Learning to Make Pottery in the Prehispanic American Southwest

Author(s): Patricia L. Crown

Source: Journal of Anthropological Research, Vol. 57, No. 4, Learning and Craft Production
(Winter, 2001), pp. 451-469
Published by: University of New Mexico
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3631355 .
Accessed: 15/06/2011 16:18

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=unm. .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

University of New Mexico is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of
Anthropological Research.

http://www.jstor.org
 LEARNING TO MAKE POTTERY IN THE
PREHISPANIC AMERICAN SOUTHWEST

PatriciaL. Crown
Universityof New Mexico,Albuquerque,
of Anthropology,
Department NM 87131-1086

Recent studies of apprenticeship and learning provide a framework for

understandinghow the social contextsof learning affect the material outcomeof
the learning process among potters. Using methods derivedfrom educational
psychology to examine prehispanic pottery made and painted by unskilled
pottersfrom the AmericanSouthwest,it is possible to evaluate cognitive maturity
and motor skills. Comparisonsof two culture areas indicate differences among
Southwestern populations in teaching frameworks and how children were
incorporated into craft production.

LEARNINGENABLESCHILDREN to become knowledgeable practitionersand

ensures the continuingexistence of a community of craftspeople;it is a crucial
link between past and present.1Understandinghow children2move toward full
participation in the production of crafts thus provides the basis for
comprehendinghow communities endure, how knowledge is circulated, how
space and time are organized to conduct activities, how learners access
technology and knowledge, and the order in which a complex production
sequenceis mastered(Lave and Wenger 1991:55-56;papersin Coy 1989; Rogoff
1990). Currentdiscussions of learning (Lave and Wenger 1991; Rogoff 1990;
Wenger 1998; Vygotsky 1978; papers in Cole, Engestrom,and Vasquez 1997;
Coy 1989; Moll 1990; Rogoff and Lave 1984) provide various frameworksfor
understandinghow individuals become skilled practitionersthrough access to
knowledge, technology, terminology, and motors habits, with a particular
emphasis on how learning occurs throughparticipationin activity within social
contexts. While recognizing that teaching and learningmethods can differ from
one cultureto another(Schiffer and Skibo 1987), archaeologistsrarely examine
the consequences of different learning environments.Recent studies of crafts
learning emphasize the varied outcomes of different learning environmentsin
termsof innovationand conservatism(Greenfield1984; DeBoer 1990; Gosselain
1998; Wallaert-Petre,this issue). Greaterunderstandingof the social contexts of
learning in the past is thus importantfor understandingcontinuity and change,
and yet to date archaeologistsgenerally have lacked a means to access them. In
this article,I describea methodfor examininghow childrenbecome pottersusing
a case study from the prehispanicAmericanSouthwest(Crown 1999).

Research,vol. 57, 2001

JournalofAnthropological
Copyright? by The Universityof New Mexico

451
452 JOURNALOF ANTHROPOLOGICAL
RESEARCH
Learning a craft entails moving toward competence in completing a task,
including efficiency in executing gestures and replicability in achieving a
desired finished product. During the learning process, and particularlywhen
learningwithout substantialadult guidance (or "scaffolding"[Greenfield1984]),
unskilled learners use inefficient gestures and create substandardfinished
products. When potters manufacturepottery requiring a high level of skill,
including intricatedesigns, some vessels in an assemblage stand out as lacking
the technology, form, or design qualities characteristicof the productsof skilled
potters (Bernbeck 1999). I argue that these vessels are largely the products of
child learnersand thatby comparingthem with the work of highly skilled artisans
of the same society, we can understandthe social context of learning for that
society.
For this study,I examinedvessels of two decoratedwaresmanufacturedin the
American Southwest between A.D. 700 and 1150: Hohokam Red-on-buff and
MimbresBlack-on-white(Figure 1). For each ware, I documentedand compared
vessels representinga rangeof skill levels, includingvessels of average/highskill
level and vessels of low skill level. In the AmericanSouthwest,pots trulylacking
evidence of skill constituteno more than 5 percentof the decoratedassemblages
in major museums. Such pots may be lumpy, asymmetrical,poorly formed and
fired, and the designs are clumsily executed and deviate from the traditional
design structure for that society. Although Southwestern archaeologists
traditionallycall such vessels "village idiot ware,"I am not the first to arguethat
childrenmade them. FrankHamiltonCushing interpretedsome vessels from his
excavationsin the Hohokamareaas the work of children,as indicatedon original
catalog cards at the Peabody Museum at Harvard University; Neil Judd
(1954:199) interpretedsome small, crudely made vessels from Pueblo Bonito as
the work of children. Unfortunately,because the vessels are all decoratedand
most are slipped,no fingerprintswere availablefor the type of analysis described
by Kampin this issue.
We can hypothesize that these poor productsare the work of either skilled
potters producing a poor vessel or unskilled potters. Skilled potters might
produce poor-qualityvessels for several reasons: (1) as an expedient form of
manufacture, (2) while under the influence of drugs or alcohol, (3) when
becoming senile, (4) as nontraditionalworks for specific purposes,or (5) as silent
forms of protest.3 I reject the first possibility because the vessels are not
characterizedby expedientdesigns; insteadthe designs reveal greater effort than
a skilled potterwould need to make in paintingthe same design. Potterswho are
painting a design expeditiously or sloppily will reduce the numberof gestures
requiredto paint a design (Hagstrum1985). The designs in this sample show the
opposite: lines are composed of many short, overlapping segments, with the
paintbrushlifted numerous times, and spirals are composed of short, slightly
roundedlines combinedinto misshapenasymmetricalscrolls. I reject the second
possibilitybecause thereis no evidence for recreationaldrugor alcohol use in the
prehispanicor early historic American Southwest, particularlyamong working
potters.If consumed, drugs and alcohol were associatedwith ritualactivities and
 LEARNING POTTERYIN PREHISPANICAMERICAN SOUTHWEST 453

a. b.

c. d

e.

