Paipai Pottery Past and Present:
Evolution of an Indigenous Ceramic Tradition
Lee M. Panich and Michael Wilken-Robertson
Abstract
Tizon Brown Ware ceramics were being produced by around AD
1000 in the southern California/northern Baja California region.
Tizon Brown Ware vessels are predominantly undecorated, made
with the paddle-and-anvil technique, and fired in an uncontrolled,
oxidizing environment. Such ceramics are Late Prehistoric period
diagnostics. While archaeologists have distinguished different variants of Tizon Brown pottery, a precise taxonomy of and chronology
for these variants remain elusive. Paipai potters of Santa Catarina,
Baja California, have carried on and transformed a localized variant
of the Tizon Brown ceramic tradition. This ethnoarchaeological
situation presents an unusual opportunity to explore details of ceramic production, use, distribution, and adaptation. Archaeological
studies at Mission Santa Catalina reveal strong ceramic continuities
from precontact times into the colonial period. A geochemical study
of diagnostic sherds from the mission site suggests that most of the
ceramics used by mission neophytes were made from locally available clay. The modern Paipai ceramic tradition reflects continuity
with prehistoric technology and style, yet its economic function and
distribution have changed as hunter-gatherers have been transformed into citizens of a more complex modern world.
Introduction
“It is wonderful to see … how these Indians manage
to manufacture their well-finished earthen pots,” wrote
José de Cañizares, a Spanish soldier with the 1769
Portolá expedition to Alta California. Cañizares was
traveling through Paipai territory near what would
later become the mission site of San Vicente (Thickens and Mollins 1952:344).
Today the Paipai community of Santa Catarina,
Baja California, has the unique distinction of being
home to the longest continuous pottery tradition of
the Californias (Figure 1). Ceramics were important
prehistorically and continue to play a significant role
in the local economy. From beginnings possibly a
thousand years ago, until the past century, locally
made ceramic vessels were essential for cooking,
storage, and ceremonies. Contemporary potters have
transformed traditional ceramics into art objects prized
by collectors and museums in both the United States
and Mexico (Wilken 1987). Ceramic production and
consumption in the mountains of northern Baja California are dynamic processes. In the present paper we
concentrate on two historic periods, the first being that
from 1797 to 1840, when Dominican fathers operated
Mission Santa Catalina, and the second being modern
times, roughly 1960 to the present, when ethnographers have worked closely with the Santa Catarina
Paipai community.1
The historic ceramic assemblage from Mission Santa
Catalina, collected as part of the Proyecto Arqueológico Santa Catarina from 2005 to 2007, is described. A
geochemical provenance study by Panich on diagnostic sherds from the Mission site suggests that most of
the ceramics used by mission neophytes, both common and exotic vessel forms, were made from locally
available clay. It appears that the historic Native
peoples of Santa Catalina drew on precontact ceramic
production technologies while at the same time expanding their repertoire of vessel forms to include new
offerings of both colonial and indigenous inspiration.
We conclude our study with an ethnographic examination of pottery production in Santa Catarina over the
Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly, Volume 48, Numbers 1 and 2
76
past half century, noting how the demand for indigenous ceramics has encouraged growth in this indigenous industry. The Paipai have reinterpreted their
ceramic tradition as they have changed from huntergathers into colonial subjects and finally into active
participants in a globalized cash economy. The dynamic
ceramic history and prehistory of Santa Catarina demonstrate that technological traditions can accommodate
dramatic changes in the cultural significance of pottery
even as the underlying technology remains constant.
Panich and Wilken-Robertson
Regional Ceramic Context
The area around Santa Catarina is near the southernmost extent of an archaeological ceramic series called
Tizon Brown Ware, which was produced by the ancestors of the modern Yuman speaking groups of this
region. Scholars have traditionally placed the introduction of pottery into the Lower Colorado River Valley and the surrounding areas at about AD 600, which
marked the beginning of the Patayan culture period
Figure 1. Location of the Paipai community of Santa Catarina and other locations in Baja California.
PCAS Quarterly, 48(1&2)
Paipai Pottery: Evolution of an Indigenous Ceramic Tradition
(Rogers 1945; Waters 1982). In addition to the Lower
Colorado River Valley, some of the first distinctly
Patayan sites are located in the Gila River Valley and
around ancient Lake Cahuilla, which was forming in
the Salton Trough during this time. Patayan diagnostics are brown or buff ceramic wares, cremation of the
dead, and small projectile points. By AD 1000 pottery
had spread throughout the area, especially into the
Peninsular Ranges of southern California and northern
Baja California (Hildebrand and Hagstrum 1995:91).
While the exact origins of the Patayan people and their
pottery tradition are still being debated, most archaeologists believe that ceramic technology in northern
Baja California and southern Alta California likely
spread westward from the Hohokam culture area in
Arizona (Schroeder 1979; Waters 1982; Shaul and
Andresen 1989; Shaul and Hill 1998; Shackley 2004;
Beck and Neff 2007).
Tizon Brown Ware and Lower Colorado Buff Ware are
the two main ceramic wares from the Patayan culture
area, and they are usually distinguished by differences
in clay raw materials. Tizon Brown Ware vessels are
typically manufactured from residual clays found in
local mountain ranges, while Lower Colorado Buff
Wares are made from alluvial clays found in the
lowland regions closer to the Colorado River (Hildebrand et al. 2002:121). The distribution of Tizon Brown
Ware stretches from the upland regions of northwestern Arizona through southern California and into
northern Baja California. Generally speaking, Tizon
Brown Ware consists of undecorated vessels that are
thinned with the paddle-and-anvil technique and fired
in an uncontrolled, oxidizing environment (Dobyns
and Euler 1958; May 1978; Van Camp 1979). Nearly
all published archaeological examples are undecorated, but some sherds do show evidence of painting,
incising, or punctation. The indigenous people of the
region developed a wide array of ceramic forms, including storage jars, cooking pots, and serving bowls,
many of which have restricted geographic ranges
and serve as temporal markers (Rogers 1936, 1945).
77
Archaeologists have distinguished various subtypes of
Tizon Brown Ware, but in general a precise taxonomy
remains elusive (Dobyns and Euler 1958; Euler 1959;
Koerper and Flint 1978; Koerper et al. 1978; May
1978, 2001; Van Camp 1979; Lyneis 1988).
Among the various Tizon Brown Ware types that have
been proposed are historic variants from the rancho
and mission periods (Evans 1969; May 1973, 1978).
May (1978), for example, identified a Mission Series
of Tizon Brown Ware comprised of types found at
Mission San Buenaventura in Alta California and
Mission Santo Tomás in Baja California. Many of the
Mission Series ceramics show evidence of Europeanderived morphological innovations such as spouts,
slipping, flat bottoms, and lug handles, leading May
(1978:9) to suggest that mission neophytes produced pottery specifically to augment the supplies of
imported colonial ceramics at the region’s missions.
While there is ample evidence that Indian neophytes
produced pottery at mission sites throughout the Californias, including areas without precontact ceramic
traditions, indigenous ceramics produced during
the colonial period varied widely (May 1973, 1978;
Tuohy and Strawn 1989; Peelo 2011). Some mission
pottery represents a significant departure from prehistoric ceramic technologies and may reflect pottery
production mandated by colonial authorities. Yet, in
other cases the pottery produced by mission neophytes appears to have been intended primarily for
their own domestic use. The classification of mission
period indigenous ceramics is further complicated in
areas such as the Sierra Juárez of northern Baja California where local peoples produced ceramics before
the arrival of Spanish missionaries and where Spanish
colonial control was not as strong as in other areas of
the Californias.
