Organization of Ceramic Production

The potter's craft in Huáncito is still an occupation that takes place in the household, with the family as the basic production unit. This kind of familiar organization for the production of crafts is a characteristic of most peasant societies, and it has been described for Tarascan society by Beals (Reference Beals and Wauchope1969), who saw the nuclear family (in some cases the extended family) as the common unit of production. In some cases, two or more men can set up an informal association, or even a society, for instance for long-distance trade or for forest exploitation. The basic kin unit is the nuclear family, to which on occasion are added single brothers or sisters or an elderly person, who may be poor and dependent. Occasional extended families are those in which parents live with one or more sons in the same household and perform all activities jointly (Beals Reference Beals and Wauchope1969:766).

According to Hirth (Reference Hirth2013), the household was a fundamental component of all economic systems in antiquity, as it still is in the present. Most of the food, fuel, and other resources were produced in households, and their importance was such that society simply could not survive without them. Households were not self-sufficient, as we can see in many ethnographic studies in Mexico and in many other places around the world. Exchange networks between several families and other groups within a settlement or a wider area were indispensable in order to compensate the shortcomings that were always present on a local level. Furthermore, the diversity of ecological landscapes ensured subsistence through exchange between groups that lived in areas with different environments. Last, economic specialization by age, ethnicity or gender could increase the diversity and efficiency of production (Hirth Reference Hirth2013:125).

Some pottery-producing families in Huáncito are of the nuclear type, consisting of the father, mother, and their sons and daughters, while others are extended families, including up to three generations and sometimes incorporating, for instance, the husband of a married daughter and their children, together with the head of the family, his wife and children, as well as one or two of his parents.

Different activities related to the manufacture of clay objects can be performed in different parts of the house, although there is a kind of low “table” where the clay is kneaded and placed inside the molds, and painting the pots can be performed there, as well. The potter's kiln is a fixed structure; it is the element with the greatest archaeological visibility in the domestic production spaces observed by the author in Huáncito and other craft-making communities.

The work linked to ceramic manufacture is organized in such a way that each family member has a specific function or functions, although sometimes these divisions are not very strict and a member of the family group can help another one to perform a certain task. For instance, the wife usually shapes the vessels in the molds, as well as doing the drying and polishing, while men or women can perform the decoration of pots indistinctly. The most difficult aspects of production are usually (but not exclusively) performed by men, such as procuring clay (Figure 3) or firewood (Figure 4), as well as firing the kiln (Figure 5), although women and children may help out, as well. Nowadays, many children go to school, so they can only help in the activities linked to the potter's craft during their free time.

Figure 3. One of the most critical aspects of the ceramic process is procuring clay from the local sources (1990). Photograph by author.

Figure 4. Potters used to go to the hills around Huáncito to collect firewood for the kilns. Nowadays, most potters get their fuel from people who bring it from other towns in trucks, which have replaced the burros and horses of the past (Fidel Lorenzo household, 1990). Photograph by author.

Figure 5. Firing the kiln is a difficult mater that involves great care and knowledge. It is done by men, although women and children may help out as well (Fidel Lorenzo household, 2014). Photograph by author.

What follows is a detailed description of each one of the steps linked with pottery production in Huáncito; the order of presentation is more or less the sequence in which each step has to be performed in order to have a successful livelihood on the basis of ceramic manufacture and distribution.

Clay Procurement

There are several clay deposits on the outskirts of Huáncito, near a stream that flows during the rainy season. In one of the procurement areas, one can see several pits dug by potters in a space of about 250 square meters, from which the clay is taken out with a pick, shovel, and wheelbarrow. Some of these pits may be quite deep, up to three meters (Figure 6). After taking the clay from the pit, it is spread out to dry on a flat surface near the pits (Figure 7), where it stays for approximately one day or more, depending on the ambient humidity.

Figure 6. Clay is taken from pits dug by potters with pick and shovel. Some of these pits may be up to three meters deep (1990). Photograph by author.

Figure 7. After being taken from the pit, the clay is spread out to dry on a flat surface near the pit, where it stays for approximately one day or more, depending on the ambient humidity (1990). Photograph by author.

Potters in Huáncito use two kinds of clay, which are classified as barro corriente (coarse clay) and barro fino (fine clay). The first one is found in some natural sediments to the north of the town, inside communal lands, and access is free to whoever wants to use it. The fine clay is located in sediments within lands that are the private property of individuals, so potters have to pay for the right to use this clay (Jiménez Castillo Reference Jiménez Castillo1982:22).

Around eight sacks of clay (50 kg each) are needed for one kiln-load of pots. Sometimes the potter gets his own earth, and he has to pay for grinding it in one of the mills found in the community, while in the early days of fieldwork I was able to see that some potters still used big rocks to pulverize the clay (Figure 8), but this is no longer the case in Huáncito.

Figure 8. Until some 20 years ago, potters still used big rocks to pulverize the clay but this is no longer the case in Huáncito (1990). Photograph by author.

Using the Mold to Shape Pots

The methods for making pottery in Michoacán have already been described by Foster (Reference Foster1948, Reference Foster1955, Reference Foster1967), but it is useful for the present discussion to include a short description of the methods and processes of manufacture in Huáncito, as well as some changes we have witnessed over the last few years and the persistence of some traditions over time.