Figure 1. Illustrationsof Some Vessels Used in This Study

a. HohokamRed-on-buffscoop, 46 mm high (ArizonaStateMuseumcatalog#94-134-253);
b. HohokamRed-on-buffjar, 42 mm high (ArizonaStateMuseumcatalog#94-134-339); c.
MimbresBlack-on-whitebowl, 35 mm high (WeismanArt Museum catalog #11B508); d.
MimbresBlack-on-whitebowl, 58 mm high (WeismanArt Museum catalog #15B456); e.
detail of MimbresBlack-on-whitescoop showing spiralwith faint skilled linework (barely
visible in photographat arrow) under poorly executed linework (Weisman Art Museum
catalog #15B300). Photographsa, b, and e by MarianneTyndall; c and d from Mimbres
archivesat the Maxwell Museumof Anthropology,Universityof New Mexico.
454 JOURNALOF ANTHROPOLOGICAL
RESEARCH
not domestic crafts production.I reject the thirdpossibility because, historically,
many elderly Pueblo potters continued to make high-qualityvessels until their
deaths, while other aging potters stopped making pottery when they could no
longer produceit with the same quality(Blair and Blair 1999:179-80).When they
did continueto work, an elderly pottermight paint shaky lineworkbut would not
have forgotten the basic culturally appropriate designs. Furthermore,
archaeologicalmortuarydata suggest that people rarely lived to the age when
they might have been senile. The fourth possibility is potentially more
problematic. Worldwide, potters sometimes make nontraditionalvessels for
specific domains or audiences, known as "realmsof protecteddeviation"(Roe
1995:49). Indeed, Hopi potters in the Southwest made small crude pinch pot
bowls with slapdash designs as offerings for pottery firings or clay sources
(Bartlett1934; MarkTahbo,Hopi potter,personalcommunication,2000). A few
of the vessels I examinedfit this description,and all of them were from ancestral
Hopi sites. However, none of the vessels used in this article fit this description.
The vessels used in this study are attemptsto replicate,albeit unsuccessfully,the
work of skilled potters. I reject the fifth possibility because there is no record,
historicallyor ethnographically,of Southwesterngirls or women contestingtheir
lives throughthe productionof crude vessels. Instead, individuals who do not
wish to makepotterydo not makepottery.Furthermore,as I discuss furtherbelow,
many pots are the collaborativework of an unskilledpotterworkingwith a skilled
potterto complete a vessel, as some portionsof the pot are perfectlyexecuted and
others a poor imitation.
If the pottersproducingthe poor-qualityvessels were unskilledpotters,these
might include eitheradultsor children.I arguethatthese potterswere childrenfor
several reasons. First, the characteristicsof the decorationson these vessels are
typical of the designs paintedby childrenlearningto drawor paint,both in terms
of the motor skills apparentand the cognitive maturityof the artisan.In studies
conductedworldwide,cross-culturally,over the last century,researchersfind that
normal children with access to art materialsprogress througha developmental
sequence in their drawing and painting.4The vessels used in this study reflect
variousstages in this developmentalsequence,from scribblingto achievementof
culturallyappropriatedesign styles. The linework is tentative,with many brush-
liftings, widely spacedhatchinglines, and otherindicatorsof undevelopedmotor
skills. Some vessels have scribbleddesigns on them, with no apparentculturally
appropriatedesign. Othershave animalswith broadsmiles. Often symmetriesand
proportionsare lacking. Carefulexaminationof the linework indicatesthat many
vessels were held in a fixed position and not turnedaroundto facilitatepainting
and that paint was pushed with brushes instead of pulled after brushes;skilled
adultpotterscertainlyknow to turnvessels and properuse of brushesin painting.
Second, these poor-qualityvessels are significantly(based on t-tests) smaller
in height and width thanthe vessels formedby skilled potters;many are miniature
vessels. The vessels are often formed using pinch methods, rather than the
culturallytraditionalforming techniques.In recent studies, researchersfind that
childrenworking with clay progressthroughdevelopmentalsequences similarto
 LEARNINGPOTTERY
IN PREHISPANIC SOUTHWEST 455
AMERICAN
those with drawingmaterials,with greatermotorcontrolover the finishedproduct
and greaterability to producea symmetrical,stable form (Brown 1975; Golomb
1993; Smilansky,Hagan,and Lewis 1988). These vessels fit the characteristicsof
these studies of child learners.
Third, when the data are available on contexts and age of burial, the poor-
quality vessels appear in higher than expected numbers in burials of children.
Two arteducatorsviewed some of the vessel designs and confirmedthat children
likely paintedthem, althoughthey could not rule out adultswith the motor skills
or cognitive ability of children (Haine Crown and Caroline Wix, personal
communications,1996). I cannot,therefore,rule out the possibilitythat some pots
were made by adultswith the mental age of children.
Extraneous to the specific attributes of these vessels, ethnographic and
historic records from the American Southwest indicate that pottery production
was traditionallylearned when females were children among the Southwestern
Pueblo and Piman-speaking groups. Ethnographic accounts indicate that,
historically, Pueblo girls learned to make pottery largely by observation and
imitation of their mothers, aunts, grandmothers,or other adult females (Bunzel
1972; Fowler 1977; Hill 1982:139; John-Steiner 1975; Stanislawski and
Stanislawski1978). Formaldirectinstructionwas rare,althoughadultssometimes
correctedchildren who were imitatingthem and gave brief instructions(Fowler
1977:29; Hill 1982:139; Stevenson 1904:373). Learning generally followed a
sequence that mirroredthe productionprocess, with forming of vessels at the
youngest age, followed by decoration, and finally firing, with the progression
largely driven by the child's interestand skill level. These ethnographicsources
indicate that girls began to learn to make potteryat about age five and generally
were expected to have all of the knowledge to run their own households
(including producing acceptable pots) by age fifteen (Dennis 1940:40; Hill
1982:139; Wyckoff 1985:138-39; Parsons 1991:94-95; Fowler 1977:29). Taking
a broaderperspective,examinationof the HumanRelations Area Files confirms
that learning pottery productionbegins in childhood in most nonstate pottery-
producing societies worldwide. Unfortunately,the sample size is small, but in
twenty-seven of twenty-eight societies, individuals learned to make pottery by
age sixteen, and for most societies the age was considerably younger (for
descriptionsof childrenmakingpottery,see DeBoer 1990; Gosselain 1998; Sillar
1994; Wallaert-Petre,this issue). Finally, a search of published descriptionsof
12,958 Southwestern burials indicates that possible pottery-producingtools/
materialsoccurredin 46 of 4,312 child burials.5While this is not a particularly
large sample, it does indicate that Southwestern groups considered pottery-
producingtools appropriatemortuaryfurniturefor children.
It is reasonablethen to assume that adultsexpected childrento learnpottery
productionduring their childhood along with other adult tasks. There certainly
were children in the prehispanicAmerican Southwest. If, as seems reasonable,
these children learned to make pottery, we can anticipate that this learning
process left residues in the archaeological record. I argue then that the pots
selected for this study on the basis of their apparentlack of skill are the work of
456 RESEARCH
JOURNALOF ANTHROPOLOGICAL
child learnersbecause they exhibit the traitsfound worldwideon objects made by
childrenlearningto draw/paintor work with clay, they are smallerthan the work
of skilled potters, and they occur in higher than expected frequencies in the
burials of children.There is certainlymore reason to believe that childrenwere
involved in learningto make potterythan there is evidence in the archaeological
record of the American Southwest for intoxicated potters, distressed damsels
contesting their culturalheritage, or village idiots.

