Hostname: page-component-5db58dd55d-688nx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-06-02T11:46:36.044Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A material and technical study of Paracas painted ceramics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 December 2018

Dawn Kriss*
Affiliation:
Brooklyn Museum, Conservation Department, 200 Eastern Parkway, Brooklyn, NY 11217, USA
Ellen Howe
Affiliation:
Metropolitan Museum of Art, Sherman Fairchild Center for Objects Conservation, 1000 5th Avenue, New York, NY 10028, USA
Judith Levinson
Affiliation:
American Museum of Natural History, Anthropology Division Objects Conservation Laboratory, Central Park West & 79th Street, New York, NY 10024, USA
Adriana Rizzo
Affiliation:
Metropolitan Museum of Art, Department of Scientific Research, 1000 5th Avenue, New York, NY 10028, USA
Federico Carò
Affiliation:
Metropolitan Museum of Art, Department of Scientific Research, 1000 5th Avenue, New York, NY 10028, USA
Lisa DeLeonardis
Affiliation:
Johns Hopkins University, History of Art, 3400 North Charles Street, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA
*
*Author for correspondence (Email: dawnkriss@gmail.com)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Paracas culture of Late Formative Period south coastal Peru (c. 900–100 BC) is renowned for its elaborate and colourful ceramics—particularly those decorated using the post-fire painting technique. The materials and the methods used to achieve post-fire painting, however, remain elusive. To investigate the evolution of, and regional variation in, this technology, the authors deploy a range of techniques to analyse a sample of Paracas ceramics curated in museum collections. The results indicate diachronic and regional variations in the paint binders and colourants used by the Paracas potters, which correlate with changes in vessel form and iconography over time.

Information

Type
Research
Copyright
Copyright © Antiquity Publications Ltd, 2018 
Figure 0

Figure 1. The south coast of Peru (drawing by Lisa DeLeonardis).

Figure 1

Figure 2. The relationship between the Paracas region and surrounding areas (drawing by Dawn Kriss).

Figure 2

Figure 3. Early Paracas Chavinoid vessels. Left & right) 41.2/7716 and 41.2/8605 (courtesy of the American Museum of Natural History); centre) 63.232.4 (courtesy of The Metropolitan Museum of Art, gift of Nathan Cummings, 1963) (photographs by Dawn Kriss).

Figure 3

Figure 4. Middle Paracas vessels from Juan Pablo (Teojate). From left to right) 64.228.114, 64.228.112, 62.26.23 (courtesy of The Metropolitan Museum of Art, gift of Nathan Cummings, 1964 and 1962, respectively) (photographs by Dawn Kriss).

Figure 4

Figure 5. Middle Paracas ceramics (courtesy of The Metropolitan Museum of Art, gift of Nathan Cummings, 1964). From left to right) 64.228.91, 64.228.86, 64.228.83 (photographs by Dawn Kriss).

Figure 5

Figure 6. Late Paracas ceramics. From left to right) 63.232.72 (courtesy of The Metropolitan Museum of Art, gift of Nathan Cummings, 1963); 41.2/6065 and 41.2/6106 (courtesy of the American Museum of Natural History) (photographs by Dawn Kriss).

Figure 6

Figure 7. Details of incised painted surfaces showing differences in preservation. Left and right) a hard, glossy and compact paint layer seen on 41.2/5981, and a powdery, degraded paint detail from 41.2/7066 (courtesy of the American Museum of Natural History); centre) an under-bound red and degraded yellow-white pigment on 62.266.23 (courtesy of The Metropolitan Museum of Art) (photographs by Dawn Kriss).

Figure 7

Table 1. Paint colourants detected on Paracas ceramics by relative time and region: *these pieces were analysed with XRF only; **iron-rich colourants refer to cases in which XRF iron peaks are higher than the underlying clay body; ***identified only on sherds from Cahuachi.