The European tradition of built-up low-fired pottery, technologically
identical to colono, was certainly available. The Irish, the Danes, and
the Scottish islanders, among others, were making this sort of pottery
during the seventeenth century.
 
Noel Hume identified the pots as colono "indian" because he presumed
that the Europeans did not have such a potting tradition.
 
Ferguson identified the pots as "african" because he presumed that the
Europeans did not have such a potting tradition.
 
Both were wrong. The stuff was all over Europe and North Africa.
Bibliography will follow.
 
The failed logic of both Ferguson and Noel Hume was examined in my
article in the Virginia quarterly bulletin, which also examined a
similar presumption in regard to dugout canoes.
 
No, the subject is entirely too complex for single-source
interpretation. Log canoes, clay smoking pipes, and colono pottery
resulted from a three-way interaction among African, European, and
Native groups, all of whom possessed the requisite traditions.