The most common technique for shaping pots is by using the vertical-half mold (Figure 9), the geographic distribution of which is limited to north-central Michoacán and a small portion of western state of México (according to Foster Reference Foster1967:Figure 15). This technique is used primarily for making cántaros (pitchers), and consists of making a clay tortilla or “pancake” which is cut in half and introduced in each one of the molds. The next step is to smooth the clay with a piece of cloth until it has the shape of the mold. After this both halves are united, the clay is further smoothed on the inside of the vessel, and the mouth or rim of the pot is made even. After a short drying period, the molds are removed, and the potter adds handles, decorations, and glazes. This technique represents a considerable saving of time compared to making pots without molds by hand shaping them as is done, for example, in Veracruz (Krotser Reference Krotser, Coe and Diehl1980).

Figure 9. The vertical half-mold technique consists of making a clay tortilla or “pancake,” which is cut in half and placed in each one of the two molds. The next step is to smooth the clay with a piece of cloth until it has the shape of the mold (1990). Photograph by author.

Arnold (Reference Arnold, Skibo and Feinman1999:61) holds that the adoption of a molding technology has important implications for the organization of the craft and has a feedback relationship with such organizational variables as “scale” and the amount of space dedicated to production. This has been observed by the author in Huáncito, where a potter using the vertical-half mold is able to make as many as one dozen pots or more in a single day.

Firing the Pots

Some authors, notably Foster (Reference Foster1955), have mentioned that the kiln used by potters in Michoacán (and elsewhere in Mexico) originated in the Mediterranean area and had been brought to Mexico by the Spaniards in the sixteenth century. Now we know that this was not always the case, because firing technology was quite advanced in pre-Hispanic Mesoamerica (Rice Reference Rice2015). Virtually every house in Huáncito has a kiln and, in some cases, two or more, although in some instances a potter may use a kiln belonging to a close relative, such as the mother or the mother-in-law. The kiln we see in Huáncito is similar to the ones known elsewhere in Michoacán and other parts of Mexico (see, for example, Foster Reference Foster1948). It has a simple design, consisting of a circular adobe wall of around 1.5 m in diameter and 1.6–1.8 m high. The firebox or hearth is underground, and to reach it there is an excavation outside the kiln. The kiln is separated from the firebox by a grill made of stone, brick, vessels, or potsherds placed more or less at floor level. In most cases, this grill rests on top of a central post made of stone, called macho (Foster Reference Foster1955:10).

A kiln in Huáncito may hold six dozen, mid-sized cántaros, which take about 10 hours to be fired, using one or two loads of firewood. Pinewood is preferred, and the potters used to buy it from people from nearby towns such as Zopoco and Tanaco. The forest is denuded around Huáncito, and there are only a few trees near the town. Nowadays, fuel is brought by truck from several towns in La Cañada. Fuel consumption in Huáncito is considerable, because, in addition to the kilns, virtually all the kitchens also depend on firewood for fuel.

Two loads of fuel (about 55 or 65 kg each) are enough for one kiln-load of pottery during the dry season, while three loads are needed in the rainy season because the firewood is wet and burns more slowly and less efficiently. In the past, the potters themselves used to bring their own firewood from the hills; they would go out between four and five in the morning with their beasts of burden (horses, mules, or donkeys) and would come back by midday. The kind of firewood used depends on what is going to be fired in the kiln, for example pots with greda (glazed ware) require pinewood, whereas madroño (Arbutus) or encino (oak) is used for unglazed pots. In order to burn the glaze properly, the pots have to be fired twice in the kiln. The first time, the fresh clay is hardened and, in the second firing, the glaze is melted down. Firing is one of the most critical and uncertain aspects of the ceramic process, because it is very hard to know how many pots are going to come out of the kiln whole and in good condition, and how many will be spoiled, completely broken, or flawed (e.g., fire stains, cracking, warping, and others) in a way that will reduce the selling price. Any minor variation in the temperature of the kiln, in the humidity of the fresh vessels within the kiln, or in the kind of firewood used, may cause the pots to crack or to come out with smoke stains or other imperfections. It takes an experienced potter to manage a firing in which all pots come out in perfect condition. In fact, this level of skill is stressed in one of the earliest accounts of Mesoamerican potters and their craft, written in the sixteenth century by friar Bernardino de Sahagún, whose Aztec informants told him that a good potter was usually a “wiry, active, energetic” person. The good potter was a skilled man or woman who worked with clay, who was “a judge of clay – thoughtful, deliberating; a fabricator”, he or she was a “knowing person, an artist… skilled with his [or her] hands” (Sahagún Reference Sahagún, Dibble and Anderson1961:42).

As we can see in Table 1, firing the kilns in Huáncito requires much firewood, which may aggravate the problem of deforestation in the area. People all over the world are increasingly worried about the availability of fuel for domestic and industrial activities. Many urban centers and rural communities, above all in developing countries, are facing the problem of widespread deforestation, because of the demand for firewood for cooking (Figure 10), firing pottery, construction, and production of crafts (Sheehey Reference Sheehy and Kolb1988). Michoacán, like the rest of Mexico, is faced with this problem and many other ecological issues. These problems were no doubt present in the pre-Hispanic world, in fact the pressure on fuel resources may have increased dramatically in ancient times with population growth, since transport technology was limited to porters with tumplines, and alternative energy sources were quite limited (Sheehey Reference Sheehy and Kolb1988:203).

Figure 10. There is a high demand for firewood in Huáncito, as it is used to cook in addition to firing pottery in the kiln (Fidel Lorenzo household, 2014). Photograph by author.

Table 1. Fuel consumption in pottery-producing households in Huáncito (2014). This table is based on a census I made in many potters' households in Huáncito in 2014. About 50 percent of informants responded to my questions. Firewood is measured in cargas (cg) or loads of ca. 55 or 65 kg each.

