2009
DOI: 10.1007/s10761-009-0082-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Colonowhen, Colonowho, Colonowhere, Colonowhy: Exploring the Meaning behind the Use of Colonoware Ceramics in Nineteenth-Century Manassas, Virginia

Abstract: This paper explores the meaning and use of colonoware ceramics recovered from six archaeological sites dating from the nineteenth-century at Manassas, Virginia. Americans, both free and enslaved, occupied this landscape. Archaeological investigations have recovered colonoware at some nineteenthcentury domestic sites but not others. The occurrence of colonoware at these sites is patterned: colonoware in nineteenth-century Manassas was not an "ethnic" marker denoting peoples of African descent, but rather a soci… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…255-259) and Ferguson (1980Ferguson ( , 1991Ferguson ( , 1992, that in greater part these ceramics were actually made by enslaved Africans and their immediate descendants. Re-named simply colonoware, Ferguson and later others (e.g., see Mouer et al 1999;Galke 1999) did not argue that any example of hand-coiled, low-fired and overall rudely made ceramic found in Virginia, Georgia, or the Carolinas on sites dating from the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries was exclusively African-made. Rather, that the major contribution was African or African-American, with some contemporaneous examples of ceramics also undoubtedly made by Native American groups.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…255-259) and Ferguson (1980Ferguson ( , 1991Ferguson ( , 1992, that in greater part these ceramics were actually made by enslaved Africans and their immediate descendants. Re-named simply colonoware, Ferguson and later others (e.g., see Mouer et al 1999;Galke 1999) did not argue that any example of hand-coiled, low-fired and overall rudely made ceramic found in Virginia, Georgia, or the Carolinas on sites dating from the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries was exclusively African-made. Rather, that the major contribution was African or African-American, with some contemporaneous examples of ceramics also undoubtedly made by Native American groups.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Significant percentages of colonoware produced by enslaved Africans exhibit burnishing on vessel surfaces, enough so that it is recognized as a key trait for the type on plantations (Cooper and Smith 2007; Ferguson 1992; Galke 2009). Similarly, a spike in the prevalence of burnished pottery became an early criterion of presumed colonial‐era Native American ceramics in the Middle Atlantic region, and in their eventual description as colonoware (Binford 1965; Noël Hume 1962).…”
Section: Colonowares and The Paradox Of Globalizationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It was made with a variety of hand-shaping techniques such as coiling, in contrast to the wheel thrown and mold techniques typically used by European Americans. Colonoware was often burnished with an implement of stone or other hard material (Deetz 1993(Deetz , 1996Ferguson 1992;Galke 2009;Mouer et al 1999).…”
Section: Colonoware Potterymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…African-American sites from the late 1700s onward have increasing frequencies of wares made by American and European pottery manufacturers. By the 1820s, more African-American households, whether free or under bondage, used European-or American-manufactured ceramic wares instead of colonowares (Deetz 1993(Deetz , 1996Ferguson 1992;Galke 2009). Following the same trend over time, more African-American households, both free and in bondage, attained the ability to purchase and trade goods with local merchants.…”
Section: Colonoware Potterymentioning
confidence: 99%