ceramic decoration, ethnicity and political economy … part 17... · cunningham ceramic...

Cunningham CeramicDecoration,EthnicityandPoliticalEconomyinMali 265

Ceramic Decoration, Ethnicity and Political Economy in the Inland Niger Delta of Mali

JerimyJ.Cunningham

Few issues have perhaps been as consistentlyproblematic for archaeology as the pursuit ofethnic identity in the material record. As Jones(1997)haspointedout,archaeologicalstudiesofethnicityare the final stage ina lineofresearchthatbeganwiththequesttoidentifyraces,thenmovedontoculturesandcultureareas,andhasfinallyarrivedatquestionsaboutethnicgroups.Withsomeconsistency,archaeologyhasfocusedon stylistic variation as the window throughwhichdistinctpeoplescouldbeidentifiedinthepast.Asanaspectofvariationthatisadjuncttotheecologicaloradaptiveconstraintsthatimpact-edpasttechnologies(i.e.,thatisadjuncttothatwhichis“functional”),styleisthoughttobefreeof utilitarian constraints in ways that make itamenable to ethnic symbolism (Cunningham2003a).Oneoftheconvenientshortcutsinthislongtraditionofarchaeologicalresearchhasbeentherelativelyconstantequationofceramicdeco-rationwiththesocialworldsofthepast.Recentresearch may have found that even mundanetechnologicalchoicesareimpactedbysocialfac-tors like identity; yet, decorative variation inceramicsremainsthemostlogicalplaygroundfortheexpressionsofidentityandthedefaultavenueofinquiryforthoseseekingidentitiesinthepast.Inthefollowingpaper,Iwishtodrawuponmyrecent ethnoarchaeological work to assess theequation of decorative patterning in ceramicswith identity.This research was stimulated ini-tially by an analysis of ceramic variability fromthe Van Bree site, conducted as part of a MAproject supervised by Mike Spence at theUniversityofWesternOntario,whichsuggestedthat factors such as the scale and intensity ofceramicproductionhadan important influenceon the final character ofdecorative variation in

theearly-LateWoodlandofSWOntario.Italsopromptedmetoundertakeacriticalexplorationof the concept of “style” in archaeology(Cunningham 2003a) and then into ethnoar-chaeologicalworkaimedatuntanglingthecausalcomplexitythataffectsregionalceramicpatterns.Mydoctoralprojectfocusedontheexchangeandconsumptionofhouseholdvessels intheInlandNiger Delta (IND) of Mali. In the IND, Iobservedtwoexamplesofsignificantchangesin“adjunct”ceramicdecoration,changesthatclose-lymimic thepatterns archaeologistsoftenattri-butetomigrationsorconquests.Despitethefactthat potting traditions in the region are ethni-callyembedded,thesechangesresultednotfromradical social change, but rather from processesrelatedtolaboranditsextractionwithinhouse-hold political economies. I begin by lookingbriefly at the role that ethnoarchaeologicalknowledgeplays in archaeology,moveon to anexplorationofthefactorsthataffectedthechang-esIobservedinmyfieldwork,andthenconcludebyassessingtheimplicationsofthisresearchforcurrent attempts to identify ethnicity in thearchaeologicalrecord.

Ethnoarchaeology and Archaeology

Atthispointinarchaeology’shistory,anydiscus-sionofethnoarchaeologicalfindingsmustincludesomepreambleabouttheroleethnoarchaeologyplays within archaeological research.Ethnoarchaeology has the misfortune of beingconceived both as necessary to archaeologicalstudiesandsomehowalwaysdeficientinmeetingitsobjectives.Bothprocessualandpostprocessualarchaeologiesmayhavekickedofftheirrespective

266 OntarioArchaeologyNo.85-88/LondonChapterOASOccasionalPublicationNo.9

researchprogramswithethnoarchaeologyprojects(e.g,Binford1978;Hodder1982);butsincethenethnoarchaeologyhasfacedsharpcritique.Simms(1992) famously described ethnoarchaeology aslittlemorethananobnoxiousspectatororatrivialpursuit,whileAnnStahl(1993)exposedethnoar-chaeology’s soft underbelly by pointing out thatethnoarchaeologicalworkoftenreliesonassump-tions anchored in unilinear evolution. Morerecently,ethnoarchaeologyhasbeenchastised forbothitseclecticism(ArnoldIII2000)anditscon-tinued tendency to produce cautionary tales(Kuznar 2001). Others have dismissed ethnoar-chaeological studies entirely, finding them to beethicallybankrupt(Gosden1999;Jones2002).

Manyofethnoarchaeology’scurrentproblemsareaproductofitsbirthinthepositivistepiste-mology put forward by the New Archaeology(Cunningham 2009a). Indeed, its perceivedshortcomingsemergefromitsfailuretomeettheexpectationssetoutforitbytheNewArchaeology,expectationsthatbyandlargewereneverachiev-able. Ethnoarchaeology moved from its initialposition as an intriguing archaeological side-project to become the vanguard of the NewArchaeology’s scientific study of the past.Ethnoarchaeology would provide the linkingprinciplesthatwouldtiethebehavioralphenom-ena referenced in the social theory archaeologyused–effectivelyatri-partmodelofculturepro-posingecologicaldeterminism–tothematerialpatternsthatwereobservedinthearchaeologicalrecord. By going to the field and documentingunambiguous causal relations between materialcultureandthesebehaviors,ethnoarchaeologistsprovidedthemeansforpositiviststodeductivelytest their interpretations (Binford1983:14,54).Relationsbetweenmaterialpatternsandhumanbehaviorwereexpectedtobedirectlyapprehen-sible through bottom-up programs of “theorybuilding” (Binford 1981). Unlike archaeology,whichneededbackgroundtheoriesanddeductiveprogramsoftheorytestingtoestablishinterpreta-tions, ethnoarchaeology could be an inductivepursuit.Asaprojectof“theorybuilding”(ratherthan“theorytesting”),themiddlerangetheoriesethnoarchaeologistscreatedfrominductivestudywouldbe independentofarchaeology’sexplana-

tory theory. Despite the critiques of positivismmadebyKuhn(1996),Binfordcouldthussug-gestthatarchaeologyachievedamethodologicalform of “objectivity” (Binford 1983: 45-55)becauseitreliedonmiddlerangetheoriesduringtesting that were independent of archaeology’sgeneraltheory.Thebenchmarkforethnoarchae-ology’ssuccesswouldthusbeitsabilitytoiden-tify – through inductive, ethnographic study –unambiguousrelationsbetweenmaterialculturepatternsandhumanbehavior.