LEARNING TO MAKE POTTERY

Learning to make pottery requires mastering a complex series of tasks

including selecting appropriatematerials, mixing them, forming the vessels,
drying them sufficiently, finishing the pots by scraping, slipping, and/or
decorating them, and firing the vessels. It also entails learning the secrets
associated with the materials sources, techniques, or symbols and the relevant
taboos associated with gender, age, or social status. Each step in the process
requiresknowledge and motor skills. While the interestedchild may access these
througha teachingframework(Schiffer and Skibo 1987:597) and practice,6they
may not be capableof masteringthe entiretask sequence until they have attained
sufficient cognitive maturityand motorcoordination.This is particularlytrue for
the complex designs found on Southwesternpottery,where the novice must learn
the motifs and their symbolic content, the culturally sanctioned ways of
combining these motifs, the appropriatelayouts and symmetries for particular
vessel shapes, and how to apply two-dimensionaldesigns onto three-dimensional
surfaces. Just as no child is born capable of paintingthe Mona Lisa, no child is
born capableof paintingan intricateSouthwesternpot-both becausethey cannot
conceptually create such designs until their brains have maturedsufficiently to
breakdown the complex designs into their constituentpartsand recombinethem
properlyinto an acceptablewhole (a process somewhatanalogousto readingand
writingin our own culture)and because they cannot manipulatethe paintbrushes
and paint properly until they have developed fine-motor skills (a process
analogous to learningcursive handwritingin our own culture).
Teachingframeworksfor potterymanufacturemay include observationwith
imitation, verbal instruction,hands-on demonstration,or self-teaching (Schiffer
and Skibo 1987:597). In nonstate societies, observationallearningand imitation
of skilled adults is probablythe most common form of transmittingknowledge
(Bunzel 1972; Crown 1999; DeBoer 1990; Fortes 1938; Goody 1989; Lave and
Wenger 1991). An analysis of one hundred prestate societies in the Human
Relations Area Files reveals that among the twenty-five pottery-producing
groups for which observations are available, children in 48 percent of the
societies learned to make pottery by observation/imitationalone, 24 percent
received some verbalinstructionfrom adultsin domestic contexts, and 28 percent
learnedthroughmore formal apprenticeships.
Research in educationalpsychology shows that drawing/paintingability is
related to motor coordination, cognitive maturity, previous experience, and
 IN PREHISPANIC
LEARNINGPOTTERY AMERICAN
SOUTHWEST 457
social factors (Biber 1962; Cox 1993, 1997; Deregowski 1980; Goodnow 1977;
Krampen1991). Studies based on cross-culturaldata indicate some regularityin
the ages at which children are able to draw certain forms and in their ability to
renderthem in an accuratemanner.For instance,by the age of four, most children
with access to drawing materials will hold drawing tools in the adult manner
ratherthan with the entire fist (Biber 1962). With expanding intelligence and
conceptual maturity come changes in the subject matter and ability to copy
designs, so that between ages seven and nine, childrenin differentcultureshave
masteredthe style characteristicof theirculturegroup (Dennis 1942:347;Wilson
and Wilson 1984; Wilson and Ligtvoet 1992). In cultureswhere realismis valued
(such as our own), most children aged eight to twelve are capable of producing
realistic drawingswith perspectiveand proportion(Krampen1991). Childrenare
able to rendersome symmetricalmotifs by the age of four (althoughthey rarely
do), with the ability to manipulate symmetry patterns generally following a
sequence from simple repetition,to rotationarounda point, to reflection across a
verticalor horizontalline, to reflectionacross a diagonalline (DroraBooth study
describedin Goodnow 1977:40-41, although see Washbur 1999:553).
While many educators recognize general ages at which specific
accomplishmentsare attained,research also confirms significant differences in
the drawing ability and the content of drawings of children within a single age
cohort (Biber 1962; Cox 1993; Deregowski 1980; DuBois 1944; Fortes 1940;
Goodnow 1977; Havighurst,Gunther,and Pratt 1946; Munn 1973; Paget 1932;
Russell 1943; Thomas 1995). The actual productionof children's drawings is
influenced by the social context of learning and previous experience. Children
raisedin settingswhere artisticachievementleads to higherstatus,or where adults
often engage in drawing, develop drawing abilities at earlier ages than children
raised in settings withoutthese advantages(Cox 1993:102). Childrenwith access
to drawing materialswho practice drawing from an early age progress in their
drawing ability faster than children without such experience (Biber 1962).
Althoughsome psychologists arguethatthereare universalfigures common to all
children, after about age four to five, children's drawing is increasingly
influenced by culturally sanctioned visual models available to them through
their peers and adults (Cox 1997; Wilson and Wilson 1984). Thus, while motor
and cognitive capabilitiesrelated to drawing ability unfold in fairly predictable
ways in humanpopulations,the sequence in which childrenmasterany particular
design style may differ from cultureto culture(De Boer 1990).