At present, in La Cañada and most of Michoacán, one can see high levels of deforestation. In addition to the huge amounts of firewood used in the kilns in Huáncito and other craft-producing towns, the kitchens in many homes use firewood as the primary, and sometimes the only, fuel source. Because of this situation, I have been trying to answer the following questions regarding the ecological impact of the pottery industry: (1) How many pottery-making households are there in Huáncito at the moment? (2) How many kilns are there per potter's household? (3) How frequently are the kilns fired in each household? (4) How much firewood is used in each firing? (5) What other uses are there for firewood (for instance, cooking)? (6) Roughly how much firewood is consumed in this town during a certain period of time?

The questions stated above have obvious implications for the study of ceramic ecology in the region. Although at present it is difficult to make a projection of current fuel consumption, much less in the pre-Hispanic past, the questions mentioned above would be a first step to suggest a tentative figure, not unlike what Sheehey (Reference Sheehy1992) accomplished in Teotihuacan.

Pottery Decoration

In Huáncito and other craft centers in Michoacán, potters use charanda to paint pots with a characteristic red hue; charanda is also used as slip to cover the whole pot surface, therefore it is an indispensable substance that the potters buy by the liter from people who come from the nearby town of Tarecuato. Charanda is only found in this town, and in order to extract it one needs permission from the local authorities.

The charanda is dissolved with water in a wooden tray, applied to the pot with a brush (Figure 11), and then polished with a cloth before the pot is fired in the kiln. The potters also use a natural source for black paint, small stones from ant nests found in Zirahuén, a lake in north-central Michoacán. Very few people are still using these natural colors for painting pots, however, because they are too expensive. Several potters told me that they only use natural colors when they have a special order from certain customers. Nowadays, most craftspeople in Huáncito use industrially produced paints, which have two main advantages over natural colorants: they are cheaper and are applied to pots after firing, so no time is wasted on painting pots that will probably break or become damaged during firing. The decoration motifs are usually naturalistic, including flowers, birds, rabbits, and other animals. Although there is a certain degree of uniformity in the wares produced throughout this town, each craftsman or woman has his or her own personal style, and the same design will be performed differently in each domestic workshop.

Figure 11. The charanda is a red earth used as slip in Huáncito and many other Tarascan towns in Michoacán. It is dissolved with water in a wooden tray, and applied to the pot with a brush (Isaac Cayetano household, 2014). Photograph by author.

One of the families with whom I worked in the first stage of the research in Huáncito (1990–1997) is that of Isaac and Amalia Lorenzo. I revisited their household in 2013–2015, and was able to see that many important changes have taken place in the family, which are reflected in the pottery, both the shapes of the vessels and the decoration motifs. Amalia's daughter Elena is now living in an independent household with her husband and children, and Pablo (Isaac and Amalia's adoptive grandson) is now married and lives with his wife and son in a room in Isaac and Amalia's house. Elena's 10 sons and daughters, as well as Pablo's son, have joined the domestic work force, contributing their own style to the craft. This situation has allowed me to see how a ceramic style is evolving and being transmitted from one generation to the next, including vessel form, motifs, style of decoration, and manufacture techniques.

Commercialization of Pottery

Most Huáncito potters sell their wares directly in town, to people who come from cities in the region (Apatzingán, Morelia, Zamora, or Guadalajara); they may be merchants or somebody who has requested an order of dishes, ashtrays, pots, and so on. Pottery is also sold to acaparadores or middlemen, also known as “coyotes,” who may have shops in town or on the highway near Huáncito (Figure 13). Middlemen also include rescatones, who buy pottery and take it as far as Lázaro Cárdenas (on the Michoacán coast), Guadalajara, Mazatlán (Sinaloa), and Baja California. Potters are always in debt to these middlemen, because they pay part of the production in advance and thereby establish a relationship of economic dependence on craftspeople. When a load of pots is taken out from the kiln, the middlemen judge the quality of the pots: for example, de primera (first quality) means that the items are perfect and will command a full price. If the pots are misfired, have smoke stains or any other imperfection, they will be considered de segunda (second quality) and the potters will receive less money. When the pots are cracked or otherwise useless for their desired function they may be used for making piñatas. Finally, a pot that is not functional in any way will be thrown away. In some households one can see pots that are recycled as flowerpots once their use-life is over (Figure 14).

Figure 13. Potters sometimes sell their production to middlemen, who may have shops in town or on the highway near Huáncito (2014). Photograph by author.

Figure 14. In some households, one can see vessels that are no longer functional and are recycled as flower pots once their use life is over. This custom has obvious archaeological implications (1990). Photograph by author.

Some potters take their own wares to some of the places mentioned above. Once in Apatzingán, for instance, they go to nearby towns where they sell their products in the markets. They usually carry their pots in bundles made with sacks padded with twigs and grass for protection (Figure 15). One can see them waiting on the highway (in La Cañada or near Zamora, La Piedad, and other towns) for a lift in one of the many “trailers” or trucks that pass on the highway. I have seen Tarascan craftsmen and women selling their wares as far afield as San Luis Potosí.

Figure 15. Many potters usually carry their pots in bundles made with sacks padded with twigs and grass for protection when taking them to sell outside of Huáncito (Salomón Espicio household, 1990). Photograph by author.