Relatively little archaeological research has been
conducted on the native ceramics found in the mountains of northern Baja California, but ceramic analysis
conducted in the 1950s indicates that Tizon Brown
PCAS Quarterly, 48(1&2)
78
Ware from the Santa Catarina area cannot be readily
distinguished from that of other areas in northern Baja
California and southern California on the basis of
color, thickness, temper, or paste (Hicks 1959; McKusick and Gilman 1959; Meighan 1959). A previous
comparison of indigenous pottery from the site of
Mission Santa Catalina with a sample of prehistoric
ceramics from the same area suggests little basis for
creating new ceramic subtypes for either prehistoric
or mission period ceramics from the region around
Santa Catarina (McKusick and Gilman 1959). Based
on the research conducted as part of this project, we
are similarly hesitant to assign the predominantly
brown ware sherds of the mission period ceramic
assemblage to any particular type or subtype without
more detailed study. Future work would ideally include a combination of petrographic analysis of paste
and temper with a geochemical analysis that would
include archaeological and ethnographic ceramics of
known provenance.
Indeed, combined geochemical and petrographic
studies in southern California and the Lower Colorado River region have been successful in determining the provenance of undecorated native ceramics
(Koerper et al. 1978; Hildebrand et al. 2002; Beck
and Neff 2007). Hildebrand et al. (2002), for example, used optical petrography and neutron activation analysis to demonstrate a distinct east to west
distribution of indigenous ceramic types in southern
California. Their study included two sites located
in the Peninsular Ranges of southern San Diego
County, and their analysis demonstrated that roughly
80 percent of the ceramic artifacts from both sites
were from residual mountain clays, while the remaining 20 percent or so were from the Salton Trough
and/or the Lower Colorado River region (Hildebrand
et al. 2002:133–134). In sum, the majority (about 80
percent) of the ceramics appear to have been local to
the mountains, although a significant amount of pottery from the lowland region was also being used in
these upland sites.
PCAS Quarterly, 48(1&2)
Panich and Wilken-Robertson
The Mission Santa Catalina Ceramic Assemblage
The indigenous ceramic assemblage from Mission
Santa Catalina includes 12,972 objects, with a combined weight of 47.2 kg, collected during systematic
surface collection and excavation between 2005 and
2007. The surface collection was conducted across
the entirety of the primary site area (roughly 100 m x
100 m), including the mission quadrangle as well as
areas directly adjacent to it. Excavations took place
primarily in two middens representing neophyte
habitation areas. These are located along the southeast and northeastern walls of the mission compound.
Additional excavations tested deposits within the
mission itself. The overwhelming majority of the ceramic artifacts collected from the site (n=11,737) are
nondiagnostic body sherds. The bulk of the present
analysis is accordingly limited to a sample of diagnostic rim and decorated sherds that have recordable
attributes.2
Ceramic Forms
Some generalizations can be made about the vessels used by the region’s inhabitants on the eve of
European colonization. As other researchers have
noted, jars (often included in the same general
category as cooking pots or ollas) and bowls were
the most common vessel forms made by the Kumeyaay and their neighbors to the south (Rogers 1936;
Drucker 1937, 1941; Treganza 1942; Van Camp
1979). Although such vessels were mainly utilitarian, they varied widely through time and across the
region. Other forms common in prehistory include
parching trays, scoops, pipes, and effigies, many of
which have strong correlations with certain areas of
the broader Patayan region. The historic indigenous
ceramics from Mission Santa Catalina correspond
well with those from late precontact contexts, yet innovation was certainly taking place. Some forms and
elements introduced by the Spanish missionaries and
soldiers are present in the mission assemblage as are
79
Paipai Pottery: Evolution of an Indigenous Ceramic Tradition
decorative motifs that perhaps indicate the presence
of or contact with other Native peoples from across
the region.
Jars and Bowls
Jars and bowls make up the vast majority of native
ceramic assemblages, including that from Mission
Santa Catalina. Among the Kumeyaay and neighboring groups, large and medium jars were used for the
storage of dry foodstuffs as well as other perishable
items. Small jars may have been used to store water
or food during hunting or gathering trips, and water
ollas typically have a small orifice. Ollas were also
used for cooking, with the cooking pot resembling a
smaller version of storage vessel. Most jars and ollas
have recurved rims, a globular body, and a rounded
base (Rogers 1936:18–19; Drucker 1941:108, 177;
Van Camp 1979:54–55). Bowls served a number of
purposes, with large deep vessels used for cooking
and shallower ones used for serving. Two main bowl
forms exist, those with recurved rims and those with
direct rims (Van Camp 1979:56). For the assemblage
from Mission Santa Catalina, bowls were the most
prevalent form, a pattern consistent with prehistoric
ceramic assemblages from the broader region (Rogers
1936; May 2001) (Table 1).
Introduced Ceramic Forms
Only nine rim sherds from unique vessels could
be assigned to the plate category. Two other sherds
represent fragments of two distinct plate foot rings.
Although ceramic parching trays would have been
used in the region, the vessels categorized as plates
here are shallower (e.g., Treganza 1942:Figure 10E).
Interestingly, all of the plates cluster with the local or
secondary groups in the XRF study discussed below,
but none of the plate fragments were found inside the
mission walls. Five possible loop handle fragments
(excluding scoop handles, to be discussed below) were
found during archaeological work at the mission site,
including two phallic handles. Handles are not a common attribute of indigenous vessels in this area and,
like the plates, may represent an element introduced
by the Spanish (Treganza 1942:159). Although these
artifacts indicate that new forms and elements were
being employed by Native potters at Mission Santa
Catalina, they were apparently not widely adopted.
Effigy Scoop Handles
An interesting ceramic artifact excavated at the Mission Santa Catalina site is a scoop handle bearing
the classic coffee bean eye motif. A second similar
Table 1. Ceramic Forms from Mission Santa Catalina and Lake Cahuilla.
Lake Cahuilla
Mission Santa Catalinaa
Count
Percentage
May (2001:51) %
Bowl
108
56.3
62.3
Jar/Olla
60
31.3
32.9
Plate
12
6.3
0.3
Scoop
7
3.6
2.3
Pipe
2
1.0
0.6
Disk
2
1.0
0.6
Bead
1
0.5
<0.3
Form
Data from Santa Catalina represent minimum numbers of vessels for each category and
do not include sherds of unknown vessel form that were included in the EDXRF study.
a
PCAS Quarterly, 48(1&2)
80
artifact was noted in the collection of a Paipai family in Santa Catarina (Figure 2). Known as “quail
heads” among the Mohave, these zoomorphic or
anthropomorphic effigy handles are characterized
by a curving, parrot’s beak-like nose and incised,
ovoid eyes that are similar in size and shape to coffee beans (Kroeber and Harner 1955:9; Van Camp
1979:56). The effigy handles from Santa Catalina fit
most closely with the Type II Effigy Scoops defined
by Hedges (1973:22). The eyes are placed on the
rim with the incisions parallel to it, and a large nose
divides them. Owing to the small amount of vessel
body remaining attached, it is unclear whether the
handle’s face is oriented toward the interior of the
scoop, as in Hedges’s Type II, or to the exterior. If
the latter, this would place them in a separate, undefined category (see also Panich 2009:199–202).