BECOMING A POT'ER IN THE AMERICAN SOUTHWEST

Most sedentarypopulationsliving in the AmericanSouthwestafter A.D.500

used pottery with painted decorations on a daily basis. Although specialized
productionof pottery occurred at specific times and places (Mills and Crown
1995), most villages would have had potters who producedpottery largely for
domestic use. Females were likely responsiblefor forming and firing the vessels
and in most areasfor decoratingthem as well (Mills and Crown 1995); however,
458 JOURNALOF ANTHROPOLOGICAL
RESEARCH
severalresearchershave arguedthatmen paintedsome Mimbresvessels, based on
the content of the designs (Brody 1977:116; Hegmon and Trevathan1996; Jett
and Moyle 1986:716-17).
For this study, I use only a portion of the vessels used in a broaderstudy.
These vessels come from the Mimbres and Hohokam areas of the American
Southwest. The Mimbres area is located in southwesternNew Mexico, and the
vessels sampledwere made between approximatelyA.D. 900 and 1150 (Mimbres
Boldface and MimbresClassic Black-on-whites).The Hohokamareais locatedin
southernArizona, and the vessels sampled were made between approximately
A.D. 700 and 1100 (SantaCruzand SacatonRed-on-buffs).Nonspecializedpotters
made most of the vessels of these wares for domestic use, althoughresearchers
have suggested that part-timespecialists might have made some vessels of both
wares (Gilpin, Canouts,and Bishop 1994; Lindauer1988). I selected a sample of
112 MimbresBlack-on-whitevessels and 97 HohokamRed-on-buffvessels from
tens of thousandsof pots curatedin museumsthroughoutthe United States.As an
example of the sampling procedure,the Weisman Art Museum in Minneapolis
curates700 paintedMimbres vessels from the Galaz Ruin in southwesternNew
Mexico. I examined each vessel in the collection and selected 44 vessels (6
percentof the assemblage)for furtheranalysisbecause they showed a lack of skill
in either the decorationor the forming/finishingtechniques.
As described above, the vessels used in this study included some typical,
well-made vessels and some with substandarddesigns and/or technology. I
recordedforty attributes,includingattributesrelatedto the skill of the design, the
skill of the form, the skill of the technology, and the life historyof the vessel. The
design attributesrecorded (Table 1) were based on analytic techniques used in
education and psychology in assessing the mental age of children (see
particularlyGoodnow 1977; John-Steiner1975; Crown 1999:32). Nine attributes
(here numbered2-10) reflected cognitive development, including the ability to
replicategeometricshapes, understandthe grammaticalstructureof a design, and
use symmetryfunctions.A second group of seven attributes(here numbered11-
17) measuredmotorcontrolin executingthe designs. For a full discussionof these
design attributesand value codes, see Crown (1999). The value codes for each
attributeincrease with increasingcomplexity, and thus it is possible to sum the
codes to derive a total thatreflects overall skill level. I also sum the attributesthat
reflect cognitive developmentand those thatreflect motor skill separately.When
I interpret the results, I assume that the "motor skills" attributes reflect a
combination of age and previous experience, while the "cognitive maturity"
scores are a strongerindicatorof mental age alone. Additional attributesassess
vessel formingskills (which were totaledto obtaina forming skills score), vessel
morphology, vessel life history, technology skill, and presence of learning aids
and erasures.I assume thatthe sampledpots reflect an adequaterangeof products
for that ware. It is entirely possible, however, that earlierefforts were attempted
but not fired.
 LEARNING POTTERYIN PREHISPANICAMERICAN SOUTHWEST 459
TABLE 1
Attributes Recorded for the Learning Study
Attributesfor assessing skill in vessel painting
1. Numberof motif units
2. Motif state(empty/solid/hatched)
3. Amountof field filled with design
4. Typeof drawing(geometric/representational)
5. Integrationof motifs into largerdesign
6. Grammaticalstructureof design
7. Proportionsof identicalmotifs aroundvessel
8. Shapes used in design
9. Symmetry(highestlevel for any motifs)
10. Use of vessel shape as field of painting
11. Executionof design
12. Overlappinglines in design
13. Numberof clear errorsin painting
14. Motorcontrolbrush-liftings(sloppy to controlled)
15. Linework/direction
16. Line width (finest)
17. Line control/evennessof lines
18. Widthof hachurelines wherepresent
19. Distancebetweenhachurelines wherepresent
Attributesfor assessing skill in vessel forming
20. Vessel form
21. Formingtechnique
22. Finishingtechnique
23. Forming/finishingquality
24. Vessel symmetry
25. Complexityof form
26. Vessel wall thickness(takenat six points aroundvessel at same depth)
27. Maximumheight
28. Maximumwidth
29. Minimumorifice
30. Neck length (forjars)
Attributesfor assessing vessel life history
31. Interiorusewear
32. Exteriorusewear
33. Use alteration
34. Contextof recovery
35. Age of burial
Attributesfor assessing skill in vessel technology
36. Vessel type
37. Fireclouds
38. Colorcontrol
Attributesfor assessing learningaids
39. Incisedlines underpaint
40. Erasures
460 JOURNAL OF ANTHROPOLOGICALRESEARCH
Because the analytic techniques were held constant and all attributes were
recorded by a single observer, differences in the scores provide an opportunity to
examine differences in the social contexts of learning for the two culture areas (see
Tables 2 and 3 for statistical tests comparing the samples). I review the results for
each of the different wares before returning to general conclusions.
Between A.D. 700 and 1100, skilled Hohokam potters formed vessels from
thick coils and thinned the vessels by using a wooden paddle (resembling a small
pizza paddle) and stone anvil (resembling a stone mushroom); the anvil was
placed inside the vessel and the paddle thinned and shaped the clay opposite the
anvil on the exterior wall. They made vessels in a wide variety of shapes,
including bowl, jar, scoop, and effigy forms. Potters decorated the finished, dry
vessels with iron-based paint, applied in designs that were either geometric or
representational. The designs tend to have wide linework. Finally, they fired the
vessels in an oxidizing atmosphere to achieve a red design on a buff-colored
background.

TABLE 2
Pearson Chi-Square Tests for Independence of Design Attributes and Skill Level
with Vessels Grouped as Decorated by a Child/Learner versus Adult/Skilled Potter
Attributes HohokamVessels MimbresVessels

Motif state X2= .872, 2 df, p = .646 X2= .330, 2 df, p = .85
Amountof field filled 2 = .548, 1 df, p = .459 2 = .685, 2df, p = .71
Drawingtype X2= 5.938, 3 df, p = .115 X2 = 7.71, 4 df, p = .103
Motifintegration X2= 8.973, 2 df, p = .011 X2= 2.495, 2 df, p = .287
Grammar X2 = 18.299, 2 df, p = .000 X2= 22.77, 2 df, p =.000
Motif proportions X2= 20.611, 3 df,p = .000 X2= 16.698, 3 df,p = .001
Design symmetry %2 = 2.412, 2 df, p = .299 X2= 5.949, 4 df, p =.203
Use of vessel as design field X2 = 9.534, 2 df, p = .009 X2= 6.618, 2 df,p = .037
Complexityof motif shapes X2= 4.675, 2 df, p = .097 X = 1.297, 2 df, p = .523
Execution X2= 5.865, 2 df, p = .053 X2= 3.794, 2 df, p =.150
Motif overlap X2= 3.425, 2 df,p= .180 X2= 7.107 2 df,p =.029
Numberof errors X' = 8.323, 4 df, p = .080 X2= 13.641, 4 df,p = .009
Brush-lifting X = 31.73, 2 df, p =.000 X2= 28.209, 2 df, p = .000
Lineworkdirection X2 = 19.364, 3 df, p = .000 X2= 10.017, 3 df,p = .018
Line width X2= 9.298, 3 df,p = .026 X2= 9.291, 3 df,p = .026
Linecontrol 2 = 41.079, 3 df,p = .000 X2= 29.975, 2 df,p = .000
Formingtechnique X2 = 24.576, 5 df,p = .000 X2= 6.774, 1 df, p = .009
Finishingquality X2 = 35.191, 2 df,p = .000 X2= 27.972, 2 df, p = .000
Vessel symmetry X2= 25.194, 1 df,p = .000 X2= 8.804, 2 df,p = .012
Formcomplexity X2= 5.922, 2 df, p = .052 X2= 5.436, 2 df, p =.066
Fireclouds X2=.515, 1 df,p=.473 x2 = 2.297, 1 df,p =.130
Colorcontrolin firing X2= 1.439, 3 df, p = .696 X2= 8.328, 2 df,p = .016
Note: Statistics in bold are significant at a probability of less than .05.
 LEARNING POTTERYIN PREHISPANICAMERICAN SOUTHWEST 461
TABLE 3
Separate Variance t-Tests for Differences in Means
Attributes HohokamVessels MimbresVessels

Vessel height -3.336, 92 df, p = .001 -2.640, 106 df,p = .010

Vessel width -3.671, 95 df, p = .000 -2.061, 98 df,p = .042
Wallthickness(coefficientof
variation) 1.366, 94 df, p = .175 2.361, 74 df,p = .021
Wallthickness(average) 0.084, 92 df, p = .933 -0.119, 82.8 df, p = .905
Formingskills score -7.976, 94 df,p = .000 -5.563, 74 df,p = .000
Totalskills score -7.903, 48 df, p = .000 -6.037, 40 df, p = .000
Cognitivematurityscore -3.964, 38 df, p = .000 -3.680, 44 df, p = .001
Motor skills score -8.033, 45 df, p = .000 -7.540, 49 df,p = .000
Note: Groupingsfor vessel height, width, wall thicknesscoefficient of variation(based on
measurements at six points aroundcircumference),averagewall thickness,and formingskills
scoresas formedby child/learner versusadult/skilledpotter.Groupingsfor remainingattributes
are vessels decoratedby child/learnerversusadult/skilled
potter.Statisticsin bold are significant
at a probabilityof less than.05.