Pottery Manufacture and the Use of Domestic Space

This section deals with the organization of domestic space in three households in Huáncito where ceramic production is the main activity. The organization of domestic space has received attention from a number of archaeologists for a long time (see examples in P. Arnold Reference Arnold, Bishop and Lange1991, Reference Arnold and Williams2005; Binford Reference Binford1983, Reference Binford1986; De Lucia Reference De Lucia2013; De Lucia and Overholtzer Reference De Lucia and Overholtzer2014; Douglass and Gonlin Reference Douglass and Gonlin2012; Flannery Reference Flannery and Flannery1976, Reference Flannery and Flannery1986; Kent Reference Kent1984, Reference Kent and Kent1990; Metcalfe and Heath Reference Metcalfe and Heath1990; Simms and Heath Reference Simms and Heath1990, among many others). The goal of defining the spatial structure of the archaeological record and the activities that were performed in a site cannot be fulfilled solely by archaeological research (i.e., excavation), however, because archaeological facts are static, and in themselves lack the information we need to interpret the dynamic aspects of culture. In the case of ceramic production in the pre-Hispanic era, the information we have about the use of domestic space is rather limited, since extensive excavations of pottery-producing households are few and far-between (see Canto Aguilar Reference Canto Aguilar and Manzanilla1986 for an explanation of this problem). This lack of information is particularly evident in Western Mexico.

Kent (Reference Kent and Kent1990:1) said the following about this situation in Mesoamerican archaeology: “[a]rchaeologists… have tended to work in discipline isolation. They have neglected the research and therefore the insights obtained in other disciplines confronting similar problems.” In her book Domestic Architecture and the Use of Space, Kent (Reference Kent and Kent1990:1) demonstrates “how an archaeologist can use the other disciplines' data and theories in a productive manner.” Kent's book investigates “the relationship between architecture and the use of space… around the world and through time.”

The relationship between the fragments of matter that archaeologists find in the field and the cultural phenomena responsible for their creation is not always obvious; therefore, we need more studies of the formation processes of archaeological contexts, of the use and organization of domestic space, of the structure and functioning of households, and of activity areas in general. These studies should include ethnographic observations in contemporary communities, with the goal of obtaining middle-range information that would help us in the interpretation of the processual aspects of human behavior from the artifacts and their spatial associations.

This study seeks to increase our knowledge and understanding of the spatial context or activity areas in ceramic-producing households. The activity-area concept has gained a great popularity in the archaeological literature since the 1970s. According to Flannery and Winter (Reference Flannery, Winter and Flannery1976), this concept refers to a spatially restricted area where a specific task (or cluster of interrelated tasks) has taken place. An activity area is usually characterized by an accumulation of tools, discarded products, or raw materials. Even in the cases where no activity areas are identified, many archaeologists in Mesoamerica have recognized “tool kits” used for specific tasks (Flannery and Winter Reference Flannery, Winter and Flannery1976:34).

For Flannery (Reference Flannery and Flannery1976:5), the smallest unit of analysis in a pre-Hispanic village is the activity area, comparable with an element that includes non-moveable features such as fire hearths or storage pits. In the next level of complexity, we could add those portions of a house floor that usually consist of several elements or activity areas, integrating the gendered work areas inside the household. The next unit of analysis is the house itself, to which we could add the household cluster (i.e., the house plus all the features found immediately around it, such as storage pits, burials, and others that can be linked to the same domestic structure). According to Manzanilla (Reference Manzanilla and Manzanilla1986:9), an activity area “is the basic unit of analysis of the archaeological record, because it is a reflection of specific and repetitive actions, with both a social character and a specific functional basis.”

Nevertheless, the activity area concept in archaeology has not been free of criticism. One of the most vocal critics is O'Connell (Reference O'Connell1987), who says that most analyses and interpretations of spatial patterns have been based on three assumptions: (1) activities are spatially segregated, that is to say that each activity or cluster of mutually linked activities is restricted to its own space or cluster of spaces within a site; (2) most activities typically produce “tool kits”, or groups of artifacts which are characteristic to each activity and vary accordingly, or physical residues in proportion to the frequency of execution of a given activity; and (3) artifacts and residues associated with a specific activity are deposited at, or very near, the place of execution.

All these assumptions have been questioned by recent ethnoarchaeological research, which has shown that: (1) different activities are frequently executed in one place, and conversely one same activity can be carried out in different places within a site, depending on such factors as the composition of group works, the number and kind of activities performed simultaneously, climatic conditions, and the distribution of shade or shelter inside the house; (2) many activities do not necessarily produce co- varying clusters of artifacts in proportion to the frequency of execution; and (3) residues produced by a specific activity are not necessarily deposited in the place of production; frequently they are reordered according to parameters that are not linked to the activity that produced them, and may be moved differentially to another locality to be discarded (O'Connell Reference O'Connell1987:74).

Kent (Reference Kent1984) came to similar conclusions in her ethnoarchaeological study of activity areas by informants pertaining to three distinct ethnic groups: Navajos, Spanish-Americans, and Euro-Americans. Kent tested three hypotheses, namely that activity areas can be discerned from the content and spatial arrangement of artifact (and other) remains; that most activity areas are gender-specific; and that in most activity areas only one function is performed. The first assumption was confirmed by Kent's data, while the other two were not (Adams Reference Adams1987:105).

In conclusion, the relationship between cultural behavior and its reflection in the archaeological record is apparently much more complex than one might think. On the other hand, the organization of space is a systematic affair, and so it should be represented in systematic patterns in the archaeological record. Therefore, we should ask ourselves the following questions: can we identify and describe the factors that shape the organization of behavior within sites? Can the knowledge of their operation be used in investigations about the archaeological record, and in the reconstruction of ancient behavior? These questions can be answered through ethnoarchaeological research, by the following means: (1) direct observation of modern behavior, especially how a material (i.e., archaeological) record is formed; (2) developing hypotheses to explain the relationship between behavior and material contexts; and (3) testing the hypotheses under different conditions, again in situations where both the cultural behavior and its archaeological consequences can be directly seen (O'Connell Reference O'Connell1987:75).

