article
The making and breaking of Shipibo-Conibo ceramics
Ethnoarchaeology : implications of ethnography for archaeology • New York • Published In 1979 • Pages: 102-138
By: DeBoer, Warren R., Lathrap, Donald W. (Donald Ward).
AbstractBrief abstract written by HRAF anthropologists who have done the subject indexing for the document
DeBoer and Lathrap discuss the ceramic industry of the Shipibo-Conibo of eastern Peru, describing in turn the procurement of raw materials, vessel manufacture, distribution within households, the primary functions and secondary uses of vessels, and patterns of ceramic discard. Although not concerned primarily with classification, the authors provide useful information about a native taxonomy, especially as it relates to vessel function, and about variations among potters in the production of the ceramic ware. 'In focusing on variations in vessel use and longevity, and on the processes which transform ceramic objects into archaeological artifacts, the article contributes to a growing literature illuminating formation processes of the archaeological record, and has implications for the formulation of archaeological sampling design' (p. 102).
- SubjectsDocument-level OCM identifiers given by the anthropology subject indexers at HRAF
- Special deposits
- Ceramic technology
- Refuse disposal and sanitary facilities
- Miscellaneous hardware
- cultureCulture name from the Outline of World Cultures (OWC)
- Shipibo
- HRAF PubDateThe date HRAF published the document
- 2002
- RegionThe area the document pertains to
- South America
- Sub RegionThe more specific area the document pertains to, which is located within the Region
- Amazon and Orinoco
- Document TypeMay include journal articles, essays, collections of essays, monographs, or chapters/parts of monographs
- article
- Evaluation
- Creator TypesThe type of person writing the document, e.g. Ethnographer, Missionary, Archaeologist, Folklorist, Linguist, Indigenous Person, and so on.
- Archaeologist
- Ethnologist
- Document Rating A ranking done by HRAF anthropologists based on the strength of the source material on a scale of 1 to 5, as follows: 1 - poor; 2 - fair; 3 - good, useful data, but not uniformly excellent; 4 - excellent secondary data; 5 - excellent primary data.
- 5: Excellent Primary Data
- AnalystThe HRAF anthropologist who subject indexed the document and prepared other materials for the eHRAF culture/tradition collection
- John Beierle ; 2001
- Field DateThe date the researcher conducted the fieldwork or archival research that produced the document
- 1971
- Coverage DateThe date or dates that the information in the document pertains to
- ca. 1971
- Coverage PlaceLocation of the research culture or tradition (often a smaller unit such as a band, community, or archaeological site)
- Ucayali River area, Peru
- NotesAdditional notes
- Warren R. DeBoer and Donald W. Lathrap
- Includes bibliographical references (p. 136-138)
- LCCNLibrary of Congress Control Number
- 78010357
- LCSHLibrary of Congress Subject Headings
- Shipibo-Conibo Indians