Comparisonof pots made by skilled Hohokam potters with those made by

learnersreveals significant differences. First, only one of the vessels made by
children was formed using a paddle and anvil; the remainderwere made by
persuadingthe clay with their hands only (so-called pinch method) or molding
the clay in a bowl. These vessels are significantlysmallerthanthe vessels madeby
adults, yet the vessel walls are no different in thickness and are no different in
evenness aroundthe vessel walls. Childrenmade fewer, simplerforms thanadults,
but they still made a wide range of differentshapes. For the decorations,children
and adultsboth used from one to six motifs in paintingindividualvessels, and the
mean numberof motifs used is roughlythe same for adultsand children.Overall,
the designs painted by children show less integrationof different motifs. Poor
planning characterizedvirtually all of the designs, with the last repeated motif
squeezed to fit the available space. Children rarely painted vessels with
traditionalHohokamdesign "grammar,"althoughmost of the pots showed some
knowledge of appropriatelayout and other aspects of this grammar.The motor
skills of the childrenreveal shaky linework,numerousbrush-liftings,wider lines,
and incorrect use of the brush (pushing paint in front of the brush, rounding
corers, or failing to turn the vessel aroundto paint difficult angles) (Figure la
and lb). The total skills scores are significantly lower for the pots painted by
children compared to those painted by adults, as are both the cognitive
componentand the motor skills componentof these total scores.
The traditionalMimbres pottery productiontechniques differed from those
of the Hohokam. Skilled Mimbres potters formed vessels from thin coils and
scrapedthe coil joints away with a scrapingtool. They made almost exclusively
bowls, in variousshapes and sizes, along with a few jar and effigy shapes.Potters
decoratedthe finished vessels with iron-basedpaint, appliedin designs that were
462 JOURNALOF ANTHROPOLOGICAL
RESEARCH
either geometricor representational.Finally, they fired the vessels in a neutralto
reducingatmosphereto achieve black designs on a white-coloredbackground.
The potterymade by child learnersis significantlydifferentfrom that made
by adults in many respects.Both childrenand adultsused the traditionalcoil-and-
scrape method of formingthe majorityof vessels, althoughchildrenalso used the
pinch techniquefor four vessels in the sample. The vessels made by childrenare
smaller, with significantly less even wall thicknesses. Children's vessels were
more often unintentionallyasymmetricalin form. Childrenmade slightly fewer
forms than adults.Both adultsand childrenpainteddesigns with up to ten motifs
on a vessel, but childrenused fewer motifs per vessel on average.Childrenpainted
designs with uneven motif sizes that failed to have appropriateMimbresdesign
grammar. In terms of motor skill, children painted designs with fatter
paintbrushes,shaky linework, many brush-liftings,more errors, and less line
control than adults (Figure lc and Id). Some of the vessels paintedby children
were scribbled,indicatingdevelopmentallyyoung children (Figure Id).
The results indicate importantdifferences in the learning process between
these two cultures.Hohokamchildrenapparentlybegan learningto form vessels
using the simplest method (pinch). Even skilled Hohokam potters occasionally
used the pinch method to form small vessels, but children apparentlydid not
begin making larger vessels with the paddle and anvil until they had mastered
other aspects of vessel production. Interestingly,children mimicked the wide
variety of Hohokam decorated forms, reproducingnine of the thirteen shapes
made by adults in this sample. In contrast,Mimbres children primarilyformed
vessels using the traditionalcoil-and-scrapetechnique, resorting to the pinch
methodrarely.They also mimickedadultforms in vessel shapes,but the Mimbres
potter produceda narrowerrepertoireof shapes overall, and children produced
only five of the eight distinct forms in the assemblage. For both cultures, the
problemschildrenhad with vessel symmetryand finishing theirpots suggest that
they were familiar with what to do and how to do it, but lacked the practice
necessary to make a vessel of average quality. Comparisonof the cognitive
maturityportion of the design skills scores with the motor skills portion of the
design skills scores reveals similarpatterning.The cognitive maturityportionof
the skills scores indicatethat many childrenpaintingthese pots were old enough
to understandhow a culturally appropriatedesign should look, but they had
trouble executing this understandingon an actual pot. They had the most
problemsfitting designs onto the curved surfaceof pots in an even way, without
having to squeeze a final motif into a small space. And overall they lacked the
motor coordination to apply the designs to the vessels in a skilled fashion,
resultingin strikinglylow motor skills scores.
In both cultures,skilled adultpottersapparentlycontributedtime and energy
to the learningprocess. Some perfectlymade pots have highly unskilleddesigns,
indicatingthat childrenwere allowed to decoratevessels made by skilled potters.
Skilled potters sometimes worked together with unskilled potters in decorating
vessels as well, eitherby allowing the unskilledpotterto complete a small portion
of an otherwisebeautifullyexecuted design or by child and adulteach decorating
 LEARNING POTTERYIN PREHISPANICAMERICAN SOUTHWEST 463
a separatepotion of the pot. In the Mimbres area, such collaborativepots are
relatively common: adultsmade 50 percentof the pots decoratedby children(for
example, Figure lc). Adults also collaboratedwith childrenon nineteen vessels
(18 percent of the total sample documented);on eighteen of these an unskilled
potterclumsily executed a small portionof an otherwise flawless design, and on
one pot a skilled potterpaintedthe interiorand an unskilledpotterthe exteriorof
a bowl. Interestingly,on three of the collaborativeMimbres vessels, faint well-
executed lines are visible under the portionspaintedby children,indicatingthat
skilled adults provided clear templates for the learning potter to follow, albeit
clumsily (Figure le). The difference in skill level of the linework is clearly
apparentin these instances,as the faint lines were paintedwith single continuous
strokes,in contrastto the overlinespaintedwith many short,choppy strokesof the
brush. On several other collaborativevessels, skilled potters flawlessly outlined
motifs and allowed unskilledpottersto fill in the solid motifs so clumsily thatthe
filler edge is uneven and often outside the carefully providedoutlines.
In the Hohokam sample, adults made 41 percent of the vessels painted by
children. Adults collaboratedwith childrenin painting six vessels (6 percent of
the total documented);on all of these a child potterpaintedone or a few motifs on
a vessel otherwisepaintedby a skilled potter.Some Hohokamvessels also show
"ghostlines" apparentlyplaced as a guide for the final painting.However, unlike
the Mimbresexamples, the Hohokamghost lines were apparentlythe work of the
same child artisan who then painted over them because they are as clumsily
executed as the final linework over them.
The skills requiredin learning pottery productionamong the Mimbres and
Hohokamdifferedin importantways. Among the Mimbrefios,skilled pottersused
a single forming/thinningtechnique(coil and scrape)to producea narrowrange
of vessels, primarilybowls. This relatively simple technology contrastedwith the
decorationson these vessels, which display creative expression and requireda
greater level of skill than Hohokam designs. It is interestingthen that skilled
potters made vessels and then allowed young children to paint them, including
children so young that they had not masteredlinework beyond the scribble.The
emphasis in this learning process appearsto have been on masteringthe motor
skills to paint careful, fine linework. Adults helped in the process by providing
vessels, templatesin partiallyfinished vessels, and even ghost lines to trace. Yet,
despite the collaborationwith skilled potters, the designs of unskilled potters
reveal latitudein creativeexpression,rangingfrom standardgeometricdesigns to
naturalisticanimals-a reflection of the range of designs of the skilled potters
they emulated. The emphasis of skilled potters in the training of unskilled
childrenappearsto have centeredon techniquemore than subjectmatter(within
certain culturallydefined constraints).
Among the Hohokam, skilled potters primarilyused the paddle and anvil
thinningtechniqueto manufacturea wide variety of vessel shapes and sizes. The
thinningtechnique,variety of shapes, and largersizes of vessels demandgreater
skill than Mimbrespottery (as a generalizationthat may not apply to any single
vessel), particularlyfor the unskilledlearner.It is not surprisingthen thatchildren
464 JOURNALOF ANTHROPOLOGICAL
RESEARCH
mastered decoration on vessels made by nontraditionalmethods or by adults
before they began learning to make larger vessels using the paddle and anvil.
Overall, Hohokam designs requiredless skill than Mimbres designs, and there
appears to have been less emphasis among the Hohokam on impartingmotor
skills for paintingdesigns because there are no ghost lines paintedby adults for
childrento follow. While adults sometimes allowed unskilledpotters to finish a
design, thus providing a template for a correct design, they did not allow very
young scribblersto decorate pots. By this method, children learned to paint a
fairly rigid, but relatively simple set of standarddesigns. This is not to imply that
Hohokamchildrennever exhibited self-expressionin their designs, but only one
(3 percent)in thirty-ninevessels paintedby Hohokamchildrenhas a naturalistic
design, while seven (23 percent) in thirty vessels painted by Mimbres children
have naturalisticdesigns.
As documentedby DeBoer (1990), Greenfield(1984, 2000), and Wallaert-
Petre (this issue), learning crafts occurs in a social context that may demand
conservatism or encourage creativity and innovation. From these studies, it
appears that when transmissionis carefully guided by a skilled teacher, there
tends to be less variationin the finished products.When transmissioninvolves
less directionand more trial-and-error,there tends to be greatervariationin the
finished products.Among the Mimbres,errorrates in designs paintedby children
arehigh (83 percentof vessels have one to ten errors)comparedto designs painted
by adults (45 percent of vessels have one to ten errors). This high error rate
correspondswith the apparentemphasisamong the Mimbreson creativity,rather
than getting the design "right."In contrast, on the relatively simple designs
paintedby the Hohokam,errorrates for adultsand childrenare more similar (59
percentof vessels paintedby childrenand 48 percentof vessels paintedby adults
have one to ten errors),matchingthe apparentemphasison completingdesigns in
the propermanner.

