Recently several anthropological and sociological studies have interpreted technologies as cultural choices that are determined as much by local perceptions and the social context fly any material constraints or purely functional criteria. Using the example of ceramic technology we consider how materials science studies can contribute to and benefit from this understanding of technology as a social construct. Although we acknowledge some potential difficulties, it is our contention that both materials scientists and archaeologists have gained much and have much to gain by cooperating together to study ancient technologies, and that the concept of ‘technological choices’can facilitate a wider consideration of the factors shaping technological developments.

A major focus of inter-disciplinary debate has been the need to bridge the Cartesian divide between people as active subjects and inert passive objects, to better reflect how things provoke and resist human actions through their ‘secondary agency’. Many Central Andean people express a deep concern about their relationship with places and things, which they communicate with through daily work and rituals involving ‘sympathetic magic’. A consideration of Andean animism emphasizes how agency is located in the social relationship people have with the material world and how material objects can have social identities.

A discussion of how Andean potters acquire and use their fuels is used to demonstrate the 'embedded' nature of ceramic technology. The most common choice offuel in the highlands of Peru and Bolivia is animal dung (mainly cow, sheep, and llama). This technological choice is related to wider social and economic practices (particularly in relation to animal husbandry) which has further repercussions that affect other technologies (such as agriculture practices). Such a succession of interrelated activities is not unique to pottery; it is fundamental to alltechnologies and should be considered within archaeological analysis.

No abstract