What if the Local is Exotic and the Imported Mundane?

Measuring Ceramic Exchanges in Mormon Utah
  • Timothy James Scarlett


No archaeologist in western North America is shocked to discover a fragment of White Improved Earthenware. Locally manufactured ceramics, however, are rare and poorly understood. Archaeometric and historical analyses reveal the true complexity of ceramic exchanges in Utah, where pottery and ceramics served key roles in the performance of social and religious identity. This chapter reviews the progress of the Utah Pottery Project, established in 1999 to map the colonization of immigrant potters into the Mormon Domain. Crocks, pots, and jars represent connections between people in space and through time, some readily mapped while the complexity of others are difficult to reduce in a Geographic Information System (GIS) analysis. Utah Pottery Project scholars work toward an integrative approach centered upon exchange where the local is exotic and the foreign is mundane.


Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis Historical Archaeologist Kiln Site Immigrant Potter Consumption Site 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Adams, W.H. (1977). Silcott, Washington: ethnoarchaeology of a rural American community. Pullman: Department of Anthropology, Washington State University.Google Scholar
  2. Appadurai, A. (Ed.) (1986). The social life of things: commodities in cultural perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Arnold, D.E., Neff, H.A., Bishop, R.L., Glascock, M.D. (1999). Testing interpretative assumptions of neutron activation analysis: contemporary pottery in Yucatan, 1964-1994. In E.S. Chilton (Ed.), Material meanings: critical approaches to the interpretation of material culture (pp. 61-84). Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.Google Scholar
  4. Arrington, L.O. (1958). Great Basin kingdom: an economic history of the Latter-day Saints, 1830-1900. Cambridge, Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Asad, T. (Ed.) (1973). Anthropology and the colonial encounter. Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bagley, W. (2002). Blood of the prophets: Brigham Young and the massacre at Mountain Meadows. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
  7. Beaudry, M.C., Cook, L.J., and Mrozowski, S.A. (1991). Artifacts and active voices: material culture as social discourse. In R.H. McGuire and R. Paynter (Eds.), The archaeology of inequality (pp. 150-191). Cambridge: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  8. Brooks, J. (1962). The Mountain Meadows Massacre. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
  9. Clifford, J.C. (1988). The predicament of culture: twentieth-century ethnography, literature, and art. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Cook, L.J., Yamin, R., and McCarthy, J.P. (1996). Shopping as meaningful action: toward a redefinition of consumption in historical archaeology. Historical Archaeology, 30(4), 50-56.Google Scholar
  11. Descantes, C., Neff, H., Glascock, M.D. (2002). Yapese prestige goods: the INAA evidence for an Asian dragon jar. In M. Glascock (Ed.), Geochemical evidence for long-distance exchange (pp. 229-256). Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group.Google Scholar
  12. Earle, T.K., and Ericson, J.E. (Eds.) (1977). Exchange systems in prehistory. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  13. Ericson, J.E., and Earle, T.K. (Eds.) (1982). Contexts for prehistoric exchange. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  14. Fabian, J. (1983). Time and the other: how anthropology makes its object. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Fowler, C. (2004). The archaeology of personhood: an anthropological approach. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Griffin, J.B., and Gordus. A.A. (1967). Neutron activation studies of the source of prehistoric Hopewellian obsidian implements from the Middle West. Science, 158, 528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hardesty, D.L. (1999a). Archaeological models of the modern world in the Great Basin: world systems and beyond. C. Beck (Ed.), Current models in Great Basin anthropology (pp. 213-219). Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.Google Scholar
  18. Hardesty, D.L. (1999b). Historical archaeology in the next millennium: a forum. Historical Archaeology, 33(2), 51-58.Google Scholar
  19. Henrichsen, K. (1999). Provo, the primary pottery production center of pioneer Utah. Paper presented at the Provo Sesquicentennial Conference, 10 September, 1999. Provo, Utah. MS in possession of the author.Google Scholar
  20. Hodder, I. (1974). Regression analysis of some trade and marketing patterns. World Archaeology, 6:172-189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Irvine, W.B. (2006). On desire: why we want what we want. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Kopytoff, I. (1986). The cultural biography of things: commoditization as process. In A. Appadurai (Ed.), The social life of things: commodities in cultural perspective (pp. 3-63). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Leonard, G.M. (2009). Revisiting the massacre at Mountain Meadows. St. George, UT: Dixie State College.Google Scholar
  24. Levi-Strauss, C. (1969). The elementary structures of kinship. Boston: Beacon.Google Scholar
  25. Levi-Strauss, C. (1949). Les structures elémentaires de la parenté. Paris: Moutin.Google Scholar
