“A Set of Very Fair Cups and Saucers”: Stamped Ceramics as...

P1: FPN

International Journal of Historical Archaeology [jha] PL122-48 January 29, 2000 10:9 Style file version Nov. 19th, 1999

International Journal of Historical Archaeology, Vol. 4, No. 1, 2000

“A Set of Very Fair Cups and Saucers”: StampedCeramics as an Example of Inuit Incorporation

Melanie Cabak1 and Stephen Loring2

During the nineteenth century, the Labrador Inuit were incorporated into theglobal economic system primarily through contact with Moravian missionaries.Although they never abandoned traditional food procurement strategies, someInuit became wage laborers for missions, and others participated in a marketeconomy based on their procurement of marine mammals, fish, and furbearers.Excavations conducted at the Inuit village site of Nain attest to the increasedconsumption of European products throughout the nineteenth century. We describeone recovered artifact type, stamped earthenware, in detail and discuss how theseartifacts provide insight into global economic processes.

KEY WORDS: Labrador Inuit; world systems theory; nineteenth century; stamped (cut-sponge)ceramics.

INTRODUCTION

With the commencement of the full-scale exploration and exploitation ofNew World resources in the sixteenth century, the history of indigenous peoplesbecame intimately linked to European expansion and colonization. Any attemptto understand the postcontact cultural dynamics of native peoples must include aconsideration of the consequences of this interaction. Whereas a wide variety ofcolonial records and documents present a Euroamerican perspective on these trans-actions, the voice of native peoples is underrepresented and frequently obscured.Archaeology has the potential to change this situation by empowering indigenouspeoples through interpretation of the material record of their own making. His-torical archaeologists have argued that a successful archaeology of colonialism

1Savannah River Archaeological Research Project, South Carolina Institute of Anthropology andArchaeology, P.O. Box 400, New Ellenton, South Carolina 29809.

2Arctic Studies Center, National Museum of Natural History (NMNH), Smithsonian Institution,Washington, DC 20560.

1

1092-7697/00/0300-0001$18.00/0C© 2000 Plenum Publishing Corporation

P1: FPN


2 Cabak and Loring

should be multivocal and adopt a global perspective, because the subjection andincorporation of native peoples were predicated upon political and economic initia-tives that spread worldwide (Orser, 1996). The archaeology of postcontact NativeAmerican sites, by necessity, must seek to understand cultural dynamics at thelocal level and then expand to larger spatial scales. Such multiscalar analyses canpotentially illustrate the connections that structured social relations and also serveto ground these interrelationships in a global perspective (Orser, 1996).

World systems theory seeks to explain how European capitalism has cre-ated a single, global economic system (Wallerstein, 1974, 1980). The formative,capitalist world economy was centered in Europe (a core area) and expanded itsboundaries by incorporating new geographic areas (peripheral areas; Hopkins andWallerstein, 1987). These peripheral areas supplied core areas with raw materialsand inexpensive labor. One critique of the global approach has been the degreeto which it overlooks the point of view of indigenous peoples in peripheral ar-eas. World systems theory often portrays small-scale societies as helpless pawnsof more invasive imperial economic forces (Leone and Potter, 1988, pp. 4–5).Several archaeologists have successfully used artifacts to provide a native per-spective on the interaction between Europeans and indigenous cultures (Brenner,1988; Crosby, 1988). We believe that the archaeology of postcontact native NorthAmerica can benefit from an approach that adopts world systems theory, as long asresearchers recognize the significance of a native society’s agency in structuringsocial–economic relationships.

In Labrador, sustained European contact began with the establishment of aMoravian mission to the Labrador Inuit in 1771 (Davey, 1905; Taylor, 1974). Dur-ing the nineteenth century, the Labrador Inuit experienced the transition from acommunity- to a commodity-based economy. This juncture was characterized byincreased articulation with the global economic system by means of Inuit interac-tion with the Moravians.

Archaeological data recovered from an Inuit midden at the first Moraviansettlement at Nain, Labrador (HdCk-27) bears testimony to the full sequenceof Inuit village life from 1771 to the present (Cabak, 1991). The large propor-tion of European manufactured ceramics typically encountered at nineteenth- andtwentieth-century Inuit sites represents a material vestige of Inuit–Moravian in-teraction. Ceramic assemblages also offer a tangible example of the historicalprocesses that drew the Inuit into the world economy. A ceramic type used by theInuit, stamped pottery, is less than ideally documented in historical archaeology. Inthis paper, we address the distribution of this decorated ware by discussing archae-ologically recovered stamped ceramics from Nain and other northern nineteenth-century sites. Despite the globalization that was occurring, European ceramics, oneof many artifact classes, demonstrate that the Inuit accepted and used Europeanmaterial culture on their own terms. Finally, we suspect that stamped ceramicsmay be a cultural marker of native involvement in the expanding world market.

P1: FPN


“A Set of Very Fair Cups and Saucers” 3

The first part of this essay provides a brief summary of the historical contextassociated with the nineteenth-century Labrador coast, specifically focusing onthe Inuit adoption of European goods. A brief historical overview of stamped ce-ramics is then provided to help interpret these artifacts. We subsequently discussthe Nain assemblage and ceramic collections from other relevant sites to showhow stamped ceramics are commonly found on northern native sites. Finally, weargue that stamped pottery, one of many artifact classes recovered from archaeo-logical investigations in Nain, demonstrates how the world system was penetratingperipheral areas such as Labrador by the second half of the nineteenth century.Nevertheless, the data demonstrate how the Labrador Inuit selectively adoptedEuropean material culture.

THE LABRADOR INUIT AND THE WORLD ECONOMIC SYSTEM

Prior to the establishment of the Labrador Moravian mission in 1771, theLabrador Inuit had already sustained more than 250 years of interaction withEuropeans. Although it was among the earliest of the New World landscapes tobe seen by Europeans, by Vikings, and 500 years later by Elizabethan mariners,Labrador’s imposing coastal facade of icebergs and bleak rocky headlands ini-tially held little allure. However, Europeans were not long in realizing that thefog-shrouded waters off Newfoundland and Labrador held extraordinary concen-trations of marine mammals, birds, and fish. Reports from John Cabot’s voyageof 1497, stating that bushels of cod could be caught by just lowering a weightedbasket, were the catalyst for the development of a vast “floating” industry ofPortuguese, Basque, French, and English ships engaged in the New World’s NorthAtlantic fishery. Seasonally occupied shore stations were established throughoutthe Canadian Maritimes, where cod could be dried and salted. Concurrent with theemergence of the cod fishery was the development of the Basque whaling industrycentered along the Quebec shore of the Strait of Belle Isle (Proulx, 1993; Tuckand Grenier, 1981). These European enterprises brought hundreds of vessels to thecoast of Newfoundland and adjacent Labrador, resulting in frequent contact andincreasingly active economic interactions with native peoples, as Indians and Inuitacquired European raw materials, manufactured products, and foodstuffs (Auger,1991, 1993).

By the early eighteenth century, the Inuit interest in obtaining European man-ufactured goods and raw materials encouraged a period of internecine raiding alongthe coast between Inuit and Europeans. This raiding directly interfered with theexpansion of the Newfoundland fishery (Jordan and Kaplan, 1980; Kaplan, 1985).In this climate of mutual hostility, the British government was amenable to a planput forward by the Moravian Brethren to establish a mission in northern Labrador.By so doing, they would provide a buffer between the Inuit and the ever-expanding

P1: FPN


4 Cabak and Loring

European interests. The Moravians realized that trade with the Inuit was inevitableif they were to keep the Inuit from traveling to the south and bartering with tradersand fishermen. They sought and eventually acquired an exclusive trading con-cession for the Inuit in the vicinity of their missions. The mission’s struggle toadminister to both the temporal, worldly needs as well as the spiritual needs oftheir Inuit congregations presented a practical and moral dilemma. Despite theirbest efforts to separate these spheres of influence, they were inextricably linked inthe minds of the Inuit.

In 1752, an initial attempt to establish a mission in Labrador was quicklyaborted when five members of the party were murdered by the Inuit (Hiller, 1967).However, a second attempt, in 1771, succeeded in establishing a mission station atNain (Hiller, 1971). Shortly after the Moravian settlement at Nain, mission stationswere organized to the north at Okak (1776) and to the south at Hopedale (1782).Throughout the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the Moravians continuedto establish mission towns along the Labrador coast at Hebron (1830), Zoar (1866),Ramah (1871), Makkovik (1896), and Killinek (1904; see Fig. 1).

With the establishment of the Moravian communities in Labrador, Inuit social,economic, and ideological agendas became closely intertwined with the Moravianmission. The Moravians encouraged the Inuit to convert to Christianity and livewith them in communities based on Moravian concepts of social order and morality(Brice-Bennett, 1981; Cabak, 1991; Loring, 1998; Richling, 1978). The late eigh-teenth and the nineteenth centuries witnessed the transition from a self-sufficientindependent hunting and subsistence economy to one predicated on interactionwith the Moravian mission and in turn with European sociopolitical and marketinfluences.

Social and economic incentives, particularly access to European goods, at-tracted the Inuit to the Moravian mission stations (Cabak, 1991). As alluded toabove, this situation posed a moral dilemma to the missionaries. They at first soughtto limit Inuit access to European goods in order to preserve Inuit subsistence-basedculture. At the same time, interaction encouraged Inuit dependence on Europeantrade materials and was a means toward bonding the Inuit to the mission settle-ments. This strategy also helped the Moravians recoup mission operating expenses(Kleivan, 1966).

By the mid-nineteenth century, Labrador Inuit society had shifted from anexclusively subsistence-based economy to one that was increasingly commoditybased and dependent on markets outside of Labrador. The Inuit acquired Europeanmaterials by trading local commodities, through cash purchase from wage labor,and, to a lesser extent, as gifts and rewards from the missionaries for “appropriate”Christian behavior.