Three main concentrations of scoops with coffee bean eye effigy handles can be noted; these are
the Lower Colorado River, the western margins
of the Salton Sea, and eastern San Diego County
and adjacent areas of Baja California (Hedges
1973:8). Although a few scoops analyzed by Hedges
(1973) were made from residual mountain (brown
ware) clays, the vast majority of the scoops were
Panich and Wilken-Robertson
constructed from alluvial (buff ware) clays. This
information linking effigy scoops and the coffee bean
eye motif to the Lower Colorado River area corresponds well to that provided by other scholars. It is
thought that the motif itself may have originated with
the Hohokam (Gifford 1933:330; Drucker 1937:22;
1941:108; Rogers 1945:188; Haury 1976; Koerper
and Hedges 1996). The scoop fragment from Mission
Santa Catalina is, at least for now, the farthest south
that the coffee bean eye element has been archaeologically documented within the Californias (Ken
Hedges, personal communication 2006). Significantly, the scoop handle from the mission site is of Tizon
Brown Ware and clusters with the local group in our
EDXRF provenance analysis. As such, it suggests an
interesting connection to the peoples some distance
away, either those living on the Colorado River or
perhaps in the northern Peninsular Ranges, and it
offers tantalizing evidence that the historic mission
neophyte potters incorporated new ceramic elements
with both native and colonial antecedents.
Other Ceramic Forms
Our excavations at Mission Santa Catalina also
yielded a variety of ceramic artifacts attesting to
Figure 2. Effigy scoop handles. Note
“coffee bean” eyes on either side of
generalized nose or beak. Left: Example from Mission Santa Catalina.
Right: Example in private collection
in Santa Catarina.
PCAS Quarterly, 48(1&2)
81
Paipai Pottery: Evolution of an Indigenous Ceramic Tradition
daily practices beyond cooking and storage. Three
potsherds had been ground into a circle and perforated. The diameters of these disks range between
4 cm and 5 cm. Similar artifacts found in southern
California and northern Baja California have been
referred to as spindle whorls. Although weaving is
not known to have been practiced in the region prior
to European colonization, these artifacts could still
have been used for twining yucca or agave fibers for
non-textile applications. These objects have been
alternatively identified as jar lids, ornaments, or gaming pieces (Treganza 1942:159; Van Camp 1979:60;
May 2001:51). Meigs (1939:43), for example,
indicated that the Kiliwa used modified potsherds to
play a spinning top game called j(us)ká pój, or “olla
broken.” The pottery disk used as a spinning top was
also noted by other researchers (Drucker 1937:24;
1941:130; Soto 1961:34). One Paipai informant similarly suggested that the pottery disks recovered from
the site were used for a spinning top game similar to
the one enjoyed by the Kiliwa (Panich 2009:206).
Other ceramic artifacts included one fragment of a
spherical ceramic bead and three sherds that appear
to be from miniature bowls. Little is known about
the use of miniature vessels. Van Camp (1979:56)
suggested that they may have played a role in the
Keruk ceremony or simply may have been toys. Two
small, triangular-shaped objects were recovered that
are likely fragments from the handles of bow pipes,
which are often found in Kumeyaay assemblages
(Rogers 1936:19, 50; Van Camp 1979:60). Hohenthal
(2001:169) suggested that these were common as
far south as Paipai territory. Ethnographic information from the region is in general agreement that
tobacco was smoked casually as well as for ritual
and medicinal purposes (Lightfoot et al. 2009:348).
The presence of ceramic smoking pipes at the mission is yet another indication that precontact pottery
technologies and associated daily practices continued
into historic times.
Discussion of Ceramic Forms
The ceramic forms present in the assemblage from
Mission Santa Catalina include most of the vessel
forms and other ceramic objects noted in prehistoric
assemblages for the region as well as in early ethnographic works (Rogers 1936; Meigs 1939; Treganza
1942; Van Camp 1979; Hohenthal 2001). Indeed,
the percentages of identifiable vessels collected from
the mission site are nearly identical to those reported
by May (2001:51) for an assemblage of rim and
diagnostic sherds from a collection comprised of
samples from 134 sites along the ancient shores of
Lake Cahuilla, an area that was on the border between
Kumeyaay and Cahuilla groups (Table 1). With the
notable exception of plates, the ceramic assemblage
from Mission Santa Catalina varies little from that
of groups living in the same general region during
precontact times. This may not be surprising given
that few colonial ceramics (of European, Mexican,
or Asian manufacture) were found at the site, but the
diversity of forms from Santa Catalina suggests strong
continuities in ceramic manufacture and use.
The XRF provenance data show that very little difference exists between the local group and the secondary group in terms of proportions of vessel forms or
other ceramic artifacts. For both geochemical groups,
bowls are the most prevalent, followed by jars or ollas, as well as plates. No plates were noted among the
non-local ceramics, a trend that makes sense given
the fact that plates or flat vessels were not common in
precontact times. While the total number of non-local
sherds is small, there is a weak preference for jars/ollas over bowls in that category that may be related to
their possible use as storage vessels during seasonal
movements. Other ceramic forms are also distributed
relatively evenly between the two main groups, and it
appears that clay from the two local sources was not
preferred for the manufacture of any one particular
type of ceramic object.
PCAS Quarterly, 48(1&2)
82
Decorations and Modifications
Panich and Wilken-Robertson
Gilman (1959:55) found only two incised sherds and
one punctate sherd.
Painting, Incising, Impressing
Today, Paipai potters rarely employ decorations such
as painting and incising on their wares, and this pattern
seems to have strong antecedents in precontact and
early historic times. Only three sherds from Mission
Santa Catalina collected as part of the current project
show evidence of painting, specifically, red paint on
the exterior of the vessel. Pottery displaying red paint
is most common along the Colorado River, but it is
also occasionally found in the mountains of northern
Baja California and southern California (Rogers 1936;
Treganza 1942:159; Van Camp 1979:61). McKusick
and Gilman (1959:55) collected five rim sherds decorated with red paint from Mission Santa Catalina and
the nearby habitation site that they excavated.
We collected nine incised sherds of two main categories, bowls with incised or notched rims and vessels
with body incisions. Treganza (1942:158–159) noted
notched rims in both desert and mountain sites, and
Rogers (1936:42) and Van Camp (1979:66, Figure
12a) also noted the presence of notched rims among
Kumeyaay assemblages. While uncommon, vessels with incisions, fingernail incisions, and punctate
designs all occur in the general area (Van Camp
1979:63). In their excavations at Mission Santa
Catalina and the Cerrito Blanco site, McKusick and
Another interesting decorative motif appears to be the
result of either basketry or maize cob impressions. Five
sherds from a single plate were collected that bear a
distinctive impression, which appears to be either that
of a maize cob that was rolled across the surface of the
vessel while the clay was still wet or that from basketry
perhaps used as a mold (Figure 3). Basketry impressions are not uncommon in northern Baja California and
southern California (Rogers 1936:8), and this may be
the most plausible explanation. Yet, the fact that the impressions extend all the way to the rim suggests that the
marks were an intentional design element rather than
an incidental effect of the production process. If future
work shows these sherds to be unequivocally cobmarked, they would represent an intriguing example of
a new vessel form, the plate, decorated with a design
produced by a newly introduced food crop, maize.
