concern here isprimarily with"origins" in the sense of pot-tery's initial emergence (inception, invention, innovation) as a container

2 Rice


3/54

technology, and less with the subsequent spread or adoption2 of this tech-nology.

CONCEPTS AN DTHEORIES IN THEORIGINSOFPOTTERYPottery, as tool and as technology, represents a sophisticated mergingof previously separate domains of human knowledge and experience: re-

sources, technological processes,and needs; or, more specifically, clay,fire,and containment. Discovery of the changes wroughtin claywhen fire wasapplied has been recognized since the late nineteenth century as a signifi-cant technological leap. Following the lead ofTylor (1871,p. 273), Morgan(1878, pp. 12-14) distinguished "lower barbarism" from "upper savagery"by the presence of pottery, heralding "a new epoch in human progress inthe direction of an improved living and increased domestic conveniences."Decades later, Childe (1939, p. 90) hailed it "the earliest conscious utili-zation ... of a chemical change" in inorganic materials, i.e., the formationof artificial stone.Butwhenand why wasthis conceptuallinkmade betweenplastic clay and fire hardening, and whenwas it attached to the need forportable containers? To borrow the term employed by Schiffer and Skibo(1987), we might ask, When and how did these principles crystallize intoa ceramic "technoscience"? We can try to move toward an answer by con-sidering each of the three technological components of pottery in moredetail, and then reviewing theories as to their convergence.

Components ofPottery TechnologyThe primary component of pottery, clay, draws upon humans' knowl-

edge of the properties of earthy materials. Clay's versatility and physicalpropertiesmalleability orplasticitywhen wet and hardening when driedor heatedcoupled with its ready availability surely were recognized earlyin human history, making it an attractive resourcewith many applications.2Questions about the adoption of pottery, i.e., its wider incorporation into the containertechnologyofpreviously nonpottery-usingsocieties,are related to itsinnovationin the senseof the additionofnovelty intoamaterial assemblage. The spread or adoption of potteryisaddressed, in one way or another, inseveral publications (see, e.g., chapters in Barnet t andHoopes, 1995; also Arnold, 1985; Brown, 1989; Sassaman, 1993; Vandiver, 1987). Note alsothat I am not addressing in detail noncontainer uses of clay, such as figurines (see Clarkand Gosser, 1995; Moore, 1995; Vandiveretal.,1990) andornaments.

Origins of Pottery 3


4/54

Although parietal art (i.e., cave pain ting) is typically interpreted ashumans' earliest "artistic" expression, prestige technologies , three- dim en-sional representations, and symbolic behavior appeared considerably ear-lier, perhaps as much as 35,000-40,000 years ago (Hayden, 1995; White,1992, pp. 538, 548; cf.Lindleyand Clark, 1990). These representations aremodeled, sculpted, engraved, and sometimes painted objects of clay, antler,ivory,stone, and other materials in the form of humans, animals, and per-sonal adornments. The earliest surviving examples of ceramic technologymaybe found in Eurasia during earlyUpper Paleolithic times, i.e., the firedand unfired clay figurines at Dolni Vestonici (see below) and other sites.Clay and colored earths were perhaps the earliest expressive or "artistic"media used by humans, and as such they may have been employed for avariety of other needs [balls for slings, lining basketry, counting tokens,beads or ornaments, and so forth (Schmandt-Besserat, 1974, 1977a, b,1978)].The second major component of pottery manufacture is the use offire. Humans have ha d knowledge of fire fo r several hundred thousandyears (James, 1989), including recognition of its useful ability, when prop-erly applied, to harden objects of wood and clay. The site of DolniVestonici, an Upper Paleolithic seasonal (summer and winter) campsite formammoth hunters in the then-tundra of Czechoslovakia, provides intriguingevidence. Thousands of small fragments of fired ceramic, plus several"kilns," attest to sophisticated knowledge of the behavior and propertiesof both clay and fire some 26,000 years ago (Vandiver et al., 1989, 1990;Pavlu, 1996). The clay was used to form zoo- and anthropomorphic figu-rines, but on the basis of their experiments the researchers believe that theancient artisans did not intend to m anufa cture durable images. Instead,they conjecture, the artisans fired the clay objects while still wet, and theentire procedure wasdesigned to thermally shock the items, causing themto steam, sizzle, an d explode, perhaps fo r ritual or divinatory purposes.The third component in the pottery equation is recognition that clay+ fire can be manipulated in such a way as to meet a need for containers.This need wasmet, in preceramic times an d among contemporary hunter-gatherers,3 by making use of objects readily available in the environment,such as animal skins, gourds, large shells, or by using wood, bark, and fibersto fashion bowls, nets, and baskets. But when and how did an under-standing of the transformation of clay objects with the application of heat3I use the term "hunter-gatherer" here as a convenient shorthand term to refer tonon-food-producing groups who practice a broad range of hunting, gathering, fishing,foraging, and/or collecting subsistence strategies and whose settlement pattern is largelymobile or semisedentary. A great deal of variability in subsistence, settlement, and societalcomplexity is subsumed within this rubric (for extended discussion see Arnold, 1996).

Rice


5/54

lead to the production of fired clay containers? The Dolni Vestonici re-searchers (Vandiveretal., 1989, p. 1008) conclude that this Upper Paleo-lithic ceramic technology, "because of [its] social context . . ., could nothave led to pottery production," by which they presumably mean produc-tionofpottery containers. This early exampleadmittedlyasample ofonlyone casesuggests that clay as raw material and clay as [potential] con-tainer were two separate technological domains"prestige" and "practi-cal," to borrow Hayden's (1993, p. 203; 1995, 1998) terms-at least at thebeginning of the Upper Paleolithic period. When, how, and why did thesedomains coalesce?

Theoriesof PotteryOriginsFinds of pottery in agriculturalfields led sixteenth-century European

scholars to believe that they sprouted spontaneously out of the earth orrepresented utensils belonging to dwarves (Abramowicz, 1981). More re-cently it has been suggested that clay containers were inspired by "soilcrusts" (Goffer, 1980, p. 108). These quaint notions aside, we are moreinterested here in propositions that more closely resemble testable "theo-ries." It is important to bear in mind that the theories discussed below arenotmutually exclusive.

Architecture. One theory of the origins of pottery is based on parallelsbetween construction ofbuildingsout ofclayand construction ofpots outof clay. Analysis of early pottery in western Asia led Vandiver(1987) toproposewhat might be called an "architectural hypothesis" on the basis ofanalysis of the composition and forming techniques of early vegetal- andchaff-tempered coarseware found at sites in the Zagros region of westernAsia beginning around 7000 B.C. This fiber-tempered pottery was manu-factured by "sequential slab construction," a technique she feels iscloselyrelated to existing architectural construction methods using mixtures of clayand strawindaub, mud-brick,and puddled adobe (orpise). Calling atten-tion to the technological isomorphism in "using preformed elements with-out standard sizes to be stacked on top of one another," she proposed(1987, p. 10; emphasis added) that the innovation of ceramic technologywasa

. . .twostepprocessin whichforming developed first and independently of firing.Aperiod of time when people did not choose or did not know how to make potterywa s followed bya period when clay vessels wereformed andsunbaked, withoutbeingconsolidated by firing.Thiswasfollowedby the emergence of pottery as amaturepyrotechnical craft [ca. 5500 B.C.].

OriginsofPottery 5


6/54

Sheconcluded that pottery technology probably developed out of prepot-tery neolithic plaster technology or out of oralong with architectural tech-nology (Vandiver, 1987, p.29). Indeveloping these ideas, shedrew uponearlier notionsofDyson (1965),whopostulatedanearly software horizonto include the western Asian ceramic material.Apart from similarities in theforming process, there ar e also techno-logical links between clay and plaster in the use of fire. Moore (1995, pp .45-46) amplified these ideas, noting that the firing of clay containers inwestern Asia may represent a transference of prior pyrotechnical knowl-edge ofcalcining calcite orgypsumtomake plaster (see also Gourdin andKingery, 1975; Pavlu, 1996, pp. 30-31). Indeed, the earliest manufacturedcontainers in this region were made of plaster, including small vaisellesblanches inbowl and pan forms (Marechal, 1982) and larger storage jars.Thelatter were built into early houses in theLevant as permanent storagefacilities, and were

. . . often formed in molds made of baskets or other materials. The walls werebuilt up in thin layers . . . . The greatest quantities of [these jars] were made inthe fewcenturies before and after 8000bp . . . .This abundance suggests that theneed for large, durable containers to store foodstuffs indoors increased significantlyduring the ninth millennium, providing one reason, perhaps, for the inventionofpottery. (Moore, 1995, p. 45)Culinary Hypotheses. Traditional views of the origins of pottery con-tainers are kitchen-based (for review,see Brown,1989):According tovari-ou s culinary hypotheses, potteryw asthoughttohave been invented after

thediscovery that sun-baked claycould beused tocreate arigid containeruseful fo r storage, capable of being placed over a fire for toasting, andable to hold liquids if fired. Ideas abound as to howthis invention mighthave come about. Some center on theextensionofprior knowledgeofclay'sproperties,either forlining baskets toconfer impermeability (Childe, 1936,p. 89; Linne, 1925, p. 3; Morgan, 1878, p. 14, n. 1;Morris, 1927; Worm-ington and Neal, 1951, p. 9) or forlining ovens or firepits, the clay beinghardened when heat wasapplied (e.g., Amiran, 1965, p. 242).4Vandiver (1987, p. 29) sees early pottery technology in western Asia as part of a broadertechnological complex that she refers to as soft stone technology. Throughout the region"therewas atechnology of earthy pastes, using a large varietyofresources, from limestone,gypsum, steatite, quartz, hematite, etc., to sediments of the above in a wide diversity ofmixtures both withone another andwith water orother liquid organic binder, to form suchmaterials as plasters, pigments and ceramics, in similar ways for a wide variety ofpurposesbeads, sling balls,jar sealings, loomweights, daub, bricks, vessels, etc.