In addition to supplying the missionaries with game, the Inuit were encour-aged to bring a variety of products to the mission for trade. Principle items oftrade included whalebone (baleen), walrus ivory, oil rendered from seal blubber,

P1: FPN



Fig. 1. Moravian mission stations on the coast of Labrador, Canada (map prepared byDan Cole, NMNH, Smithsonian Institution).

fish, and fur. By the late eighteenth century, the North Atlantic whale and walrusstock had been nearly exterminated through intensive hunting in New England andthe Canadian Maritimes. The missionaries encouraged the Inuit to intensify theirbiannual harp seal hunt, when hundreds of animals could be killed during their mi-gration. The missionaries introduced seal nets around 1800 (Brice-Bennett, 1981),which proved much more productive than kayak hunting. Sealing provided meatand skins for the Inuit and their dogs. Blubber was rendered to produce a high-quality oil that was in great demand in Europe (Kleivan, 1966, pp. 61–63). Not only

P1: FPN


6 Cabak and Loring

did the Inuit provide the knowledge, skills, and labor to conduct a successful sealhunt, but their labor, especially that of women, was instrumental in rendering oil.

The missionaries also encouraged the Inuit to conduct a summer cod and charfishery, both as insurance against periods of resource scarcity and as a marketablecommodity (Kleivan, 1966, pp. 52–55). The summer fishery came at the expenseof the Inuit traditional late-summer caribou hunt, which was an important sourceof hides for clothing as well as food. The Inuit hunted fur-bearing animals oppor-tunistically, because this took time and resources (i.e., food to feed the dogs) awayfrom traditional subsistence activities. Inuit hunters valued the independence andself-reliance that was their hunting legacy. However, throughout the nineteenthcentury, greater participation by the Inuit in the production of raw materials for aEuropean market, at the expense of traditional subsistence activities, resulted intheir increased reliance on European foods and textiles purchased from the missionstores.

In the Moravian villages, Inuit women acquired wage employment throughwork in the blubber yards, as gardeners, teachers, kitchen and laundry aides, nurses,and nannies for Moravian children, and as job laborers as needed (e.g., waterfetching, snow removal, and hay making) (Hutton, 1912; Jenness, 1965; PeriodicalAccounts, 1838, p. 14; 1867, p. 26; 1874, p. 189; 1880, p. 31). Inuit men alsoworked for the Moravians, performing tasks such as cutting firewood, helpingwith construction and repair to mission buildings, and transporting goods betweenvillages. In general, only men who were too old to hunt and fish or lacked equipmentwere interested in working for the Moravians. Hunters only sought employmentfrom the Moravians as a last resort (Brice-Bennett, 1981, pp. 343–344). The Inuitsecured additional income by trading sealskin boots, woven grass basketry, ivorycarvings, and prepared animal skins (Brice-Bennett, 1981, p. 380; Packard, 1891,p. 201). Payment for employment by the Moravians consisted of both food andcash (Brice-Bennett, 1981, p. 380; Hantzsch, 1932, p. 84).

Excavation of the Nain midden confirms nineteenth-century historical ac-counts that stress increased Inuit consumption of European commodities, such asfood supplies, household items, hunting equipment, clothing, and personal items.The Moravians tried to limit Inuit access to European goods by encouraging themto pursue traditional subsistence resources (Davey, 1905, p. 34; Periodical Ac-counts, 1904, p. 544). At the same time, the missionaries sought Inuit labor forthe production of marketable materials. By the mid-nineteenth century, many Inuithad become dependent on European foods, particularly bread, biscuits, dried peas,and tea (Periodical Accounts, 1846, pp. 121–122; 1856, p. 384; 1858, p. 384;1874, p. 198; 1877, p. 30; 1878, p. 30; 1879, p. 241). A missionary remarkedin 1879 that “Eskimos are only too hasty in disposing of the skin-boots whichthey make in order to buy flour, biscuit and tobacco” (Periodical Accounts, 1879,p. 241).

Between circa 1870 and 1926, missionaries reported that the Inuit were be-coming “poorer and poorer” (Kleivan, 1966, p. 64) and “the gulf between the

P1: FPN



growing material aspirations and the possibilities of satisfying them clearly be-came greater” (Kleivan, 1966, p. 85). According to the Moravians, the Inuit wereincreasing their acquisition of European goods but not increasing production ofgoods to trade with the Moravians (Kleivan, 1966, p. 64; Periodical Accounts,1873, p. 6). A second reason for the growing poverty in the missions was thefact that by the turn of the century, the markets for Inuit maritime commoditieshad collapsed in Europe, making it difficult for the Inuit to earn enough to covertheir store debts. The increasing difficulties of operating a profitable trade forcedthe Moravians to eventually reorganize their trading policies and practices. Theydeveloped stricter credit policies, refused to provide what they viewed as needlessarticles on credit, and occasionally canceled old debts to improve trade relations(Kleivan, 1966, p. 86; Periodical Accounts, 1879, pp. 241–215). The Moravianrecords contain evidence of Inuit opposition to the new credit restrictions (Kleivan,1966, p. 85; Periodical Accounts, 1877, p. 331). As a result of the tightening ofMoravian credit policies and the falling market value of Inuit products in the lastquarter of the nineteenth century, European-produced goods may have becomemore difficult to secure.

The agenda of the Moravian missionaries, from the beginning, included aneconomic component. The Inuit economy shifted from a subsistence-based to acommodity-based orientation, and by the mid-nineteenth century the Inuit weredependent on European goods. The archaeology of Nain provides an excellentexample of economic globalization that provided power and wealth to core areasand radically changed the lives of indigenous peoples. The archaeological recordcan also help provide a native perspective on Inuit–Moravian interaction.

STAMPED EARTHENWARE

As Kelly (1993, p. 3) notes, “The subject of sponge-printed pottery must beone of the most neglected in the history of ceramics in Britain.” For this paper, wegathered relevant literature on stamped pottery to provide a better understandingof the production history, cost, and forms of this ceramic ware. This informationin turn helps us interpret how the Inuit used these ceramics.

Stamped pottery was a widely exported utilitarian ceramic that was muchadmired for its “bright fancy character” (Jewitt, 1883, p. 564; cited in Collard,1984, p. 145). It has been described as having a “crude, easily recognized peasantstyle of decoration” (Hughes, 1967, p. 71), and “country charm” (Collard, 1984,p. 145). Collectors, antique dealers, ceramic historians, and archaeologists havecalled this ceramic type by many names, including sponge printed, cut-spongeprinted, stamped, stenciled, stick spatter, spongewares, and Portneuf pottery. Mostarchaeologists refer to this type as stamped or cut-sponge-decorated pottery (Jelks,1973; Oswalt, 1980; Price, 1982). To avoid confusion, we refer to this ceramicdecorative technique only as stamped earthenware in this essay.

P1: FPN


8 Cabak and Loring

Stamped wares were manufactured between the 1840s and 1930s, with theheight of popularity and production occurring between 1880 and 1910 (Finlayson,1972, pp. 52–55; Hughes, 1967, p. 71; Kelly, 1993, p. 19). The decorative tech-nique appears to have been flourishing in Scotland before it was introduced tothe English potteries in the late 1840s (Collard, 1984, pp. 144–147; Fleming,1973, p. 195; Kelly, 1993, pp. 3–4; Miller, 1991, p. 6). The wares were primar-ily produced for export in Scotland and England, although as with other popularnineteenth-century ceramic design techniques, stamping was widely copied by pot-teries in Holland, the United States, and Russia (Fleming, 1973, p. 65; Kelly, 1993,p. 19).

Stamped vessels were decorated with a design cut from the root of a sponge(Finlayson, 1972, p. 54). A pictorial stamp was dipped into an underglazed colorand then pressed onto biscuit ware. The design was often repeated many times,along the rim of the vessel. This method resulted in a very fast and inexpensiveway to decorate pottery (Fleming, 1973, p. 65). Some of the vessels also have athin, hand-painted line, or band, located above or below the decorative motifs. Thestamped decorative technique was applied to inexpensive white or cream-coloredearthenware. The technique of stamping was sometimes combined with transferprinting, hand-painting, and sponge dapping. Kelly (1993, p. 3) distinguishes be-tween “dapping the biscuit with a rough sponge” and “printing with portions cutout of the smooth root of a sponge.” The dapping technique is commonly referredto as “spongeware” by collectors in the United States.

Stamped vessel decoration can be both monochrome and polychrome. Vividcolors, including blue, pink, green, brown, rusty red, purple, and yellow, are char-acteristic of stamped wares (Finlayson, 1972, p. 54; Hughes, 1967, p. 71). Theearliest vessels appear to be monochrome, decorated primarily in blue and some-times in purple, crimson, and leafy green (Forsman, 1985; Kelly, 1993, p. 16).Common forms were table, kitchen, and toiletry vessels (Finlayson, 1972, p. 52).Bowls with small pedestals were particularly common and are known in Scotlandas “porridge bowls.” The bowls were produced in a variety of sizes, from 3 to16 in. (7.62–40.64 cm) in diameter and 3 to 8 in. (7.62–20.32 cm) in height(Finlayson, 1972). An examination of ceramic books shows a wide variety ofstamped forms, with a predominance of small bowls and plates (Finlayson, 1972;E. Robacker and A. Robacker, 1978). It appears that stamped vessels were pro-duced in both hollowware and flatware forms. This trend contrasts markedlywith the equally inexpensive shell-edged earthenware, which was produced most-ly on flatware (plates) or serving dishes (platters, soup tureens, etc.). Bowlsand teaware do not seem to have been commonly produced in shell-edgedearthenwares.

For the most part, decorative elements on stamped earthenware consist of sim-ple geometric and floral motifs arranged in repetitive border designs. Design mo-tifs include stars, crosses, rosettes, diamonds, florets, ferns, and leaflets. Thematic

P1: FPN



designs were used to decorate some stamped vessels. For example, the so-calledJumbo bowl with its elephant design refers to the famous elephant that resided atthe London Zoo prior to being sold to P. T. Barnum in 1882. The English publicwas outraged over losing Jumbo, who had become something of acause celebre,with his image featured on a wide array of consumer goods. Shortly after his ar-rival in North America, Jumbo was struck by a train and died. Jumbo bowls wereprobably manufactured during the period when interest in Jumbo was at its heightin Great Britain and the Americas, between 1882 and 1885 (Collard, 1984, p. 146;Finlayson, 1972, p. 81–85).