Itnowgoeswithoutsayingthattheviewofethno-graphicresearchputforwardbytheNewArchaeology– as the simple, a-theoretical recording of humanbehaviors–contrastsquitesharplywithcontempo-raryanthropologicalapproaches.Manyanthropolo-gistsaredeeplyskepticalabouttheirabilitytocreatean “objective” account of human behavior fromobservation alone (e.g., De Certeau 1984; Geertz1973;MarcusandFischer1986).Behaviordoesnotcomepre-packagedintodiscreteunits(forwhicha“materialcorrelate”couldbeidentified),butiscon-tinuousandinherentlyambiguous.Theproblemisevenmorepronouncedwhenweconsider that, inarchaeology,“behaviors”areusuallystructuralphe-nomenaratherthanthesortofdiscreteeventstypi-callyseenindailyhumanpractice.Identifyingspe-cific behaviors, their causal antecedents, and theirmaterialcorrelateswouldthusseemtorequirealevelof theorization that isat least asdevelopedas thatused by archaeologists to interpret the materialrecord.

Many archaeologists nonetheless seem to haveboughtintothepositivistoutlook,goingintothefieldforrelativelyshortperiodstotryanddocu-mentsomeinterestingbehavioral-materialrelation(seeDavidandKramer2001fordiscussion).Notsurprisingly, they often returned from the fieldarmedwithresultsthatsuggestedthecausalforcesimpactingbothbehaviorandmaterialcultureweremuch different than those proposed in archaeo-logicaltheories.Manyarchaeologistsrespondedtothese findingsbydismissing ethnoarchaeology assenselessly eclectic and a nihilistic producer ofcautionarytales.Ratherthanadeficiencyineth-noarchaeology,however,muchoftheproblemliesinthepositivistsunderestimationofthedifficultiesof ethnographic research (Cunningham 2003b).


The consequencehasbeen that, forunrepentantpositivists, ethnoarchaeology became the scape-goatforthefailureoftheirgrandvision,whileforanti-positivists, ethnoarchaeology became theposterchildofscientism.

As a consequence of its ties to the NewArchaeology, much of the received knowledgeabout ethnoarchaeology is even now distinctlyanachronistic. Many archaeologists still seem tofeelthatethnoarchaeology’sroleistoidentifylaw-like relationsbetweenbehaviorandmaterial cul-ture1, despite the fact that the positivism thatunderwrote this role no longer has widespreadsupport. Recent research has instead identified aslewofcongruenciesinoncepolarizingepistemicpositionsbetweenprocessual andpost-processualarchaeology(Hegmon2003;Kosso2001;Trigger1998, 2003a, 2003b; Tschauner 1996; VanPoolandVanPool1999;Wylie2002).Minortermino-logical differences still exist (e.g., advocacy of“metaphor”versus“analogy”),butcurrentresearchseemstohavesettledonadistinctlypost-positivistapproach.Attheheartofthepost-positivistepis-temic vision is the realization both of the con-structednatureofourinvestigationsandofaseriesof procedures for counteracting the tautologiesthatalwaysthreatentoemerge.Datamayalwaysbeidentifiedinthelightofbackgroundknowledgeandtheories,butthatdatamaystillresistourwild-estflightsoffancy,creatingnetworksofresistancesthat challenge poor interpretations (Shanks andTilley 1987). More explicit and proactive tech-niquesincreasethepoignancyoftheseresistances.Theories do frame archaeological data, but notheory is so encompassing and logically seamlessthat it determines every aspect of the empiricalwordthatcanbeusedasevidenceforthattheory(Wylie2002).Fragmentationoccursamongdiffer-ent theories and the diverse datasets that theybringintobeing,creatingopportunitiesforinde-pendence in testing procedures that defy vicioustautologies. Interpretations that “tack” betweenindependenttheoriesanddatasetsandareabletotriangulate independent lines of evidence buildinterpretivesecurity.

1 For example, some researchers still feel ethnoarchaeologyshouldgetonwiththejobof“mapping”relationsbetweenbe-haviouralphenomenaandmaterialpatterning(Arnold2003).

Ethnoarchaeologyhasanimportantroleinthisnewpost-positivist environmentbecause ethno-graphicstudiescanprovideindependentsupportforarchaeologicaltheories.Archaeologyandeth-noarchaeology are two distinct research “tacks”(Wylie2002).Archaeological research interpretsthe material record in the light of backgroundtheoriesabouthumanactionanditstiestomate-rial culture, while ethnoarchaeology makes acomplementarytackthatassessesthesametheoryinethnographiccontexts.Ratherthanatheory-free quest for unambiguous material correlates,ethnoarchaeologyisasignificantaspectofarchae-ologicalresearchbecauseitoffersanindependentcontext inwhich the same theoryarchaeologistsusetointerpretthematerialrecordcanbetestedandrefined.This theory includesnotonlygen-eral propositions about human action (“generaltheory”),butalsomid-leveltheoriesthatseektobalance empirical and theoretical content andevenlow-leveltheoriesthatfocusonbehavioral-material relations. Ethnoarchaeology is a usefulcomplement to archaeologybecause its researchcontexts – i.e., studies of daily practice – areuniquefromarcheology’smorestructuredvisionofhumanaction,creatingthesortsofdata-theo-ry independencies that build confidence in ourconceptualframeworks.