SUMMARYANDCONCLUSIONS

This study reviews a method for assessing how childrenlearnedto become

potters.The resultsconfirmthatdifferencesexist in the social contextsof learning
to make pots among the differentculturespresentin the Southwest.They suggest
that Mimbreschildrenbegan decoratingpotteryat an earlierage than Hohokam
children, often painting vessels made by more skilled potters and sometimes
painting over designs laid out by experiencedpotters. Mimbres learning led to
greaterfreedomof expressionand a greatererrorrate.The resultsalso suggest that
Hohokam children began with nontraditionalconstruction techniques, only
learning the more difficult aspects of the technology once they had mastered
otheraspectsof the productionprocess.The emphasisamongthe Hohokamseems
to have been on childrendoing only what they were capable of doing, but doing
it correctly,so that the errorrate was considerablylower. For both groups, most
children were better able to visualize designs than execute them correctly,
indicatinggreatercognitive maturitythan practicalskill in painting pottery.
 LEARNINGPOTTERY
IN PREHISPANIC SOUTHWEST 465
AMERICAN
Most aspects of the learningprocess appearto reflect those documentedin
the Southwesternethnographicrecord. But the amount of adult involvement in
the process differs from that suggested by Southwestern ethnographies. In
particular,the presence of several vessels apparentlymade by skilled pottersand
then paintedby childrensuggests that adults invested greatertime and resources
in the learningprocess of buddingpottersthan recordedin ethnographicsources
for the Southwest.
The differences discussed have important implications for interpreting
broaderpatternsin material culture in these two groups. While the Hohokam
ceramic sequence is often characterizedas patternedby slow, consistent change
in design on a stable technologicalfoundation,the Mimbresceramic sequence is
characterizedby changes in technology as well as startlinglycreative designs.
Such differences are likely the direct result of differences in how children were
socialized in pottery production, how communities of artisans endured. The
emphasis among the Hohokam on performing only aspects of the production
process that children can do without error resembles the "closed" learning
describedby Wallaert-Petre(this issue) among the Faro groups,which she argues
leads to style continuity. In contrast, the emphasis among the Mimbres on
encouraging exploration by giving access to materials at a young age and
allowing mistakes resembles the "open"learning she describes for the Fali as
leading to greaterdiversity.
As discussed at the beginning of the article, study of learning in
archaeologicalcontexts has the potentialto informon many issues of importance
to archaeologists, particularly rates of change in assemblages. Although
archaeologists would generally acknowledge the importance of teaching and
learningto the processes of change they study, they have generallylacked access
to how children acquiredadult occupationalskills and at what age the learning
process began. Often, archaeologistsassume that knowledge is transmittedin an
orderly fashion from one generation to the next, without making explicit
statementsabout how and when such learningtook place. Our understandingof
pottery production,change in pottery through time, and community dynamics
would be greatly enhanced by clearer perceptions of how children were
incorporatedinto the adultworld of craftsproductionand how design styles were
acquiredthroughimitation and creativity.The methods presentedhere permit a
greaterunderstandingof the processes of learningin Southwesterncommunities
and have great potential for aiding archaeologistsin understandingthe past.