This discussion has briefly summarized the literature on stamped ceramicsthat are typically found at Inuit–Moravian villages in Labrador. The bright colorsand hollowware forms may have appealed to the Inuit. Stamped pottery was alsoa low-cost, mass-produced ware. During its period of manufacture, the ware wasone of the least expensive decorated ceramics on the market. This fact may alsohelp explain its presence in Labrador. These ceramics would have been moreaffordable than other decorated wares during a time when Inuit products werefalling in value in Europe. The stamped ceramics were more than likely acquiredthrough the Moravian mission trading establishments. The Moravians may havealso imposed their own standards upon their Inuit consumers. A component ofMoravian religion was self-sufficiency, which included frugality (Dawson, 1912,pp. 98–102; Murtagh, 1967, pp. 17–20). In fact, the Nain ceramic assemblagecontrasts markedly with the fairly standardized inventory of the transfer-printedwares made available by the Hudson Bay Company at many of their posts innorthern regions (Sussan, 1979). The Nain assemblage is unusually diverse, whichis probably a result of the frugality of the Moravians. The ceramic diversity isprobably also due to the odds and ends that were donated by rural parishes inEngland for the needy in Labrador.

Stamped Ceramics from Labrador Inuit Archaeological Sites

As alluded to above, stamped wares are not significant elements of mostnineteenth-century archaeological assemblages. In part, this trend may be at-tributable to the ware’s being an inexpensive ceramic directed toward lower incomehouseholds. The paucity of the ceramics represented archaeologically may alsobe the result of regional markets that have not yet received much archaeologicalinvestigation. Because of a dearth of information in the historical archaeologicalliterature, we describe the stamped assemblage from Nain, Labrador in some de-tail. We then briefly described the stamped ceramics found at other Labrador Inuitsites. The archaeological literature for sites located in the northern section of NorthAmerica is also reviewed, which produced examples of assemblages containingstamped ceramics.

P1: FPN


10 Cabak and Loring

The Nain Archaeological Data

Nain was established in 1771 by Moravian missionaries. In the early yearsof the mission, the Moravians had difficulty converting the Inuit to Christianityand establishing communities based on Moravian ethics, beliefs, and morality.One of the reasons why it took so long to establish these communities is becauseNain was a poor winter hunting place; therefore the Inuit did not immediatelysettle around the mission (Hiller, 1971, p. 843). However, in the early nineteenthcentury the mission stations experienced a rapid rise in Inuit residents and churchcongregations. Today, Nain is the most northern Inuit village in Labrador.

The Nain midden (HdCk-21) was excavated during the summer of 1990 aspart of the Taipsumani Archaeological Project, a joint initiative sponsored by theUniversity of South Carolina and the Torngasok Cultural Center in Nain. This field-work was part of a long-term research effort exploring the relationship betweenthe nineteenth-century Inuit and Moravian missions (Loring, 1999). The projectwas also the beginning of a public archaeology program designed to involve Inuitstudents and provide an opportunity for the Inuit to participate in archaeologicaland historical research. The 1990 fieldwork centered on an over-the-bank middenlocated in an Inuit village associated with the Nain mission. The midden paralleleda beach ridge upon which Inuit houses had been constructed in the late eighteenthcentury. A small drainage stream located in front of the midden had exposedartifacts and revealed the archaeological potential of the site. Modern housingpresently sits upon much of the midden. The surviving beach ridge is situatedbehind the Moravian Church built in 1929 (after the original building had beendestroyed by fire). The midden is approximately 12 m wide, 6 m broad, and approx-imately 1 to 1.5 m deep. The midden was formed by the traditional Inuit practiceof disposing of household refuse near the entrance of their dwellings. Householdmiddens are commonly found adjacent to sod houses at archaeological sites inLabrador (Bird, 1945; Kaplan, 1983; Schledermann, 1972, 1976). This refuse dis-posal practice continued after Moravian contact, despite repeated Moravian effortsto curtail the custom. Cold weather and snow accumulation meant that the middenwould be covered and remain permanently frozen for most of the year. Many Inuitfamilies would depart from the village during the summer, leaving the odorifer-ous landscape to missionaries and summer visitors. In 1864, A. S. Packard (1885,p. 559) described a similar midden at Hopedale that consisted of a “dog’s carcass,fish bones and other rejectamenta,” while another visitor in 1892 was moved towrite “the spaces between the houses were simply indescribable garbage heaps”(Grenfell, 1932, p. 84).

The archaeological deposits in the midden were primarily the result ofwomen’s housecleaning and wood-chopping activities. Wood chips created anexcellent preservation medium, and the lower part of the Nain midden was frozen.To a large extent, the midden assemblage is indicative of women’s roles pertaining

P1: FPN



to foodways, sewing, and childcare, since most of the recovered items had passedthrough their hands as they maintained and cleaned the home (Cabak, 1991).The domestic midden contained artifacts from three primary sources: local an-imal resources (faunal remains), trade (European manufactured commodities),and locally produced items (i.e., traditional Inuit artifacts). The midden depositsfrom Nain were divided into three chronological components. At the base of themidden were found traces of late eighteenth-century deposits; however, the bulkof the midden contained materials spanning the nineteenth century, from circa1820 to 1880. The upper portions of the midden contained a thin late nineteenth-century to early twentieth-century deposit. This essay addresses ceramics recov-ered from the nineteenth- and twentieth-century components, in particular thestamped earthenwares.

Nain, Labrador

A total of 115 stamped shards, representing at least 37 vessels, was iden-tified in the ceramic assemblage from Nain, comprising 14% of the whitewareassemblage. The shards were found both in nineteenth-century (78%) and earlytwentieth-century (22%) midden deposits. Most of the shards have repeating mo-tifs along the rim of the vessel (80%). However, a few shards bear a motif thatappears to have been the central design element. Seventy percent of the vesselsalso contained a hand-painted band above the stamped designs [Fig. 2(a)]. Thisline was repeated on the inside of 11 (30%) of the vessels. Six decorative types,defined by the individual motifs, were identified in the assemblage.

Type 1 consists of variants of afleur-de-lismotif (n= 35, including threebody shards and 32 rim shards). The repeating motif is purple or bluish-purple on33 shards and forest green on two [see Fig. 2(a)]. Three shards contain a purplefleur-de-lismotif on the body of a large, unidentified hollowware vessel. Theremaining 31 shards contain a stylized or pseudofleur-de-lismotif. These shardsall contain a single line above the row of repeating motifs along the rim, and all butone have the line repeated on the interior of the vessel. The vessels consist of a bowl,soup dish, teacup, saucer, and two mugs. Several examples offleur-de-lismotifsare found in Finlayson’s (1972) ceramic catalog. Oswalt (1980) has identified63 shards with what he called the “pseudo-fleur-de-lis” type in the assemblagefrom the Kolmakovski Redoubt in southwest Alaska. This type represents 33% ofthe stamped ceramics from Nain.

Type 2 is a stylized cross motif (n= 3). This cross appears to be a variantof the fleur-de-lismotif or Maltese cross [see Fig. 2(b)]. One rim and two bodyshards are purplish-blue in color and represent at least two mugs. The rim shardcontains a row of repeating crosses that have a parallel pair of thin red lines aboveand below the stamped design.

P1: FPN


12 Cabak and Loring

Fig. 2. Stamped shards from Nain, Labrador: (a) Type 1, (b) Type 2, (c) Type 3, (d) Type 4,(e) Type 4, (f) Type 5, (g) Type 5.

Type 3 consists of leaf motifs. This is a general category of shards that con-tain predominately leaf motifs, including oak leaves (n= 3), a clover leaf design(n= 1), and unidentified leaf designs [n= 3; see Fig. 2(c)]. The design colorsinclude three blue and three polychrome shards, which represent two mugs andthree bowls. One bowl is decorated with numerous black clover leaves on itsbody and also contains one small blue star. One of the Type 3 vessels is deco-rated with a row of repeating blue leaves and heavy, hand-painted blue lines onthe interior bowl base. The interior of the rim also contains repeating leaves anda heavy band. Finally, one of the mugs contains repeating oak leaves along itsrim. The corner of this shard contains a portion of a red stamp, which suggeststhe vessel contained another motif. The central design of the mug was probablyfloral.

Type 4 consists of floral motifs (n= 31). Although most of these motifsare unidentifiable to flower type, several appear to represent rosettes, tulips, andpetunias, frequently accompanied by small leaf motifs [see Figs. 2(d) and 2(e)].Type 4 represents 27% of the stamped ceramics from Nain, 11 of which are green.The remaining 20 examples are polychrome decorated. Most of the polychromeshards have red and green floral motifs. The vessel forms include two plates as wellas six teaware and three bowls. One of these vessels, a saucer, has a thin red bandabove a blue rope border that appears to surround a central floral motif. The rope

P1: FPN



border was a design element used by the Scottish potteries and is not commonlyfound on Staffordshire vessels (Finlayson, 1972, p. 97).

Type 5 consists of geometric motifs (n= 27). Four polychrome and 23 blueshards represent this type. The vessels consist of one mug, four bowls, and oneplatter. One motif style is found on two different bowls. The design element isidentifiable only as repeating blue oval shapes with small lines down the center andlines between the ovals. Eleven shards contain a light blue, triangular, Christmas-tree-shaped motif, which is also repeated on the vessel interior. These shards onlyrepresent one mug. Brown diamonds or lozenges are found on one shard. Thedesign alternates between solid, larger diamonds and smaller, outlined diamonds[see Fig. 2(f)]. This example also appears to contain a very small portion of afloral motif. Unfortunately, additional shards from this vessel were not recoveredto help further define the motif. Another shard contains a repeating border of largepurple×’s, with very small blue flowers separating the main design element.Finally, a bowl represented by two shards contains a thick black band with repeatingyellow ovals, which contain smaller black ovals inside them [see Fig. 2(g)].