ItisinthislightthatIofferthefollowingdis-cussion of ceramic variability. No single ethno-graphicsettingwilleverserveasaperfect(orevenmarginallyperfect)analogue(or“metaphor”)fora particular archaeological context. But ethno-graphicresearchinanumberofdifferentsettingsmaydocumentthecausalforcesthatcanimpactceramicdecorationandsuggesttestingstrategies(i.e., independent lines of archaeological evi-dence) that may allow archaeologists to selectbetweenthoseoptions.

Ceramic Change in the Inland Niger Delta

CeramicsintheInlandNigerDeltaareproducedbycastedwomenpotterswhoworkoutoftheirownhomes.TheInlandNigerDeltasitsonthenorthernperiphery of the Mandé cultural sphere and itssocial structure is often interpreted in relation to


Mandé’stri-partcastesystemofnoblesandfarmers,craftspecialists,andslaves.Thesecastestransecttheethnicdivisionspresentintheregion(seeFigures1and2).Craftproducersaretypicallysituatedinanambiguous social position, both revered andshunnedbecauseoftheircontrolovertransforma-tive technologies (ConradandFrank1995;Frank1998;LaViolette2000).Typically,theyaredescribedasendogamous;however,recentchangesinthelocaleconomy–specifically thedecreasingdemandforsmelted iron–havemeant thatmanypotters arenowmarriedtolocalfarmers.Indeed,ethnicityandcastebothseemsmuchmorefluidthanhastradi-tionallybeenassumed,especiallyintheupperdelta(Amselle1998;Conrad2002;Cunningham2005:Ch.3).

Pottersinthestudyareatendtoresideinoneoftwoethnicgroups,eachofwhomfollowsdis-tinctoperationalsequencesintheproductionoftheir pottery (Gallay and Huysecom 1989;Gallay, et al. 1998; Huysecom 1994a, 1994b;LaViolette 2000; Mayor 1994, 2003). Somono

numupotterstendtouseconcaveceramicmoldstoformthebaseofavesselandthenbuildupthesides through the use of coils. These pottersemploy slow wheels in their production. Slowwheelsareconicalvessels thatpivotonanoiledindentation in the floor of a work space. Thewheel is filled with fine grog that supports aceramicmoldandthewheelisspunbyonehandwhile theother isused to formthepot.Pottersformthevesselinitiallybypressingtheclayintothemoldwiththeirhand.Ascoilsareaddedtothe rim, potters use wet leather and ellipticalpiecesofcalashwithonehandtosmoothoutthesides as the vessel as it is slowly turned. Onceformed,vesselsmaybedecoratedwith incision,rouletting,stamps,andincising;or,theymaybeformedandthendirectlysetouttodryandawaitpainting.

Incontrast,Fulani (Peul)griotpottersdonotuseaslowwheelandinsteadtendtouseconvexmolds in association with a paddle and anviltechnique to form their vessels. Small pots are

Figure 1. The study area.


formedbybeingpressedintoaconcavewoodenmoldtoformthebaseandthentheupperpor-tionsofthevesselareformedbyaddingcoilsandusingapaddleandanvil.Largervesselsbeginasaflatpancakeofclaythatisdrapedoveraconvexmold– typically abroken vessel similar to thatbeingmade–andpoundedintoform.Oncethebaseisdry,itisremovedfromthemoldandcoilsofclayareaddedandtheformismadewiththeassistance of a hammer and anvil. The wheeltechniqueusedbynumupottersallowsthemtomakeafarwiderrangeofvesselformsthantypi-callyareproducedbygriotpotters,butthehigherdensity of Griot pots makes their water vesselshighlysoughtafterbecauseofitscoolingproper-ties.

Potsarefiredbybothgroupsinopenbonfiresthatarefueledbycattle-dungandstraw.Bothof

these fuels are available only at the end of theharvest, which restrict most pottery productiontothedryseason(seebelow).Pottersuseanum-ber of different marketing strategies to markettheir wares. They sell in their own village,through local markets, through sales trips toneighboring villages, through the use of fran-chises, and occasionally through pirogue-baseditinerant marketing and even itinerant produc-tion where potters relocate with their tools toproduce in another village. Water jars are rela-tivelyunique vessels in the InlandNigerDelta.Generally, they appear in two distinct varietiesthat are produced by potters in both ethnicgroups. First, they may be “courtyard vessels”whicharelargejarsplacedinthecookhouseorinashadypartofthecourtyard.Thesepotscontainwater for cooking, washing and other domestic

Figure 2. Examples of water jars from the inland Niger Delta. Griot water jars for sale in Jenné (top left); cur-rent Forgeron jars for sale in Jenné Market (top right); a traditional Forgeron jar (bottom left); Kotimé’s water jar (bottom right).


tasks. In contrast, “drinking vessels” are smallerandtypicallyareconvenientlyplacedonapatioattached to the house or in the corner of theantechamberofaroomblock.Incomparisontowaterstoragejars,whicharemodestlydecorated,waterpotsfordrinkingarehighlydecoratedandproudlydisplayed.

BothGriotpottersandForgeronpotterspro-duce“drinkingvessels”,althoughtheyaremark-edlydifferentinboththeirformanddecoration.Griot jars tend tobe spherical in shape,donotpossesseitheradefinedneckorafootring,butdohaveashortlip.ThepaddleandanviltechniqueusedbyGriotpottersproducesthinanddenselywalledvesselsthatarefamousforkeepingdrink-ingwater ice cold, although they tend to sweatwaterquitequickly.Griotdrinking jars tend tohaveredtriangularanddiamondshapeddesignspainted down the upper half of the vessel inhorizontalbandswiththeoccasionalbossadorn-ment. In contrast, Forgeron potters producelargersphericalvesselsthatpossesshandlesplacedat the mid point of the body, a footring, andsometimesa tallneck.Currently, theupper1/3ofForgeronpots is red slipped,withhorizontalbands of triangular, naturalistic or text-baseddecorationcoveringthemid-sectionofthebodyBoth Forgeron and Griot potters will occasion-allymaketheirbandsofdecorationstandoutbypaintingthedesignsoverawhiteslip.

