Introduction

Pottery making in what is now the United States appears to have begun in coastal South Carolina, Georgia or Florida between about 4,500 and 5,000 years ago. In the next 1,000 years it spread up the east coast and into the nation's interior. There are, over that long period, many changes and local variations, but for the most part people stayed with their tried and true recipes for paste, manufacturing techniques and surface treatments which allows pottery to serve as a time-marker for archaeologists.

The purpose of this web site is to introduce the reader to the pottery we find and the literature that defines it. In preparing for this the author (Carl Steen) has read numerous site reports and papers on pottery analysis, use, and manufacture. This has shown me that the questions revolving around pottery are more complex than they might seem, because change in pottery making occurs locally and regionally on both synchronic and diachronic levels. So a sherd of cord marked pottery tempered with coarse sand found at a site on the Pee Dee may date hundreds of years earlier or later than a sherd of the same description found on the Savannah. The data that is needed to track all of these changes has simply not been recovered and applied. We still have much to learn.

This web site is aimed at professional archaeologists and archaeology students primarily, but a more basic identification guide for students and interested parties is found at the link. If you have found a piece of pottery and would like to identify it, this would be a good place to start.

This site will consist of three main areas: Pottery Basics, Previous Research, and a section called “Series and Types.”

In Pottery Basics the history of pottery use in the state is discussed. Here questions of what pottery means and how it might help us interpret past cultures are introduced. Next dating and distribution are discussed. Analysis techniques and approaches, and the terms used are also presented in hopes that a bit of standardization can be achieved.

“Previous Research" is split into "Previous Research in South Carolina” and "Previous Research in Adjacent States." I have also posted a number of papers, reports and books in Adobe pdf format at this link.

The first section will introduce the important pottery studies that have been conducted in South Carolina. The list is rather short actually. On the other hand there have been literally hundreds of Cultural Resources Management (CRM) projects that have resulted in the discovery of a few sherds. A sample of those reports have been examined, focusing mostly on the counties that have had the least sites recorded to attempt to even out our understanding of distribution. The data provided has been entered in a database to allow distribution plots to be made. David Anderson's 1975 distribution data, and a large database of pottery producing sites at Fort Jackson compiled by Sean Taylor are also included.

“Previous Research in Adjacent States” is a bigger job. The vigorous university programs in North Carolina, Tennessee, Florida and Georgia have produced a number of theses and dissertations, some of which are summarized at the link, The key is determining how they are pertinent to what we find in South Carolina. Some pottery type / series names used in adjacent states have been incorrectly adopted here, yet in other cases, groups such as the Sara, who lived in southern Virginia, are known to have moved here and theoretically they should have brought their ways of making pottery with them.

“Series and Types” is the main purpose of the site. Pottery is one of the most common artifacts we find, and it varies over time, so it can be a useful tool in dating a site or context. Likewise any hand made object reflects the intent of the maker, and thus its culture, so pottery can give us hints about the values and culture of its maker. Many concepts have been used in the past to attempt to bring order to ceramic assemblages. Types, varieties, series, wares and phases are most common. I have used broad ware groups that are both temporally and visually ordered, but mostly the series and type names used by researchers in the state are faithfully introduced.

The bulk of the type descriptions are from the 1995 COSCAPA symposium published in draft form as Indian Pottery of the Carolinas by David Anderson, Chris Judge and Niels Taylor (1996). These descriptions were mostly written by David Anderson and Jane Eastman. Pertinent formal descriptions from other sources are included, but I have also asked a group of contributing scholars to add their comments, and have summarized pertinent discussions as well. Each ware group page will have links to the different series main pages, and these will link to the various types. Photo galleries will be linked from the type pages also. An alphabetical list of the type names used herein are found at the link.

Major Ware Groups by River Drainage / Region

*= New River and Cape Fear as defined by Herbert (2009) to include Deep Creek and Mt. Pleasant

**= Conflates Hanover and Wilmington

***= Conflates Irene, Lamar

****= Conflates Ashley, Jeremy, Wachesaw, Daniel Phase Pee Dee and other historic wares.a

*****= As described by Riggs et al 2008.

?= Pottery with this type description is found in the drainage, but it is unclear whether it should be considered this series.

This effort has been sponsored by the people of Beaufort County, with the support and guidance of the South Carolina Department of Transportation and the Department of Archives and History. Their support is greatly appreciated. Thanks also to the many colleagues who contributed to this effort.