What follows is a discussion of the organization of domestic space in three households in Huáncito where the production of pottery is the single most important economic activity that shares domestic spaces with other day-to-day activities performed by all members of the household, such as cooking, eating, sleeping, washing, relaxing, and so on. The objective of this research is to find out to what extent the activity-area concept can be sustained in the light of the “ethnographic reality” of the case under discussion.

Two families are mentioned above (Fidel Lorenzo and Isaac Cayetano), while the third household, pertaining to Salomón Espicio and his family, is very similar in all respects to the other two, so there is no need for a full description here. The original ethnographic work on which this section is based was carried out in 1991–1992; back then, the three houses were similar to each other in terms of architecture and general layout. They had several rooms around a patio; these rooms were used for sleeping and for storing all kinds of objects, many of them related to potting activities, such as molds, sacks of clay, finished and unfinished pots, and so on. The kitchen is usually in a separate room, and is not only used for preparing and consuming food, but also for many other activities such as making and painting pots. In Fidel Lorenzo's household, food may be prepared and consumed near the kiln, using a small stove made of adobe (Figure 16a). Sometimes food is prepared in the patio outside the kitchen, using an improvised hearth with several rocks directly on the floor (Figure 16b).

Figure 16. (a) In Fidel Lorenzo's household, food may be prepared and consumed near the kiln, using a small stove made of adobe. (b) Sometimes food is prepared in the patio outside the kitchen, using an improvised hearth with several rocks directly on the floor (2005). Photographs by author.

The floor of the houses consisted of packed earth, but it was replaced by a cement floor about 10 years ago. Only the most basic furniture was found in most houses: wooden chairs and tables, cupboards, and the like. People used to sleep on woven reed mats (petates) on the floor. The patios have many kinds of fruit trees that give shade while working in the open (Figure 17). All three houses have electrical power, running water, and a latrine.

Figure 17. The patios of many houses in Huáncito have several fruit trees and other plants that give shade while potters are working in the open (Fidel Lorenzo household, 1990). Photograph by author.

The portable objects and fixed elements and features linked to pottery manufacture are basically the same in most households in Huáncito: the “work table” (Figure 18) consisting of a thick wooden plank (30 cm wide by 50 cm long) directly at ground level or at a height of some 50 centimeters; a variable amount of molds, several objects used for polishing pots, such as rags and bits of plastic; kilns for firing the pots (Figure 19), and areas for drying the pots and for storage (Figure 20).

Figure 18. The “worktable” found in many houses in Huáncito consists of a thick wooden plank (30 cm wide by 50 cm long) directly at ground level or at a height of some 50 cm. This figure shows a worktable in use. Note the pots around it, the paint containers on the table, the stone mano used for flattening the clay before putting it into the mold, and the metate in the corner used for grinding the clay (1990). Photograph by author.

Figure 19. In Fidel Lorenzo's home, the room where the kiln is located is used as a de facto storage area, where all kinds of objects are kept in a somewhat chaotic arrangement. Note the remains of a meal near the hearth in the lower right-hand corner (2014). Photograph by author.

Figure 20. A storage area in Isaac Cayetano's house is used to store many items used in the ceramic process. Here we see pots, molds, and plastic buckets (2014). Photograph by author.

Potting Activities in Spatial Context

The systematic observations discussed here included all activities inside and outside the potting compounds, and were aided by interviews and by a collection of pottery samples. The information obtained in this part of the study is summarized in Tables 2–4 and Figures 21–23. A photographic record of all relevant activities and features was made during the period of study. This information has been complemented by unsystematic observations in Huáncito and other towns inside and outside La Cañada during many years from the early 1990s up to the present.

Figure 21. Map of Fidel Lorenzo's household showing activity areas and some elements and features linked to pottery manufacture (1992). Map by author.

Figure 22. Map of Isaac Cayetano's household, showing activity areas and some elements and features linked to pottery manufacture. An asterisk indicates features that were destroyed by the household members during the course of fieldwork (1992). Map by author.

Figure 23. Map of Salomón Espicio's household, showing activity areas and some elements and features linked to pottery manufacture (1992). Map by author.

Table 2. Distribution of activities in the Fidel Lorenzo household. “Storage” refers to clay, fresh (i.e., unfired) pots, finished pots, firewood, and molds.

Table 3. Distribution of activities in the Isaac Cayetano household. Storage refers to clay, fresh (i.e., unfired) pots, finished pots, firewood, and molds.

Table 4. Distribution of activities in the Salomón Espicio household. This household produces mostly utilitarian, undecorated pots, so no burnishing or painting takes place here. “Storage” refers to clay, fresh (i.e., unfired) pots, finished pots, firewood, and molds.

Sugiura and Serra (Reference Sugiura, Serra, Sugiura and Serra1990:205) conducted a study of the use of space in several potting compounds in the Toluca Valley, arriving at the conclusion that “space is a multi-dimensional, multi-semantic variable that can be approached from several perspectives.” For Sugiura and Serra, the first level of approach to the issue of space in archaeology consists in defining and identifying the “functional space”, or the area where we think certain specific activities took place. This identification should be based not just on archaeological data about prehistoric contexts, but should also include information on spatial organization in modern communities, such as the data presented below.

Clay Extraction and Grinding

We have already seen that, in Huáncito, the clay beds are on the outskirts of town, so both extraction and grinding of clay are usually carried out outside the households. The clay can also be pulverized in the potter's home, however, as well as sifted to eliminate small stones, twigs, and other “impurities” using a sieve (Figure 24). In addition to the rocks used for pulverizing the clay, potters use metates, similar to the ones used for grinding maize for making tortillas, like the one seen at the right in Figure 18.

