The Kalinga Ethnoarchaeological Project (KEP), based in the Cordillera Mountains of the Philippines, was one of the longest-running ethnoarchaeological projects in the world. It was initiated by William Longacre, professor at the University of Arizona, in 1973. Lasting for almost 20 years, research focused on pottery production, use, exchange, and discard, and was carried out by Longacre and his team of Kalinga assistants, archaeology students, and colleagues.
History of the region Kalinga is a province located in the Cordillera Mountains of the Philippines. The word “Kalinga” is not native to the region in fact it “is derived from the Ibanag and Gaddang "Kalinga" which means "headhunters”. Headhunting was a historical practice that was thought to have shown leadership and respect within the community. Once the peace pact was established rules and codes were implemented to limit intertribal quarrels and headhunting. The peace pact is often referred to as the “Bodong” and helped “resolve public disputes, negotiate border problems with neighboring villages” This practice of headhunting is no longer widely and openly practiced, but during World War II “Kalingas loyal to American forces resumed headhunting against Japanese soldiers”. The inhabitants of the Cordillera Mountains are often referred to as Ygorretes. The region was not established as its own political province until after the Philippine–American War. The region of Kalinga has a rich cultural history. The Cordillera Mountain region—where Kalinga is located—is currently known for its mineral resources and at one point was renowned for its gold mines. Since Kalinga was abundant with gold Spaniards and missionaries tried to pacify and colonize the region in hopes of gaining access to the gold and own the land therefore owning the mines and monopolizing the gold. However, after many attempts they were not successful and the colonizers often encountered hostility and defiance from the Ygorretes. It was not until the 1880s when colonizers were successful in gaining control over the region, and much of that was attributed to the recent gun technology advancements which allowed the Spanish colonizers established a militia in the Kalinga area. After the Philippine–American War U.S. colonization occurred and the U.S. began constructing roads and firms in Kalinga. However, the establishment of these entities were drawn to a halt after World War II. After the war American presence in the area began to diminish and the Philippine government neglected the region's politics. This in turn created a downfall of Kalinga. The interventions from the colonizers such as roads and firms began to fall apart. The enterprise's post World War II were haphazard and not supported by the state which resulted in raids from outside forces that hurt the economy, culture and ecology of Kalinga. Due to the decline of Kalinga post WWII there have been pressures to assimilate to non-mountain—more specifically Ilocano—ways of life.
William Longacre and the Kalinga Ethnoarchaeological Project The site was introduced to Longacre by Edward Dozier, who had previously worked with the Kalingas. He suggested Longacre study the ceramics of the Kalinga because they were a tribal society who lived in small villages. He knew that women used pottery in a way that it was not always traded out of the community. Lastly, he knew that since the Kalinga had previously been studied, long-term research with the Kalingas could be achieved more easily.
Longacre was determined to follow the New Archaeology movement which emphasized explanation over description. Longacre proposed that the pottery the Kalinga made (and still make) could reveal their past. Previously, Longacre studied the pottery of Carter Ranch Pueblo, Arizona. It was here that he made the inference that "certain aspects of social organization could be inferred through such a distributional study". Longacre chose to study a community that still lives and uses the pottery today so that the truth behind the pottery could be revealed. He chose the Kalinga because they are a culture that uses the pottery not only for commercial use, but also for household use. He also wanted a culture that had been previously studied by anthropologists in order to have a foundation of ethnoarchaeological research to rely on. When Longacre went to see the area, the Kalinga convinced him to come back and study their pottery.
The main idea of the Kalinga ethnoarchaeological project was to compare inferences made in Carter Ranch Pueblo to the results of the Kalinga project about the social context of pottery making. Later, in 1975, "the new research goal" was added to the Kalinga ethnoarchaeological project. Longacre and his researchers wished to investigate how long artifacts lasted before they were discarded by the people who used them. Within the Kalinga project specifically, this meant studying how long pots were used before they were discarded.
