Cultural Practices in Kalinga Clay Selection and Use
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, Vol. 7, No. 4, 2000 Ceramic Technology and Social Boundaries: Cultural Practices in Kalinga Clay Selection and Use Miriam T. Stark,1 4 Ronald L. Bishop,2 and Elizabeth Miksa3 This study examines cultural sources of variation in ceramic compositional pat terning in two pottery-making villages of the highland Philippines. In Dalupa, many potters are part-time specialists whereas in Dangtalan, women make pot tery 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 postdeposi tional sources of compositional variability, little is known about behavioral factors that affect chemical and mineralogical compositional patterning. This study ex amines cultural practices of clay selection and use in an ethnographic setting, and undertakes technical analyses to assess the relationship between behavior and ma terial 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 commu nities. 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 p?trographie techniques, can yield insights on intraregional variation at a finer scale of resolution than is often attempted. KEY WORDS: ceramic composition; quantitative petrography; ethnoarchaeology; social boundaries. 'Department of Anthropology, University of Hawai'i, Honolulu, Hawai'i. 2Center for Materials Research and Education, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC. 3 Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson, Arizona. 4To whom correspondence should be addressed at Department of Anthropology, University of Hawai'i, 2424 Maile Way, Social Sciences 346, Honolulu, Hawai'i; e-mail: [email protected]. 295 1072-5369/00/1200-0295$18.00/0 ? 2000 Plenum Publishing Corporation This content downloaded from 160.111.254.17 on Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:24:12 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 296 Stark, Bishop, and Miksa INTRODUCTION Studying social boundaries through ceramic analysis has a hallowed tradi tion in archaeological research, and stylistic approaches have dominated research on social boundaries for more than 20 years (e.g., Carr and Neitzel, 1995; Hegmon, 1992, 1998; Rice, 1996a, pp. 148-153; Stark, 1998a). As the use of ceramic com positional analyses increases among archaeologists, more work is required to refine our understanding of different techniques and their applications to archaeological questions (e.g., Bishop et al, 1982; Bishop and Neff, 1989; DeAtley and Bishop, 1991; Drue and Gwyn, 1998; Neff, 1992; Neff etaU 1988a,b; Rice, 1996b). One fruitful, if underexplored, application lies in the analysis of compositional data to study technical and social boundaries. Interest in these two domains?that is, studies of social boundaries and compositional approaches?offers opportunities to ceramic ethnoarchaeologists, who can study both behavior and material culture patterning that potters and consumers create in various settings. Ethnoarchaeo logical research allows us to apply compositional techniques to a data set with a known provenance to test the validity of our techniques. This study combines ethnoarchaeological and analytical approaches to study cultural practices of clay selection (as the decision-making processes governing which sources the potters choose) and clay use (as the processes involved in trans forming raw clays into finished ceramics) in one area of the northern Philippines (Fig. 1). Using this approach enables us to examine sources of variation in the composition of Kalinga ceramics. Data derive from the Kalinga Ethnoarchaeolog ical Project, specifically from the two Kalinga villages in the Pasil river valley: Dalupa and Dangtalan. In this paper, we use compositional analyses to examine technological differences in the goods produced in these two pottery-making vil lages. These villages are closely spaced in a similar geological environment, and potters from both villages participate in a single exchange network. We give emphasis to differences in raw materials, focusing on the material characteristics resulting from the cultural practices of Kalinga clay use. Most ar chaeological studies must rely on inferences about procurement and production variables, without knowledge of either raw material provenance or manufacturing technology. In combining ethnoarchaeological data on manufacturing technology and behavior with compositional analysis, this technological study is a rare oppor tunity to evaluate the strength of interpretations that archaeologists routinely use to explain patterning in archaeological ceramic data. One goal of our research was to detect whether stylistic and morphological boundaries reflected at the aggregate (village) level are also manifested at the com positional level. This compositional study of Kalinga raw materials and pottery was able to link together regional clays (raw materials) and the finished products. Further, chemical and mineralogical distinctions between the two groups of clay sources were identified that represent discrete pottery-making communities. Given the homogenous geological setting in which these villages are found, with villages This content downloaded from 160.111.254.17 on Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:24:12 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms Cultural Practices in Kalinga Clay Selection and Use 297 Fig. 1. The study area (Kalinga province, Philippines). This content downloaded from 160.111.254.17 on Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:24:12 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 298 Stark, Bishop, and Miksa separated by only 2 km, these results demonstrate the potential of compositional approaches to provide fine-grained perspectives on ceramic production i?rthe ar chaeological past. In the following section, we discuss the relationship between ce ramic technology and social boundaries, and then we turn to the Kalinga case study. CERAMIC TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIAL BOUNDARIES Archaeologists working around the world have been interested in studying social boundaries through distributional patterning since the culture history era. A recent, revived interest in social units such as "ethnic groups" and social pro cesses such as "migration" underscores our abiding concern with identifying so cial units in the archaeological record of both complex and noncomplex societies (e.g., MacEachern, 1992,1998; Shennan, 1989). Researchers now use a variety of improved approaches to identify social boundaries in material culture patterning (e.g., Dietler and Herbich, 1998; Gosselain, 1998; Graves, 1994; Hegmon, 1998; Hosier, 1996; Stark, 1998a,b). Arnold and his colleagues (1991, p. 75) point out that, in most compositional research that focuses on archaeological ceramics, ar chaeologists know little about the potential variability of raw materials in terms of their location and procurement variables involved. Ethnoarchaeology provides a potentially powerful strategy for studying such variability because it allows ar chaeologists to investigate both the behaviors and their material results within a well-understood spatial and temporal framework (Kramer, 1985). A growing technological emphasis in ceramic studies has increased the range of methods available for studying social boundaries based on material culture patterning. Ethnoarchaeological studies that focus on the impact of producers' choices in raw materials selection (Aronson et a/., 1991; Gosselain, 1994) and on the variability inherent in raw materials sources (e.g., Arnold et al., 1991; Drue and Gwyn, 1998; Rye, 1976) have been especially useful in expanding our knowledge of resource use by potters. So, too, have ethnoarchaeological studies that study the relationship between the manufacturing sequence and social bound aries among traditional potters (e.g., Dietler and Herbich, 1998; Drue and Gwyn, 1998; Gosselain, 1992, 1998). Understanding the complex and heterogenous na ture of ceramic composition (which reflects both natural and cultural processes) in archaeological patterning requires extensive research using a variety of com positional approaches. To contextualize this study of technical choices in Kalinga clay use, we first provide a brief background to the study region and to the Kalinga Ethnoarchaeological Project. Background to Kalinga Pottery Production William A. Longacre launched the Kalinga Ethnoarchaeological Project in 1973 in the Pasil river valley (Kalinga province) of the northern Philippines (Fig. 2). This content downloaded from 160.111.254.17 on Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:24:12 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms Cultural Practices in Kalinga Clay Selection and Use 299 ^\\||L \ ?J. >) ?^-^&N Hi lu ?wA I I % Jt i \>\ K\{ \ ??""^ j >r^ 1 This content downloaded from 160.111.254.17 on Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:24:12 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 300 Stark, Bishop, and Miksa With field seasons undertaken intermittently since then, the Kalinga Ethnoarchaeo logical Project is one of a handful of longitudinal ethnoarchaeological