Rim Lip Finishes
The rim sherds collected from Mission Santa Catalina
can be characterized by four rim lip styles: coiled,
rounded, beveled, and extruded (Figure 4). These
same finishes have been noted elsewhere under different names (e.g., Van Camp 1979:58), but for the sake
of consistency, we follow those put forth by McKusick
and Gilman (1959:Figure 3) in their study of ceramics
Figure 3. Maize cob or basketry impressed sherd
from Mission Santa Catalina.
PCAS Quarterly, 48(1&2)
83
Paipai Pottery: Evolution of an Indigenous Ceramic Tradition
a
b
c
from Mission Santa Catalina and the nearby Cerrito
Blanco site.
It is difficult to parse the patterning that exists among
the rim lips, and as McKusick and Gilman (1959:52)
noted, a single vessel may bear more than one kind of
rim lip finish. Nonetheless, one trend may be worth
noting, and that is the variable distribution of rims
with beveled lips, which would have required the use
of a blade or a thin cord to slice away excess clay. In
both studies beveled lips were most common in areas
from within the mission quadrangle. The precontact
Cerrito Blanco site, moreover, has a significantly
lower percentage of beveled rim lips than any of the
mission contexts. This may suggest that beveled lips
were preferred by the Spaniards and/or higher ranking
neophytes who may have lived within the mission.
Early Historic Ceramics
The indigenous ceramic assemblage from historic
Mission Santa Catalina suggests strong continuities of
practice from precontact times into the colonial period. Although some new forms appear and other forms
may have been elaborated, for example, with the addition of handles or the increased prevalence of beveled
rims, the vast majority of ceramics correspond to the
precontact ceramics of the region. Some evidence also
exists for the incorporation of native forms, such as effigy scoops, that were not common in the area around
Santa Catalina prior to mission times. A few exotic
wares were noted in the analysis of design motifs and
in the EDXRF provenance study, but the great majority of analyzed ceramics are of clays either from the
mission site or from a source only 5 km distant.
d
Figure 4. Rim lip finishes. (a): coiled; (b): rounded;
(c): beveled; (d): extruded. After McKusick and
Gilman (1959).
The mission period was the beginning of a new
chapter in the ceramic tradition of the Sierra Juárez.
The ceramic assemblage from the historic Mission
Santa Catalina resembles that of precontact sites in the
broader border region (May 2001). This strong ceramic technological continuity was also coupled with experimentation and amalgamation. Mission neophytes
certainly faced many constraints, strict social controls
and a rigid labor schedule to name just two, but the
ceramic artifacts from the site suggest at least one area
of material culture and social life where Native people
had ample opportunity to continue important yet
dynamic traditions. The mission was home to diverse
peoples from throughout the region, and the ceramic
evidence suggests that these families and individuals
maintained ties to their relatives in the hinterlands at
the same time that they forged new bonds with other
indigenous people living at Santa Catalina. The Native
people of Mission Santa Catalina brought with them
their own personal, familial, and regional approaches
to ceramic production that stretched back many centuries. This diversity, combined with a local supply
of high quality raw clay material, allowed mission
neophytes and their descendants to create a ceramic
tradition with deep roots in the prehistoric past while
simultaneously adapting to new social settings.
EDXRF Source Analysis
Methods and Sampling Strategy
Chemical source analysis was conducted on a sample
of pottery sherds from the Santa Catalina Mission site
using a Niton XLt-793W portable energy dispersive
PCAS Quarterly, 48(1&2)
84
X-ray fluorescence (EDXRF) spectrometer. Chemical
data are provided in parts per million (ppm) for a total
of 17 elements, although only eleven elements were
consistently detectable by the instrument in this study.
These eleven elements are: Sb, Sn, Ag, Sr, Rb, Pb,
Zn, Cu, Co, Fe, and Mn. Unfortunately, this list does
not cover the full suite of elements usually used for
ceramic provenance analysis (Hildebrand et al. 2002;
Morgenstein and Redmount 2005:1616). The use of
the portable XRF unit, moreover, will limit the direct
quantitative comparability of the raw data from this
study with other geochemical provenance analyses
conducted with desktop instruments. These limitations notwithstanding, the portable EDXRF instrument
proved ideal for non-destructive geochemical analysis
in Mexico. It should also be very valuable in international contexts where ceramic or geological materials
might not otherwise be analyzed owing to the restrictions of special export permits.
The archaeological ceramic sample analyzed as part
of the EDXRF study included 239 artifacts. The 1,213
total rim sherds collected from the site were initially
sorted by size. Those that met the minimum requirements for analysis with the portable XRF unit (roughly 1 x 2 cm) were included in the preliminary sample.
In order to limit the sample to unique vessels, these
rim sherds were then further examined on the basis
of vessel form, orifice diameter, wall and rim thickness, evidence of charring, as well as any decorative
treatments. A total of 220 rim sherds were eventually
selected for inclusion in the XRF study. The other 19
ceramic artifacts include one ceramic bead, one pipe
fragment, four ceramic disks, seven potential handle
fragments, and six body sherds with diagnostic decorative features such as painting or incising.
Chemical analysis was conducted using the Delta
Graph software package to generate ternary plots
and SPSS statistical software to determine clusters.3
The ternary plot (Figure 5) shows the relationship of
each ceramic fragment to one another based on three
PCAS Quarterly, 48(1&2)
Panich and Wilken-Robertson
elements: strontium, rubidium, and iron. Both analyses suggest that most of the ceramic fragments in the
sample have a very similar chemical signature, grouping into a large primary cluster (n=190). A secondary
grouping of archaeological sherds (n=38) can also
be noted, and this group may represent vessels made
from another clay source in the general vicinity of the
mission site. A very small number of sherds (n=11)
also appear as outliers in both representations of the
XRF data, and thus they can be tentatively classified
as non-local.
Four clay samples representing two distinct sources in
the community of Santa Catarina were also analyzed
as part of this study. Two raw material samples were
collected from the clay source currently used by local
potters (Clay Source 1). Two other samples were collected from a clay source (Clay Source 2) that is located roughly 5 km east of the mission site and that was
mentioned in two previous ethnographic accounts of
pottery production in Santa Catarina (Michelsen 1972;
Wilken 1987). Paipai potters no longer use this outlying source. A total of 13 pots purchased from eight
different potters in Santa Catarina were also included
in the EDXRF analysis. These pots, which were all
made with clay from Clay Source 1, represent samples
from nearly all the women making pottery in the community today. As seen in Figure 5, the modern pottery
samples all fit into the primary cluster of ceramic
sherds collected from the mission site, reinforcing the
idea that the ceramics in this particular group were
in fact locally produced from clays available near the
mission site. The two raw material samples from the
clay source employed by modern potters also fit into
this primary group. The raw material samples from the
ethnographic clay source, however, do not cluster with
the modern ceramics or with the primary group of archaeological ceramics. These two clay samples instead
cluster with the secondary group of archaeological
samples. Based on the strong correlation between the
modern pots and the clay used to construct them, it
may be possible that the archaeological sherds from
85
Paipai Pottery: Evolution of an Indigenous Ceramic Tradition
Figure 5 Clay source analysis. Ternary plot showing results of EDXRF study. Values for iron and rubidium were adjusted to
facilitate presentation of data.
this secondary group were made from clay gathered at
the outlying clay source.
