Skip to main content
Log in

How to Make an Unfired Clay Cooking Pot: Understanding the Technological Choices Made by Arctic Potters

  • Published:
Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Between about 500 a.d. and the late nineteenth century, clay cooking pots associated with the Thule culture were produced in the Arctic region. Ethnographic and archaeological records indicate that these vessels were typically underfired (often even unfired), highly porous, and easily broken. Despite these characteristics, the evidence indicates that they were used to heat water over open fires. In this paper, we examine how Arctic potters were able to produce unsintered vessels capable of holding liquids without disintegrating. We conclude that the application of seal oil and seal blood to the pot’s surface was the key to their success.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Pottery associated with the Norton tradition is typically described as being “relatively thin-walled, well fired, [and] tempered with a mixture of organic fibres and sand” (McGhee 1980:44). Thule pottery, in contrast, is described as being “plain, thick, poorly fired [and] tempered with sand and gravel” (McGhee 1980:45). In practice, the difference between the two types appears to be one of a general trend rather than a sharp distinction, and there is a great deal of variation within each tradition. In this paper, we deal only with the Thule cooking pot. Although we believe that the differences between the two technologies deserve exploration, we find that the issue is beyond our ability to explore at this time given the relative paucity of information pertaining to Norton ceramics and to the environmental and cultural contexts of these cultures.

  2. In this and the following experiments, no attempts were made to replicate Thule paste recipes. Because our goal was to isolate the effects of specific variables, our experimental design did not require that we use any particular paste recipe but only that the paste recipe be consistent within any one set of experiments. In point of fact, because of the great variability exhibited in Thule ceramic pastes, such replication would have been nearly impossible.

References

  • Bleek, W. H. I., & Lloyd, L. C. (1911). Specimens of Bushman folklore. London: George Allen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogoras, W. (1904). The Chuckchee. Memoirs of the American Museum of Natural History 11. New York: Johnson Reprint.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cadzow, D. A. (1920). Native copper objects of the Copper Eskimo. New York: Museum of the American Indian, Heye Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, H. G. (1937). Archaeology of St. Lawrence Island, Alaska (vol. 96(1)). Washington, DC: Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections.

  • Coxe, W. (1804). Account of the Russian discoveries between Asia and America. London: Cadell and Davies.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Laguna, F. (1939). A pottery vessel from Kodiak Island, Alaska. American Antiquity, 4(4), 334–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Laguna, F. (1940). Eskimo lamps and pots. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, 70(1), 53–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Laguna, F. (1947). The prehistory of Northern North America as seen from the Yukon. Menasha: Society for American Archaeology Memoirs, No. 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Laguna, F. (2000). Travels among the Dena: exploring Alaska’s Yukon Valley. Seattle: University of Washington Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eerkens, J. (2003). Residential mobility and pottery use in the western Great Basin. Current Anthropology, 44(5), 728–738.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eerkens, J. (2004). Privatization, small-seed intensification, and the origins of pottery in the Western Great Basin. American Antiquity, 69(4), 653–670.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eerkens, J. W., Neff, H., & Glascock, M. D. (2002). Ceramic production among small-scale and mobile hunters and gatherers: a case study from the southwest Great Basin. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 21(2), 200–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ewers, J. C. (1945). The case for Blackfoot pottery. American Anthropologist, 47(2), 289–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fienup-Riordan, A. (1975). Maraiuirvik Nunakauimi: history and development of pottery at Toksook Bay. Unpublished manuscript, Alaska Humanities Forum. Copy on file at the ANCSA Office of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Anchorage, Alaska.

  • Friday, J. (1983). ANCSA interview 83VAK23. Record on file, Bureau of Indian Affairs ANCSA Office, Anchorage, Alaska.

  • Frink, L., & Harry, K. G. (2008). The beauty of “ugly” Eskimo cooking pots. American Antiquity, 73(1), 103–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, A., & Woods, A. (1997). Prehistoric pottery for the archaeologist. London: Leicester University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, G. B. (1906). Notes on the Western Eskimo. Transactions, Department of Archaeology, University of Pennsylvania, 11, 1, Philadelphia.

  • Harry, K. G., & Frink, L. (2009). The Alaskan clay cooking pot: why was it adopted? American Anthropologist, in press.

  • Kelly, I. (1976). Paiute Indians II: Southern Paiute ethnography. New York: Garland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambuth, A. A. (2003). Protein adhesives for wood. In A. Pizze, & K. K. Mittal (Eds.), Handbook of adhesive technology (pp. 457–478). New York: Marcel Dekker.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mathiassen, T. (1927). Archaeology of the Central Eskimos (vol. 4, pp. 1–237). Report of the Fifth Thule Expedition, 1921–1924, Copenhagen.

  • McGhee, R. (1980). Technological change in the prehistoric Eskimo cultural tradition. Canadian Journal of Archaeology, 4, 39–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murdoch, J. (1892). Ethnological results of the Point Barrow Expedition (pp. 19–441). In 9th Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology for the Years 1887–1888, Washington.

  • Nelson, E. W. (1899). The Eskimo about Bering Strait. In J. W. Powell (Ed.), Eighteenth Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology (pp. 3–518). Washington: Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neupert, M. (1994). Strength testing archaeological ceramics: a new perspective. American Antiquity, 59(4), 709–723.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Leary, M. (1999). Early Yupiit–Cupiit regional groups with special reference to ceramic cooking pot designs. Paper presented at the 26th Annual Meeting of the Alaska Anthropological Association Meeting, Anchorage.

  • Osgood, C. B. (1940). Ingalik material culture. YU-PA, 22.