  26. Little, N.C., Scarlett, T.J., Speakman, R.J., Merritt, C.W., and Glascock, M.D. (2007). Analysis of historic Latter-day Saint pottery glazes by LA-ICP-MS. In M.D. Glascock, R.J. Speakman, and R.S. Popelka (Eds.), Archaeological chemistry: analytical methods and archaeological interpretation, American Chemical Society Publication Series #968 (pp. 447-459). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Malinowski, B. (1922). Argonauts of the western Pacific. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  28. Marx, K. ([1867]1967). Capital: a critique of political economy, vol. 1: the process of capitalist production. Translated by S. Moore and E. Aveling. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Mauss, M. (1923). Essai sur le don: forme et raison de l’échange dans les société archaïques. In M. Mauss (Ed.), Sociologie et anthroplogie (pp. 145-279). Paris: PUF.Google Scholar
  30. Mauss, M. ([1923]1954). The gift: forms and functions of exchange in archaic societies. Translated by I. Cunnison. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.Google Scholar
  31. Merritt, C.T. (2006). Trade and consumption in the Mormon Great Basin, 1847-1900: locally produced ceramics and instrumental activation analysis. Unpublished MS Thesis, Department of Social Sciences, Michigan Technological University.Google Scholar
  32. Miller, G.L. (1980). Classification and economic scaling of 19th century ceramics. Historical Archaeology, 14, 1-40.Google Scholar
  33. Miller, G.L. (1991). A revised set of CC index values for classification and economic scaling of English ceramics from 1787-1880. Historical Archaeology, 25(1), 1-25.Google Scholar
  34. Novak, S. (2008). House of mourning: a biocultural history of the Mountain Meadows Massacre. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.Google Scholar
  35. Orser Jr., C.E. (1996). A historical archaeology of the modern world. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  36. Price, S. (1989). Primitive art in civilized places. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  37. Polanyi, K. (1957). The economy as instituted process. In K. Polanyi, C. Arensberg, and H. Pearson (Eds.), Trade and market in the early empires (pp. 243-269). New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  38. Polanyi, K. (1944). The great transformation: the political and economic origins of our times. Boston: Beacon.Google Scholar
  39. Renfrew, C.R. (1975). Trade as action at a distance: questions of integration and communication. In J.A. Sablof and C.C. Lamberg-Karlovsky (Eds.), Ancient civilizations and trade (pp. 3-59). Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.Google Scholar
  40. Renfrew, C., Dixon, J.E., and Cann, J.R. (1968). Further analysis of Near Eastern obsidians. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, 34, 319-331.Google Scholar
  41. Rice, P.M. (1987). Pottery analysis: a sourcebook. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  42. Robertson, R. (1995). Glocalization: time-space and homogeneity-heterogeneity. In M. Featherstone, S. Lash, R. Robertson (Eds.), Global modernities. London: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
  43. Sayre, E.V., and Dodson, R.W. (1957). Neutron activation study of Mediterranean potsherds. American Journal of Archaeology, 61, 135-141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Scarlett, T.J. (2006). Flowscapes of globalization in Mormon pioneer Utah. International Journal of Historical Archaeology, 10(2), 109-134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Scarlett, T.J. (n.d.). Bedson Eardley’s eight large jars: commodity phases and Utah’s domestic pottery. In T.J. Scarlett (Ed.), Science and historical archaeology. Gainesville: University Press of Florida. In preparation.Google Scholar
  46. Scarlett, T.J., Bastion, A.M., Cecil, L.G., Merritt, C.W., and Glascock, M.D. (n.d.). A muddy study: using Muddy Mission ceramic artifacts to develop an anthropological historical archaeology for the Utah pottery project. In M. Purser and M. Warner (Eds.), Archaeologies of the American west. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. In preparation.Google Scholar
  47. Scarlett, T.J., and Merritt, C.W. (n.d.). An update from the Utah pottery project: expanding ideas of consumption from Frederick Petersen’s Salt Lake City pottery. In B. Pykles (Ed.), Historical archaeology of the Mormon domain. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. In preparation.Google Scholar
  48. Scarlett, T.J., Speakman, R.J., and Glascock, M.D. (2007). Pottery in the Mormon economy: a historical and archaeometric study. Historical Archaeology, 41(4), 70-95.Google Scholar
  49. Shepard, A.O. (1948). Plumbate: a Mesoamerican trade ware. Carnegie Institution of Washington Publication 573. Washington, DC: Carnegie Institution of Washington.Google Scholar
  50. Tite, M.S. (1999). Pottery production, distribution, and consumption: the contributions of the physical sciences. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 6(3), 181-233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Walker, R.W., Turley, R.E., and Leonard, G.M. (2008). Massacre at Mountain Meadows. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Wilmsen, E.N. (1972). Social exchange and interaction. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan Anthropological Papers 46. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  53. Weigand, P.C., Harbottle, G., and Sayre, E.V. (1977). Turquoise sources and source analysis: Mesoamerica and the southwestern U.S.A. In T.K. Earle and J.E. Ericson (Eds.), Exchange systems in prehistory (pp. 15-34). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  54. Wolf, E. (1982). Europe and the people without history. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  55. Young, B. (1856a). The powers of the priesthood not generally understood—the necessity of living by revelation—the abuse of blessings, 1/27/1856. Journal of Discourses, 3, 191-196.Google Scholar
  56. Young, B. (1856b). Sermon, 8/17/1856. Journal of Discourses, 3, 17-20.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Michigan Technological UniversityHoughtonUSA

Personalised recommendations