EDXRF Data Interpretation
The EDXRF data from Mission Santa Catalina are
interesting when compared to the ceramic provenance
data collected by Hildebrand et al. (2002). While
their sample size for the mountain sites was relatively
small (n=30), Hildebrand and his colleagues offered a
picture of ceramic source variability for Late Prehistoric southern California Kumeyaay sites that may
serve as a general proxy for precontact sites in the
vicinity of Mission Santa Catalina. The primary, local
cluster of ceramics from the mission site represents 79
percent of the total sample, which corresponds well
to the 80 percent figure for local ceramics found in
mountain sites in the Hildebrand et al. (2002) study.
Yet, the secondary cluster from Santa Catalina comprises approximately 16 percent of the sample, and
it too includes ceramic artifacts that macroscopically
PCAS Quarterly, 48(1&2)
86
Panich and Wilken-Robertson
appear to be brown wares and that may have been produced from a clay source only 5 km from the mission
study site. The remaining 5 percent of sherds from
Santa Catalina appear to be made from non-local clays
based on the geochemical analysis. This percentage is
much lower than those shown for the mountain sites
(Hildebrand et al. 2002). While more comparative
studies are needed to define regional and temporal patterns, the XRF data from Santa Catalina nonetheless
suggest that the mission site may contain less non-local pottery than precontact sites in the region.
southern California, the Colorado River region, and
southwestern Arizona (Hinton and Watahomigie
1984). Strong linguistic ties between the Paipai and
the Upland Pai peoples, such as the Yavapai, Hualapai,
and Havasupai of Arizona, have led some researchers to suggest that the Paipai might be fairly recent
arrivals to the mountains of the northern Baja California peninsula (Winter 1967). The Paipai themselves
believe that their ancestors came from the northeast.
The Arizona Pai also retain oral tradition of a group of
Pai that migrated to Baja California (Mixco 2006).
A related pattern at Mission Santa Catalina is the near
total lack of ceramics characterized macroscopically
as Lower Colorado Buff Ware. While it is possible
that some buff ware sherds are among the many thousands of body sherds collected from the site, only one
artifact macroscopically identifiable as buff ware (a
painted body sherd) was among the rim and diagnostic
sherds chosen for the XRF study. Not surprisingly,
it did not cluster with either the local or secondary
group.4 McKusick and Gilman (1959) in their study of
ceramics from Mission Santa Catalina similarly classified the entire ceramic assemblage as Tizon Brown
Ware.
In historic times a permanent settlement of Paipai was
located on the western margin of the lower delta of the
Colorado River in the territory of the Cucapá (Kelly
1977), possibly a remnant link between the Pai peoples of Arizona and Baja California. Recent exchanges
between the Baja California Paipai and the Arizona
Pai groups have corroborated the existence of strong
linguistic and cultural ties between the groups. The
chronology of a Pai migration into Baja California,
however, remains unclear (Mixco 2006). Laylander
(1997, 2007) has explored a variety of scenarios, most
of them involving migrations south into the peninsula
but also including the possibility of a Baja California
Pai homeland.
This pattern is notable, especially considering the
presence of buff ware sherds in the mountain sites
discussed by Hildebrand et al. (2002) as well as the
fact that many of the mission neophytes likely had
strong kinship and social relationships with people
living near the Colorado River (Panich 2010). It may
be that buff ware pottery was rare even in precontact
times, since McKusick and Gilman (1959) also did not
note buff ware sherds for the ceramics recovered from
Cerrito Blanco, a prehistoric processing site roughly
20 km west of Santa Catarina.
Ethnolinguistic Background
Paipai belongs to the Yuman language family, which
also includes languages from northern Baja California,
PCAS Quarterly, 48(1&2)
While Santa Catarina is principally thought of as a
Paipai community, it also home to speakers of the
Ku’alh language, a southern variant of Tipai, also
known as Kumiai/Kumeyaay, or Diegueño (Owen
1963; Michelsen 1977; Mixco 2006). The Ku’alh have
intermarried with Paipai speakers and except for their
language today are ethnically indistinguishable from
the Paipai.5 The Ku’alh may represent the remnants
of the southern Tipai speaking peoples who lived
in the area before the arrival of the Paipai; linguist
Mauricio Mixco (2006) pointed out that many of the
place names still used in Santa Catarina come from the
Ku’alh language. The question of whether the local
pottery tradition was originally associated with Paipai
or Ku’alh culture, or whether it arrived after their
87
Paipai Pottery: Evolution of an Indigenous Ceramic Tradition
admixture, is unclear. It is worth noting, however, that
most of the potters interviewed by ethnographers over
the past 50 years spoke Ku’alh as their first language
(Wilken 1987). On the other hand, the association
of the Paipai with Colorado River peoples and the
Upland Pai groups might suggest the arrival of ceramics technology to the peninsula along with the Paipai
migration. Future research in northern Baja California
and adjacent regions may shed light on these important questions.
Baja California’s Paipai people today live in two
federally recognized indigenous communities of the
northern peninsula, Santa Catarina and San Isidoro
(Hinton and Owen 1957; Owen 1962; Alvarez Williams 2004). Most of the current population (approximately 400) and all modern potters live in the western
part of Santa Catarina’s 68,000 ha, near the 1797
Santa Catalina Dominican Mission site (Wilken-Robertson 2004). According to Paipai cultural authorities interviewed by twentieth century ethnographers,
precontact Paipai lineages, called shimuls, inhabited
a territory stretching across the peninsula from the
Pacific coast near San Vicente through the southern
Sierra Juárez to the desert lands of the lower Colorado
River Delta (Owen 1962; Hohenthal 2001). Like other
Late Prehistoric peoples of the northern peninsula,
they were seasonally mobile bands of hunter-gatherers, exploiting a variety of environments on their
annual round (Hicks 1963; Michelsen 1977). Ceramics, bows and arrows, plant fiber cordage, and carrying
nets facilitating the foraging economy were already
well developed before the arrival of the Spanish missionaries (Rogers 1936; Michelsen 1974; Laylander
1987; Moore 2006).
The Historic Mission
In the 1790s Spanish officials searching for potential
mission sites with access to the Colorado River desert
found several rancherías, or settlements of indigenous people, living in the vicinity of the mountain
springs where the Dominicans would eventually
establish the Santa Catalina Mission (Arrillaga
1969). The groups encountered were bands inhabiting the area during the summer and autumn harvests
of agave, pine nuts, sweet acorn, prickly pear, yucca
fruits, and other plant resources. It is unlikely that
they would have stayed in the high elevation area
(approximately 1,200 m asl) through the cold winter
(Hicks 1963; Michelsen 1977).
During the mission’s 43 years of existence, Paipai,
Ku’alh/Tipai, and probably Cucapá speakers from a
broad area of northern Baja California were brought
to the mission or influenced by it. The missionaries
attempted to introduce a sedentary way of life based on
agriculture and livestock (Panich 2009). Mission Santa
Catalina eventually had a large and relatively stable
neophyte population, with roughly 250 Native people
attached to it in any given year (Meigs 1935:120; Nieser 1998; Panich 2010). Some people lived as neophytes
in the immediate vicinity of the mission, while others
maintained limited or no contact with the mission as
they attempted to continue their hunting and gathering lifeways in an ever shrinking territory (Magaña
Mancillas 1997). One aspect of indigenous culture that
continued in spite of the tremendous changes of the
mission period was ceramic technology.