Ametaphoricalaswell as atechnicallink betweenthese technologiesmayhaveexistedin the ancient Near East, as clay, pottery, and bricks were symbolically intermeshed innumerous ways, including associationsbetween the creation of bricks and human birth andeven the birth of civilization (Foster, 1991, pp. 392-393).

6 Rice


7/54

The culinary origin of fired pottery containers is supported by the factthat inmany areasof theworldtheearliest known pottery mimicstheshapeof food containers made ofother, usuallyperishable, materials. Sixtyyearsago, it was asserted that early pots copied familiar containers made fromother materials because "pots were generally made by women and forwomen, andwomenare particularly suspiciousofradical innovations . . .[claypots would then] look less new-fangledand outlandish to the prudenthousewife "(Childe, 1936, pp.93-94).Gourds and hard-rind squashes seemto have been especially favored (Joesink-Mandeville, 1973; Heidke andStark, 1996). Early potsmayhave been formed bypress-molding, i.e., press-ingmoist clayinsideoroutside these disposable natural molds,assuggestedby the morphological similarities of early pots to bottle gourds (Flanneryand Marcus, 1994, pp.47-50).Similar forms (called "skeuomorphs") havealso been noted withother prototype containers, including bags or basketsofbirchbark (Speck, 1931), soapstone bowls(Griffin, 1965, pp.105-106;Sas-saman,1993), animal skin bags, and so forth. Wovenfiberbags could havebeen aparticularlyuseful prototype insome regions, suchas the southeast-ern andmidwestern United States. Here, pottery often hascordmarkinginthe interior, suggesting to Brown (1986, p. 600) that these vessels weremanufactured "over an armature whose presence left traces in horizontalcordmarks on the vessel interiors." Pots could have been press-molded insidethese bagsorcreated byspreading moistclayoverapiece of fabric ormat-ting which wasthen rolled up into a bag form and left to drybefore firing.

Another possible early culinary use of clay is in "clay cooking," thepractice ofencasing meat, sucha swholefish or fowl, inclay prior tobakingin afire.Roasting whole cutsofmeat in aclaycasing yields moistand tendermeatwhile retaining nutritious juices; smaller cutsor individualitems (shell-fish)mightbesteamed with less water thanbyother methods.The practicecan be found todayin manycuisines [e.g., Indian (tandoori chicken), southChinese (beggar's chicken), Yucatec Mexican (polio pibil), to name afew],andSwanton (1979,p.370) mentionsthepractice amongturn-of-the-centuryNativeAmericans in the southeastern United States. Amorphous fragmentsofburned clayare commonlyfound at early archaeological sites, and thesecould represent clayfirepit lining,figurines, orclay cookery.55Such possibilitiesrequire carefulattention,andunfortunately theevidenceisusually negative.For example,at theDianasite,anArchaic site inIllinois(radiocarbondatedto ca.4000-3700B.C.),fired sandy clay fragments were recovered that were notclearly pottery (Lopinot, 1991,pp.168-172).Since they were found in pit features, they couldrepresentburned firepit lining.Orthey could represent the resultsofclay roasting. Very little faunal materialwasrecoveredfrom the site, doubtless a preservation problem exacerbated by acid soils, but small birds(quail, pigeon), rodents, or fish might have been roasted and eaten, bones and all. For adescription of historic-period cooking techniques in the Southeast, see Swanton (1979, pp.368-372).

Origins of Pottery


8/54

In general, culinary hypotheses concerning the originsof pottery havelong embedded this innovation in the so-called Neolithic trans ition andthe interwoven processes of food production and sedentarization that ac-companied large-scale lifestyle transformations at the beginning of theHolocene (Childe, 1936). The theoretical grounding of the association ofthese processes is based, to a greater or lesser degree, in the prevailingdiscourse of Western-biased reconstructions of the origins of civilization:Societal complexity is believed to have originated in temperate (highlandand/or arid riverine) areas where the economic base of cultivated cereals(wheat, barley, corn) provided storable surpluses to feed large, sedentarypopulations. Pottery was considered an integral part of this Neolithic com-plex, partlyinorder toboil these grains,butalso because sedentary villageexistence permitted the use and elaboration of these fragile vessels.Most of the explanations sup porting the culinary context of potteryinvention and subsequent adoption fall into the category of what Brown(1989,pp. 210-211)hascalled adaptationist or enabling explanations.In response to the question, Why would people have begun making con-tainers out ofclay if containers for storage, transport, and processing werealready available in other raw materials?, adherents would answer that pot-tery provided a new technology an adap tation that enabled a range ofnew foods to be processed. This waspart of the much-heralded broad-spectrum collecting strategies for adapting to changing environm ents atthe close of the Pleistocene. In these circumstances, fired clay containersare thought to have had numerous advantages, such as (1) increasing ef-ficiency in preparing new food items, especially cereals (wheat, barley,maize), by toasting or by direct or indirect boiling (stone-boiling); (2)enhancing capacityand securityof long-term storage of grainsand pulses;(3) improving nutrition deliveryto children, nursing mothers, and the eld-erly by permitting preparation of soft cooked foods, e.g., for weaning(Crown and Wills, 1995, p. 249;Hoopes and Barnett, 1995, pp. 5-6); (4)widening the range of resources that could be used as food in the post-glacial period, effectively increasing the carrying capacity of the environ-ment (Ikawa-Smith, 1976, p. 515); (5) reducing the time spent in tendingor pot-watching (Schiffer and Skibo, 1987), compared to containers ofgourds, stone,bark, skin,or basketry used for stone-boiling; and (6)allow-ing processing of foods containing toxins or that otherwise could not havebeen incorporated intothediet without prolonged soakingorcooking(e.g.,Arnold, 1985, pp. 127-135,232-233).Related to this last point, geophagyingestionof earth, especiallyclayis widely known in human populations (and also among primates).The cause of this behavior is not definitely known, although many expla-nations have been offered (see Abehsera, 1990; Bicca-Marques and Cale-

Rice


9/54

garo-Marques, 1994,p. 8): toalleviate mineral (including salt) deficiencies;to detoxifycertain compounds, enhancing protein absorption; to aid diges-tion; toeliminate digestive disorders;and as aresponse tointernal parasiteinfestations.6 Clays' role indetoxification is a consequence of their well-known adsorptive properties.7 Geophagy hasbeen associated with humanconsumption of potatoes to bind or eliminate the bitter taste of glycoal-kaloids (Johns, 1989, pp. 513-514; see also Browman and Gunderson,1993). Clay-eating was practiced among Native Americans in the south-eastern United States and in sixteenth- an d seventeenth-century northernFlorida, the Timucua ate both dirt andbroken pottery in times offamine(Swanton, 1979, pp.243, 280, 281; see also Levi-Strauss, 1988, p. 175). AsVitelli (personal communication, 1997) suggests, pottery fragments mighthave absorbed fats or other nutrients from prior use in food preparation.In the Southeast, the ingestion of clays and earth also may have helpedeliminate tannins present in acorns an d other nuts that were commonlyeaten. Early usage of low-fired or sun-baked pottery could have inadver-tently, bu tsalubriously, contributed clay to the diet.One conclusion commonly drawn from all theculinary considerations[aswell from widespread myths (Levi-Strauss, 1988)] is that pottery was,as Childe avuncularly explained, invented bywomen. According to Lon-6M a n y plants, especially tropical forest plants, contain significant quantities of secondarybiocompounds such as lectins, alkaloids, cyanogenic glycosides, and polyphenols, which areevolutionary adaptations as defenses against herbivory (see, e.g., Janzen, 1985). Whilesomeofthesemay bedesiredasstimulantsorhallucinogens, othersmay beunhealthyorpoisonous,e.g., tanninsand toxins. Tanninsare large, complex molecules present inabout80% ofwoodyperennials; they"reduce the digestibilityofplant tissue bycomplexing withstarch, proteins,or herbivore enzymes . . ." (Barbour etal., 1980, p. 104). Toxins, whichare small moleculestypically in annual plants, are far more deadly, as they interfere with nerve and muscleactivity, with hormone activity, or with liver orkidney functions ibid.).These biocompounds may bepresent either in the entire plant or incertain partsof it,such as leaves, stems, or roots. Furthermore, the strength of the compound mayvary withthe age of the leaves (young leaves having less) and it also may vary with diurnal cycles: The quantityof alkaloid within plant bodieshas itshighest value in theearly morning, anddeclinesduring theday. Following itsdaily cyclic rhythm, toxicitystarts to accumulate againin the evening (Kano, 1992, p.104). Inhabitantsof the Amazonian tropical forest maycollectcertain plant products,such as the bark of the tree Virola theiodora(Myristicaceae; nutmegfamily), in theearly morning inorder toprepare apsychoactive snuff (Schultesand Raffauf,1990, p.333). Toxiccompounds are particularlycommonin certainleaves,legumes(see Kislevand Bar-Yosef, 1988, p. 176), and roots/tubers (e.g., manioc,potatoes) (see Stahl, 1984).7Clay minerals readily interact chemically withorganicmaterials inseveral ways (see Lagaly,1984). Clays' adsorptive properties result from their chemical and mineralogical composition,i.e., their cationic (or base) exchange capacity, which in turn is enhanced by their layeredstructure,smallsize,and plate-like shape. Many clay minerals, particularly expandinglattice"clays, have unf illed negative electrical charges onsurfaces andedgesofparticles and betweenlayers. CationsespeciallyMg, Ca,etc.can occupy these loci.These"absorbent" propertieshave long made clays useful in modern industry as thickeners, gelling agents in lubricants,binders, fillers, decolorizers, and strengthening agents. They are currently exploited inpollution control for adsorbingbiocides, clearing water, and soforth(e.g.,Singhetal.,1996).