Type 6 is a flag motif (n= 1). A single polychrome shard containing a pairof crossed nautical pennants, one of which is an American flag and the otherapparently a variant of a British standard, is the single example of Type 6. Thistype has been classified as a patriotic bowl by ceramic historians (Kelley, 1993,p. 23). The design quite possibly commemorates the interest in the America’sCup races, specifically the first British challenge of 1870. The British challengerCambriaflies a pennant similar to the one on the bowl (Stone and Loomis, 1982,p. 27).

A portion of the stamped pottery was either too small (n= 6) or too blurred(n= 4) to identify. The forms represented by these vessels consist of a teacup,saucer, platter, and an unidentifiable hollowware vessel. There were three purple,two green, and five polychrome shards.

The shards described above are all summarized by color (Table I). Purplewas the most common monochrome color, followed by blue. Thirty-six shardscontained two or more colors, with red and green being the most common colorcombination. These examples were typically shards with floral motifs. Table II

Table I. Color of Stamped Shards from Nain

Type No. of Shards Purple Green Blue Red/Green Polychrome

1 35 33 22 3 2 13 7 3 44 31 11 10 105 27 23 46 2 27 10 3 2 3 2

Total 115 38 15 26 15 21

P1: FPN


14 Cabak and Loring

Table II. Vessel Forms Identified in the Nain Stamped Ceramic Assemblage

Type Total MNV Saucer/Cup/Mug Bowl Soup Dish Hollowware Plate/Platter

1 7 4 1 1 12 2 23 5 2 34 12 6 3 1 25 6 1 4 16 1 17 4 2 1 1

Total 37 17 13 1 2 4

Table III. Percentages of Decorated Earthenware Shards by Cultural Zone

Decorative Type Nineteenth Century Twentieth Century Total

Transfer printed 41 35 40Flow blue 4 0 4Hand-painted 10 2 8Dipped 17 1 14Shell-edged 1 0 0Spatter/Sponge 4 1 4Stamped 14 19 15Banded 5 13 6Gilded 2 3 2Decalcomania 2 26 7

Total 100 100 100

shows the vessel forms by decorative type. Teaware was the most common form,composing 46% of the assemblage. Thirty-five percent of the vessels were iden-tified as bowls of various sizes, mostly small. Plates and platters represent only11% of vessel forms.

The Nain excavations provide some insight into diachronic changes instamped pottery (Table III). Stamped wares were not available until after the 1850s,and therefore the transfer-printed and hand-painted shards, which were producedthroughout the nineteenth century, compose larger portions of the assemblage. Ifit were possible to sort the nineteenth-century midden deposits into shorter timeintervals, it is likely that stamped ceramics would comprise a larger portion of the1850 to 1900 assemblage than the 14% for the entire nineteenth-century zone.

To examine how these vessels varied through time, we examined the shardsassociated with the nineteenth-century versus the early twentieth-century deposits.Previous studies have demonstrated that the earlier stamped vessels are usuallymonochrome (Kelly, 1993). At Victoria Post in Alberta, the stamped shards fromthe early deposits are all monochrome (Forsman, 1985). At Nain, the nineteenth-century midden deposits also contain polychrome vessels, but monochrome shardswere by far more common. Monochrome shards occurred in purple (n= 33), green

P1: FPN



(n= 6), and blue (n= 2). Only six shards from the nineteenth-century depositswere polychrome. All of the vessel designs found exclusively in the early twentieth-century midden deposits (n= 6) were polychrome, and all but one contained floralmotifs. The nineteenth-century deposits contained only one example of a vesselwith a floral motif. By shard count, thefleur-de-lis is the most prevalent motif(n= 28) in the entire stamped assemblage from Nain.

Zoar, Labrador

Situated approximately 50 km to the south of Nain is the site of the formerMoravian mission station at Zoar. Zoar was established in 1865 to administerto a small congregation of European settler and Inuit families and perhaps toattract nomadic Indian bands. The mission proved too costly to maintain and wasabandoned in 1890. A small surface collection consisting of 124 ceramic shardsand 12 pieces of bottle glass was recovered from the beach in front of the abandonedstation in 1984 (Loring, 1985). The Zoar assemblage included three stamped shardsfrom two vessels. Two shards were from a chamber pot with a stylized blue crossstamped design (Type 2). A shard with a single red rose motif with green leafdesign was also recovered (Type 4).

Ramah Bay and Komaktorvik Fiord

Until the opening of the station at Killinek, in 1904, the mission at Ramah(1871–1907) was the most northerly of the Moravian settlements on the Labradorcoast (Davey, 1905). The so-called Jubilee Station (opened during the centenaryyear of the Moravian tenure in Labrador) was situated to attract the last bands ofheathen Inuit out of their abodes in the Torngat Mountains. It was as well a populartrading destination for Inuit groups even farther afield, from the Killinek regionand Ungava Bay. By 1890, the Ramah congregation amounted to approximately80 Inuit living in semisubterranean sod houses on the beach to one side of themission station (Kleivan, 1966). The deserted site of the Ramah mission wasvisited by members of the Torngat Archaeological Project in 1977–1978 (Fitzhugh,1980). Small test pits in three of the Inuit houses produced a ceramic assemblage ofapproximately 70 earthenware shards, including at least three hollowware vesselswith stamped decorations (Kaplan, 1983, pp. 627–654). The design motifs onthe Ramah stamped vessels include a floral design (Type 4) and two different(Type 5) geometric patterns. Given that the Ramah mission has such a tight rangeof occupation, this may indicate that the majority of the Labrador stamped wareswere acquired in the last quarter of the nineteenth century.

The Ramah mission was an important economic option for northern Labradorand Quebec Inuit who chose not to trade with the Hudson’s Bay Company at FortChimo. A single stamped shard, evidence of trade with the Moravians, was found

P1: FPN


16 Cabak and Loring

in a test pit placed in a late nineteenth-century Inuit sod house at Komaktovik Fiordapproximately 50 km north of Ramah Bay (Kaplan, 1983, p. 715).

Stamped Ceramics from Northern Archaeological Sites

Ceramics from other northern sites are briefly examined in this section. Theseexamples include sites occupied by Europeans, Native Americans, and the Inuit.Figure 3 shows the location of the sites located in Alaska and western Canada.

Other Canadian Sites

Overlooking the harbor of St. John’s, Newfoundland is a commanding edificeupon which a number of British fortifications have been built over the centuries

Fig. 3. Sites in Alaska and adjacent Canada where stamped ceramics have been recovered (mapprepared by Dan Cole, NMNH, Smithsonian Institution).

P1: FPN



(Jelks, 1973, p. 66). The most intensive period of activity at Signal Hill was betweencirca 1795 and 1850. Although contemporaneous with the Inuit occupation at Nain,the Signal Hill assemblage represented quite a different sort of site, being thebarracks and activity area for military personnel. In both cases, the overwhelmingmajority of manufactured European products were derived from English sources.However, the tablewares available to the soldiers in Newfoundland apparentlywere quite different from those ceramics obtained by the Labrador Inuit. Thestamped motifs from Signal Hill are leafy branches and geometric forms withhand-painted bands along the vessel rims. Blue is the predominant color, but darkbrown, red, green, and purple also occur. Principal forms from Signal Hill aresaucers and small bowls. In comparison with Nain, there is much less stampedware at Signal Hill. Only 1% of the decorated wares were stamped. Conversely,shell-edged earthenware was common at Signal Hill and almost completely absentin Nain, a situation that appears to reflect the soldiers’ preference for plates ratherthan bowls.

Other Canadian sites where stamped ceramics have been recovered includeFort Lennox, a military establishment on the Richelieu River valley south of Mon-treal (Barka, 1978) that was abandoned by 1870, and a pair of Hudson’s BayCompany trading establishments: Fort Pelly (1824–1856) in central Saskatchewan(Klimko, 1983) and Victoria Post (1864–1897) on the upper Saskatchewan Riverin central Alberta along the old cart trail from the Red River colony (Forsman,1985). Only a small number of stamped shards (approximately 1% of the dec-orated assemblage) were recovered at Fort Pelly, not surprising given its earlydate. At Victoria Post, the stamped ceramics included a wide variety of decorativeforms, mostly cups and saucers in blue, purple, brown, green, and red. The ceramictypes in the assemblage from Victoria Post are important because they are fromthe peak periods of production and popularity of stamped wares. The assemblageis also from a remote area in the north and hence is similar to the Nain assem-blage, but it was associated with a Euroamerican residential area rather than nativedwellings.

Alaska

Hand-painted and stamped earthenware ceramics with floral designs are reg-ularly encountered in nineteenth-century artifact assemblages from Native Amer-ican sites in Alaska (Fig. 4). The hand-painted portion of the design can be ei-ther broad-brush or fine-line decoration and usually consists of green or blackstems running horizontally around vessels with green or blue leaves and red orpurple blossoms. In many Alaskan assemblages, the hand-painted decoration isaugmented with a stamped design of small clusters or circular florets that are eitherblue, red, or purple (cf. E. Robacker and A. Robacker, 1978, p. 83). Shards bear-ing exclusively stamped designs are less common. The Nain assemblage contains

P1: FPN


18 Cabak and Loring

Fig. 4. Hand-painted with stamped decorated teacup and saucers (taken from Yupik burial scaffoldsnear Shageluk): (a) hand-painted floral design with black stem, green leaves, and red blossoms,with blue stamped florets (artifact at the Smithsonian Institution, #345843); (b) hand-painted floraldesign with black stem, green leaves, and red blossoms, with purple stamped florets (artifact at theSmithsonian Institution, #345787).

P1: FPN



none of the stamped and hand-painted wares that appear commonly in Alaskaassemblages.

In southeast Alaska, hand-painted/stamped and stamped ceramics have beenrecovered at the Homeshore Site in Excursion Inlet on the north shore of Icy Straitin Glacier Bay National Monument (Ackerman, 1965) and at the Russian Hospitalin Sitka (Blee, 1986). The Homeshore Site was a large Tlinget lineage house thatdated from the late 1870s to 1900. Included in the Homeshore assemblage wasa small serving bowl with a hand-painted floral design augmented with smallstamped florets and also a polychrome shard bearing a stamped diamond motif.