Figure 24. In some cases, the clay must be sifted to eliminate small stones, twigs, and other “impurities” using a sieve (Isaac Cayetano household, 2014). Photograph by author.

Molding the Pots

Once the kneading is finished and the paste is ready, the next step is to put it inside the molds for obtaining the desired shape (Figure 25). This activity is usually performed on the “work table.” The table has to be covered by a special kind of fine dust so the clay will not stick to it. Potters in Huáncito use two kinds of molds: the concave vertical-half mold is used for making cántaros, ollas and botellones (water bottles), while the convex or mushroom mold is used for making cazuelas (pans) and comales or griddles. These molds are kept in several places inside the houses, so they are not always found in or near the place where they are used.

Figure 25. The fresh clay is put inside the molds for obtaining the desired vessel shape. This activity is usually performed on the “work table” or near it, and it requires making a “tortilla” of clay, cutting it down to size, and inserting it into the two halves of the mold (Fidel Lorenzo household, 1990). Photograph by author.

Smoothing, Polishing and Burnishing the Pots

Once out of the mold, the vessel is smoothed with a piece of wet cloth; this way the mold scars are erased, as well as any imperfection on the surface of the still-fresh vessel. After the charanda slip is added, the pot is polished or burnished with a fragment of plastic until it is shiny (in ancient times a small fine-grained river cobble was used; Figure 26). These activities can be performed in virtually any space inside the house, for instance under the shade of a tree in the patio, or inside one of the rooms, especially in case of rain. Sometimes the potters perform this task while watching television.

Figure 26. Pots are usually polished with a fragment of plastic until the surface is smooth and shiny (in ancient times a small fine-grained river cobble may have been used for this activity; Fidel Lorenzo household, 1990). Photograph by author.

Drying the Pots

After polishing the pots they are put in a room to dry, which may be dedicated exclusively to that task (in the case of Salomón's house), or in one of the bedrooms. It happens sometimes that space for sleeping in a room is minimal on account of all the pots stored there for drying. Before putting the pots into the kiln, they are further dried in the open, usually in the patio (Figure 27). Potters try to use the area of the patio with less traffic in order to avoid accidents, but this is not always possible on account of dogs and children.

Figure 27. Before putting the pots into the kiln, they are further dried in the open, usually in the patio. Potters try to use the area of the patio with less traffic in order to avoid breakage due to accidents (Salomón Espicio household, 1990). Photograph by author.

Firing Pots in the Kiln

Of all the processes involved in making clay objects, firing is of the utmost importance, because this is how vessels, figurines, roof tiles, and other items become hard and strong enough to perform their function successfully. We have already seen that, in Huáncito and most other areas where pottery is made, the kiln is the feature where firing, the most crucial activity, takes place. The kiln is usually located in the patio, although in many instances kilns are constructed indoors.

Fuel for firing the kiln is frequently stored in the potter's home, or has to be procured just before using the kiln. The top of the kiln is covered by broken pots, called “wasters,” and comales (griddles), usually kept near the kiln (Figure 28). Such a concentration of broken and burned potsherds, in addition to the kiln itself, would be an archaeological correlate or marker for pottery production.

Figure 28. The wasters and comales that cover the kiln during firing are usually kept near the kiln when not in use. Such a concentration of broken and burned potsherds, in addition to the kiln itself, would be a prime archaeological correlate or marker for pottery production (Salomón Espicio household, 1990). Photograph by author.

Pottery is still fired in the open, without using a kiln, in several Tarascan towns, such as Zipiajo in the Zacapu Basin (Figure 29), some 40 kilometers east of La Cañada. Firing in the open may produce chemical alterations in the soil, which together with burn stains and ash concentrations would remain as archaeological markers for this activity (Barba Reference Barba2016; De Lucia Reference De Lucia2013).

Figure 29. In several Tarascan towns, such as Zipiajo in the Zacapu basin, pottery is still fired in the open, without using a kiln (Elvia Silva Bartolo household, 1995). Photograph by author.

Painting the Pots

This is one of the activities we have seen in many Huáncito households with less restriction in terms of the areas where it can be performed. The part of the house where pots are painted depends on variables such as weather, available shade and space, and other activities being carried out at the same time. When the climate is dry, potters prefer to paint in the patio under the shade of a tree, although it is also common to use the kitchen or one of the rooms (Figure 30).

Figure 30. In Huáncito, it is common to use the kitchen or one of the rooms for painting the pots (Fidel Lorenzo household, 2014). Photograph by author.

Discard of Broken or Defective Products

Although most potters in Huáncito are quite skilled and usually do not encounter any problems when firing the kiln, it is not uncommon for some vessels to break or to be found to be defective (i.e., pots with thin walls, with smoke stains, warped, cracked, or otherwise malformed) during or after firing. If all these defective pots were left in the kiln's vicinity, in time the area would be full of discarded material. We have seen that lower quality or “second class” pots can be sold cheaper than the rest, while the pots that are totally useless or broken beyond repair are discarded outside the house (Figure 31). There are two spots on the outskirts of Huáncito where these rejects are discarded, near a river and in a gully (Figure 32), where one can see great concentrations of potsherds. These discard patterns would have obvious archaeological implications for the identification of pottery-producing households.

Figure 31. In most potting households, the pots that are totally useless or broken beyond repair are discarded outside the house. In this case, a wheelbarrow is used to transport the potsherds to the dumping area (1990). Photograph by author.