While Griot pottery seems to have remainedlargely similar throughout the latter half of the20thCentury,currentForgeronpotteryisunder-goingsomerapidchanges.TwosignificantshiftsinForgerondrinkingjarsareevident.First,mostwater jars originally seemed to have possessedlong necks, where as now up to half of theForgeron vessels for sale throughout the regiondonot.Second,thesevesselsseemtohaveorigi-nallybeendecoratedwithhighlyelaborateincisedandstampeddesignsthatranfromtheliprightdowntothebaseofthepot.Incontrast,currentdrinkingjars–bothneckedandun-neckedver-sions – are almost always decorated with justpainteddesigns.Oldervesselswithtallnecksandstampedorinciseddesignsarepresentinhouse-holds throughout the region and many of thepotterswhowereinterviewedpossessthetoolsto

makethesepotsandsaidtheycoulddosoiftheywere specially ordered. However, incising andstampingwasnolongerapartoftheireverydayproduction.

Toward Thick Descriptions of Ceramic Change

Oneofthemoreproblematicaspectsofethnoar-chaeological work has been a tendency to notfullyembedpotters’productionwithinthemod-erneconomicandculturalcontextinwhichtheylive.Thefactthatpotterypredatesothermateri-alsintheregionhasoftenmeantthatarchaeolo-giststreatitasa“traditionaltechnology”–some-thingleftoverbutlargelyintactfromthebygone,pre-colonialera.However,craftproducersrarelycontinue to produce craft items, or consumerscontinue to buy them, just because of inherenttraditionalism.Understandingcurrentcraftpro-ductionthusmeansanexplicitconsiderationofhow people have adjusted to the post-colonialsettingsinwhichtheylive.Ifthesesortsofcon-nections are ignored in order to make ethnoar-chaeological findings look more “traditional”,i.e.,morelikeahypotheticalarchaeologicalsitu-ation, then an artificialpictureof craftproduc-tioniscreated.IntheInlandNigerDelta,potteryproductiondoesoccurwithincastedhierarchiesand ethnically defined technological traditions,but that production is an economic activity.Womenproducepotsbecause itallowsthemtogeneratetheincometheyneedtomeettheirobli-gations within patrilineal households. For thisreason, it is important to contextualize potteryproduction in the broader economic systembeforemovingontoaconsiderationofthecausalforcesaffectingchange.

Potters currently face an economic squeeze.On the one hand, the Malian cash economy ismakingitincreasinglydifficulttobarterpotteryfortheservicesneededtoproducetheirpottery.Whereas teamsters used to be given a large potsuchasawaterjarinexchangeforhaulingtheirfiringmaterialsandclaytothepottersfiringloca-tionorworkplace,nowteamstersdemandafixedcashpayment.Ontheotherhand,pottershave


seen the amount they receive in exchange fortheirpotteryfixedaccordingtoanabsolutecashvalue.Previously,theamountgiveninexchangefor a pot was prone to fluctuate. For example,within their home village, potters would oftengive away pottery during the fall (during theplantingandweedingperiodsoftheagriculturalcalendar) and then receive a “re-gift” of cerealsafter the harvest. Although the re-gift of rice isexpected by both parties when the pot is givenaway, the delayed nature of the exchange takesthe social form of “gifting” (after Smart 1993).Theimportantconsequenceforpotterswasthattherewasrarelyanexplicitassessmentofequityintheexchange.Grainprices,forexample,tendto drop during and immediately following theharvest,whichenabledpotterstoreceivebetween50and100%morecerealinreturnforpotstheyhad“gifted”thentheywouldotherwisenormallyreceiveforadirectexchange.Asaresult,pottersarequicktoenterintodelayedformsofreciproc-ityandfocusadditionaleffortinsellingtheirpotsduring this period. Several potters noted thatthey would often gain more cereals than theyneeded for their own annual consumption andthuswouldresellitlaterinthedryseasonwhengrain prices returned to normal. Unfortunately,cashnowprovidesaneasywaytocomparevalue.Most consumers are unwilling to enter intodelayed forms of reciprocity and prefer to paycashor“cashvalue” forpotteryduring thehar-vestratherthannegotiateforaquantityofgrain.Asa result,pottersaregetting less in return fortheirvesselsatthesametimetheyarebeingaskedtopaycashforproductionexpenses.

Inadditiontotheimpactofthecasheconomy,ceramicproductionhasalsobeendeeplyeffectedbyindustriallyproduced,functionalequivalentsofmanypotforms,includingplasticbuckets,enamelserving dishes and aluminum caldrons.Nonetheless,whenconsideredasagroup,potteryremains a major component of most householdtool kits. In a census of 100 households in theregion,potterymadeupover40%of thevesselsthatwereidentified.Ingeneral,thepersistenceofpotteryintheeconomyisafunctionofitslowcostand availability. Industrial objects typically mustbe paid for upon possession and requires an

amountofcashthatdemandsdedicatedsavingorawindfall.Italsousuallyrequiresavisittooneoftheregion’slargermarkets.Incontrast,pottersareubiquitous throughout the region and engage inextensive marketing strategies that bring theirinexpensivepotterytothedoorstepsofmanycon-sumers.Pottersarealsowillingtoengageinbarterand delayed reciprocal exchanges, which meansthatruralfarmerscanstillgetpotterywhentheydo not have the time, cash or surplus cerealsneededtoacquiremoredesirableindustrialitems.

Yet, the vessel forms present were primarilythose thathaveresisted the impactof industrialmaterials.Forexample,consumersclearlypreferto own plastic wash kettles instead of ceramicwashpots,yetwashpotsremainpopularbecauseof their availability and inexpensiveness. Largeceramiccookpots,usedtopreparericeandothercereals,havelargelybeenreplacedbyaluminumcaldrons.Theynowmakeup less than1/6thofthe total number of caldrons identified in thecensus. Ceramic serving dishes have almostentirelybeenreplacedbyenamelserversandpot-tersnotedthatnowtheyonlymadeceramicserv-ing vessels when they were specially ordered,typicallybypeoplethepottersdescribedas“tra-ditionally minded.” In contrast, traditionalceramicmedicinepreparationpotsare relativelycommonandareexplicitlysoughtbyconsumersbecause marabous-healers feel that traditionalmedicinesmustbebrewedin“traditionalvessels”tobeeffective.