No stamped shards were recovered from the excavation of the trash pit fromthe Russian hospital in Sitka (dated 1858–1860), but 19 blue and two polychromestamped shards are reported from the late nineteenth-century fill above the trashpit feature (Blee, 1986, p. 437).

Hand-painted and stamped floral whiteware shards were recovered from Kijik,a nineteenth-century Tanaina Indian village at Lake Clark on the Alaska Peninsula(VanStone and Townsend, 1970). Situated to the north of the Cook Inlet–IliamnaLake–Bristol Bay travel route, Kijik villagers had access to Russian–Americantrading establishments both on Bristol Bay and in Cook Inlet. Occupied during thelatter part of the nineteenth century, the village was gradually abandoned by about1900. Approximately 1,000 shards, mostly from saucers and soup bowls but alsotea pots, mugs, and kitchen bowls, were recovered. The Kijik assemblage included36 hand-painted shards, one hand-painted/stamped example, and eight stampedshards. A single hand-painted/stamped vessel in the Kijik assemblage (VanStoneand Townsend, 1970, Plate 16:9) is similar to the whole vessels recovered bythe Smithsonian’s Aleˇs Hrdlicka from Yupik burial scaffolds on the lower YukonRiver.

Following their discovery by Vitus Bering in 1741, the Aleutian Islands werequickly overrun by Russianproymeleski, or maritime fur traders, drawn to theregion by the fortunes to be made in the sea otter harvest. A half century or soof unrestricted exploitation nearly exterminated the sea otters prior to the estab-lishment of a more formal administrative regime under the management of theRussian-American Company and also the Russian Orthodox Church. During thefirst half of the nineteenth century, the natives of the North American Pacific Rim,from the Aleutians to northern California, were incorporated into the world eco-nomic system through increased interaction with the Russian-American Company(Crowell, 1997). Russian fur traders established a post on Atka Island, approxi-mately midway along the Aleutian Chain, between 1811 and 1812. In 1826, foxeswere introduced on the island and a village at Korovin Bay was established (Black,1984; p. 190). Excavations at the Aleut-Russian village of Korovinski (Veltre,1979) produced an assemblage of 752 European ceramics. Included in the assem-blage were hand-painted (n= 83) and hand-painted/stamped ceramics (n= 69),representing 21% and 17%, respectively, of the decorated earthenware shards in

P1: FPN


20 Cabak and Loring

the assemblage. The vessels consisted primarily of small bowls decorated with avariety of floral and geometric designs. Some vessels contained a broad horizontalcolored band underlying the stamped design. Nothing like this design element isseen in the Nain assemblage, nor is it illustrated in published catalogs of this ce-ramic ware (Finlayson, 1972; E. Robacker and A. Robacker, 1978), but it occursat other Alaskan sites, including the Homeshore Site (Ackerman, 1965, Fig. 15-6)and at Kolmakovski. Because Korovinski was abandoned around 1870, these col-ored bands overlaid with a stamped design may indicate an early design horizonin the stamped earthenwares.

Beginning in 1828, Russian entrepreneurs moved Aleut hunters and theirfamilies to the Kurile Islands (the archipelago stretching north from Japan towardKamchatka) in order to exploit the sea otter hunt in that region. Excavations atKurilorossiia on Urup Island provide insight into the extraordinary expansionof Russian economic concerns in the North Pacific (Shubin, 1990, 1994). Thevillage was managed by the Russian-American Company, which arranged forthe transshipment of materials and supplies (including English export ceramics)originally purchased from the Hudson’s Bay Company. The site was occupied untilabout 1877, at which time most of the resident Aleut and Koniag were relocatedto Kamchatka. Louise Jackson (1994, and personal communication) has reporteda small amount of hand-painted and stamped cups and bowls recovered from theexcavation of the trading post on Urup.

In the Bristol Bay Region, north of the Alaska Peninsula, stamped ceramicshave been recovered from a variety of Alaskan native contexts: at the Yupik villageof Nushagak situated at the mouth of the Nushagak River in Bristol Bay adjacent tothe first Russian-American Company post; at Aleksandrovski Redoubt, establishednorth of the Alaska Peninsula in 1818 (VanStone, 1972); and at the location of thefirst Russian Orthodox Church established north of the Alaska Peninsula in 1841.Stamped ceramics were also recovered from a pair of Yupik villages upstream, atAkulivikchuk (VanStone, 1970) approximately 75 km upstream from the post, andat Tikehik (VanStone, 1968) located nearly 200 km from the Nushagak mouth. Bothvillages were occupied throughout the nineteenth century and abandoned around1900. All three sites produced shards from both hand-painted and stamped andstamped design vessels. Hollowware forms predominate, consisting of bowls, soupplates, and mugs.

Hand-painted and stamped ceramics have been recovered from a numberof Native American sites in the Yukon–Kuskokwim region of southwest Alaska.These sites consist of Ft. Reliance (1874–1886), situated across the Yukon from amajor Han Indian summer fishing village (Clark, 1995, 1996), Yupik cemeteriesalong the lower Yukon, the Kolmakovskiy Redoubt (Oswalt, 1980), and CrowVillage (Oswalt and VanStone, 1967) sites on the Kuskokwim.

Situated at the eastern frontier of Russian America, Kolmakovskiy Redoubt,built by the Russian-American Company in 1841, was the first mercantile

P1: FPN



establishment erected in the Alaskan interior (Oswalt, 1980). Its location on thecentral Kuskokwim River provided a large number of Yupik Eskimos and North-ern Athapaskans with their first exposure to western manufactured products aswell as to western values and belief systems. The Russian-American Companyabandoned the fort in 1866 just prior to the sale of Alaska to the United States.The fort was reestablished by Anglo-American traders, who operated it betweenapproximately 1870 and 1917. Excavations recovered stamped wares and wareswith both stamping and hand-painting. The designs of the shards were predom-inately floral with green stems, green and blue leaves, and red blossoms. Hand-painted decoration frequently co-occurs with stamped designs. The most commonvessel forms were cups and saucers. From marks found on some hand-paintedvessel shards, Oswalt dates the examples to between 1880 and 1900 (VanStoneand Townsend, 1970, p. 78). The European ceramic assemblage from this site isimportant because it was occupied during the peak production period of stampedwares.

Downstream from the Kolmakovskiy Redoubt is the Yupik Eskimo site ofTulukaghogamiut, or Crow Village, that was occupied between 1780 to 1910.The site was situated on the north side of the Kuskokwim River along a traditionaltravel route to the neighboring Yukon River drainage (Oswalt and VanStone, 1967).Hand-painted and stamped decorated ceramics identical to those recovered fromKolmakovskiy as well as elsewhere along the lower Yukon and Kuskokwim werecommon at Crow Village.

While searching for traces of early humans in Alaska, Aleˇs Hrdlicka collectedseveral nineteenth-century English ceramics from burial scaffolds along the lowerYukon River in 1929 (Hrdliˇcka, 1943). Included in this assemblage are two cupsand two saucers that have hand-painted and stamped decoration collected nearShageluk (approximately 35 km downstream from Anvik) and a stamped saucerfrom Pilot Station (Fig. 5). The reverse of the Pilot Station saucer has an impressedmark, “BAKER&CO.” Robacker and Robacker (1978, p. 95) list Wm. Baker andCompany as one of the Staffordshire potteries, established in 1839. Impressedmarks on Baker & Co. wares were used prior to 1893, after which only printedmarks are found. Another tea saucer with a stamped design was collected in 1931from the Yupik Eskimo village of Togiak. A Lower Yukon–Kuskokwim burialscaffold with at least two ceramic vessels, one of which appears to be a stampedsaucer, is illustrated in Anderson and Eells (1935, Plate VI).

In Alaska, stamped English ceramics are recognized from a number of do-mestic and mortuary contexts. The appeal to the spiritual dimension of Yupiklife may be inferred from an unusual artifact collected by Edward Nelson fromthe Kuskokwim region (ca. 1879). A man’s sealskin bracelet, used to secure thesleeves of a waterproof gutskin parka, has a carefully shaped earthenware shardset into the band. The shard has a stamped, five-petal blue flower design (Fitzhughand Kaplan, 1982, p. 150). The blue flower appears to be a reference to the portal

P1: FPN


22 Cabak and Loring

Fig. 5. Stamped tea saucer collected from a Yupik burial scaffold at Pilot Station onthe Lower Yukon River in 1929 by Aleˇs Hrdlicka. A red line encircles the rim, beneathwhich is a stamped design consisting of a garlandlike border with a small floret patternin red joined by a branchingfleur-de-lispattern in green (artifact at the SmithsonianInstitution, #345826).

between the human world and the spirit world, usually represented by a large bluetrade bead.

In this paper we have discussed stamped wares, which were produced at anumber of potteries in England and Scotland (and in lesser amounts elsewhere).As shown above, these wares were found at sites across the northern tier of NorthAmerica. A tremendous amount of scholarship remains to be conducted in orderto refine local pottery production styles and assemblages. It is apparent that thePortneuf assemblages from Quebec, apparently derived from Scottish sources, arecharacterized by cable and rope stamped rim designs and by figurative elements—including animals, birds, and flowers. Some of the Alaskan assemblages havestamped designs overlying broad color bands as well as hand-painted and stampedfloral designs. Given the prevalence of Spode and Copeland transfer-printed waresin these Alaskan assemblages, it appears likely that the Alaskan stamped ce-ramics are also derived from the Stoke-on-Trent Staffordshire potteries. Russianstamped ware is known from a single specimen in a private collection (E. Robackerand A. Robacker, 1978, p. 82), but the nearly total absence of Russian ceramics

P1: FPN



from Alaskan assemblages (Jackson, 1991, 1994) dissuades us from postulatinga Russian origin for the archaeological material. The hand-painted floral designscommon on the stamped wares in Alaska are lacking in the Labrador assemblages.The Labrador stamped ceramics consisted of simple stamped motifs along withhand-painted bands near the rim. It is likely that the stamped wares in Labradororiginated from England or Scotland, since the Moravian supply ship, The Har-mony, was based in England.

