Resumen: Es común que los artefactos de metal se estudien separados de otros bienes. El examen holístico del ajuar funerario de tres tumbas de tiro de la élite de Sicán Medio, recientemente excavadas en el sitio Sicán de la costa norte peruana, muestra que la producción de objetos de metales preciosos se entiende mejor como un componente de un sistema integrado de producción de bienes suntuarios, que también incluyó elaboración de cerámica, textiles y lapidaria. Este artículo ilustra cómo estos objetos estuvieron íntimamente relacionados en cuanto al diseño, manufactura y uso, y cómo las aproximaciones usuales a la orfebrería, que ls consideran como un medio singular, no aclaran propiamente tales interrelaciones. Otras excavaciones en sitios de trabajo y esquemas interpretativos más flexibles son necesarios, como también futuras exploraciones sobre las condiciones bajo las que la producción inter o multi manufacturas tuvo lugar.

Same 10 years ago, I discovered a series of 3000 to 2700-year old ceramic kilns in the Poma Archaeological and Ecological Reserve in the mid-La Leche Valley on the Peruvian north coast. I was struck by the overall similarity of their design and form to later Middle Sicán (AD. 900-1100; see Table 1) arsenical branze smelting furnaces (Shimada et al. 1990, 1994, in press). Although there were differences in size and construction material, both had a carefully lined, simple bowl-shaped chamber formed by arching side walls and a praminent "chimney" that created thermal convection and increased updraft, respectively. Their similarities should not surprise us as both were intended to attain and sustain high temperatures and certain atmospheric conditions to effect the desired physical and chemical transformation of the contents. I wondered if the technological understanding gained in earlier ceramic firing could have contributed to the development of early smelting in the Andes during the first millennium B.C.

This paper is, in essence, an outgrowth of the above inference that there was important interplay among crafts that were practiced concurrently and perhaps in clase proximity. Over the past few decades the scope of archaeological studies of craft production and technology has expanded under the banner of the "social construction of technology" (e.g., Bijker et al. 1987; Dobres and Hoffman 1994; Lemonnier 1986, 1992, 1993; pfaffenberger 1992; see earlier thoughts in Bergsoe 1937; Lechtman 1977, 1984a,b; Smith 1965, 1970, 1975). Traditional technological studies have been challenged as being overly influenced by modern western economic thinking that emphasizes a functionalist, efficiency-minded solution and production aimed toward consumption and material abundance, Instead, these studies have focused on the social and ideological foundations of technological innovation, use and spread.

Concurrently, there has been a notable increase in studies concerned with the organization of production, including the associated technology and procurement and utilization of raw materials (e.g., Clark and Parry 1990; Costin 1991, 1996; Costin and Hagstrum 1995; Feinman 1985; D'Altroy and Bishop 1990; Nelson 1991; Peacock 1981; Rice 1981, 1987). However, proposed organizational models have been predominantly based on ceramics and insights fram ethnoarchaeological studies. Studies based on excavations of production sites remain rafe (e.g., Shimada [ed.] 1994, inpress) and even data from those studies tend to be interpreted in terms of models built on analysis of finished products and ethnoarchaeology, rather than those resulting from internal analysis.