Figure 32. The potsherds are periodically discarded in a gully on the outskirts of Huáncito (1990). Photograph by author.

Most potters eat in their homes during the day, a basic diet primarily of maize tortillas, beans, chili peppers, and squash. Meat is consumed on special occasions, such as the Day of the Dead (November 1 and 2), a ritual celebration when a chili broth called churipo is made with corundas (maize tamales), vegetables, and beef. On a daily basis, meals are eaten in the house, near the kiln in the case of Fidel's house. A small adobe stove has been built for cooking in that area (Figure 33). One would expect that a greater number of pottery items, such as cooking pots, water jugs, serving dishes, glasses, cups, etcetera, would break in this area over time than in the rest of the house. Some of these potsherds would perhaps remain in the archaeological record for future archaeologists to find.

Figure 33. A small adobe stove has been built for cooking in the area near the kiln in Fidel's house. Lafira is seen cooking at far right, while Fidel and Magdaleno are eating in the middle, and Marina is working at the left of the figure (painting pots). This is an example of the flexibility of domestic space mentioned in the text (Fidel Lorenzo household, 2014). Photograph by author.

The Structure of Spatial Organization

The information presented by Arnold (P. Arnold Reference Arnold1991:100–101, Reference Arnold and Williams2005) about potting communities in Los Tuxtlas, Veracruz, is to some extent applicable to the Huáncito case study. According to Arnold, ceramic production can be organized either as a flexible activity, or as one that has a more rigid and restricted structure. This characterization is represented by a continuum of productive activities, with tasks that are flexible in terms of the use of space in one extreme, and restricted in the other. Spatially flexible activities are not confined to a specific place; rather, they can be moved from one place to another according to availability of space. The elastic nature of these activities usually means that they are finished with relative speed and produce few material remains and in a low density.

In order to perform spatially flexible activities, tools and techniques are preferred which do not impede the possible relocation of the activity. The artifacts associated with this kind of activity might include polishing stones, small molds, and cutting tools (i.e., blades, knives, scrapers, and other tools made of obsidian or other stones, such as chert). These tools can be used anywhere and can be easily moved with changing conditions that affect the use of space (e.g., sunlight, shade, wind direction, rain, and where the children are playing; P. Arnold Reference Arnold, Bishop and Lange1991).

Spatially restricted activities are linked to different materials and technology than the ones described above. These activities must be performed in a well-defined space, because they depend on a fixed feature, such as the potter's kiln. In comparison with flexible activities, restricted activities usually take longer to perform and produce bigger and more abundant refuse. Other factors that can influence the organization of production are the following: the area available for productive activities (Arnold Reference Arnold and Williams2005), the size of the work force, and the sequence in which productive activities are performed (P. Arnold Reference Arnold, Bishop and Lange1991:102).

The ideas expressed by Arnold (P. Arnold Reference Arnold, Bishop and Lange1991) are shared by Sugiura and Serra (Reference Sugiura, Serra, Sugiura and Serra1990:212), who say that there are several levels of intensity of production, the lowest being the individual level, in which activity areas linked to pottery manufacture are not fixed or well-defined. In this case, space is multifunctional, and the location of some activities (for instance, working with the molds) may change according to the season of the year, the time of day, the weather, or other variables. The use of space in this level of production is disperse and superimposed, like a palimpsest, because spaces are used for multiple purposes, including an endless list of tasks that are not related to pottery manufacture, such as maize processing (shelling, grinding, and boiling), among others.

In the potting households I have studied in Huáncito, most activities linked to pottery manufacture could be defined as “flexible” in terms of the use of space, since there is no particular or exclusive place for each activity (Tables 2–4), excepting those carried out on the work table and the firing of pots in the kiln (see Figures 21–23). Likewise, time is organized in a very elastic manner. Although there is a certain order in which certain actions have to be performed (first the clay has to be extracted from the quarry, then processed by grinding, and the pots have to be smoothened before being polished, and painted before or after firing, according to the kind of paint being used, and so on) certain aspects of production depend on factors outside the control of the potter, such as the weather. In cases when the ideal conditions for making pots are not present, activities are postponed, for instance firing the kiln would not be attempted on a rainy day.

Lessons to be Learned about the Use of Domestic Space

In pottery making, as well as in other production activities, one should differentiate clearly between domestic activities for the household's own consumption, which, in most cases, are performed part-time, and specialized full-time activities that satisfy the demands of the whole community or of some social sectors (Manzanilla Reference Manzanilla and Manzanilla1986:463; see also Feinman and Nicholas Reference Feinman, Nicholas, Manzanilla and Hirth2011, Reference Feinman and Nicholas2012). Most potting households in Huáncito could be defined as specialized workshops, because their level of production far exceeds the needs of the household, and is aimed at trade or exchange. This level of production existed in pre-Hispanic Mesoamerica (Berdan Reference Berdan2014; Rattray Reference Rattray1990:184; Smith Reference Smith2004, Reference Smith, Nichols and Rodriguez-Alegría2016).

According to Gougeon (Reference Gougeon, Douglass and Gonlin2012), the majority of activities that occurred at the household level were probably involved in production for domestic needs and consumption. In Gougeon's (Reference Gougeon, Douglass and Gonlin2012:142) opinion, “looking at households as ‘black boxes' hides the contributions of the individuals within them[.] It becomes important… when discussing household production to examine the role of the individual. One way of accomplishing this goal is through an examination of activity areas and the division of labor.” Households encompass activity groups, “thus, it follows that archaeologists excavate the remains of their activities and the loci of activities. The analysis of activity areas can contribute to studies of household production, consumption, craft specialization, and the… division of activities and space” (Gougeon Reference Gougeon, Douglass and Gonlin2012:142).