Stamped Ceramics from the United States

Excluding Alaska, stamped ceramics appear to be sparse in the archaeologicalrecord from the United States. One example is derived from a series of excavationsat eight farmsteads in the eastern Ozark region of Missouri that were occupiedbetween 1810 and 1870 (Price, 1982). Stamped wares are present but not prolific.They compose an average of 3% of the decorated wares at these sites. Stampedwares were found in greater frequency at Rancho Punta De Agua near Tucson,Arizona. This site was first occupied by a German–Mexican household and later bya Mexican household. Almost 10% of the whiteware shards are stamped (McGuire,1979, p. 32).

Along the Savannah River in South Carolina, stamped ceramics are veryrarely recovered on the over 500 historic sites that have been recorded (TammyForehand, personal communication). A further illustration of the lack of stampedwares from sites in the United States is provided by the recent excavations con-ducted at the George Bush Plantation in South Carolina (Cabak, n.d.). This sitewas occupied between circa 1810 and 1920, which encompasses the peak periodof production of stamped wares. These ceramics should have been available to theoccupants of the Bush Plantation. The extensive excavations at this site recovered4,433 whiteware and pearlware shards, of which 39% were decorated—not oneof these shards contained stamped motifs. A nineteenth-century farmstead in EastTennessee likewise produced 1,219 pearlware and whiteware shards, and only oneof these shards was stamped (Groover, 1998).

We suspect that this cursory summary of ceramics from rural contexts in theUnited States illustrates at least two trends. Nineteenth-century rural residents inTennessee, Missouri, and South Carolina, regardless of socioeconomic class, didnot typically acquire the inexpensive stamped wares common at northern NativeAmerican sites. However, the residents of Rancho Punta de Agua, whose house-hold was of both Native American and European heritage, did apparently acquirestamped wares. The occupants at the George Bush Plantation, although wealthy,did choose inexpensive wares. Shell-edged earthenware composes 13% of dec-orated wares at this site. Likewise, farmers in Missouri and Tennessee selectedinexpensive shell-edged wares. These ceramics make up 23% and 19%, respec-tively, of the whiteware and pearlware assemblages. The Labrador Inuit did not

P1: FPN


24 Cabak and Loring

acquire these particular inexpensive ceramics. Less than 1% of the decorated waresfound in the Nain midden are shell edged. Because these ceramics compose 12%of the assemblage in Signal Hill, we know they were available in Newfoundland–Labrador. Apparently, the Inuit did not acquire and use shell-edged ceramics orthe Moravians did not acquire them to sell. We suspect the lack of Labrador Inuitinterest in this decoration technique is related to vessel form.

LABRADOR INUIT FOODWAYS

Prior to life in the mission villages, the diet of the Labrador Inuit consisted al-most entirely of meat and fat from marine mammals, including whales, seals, polarbears, and walrus, supplemented by terrestrial resources, principally caribou, andfish. In addition, some wild plants (mostly berries), as well as shellfish, ptarmigan,and waterfowl were important food resources. Women prepared and served meatraw, frozen, stewed, roasted, and decomposed (Hawkes, 1970; Turner, 1984). Seal,caribou, and fish were dried for later consumption. Inuit beverages included meatbroth, fresh blood, and water (D’Anglue, 1984; Hawkes, 1916; Turner, 1984).

The traditional, precontact cooking vessel used by the Inuit was a soapstonekettle suspended over an oil lamp. Women served meat, blubber, and oil in ob-long shallow wooden dishes or bowls. Buckets and cups were constructed out ofsealskin and wood. An ulu knife was used by women to cut meat for cooking andconsumption. Wooden spoons were made for preparing and serving food.

The Moravians recorded very little about how European goods, such as ce-ramics, were used by the Inuit and how they influenced Inuit foodways. However,an analysis of the archaeological assemblage from Nain provides some insightconcerning ceramic use by the Inuit. Usewear analysis revealed an absence of cutmarks on the ceramic artifacts, suggesting that foods were not typically consumedwith a knife and fork. One ceramic bowl contained charred blubber, indicating thatit had been used as a blubber lamp. Inuit ingenuity and frugality is illustrated bynumerous shards (n= 61) with drilled repair holes, indicating that broken vesselswere often mended.

An analysis of vessel form provides additional insight into how European-produced ceramics were incorporated into Labrador Inuit society. Determiningthe proportion of hollowware and flatware in a ceramic assemblage is a standardanalysis technique. This method allows archaeologists to reconstruct foodwaysbased on vessel function (Otto, 1977). A predominance of hollowware suggeststhat liquid or oil-based foods such as stews were consumed. Conversely, a majorityof flatware serving vessels reflects the consumption of portioned, solid foods.

At Nain, flatware composes only 5% of the stamped assemblage (n= 6shards); conversely hollowwares comprise 95% of the assemblage (n= 108 shards).An examination of the entire ceramic assemblage from Nain reveals that hol-lowwares comprise slightly more than half of the assemblage (57%). This

P1: FPN



proportion is similar to the distribution of vessel forms documented at African-American contexts in Georgia (hollowwares= 47%), where people primarily con-sumed stews and one-pot meals (Otto, 1977, p. 115). This trend is very differentfrom Euroamerican foodways and ceramic assemblages, which typically containas much as 92% flatwares, indicating the consumption of separate foods and in-dividual portions (Deetz, 1977). Further evidence that Inuit foodways centeredupon hollowwares is the virtual absence of shell-edged earthenware in the mid-den. Shell-edged ceramics were typically tablewares (i.e., plates, platters, souptureens, gravy boats, etc.). Only two shell-edged shards were present in the Nainmidden. The absence of shell-edged ceramics and an overall low percentage offlatware in the Nain midden (43% in comparison to the 92% flatware reported insome Euroamerican assemblages) further suggest that the Inuit and Euroamericansprepared and served their food differently.

Bowls compose 35% of the stamped assemblage from Nain. The predominantvessels were small- to medium-sized bowls (15–22 cm in diameter), typically usedfor eating or serving food (Worthy, 1982, p. 339). The Inuit probably used the bowlsin traditional ways, such as to hold meat, oil, and stew for consumption. Historicphotographs also indicate that these bowls were used as serving containers. Asillustrated in Fig. 6, an Inuit family is gathered around a shared meal of meatand oil. Most likely, the bowl was used to hold oil, into which the Inuit dippedmeat. Nineteenth-century travelers recorded the prevalence of ceramics in homes(Periodical Accounts, 1863, p. 88) as well as in tents. In an Eskimo summer tentat Ramah, visited by LaTrobe in 1888, it was noted:

It is more spacious and better furnished than one would think. We can all three standupright in the middle of it, which is not possible in every house. Deer skins spread on araised platform at the further end make two beds. In that open box are hymn-book, liturgy-book, and some volumes of the Eskimo Bible. Next [to] it are a set of very fair cups andsaucers, but it seems incongruous for the china to stand on the mud floor. Various utensilslie about, but there is neither chair nor table. (Periodical Accounts, 1888, p. 477)

The most common vessel form among the stamped ceramics from Nain con-sists of teawares (n= 53 shards, making up 46% of the assemblage). These vesselsare represented by three teacups, three saucers, and 11 mugs. Historical and archae-ological evidence indicates that tea was highly desired by the Inuit. An analysisof the minimum number of vessels from the entire ceramic assemblage from Nainindicates that during the late eighteenth century, teawares composed 33% of theassemblage; they composed 22% in the nineteenth century (Cabak, 1991). It seemsunlikely that the use of teawares decreased during the nineteenth century. Rather,the relative frequency of teaware declined as other ceramic forms were incor-porated into Inuit foodways. Teaware was probably also used to consume otherbeverages, such as water. Inuit consumers adapted European containers to suittheir own needs, resulting in practices not associated with European manners andcustoms. For example, Inuit hunters cite the ease of being able to drink withoutspilling from the spout of a tea kettle while traveling in open boats in rough weather.

P1: FPN


26 Cabak and Loring

Fig

.6.

Labr

ador

Inui

tfam

ilyga

ther

edar

ound

aco

mm

unal

mea

lofm

eat,

Nai

n–O

kak,

circ

a19

12.N

ote

the

smal

lped

esta

lbow

lwith

stam

ped

deco

ratio

n(p

hoto

grap

hyco

urte

syof

The

Mor

avia

nA

rchi

ve,M

orav

ian

Chu

rch

Hou

se,L

ondo

n).

P1: FPN



The high percentage of teaware shards from the earliest midden depositssuggests that the Inuit rapidly acquired a taste for tea. Jackson (1991) also found thata majority of shards in Native Alaskan contexts were related to tea consumption andservice. Burley’s (1989) study of thehivernantMetis of the northwestern CanadianPlains also found teaware at sites of these mobile bison hunters. He argues thattea, and its associated teaware, was tied to social action—specifically it providedstructured interaction for information exchange. This custom originated amongnative or Metis wives of fur traders but spread to the families of the mobile bisonhunters. The rapid assimilation of tea into native foodways attests to the realizationof the inherent values of the beverage. Tea provides warmth in cold weather, has theability to dull hunger, is a stimulant, and may provide structured social interaction.The extent to which the Labrador Inuit appreciated tea is illustrated by the highpercentage of teaware both in the entire assemblage and stamped ceramics inparticular. Figure 7 shows a group of women during the Moravian Festival of theWidows, and it illustrates Inuit women drinking, presumably tea, from stampedmugs. The recollections of a Labrador Inuit woman also illustrates this point:

One evening when I had invited to my house perhaps ten persons, men and women. . . Iput the question to them, whether they had bettered themselves by the work of the whitepeople, or would they prefer to have the old times back. They conducted a serious and livelydebate, were silent at last, and the oldest women began to speak in order to explain to methe result of the discussion: ‘We are now well off in a different way than before; before wehad more seals and caribou, now we have tobacco and tea.’ (Hantzsch, 1932, p. 145)

CONCLUSIONS

English ceramics are among the most prevalent archaeological indicators ofthe developing global economic system. By the mid-nineteenth century, Englishceramics were in use across much of North America, even in the remote north-ern districts of Canada and Alaska. Northern sites testify to the pervasiveness ofnative involvement in the expanding world market, as remote groups, far fromEuroamerican establishments, were increasingly acquiring goods manufacturedin distant production centers. Native peoples became immersed in western mar-kets through various mercantile establishments including the Russian-AmericanCompany, the North West Company, the Hudson’s Bay Company, and the AlaskaCommercial Company, in addition to the increasing presence of western politicaland ecclesiastical influences, such as the Moravian missionaries.