Water jars were the second most frequentlyfoundvesseltypeinthecensusandbyfararethemostimportanttypeofpotteryincontemporaryMalianhouseholds.Waterjarsremainanimpor-tantcomponentofmosthouseholdsbothbecauseof its continuing functional uses as well as itsimportantroleinmarriagetrousseaus.Waterjarsface little direct competition from industrialequivalents.Althoughthermosesandotherinsu-lated water storage containers can be boughtlocally, these itemsrequire ice tocool thewaterand keep it at a pleasant drinking temperature.SeveralenterprisingfamiliesnowselliceinJenné,where there is a relatively reliable generatedpowersystem,butoutsideofJennétherearefewsourcesofregularpower.Intheseareas,waterjars


continuetobethepreferredwayofkeepingwatercool.Waterjarsarealsoanimportantpartofthemarriagetrousseausthataccompanyabrideintoher husband’s extended patrilineal family.Typically,waterjarsaregiftsgiventoabridefromher mother. The mother, in turn, may havereceiveditasagiftformalocalpotter-friendormayhavespecialordered italongwithacollec-tionofothersmallpotsfromawell-reputedpot-ter.Thesepotsareproudlydisplayedeitherinthefrontroomofahouseholdoronthepatio.Theyare highly decorated and several women statedthat theyneeded tobebeautiful so theywouldencourage her new husband to drink the watershe has brought to the compound. Water jarsfromMopti,acommercialcentersome100kmNE of Jenné, are particularly desirable as mar-riage pots.These vessels are typically decoratedfromthemidlineupwitharedslipthatisbur-nished to high gloss. Text is placed in reliefaroundthecenterofthebody,oftenstatingthebride’snameor thephrase“Souvenir de Mopti.”Waterjarsarealsoacentralcomponentofhospi-tality;visitorsareusually seatedon thepatioorfrontroomandquicklyofferedwaterfromthejarso they can refresh themselves.Thus,water jarsareanimportantpartofboththetransferenceoftheproductsofwomen’slabor(hauledwater)toherhusband.Theyalsofiguremetaphoricallyinthe subtle politics of polygamous, patrilinealhouseholds where women often vie with theirco-wivesforequalattentionandaccesstopatri-lineal resources. A husband who drinks moreoftenfromonewife’swaterjarspendsmoretimeinherhouseandwithherchildren.

Itiswithinthiscontextthatwecanunderstandthe decorative shifts that have occurred. Thechangefromtallneckedtoun-neckedpotsseemspartiallyaconsequenceoftherelativeimportanceofnewmaterials.Twospecificfactorswereoftenreported by both potters and consumers.Consumersnowseemtopreferclosingtheirves-sels with a plastic or stainless steel plate ratherthanwiththeceramiclidthatusuallyaccompa-niesthepot.Lidsarepronetobreakbecausetheyare handled so frequently throughout the day.Plastic plates, or more extravagantly, high-glossstainlesssteelplates,weregenerallythoughttobe

a more durable, appealing and fashionable lid.However, tall-necked pots often have a largermouth than the diameter of the average plate,whichmeansthatifaplateisused,itoftenrestlow down in the neck and is hard to remove.Plates aremuchmore easilyused in associationwith un-necked vessels with a smaller mouth.Un-necked pots also leave the plates in plainview,whereasplatessetintoatallneckedpotcanonlybeseenfromahighviewingangle.

Inasimilarway,thecupsusedtoretrievethewaterfromwithinthevesselseemtoimpactves-selconsumption.Originally,waterseemstohavebeenretrievedfromthepotwiththeassistanceofacalabashspoonthatcouldreachdownthelongnecks. Now, however, consumers prefer to useplasticorstainlesssteelcups,orinmoreimpov-erishedhouseholds,used tincans.Forexample,one of the consumers interviewed during thecensus had recently discarded the water jar shehad received from her mother for her marriageand replaced itwithanew,un-necked jar fromJenné. When asked about this purchase, shestatedthatshehasrecentlyboughtanexpensivestainlesssteelcupfordrinking,butbothsheandherchildrenwerehavingtroublegettingthecupdown the tall neck of her old pot to reach thewater.Asaresult,sheexplicitlywenttopurchaseanewjarsoshecouldcontinueusingthecup.

Whatisperhapsmostsurprisingisthatinboththesecases,ceramicchangesarenotduetospecificchanges in desirability related to the pots them-selves, but are caused by the more generalizeddesire to use industrially produced materials inassociationwiththepots.Householdvesselsofalltypes are uniquely women’s objects and seem tosymbolically represent theirowner.Themarriagetrousseaus that accompany a bride to her newhouseholddonot just includeherwater jar,butnowalso typically includeanextravagantdisplayofenameledservingdishes.Enamelsseemtohavetakenover the roleonceplayedby calabashes inthe trousseau, which were given to the bride asgiftsfromherandhermother’ssocialnetworkandrepresented in a relatively direct way the socialcapital she coulddrawupon (seeCooper1997).Theexpenseofenamels,however,makestheirpos-sessionmorethanjustameasureofsocialcapital.


Theyarealsoanovertdemonstrationofthewealththat the bride can draw upon; wealth that ismanifestinaformthatshecontrols(Cunningham2009b).AseconomicpowerbecomesasignificantcomponentoftheMaliansocialenvironment,newmaterials that possess economic value haveachievedadominantpositioninthelocalaesthet-ic.Whennotinuse,cupsareplacedupsidedownon theplate-lidsused to close the jar, becomingpartofitsoverallpresentation.Plasticandstainlesssteelplatesaddtotheaestheticvalueofawaterjar,whoseabsolutebeautynowispartiallyameasureof itsexpensiveand industrially-producedaccou-trements.Beautifullydecoratedwaterjarsmaystillencourageahusbandtodrinktheproductsofhiswife’slabor,butwhenhedoesso,itiswithastain-less steel cup that attests to his wife’s social andeconomic power.The shift to un-necked vesselsthusreflectstheincreasingimportanceofindustri-allyproduceditemsincomparisontopottery.