Determining relationships between pottery and household kinship The Kalinga Ethnoarchaeological Project was a comparative study proposed by William Longacre to verify whether or not the social relations (kinship systems) observed at his Carter Ranch Pueblo study were applicable to all pottery making societies or just Carter Ranch itself.
Methods of Longacre's research included: mapping the pottery-making villages in Dangtalan and Dalupa, determining relationships among different households, and identifying stylistic changes in pottery between pottery makers who knew one another vs. pottery makers who did not know each other. The exchange of pottery in the Kalinga community led to a dominance of kinship in the primary social order. The pottery is exchanged via kinship channels, modeling the Kalinga's social relationships. Therefore, this means that the Kalinga's pottery exchange used social relationships in order to frame their economy.
In his dissertation, “Aspects of Exchange in a Kalinga society, Northern Luzon”, Michiko Takaki focused on the Kalinga Ethnoarchaeological Project, specifically how “a particular agricultural people [the Kalinga] make their living and regulate their social relations”. Takaki's field work with the Kalinga as part of the Ethnoarchaeological project took place from 1964 to 1968. He found that social relations among the Kalinga were one of the main ways that made it possible for pottery to be part of their economic process.
The ranking of goods one receives in the Kalinga community parallel to the relationship they have to the member they are receiving from. Receiving goods based on kinship relationships is optional once a fifth degree of genealogical distance is reached. Longacre's study led to the term "ceramic sociology".
Ceramic production and exchange Analysis of Previously unpublished data In a study, William A. Longacre and Taylor R. Hermes analyzed the exchange of pottery, and household rice farming in Dangtalan that took place from 1975 to 1976. The study involved the analyzation of non previously published data from the Kalinga Ethnoarchaeological Project. The data shed light on the Kalinga Ethnoarchaeological Project contains information about the exchange of pottery between different levels of rice farming households. Longacre et al. (2015) argue how the exchange of pottery provides evidence of a Dangtalan household's craft specialization as well as agricultural intensification. In a 2015 research study Longacre and Hermes analyzed pottery exchange in Dangtalan, which included datasets from household material culture inventory that contained ceramic vessels. Longacre's inventory of the Kalinga barrio, Dangtalan, consisted of fifty households, four -hundred ninety four ceramic vessels, and two hundred and fifty-seven individuals. Longacre et al. (2015) argue that there was a correlation between the net trade of ceramic vessels, and the household rice productivity amongst people in Dangtalan. More specifically, the households that had very little rice productivity frequently traded their pots, and households that had immense rice productivity would retrieve the ceramic vessels from the households with low rice productivity. According to Longacre et al. (2015), these findings suggest that the exchange of pottery arbitrated each household's labor in the rice fields as "a function of cooperative work through social relations." The trading of pottery centered on specific households that specialized in the making of pottery, and households that specialized in rice cultivation. The exchange of pottery between the two groups surfaces the existence of specialization in both pottery, and rice cultivation.
Ceramic function and technique In the Kalinga society, pottery serves as an extra source of income, and is made by women. The women use their hands to form the vessel, and do not use a wheel. Instead, the potters use coil and scrape techniques as well as paddle and anvil techniques. The clay that is used to form the vessels is local, and often mined by males in the society. Male traders in the Dalupa and Dangtalan villages sometimes barter resin and ocher collected from upland forests, but women prepare the clay as well as shape and fire the pottery. The women learn how to make pots from their mothers, and often make ceramic vessels in groups rather than alone. The pottery is not only made for exchange, but also is made for household needs. The most common household pots are those made for water storage, and cooking rice as well as meat. These types of pots consist of similar decorative features. Pots made for cooking and water jars often are coated with organic resins to reduce water permeability, and also are decorated with red ochre. Open fire is used to fire the pots, and the pots are also air dried. The gifts, such as pottery, that are given are often reciprocated with rice in the Kalinga culture. In addition, the women are responsible for the exchange of pottery that takes place outside of the household, and the amount of uncooked rice that a vessel can hold determines the value of that vessel.
Work of other archaeologists