It is apparent that ceramic assemblages from nineteenth-century and earlytwentieth-century Native American contexts, certainly those in the North, arelikely to contain stamped ceramics. Likewise, it appears that stamped ceramics areless common in the United States, at least among rural households of Europeandescent in the South. According to ceramic production history, stamped ceram-ics were some of the most inexpensive decorated wares available between themid-nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. We suspect that their low cost made

P1: FPN


28 Cabak and Loring

Fig

.7.

Gat

herin

gof

wom

enfo

rth

eM

orav

ian

Fes

tival

ofth

eW

idow

sor

Wid

ows

Day

,N

ain,

Labr

ador

,ci

rca

1890

–190

0.T

here

are

two

stam

ped

deco

rate

dte

am

ugs

visi

ble

alon

gw

itha

tran

sfer

-prin

ted

cup

and

two

deca

lde

sign

edcu

ps(p

hoto

grap

hco

urte

syof

Aus

stel

lung

i.Uni

tas-

Arc

hiv,

Her

rnhu

t,G

erm

any,

#526

5).

P1: FPN



these ceramics attractive to both importers and to Native American consumers. Theoccurrence of stamped ceramics in greater quantities at American and Canadiancontact sites and in lower economic contexts suggests that these wares are inter-esting cultural markers for European–Native American interaction.

However, stamped ceramics were not the only inexpensive, decorated earth-enware available in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. We believe the mainfactor among the Labrador Inuit, as well as other native groups, in the selec-tion of stamped wares over other inexpensive wares was vessel form. Commonforms of stamped ceramics were cups and bowls, which existed in Inuit foodwaysprior to the arrival of the Moravians. Shallow wooden dishes were used to servemeat, blubber, oil, and stew. Therefore, ceramic bowls were merely substitutedfor the wooden bowls without drastically disrupting or changing traditional foodservice methods. Common forms of shell-edged earthenware, another inexpensivenineteenth-century ceramic, consisted of plates and fancy serving vessels (suchas gravy boats). These forms clearly did not have a preexisting function amongthe Inuit. Shell-edged decoration was not common on teaware, but teaware wasdecorated with stamped designs. The western import of tea was a new custom,was highly desired by the Labrador Inuit, and is still an important aspect of theirculture today. In Alaska, inexpensive, brightly colored teaware was also desiredby native groups. This trend demonstrates the importance of tea among indigenousnorthern groups (Fig. 8).

The purpose of this study was to better understand archaeologically recoveredstamped ceramics in general, and why they were found in greater numbers inthe Inuit midden in Nain, Labrador. We found what may be a regionally specificdistribution of these wares. However, this cursory survey was not meant to illustrateevery example of where stamped earthenware occurs. What is needed is moreregional comparisons of late nineteenth-century to early twentieth-century ceramicassemblages so that we might better understand the processes of market availabilityand consumer choice in the globalization of indigenous North American nativeeconomies.

In closing, critics claim that world systems theory often does not adequatelyconsider the native view or the impact of globalization upon small-scale soci-eties (e.g., Dunaway, 1994). From a world systems perspective, it is mechanicallyassumed that western European culture was transplanted globally, and the accom-panying economic system washed over small-scale societies. The global systemdid indeed restructure, often dramatically, small-scale societies. However, whenthe native response is examined in detail at the household and local levels, agencyis illustrated through the ways in which western culture was selectively adopted.As seen in the example of stamped ceramic use among the Labrador Inuit, ar-chaeology is particularly well suited for examining globalization at the householdlevel. Despite participation in the global economy and the use of European mate-rial culture, the Labrador Inuit continued to maintain some traditional foodways

P1: FPN


30 Cabak and Loring

Fig

.8.

Yupi

kE

skim

ofa

mily

near

Bet

hel,

Ala

ska,

ca.1

900

(pho

togr

aphy

cour

tesy

ofA

usst

ellu

ngi,

Uni

tas-

Arc

hiv,

Her

rnhu

t,G

erm

any,

#245

2).

P1: FPN



practices. A consideration of foodways illustrates that meals were consumed withfew plates or dishes and a large proportion of bowls, whereas tea consumption, andits associated paraphernalia, was a new custom that was readily accepted. Archae-ological sources therefore underscore how the Inuit adopted European ceramics,yet often used these European goods in distinctive Inuit ways.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The archaeological data in this study were gathered during a 1990 Universityof South Carolina field school in cooperation with the Tomgasok Cultural Center inNain, Labrador. Gary Baikie of the Torngasok Cultural Center provided invaluableassistance during the project. Research support was provided by the Arctic StudiesCenter, Smithsonian Institution and the Savannah River Archaeological ResearchProgram, South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology, Universityof South Carolina. This paper has benefited from the insightful comments andediting of Mark Groover and the suggestions of reviewers Scott Hamilton andElizabeth Scott. What flaws remain are our own doing. An earlier version of thepaper was presented at the 30th Annual Meeting of the Society for HistoricalArchaeology in Corpus Christi, Texas in 1997. Finally, the authors dedicate thispaper to the memory of their Inuit colleague, Charlie Terriak, who found many ofthe shards discussed herein, and whose sense of pride in his ancestors, evoked byhis discoveries, was a lesson to us all.

REFERENCES CITED

Ackerman, R. E. (1965).Archaeological Survey Glacier Bay-National Monument, Southeastern Alaska.Part II. Report of Investigations 36, Washington State University Laboratory of Anthropology,Pullman.

Anderson, H. D., and Eells, W. C. (1935).Alaska Natives: A Survey of Their Sociological and Educa-tional Status, Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA.

Auger, R. (1991). Labrador Inuit and Europeans in the Strait of Belle Isle: From the written sources tothe archaeological evidence.Collection Nordicana, No. 55, Centre d’´etudes nordiques, Universit´eLaval, Quebec.

Auger, R. (1993). Late-18th- and early-19th century Inuit and Europeans in southern Labrador.Arctic46(l): 27–34.

Barka, N. F. (1978).The Archaeology of Fort Lennox, Ile-Aux-Noix, Quebec, 1964 Season.History andArchaeology 20, Parks Canada, Ottawa.

Bird, J. (1945). Archaeology of the Hopedale area. Labrador.Anthropological Papers of the AmericanMuseum of Natural History39(2).

Black, L. (1984).Atka, An Ethnohistory of the Western Aleutians, Limestone, Kingston, Ontario.Blee, C. H. (1986).Wine, Yaman and Stone: The Archaeology of a Russian Hospital Trash Pit, Sitka

National Historical Park, Sitka, Alaska, U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service,Washington, DC.

Brenner, E. M. (1988). Sociopolitical implications of mortuary ritual remains in 17th-century Nativesouthern New England. In Leone, M. L., and Potter, P. B. (eds.),The Recovery of Meaning:Historical Archaeology in the Eastern United States, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington,DC, pp. 147–182.

P1: FPN


32 Cabak and Loring

Brice-Bennett, C. (1981). Two opinions: The Inuit and Moravian missionaries in Labrador. Unpublishedmaster’s thesis, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s.

Burley, D. (1989). Function, meaning and context: Ambiguities in ceramic use by theHivernantMetisof the northwestern Plains.Historical Archaeology23(l): 97–106.

Cabak, M. (1991). Inuit women as catalysts of change: An archaeological study of 19th century northernLabrador. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of South Carolina, Columbia.

Cabak, M. (n. d.).Plantations Without Pillars: Archaeological Investigations at the George Bush Plan-tation (38AK660), Aiken County, South Carolina. Savannah River Archaeological Research Papers10, Savannah River Archaeological Research Program, South Carolina Institute of Archaeologyand Anthropology, University of South Carolina, Columbia.

Clark, D. W. (1995).Fort Reliance, Yukon: An Archaeological Assessment. Mercury Series Archaeo-logical Survey of Canada Paper 150, Canadian Museum of Civilization, Ottawa.

Clark, D. W. (1996). Archaeological examination of Fort Reliance, Yukon.Historical Archaeology30(2): 93–100.

Collard, E. (1984).Nineteenth-Century Pottery and Porcelain in Canada, 2nd ed., McGill-Queen’sUniversity Press, Montreal.

Crosby, C. A. (1988). From myth to history, or why King Philip’s ghost walks abroad. In Leone, M. L.,and Potter, P. B. (eds.),The Recovery of Meaning: Historical Archaeology in the Eastern UnitedStates, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC, pp. 183–210.

Crowell, A. (1997).Archaeology and the Capitalist World System: A Study from Russian America,Plenum, New York.

D’Anglue, B. (1984). Inuit in Quebec. In Damas, D. (ed.),Handbook of North American Indians,Volume 5: Arctic, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC, pp. 397–414.