rigins ofPottery 9


10/54

gacre (1995, p. 278), ". . . Pottery was invented by women and remaineda woman's technologyfor millennia. . . .pottery is one of the fewtech-nologies controlled bywomen."HoopesandBarnett (1995,p. 6)elaboratefurther: "Women, as gatherers and as the individuals most closely associ-ated withhouseholds, might also have been closer to the technologies andmaterials formaking pottery and better able toorganize the diverse tasksnecessary formanufacturingceramics."[Additional supportforthis generalposition comes from Sassaman (1993), Skibo and Schiffer (1995), andVitelli(1995,p. 61,1998);but see also Crown and Wills (1995, p. 248) andWright (1991, n. 6).]8

Several lines of reasoning have prompted growing skepticism towardculinaryhypothesesofpottery origins (see Vitelli, 1989) and the associatedfunctional/adaptationist rationales. Culinary explanations illustratethecom-montendency among anthropologistsand archaeologists(or atleast amongAnglo-Americans) toadoptanethnocentric, Western perspective inlookingat technology, especially at itsorigins.In this view, various technologieswhetheragricultural, stone tools, or ceramicswere developed because theadvantages they presented were self-evidenttoearly humans (Pfaffenber-ger, 1992). More importantly, traditional "Neolithic revolution" scenariossimply do not "work" to explain pottery origins. Although it was notedmanydecadesagothat agriculture, sedentarization,andpottery makingareindependent phenomena (Childe 1936, p. 89; Linton, 1944, p. 379), it hascontinued to be difficult to disentangle questions of pottery origins fromthose of both emerging food production and sedentary village life.ResourceIntensification. Athird explanationfor the originof and needfo r pottery containers is suggested by theories attempting to explainchanges in subsistence strategies during the late Pleistocene/earlyHolocenetransition. Such theories elaborate concepts of intensification (see Morri-son, 1994) among hunter-gatherer groups, and they are builton observa-tions and expectations concerning resource abundance, distribution,seasonality, and the human response of increasing sedentarization. Themost influentialof these hypotheses addresses agricultural origins, and isfocused oncomplex hunter-gatherers occupying resource-rich environmentsat the close of the Pleistocene. Hayden (1990) postulated that intensified8Despite the overwhelming popularity of the position that women invented pottery, I amconcerned thatwe are u n w i t ti n g l ypromulgating current western stereotypes about whodoesthe hunting and who does the gathering and who controls certain technologies. If theearliest clay containers andotherobjects wereassociatedwith ritual and/or shamaniccontrolof production, manufacture could have been byeither sex. Insomesocietiestoday,men cookthe foods for men's ceremonies and may also make the pots inwhich the food iscooked.With regard to late Pleistocene/early Holocene times, of course, we know very little aboutthe differentiation of any gender roles.In this context, it is unclear what significantresearchquestionhas been asked forwhich pottery wasinvented bywomen is ameaningful answer.

10 Rice


11/54

exploitation ofselected, highly productive resources (seeds, shellfish, etc.)by these semisedentary groups was accompanied by the emergence of so-cioeconomic competition on the part of certain "aggrandizing" individualswith "accumulative personalities." These individuals competed for power,prestige, and status bystaging competitive feasts featuring rare and highlydesirable foods. He concluded that

[t]he first domesticates should display qualities that can be construed as desirablefor feasting. While thiswill varyaccording to the nature of local diets, and perhapstastes, it can generally be expected that intoxicants, delicacies, dietarily deficienttypes of food, or any items conferring prestige would be prime candidates . . .(Hayden, 1990, p. 39)Extended to pottery,9Hayden's (1995, pp. 260-261)aggrandizer/com-petitive feasting model(s) can be considered to be a combination of the

"culinary" and "symbolic" (see below) explanations,but with more robust(i.e., fewer post-hoc adaptationist) implications for the origins and wideradoption ofpottery. Container technology would have played animportantrole aspart ofcommunal displayon feastingoccasions, primarilyasvesselsfor holdingand serving the featured consumables, whetherfatty,oily, car-bohydrate-rich,oralcoholic (orother)stimulants. This model also providesan indication where on emight expect to find the earliest pottery: areasofresource abundance and generation of surpluses that supported large,semisedentary populations at the close of the Pleistocene.

Several researchers have critiqued Hayden's original formulationa ndmoved on to articulate their own expectations concerning the occurrenceand functions of early pottery. Oyuela-Caycedo (1995), for example, sug-gests that intensification is based on adaptations to less predictable sea-sonali ty of resources during the climatic changes at the end of thePleistocene. He suggests that this unpredictability would lead to reducedmobility (longer settlement around reliable resources) and, thereby, to so-cioeconomic intensification (including feasting and changes in food proc-essing). Concerning pottery, he concludes that "pottery is just a tool thatis invented or adopted to cope with resource scarcity . . ."(Oyuelo-Cay-cedo, 1995, p. 134). Hoopes (1995) sticksfairlyclosely to the Hayden modelbu t suggests that pottery would have been particularlysignificant in areas9Not long before Hayden's "competitive feasting model" of agricultural originswas published,Goodyear made some observations on pottery origins in the southeastern UnitedStates thatseem to be accommodated by this model (as well as by general "culinary theories").Commenting on the association between early pottery and resource intensification, he (1988,p. 321, emphasis added)noted that "it might be more profitable to view the production ofpottery among Late Archaic hunter-gatherers not as a minor addition to subsistencetechnology but as a manifestation of technologicalintensification in the area of calorie an dnutrient extraction."

Origins ofPottery 11


12/54

where subsistence strategies focused on r-selected resources (such as fruit,seeds, and shellfish) asopposed to K-selected species. In particular, he be-lieves that potterywas singularlyimportant inprocessing and serving fruits,oils, starches,andbeverages from seasonally abundant tree crops, especiallypalms, for purposes ofgroup feasts. Avariant theory of resource intensi-fication comes from Kelly (1991, pp. 145-146), who focuses on patchy orlocalized resource distributions. He asserts that as mobility declines (orsedentarization increases), storage becomes increasingly important, whileat the same time significant changes take place in social relations amongan dbetween neighboring groups. Ingroups with high mobilityalarge num-ber ofindividuals interact (via marriage, exchange, etc.) with individualsinother groups. Given restricted mobility, he argues, a reduced number ofinfluentialindividuals come todominate intergroup relations,an dthey con-trol such relations through marriage alliances and/or feasting using storedresources. In such circumstances, it might be expected that decoration ofpottery would be increasingly significant for asserting social identitiesand/or boundaries.Whatevertheprecise mechanism(s) leadingtoresource intensification,the aggrandizer/competitive-feasting model provides some expectations asto the characteristics of the early pottery containers used in feasting an dthe sites where theyare found:

Early pottery will appear in thecontextofseasonal occupations,rather than fully sedentary settlement.10 Early pottery vessels will appear (whether by invention oradoption) among complex hunter-gatherer groups as part of

emerging social rank distinction. They would be expected to consist of special-purpose vessels,associated with accumulating, storing, preparing, and servingspecial foods; such foods mightbe carbohydrates in protein-richenvironments or fats and oils inareas withpredominantly starchydiets.

Vessel capacities (either size or number of vessels) should belarge, i.e., sufficient for storage, serving, and consumption of thecontents.10Hoopes(1995,p. 196) concludes hissurveyofearly pottery in Central America withaseriesof test implications about where early pottery might be expected to be found byarchaeologists.Atleast threeoftheseare more widely generalizable beyond tropical CentralAmerica: (1) pottery will first appear in the context of seasonal, rather than year-round,

occupation; (2) byextension, early ceramic-bearing siteswill representonly partof the totalsettlement system; (3) and there may be an "overlap" of preceramic/ceramic traditions atseasonal sites of interchange between mobile and more sedentary groups.

12 Rice


13/54

Vessels used for serving feast foods might be expected to bedecorated, bearing stylistic information pertaining to the"aggrandizer," his/her family, and/or larger social group.