Facedwith thedevaluationof theirproducts,potters have actively sought to limit the labourthey invest in potting.They have done this byreplacing time-consuming incised and stampeddecorative techniques with painted designs.Pottersnotedthatconsumerscontinuedtocher-ishstampeddesigns,buttheywereunwillingtopay extra forpotswith these treatments.Whenhighlydecoratedvesselswereoffered inmarketsnexttolessexpensive,painteditems,consumerswould tendtochoose the leastexpensivevessel.Thedilemmaismostacutelyfeltbyayoungpot-ter from Soa named Fatumata. Fatumata wastrainedatthetownofDiabyhergrandmother.Herpotsareincrediblyuniformandundeniablybeautiful,withaglossyfinish,bandsofreliefandthephrase“Vive L’Armée”embossedaroundthepot at themidline.2Byher estimation, it takesheraboutthreetimeslongertomakethesepotscompared to a painted water jar and she nor-mallyasksalmostdouble thepriceof apaintedjar.Althoughconsumersarequicktoshowinter-estinthesejars,theymoveonwhenthepriceisstatedandusuallybuyacheaperjar.Atthetime

2 The phrase probably reflects a special order made by thearmytohergrandmotherforanumberofvessels.Hergrand-mothernow includes thephraseonallherpots and taughtFatumata todothe same.Thephrase is remarkablebecausebothFatumataandhergrandmotherareilliterate.

oftheinterview,Fatumatawasconsideringhalt-ingherproductionofthesepotsbecauseshesaidthatpeopleweretoopoortobuyherwares.

It’simportanttonotethatpottersarenotseek-ingtolimitlaborinvestmentsinpottingbecausethey are the ruthless calculators of inputs andoutputsoftenimpliedbyformaleconomicmod-els (although they are certainly shrewdbusinesswomen),butbecause labor is a scarceandcon-tested resource. The patrilineal families intowhichpottersmarryhaveahierarchicalsystemoflaborallocation.Daughtersinlawareexpectedtocarryoutmostdomestic tasksnotonly in theirnuclear family’s own home, but also in theextendedfamily’scentralhousehold.Thesetasksinclude cleaning the house, hauling water andpreparingcollectivemeals.Inhouseswithseveraljunior daughters in law, work for the extendedhouseholdispartitionedonadailyrotation.Forfamilies with just one or two daughters in law,however, the labor demanded by her husband’sfamily can be extreme. On work days, womenriseearlyandspendtheirentiredayservingtheextendedfamily.Justpreparinganeveningmealmay take more than four hours of work.Independenteconomicactivities,suchaspotting,must takeplace in the “free-time”women havewhennotcommittedtotheextendedfamily.

Addingtothisproblemisthecollapseofironproduction and a marked tendency for potters’husbandstoengageinagriculturalwork.Atonetime,potters’husbandswerededicatedcraftpro-ducers, typically ironworkers,whogainedtheirstaple cereals through trade. However, thedroughtthathashittheSahelsincethe1970shassignificantlyreducedthesurplusesagriculturalistshave produced. Additionally, the abundance ofhighqualityscrapironinthelocaleconomyhaseradicatedmostlocalsmelting.Thoseironwork-erswhocontinuetoworkinthetradeoftendosointermittently, shifting their focus from ironsmeltingtosmith-work.Facedwithdiminishingreturnsandfewagriculturalsurpluses,manyfor-merironworkershaveadoptedagriculturalpro-duction–eitherasawayofsupplementingtheirironworkorasacompletereplacementtocraftproduction.


This shift is dire for potters because agricul-turalproductionsignificantlyincreasesdemandsontheirlabor,bothfromfieldrelatedworkandfrom associated household chores. In the deepwaterchannelsofthedeltaknownasthePondori,potters who once followed itinerant, pirogue-based marketing strategies with their mothershaveabandonedthepracticebecauseitconflictswiththetimeoftheyearwhentheyareneededtohelp with weeding and the harvest. Instead ofstockpiling pottery during the dry season andthenusingpirogues to sell itduring the floods,pottersnowfocusalmostentirelyonsellingdur-ing the dry season by donkey cart and horse-drawn wagon because this is when agriculturaldemandsontheirlaboraremuchlighter.

Discussion

In contrast to archaeological maxims that seedecorative variability as a straight forward andrather unproblematic reflection of social affini-ties, the findings here point to the myriad offactorsthatmaycreatedecorativeelements.TheNewArchaeology’soptimismaboutethnoarchae-ology’sabilitytofindunambiguousmaterialcor-relates relied on the hope that material cultureshouldpartitionoutintoasimpleandcross-cul-turally relevant series of “decodes”. For everyprocess inhumansociety–suchasethnicsym-bolism– there shouldbeanassociatedmaterialpattern – such as ceramic decorative styles.Binfordarguedthatmostofsocietyshouldparti-tion in similar ways: technomic, sociotechnic,and ideotechnic variability in material culturewould directly reflect the adaptive, sociologicaland ideological behaviors of past societies(Binford1962,1965). In stark contrast,what IhopeismostexplicitintheprecedingaccountofdecorativechangesinMaliisthatsomething“assimple”asachangeindecorativevariationactu-ally results from a highly complex mélange ofprocesses. The implication is that rather thanone-to-one relations between pattern and pro-cess,materialpatternsaresummative:theyrepre-sentthecumulativeeffectsofanumberofinter-actioncausalforces.