NOTES

1. This study was completed with funding from the National Endowment for the
Humanities(RZ-20362-98), the Wenner-GrenFoundation(Grant#6318), andan American
PhilosophicalSociety SabbaticalFellowship.Thevessels discussedarecuratedattheArizona
State Museum/Universityof Arizona,Field Museum of NaturalHistory,Museum of New
Mexico/Museum of Indian Arts and Culture, Museum of Norther Arizona, Peabody
Museum at HarvardUniversity, SmithsonianInstitution/MuseumSupportCenter,and the
466 JOURNAL OF ANTHROPOLOGICALRESEARCH
WeismanArtMuseumin Minneapolis.All photographswere takenby my researchassistant,
MarianneTyndall,who also conductedthe HRAF studyof pottinggroupsandthe surveyof
potting tools in child burials.My sister, Haine Crown, an arttherapistand artist,provided
information,references,andincentivefor this research.CarolynWix, AssociateProfessorof
Art Education at the University of New Mexico, also gave valuable advice and
encouragement.ElizabethBagwell discoveredtheeducationalliteratureon childrenworking
with clay. Michael Schiffer, Lawrence Straus, and two anonymous reviewers provided
insightfulcommentson an earlierdraftof this article.
2. "Child"is definedhere in highly generalbiological termsto meanan individualwho
hasnotreachedadulthoodandis biologicallyimmature.I do notknowtheculturalmeaningof
child or childhoodamongthe Southwesterngroupsstudied,althoughethnographicaccounts
would suggest thatmarriagewas expectedat aboutage fifteen.
3. This latterpossibilitywas suggestedto me by an anonymousreviewer.I readilyadmit
an inabilityto assess it in the past.
4. I recognizethatmanyanthropologistsfind any suggestionof universalitydistasteful.
However, childrendo have universaltrendsin their developmentdue to their burgeoning
braingrowthandmuscle control.Thereis, for example,no child bornable to controlbladder
function,speak,or walk, yet normalchildrenin normalsettingslearnthese tasks.All normal
childrenprogressthroughdevelopmentalsequences,althoughatdifferingratesdependingon
many factors.Ignoringsuch patternsbecauseuniversalityis seen as too generalizingor as a
paternalisticplot wouldinvolve throwingthe baby (who cannotwalk,talk,or changeits own
diaper)out with the bathwater.
5. The tools/materialsarepotentiallyused for potteryproduction,but all could be used
forotheractivitiesin thepastas well; theseincludepolishingstones,clay, pigment,gourdrind
scrapers,and paint palettes. While the numberof childrenwith pottery-producingtools is
relativelylow, the numberof adultswith pottery-producingtools is also quitelow.
6. Here, I define practice as "repeatedmental or physical action for the purpose of
learningor acquiringproficiency"(Webster'sNew UniversalUnabridgedDictionary1983).

REFERENCES CITED

Bartlett,K., 1934, The MaterialCultureof Pueblo II in the San FranciscoMountains,

