The Spiro Ceremonial Center: The Archaeology of Arkansas Valley Caddoan Culture in Eastern Oklahoma, Vols. 1 and 2 9781951519971, 9780915703395

Citation preview

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology University of Michigan Number 29

The Spiro Ceremonial Center The Archaeology of Arkansas Valley Caddo an Culture in Eastern Oklahoma James A. Brown

with contributions by Alice M. Brues Lyle W. Konigsberg Paul W. Parmalee David H. Stansbery

Volume One

Ann Arbor, 1996

© 1996 by the Regents of the University of Michigan The Museum of Anthropology All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America ISBN 978-0-915703-39-5 (paper) ISBN 978-1-951519-97-1 (ebook) Cover design by Katherine Clahassey. The copper plate on the cover of Volume One is from the Ohio Historical Society collection (photograph by by Hillel Berger). The copper plate on the cover of Volume Two is from the Oklahoma Museum of Natural History collection (photograph by Henry Klippell). The University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology currently publishes three mono­ graph series: Anthropological Papers, Memoirs, and Technical Reports. We have over seventy titles in print. For a complete catalog, write to Museum of Anthropology Publications, 4009 Museums Bldg., Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1079. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publications Data Brown, James A llison, 1934The Spiro Ceremonial Center : the archaeology of Arkansas Valley Caddoan culture in eastern Oklahoma/ James A. Brown, with contributions by Alice M. Brues ... [et al.]. p. cm. - (Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan ; no. 29) Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 0-915703-39-4 (pbk. : alk. paper) 1. Spiro Site (Okla.) 2. Caddoan Indians-Antiquities. I. Brues, Alice Massie, 1913- . II. Title. III. Series. GN2.M52 no. 29 [E78.045] 306 s-----dc20 [ 976.6'79] The paper used in this publication meets the requirements of the ANSI Standard Z39.48-1984 (Permanence of Paper)

95-36153

To Robert E Bell, whose career-long devotion to Spiro has stimulated this and other explorations of such a fascinating bit of archaeology.

Contents-Volume One List of Figures

vi

List of Tables

viii

Foreword, James B. Griffin

xv

Preface

xix

Part I OVERVIEW Chapter 1

Introduction

2

The Spiro Mound Group

3

Research Background

19

4

Cultural Context

27

5

The Natural Environment

35

6

The Spiro Site-Early Reputation 1933-1936

41

3 7

7

The Craig Mound

53

8

The Great Mortuary

85

9

The Platform Mounds

105

10

Buried Structure Mounds

115

11

The Spiro Occupation Area

123

12

Gravelot Sequence

133

13

Cultural Chronology at Spiro

153

14

Mound Function

169

15

Social Dimensions of Mortuary Practices

183

16

Summary

193

Part n THE COLLECTIONS Tables 2-1 through 2-203

201-291

v

List of Figures 1-1 1-2 1-3 1-4 1-5 1-6 1-7 1-8 1-9 1-10 1-11 1-12 1-13 1-14 1-15 1-16 1-17 1-18 1-19 1-20 1-21 1-22 1-23 1-24 1-25 1-26 1-27 1-28 1-29 1-30 1-31 1-32 1-33 1-34 1-35 1-36 1-37 1-38 1-39 1-40 1-41 1-42

The Fort Coffee Archaeological Region Sites in the Fort Coffee and Spiro neighborhoods Idealized transect of vegetational communities across the Arkansas River valley in the Fort Coffee region Spiro site map of WPA excavations Aerial photograph of the Spiro site and vicinity Spiro site earthworks in the setting The North Caddoan Area, environment and principal sites The Craig mound during the winter of 1913-14 Spiro mounds Reconstructed topographic map of the Craig mound and vicinity Commercial excavations in the Craig mound Views of the Craig mound Craig mound grid system reconstruction Diagrammatic conceptions of Models A, B, and C Diagrammatic section lengthwise through the Craig mound Trench profiles across the south end of the main mound unit Trench profiles across the middle and north ends of the main mound unit Craig mound details Harris matrix of gravelot superpositions within the Craig mound main unit Interfeature connections through ceramic and engraved shell crossmends Spiro I period features The giant crematory basin and the primary mound Spiro II period features Crematory basin, B187 Map of the LfPbl section of the Craig mound Spiro III period features Spiro IV period features, excluding Great Mortuary detail Hamilton's reconstruction of the "central chamber" layout Hobbs'sketch of the "central chamber" layout Great Mortuary floor plan Litter burials from the Great Mortuary Great Mortuary burial types Feature details of the central floor zone Brown mound (Lf51)-plan view of the LffirIII and LfCrIII sections Two versions of Brown mound stratigraphy (taken in 1933 and 1938) Brown mound profiles through rows 13 and 11 (LffirIII) Views of the Brown mound The Brown mound stages and their associated features Copple mound (Lf50)-plan view of excavation and associated profile The Ward mounds and adjoining burials in LfCtI Buried House Mound 1 (Lffirl) Buried House Mound 4 (LfCrV) vi