Twobroadlessonsemergefromthisstudy.First,notonlyarematerialpatternstheresultofseveralprocesses, but the importance of these processesmayshiftovertime.Atonepoint,thedecorativevariation studied here may have been stronglyinfluenced by concerns with ethnic symbolism,but inMali’s currentpostcolonial andglobalizedsetting, householdpolitics and the economics oflabor have come to have a definitive impact onceramicvariability.Second,theseshiftsinimpor-tancearerarelyconfinedtoasingleaspectofmate-rialculture.Aswehaveseen,theimpactofhouse-holdlaborextractionisnotjusttiedtodecorativevariation.Womenalsoconsumehouseholdvesselsbecausetheyassisttheminnegotiatingtheirposi-tionwithintheirhusband’sfamily.Abride’scollec-tion of enamels reminds her husband’s familyaboutthesocialandeconomicresourcesshehasatherdisposal,allowinghertoresistoverexploitationdespiteherinherentlymarginalizedpositionwith-in the household’s political economy. Beautifuldecoration on water jars is less important nowthan it once was because the economic capitaldisplayedthroughacollectionofindustrialmateri-als is an important part of personal identity.Potters, just likeotherwomen in the region, areembedded in these political economies and facethe systematic extraction of their labor by theirhusband’s family.Astheirhusbandsshift toagri-culturalproduction,moreoftheirlaborisappro-priatedforthehousehold,whichreducesthetimetheyhaveforpotting.Facedwithlesstimetopot,aneconomicsqueeze,andaclienteleunwillingtopay for elaborate decorative treatments, pottershaveshiftedfromstampedandinciseddesignstomorequicklyandeasilyproducedpainteddecora-tive elements. Political economies have such adiverse impact ondifferent elements of potpro-ductionandconsumptionbecauseitisoneofthemostsalientaspectsofwomen’sexperiencesinthiscontext at this particular time. In Bourdieu’s(1977:164-169) terms, women’s position in thehousehold has reached a point of heterodoxy inwhich it is the subject of explicit concern andnegotiation.

Likepebblesdroppedinponds,wewouldthusexpectthatthoseprocessesthathaveadominant


impactonasocialsettingarenotrestrictedtoonefacet of material variability, but instead createwavesofchangethattravelthroughdiversefacetsof material culture. Moments of severe adaptivestress, ethnic conflicts, or economic change like-wise should manifest themselves archaeologicallynotjustinspecificmaterialpatterns,butinchang-esthroughoutawiderangeofmaterialresidues.Bytacking between independent lines of evidencethathavebeenpartiallyimpactedbysuchculturalphenomena,archaeologistswouldbeabletoiden-tifythepresenceofcausalforces–likethoseorigi-natinginhouseholdpoliticaleconomies–thatareresponsible formaterialpatterning.For this rea-son,itisperhapsimportantthatethnicityisnotnarrowly equated with decorative variation.Doingsohastheeffectof,ontheonehand,over-simplifying thenumberof causal forces that gointo creating a decorative pattern and, on theother,leavingotherlinesofevidenceforethnicityunexplored.

Conclusion

Ethnoarchaeology exists to aid archaeologicalinterpretation.Yet,itwillneverprovidearchaeol-ogywiththelistofmaterial-to-behaviordecodesthat the New Archaeology once hoped. Whatethnoarchaeologycando,however, is toseektounderstand the relationship between humanactionandmaterialpatterningsothatthisknowl-edgecanbeusedbyarchaeologiststodevelopthemethodsandconceptual frameworks that facili-tatethebestpossibleinterpretationsofthepast.AsIhaveshown,thedefault(yetanachronistic)assumptionthatpatternsinmaterialcultureiso-morphicallyrelatetospecificprocesses,suchthatdecorativevariationcouldalwaysbeameasureofpast ethnicities, is inconsistent with the ethno-graphic record. The patterning observable indecorativevariationmayresultfromavarietyofcausal antecedents, includingones that are par-ticular to specific times and places.The key toidentifyingwhichof thevarious alternatives areresponsibleforaparticularpatternfoundinthearchaeologicalrecordisaquestionthatcanonlybeansweredbyexpandingtheresearchandseek-

ingotherlinesofevidence–othermaterialpat-terns–thatshouldbepresentiftheprocesssug-gestedintheinterpretationwasinoperation.

References Cited

Amselle,J.-L.1998 Mestizo Logics: Anthropology of Identity in

Africa and Elsewhere.TranslatedbyC.Royal.StanfordUniversityPress,Stanford.

ArnoldIII,P.J.2000 Working Without a Net: RecentTrends in

Ceramic Ethnoarchaeology. Journal of Archaeological Research 8(2):105-133.

2003 BacktoBasics:TheMiddle-RangeProgramas Pragmatic Archaeology. In Essential Tensions in Archaeological Method and Theory,editedbyT.L.VanPoolandC.S.VanPool,pp. 55-66. Foundations of ArchaeologicalInquiry, J. M. Skibo, general editor.UniversityofUtahPress,SaltLakeCity.

Binford,L.R.1962 Archaeology as Anthropology. American

Antiquity 28:217-225.1965 ArchaeologicalSystematicsandtheStudyof

CultureProcess.American Antiquity31:203-210.

1978 Nunamiut Ethnoarchaeology.AcademicPress,NewYork.

1981 Bones, Ancient Men and Modern Myths. AcademicPress,NewYork.

1983 Working at Archaeology. Academic Press,London.

Bourdieu,P.1977 Outline of a Theory of Practice.Translatedby

R. Nice. Cambridge University Press,Cambridge.

Conrad,D.C.2002 Somono Bala of the Upper Niger: River People,

Charismatic Bards, and Mischievous Music in a West African Culture. African Sources forAfricanHistory;v.1.Brill,Boston.

Conrad,D.C.andB.E.Frank(editors)1995 Status and Identity in West Africa: Nyamakalaw

of Mande. Indiana University Press,Bloomington.

Cooper,B.M.1997 Marriage in Maradi: Gender And Culture in a

Hausa Society in Niger, 1900-1989. Heinemann,Portsmouth,NH.

Cunningham,J.J.2003a RethinkingStyleinArchaeology.InEssential


Tensions in Archaeological Method and Theory,editedbyT.L.VanPoolandC.S.VanPool,pp. 23-40. Foundations of ArchaeologicalInquiry, J. M. Skibo, general editor.UniversityofUtahPress,SaltLakeCity.

2003b Transcendingthe“ObnoxiousSpectator”:ACase for Processual Pluralism inEthnoarchaeology.Journal of Anthropological Archaeology22:389-410.