Although the organization of domestic space in Huáncito's potting households shows some regular patterns, its analysis following the “activity area” concept presents some challenges due to the fact that most activities are not performed in spatially restricted areas, and are not characterized by an accumulation of tools, discarded products, or raw materials. As we have seen, the activities performed by potters are not consistently carried out in the same place, and several activities can take place in the same spot over time.

According to Sugiura and Serra (Reference Sugiura, Serra, Sugiura and Serra1990:208), many studies dealing with activity areas lack any objective beyond the identification of such areas in archaeological contexts, and the “formal description of their functionality.” According to Schiffer (Reference Schiffer1988:472), although many archaeological studies are based on the assumption that the analyzed artifacts were deposited as primary refuse (i.e., they are found in the place where they were used), this kind of refuse is only produced under certain limited conditions. This has been corroborated by my research in Huáncito, where daily cleaning activities in the houses (especially sweeping the floors in the rooms and the patio) erase the traces left by most activities.

We have seen in these pages that one of the problems for defining activity areas in the case of pottery production is that most of the tools and artifacts used by the potters are small, and can be reused or transported to other settings outside of the place where they were used (see discussion in Stark Reference Stark1984:12). The “archaeological visibility” of these activities is also affected by the fact that not all activities are consistently carried out in the same space. Obviously, the more frequently one activity is performed in the same spot, the more likely it is to leave material traces or archaeological markers (Table 5) that an archaeologist would be able to recognize as diagnostic features of a certain activity (Deal Reference Deal and Kolb1988:113).

Although the present study has not considered a sample of households big enough for obtaining definitive conclusions, it does allow for generalizations about the organization of space in potting households. As one can see in the data discussed above, space in these households is not divided into specific activity areas, and residues of the activities of production are not deposited in primary contexts, i.e., in or near the spot where the activity took place.

The ethnographic information gathered by my research seems to point toward the need for other concepts or paradigms in addition to the activity area, because the proponents of this concept do not take into account the ease with which certain activities are performed indistinctly in one place or another within the house, or are started in one place and finished in another, as we have seen in Huáncito. The activity-area concept is certainly a valid proposition and is very relevant to archaeology in Mesoamerica and elsewhere. Archaeologists, however, should have a more holistic, complete, and integral understanding of all activities usually performed in a household, both those that are linked to the ceramic process and those that are not. This would allow us to fully understand the structure of the spatial context and the organization of domestic work. These perspectives can be obtained or enhanced through ethnographic observation in contemporary communities, and the insights gained by ethnographic analogy should be applied to the interpretation of the archaeological record.

Mitchell et al. (Reference Mitchell, Plug, Bailey, Ashmore, Dobres, Nelson and Rosen2006) have explored the way in which people organize their living space and how ethnographic studies of such behavior can be applied to archaeological situations. A case in point is the understanding of the way in which South African hunter-gatherers structured their campsites and organized the space within them. This has been a long-standing theme of ethnographic fieldwork among surviving Bushman peoples in the Kalahari Desert of South Africa, often with a specific interest in the insights that this may generate for archaeological studies about hunter-gatherers, in particular, and, more generally, for archaeological research in other areas of the world (Mitchell et al. Reference Mitchell, Plug, Bailey, Ashmore, Dobres, Nelson and Rosen2006:81).

Another important input to ethnoarchaeological studies of the use of cultural space comes from Jarvenpa and Brumbach (Reference Jarvenpa, Brumbach, Ashmore, Dobres, Nelson and Rosen2006), who set out to “reassess one of the bedrock concepts of anthropology and social sciences: the sexual division of labor”. In their opinion, archaeologists who assume a rigid division of labor in all societies throughout the modern world may be projecting their Western beliefs onto the archaeological record (Jarvenpa and Brumbach Reference Jarvenpa, Brumbach, Ashmore, Dobres, Nelson and Rosen2006:97). In discussing specialization within the household, these authors argue that “specialization allows families and other small-scale social units to perform a wider array of tasks and skills than any individual alone could master” (Jarvenpa and Brumbach Reference Jarvenpa, Brumbach, Ashmore, Dobres, Nelson and Rosen2006:98).

The work of Rapoport (Reference Rapoport and Kent1990) has been particularly important to understand the archaeological implications of the behavior we see among potters in the Huáncito households. According to Rapoport, “the notion of ‘activities' is not at all self-evident and needs clarification both regarding the relation of activities to culture and also in terms of four aspects of activities” ranging from (1) instrumental aspects which are the most obvious (the nature of the activities); (2) how activities are carried out; (3) how they are associated into systems; and, lastly, (4) the meaning or most latent aspect of all activities.

Rapoport (Reference Rapoport and Kent1990:9) holds that “one cannot discuss single activities but only systems of activities… [their] setting also cannot be considered singly but only as systems, so that systems of activities actually occur in systems of settings. These are organized in varying and complex ways, not only in space but in time and in other ways, all related to culture.” The implication of these observations is that “what happens in one part of the system greatly influences what happens or does not happen elsewhere[.]” Rapoport (Reference Rapoport and Kent1990:9) adds that “a particular way of addressing an important question regarding environment-behavior interaction” is “who does what, where, when, including or excluding whom (and why).”

My work dealing with pottery manufacture and use in the context of domestic space has explored the systemic context and its archaeological implications in only three cases for a limited period of time. Much remains to be done, but the results so far have been extremely illuminating and encouraging.