Davey, J. W. (1905).The Fall of Torngat, S. W. Partridge, London.Dawson, E. (1912).Missionary Heroines in Many Lands, Seeley, Service, London.Deetz, J. (1977).In Small Things Forgotten, Doubleday, Anchor Books, New York.Dunaway, W. A. (1994). The southern fur trade and the incorporation of southern Appalachia into the

World-Economy, 1690–1763.Review17(2): 215–242.Finlayson, R. W. (1972).Portneuf Pottery and Other Early Wares, Longman Canada, Ontario.Fitzhugh, W. (1980). Preliminary report on the Torngat Archaeological Project.Arctic 33(3): 585–

606.Fitzhugh, W., and Kaplan, S. A. (1982).Inua: Spirit World of the Bering Sea Eskimo, Smithsonian

Institution Press, Washington, DC.Fleming, J. A. (1973).Scottish Pottery, EP Publishing, Glasgow. (First published in 1923.)Forsman, M. R. A. (1985).The Archaeology of Victoria Post: 1864–1867. Archaeological Survey of

Alberta, Manuscript Series No. 6, Alberta Culture, Historical Resources Division, Alberta.Grenfell, W. S. (1932).Forty Years for Labrador. Houghton Mifflin, New York.Groover, M. D. (1998). The Gibbs Farmstead: An archaeological study of rural economy and material

life in Southern Appalachia, 1790–1920. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University ofTennessee, Knoxville.

Hantzsch, B. (1932). Contributions to the knowledge of extreme north-eastern Labrador.The CanadianField-Naturalist44: 143–145.

Hawkes, E. W. (1970).The Labrador Eskimo, Department of Mines, Ottawa. (Reprint of 1916 edition.)Hiller, J. K. (1967). The foundation and early years of the Moravian missionaries in Labrador, 1752–

1805. Unpublished master’s thesis, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s.Hiller, J. K. (1971). The Moravians in Labrador, 1771–1805.The Polar Record15(99): 839–854.Hopkins, T. K., and Wallerstein, I. (1987). Capitalism and the incorporation of new zones into the

World-Economy.Review10(5): 763–779.Hrdlicka, A. (1943).Alaska Diary, 1926–1931, Jacques Cattell, Lancaster, PA.Hughes, G. B. (1967).Victorian Pottery and Porcelain, Springs Books, London. (Originally published

in 1959.)Hutton, S. K. (1912).Among the Eskimos of Labrador, Seeley, Service, London.Jackson, L. (1991). Nineteenth century British ceramics: A key to cultural dynamics in southwestern

Alaska. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California at Los Angeles.Jackson, L. (1994). Ceramics in Russian America: Insights from the Kurile Islands: A preliminary

investigation. Paper presented at the 26th annual meeting of the Society for Historical Archaeology,Vancouver, British Columbia.

P1: FPN



Jelks, E. B. (1973).Archaeological Explorations at Signal Hill, Newfoundland, 1965–1966. Cana-dian Historic Sites, Occasional Papers in Archaeology and History, No. 7, National HistoricSites Service, National and Historic Parks Branch, Department of Indian Affairs and NorthernDevelopment, Ottawa.

Jenness, D. (1965).Eskimo Administration: III. Labrador.Technical Paper 16, Arctic Institute of NorthAmerica, Montreal.

Jewitt, L. (1883).The Ceramic Art of Great Britain, publisher, London.Jordan, R., and Kaplan, S. (1980). An archaeological view of the Inuit/European contact period in

central Labrador.Etudes Inuit4(1–2): 35–45.Kaplan, S. (1983). Economic and social change in Labrador neo-Eskimo culture. Unpublished doctoral

dissertation, Bryn Mawr College, Bryn Mawr, PA.Kaplan, S. (1985). European goods and socio-economic change in early Labrador Inuit Society. In

Fitzhugh, W. W. (ed.),Cultures in Contact: The European Impact on Native Cultural Institutionsin Eastern North America, A.D. 1000–1800, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC,pp. 45–69.

Kelly, H. E. (1993).Scottish Sponge-Printed Pottery: Traditional Patterns, Their Manufacturers andHistory, Lomondside, Glasgow, Scotland.

Kleivan, H. (1966).The Eskimos of Northeast Labrador: A History of Eskimo-White Relations, 1771–1955, Norsk Polarinstitutt, Oslo.

Klimko, O. (1983). The Archaeology and History of Fort Pelly I, 1824–1856.Pastlog No. 5,Saskatchewan Culture and Recreation, Regina.

Leone, M. P., and Potter, P. B. (1988). Introduction: Issues in historical archaeology. In Leone, M. L.,and Potter, P. B. (eds.),The Recovery of Meaning: Historical Archaeology in the Eastern UnitedStates, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC, pp. 1–22.

Loring, S. (1985). Archaeological investigations into the nature of the late prehistoric Indian occupationin Labrador: A report on the 1984 field season. InArchaeology in Newfoundland and Labrador1984, Annual Report No. 5, Historic Resources Division, Government of Newfoundland andLabrador, St. John’s, pp. 122–153.

Loring, S. (1998). In Torngat’s realm: The 19th century photography of Moravian missionaries inLabrador. In King, J., and Lidchi, H. (eds.),Imagining the Arctic: The Native Photograph inAlaska, Canada and Greenland, British Museum, London, pp. 207–220.

Loring, S. (1999). The archaeology of Eskimo H¨utte (IKD6-2); Inuit sovereignty in the Torngat.EtudesInuit 22(2): 53–76.

McGuire, R. H. (1979).Rancho Punta De Agua.Contribution to Highway Salvage Archaeology inArizona, No. 57, Arizona State Museum, Tucson.

Miller, G. L. (1991). A revised set of CC index values for classification and economic scaling of Englishceramics from 1787 to 1880.Historical Archaeology25(l): 1–25.

Murtagh, W. L. (1967).Moravian Architecture and Town Planning, University of North Carolina Press,Chapel Hill.

Orser, C. E., Jr. (1996).A Historical Archaeology of the Modern World, Plenum, New York.Oswalt, W. H. (1980).Kolmakovskiy Redoubt: The Ethnoarchaeology of a Russian Fort in Alaska,

Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angles.Oswalt, W. H., and VanStone, J. (1967).The Ethnoarchaeology of Crow Village, Alaska.Smithsonian

Institution Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 199, U.S. Government Printing Office,Washington, DC.

Otto, J. (1977). Artifacts and status differences: A comparison of ceramics from planter, overseer, andslave sites on an antebellum plantation. In South, S. (ed.),Research in Historical Archaeology,Academic, New York, pp. 91–118.

Periodical Accounts (1838–1888).Periodical Accounts Relating to the Missions of the Church of theUnited Brethren, Established Among the Heathen, Brethren’s Society for the Furtherance of theGospel Among the Heathen, London.

Packard, A. S. (1885). Notes on the Labrador Eskimo and their former range Southward.AmericanNaturalist19: 471–481, 533–560.

Packard, A. S. (1891).The Labrador Coast, N. D. C. Hodges, New York.Price, C. R. (1982).19th Century Ceramics in the Eastern Ozark Border Region.Center for Archaeo-

logical Research, Monograph Series Number 1, Southwest Missouri State University, Springfield.(First edition 1979.)

P1: FPN


34 Cabak and Loring

Proulx, J. E. (1993).Basque Whaling in Labrador in the 16th Century.Studies in Archaeology, Archi-tecture and History, National Historical Sites, Parks Service, Ottawa, Canada.

Richling, B. (1978). Hard times them times: An interpretative ethnohistory of Inuit and settlers in theHopedale District of Northern Labrador. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, McGill University,Montreal.

Robacker, E. F., and Robacker, A. F. (1978).Spatterware and Sponge: Hardy Perennials of Ceramics,A. S. Barnes, Cranbury, NJ.

Schledermann, P. (1972). The Thule tradition in Northern Labrador. Unpublished master’s thesis,Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s.

Schledermann, P. (1976). Thule culture communal houses in Labrador.Arctic 29(1): 27–37.Shubin, V. O. (1990). Russian settlements in the Kurile Islands in the 18th and 19th Centuries. In

Pierce, R. (ed.),Russia in North America: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference onRussian America, Sitka, Alaska, 1987, Alaska History No. 25, The Limestone, Kingston, Ontario,pp. 425–450.

Shubin, V. O. (1994). Aleut in the Kurile Islands: 1820–1870. In Fitzhugh, W., and Chaussonnet, V.(eds.),Anthropology of the North Pacific Rim, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC,pp. 337–345.

Stone, H., and Loomis, A. (1982).Millions for Defense. A Pictorial History of the Races for theAmerica’s Cup, Derrydale, New York.

Sussan, L. (1979).Spode/Copeland Transfer-Printed Patterns found at 20 Hudson’s Bay CompanySites, Canadian Historic Sites, No. 22, Quebec.

Taylor, G. J. (1974).Labrador Eskimo Settlements of the Early Contact Period.Publications inEthnology, No. 9, National Museum of Canada, Ottawa.

Tuck, J. A., and Grenier, R. (1981). A 16th-century Basque whaling station in Labrador.ScientificAmerican245(5): 180–190.

Turner, L. (1984). Ethnology of the Ungava District, Hudson Bay Territory.Eleventh Annual Report ofthe United States Bureau of American Ethnology, Government Printing Office, Washington, DC,pp. 159–350.

VanStone, J. W. (1968). Tikchik Village: A nineteenth century riverine community in southwesternAlaska.Fieldiana Anthropology56, Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago.

VanStone, J. W. (1970). Akulivikchuk: A nineteenth century Eskimo village on the Nushagak River,Alaska.Fieldiana Anthropology60, Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago.

VanStone, J. W. (1972). Nushagak: An historic trading center in southwestern Alaska.Fieldiana An-thropology62, Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago.

VanStone, J. W., and Townsend, J. B. (1970). Kijik: An historic Tanaina Indian settlement.FieldianaAnthropology59, Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago.

Veltre, D. W. (1979). Korovinski: The ethnohistorical archaeology of an Aleut and Russian settlementon Atka Island, Alaska. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut, Storrs.

Wallerstein, I. (1974).The Modem World-System I, Academic, New York.Wallerstein, I. (1980).The Modem World-System II, Academic, New York.Worthy, L. (1982). Classification and interpretation of late nineteenth and early twentieth century

ceramics. In Dickens, R. (ed.),Archaeology of Urban America, Academic, New York, pp. 329–360.

“A Set of Very Fair Cups and Saucers”: Stamped Ceramics as...

Documents

Transcript of “A Set of Very Fair Cups and Saucers”: Stamped Ceramics as...