Social/Symbolic Elaboration.This "theory" of pottery origins has de-veloped out of renewed interest in the social organization ofhunter-gath-erers past and present (see reviews by Aldenderfer, 1993; Arnold, 1996;Bender, 1981; Cashdan, 1980; Gregg, 1991; Ingoldetal., 1988; Laytonetal., 1991; Myers, 1988; Sampson, 1988; Testart, 1988).Agrowing bodyofdata is calling attention to symbolic elaborations in early complex (ornonegalitarian,or "transegalitarian") hunter-gatherer groups. Forexample,Moore (1995,p. 46, cf. 48; see also Hodder, 1988, p. 73) notes that epi-Paleolithic unfired clay objects in western Asia and elsewhere are oftenfigurines,miniature vessels, beads, spindle whorls, and thelike, rather than"practical,"utilitarian (e.g.,culinary) apparatus. And Vitelli reminds us ofthe specialized knowledge of resources thatwascriticalin hunter-gathererlife. Reflecting on the parallels of finding andgathering both plant mate-rials and pottery resources, she (1995, pp. 61-62, in press) suggests thatthis knowledge of certain materials an d transformationsplants, clay,firemay havebeenrestricted tocertain individuals such asshamans. In-creasing complexity and/or seasonal aggregation ofhunter-gatherer groupsin certain regions mayhave been accompanied byexchange ofexotics andthe emergence of prestige technologies, including the production anduse/display of identity-or ritual-specific objects made of clay and/or theemergence of specialists such as shaman-potters.11 The latter possibilitygains support through theorigin mythsofmany societies that ascribe magi-cal powers to creator-beings whose creations are ofclay(e.g.,Quiche MayaTzakol/Bitol).Along these lines, it is also important to note that significant amountsofvery early pottery found around the world arewell made and bear em-bellishmentoften quite elaborate embellishmenton the surfaces. Thiscircumstance has drawn attention to possible symbolic functions of firedpottery containers in complex hunter-gatherersocieties,and these functions11As Vitelli (1999) notes, shamans are likely to have knowledge of all manner of

transformations that were, to them, predictable, but wondrous to ordinary people.Transformations involving fire might have been among the most mysterious and powerfulof these; changes in objects of clay (changes in color; occasional explosions) could havebeen viewed as avenues of communicationwithhigher powers and fociof ritual. An exampleof such rituals, perhaps quasi-divinatory, might be the late Pleistocene exploding Venusfiguresdiscussed earlier.Early"specialists"among hunter-gatherers could also include traders, as exoticgoodssuch as shell and amber are known to have changed hands during the Upper Paleolithic(see White, 1992). Aleading workon the role of trade and chiefly leadershipis, ofcourse,Helms' (1979) studyof Panamanian chiefs.



14/54

have been interpreted in twoways. One isalong the same lines asstylisticanalyses of other artifacts in archaeology, i.e., using interaction theory, in-formation theory, etc. (Plog, 1978; Wiessner, 1983; Wobst, 1977); the otheris in the context of social intensificationand feasting, as discussed above.

LOC TIONS OFRECOVERYOFE RLYPOTTERY

Finding the"earliest"pottery in anyculture area isdoubtlessalogicaland methodological impossibility,a needle-in-a-haystack problem. Givenour current lack of comprehension of the precise circumstances leading topottery manufacture, it has been difficult to predict where to look. In ad-dition, the competitive feasting model suggests tha t early pottery migh thave had arestricted occurrence: Its presence or visibility inactivity areasshould be limited as a consequence of the limited role it played as a newstrategy for intensifi cation (Oyu ela-Caycedo , 1995, p. 135). These consid-erations, coupled with ever-present questions of preservation oflow-fired,porous wares, means that definitive claims for the earliest pottery madeinany area will in all likelihood remain elusive. What is presented below isan area-by-area reviewof existing (published) evidence forvery early pot-tery (as ascertained by associated radiocarbon dates), with no claim thatthese are necessarily the earliest ceramic materials ever produced in anyof these areas.

Jomon JapanJomon pottery in Japan is widely claimed to be the earliest pottery

(i.e., fired clay containers) in the world. Jomon settlement in Japan ha sbeen divided into a numberofchronological periods; of interest to us hereare the Incipient, Initial, and Early Jomon periods, from 12,700 to5000/4500 b.p. (see Aikens, 1995; Bleed, 1978; Harris, 1997; Pearson,1991).12Some pre-Incipient Jom on pottery may exist, represented by plain,rounded-bottom jars. Better known is pottery from the Incipient period(ca. 12,700-10,000 b.p.) onward. On the southern island of Kyushu, twocave sites, Fukui an dSenpukuji, yielded early pottery with applique deco-12A radiocarbon date (GaK-950) from pottery-bearing layers in Fukui cave in northwest

coastal Kyushu yielded an age of 12,700 700 b.p. (Ikaw a-Smith, 1976, p. 513, Table 1),while thermoluminescent dating of Jomon pottery suggests an age in the range of 7500600 b.p. (Ichikawaet al., 1978, p. 175, Table2) and fission track dating gave an age of9800b.p. (Ikawa-Smith, 1976, p. 513). For more complete information on dating Jomon, seeAikens, 1995).

14 Rice


15/54

ration,followed stratigraphicallybythumb-nailorbamboo impressions. In-itial Jomon period (ca. 10,000-6000 b.p.) pottery exhibits surface decora-tion made by impressions of cords or cord-wrapped sticks (jomon ='cord-marked') or byrouletting;inaddition, plain potteryand"thin, small,triangular clayfigurines" have also been found.

Jomon pottery generally occurs as "small, deep, pointed- or round-bottomed pots,"thin-walled and conical in shape (Harris, 1997, p. 24), per-haps copies of baskets. Hand built (usually coiled) and fired to ca.600-900C, these vessels are believed to have been used for boiling foods(Pearson, 1991, p. 16). The pottery iscommonly fiber-tempered in EarlyJomon, thoughin later periods it wasmineral-tempered (oftenwith mica).From earliest times, most of the decoration appeared around the rim, cul-minating in the Middle Jomon period (4500-4000b.p.), with its"flamboy-antly shaped and sculptured pottery" (Aikens, 1995, p. 14).

Jomon pottery-yielding settlements spread northeastward through theJapanese archipelago from Kyushu to Hokkaido. The earliest Jomon siteswere caves and rockshelters, though coastal shell middens were widespreadfrom the Initial period onward (Aikens, 1995, p. 13) and Initial period set-tlements have "villages" of semisubterranean dwellings (Harris, 1997, p.23). Sites lack evidence foragriculture, although grinding stones were pre-sent (Aikens, 1995, p. 13).

ChinaThe earliest pottery known thus far in China is ca.10,000-14,000years

old and has been found in several locations [except where indicated, thefollowing dataare taken from summariesofChinese-language publicationsbyUnderbill (1997), and Wang(1995,personal communication)]. Surface-collected materials from sites in the Alashan Desert of Inner Mongolia(Bettinger et al., 1994) in northern China indicate the presence of earlyHolocene pottery, perhaps as early as 11,000 years ago, but radiocarbondatesarelacking (Bettingeretal.,1994). In themiddle YellowRiver valley,the site of Nanzhuangtou yielded early pottery with seven associated ra-diocarbon dates rangingfrom 10,800-9700b.p. Vessels are thick-walled andporous,with plain surfaces; somemay bejars.To the southeast, in Jiangxiprovince, workbyMacNeishandChinesecollaboratorsatXianrendongandWangdongCaveshas reavealed early pottery inwhat they calltheNeolithic1 stage,datingto 14,000-11,200years ago(Underhill, 1997, pp. 138-144).Cordmarked pottery appearsin the followingNeolithic2phase. Still farthersouth, in the lower Zhujiang River and coast, coarse-tempered, low-fired,cord-impressed early potteryhas been found in levelswith suitesof radio-



16/54

carbon dates averaging 8000-9000 b.p. MacNeish(1992,pp.160-163)refersto the subsistence pattern of the period in this area as one of foraging;middens show use of aquatic resources (especially shellfish). Pottery mayhave been independently invented in several areas of China, each due todifferent causes, and its occurrence seems to correlate with early evidencefor increasing sedentarization (such as burials), reliance on cereals (grind-ing stones), and animal domestication (Underhill, 1997).

More widespread in China is Neolithic pottery, which dates to ca.7500-5000years ago. This material is found in fourmajor river valleys,onthecoast, and on theislandsofQuemoyandTaiwan.Evidence from coastal,island, and lower valley sites indicates hunting,fishing, and gathering sub-sistence economies emphasizing shellfish; interior sites along river valleysfrequently exemplify simple village agriculture (MacNeish, 1992, pp. 160-163), with taro and yams possibly cultivated. Although the pottery variesfrom region to region, it iscommonly described asthickand low-fired (est.700-950C), with mineral or more rarely organic tempering. Surfaces aretypically given some plastic treatment, especially cord-marking, incising,orimpressing, although painting also occurs (e.g., in themiddle Yellow Rivervalley). Common forms include bowls, jars, and tripods; large decoratedurns aredistinctive componentsin theLiaohe valleyin northeastern China.

Western AsiaFor several millennia before fired clay containers began to be made,claywas used in mud-brick architecture and to make beads and other or-

naments, stamp seals, spindle whorls, figurines, "tokens," and so forth.Many of these items were unfired or onlylightlybaked; indeed, small, un -firedcups, vases,anddishes made ofuntempered clay have been recoveredfrompre-pottery deposits. Moore (1995,p. 46) suggests that many oftheseearlyunfired clay objects "had symbolic significancefor their makers" andwere unlikely to have had utilitarian functions. As noted above, Vandiver(1987; see also footnote 4) refers to this dried or sun-baked pottery asmarking a "soft stone technology" or "software horizon" (which also in-cludes plaster technology). Virtuallyall the early pottery wasformed by asingle technique, widely used in western Asia, called "sequential slab con-struction." This can be related to architectural constructional sequences ofbuildingwith mud bricks or adobe (Vandiver, 1987, p. 29).