Arizona.Museum of NorthernArizonaBulletin 7. Flagstaff:NorthernArizona Society of
Science andArt.
Bernbeck,R., 1999, StructureStrikesBack:IntuitiveMeaningsof CeramicsfromQale
Rostam,Iran.Pp. 90-111 in MaterialSymbols:CultureandEconomyin Prehistory(ed. by J.
Robb).Centerfor ArchaeologicalInvestigationsOccasionalPaper26. Carbondale:Southern
IllinoisUniversity.
Biber, B., 1962, Children'sDrawings:From Lines to PicturesIllustrated.New York:
BankStreetCollege of EducationPublications.
Blair, M.E., and L. Blair, 1999, The Legacy of a Master Potter:Nampeyo and Her
Descendants.Tucson, Ariz.: TreasureChestBooks.
Brody, J.J., 1977, Mimbres Painted Pottery. Albuquerque:School of American
Researchand the Universityof New Mexico Press.
Brown, E., 1975, DevelopmentalCharacteristicsof Clay Figures Made by Children
from Age ThreethroughAge Eleven. Studiesin Art Education16(3):45-53.
Bunzel, R., 1972, The PuebloPotter:A Studyof CreativeImaginationin PrimitiveArt.
New York:Dover.
 LEARNING POTTERYIN PREHISPANICAMERICAN SOUTHWEST 467
Cole, M., Y. Engestr6m, and 0. Vasquez, eds., 1997, Mind, Culture,and Activity.
Cambridge,Eng.:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Cox, M.V., 1993, Children'sDrawings of the HumanFigure. Hove, Eng.: Lawrence
ErlbaumAssociates.
Cox, M.V., 1997, Drawings of People by the Under-5s.London:FalmerPress.
Coy, M.W., ed., 1989, Apprenticeship:From Theory to Method and Back Again.
Albany: State University of New York Press.
Crown,P.L., 1999, Socializationin AmericanSouthwestPotteryDecoration.Pp. 25-43
in Potteryand People: A Dynamic Interaction(ed. by J.M. Skibo and G.M. Feinman).Salt
Lake City: Universityof Utah Press.
DeBoer, W., 1990, Interaction,Imitation,and Communicationas Expressedin Style:
The Ucayali Experience.Pp. 82-104 in The Uses of Style in Archaeology(ed. by M. Conkey
and C. Hastorf).Cambridge,Eng.: CambridgeUniversityPress.
Dennis, W., 1940, The Hopi Child. New York:D. Appleton-Century.
Dennis, W., 1942, The Performanceof Hopi Childrenon the GoodenoughDraw-a-Man
Test. Journalof ComparativePsychology 34:341-48.
Deregowski,J.B., 1980, Illusions,PatternsandPictures:A Cross-CulturalPerspective.
New York:Academic Press.
DuBois, C., 1944, The People of Alor: A Social-PsychologicalStudyof an East Indian
Island.Minneapolis:Universityof MinnesotaPres.
Fortes,M., 1938, Social andPsychologicalAspects of Educationin Taleland.Pp. 201-
59 in Time and Social Structureand OtherEssays (ed. by M. Fortes).London:Athlone.
Fortes,M., 1940, Children'sDrawingsamong the Tallensi.Africa 13:293-95.
Fowler, C., 1977, Daisy Hooee Nampeyo: The Story of an American Indian.
Minneapolis,Minn.:Dillon Press.
Gilpin, P.A., V. Canouts,and R.L. Bishop, 1994, The Productionand Distributionof
ClassicMimbresBlack-on-WhitePottery.AmericanAntiquity59:695-709.
Golomb, C., 1993, Art and the Young Child: Another Look at the Developmental
Question.Visual Arts Research 19(1):1-15.
Goodnow, J., 1977, Children'sDrawing. London:Open Books.
Goody,E.N., 1989, Learning,Apprenticeship,andthe Division of Labor.Pp. 233-55 in
Apprenticeship:From Theory to Method and Back Again (ed. by M. Coy). Albany: State
University of New York Press.
Gosselain,0., 1998, Social andTechnicalIdentityin a Clay CrystalBall. Pp. 78-106 in
The Archaeologyof Social Boundaries(ed. by M. Stark).Washington,D.C.: Smithsonian
InstitutionPress.
Greenfield,P., 1984, A Theory of the Teacherin the LearningActivities of Everyday
Life. Pp. 117-38 in EverydayCognition(ed. by B. Rogoff andJ. Lave). Cambridge,Mass.:
HarvardUniversityPress.
Greenfield,P., 2000, School of AmericanResearchAnnualReport,p. 8. SantaFe.
Hagstrum,M., 1985, MeasuringPrehistoricCeramicCraftSpecialization:A Test Case
in the AmericanSouthwest.Journalof Field Archaeology 12:65-75.
Havighurst,R.J., M.K. Gunther,and I.E. Pratt, 1946, Environmentand the Draw-a-
ManTest:The Performanceof IndianChildren.Journalof AbnormalandSocial Psychology
41:50-63.
Hegmon, M., and W. Trevathan,1996, Gender,AnatomicalKnowledge, and Pottery
Production:Implicationsof an AnatomicallyUnusualBirth Depicted on MimbresPottery
from SouthwesternNew Mexico. AmericanAntiquity61:747-54.
468 JOURNAL OF ANTHROPOLOGICALRESEARCH
Hill, W.W., 1982, An Ethnographyof SantaClaraPueblo New Mexico (ed. by C.H.
Lange). Albuquerque:Universityof New Mexico Press.
Jett,S.C., andP.B. Moyle, 1986, The Exotic Originsof Fishes Depictedon Prehistoric
MimbresPotteryfrom New Mexico. AmericanAntiquity51:688-720.
John-Steiner,V., 1975, LearningStyles among Pueblo Children.Final Report U.S.
Departmentof Health,Education,andWelfare,NationalInstituteof Education.Albuquerque:
College of Education,Universityof New Mexico.
Judd,N., 1954, The MaterialCultureof Pueblo Bonito. SmithsonianMiscellaneous
Collections 124. Washington,D.C.
Krampen,M., 1991, Children'sDrawings:Iconic Coding of the Environment.New
York:PlenumPress.
Lave, J., andE. Wenger, 1991, SituatedLearning:LegitimatePeripheralParticipation.
Cambridge,Eng.: CambridgeUniversityPress.
Lindauer,0., 1988, A Study of Vessel Formand PaintedDesigns to ExploreRegional
Interactionof the SedentaryPeriodHohokam.Ph.D. diss., ArizonaStateUniversity,Tempe.
Mills, B.J., andP.L. Crown, 1995, CeramicProductionin the AmericanSouthwest:An
Introduction.Pp. 1-29 in CeramicProductionin theAmericanSouthwest(ed. by B. Mills and
P. Crown).Tucson:Universityof ArizonaPress.
Moll, L., 1990, VygotskyandEducation:InstructionalImplicationsandApplicationsof
SociohistoricalPsychology. Cambridge,Eng.:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Munn,N., 1973, WalbiriIconography.Ithaca,N.Y.: Corell UniversityPress.
Paget, G.W., 1932, Some Drawingsof Men and WomenMade by Childrenof Certain
Non-EuropeanRaces. Journalof the Royal AnthropologicalInstituteof GreatBritainand
Ireland62:127-44.
Parsons,E.C., 1991, Waiyautitsaof Zuni,New Mexico. Pp. 89-105 in PuebloMothers
and Children(ed. by B. Babcock). SantaFe, N.M.: Ancient City Press.
Roe, P., 1995, Style, Society, Myth, and Structure.Pp. 27-76 in Style, Society and
Person:ArchaeologicalandEthnologicalPerspectives(ed. by C. CarrandJ. Neitzel). New
York:PlenumPress.
Rogoff, B., 1990, Apprenticeshipin Thinking: Cognitive Development in Social
Context.New York: OxfordUniversityPress.
Rogoff, B., and J. Lave, eds., 1984, Everyday Cognition: Development in Social
Context.Cambridge,Mass.: HarvardUniversityPress.
Russell, R.W., 1943, The Spontaneousand InstructedDrawings of Zuni Children.
Journalof ComparativePsychology 35:11-15.
Schiffer, M.B., and J.M. Skibo, 1987, Theory and Experiment in the Study of
TechnologicalChange.CurrentAnthropology28:595-622.
Sillar, B., 1994, Playing with God: Cultural Perceptions of Children, Play, and
Miniaturesin the Andes. ArchaeologicalReview fromCambridge13(2):47-63.
Smilansky,S., J. Hagan,andH. Lewis, 1988, Clay in the Classroom:HelpingChildren
Develop CognitiveandAffective Skills for Leaning.New York:TeachersCollege Press.
Stanislawski, M.B., and B.B. Stanislawski, 1978, Hopi and Hopi-Tewa Ceramic
TraditionNetworks. Pp. 61-76 in The SpatialOrganizationof Culture(ed. by I. Hodder).
Pittsburgh,Pa.: Universityof PittsburghPress.
Stevenson,M.C., 1904, The Zuni Indians:TheirMythology,EsotericFraternities,and
Ceremonies.Pp. 3-634 in Twenty-thirdAnnualReportof the Bureauof AmericanEthnology
for the Years 1901-1902. Washington,D.C.
 LEARNING POTTERYIN PREHISPANICAMERICAN SOUTHWEST 469
Thomas,G.V., 1995, The Role of DrawingStrategiesandSkills. Pp. 107-22 in Drawing
and Looking (ed. by C. Lange-Kuttner and G.V. Thomas). New York: Harvester
Wheatsheaf.
Vygotsky, L.S., 1978, Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological
Processes (ed. by M. Cole, V. John-Steiner,S. Scribner,and E. Souberman).Cambridge,
Mass.: HarvardUniversity Press.
Washburn,D., 1999, PerceptualAnthropology:The CulturalSalience of Symmetry.
AmericanAnthropologist101(3):547-62.
Wenger, E., 1998, Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity.
Cambridge,Eng.: CambridgeUniversityPress.
Wilson, B., and J. Ligtvoet, 1992, Across Time and Cultures:Stylistic Changesin the
Drawingsof Dutch Children.Pp. 75-88 in DrawingResearchand Development(ed. by D.
Thistlewood).London:Longman.
Wilson, B., and M. Wilson, 1984, Children's Drawings in Egypt: Cultural Style
Acquisitionas GraphicDevelopment.Visual Arts Research10:13-26.
Wyckoff, L.L., 1985, Designs and Factions:Politics, Religion, and Ceramicson the
Hopi ThirdMesa. Albuquerque:Universityof New Mexico Press.