  • Oswalt, W. H. (1952). Pottery from Hooper Bay Village, Alaska. American Antiquity, 18(1), 18–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oswalt, W. H. (1955). Alaskan pottery: a classification and historical reconstruction. American Antiquity, 21(1), 32–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasmussen, K. (1932). Intellectual culture of the copper Eskimos (vol. IX). Report of the 5th Thule expedition 1921–1924, Copenhagen, Denmark.

  • Ray, V. (1932). Pottery on the Middle Columbia. American Anthropologist, 34(1), 127–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ray, D. J. (1975). The Eskimos of the Bering Strait, 1650–1898. Seattle: University of Washington Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reid, K. C. (1989). A materials science perspective on hunter–gatherer pottery. In G. Bronitsky (Ed.), Pottery technology: ideas and approaches (pp. 167–180). Boulder: Westview.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reid, K. C. (1990). Simmering down: a second look at Ralph Linton’s ‘North American cooking pots’. In J. M. Mack (Ed.), Hunter–gatherer pottery from the far west (pp. 7–18). Carson City: Nevada State Museum Nevada State Museum Anthropological Papers No. 23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodrίguez, C. (1995). Sites with early ceramics in the Caribbean Littoral of Colombia: a discussion of periodization and typologies. In W. K. Barnett, & J. Hoopes (Eds.), The emergence of pottery: technology and innovation in ancient societies (pp. 145–156). Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roosevelt, A. C. (1995). Early pottery in the Amazon: twenty years of scholarly obscurity. In W. K. Barnett, & J. W. Hoopes (Eds.), The emergence of pottery: technology and innovation in ancient societies (pp. 115–132). Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sampson, C. G. (1988). Stylistic boundaries among mobile hunter–foragers. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sapir, L. (1923). A note on Sarcee pottery. American Anthropologist, 47(2), 289–299.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sassman, K. E. (1992). Gender and technology at the Archaic-Woodland “transition”. In C. Claassen (Ed.), Exploring gender through archaeology: selected papers from the 1991 Boone Conference (pp. 71–79). Madison: Prehistory.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sassman, K. E. (1995). The social contradictions of traditional and innovative cooking technologies in the prehistoric American Southwest. In W. K. Barnett, & J. W. Hoopes (Eds.), The emergence of pottery: technology and innovation in ancient societies (pp. 223–240). Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiffer, M. B. (1990). The influence of surface treatment on heating effectiveness of ceramic vessels. Journal of Archaeological Science, 17, 373–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schiffer, M. B., & Skibo, J. M. (1987). Theory and experiment in the study of technological change. Current Anthropology, 28(5), 595–622.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skibo, J. M. (1992). Pottery function: a use-alternative perspective. New York: Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skibo, J. M., & Blinman, E. (1999). Exploring the origins of pottery on the Colorado Plateau. In J. M. Skibo, & G. M. Geinman (Eds.), Pottery and people: a dynamic interaction (pp. 171–183). Salt Lake City: The University of Utah Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skibo, J. M., Schiffer, M. B., & Reid, K. C. (1989). Organic-tempered pottery: an experimental study. American Antiquity, 54(1), 122–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spencer, R. F. (1959). The North Alaskan Eskimo, a study in ecology and society. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 171.

  • Spray, Z. (2002). Alaska’s vanishing Arctic cuisine. Gastronomica: The Journal of Food and Culture, 2(1), 39–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stefánsson, V. (1914). The Stefansson–Anderson Arctic Expedition of the American Museum: preliminary ethnological report. Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History, 14(1), 1–395.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stefánsson, V. (1962). My life with the Eskimo. New York: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steward, J. H. (1933). Ethnography of the Owens Valley Paiute. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology, 33(3), 233–350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stimmell, C., & Stromberg, R. L. (1986). A reassessment of Thule Eskimo ceramic technology. In W. D. Kingery (Ed.), Ceramics and civilization, volume II: technology and style (pp. 237–250). Columbus, Ohio: American Ceramic Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Velde, B., & Druc, I. C. (1999). Archaeological ceramic materials: origins and utilization. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wissler, C. (1910). Material culture of the Blackfoot Indians. Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History, 5, 1–177 New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhushchikhovskaya, I. S. (2005). Prehistoric pottery making of the Russian Far East. Oxford: ArchaeoPress BAR International Series 1434.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhuskchikhovskaya, I. S., & Shubina, A. (2006). Pottery making and the culture history of Neolithic Sakhalan. In D. E. Dumond, & R. L. Bland (Eds.),Archaeology in Northeast Asia: on the pathway to Bering Strait (pp. 91–128). Eugene: University of Oregon Anthropological Papers No. 76.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was made possible by a National Science Foundation Office of Polar Programs grant (#0452900, Program Officer Anna Kerttula de Echave) along with logistic support from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. We wish to thank Cory Dangerfield and Clint Swink for their work with reconstructive experiments in Tununak and Elisa George and David Yoder for their help with the laboratory experiments. We also would like to thank Raymond Kozak for fabricating the text fixture, Stacy Nelson for helping to conduct the strength experiments, and Hal Rager and Mark Slaughter for their help in finalizing the figures. Examination of archaeological sherds was made possible through the assistance of the faculty and staff of the Museum of the North, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, and we especially thank Don Odess, Angela Lynn, and Jim Whitney. We express our deepest thanks to the many Tununak elders we consulted with who provided information and other insights into the use of the clays and pottery from the region. Finally, we would like to thank Jelmer Eerkens, Jim Skibo, and three anonymous reviewers for their comments that helped to improve this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Karen G. Harry.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Harry, K.G., Frink, L., O’Toole, B. et al. How to Make an Unfired Clay Cooking Pot: Understanding the Technological Choices Made by Arctic Potters. J Archaeol Method Theory 16, 33–50 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-009-9061-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-009-9061-4

Keywords

Navigation