Regional Variation in Kentucky Fort Ancient Shell Temper Adoption
2008; Taylor & Francis; Volume: 27; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês
ISSN
2168-4723
AutoresDavid Pollack, A. Gwynn Henderson, C. Martin Raymer,
Tópico(s)Archaeology and Rock Art Studies
ResumoVariation in the rate and timing of shell temper adoption in the middle Ohio Valley is examined by comparing the temper profiles of Fort Ancient (A.D. 1000-1750) sites located in northern and central Kentucky. Shell temper began to be used ca. A.D. 900, and by A.D. 1400, it was the only temper in use. Since its adoption was not swift, shell temper apparently was not a significant technological improvement over limestone temper. In central Kentucky, it took 100 years longer for shell to completely replace limestone as a tempering agent than it did in northern Kentucky. Environmental and cultural factors may account for this variation. Village proximity to dense freshwater mussel shell beds, ease of access to these beds, regional ceramic manufacturing traditions, and social interaction networks may have influenced Early and Middle Fort Ancient potters' choice of temper. However, with the introduction of new vessel forms and possible improvements in ceramic firing techniques after A.D. 1400, shell's platy characteristics may have offered Late Fort Ancient potters some technological advantages. This study was inspired by an invitation to explore the origin and spread of sheU-tempered pottery in the Eastern Woodlands as part of a poster symposium of the same name at the Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology in Austin, Texas (Pollack et al. 2007). We take as our point of departure Feathers' (2006) article that examines the rise in frequency of shell-tempered pottery in prehistoric eastern North America. In that article, Feathers characterized the shift from crushed rock to crushed shell temper as a localized adaptation. The reason(s) for the shift, in terms of vessel properties, varied from place to place as use, raw materials, and manufacturing processes differed. In southeastern Missouri, Feathers (2006) explained the increase in the use of shell temper at the expense of sand as a technological improvement in ceramic vessel manufacture: potters recognized sheU's superior benefits and stopped tempering their vessels with sand. From our middle Ohio VaUey vantage point, we agree with his characterization of temper change as a localized phenomenon, but we think technological explanations alone do not completely account for the material culture transitions observed in the archaeological record. As discussed by Sillar and Tite (2000:9; see also Livingstone Smith 2000), changes in the materials and techniques used to manufacture ceramic vessels reflect potters' choices, which are embedded within and, therefore, may be dependent on wider cultural values and ideological concepts. In our opinion, therefore, any discussion of shell temper adoption in the middle Ohio Valley must consider the technological as well as the environmental and cultural factors that may have influenced those choices (Livingstone Smith 2000; SiUar and Tite 2000). After describing our study sample and briefly discussing when shell temper was first used in the middle Ohio Valley, we describe and compare the regional temper profiles of Fort Ancient (A.D. 1000-1750) sites in two regions: northern Kentucky and central Kentucky (Figure 1). After identifying the patterns in our data, we consider possible technological, environmental, and cultural factors that may account for the 400 to 500 years that it took for regional populations to complete the transition from limestone to shell temper, and that influenced regional variation in the adoption of shell temper in our study area. Study Sample Ceramic assemblages from Fort Ancient village sites in northern and central Kentucky provided the data for this study (Figure 1). For several reasons, which are outlined below, these two regions are exceptionally well suited for a study of this type. Clear temporal trends in ceramic manufacture, supported by radiocarbon dates, have been identified for both regions (Henderson 2008; Sharp 1990; Pollack and Henderson 2000a; Turnbow 1988a). …
Referência(s)