Ceramic technology and social boundaries: Cultural practices in Kalinga clay selection and use

96Citations
Citations of this article
209Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

This study examines cultural sources of variation in ceramic compositional patterning in two pottery-making villages of the highland Philippines. In Dalupa, many potters are part-time specialists whereas in Dangtalan, women make pottery less frequently. Previous studies show that both pottery form and decoration correspond well with Kalinga social boundaries, but how do morphological and decorative patterning relate to compositional variability? Although researchers have made substantial advances in our understanding of natural and postdepositional sources of compositional variability, little is known about behavioral factors that affect chemical and mineralogical compositional patterning. This study examines cultural practices of clay selection and use in an ethnographic setting, and undertakes technical analyses to assess the relationship between behavior and material culture patterning. Our study identified paste differences between the clays and fired ceramics from Dangtalan and those from Dalupa. Findings from our compositional research thus parallel earlier morphological and stylistic studies, and illustrate multivariate differences in ceramics from these two Kalinga communities. This ethnoarchaeological and analytical project contributes, therefore, to understanding objective parameters within a behavioral context. It also provides an example of how a combined characterization approach, using chemical and petrographic techniques, can yield insights on intraregional variation at a finer scale of resolution than is often attempted. © 2000 Plenum Publishing Corporation.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Stark, M. T., Bishop, R. L., & Miksa, E. (2000). Ceramic technology and social boundaries: Cultural practices in Kalinga clay selection and use. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 7(4), 295–331. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026518922642

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free