Throughout western AsiaAnatolia, Zagros, theLevant,andeven far-ther west around the Mediterranean coastthe earliest fired pottery datesbetween ca. 8300 and 7900 b.p. (Moore, 1995,pp. 40-44;see also Cauvin,1974). The inception of pottery was associated with a significant early-to-

16 Rice


17/54

late Neolithic transition, and the "first potters were settled farmers wholived in villages" (Moore,1995, pp. 44-45). Much of this pottery was foundintwo wares, one coarse and theother fine anddecorated(often by paint-ingor slipping); some was chaff-tempered.13 Vandiver's(1987,p. 10) analy-ses of this pottery suggested that "vegetal- or chaff-tempered coarseware[was] used for such utilitarian purposes as storing foodstuffs, cooking andother food preparation and serving."

AfricaRecent reviews of data on early pottery in northern Africa (Close,

1995; Welsby, 1997) indicate that the invention of pottery probably occurredalong the southern edge of the Sahara and/or the middle Nile valley (mod-ern Sudan) sometime around themid-tenth millennium beforepresent.Atthat time,theSahara regionwas amoderately well-watered grassland ratherthan adesert.The Nile valley would have been a particularly rich habitat;pottery-bearing sitesare associatedwith intensive use ofriverine resourcesand perhaps seasonally semisedentary hunter-gatherer occupation (Close,1995, p. 31). The earliest (ca. 9500-8000 b.p.) known pottery (KhartoumMesolithic) in the region had no apparent correlation with food production,although pottery commonly co-occurred with grinding stones.

13Vandiver (1987) studiedearlywestern Asian fiber-tempered coarsewares todeterminehowthe vessels were made. Her analyses incorporated xeroradiography, microscopy, andreplication analysis usingclayscollected fromarchaeological sites [the clays were identifiedby X-ray diffraction and differential thermal analysisasmontmorillonites (Vandiver, 1987,pp. 17,30)]. It wasdeterminedthat the vesselshad highlyvariable amounts (5 to 25%,byvolume, as measured bypores) of fiber temper, which were added as cut grass or strawrather thanasmasticatedfibers from the dungofruminantssuch assheeporgoats (p. 17).Th e resulting clay paste wa s"short" with a lowyield point and low extensibility; itcouldnot becoiledor thrown without delaminating from the fibers.Th e technique of manufacture was "sequential slab construction," which involves building ofvessels bystacking slabs on top of one another;" vesselsusually had roundedbottoms andburnished and/or slipped surfaces (p.18). This techniquewas"optimized" forworking with montmorillonite clays, as the "software" clay body represented "afiber-reinforced composite, much like fiberglass." Between 5500 and 4500 B.C. potterschanged to a "grit-tempered clay body with entirelydifferent working properties [which]freed the technology to adopt different formingmethods . . ." and also required that theclay be aged (p. 25). Sequential slab construction was found to be "an optimal butconservative technology"(p. 18)thatwaswidespread overmuchof theNear EastandeasternMediterranean region(p.20). Later changeor technological innovation, suchas the use ofmineral temper, occurred "not by trial and error, but by analogical reasoning, that is, bymodification of what is[already]being done successfully to serve a newpurpose" (p. 27).Vessel function(i.e.,morphotechnological and "performance characteristics")was not givenextensive consideration inVandiver's analysis.

OriginsofPottery 17


18/54

As to appearance, some ofthis earlyAfrican pottery consisted of "sim-ple vessel forms" that were "extensivelydecorated"with comb or cord im-pressions or rocker stamping in a variety of motifs (Close, 1995, p. 26).Burnished surfaces appeared late, after ca. 6000 b.p. In the middle Nile(Welsby, 1997, pp. 28, 30), Mesolithic and Neolithic pottery wasbuiltbycoiling, the walls getting thinner through time; clays were tempered pri-marilywith mineral temperbutalso sometimes withchaff. In general, earlynorth African pottery tended to be sowell formed and fired [to tempera-tures of ca.800-900C(Welsby, 1997, p. 28)] that researchers feel it "musthave been preceded by alengthy (though as yet undiscovered) period ofdevelopment," perhaps inwhat is now the Sahelian zone (Close, 1995, p.26).

As to vessel uses, little is securely known. In the eastern Sahara andTadrart Acacus, sherds were generally scarce (Close, 1995, pp. 28, 30):therewere "not enough potsherds for pots to have had regular importance incooking, storage, holding water, or, indeed, any other everyday affair inthese areas, and "Their significanceis more likely to lie within the socialand symbolic spheres . . . ." In themiddle Nile valley, however, potteryoccurred so abundantlyas to suggest that "pottery wasused in some im-portantand common practice(s)" (Close, 1995,p.31). Forms include globu-lar jars, wide-mouth bowls, dishes, beakers, and colanders, allcommonlywithrounded bases (Welsby, 1997,pp.30-31).Some of these vessels wereprobably used for storage, especiallyof fats or oils,or for processing mol-lusks (Caneva, 1983; Clark,1989). Others, such as the distinctive Neolithic"calciform beakers,"narrow vase-like vessels withpointed bases, wide out-flaring rims, and rocker-stamped decoration, appear to have been madefor funerary use (Welsby, 1997, p. 31).

South AmericaIn thewestern hemisphere, theearliest pottery known thusfar comesfrom eastern tropical South America. Excavations into shell middens at

Taperinha and Caverna da Pedra Pintada, in interior Amazonia, yieldedpottery-bearing strata with mean radiocarbon accelerator dates rangingfrom 7580 to 6300 b.p. (Roosevelt, 1995, Table 10.2; also Roosevelt et al.,1991).Vessels atTaperinha were small, low-fired, sand-tempered bowlsortecomates, some sooted; ca. 3% had complex incised rim decoration(Roosevelt, 1995, pp. 125-126). As indicated by faunal remains, the sub-sistence economywas one of"intensive foraging onsmall, abundant river-ine species"including freshwater mussels, turtles,and catfish;plant remainsare rare (Roosevelt, 1995, p. 126). Pottery from Pedra Pintada is similar

18 Rice


19/54

except for decorative variation; in addition, Roosevelt (1995,p. 128) creditsVandiver with the observation that the pottery was formed "out of claypatches rather than from clay rings."

Other sites in the Amazonian region also yielded early pottery, butnot as earlyas that from Taperinhaand Pedra Pintada. Sites of the Minaphase, near the mouth of the Amazon River in Para, Brazil, had pottery-bearing layers yielding radiocarbon dates of ca. 5500-3500 years ago(Roosevelt, 1995, p. 118). This pottery, which comes from deep shellmounds in anestuarine environment, consists ofplain, simple bowl shapeswith shelland sand inclusions(ibid.).Shell-mound sites along the coastofGuyana yielded sand-andshell-tempered plain pottery,the datesofwhichranged from nearly 6000 to 4100 b.p. (Roosevelt, 1995, p. 120; see alsoWilliams, 1997; Roosevelt, 1997).Very early pottery also has been found in the lower Magdalena riverbasin on the Caribbean side of northern Colombia; a suite of radiocarbondates indicates that pottery was made as early as 5940 b.p. (Oyuela-Cay-cedo, 1995, pp. 136-137).The earliest pottery had fiber temper, whichwaslater (ca. 4600 b.p.) replaced bysand, grog, and shell tempering (see alsoRodriguez, 1995). Many of the sites located in estuarine and riverine en-vironmentareshell middensand represent seasonal occupationsbyhunter-collectors (Rodriguez, 1995).

The recently excavated inland site of San Jacinto 1,Colombia, is be-lieved tohave been a long-term seasonal base campfor anextended familywith asubsistence economy based oncollecting rhizomesand seeds ofwildgrasses andhunting deer, tapir, and small animals (Oyuela-Caycedo, 1995,p. 139). Pottery fromStratum 9 was fiber-tempered, and consisted of bowls,spouted jars,andneckless globular jarswith lughandles(ibid.).While morethan 95% of the pottery was plain, the few sherdswith incised, impressed,and modeled decoration exhibited striking diversity (Oyuela-Caycedo, 1995,p. 139, Table 11.3). Comparison of the distribution of the pottery againstdistribution of fire-cracked rock suggested that the twowere not relatedin terms of cooking activities (Oyuela-Caycedo, 1995, pp. 140-141).

Central and North AmericaFrom these tropical regions of South America, techniques of pottery

making and usage seem to have spread throughout the hemisphere, mostdramatically northward through the Central American isthmus andMesoamerica. In addition to the6000b.p. pottery from northern Colombia,Valdivia pottery from coastal Ecuador dates some 5300 years ago (Dampand Vargas,1995). In Panama, reevaluation of the Early Ceramic Mona-