Modern Paipai Potters
The Paipai of Santa Catarina, the direct descendants
of Mission Santa Catalina’s neophyte population,
continue to make pottery. While some aspects of the
contemporary tradition are ethnoarchaeological and
reflect continuity with prehistoric ceramic technology,
manufacture, and stylistic preferences, other aspects
such as economic function and distribution are completely new. These are responses to the many dramatic
changes faced by Paipai potters since the demise of
the mission. The role of pottery within Paipai culture
and society has also changed since the middle of the
nineteenth century.
PCAS Quarterly, 48(1&2)
88
After the destruction of the mission in 1840 and with
the establishment of an ever more sedentary way of
life, livestock production and, to a lesser degree, agriculture became increasingly important to the Paipai
economy. For the last century and a half many Paipai
have also made a living outside of the community
working as wage laborers for neighboring ranches, in
mines during Baja California’s 1860–1880 gold rush,
and in seasonal agricultural projects (Owen 1962;
Goldbaum 1984). Today, livestock and agriculture are
just part of a diversified economy; many Paipai also
make a living extracting natural resources such as
yucca and firewood for sale to outsiders, working for
state run road maintenance and other rural community
development projects, teaching in the local school, or
manufacturing and selling traditional handcrafts such
as pottery (Wilken-Robertson 2004).
Throughout these changing circumstances Paipai
potters have found many ways to adapt their ceramic
skills even as pottery’s economic function has been
transformed. Due to their isolated location, their
marginal economic status, and possibly to cultural
preferences, the Paipai continued producing pottery
for domestic use until metal, glass, and plastic substitutes and non-indigenous ceramics became common
by the mid-twentieth century. Even after that time
certain forms such as water ollas have continued to
be prized as superior in function to exotic wares. The
local demand for pottery manufactured for domestic
use, however, declined with increased access to wares
made from new materials (Wade 2004).
The mining period brought a huge influx of prospectors to Baja California and in particular to the nearby
town of El Alamo, where many local Indians were
also employed (Chaput et al. 1992). Paipai pottery was
undoubtedly a valuable asset on the isolated mining
frontier; one of us (MW-R) was shown an antique
ceramic gold pan in Santa Catarina. During the ranching period and well into the twentieth century, some
potters would make vessels for sale or trade to mestizo
PCAS Quarterly, 48(1&2)
Panich and Wilken-Robertson
ranchers, as documented by archaeologist Sue Wade.
Wade (2004) noted that the prehistoric trading tradition facilitated the historic transformation of pottery
from local, utilitarian contexts into a valuable trade
item as the influx of travelers, ethnographers, collectors, and other visitors began in the early twentieth
century.
Documentation of the regional pottery tradition began
with the work of Malcolm Rogers (1936) and Perveril
Meigs (1939). Rogers’s ethnoarchaeological field
work was carried out in 1928 with a southern California Kumeyaay woman, Rosa Lopez (Owas Hilmawa)
at Manzanita, California. Rogers detailed the process
of pottery manufacture in ten steps. Also in 1928 but
further south, Peveril Meigs (1939) described the
pottery manufacturing process of a Paipai woman
who lived in the Kiliwa community of Arroyo Leon.
In 1936 he interviewed and photographed Kumiai
potter Maria Ja’tám at the settlement of Manteca, Baja
California (Meigs 1974). Thirty years later Ralph
Michelsen (1972) photographed Paipai potter Petra
Higuera making ceramics in Santa Catarina. WilkenRobertson (Wilken 1987) studied the next generation
of Paipai potters, many of whom were also documented in detail by Campbell (1999).
These ethnographic descriptions were made when
pottery was already a valuable item in a cash economy.
Meigs’ (1939) account from his 1928 fieldwork mentions that “peddlers who buy pots for 25 cents each for
the Ensenada tourist market complain that the Indians
are so conservative that they won’t make decorations
to enhance the salability of their wares.” Potter Maria
Ja’tám offered her pots for sale to Meigs (1974) during
his 1936 fieldwork, but the researcher at first declined
the offer. Later her relative Abram walked two miles
to Meigs’s camp to offer some small pots and an agave
fiber net for sale; these were traded for a blanket and
some old clothes. Rogers (1936) and Michelsen (1972)
purchased sets of pottery from potters during their fieldwork, some of which are now in museum collections.
Paipai Pottery: Evolution of an Indigenous Ceramic Tradition
89
As it became better known, collectors, researchers, and
tourists shaped the demand for Indian pottery, leading
to changes in both form and function (Wade 2004).
skills at U.S. Indian reservations (Figure 7). The once
isolated potters have become well-known instructors
among related tribes, state parks, and universities. In
some cases the Paipai have been able to identify clay
sources within the U.S. tribes’ localities, clays which
have subsequently been processed and successfully
fired. The potters find that not only their products but
also their knowledge and skills are valuable export
items, and at a much wider scope than in the past. As
Paipai pots appear on eBay, the global market for authentic indigenous arts leads to new patterns of distribution of Tizon Brown Ware. Through a balancing act
between the value added concept of traditional Paipai
pottery and the creativity of the artists in responding to
the demands of the market, the “well-finished earthen
pots” described by Cañizares in 1769 have managed,
for now, to survive into the twenty-first century.
Today, buyers often select flat-bottomed pots with
colorful fire clouding to be used as art objects on
coffee tables. Some collectors seek only the most
traditional shapes, while casual buyers often prefer
more innovative designs. Potters have begun signing
their work, scratching their initials or “brand” onto
the base, as they have found it improves sales. Artistic
innovation is rewarded; potter Daria Mariscal has
developed novel shapes that have become her trademark, although these are quickly imitated by others
(Figure 6). Mariscal still uses a paddle and an anvil,
and when teaching students to process clay in the old
way, she uses a metate and mano; however, at home
her husband has rigged up a clay grinding contraption
using a washing machine motor.
Conclusion
Since 1992, U.S. Yuman groups who have lost their
pottery tradition have invited the Paipai to teach their
The community of Santa Catarina and its associated
archaeological sites offer a unique opportunity to
Figure 6. Paipai potter Daria Mariscal displays
examples of her work.
Figure 7. Paipai potter Tirsa Flores and a group of students
from the Yavapai Prescott Indian Tribe prepare to fire their
paddle-and-anvil pottery.
PCAS Quarterly, 48(1&2)
90
examine the long-term dynamics of ceramic production
from the prehistoric period to the present. Combined archaeological and ethnographic studies reveal that Native
peoples creatively manipulated pottery during times of
significant social change, including the mission period
and their incorporation into the modern cash economy.
Yuman pottery making, as exemplified by ceramic production in Santa Catarina, demonstrates important and
enduring technological continuities, while the economic
context of ceramic objects has expanded from primarily utilitarian objects to pieces manufactured explicitly
for sale to collectors, tourists, and anthropologists. The
Paipai ceramic tradition is remarkably flexible. It continues to serve as a means of local pride and Native identity, and it will continue to be important to the economic
survival of this unique group of Native Californians.
Panich and Wilken-Robertson
3. More detailed discussions of these analyses can be
found in Panich (2009:185–195).
4. Since iron content is typically cited as one main
difference between the residual clays of the Peninsular
Ranges and the sedimentary clays of the Lower Colorado, buff ware sherds, if present, should separate out
geochemically through XRF testing.