2005 Household Vessel Exchange andConsumption in the InlandNigerDeltaofMali: An Ethnoarchaeological Study.Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, McGillUniversity.

2009a Ethoarchaeology Beyond Correlates.Ethnoarchaeology1:115-136.

2009b PotsandPoliticalEconomy:Enamel-Wealth,GenderandPatriarchyinMali.Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute(N.S.)15:276-294.

David,N.andC.Kramer2001 Ethnoarchaeology in Action. Cambridge

World Archaeology. Cambridge UniversityPress,Cambridge.

DeCerteau,M.1984 The Practice of Everyday Life. TranslatedbyS.

Rendall. University of California Press,Berkeley.

Frank,B.E.1998 Mande Potters and Leather-Workers: Art and

Heritage in West Africa. SmithsonianInstitutionPress,WashingtonandLondon.

Gallay,A.andE.Huysecom1989 Ethnoarcheologie Aafricaine: Un Programme

d’Étude de la Céramique Récente du Delta Intérieur du Niger (Mali, Afrique de l’Ouest).DocumentduDépartementd’anthropologieet d’ecologie, Université de Genève; 14.UniversitedeGeneve,Genève.

Gallay,A.,E.HuysecomandA.Mayor1998 Peuples et Ceramiques du Delta Intérieur du

Niger (Mali): Un bilan de cinq années de mis-sions (1988-1993). Verlag Philipp vonZabern,Mainz.

Geertz,C.1973 The Interpretation of Cultures. Basic Books,

NewYork.Gosden,C.

1999 Anthropology & Archaeology: A Changing Relationship.Routledge,NewYork.

Hegmon,M.2003 Setting Theoretical Egos Aside: Issues and

Theory in North American Archaeology.American Antiquity68(2):213-243.

Hodder,I.1982 Symbols in Action: Ethnoarchaeological Studies

of Material Culture. Cambridge UniversityPress,NewYork.

Huysecom,É.1994a Djenne: une Région aux Productions

CéramiquesTrèsDiversifiées.InDjenne: une ville millénaire au Mali,editedbyR.M.A.Bedaux and J. D. van der Waals, pp. 122-130,Leiden.

1994b Identification Technique des céramiquesAfricaines. In Terre Cuite et Société: La Céramique, Document Technique, Économique, Culturel. Rencontres Internationales d’Ar-chéologie et d’istoire dÁntibes. vol. XIV.ÉditionsAPDCA,Juan-les-Pins.

Jones,A.2002 Archaeological Theory and Scientific Practice.

CambridgeUniversityPress,Cambridge.Jones,S.

1997 The Archaeology of Ethnicity: Constructing Identities in the Past and Present.Routledge,London.

Kosso,P.2001 Knowing the Past: Philosophical Issues of

History and Archaeology. Humanity Books,Amherst,NY.

Kuhn,T.S.1996 The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 3rd

Edition.TheUniversityofChicago,Chicago.Kuznar,L.A.

2001 Introduction to Andean Archaeology. InEthnoarchaeology of Andean South America: Ccontributions to Archaeological Method and Theory, edited by L. A. Kuznar, pp. 1-18.International Monographs in Prehistory,AnnArbor,MI.

LaViolette,A.J.2000 Ethno-archaeology in Jenné, Mali: Craft and

Status Among Smiths, Potters and Masons.BAR International Series, CambridgeMonographs in African Archaeology 49.Archaeopress,Oxford.

Marcus,G.andM.Fischer1986 Anthropology as Cultural Critique: An

Experimental Moment in the Human Sciences. UniversityofChicagoPress,Chicago.

Mayor,A.1994 Durées de vie des Céramiques Africaines:

Facteurs Responsables et ImplicationSarchéologiques.PaperpresentedattheTerreCuiteetSociété:LaCéramique,DocumentTechnique,Économique,Culturel,Antibes.

2003 Use of Ethnoarchaeology for a Better


Understanding of Ceramic Production,Diffusion and Consumption Modalities:TheMaliExample.InCeramic in the Society,edited by S. Di Pierro,V. Serneels and M.Maggetti. Proceedings of the 6th EuropeanMettingonAncientCeramics.DepartmentofGeosciences,MineralogyandPetrography,UniversityofFribourg,Fribourg.

Shanks,M.andC.Tilley1987 Social Theory and Archaeology. Polity Press,

Cambridge.Simms,S.R.

1992 Ethnoarchaeology: Obnoxious Spectator,Trivial Pursuit, or the Keys to a timeMachine?InQuandries and Quests: Visions of Archaeology’s Future,editedbyL.Wandsnider,pp. 186-198. Occasional Paper. Center forArchaeological Investigations, SouthernIllinoisUniversity.,Carbondale.

Smart,A.1993 Gifts,Bribes,andGuanxi:AReconsideration

of Bourdieu’s Social Capital. Cultural Anthropology8(3):388-408.

Stahl,A.B.1993 Concepts of Time and Approaches to

Analogical Reasoning in Historical

Perspective. American Antiquity 58(2):235-260.

Trigger,B.G.1998 Archaeology and Epistemology: Dialoguing

across the Darwinian Chasm. American Journal of Archaeology102:1-34.

2003a Archaeological Theory: The Big Picture. GraceElizabeth Shallit Memorial Lecture Series.Department of Anthropology, BringhamYoungUniversity.

2003b Artifacts & Ideas: Essays in Archaeology. Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick,N.J.

Tschauner,H.1996 Middle-range Theory, Behavioral

Archaeology, andPostempiricistPhilosophyof Science in Archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory3(1):1-30.

VanPool,C.S.andT.L.VanPool1999 TheScientificNatureofPostprocessualism.

American Antiquity64(1):33-53.Wylie,A.

2002 Thinking from Things: Essays in the Philosophy of Archaeology.UniversityofCaliforniaPress,Berkeley.

JerimyJ.Cunningham,DepartmentofAnthropology,UniversityofLethbridge

ceramic decoration, ethnicity and political economy … part 17... · cunningham ceramic...

Documents