20/54

grillo complexfrom the Parita Bay area on the Pacificcoast suggests datesrangingas early as 4900 b.p.(Cooke, 1995),while early ceramics from sitesaround Lake Arenal in northern Costa Rica date as early as 3700 b.p.(Hoopes, 1994, 1995, p. 187). Farther to the north, inMesoamerica, earlypottery hasbeen found at sites in the moist Pacific lowlandsaswellas indry highland valleys beginning about 3800 to 3600 years ago (Brush, 1965;Clark and Gosser, 1995; Flannery and Marcus, 1994).The clear south-to-north sequencing of these dates has prom pted somedisagreement as to the role ofdiffusion in the spread ofpottery. Individualresearchershave argued for indigenous innovation in each situation, on thebasis of technical and stylisticdifferences (e.g., Damp and Vargas, 1995;Hoopes, 1995). It is far more likely, however, as Clark and Gosser (1995)have suggested, that this is a situation of adoption or reinvention of pot-tery. More specifically, they describe thespread ofpottery m aking through-out Central America and into Mesoamerica as an example of 'dependentinvention.' This variant of stimulus diffusion involves the acceptance ofideas and technical knowledge by a borrowing group and the technology'srapid application and modification inwaysforeign to its use by the donorgroup (Clark andGosser, 1995, p. 209).In North America, early pottery is best knownfrom three areas: thesoutheastern United States, the southwestern United States, and the Mid-west. In the Southeast, early pottery has beenfoundalong coastal and river-ine areas of Georgia and South Carolina beginning around 2500 B.C. Thepottery is fiber tempered and often occurs in open, flat-bottomed shapesresembling soapstone basins also used in the area (see Sassaman, 1993,1995; also Jenkinset al., 1986). Shortly thereafter, around 2000 B.C., pot-terybeganto bewidelyadoptedin the Gulf coastal regionof the Southeast.In the Southwest, unfired clay figurines and other items (includingsmall conical objects ca. 3 cm long) were found in Early Archaic cave de-posits in southeastern Utah (Coulam and Schroedl, 1996). These may bepart of a broader pattern ofmanufactureof fired and unfired clay objectsin the Southwest, similar to that in Eurasia. Containers apparently wereadopted later (between 400B.C.-A.D. 150 in southern Arizona) and areassociated with pithouses and seasonal (winter) occupation. Vessels, verysmallbowlso rjars, are untempered, manufacturedbypinchingor coiling,and have been recovered primarily from big houses. A ritual functionwas suggested by ethnographic analogy: the drinking of saguaro wine insmall individual containers (gourd cups) at the onset of summer rains andbeginningof the agricultural cycle (Heidke and Stark, 1996, pp. 8-9).Pottery containers were adopted relatively late in the midwesternUnitedStates,datingto theE arly Woodland period (ca.700B.C.).Inshapeand surface treatment these vessels hint at ties to pottery from areas to

20 Rice


21/54

the south and east (see Emerson, 1986; Brown, 1986, p. 600). In contrast,pottery in northern North America had many formal similarities with latePaleolithic pottery inEurasia, leading Linton (1944,p. 372) to suggest thepossibility of diffusionary origins, but he provided no date range for thisoccurrence.

OverviewWhat hasbeen reviewed thus far concerning the kinds and locationsof early clay use highlight some intriguing points. The earliest recovered

evidence of clay manipulation, comprising a so-called "software horizon,"consists of unfired or low-fired objects (such as figurines; typically noncon-tainer forms) usuallyfound at sites in middle latitudes, some dating as earlyas the Upper Paleolithic inEurope.Early pottery containers are frequentlyfound in low-latitude, coastal/riverine situations, often with indicators ofnonsedentary and non-agricultural subsistence/settlement patterns. Thesevessels typically have plastic surface treatments, most commonly manipu-lations such as incising, punctation, impressing, rocker stamping, and cord-marking, but painting and slipping (usually with ferruginous pigments) canalso be found.

The question remains, Why pots? Do these shared general charac-teristics and circumstances of early clay vessels provide clues as to the ori-gins of pottery? Why were gourds or baskets or stone bowls unsuitable orunsatisfactory for container-related activities in these situations? How dodata pertaining to a "software horizon" relate to culinary hypotheses andother models (e.g., the "accumulator/feasting" model) vis-a-vis pottery ori-ginsversus spread and adoption of an existing ceramic technology?

EARLY POTTERY: THECONTEXTSPhysicalEnvironment

Worldwide, sites with earlyfiredpottery containers share anumberoffeatures. One islocation: such sites are commonly (though not invariably)located in warm, humid, often subtropical or tropical areas, at latitudes toabout 38N. A related feature is that early pottery is often found in riparianenvironments, especially coastal or estuarine areas, and lower- to middlereaches of major river systems.

It is important to consider the possibility that recovery of early potteryin these contexts could be an accident of preservation. Reid (1984), for



22/54

example, suggested that the spatial pattern of recovery of early fiber-tem-pered pottery in the United Stateswas a function of climate, noting thatthe w are was highly susceptible to destruction by freeze-thaw cycles be-cause of its open, porous texture. Indeed, the earliest potteryin the south-eastern United States comes from south of the 25-cm maximum frostpenetration isotherm (Skiboetal.,1989, p. 137). Subsequent laboratoryex-periments indicated that this pottery disintegrated not because of its highporosity but rather because of its low firing temperature (ibid., p. 141; seealso Goodyear, 1988, p. 320). Regardless, whether the cause isporosity orfiring, the results are the same: fiber-tempered pottery is susceptible todamage by freeze-thaw cycles.Thesecircumstances raise nagging questionsabout the preservation of low-fired pottery everywhere, especially in lightof the software hypothesis. In some coastal and riverine areas, it migh tbe expected that early low-fired clay containers would be more likely tobe preserved in the alkaline environments of shellmounds rather than inacidic soils. But coastlines present other problems: many sites with earlypottery might now be submerged as a consequence ofHolocene sea-levelrise. The significance of this is most dramatically highlighted by westernKyushuisland (Japan), w here early pottery wasfound at Fukui cave: 12,000years ago sea levels were 30-40 m lower than today, meaning that theshorelinew as10-20 kmdistantfrom the present coast (Pavlu, 1996, p. 48).In addition, from the viewpoint of preservation considerations alone, un-fired orlow-firedpottery prototypesare most likelyto berecoveredin dryenvironments with their typically alkaline soils, especially warm, arid envi-ronments suchas the southwestern United States (Morris, 1927), andwest-ern Asia and Egypt/Sudan (Close, 1995; Moore, 1995; Ochsenschlager,1974).

However, the cursory survey above suggests that warm, arid environ-ments are not the primary locations where pottery's (i.e.,containers') an-tecedents are found. Instead, asGoodyear (1988,p. 321) noted a decadeago, locations of recovery of early pottery in many areas of the world sug-gest a strong environ men tal basis [for pottery origins] in riverine-estuarysituations. Thewidespread low-latitude coastal/riverine occurrence ofearlypottery demands closer attention to these environments, andprompts somequestions: Why is the earliest potteryfound in these contexts? What aboutthem might have stimulated an early need for fired clay containers?In general, lowlatitude tropical (i.e.,betweenN and S latitude 2327')and adjacent subtropical zones exhibit more environmental diversity andless seasonal variation in temperature and rainfall than do higher latitudestoday. What were these environments like duringthe Pleistocene/Holocenetransition, the period of interest here in terms of the origins of pottery?Efforts to generalize are fraught with peril, given generally inadequate pa-

22 Rice


23/54

leoclimatic reconstructions. Nonetheless, it seems that in parts of the OldWorld, such as saharan Africa and western Asia, the transition involvedgradual warming and desiccation, such that some grassland environmentsbecame deserts. In the NewWorld tropics, the opposite seems to haveoc-curred, the variably drier and cooler climate of the late Pleistocene givingway to warmer and wetter conditions.Coasts are high-energy environments and subsume a variety of bioticzones (see Carter, 1988), including barrier islands, strandlines, intertidalzones, estuaries, lagoons, and mangrove zones, as well as adjacent terres-trialhabitats.All of these vary in their productivityforhuman exploitation.In general, coastal regions are characterized by a high productivity,highresource biomass, relatively reduced seasonality,andh igh resource diversity(particularly when aquatic faunaincluding shellfish and mollusksareconsidered with waterfowl and terrestrial plants and ma mm als) (see Yesner,1980). Riverine and lacustrine environments, like coastlines, are also rich,diverse, and relatively predictable in resources and have the advantage offresh water; in addition, rivers are corridors for travel into the interior.

Subsistenceand SedentarizationA third shared featureofsites with early pottery concerns subsistenceeconomy: sites typically yield evidence of subsistence based on hun ting , col-lecting (seeds, fruits, etc.), and fishing or shellfishing. Many early pottery-bearing sites are shell-middens with evidence for incipient cultivation orsimple horticulture, but they commonly lack convincing evidence for do-mesticated plants or animals. Part of this lack may result from warm, hu-mid, environmental conditions and consequent limitations on preservation(or failure to recover such evidence). Nonetheless, this circumstance raisesquestions about container needs in these tropical/subtropical environments,anddirectsattention to the lifewaysand foodways of early hunter-gatherers.Although, asnoted, it is difficult to categorize area-specific paleoen-vironments of the Pleistocene-Holocene transitional millennia, some gen-eral considerations may be posited. In terms of the subsistence needs ofhunter-gatherers, tropical forests pose considerable risk (see Bailey et al.,1989; Eder, 1984; Piperno, 1989). While high diversity means more kindsof potential foods, the sources may be problematic: there are few high-calorie wild foods such as carbohydrates and many plants, especially theirleaves, are toxic.Thoseplant foods that do exist are oftenwidely dispersed,

difficult to harvest, unpredictably productive (especially tree crops), andbear only small, hard-to-process edible fruits or seeds.At the beginning ofthe Holocene, however, tropical forestsin theAm ericas arethoughttohave