5. In this article we use the term “Kumiai” to refer
to groups living in Baja California and the term
“Kumeyaay” for those in the United States. Unless
indicated otherwise, the term “Paipai” refers to all
members of the Paipai community, including Ku’alh
speakers.
References Cited
Acknowledgments
To all the potters in Santa Catarina who have generously shared their knowledge with us, this article is
dedicated to your enduring vision. The archaeological
fieldwork conducted by Panich was approved by the
Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia and was
supported by a dissertation grant from the University
of California Institute for Mexico and the United
States as well as a National Science Foundation Doctoral Dissertation Improvement Grant.
Álvarez Williams, Anita
2004
Primeros pobladores de la Baja California:
introducción a la antropología de la península. CONACULTA, Mexicali.
Arrillaga, José J.
1969
José Joaquín Arrillaga: Diary of His Surveys
of the Frontier, 1796. Translated by Froy
Tiscareno, edited by John W. Robinson. Baja
California Travels Series 17. Dawson’s Book
Shop, Los Angeles.
End Notes
1. The distinction must be recognized between the
Dominican Mission of Santa Catalina (with an “l”), in
operation from 1797 to 1840, and the modern Paipai
settlement of Santa Catarina (with an “r”). The spelling of the saint’s name indicates the historical context.
2. For a more complete discussion of the ceramic
assemblage from Mission Santa Catalina, see Panich
(2009:178–220).
PCAS Quarterly, 48(1&2)
Beck, Margaret E., and Hector Neff
2007
Hohokam and Patayan Interaction in Southwestern Arizona: Evidence from Ceramic
Compositional Analyses. Journal of Archaeological Science 34(2):289–300.
Campbell, Paul Douglass
1999
Survival Skills of Native California. Gibbs
Smith, Salt Lake City.
91
Paipai Pottery: Evolution of an Indigenous Ceramic Tradition
Chaput, Donald, William Mason, and David Zárate
Loperena
1992
Modest Fortunes: Mining in Northern Baja
California. Baja California Travel Series Vol.
51, Natural History Museum of Los Angeles
County, Los Angeles.
Dobyns, Henry F., and Robert C. Euler
1958
Tizon Brown Ware: A Descriptive Revision.
In Pottery Types of the Southwest: Wares
14, 15, 16, 17 and 18: Revised Descriptions, Alameda Brown Ware, Tizon Brown
Ware, Lower Colorado Buff Ware, Prescott
Gray Ware, San Francisco Mountain Gray
Ware, edited by Harold S. Colton. Museum
of Northern Arizona Ceramic Series No. 3D.
Flagstaff.
Drucker, Philip
1937
Culture Element Distributions: V, Southern
California. Anthropological Records Vol. 1,
No. 1. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles.
1941
Culture Element Distributions: XVII, YumanPiman. Anthropological Records Vol. 6, No.
3. University of California Press, Berkeley.
Euler, Robert C.
1959
Appendix A: Comparative Comments on
California Pottery. In, Archaeology Resouces of Borrego State Park, by Clement
W. Meighan. Archaeological Survey Annual
Report, 1958–1959 1:41–42. Department of
Anthropology and Sociology, University of
California, Los Angeles.
Evans, William S.
1969
California Indian Pottery: A Native Contribution to the Culture of the Ranchos. Pacific
Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly
5(3):71–81.
Gifford, Edward W.
1933
The Cocopa. University of California
Publications in American Archaeology and
Ethnology Vol. 31, No. 5. University of California Press, Berkeley.
Goldbaum, David
1984
Noticia respecto a las comunidades de indígenas que pueblan el Distrito Norte de
Baja California. Calafia 5(3):19–26.
Haury, Emil W.
1976
The Hohokam, Desert Farmers and Craftsmen: Excavations at Snaketown, 1964–1965.
University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
Hedges, Ken
1973
Hakataya Figurines from Southern California. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society
Quarterly 9(3):1–40.
Hicks, Frederick N.
1959
Archaeological Sites in the Jamau-Jaquijel
Region, Baja California: A Preliminary Report. Archaeological Survey Annual Report,
1958–1959, 1:60–68. Department of Anthropology and Sociology, University of California, Los Angeles.
1963
Ecological Aspects of Aboriginal Culture in
the Western Yuman Area. Ph.D. dissertation,
Department of Anthropology, University of
California, Los Angeles.
Hildebrand, John A., G. Timothy Gross, Jerry Schaefer, and Hector Neff
2002
Patayan Ceramic Variability: Using Trace
Elements and Petrographic Analysis to Study
Brown and Buff Wares in Southern California. In Ceramic Production and Circulation
in the Greater Southwest, edited by Donna
M. Glowacki and Hector Neff, pp. 121–139.
PCAS Quarterly, 48(1&2)
92
Panich and Wilken-Robertson
Cotsen Insitute of Archaeology Monograph
44. University of California, Los Angeles.
Hildebrand, John A., and Melissa B. Hagstrum
1995
Observing Subsistence Change in Native
Southern California: The Late Prehistoric
Kumeyaay. Research in Economic Anthropology 16(1):85–127.
Hinton, Leanne, and Lucille J. Watahomigie
1984
Spirit Mountain: an Anthology of Yuman
Story and Song. University of Arizona Press,
Tucson.
Hinton, Thomas B., and Roger C. Owen
1957
Some Surviving Yuman Groups in Northern Baja California. América Indígena
17(1):87–102.
Hohenthal, William D., Jr.
2001
Tipai Ethnographic Notes, A Baja California Indian Community at Mid-Century.
Ballena Press Anthropological Papers No.
48. Novato, California.
Kelly, William
1977
Cocopa Ethnography. Anthropological
Papers of the University of Arizona 29.
Tucson.
Koerper, Henry C., Christopher E. Drover, Arthur E.
Flint, and Gary Hurd
1978
Gabrielino Tizon Brown Pottery. Pacific
Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly
14(3):43–58.
Kroeber, Alfred L., and Michael J. Harner
1955
Mohave Pottery. Anthropological Records
Vol. 16, No. 1. University of California Press,
Berkeley and Los Angeles.
Laylander, Don
1987
Sources and Strategies for the Prehistory of
Baja California. Master’s thesis, Department
of Anthropology, San Diego State University,
San Diego.
1997
The Linguistic Prehistory of Baja California.
In Contributions to the Linguistic Prehistory
of Central and Baja California, edited by
Gary S. Breschini and Trudy Haversat, pp.
1–94. Coyote Press, Salinas, California.
2007
Three Hypotheses to Explain Pai Origins. Paper presented at VIII Encuentro Binacional:
Balances y Perspectivas 2007, Mexicali, Baja
California.
Koerper, Henry C., and Arthur E. Flint
1978
Some Comments on “Cerritos Brown” Pottery. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society
Quarterly 14(2):19–25.
Lightfoot, Kent G., Lee Panich, Tsim Schneider, and
K. Elizabeth Soluri
2009
California Indian Uses of Natural Resources.
In California Indians and Their Environment:
An Introduction by Kent G. Lightfoot and
Otis Parrish, pp. 183–363. California Natural
History Guides: 96. University of California
Press, Berkeley.
Koerper, Henry C., and Ken Hedges
1996
Patayan Anthropomorphic Figurines
from an Orange County Site. Journal of
California and Great Basin Anthropology
18(2):204–200.
Lyneis, Margaret M.
1988
Tizon Brown Ware and the Problems Raised
by Paddle-and-Anvil Pottery in the Mohave
Desert. Journal of California and Great
Basin Anthropology 10(2):146–155.
