PofoliaShared via Pofolia

American Antiquity· 2026Q1

Why Colonoware? Exploring Functional Variations in Hand-Built Coarse Earthenwares across the Historical Upper Southeast

Elizabeth Bollwerk, Karen Y. Smith, Lindsay Bloch, Jillian Galle et al.

Short summary

Colonoware pottery in Virginia was primarily used for tableware, while in South Carolina, it served dual roles for cooking and serving, revealing regional functional differences in its production and use by marginalized communities.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Key points

  • Colonoware pottery exhibits regional functional differences between Virginia and South Carolina.
  • Virginia colonoware was primarily used for tableware.
  • South Carolina colonoware likely served dual functions for cooking and serving.
  • Functional analysis helps interpret cultural variations in local earthenware traditions.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Abstract

Abstract Colonoware, a hand-built, low-fired coarse earthenware, appears on archaeological sites occupied from the mid-seventeenth to the mid-nineteenth century throughout the southeastern United States. Although colonoware is highly variable in appearance and abundance, it is evident that subjugated and marginalized communities, including enslaved and free Africans and Indigenous people, produced, marketed, and used colonoware to contribute to, circumvent, and disrupt traditional European markets. Because of the lack of documentary evidence and definitive ethnic markers, fundamental information about colonoware—who made it and for whom it was made—remains elusive. Expecting that function was related to geographically and temporally contextual cultural practices, we adopt an attribute-level approach to identify patterns in the functional role of colonoware in two regions: Virginia and South Carolina. We analyzed data from the Digital Archaeological Archive of Comparative Slavery (DAACS; www.daacs.org ), which contains fine-grained information on colonoware and other artifacts from 21 sites. We found significant regional variation in abundance, sherd attributes, and form. We interpret this as evidence that Virginia colonoware was primarily made for tableware functions, whereas South Carolina colonoware was more likely used for both cooking and serving. Our examination of interregional variation demonstrates that function is a useful lens for interpreting cultural differences in the development and retention of locally made earthenware traditions.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. American Antiquity, 2026 · DOI ↗

TakeawaysPremium
Ask the paperFree account

Continue with a free account

Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.

Continue free on the web

Sign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.

On your phone:

Field: Anthropology

AnthropologySocial Sciences