Originsof Pottery 23


24/54

exhibited lower species diversity than today, with largerareasofmonotypicaggregations ofplant species an d greater terrestrial faunalbiomassinnon-arboreal, nonsolitary species.This might have made them more amenableto hunter-gatherer exploitation than theyare atpresent. Incontrast to theinterior forests of thetropics, coastal, riverine,an dlacustrine environmentsprovide less subsistence risk because food resources are more predictableinterms ofabundanceand accessibility.Alltold,itwould seem that optimalenvironments fo rhuman habitation in the tropics an dsubtropics, past an dpresent, wouldbe ecotonal: coastlines and lower reaches of river systemsedged by forest. The high diversity, biomass, and predictability of thesezones would have provided considerable dietary varietya nd correspondingneeds for containers to function in varied processing activities. Similarly,these advantageous subsistence circumstances could have contributed indifferent ways to resource intensification and sedentarization.And this raises a fourth shared featureofearly pottery sites: they typi-cally lack evidence for full, year-round, permanent, sedentary settlementandhousing, traits that were traditionally assumed to be necessary precur-sors to the widespread adoption ofpottery.There is,however, substantialevidence for restricted mobility or semisedentary settlement. In many ofthe coastal and riverine regions where early pottery hasbeen found, thesettlement/subsistence system ismore likelytohave been one oflong-termsemisedentary foraging an d collecting, perhaps with seasonal movementsfrom riparian to interior campsites.Subsistence/settlement activitiesm ayhave been similarto the followingidealized scenario, whichw asadvanced to explainth e originsofagricultureinthetemperateeastern United States. Smith (1992, pp.282-283)hypothe-sized that during the EarlyHolocene (pre-7000 b.p.), hunter-gatherersex-ploited resources distributed fairly evenly along river valleys.Archaeobotanical and faunal assemblages from the small camps of theseforagersindicate broad-baseduse offorest resources andpioneer plant spe-cies commonly associated with soilorforest-cover disturbance. During theMiddle Holocene (7000-4000 b.p.), climatic changes and sea-level shiftstransformed riverine an d coastal regions, providing more varied an dabun-dantdisturbed habitatsforpioneerplant colonization.Theregular seasonalavailability of these resources would have led to reoccupation and reuseoffavored site areas during the lowwater, late springtoearly winter grow-ing season." At the same time, human activity at these middens and/orshell mound camps would further disturb and chemically enrich the soils,providing "'anthropogenic' habitat patches for colonization byseedsofcollected or opportunistic plant species. These enriched environmentswould have been likely sites for both cultivation/domestication of some

24 Rice


25/54

plants as well as reduced mobility and sedentarization as the new cultigensbegan to yield storable surpluses.Keeley's (1988) cross-cultural survey of hunter-gatherer economiesanalyzed the interrelations among environment, sedentism, storage behav-ior, and socioeconomic complexity. Most important is the roleof interven-ing demographic variables such as population density and pressure incorrelations amongthesefeatures. Specifically, correlations between popu-lation pressure and socioeconomic complexity are extremely high: ". . .populationpressureis a feature of hunter-gatherers living in the more pro-ductive, more reliable environments rather than those inhabiting thepoorer, more variable regions." Demographic consequences of environ-mental variationsparticularly seasonal variations in productivitycouldbe drastic: "... the greater amplitudeofvariationsincarrying capacityin[poor,variable] environments . . .periodically trimmed populations . . ."(Keeley, 1988, p.404). Population pressure per se is not a factor inconti-nental climates where famine mortalityiscommon (ibid,). Bu t populationdensity and sedentism are not directly related; instead, their relation is me-diated by reliance on stored foods. Keeley (1988, p. 391) concluded that". . . thehighest population densities andmost complex [hunter-gatherer]societies are situated in the least seasonal environments for their respectivelatitudes." Moreover, ". .. coastal groups tendtohave higher densities thaninterior groups for any given latitude whether they are complex or not"(Keeley, 1988, p. 392).

None of this means, however, that pottery, sedentarization, and foodproduction can becompletely dissociated.The notionofsedentarization inthe absence of foodespecially cerealproduction has been slow to beacceptedbyarchaeologists [witness reaction to Moseley's (1975) "maritimeadaptations hypothesis"in the Andes (e.g., Raymond, 1981; Wilson,1981)].Reflectiononrecent case studies (e.g.,HoopesandBarnett, 1995) indicatesthatwemust decouple these twoissuesif we are tounderstandthe separateprocesses.But others (e.g.,Close, 1995, p. 32;Moore, 1995; Welsby, 1997)continue tonote theroleofsedentisminboth theinnovationand adoptionof fired clay containers.

Mounting evidence reveals that the origins of three key componentsof the so-called Neolithic transition (sedentarization, agriculture, pottery)are to be found much earlier, during the late Pleistocene/early Holocenetransition. They began with subtle adjustments to changing environmentsthat prompted both intensified exploitation of new, often abundant, andstorable foodsinrichespecially aquatichabitats,and restricted mobility,usually on a seasonal basis. At the same time, these early adjustmentsstimulated a Boserupian series of social and economic transformations, akind of "socioeconomicintensification"inwithin-groupandwithout-group



26/54

relations, resulting in emergent status distinctions. It was within this contextthat various kinds of technological intensification also began to occur, oneof them being the inception of pottery. Why? How?

Theoriesof resource intensification have not been fully explored withregard to their implications for the origins of pottery (for a first step, seeHoopes,1995).Such exploration demands,on the onehand, detailed analy-ses of the features reviewed above: the environmental, social, and subsis-tence contexts in which pottery containers were first manufactured andused,andlater recovered archaeologically.At thesame time,it isnecessaryto evaluate the relations of clay, fire, and container needs by returning tonotions of technological choice and function and examine the charac-teristics of the pottery itself.

EARLY POTTERY: THEPOTSPots asTools

Just as early ceramic-bearing sites share some features, so too doesthe early pottery found at these locations. Vessels are typically simpleshapes such as wide bowls, deep bowls, necked and neckless jars, dishes,flat-based cylinders or rectangles, and "griddles." They are commonly (butnot invariably) described as being relatively small, with diameters measuringca. 15-30 cm.Wall thickness appears to be highlyvariable. The paste oftenhasvegetal material, "grit,"or"sand"inclusions. Exterior surfacesare fre-quently given some textural treatment such asincising, punctating,or im-pressing (especially cordmarking); paint and slips are generally relativelyrare although there are some notable exceptions [e.g., red paint on somewestern Asian pottery (Moore, 1995, p. 42)].

The fact that much early fired pottery appears in coastal/riverine en-vironments raises the possibility of an earlier software component, perhapsincluding simple containers, in these areas. If clays in coastal regions hadfine particles of shell naturally present, these resources could have beenunusually desirable: An early (1873) chemical analysis of shell-tempered"mound-builders' age" pottery from the midwestern U.S. revealed that thepaste had the composition and properties ofhydrauliccement (pozzolanaor Portland cement): The investigator concluded that "the fragmentsofshellsserved the purpose of gravel or fragments of stone as at present usedin connection with hydraulic lime for the manufactureof artificialstone"(quoted in Morgan, 1878, p. 15). Vessels formed of such a clay-shell pastemight have hardened without being fired or ifonly low-fired.

26 Rice


27/54

Early pottery frequently had organic matter present in the clay, vari-ously identified (often from "casts") as grass, chaff, straw, Spanish moss,palm fibers, or other vegetal fibers. It is not always clear that such inclu-sions were deliberately added to the clay as temper, asopposed to beingnaturally or inadvertently incorporated. The general supposition is the for-mer, though, and this material is commonly called "fiber-tempered" pot-tery. A series of experimental studies (Schiffer and Skibo, 1987; Skibo etal., 1989) investigated the performance characteristics of this organic-tem-pered pottery and compared them with properties of mineral-tempered anduntempered wares. The goal was to understand better the role of fiber-tempered potteryin thesoutheastern United States (and indeed throughouteastern North America), where it began to be used about 4500 b.p. andcontinued untilfiberswere replaced by mineral temper (see also Sassaman,1993).This low-fired pottery was tempered withgrasses, Spanish moss(Til-landsia usneoides),or palmetto palm fibers and is found as small flaringbowlsand jars with primarily flattenedbases (Schiffer and Skibo, 1987, pp.601-602; also Sassaman, 1993), possibly made usingaslab technique (Skiboetal.,1989, p. 137). The researchers analyzed a large number of perform-ance-related properties of experimentally produced fiber (i.e., manure-)-tempered clay briquettes, including impact strength, resistance to abrasionand thermal shocking, heating effectiveness, and variationsinweight anddryingtime. They found that fiber-tempered potteryiscomparable tosand-tempered pottery in thermal shock resistance, but less advantageous thanmineral-tempered pottery in heating effectiveness, abrasion resistance, anddrying time. The principal advantages conferred by fiber-tempering werethat vessels were easy to manufacture (thereby allowing for an ad hoc or"expedient"ceramic technology) and lightin weight (therefore easily port-able), as compared to later pottery which was technologically better suitedto heating effectiveness.

A distinctive feature of all the unfired, sunbaked, or low-fired objects,whether containers or other items, is their apparently high "green" (un-fired) strength.14 Unfired clay objects typically are less able to withstand14Green strength refersto thedurabilityof aformedbutunfired clay body,or, in other words,itsresistance to mechanical stresses (compression, torsion, impact,etc.)without warpingorfailing (fracturing, abrading, etc.). Any object made of clay, whether fired or unfired, isbrittle andwill crack or shatter easily if dropped, given a sharp blow,or forced to supportexcessive weight. Unfired clay objects have less resistance to thesestresses than fired onesdo, since strength and hardness increase w i t h firing. However, some clays naturally haveagreat deal of green strength as a consequence of particle size distribution (generallyfine-sized), plus certain electrochemical properties(seeRice, 1987,pp.69-70).Alternatively,

green strength can be increased by adding of organic materials, such as f l o u r , cornstarch,m i l k solids, and natural resins, or mineral inclusions (especially angular particles) to theclay, or by increasing the thickness of the clay.