PCAS Quarterly, 48(1&2)
93
Paipai Pottery: Evolution of an Indigenous Ceramic Tradition
Magaña Mancillas, Mario Alberto Gerardo
1997
Nomadismo Estacional Indígena en Baja
California: Siglos XVIII–XIX. Paper presented at the Memoria de la Baja California Indígena Symposium IV, El Impacto
de la Epoca Misional en las Comunidades
Indígenas de Baja California, Tijuana, Baja
California.
May, Ronald V.
1973
An Archaeological Survey of Mission Santo
Tomás, Baja California. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 9(1):48–64.
1978
A Southern California Indigenous Ceramic
Typology: A Contribution to Malcolm J. Rogers’ Research. ASA Journal 2(2).
2001
Ceramic Rims from the Rim of Lake Le
Conte. San Bernardino County Museum Association Quarterly 48(3):45–72.
McKusick, Marshall B., and A. T. Gilman
1959
An Acorn Grinding Site in Baja California.
Archaeological Survey Annual Report, 1958–
1959 1:47–58. Department of Anthropology
and Sociology, University of California, Los
Angeles.
Meighan, Clement W.
1959
Archaeological Resources of Borrego State
Park. Archaeological Survey Annual Report,
1958–1959 1:27–44. Department of Anthropology and Sociology, University of California, Los Angeles.
Meigs, Peveril III
1935
The Dominican Mission Frontier of Lower
California. University of California Publications in Geography Vol. 7. University of
California Press, Berkeley.
1939
The Kiliwa Indians of Lower California.
Ibero-Americana Vol. 15. University of California Press, Berkeley.
1974
Field Notes on the Sh’un and Jat’am, Manteca, Baja California. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 10(1):19–28.
Michelsen, Ralph C.
1972
The Making of Paddle and Anvil Pottery at
Santa Catarina, Baja California, Mexico. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly
8(1):2–9.
1974
Ethnographic Notes on Agave Fiber Cordage. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society
Quarterly 10(1):39–47.
1977
The Territoriality of the Native Americans in
the Northern Highlands of Baja California.
Paper presented at the Baja California Symposium XV, San Diego.
Mixco, Mauricio
2006
The Indigenous Languages. In The Prehistory
of Baja California: Advances in the Archaeology of the Forgotten Peninsula, edited by Don
Laylander and Jerry D. Moore, pp. 24–41.
University Press of Florida, Gainesville.
Moore, Jerry D.
2006
The San Quintín-El Rosario Region. In The
Prehistory of Baja California: Advances in
the Archaeology of the Forgotten Peninsula,
edited by Don Laylander and Jerry D. Moore,
pp. 179–195. University Press of Florida,
Gainesville.
Morgenstein, Maury, and Carol A. Redmount
2005
Using Portable Energy Dispersive X-ray Fluorescence (EDXRF) Analysis for On-site Study
of Ceramic Sherds at El Hibeh, Egypt. Journal
of Archaeological Science 32(11):1613–1623.
Nieser, Albert B.
1998
Las Fundaciones Misionales Dominicas en
Baja California 1769–1822. Universidad
Autonoma de Baja California, Mexicali.
PCAS Quarterly, 48(1&2)
94
Owen, Roger C.
1962
The Indians of Santa Catarina, Baja California Norte, Mexico: Concepts of Disease and
Curing. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of
Anthropology, University of California, Los
Angeles.
1963
Indians and Revolution: The 1911 Invasion
of Baja California, Mexico. Ethnohistory
10(4):373–395.
Panich, Lee M.
2009
Persistence of Native Identity at Mission
Santa Catalina, Baja California, 1797–1840.
Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Berkeley.
2010
Missionization and the Persistence of Native
Identity on the Colonial Frontier of Baja
California. Ethnohistory 57(2):225–262.
Peelo, Sarah
2011
Pottery-Making in Spanish California: Creating Multi-Scalar Social Identity Through
Daily Practice. American Antiquity 76
(4):642–666.
Rogers, Malcolm J.
1936
Yuman Pottery Making. San Diego Museum
Papers No. 2. San Diego Museum of Man,
San Diego.
1945
An Outline of Yuman Prehistory. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 1(2):167–198.
Schroeder, Albert H.
1979
Prehistory: Hakataya. In Southwest, edited
by Alfonso Ortiz, pp. 100–107. Handbook
of North American Indians, Vol. 9, William
C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian
Institution, Washington, D.C.
Shackley, M. Steven
2004
Prehistory, Archaeology, and History of
Research. In The Early Ethnography of the
PCAS Quarterly, 48(1&2)
Panich and Wilken-Robertson
Kumeyaay, edited by M. Steven Shackley, pp.
12–35. Classics in California Anthropology,
Ira Jackins, general editor, Phoebe Hearst
Museum of Anthropology, Berkeley.
Shaul, David L., and John M. Andresen
1989
A Case for Yuman Participation in the
Hohokam Regional System. Kiva 54(2):105–
126.
Shaul, David L., and Jane H. Hill
1998
Tepimans, Yumans, and other Hohokam.
American Antiquity 63(3):375–396.
Thickens, Virginia E., and Margaret Mollins
1952
Putting a Lid on California: An Unpublished
Diary of the Portolá Expedition by José de
Cañizares (Concluded). California Historical
Society Quarterly 31(4):343–354.
Treganza, Adan E.
1942
An Archaeological Reconnaissance of Northeastern Baja California and Southeastern
California. American Antiquity 8(2):152–163.
Tuohy, Donald R., and Mary B. Strawn
1989
Thin-Section Analysis of Mission Period Pottery from Baja California, Mexico. Nevada
Archaeologist 17(1):36–48.
Van Camp, Gena R.
1979
Kumeyaay Pottery: Paddle-and-Anvil
Techniques from Southern California. Ballena Press Anthropological Papers No. 15.
Socorro, New Mexico.
Wade, Sue A.
2004
Kumeyaay and Paipai Pottery as Evidence
of Cultural Adaptation and Persistence in
Alta and Baja California. Master’s thesis,
Department of History, San Diego State
University, San Diego.
95
Paipai Pottery: Evolution of an Indigenous Ceramic Tradition
Waters, Michael R.
1982
The Lowland Patayan Ceramic Tradition. In
Hohokam and Patayan: Prehistory of Southwestern Arizona, edited by Randall H. McGuire and Michael B. Schiffer, pp. 275–297.
Academic Press, New York.
Wilken [Wilken-Robertson], Michael
1987
The Paipai Potters of Baja California: a Living Tradition. The Masterkey 60(4):18–26.
Wilken-Robertson, Michael
2004
Strategies for Sustainable Development of
Natural and Cultural Resources in the Paipai
Indian Community of Santa Catarina, Baja
California, Mexico. In The U.S.-Mexican
Border Environment: Tribal Environmental
Issues of the Border Region Vol. 9, edited
by Michael Wilken-Robertson, pp. 71–99.
Southwest Consortium for Environmental
Research and Policy, San Diego State University Press, San Diego.
Winter, Werner
1967
The Identity of the Paipai (Akwa’ala). In
Studies in Southwestern Ethnolinguistics:
Meaning and History in the Language of
the American Southwest, edited by Dell H.
Hymes and William E. Bittle, pp. 371–378.
Mouton, The Hague, Netherlands.
PCAS Quarterly, 48(1&2)