28/54

thestressesof active handling than are fired ones. As a consequence, theyaregenerally better suited tostorage orimmobile functions rather than toactivities in which they will be frequently moved, handled, or subject tothe mechanical stresses of processing food. Groups making extensive useof artifacts of sunbaked clay either had the advantage of living in areaswithclays havinga high natural green strength, or selectively madeuse ofsuch clays rather than less desirable clays nearby, or modified their claysto increase green strength, perhaps by adding fibers.

UsersOne important direction in rethinking pottery origins consists of a re-examinationof pottery manufacture and use among non- or semisedentary

"hunter-gatherer" groups (see Bollong, 1994; Reid, 1989; Ridings andSampson, 1990; Sampson, 1988; Sassaman, 1993). As noted (footnote 3),the term "hunter-gatherer" subsumes a great deal ofvariability in subsis-tence, settlement, and social strategies, and for purposes of attempting toretrodict any observations to prehistoric groups, it is probably useful toseparate these analytically. That is,consideration ofmanufacture and useofclay containers should address both the relationship of pottery to groupmobility(i.e., the practicality ofbulkybut fragilecontainers) as well as spe-cific utilitarian and social needsfor pots (food preparation, serving, and/orstorage among non-food-producers) in different environmental settings.

Once regarded as a sort of ethnographic oddity, it is now increasinglyapparent that nonsedentary, nonagricultural peoples make frequentuse ofpottery. In an ethnographic sample of 862 societies, 103 (nearly 12%) werepottery-making, nonsedentary societies (Arnold, 1985, p. 120). This surveyofnomadic, transhumant,an dsemi-sedentary groups concluded that a mo-bile existence affects pottery manufacture and use not primarily becauseofpottery'sfragility.Rather,it was"because settlementimpermanence lim-its the amount of time in one place needed to make pottery, can complicateobtaining suitable resources and may reduce opportunities for making pot-teryin afavorable climate" (Arnold, 1985, p. 119). Arnold goeson toassertthat the reason pottery making isfoundamong most of these non- or par-tially sedentary groups today isthat they occupy regions that have a favor-able climate for dryingand firing pottery. A different reason issuggestedby Bettinger et al. (1994, p. 95), who note a connection between ceramiccookware and intensity of land use in fuel-poor settings: pottery extends"the adaptive range ofhunter-gatherers byincreasing the utility oflocallyavailable fuels needed to prepare a broad spectrum of resources . . .,"

2 8 Rice


29/54

which in turn permits use of more marginal habitats and more intensiveuseof traditional habitats for longer periods ... ."Examples of pottery use by non-sedentary populations include theBushmen, Ute, and Seri [see Skibo et al. (1989, p. 123) for references].Karoo Bushman made grass-tempered pottery bowls decorated withstamp-impressed motifs (seven motif groups); these dateto A.D . 1500-1800(Ridings and Sampson, 1990).Elsewhere,objects of unfired, sun-dried claycan be found in parts of Papua New Guinea (May and Tuckson, 1982, p.7) and among Bedouin pastoralists (see above; Ochsenschlager, 1974). Innorthern North America, available ethnographic descriptions of potteryused by hunter-gatherers15 indicate that it was tempered with sand, grit, orcrushed rock and supported by organic mate rials while drying; vessels hadthick walls and were flat-bottomed or bucket-shaped with wide mouths;and they were generally sun-dried, low-fired,or bake d (i.e., subceramic )(Reid, 1989, p. 171). The interior and exterior surfaces were often given afatty coating, and pots were used to cook meat or fish and render oils orfat (ibid.).

These ethnographic observations, together with discoveries of earlypottery from sites in two hemispheres, indicate that use of low-fired orunfired clayutensilsa software horizon m aybe more widespread thanrecognized in prehistoric times. Straw- and chaff-temperedunfired mudobjects am ong the Bedou in of southern Iraq had surprisingly long use-lives: a mud vessel would last anywhere from a year to six and a half yearsi fwelltaken careof" (Ochsenschlager, 1974,p. 164).The Bedouin never takethe unfired clay objects with them when they move to new camps, though(ibid., p. 165). Forms included ovens, incense burners, braziers, griddles(forbak ing rice bread), dishes, storage jars, grain mills, mor tars a nd pestles,jewelry for the dead, and toys(ibid.,pp. 165-172). Six types of mu d con-tainers have been recovered from excavations into Early Dynastic contextsat the site of al-Hiba (ibid., p. 173).

UsesSpecific uses of early pottery rarely are discussed nor are data com-monly provided to facilitate such determinations. In line with prevailing

15In northern North America, pottery wasusedby the Gros Ventre, Assiniboine, PlainsCree,Northern Saltaux, Kaska, Kutchin, Tanana, Tainana, Blackfoot, K utenai, Sarsi, Ingalik,andKoyukon and various Eskimo groups (Reid, 1989, p. 170; also Stimmell and Stromberg,1986, p. 247). Linton discussed this northern pottery tradition at length, concluding that itwas "an integralpartof various hunting, food-gathering cultures, and thevessels it producedwere structurally and functionally adapted to the needs of nomads" (1944, p. 379).



30/54

culinary views of the origins and spread of pottery, the three most generalcategories of vessel function focuson food: its processing (especially cook-ing), storage, and transport (especially sewing).Cooking. In considering uses of pottery by hunter-gatherers, Reid(1989, pp. 168-170) summarized observations about two types of cookingprocesses.One type is dry heating, such as broiling, roasting, baking, andparching.Dryheatingisparticularly suitedto meats, requires temperaturesfrom ca. 150 to 625C, and often results in loss of much of the nutritivevalue of meats. Another typeofcooking ismoist heating, such as simmer-ing, boilingor stone-boiling, and steaming. These methods require lowertemperatures (ca. 85-100C) and are used forpreparing stews and soups,rendering oils, and boiling starchy seeds to make them digestible.Cookingespecially boilingplacesconsiderable stress on a pot, par-ticularly thermal and mechanical stresses. Cookpots mustbe able towith-stand sudden changes intemperature and lowporosity isusually desirableto reduce these thermal stresses. At the same time, however, pots shouldhave lowpermeability if cooking liquids is the intended use.These inter-related properties of porosity, permeability, and thermal stress resistancecan be manipulated by selection of raw materials and by manufacturingdecisions such asshape and surface treatments.Tojudge from generally inadequate published descriptions, the prop-erties of early pottery suggest theymayhave been reasonably well suitedto cooking (see Linton, 1944). Described ashavingsimple contours,usuallywith rounded or pointed bases, and agrittyor friablepastewith primarilysand or fiber temper, thepots would have been porous and hence able towithstand thermal shocking. Applyingamaterials engineering perspectiveto infer usage of fiber-tempered vessels, Reid (1989, p. 174) drew an im-plicit analogy between modern hunter-gatherer pottery and prehistoric fi-ber-tempered wares. He suggested that highly porous, underfired orsubceramic vessels provide relatively good insulation but poor heat con-ductivity,andhencearebetter suitedfor"stone boiling" thanforplacementover a fire.The flat-bottomedvessels sometimes reported areparticularlyinteresting, given that corners are stress points that may lead to unevenheating and/or cracking (see Woods, 1986). These vessels may have beenused for stone boiling or in dry cooking over fires to parch seeds and grains,or asgriddles fortoasting starchy doughs.

Roughening the surface of a cookpot by cord marking, impressing,punctation, and so forth, would have aided handlingof heavy, full vesselswhenhot or wet and, also, may havefurther aided heat transfer and ther-mal shock resistance (see Rice, 1996, pp. 141-142; Schiffer etal.,1994).The apparent thickness of the vessel walls of much of this pottery ma yhave reduced heat transfer or caused thermal gradients during drying of

Rice


31/54

thenewly made pots inhumid environments, during initialfiring, an d dur-ing use over afire.These disadvantages might have been compensated bythe greater mechanical stress resistance (reduced fragility) of thick-walledvessels, even in the unfired state: a decided advantage for use in stone-boiling. Since all pottery represents compromises between the needs andcharacteristics of available resources, design, manufacturing technology,and usage (see Schiffer and Skibo, 1997), in the case of cooking with thesepots potential problems caused bywall thickness mayhave been offset byrelatively high porosity and strength.

Thereislittle mentiono fsootingonthis early pottery (cf. Ikawa-Smith,1976; Roosevelt, 1995, p. 126; Sassaman, 1995), but whether sooting wasgenuinely absent or simplynot recorded byinvestigators isunknown. Per-haps the vessels were used not for "direct cooking" over a fire but, rather,for "indirect cooking" (stone boiling). The use of stone-boiling cookingstrategies isoften identified archaeologicallyby thepresence offire-crackedstones (although these can also indicate pit-roasting). Fire-cracked rock an-tedates pottery at coastal sites in Japan (Ikawa-Smith, 1976, p. 514), forexample,and early Jomon pots in Japan were described as "cookingpots."Similarly, early pottery in the American Midwest, adopted quite late in thehistory of the craft(rarely before ca. 700B.C.),wasprobably used in stone-boiling (Braun, 1983).On the basis of their experiments with various tem-pering materials, Schiffer and Skibo (1987; also Arnold, 1985, p. 128),concluded that potteryw asmost likely adopted "because cookingin apoteven if ittook the form ofstone boilingwould require less attention thancooking in skinsor with hot rocks in baskets ... the cooking pot mayhaverepresented a technological simplification . . . [that]freedbusy handsfor more demanding tasks." In other words, the relationship

rice 1999 on the origins of pottery

Documents

origins of pottery

unfired pottery

roles of pottery

pottery beganto

clay tedlock

cultural contexts of

practical technology

prestige technology