8 9 11 12 14 15 36 54 55 56 57 58 62 63 64 67 68 69 70 72 73 74 76 78 80 81 82 88 90 95 97 99 100 106 107 108 109 110 111 116 119 120

1-43 1-44 1-45 1-46 1-47 1-48 1-49 1-50 1-51 1-52 1-53 1-54 1-55 1-56 1-57 1-58 1-59

Spiro structures with diagrammatic sections Spiro structures with diagrammatic sections, continued Spiro structure excavations Two-dimensional plot of seriation variable values Sequence ordering of seriation sample of gravelots Sequence of ceramic forms Radiocarbon dates (calibrated) from Great Mortuary contexts Radiocarbon dates (calibrated) by period Correspondence of grave period with cultural phase Caddoan buried structure mound (parris) Specialized satellite building to Spiro, Choates House 1 Section through the dome-shaped Hughes mound Topography of the dome-shaped Skidgel mound Skidgel primary mound and associated features Spiro's eastern satellite structure, the Cavanaugh mound The concentric ranking of burials in the C lobe of the Harlan accretive mound Norman Mound A and adjacent specialized buildings

Figures 2-1 through 2-158 Figures 3-1 through 3-22

124 125 126 136

137 141 159 160 161 170 171 173 176 177 178 179 181 see Volume Two see Volume Two

vii

List of Tables PART! 1-1 1-2 1-3 1-4 1-5 1-6 1-7 1-8 1-9

Fort Coffee Archaeological Region components Intermound distances Cultural chronology of the Fort Coffee Archaeological Region Cultivated plants of the Northern Caddo Area Chronological summary of the excavations into the Craig mound Sequence within the south primary mound Ceramic crossmends Central chamber deposit inventories Summary inventory of items catalogued within gravelots of the Great Mortuary deposit I-lOA comparison of the stratigraphic sequences recorded for the Brown mound 1-11 Tabulation of elements of Spiro structures 1-12 Daub and flooring material in different mounds, area and features of the Spiro site 1-13 List of daub impressions 1-14 Chronologically sensitive variables chosen for seriation 1-15 Number of gravelots per grave period for selected artifact types 1-16 Distribution of pottery sherds by grave period 1-17 Distribution of projectile points by grave period 1-18 Temporal indicators among ceramic samples 1-19 Estimated number of individuals per gravelot by burial type and period 1-20 Secondary indicators of burial program type in the presence of odontoid processes, deer bone and breakage pattern type among associated vessels 1-21 Relative proportions of individuals interred by selected burial types 1-22 Distribution of marine shell items by rank order size of grave facility in the Great Mortuary deposit 1-23 Distribution of marine shell, copper and other indicators of wealth among Spiro burials

7 16 27 30 59 71 86 89 92 111 128 130 131 135 144 150 151 157 185 186 187 189 190

PART 2 2-1 2-2 2-3 2-4 2-5 2-6

Revised burial classification with numerical codes Three-way paradigm of inhumation types by degree of articulation, care in disposition, and disposal within a facility Grave count by type and period Single, articulated burials (type la) Disposition of the flexed and semi-flexed, partly present or partly disarticulated burials and their associations Elements present in extended burials (type 2b) viii

203 203 203 204 204 204

2-7 2-8 2-9 2-10 2-11 2-12 2-13 2-14 2-15 2-16 2-17 2-18 2-19 2-20 2-21 2-22 2-23 2-24 2-25 2-26 2-27 2-28 2-29 2-30 2-31 2-32 2-33 2-34 2-35 2-36 2-37 2-38 2-39 2-40 2-41 2-42 2-43 2-44 2-45 2-46 2-47 2-48

Elements present in extended burials (type 2c) Skeleton number and grave size of type 3a burials Skeleton number and grave size of type 3b burials Skeleton number and grave size of multiple extended burials (type 4) Minimum number of individuals and grave size of type 5a burials Minimum number of individuals and grave size of type 5b burials Frequency of individuals in disarticulated burials Skeleton number and grave size of type 7 and 8 burials Summary litter burial structure (types 9a, 9b) Skeletal parts present in litter (9a, 9b) burials Litter burial structure Skeletal parts present in copper plate burials Perishables and other materials preserved in copper plate burials Composite burial combinations Burial types in upper and lower members of composite graves Skull-postcranial associations among skeletons Number of individuals represented by different skeletal elements from preserved gravelots Number of individuals represented by different skeletal elements by grave period Comparison of skeletal parts from the Craig mound and the Fairty ossuary (Ontario) Number of individuals represented by selected parts among burial types Number of individuals represented by selected parts among four burial types Pathology other than teeth Tooth pathology Age category distribution by grave period Age distribution of individuals under 20 Typological paradigm of Spiro pottery by paste, surface fmish, and decoration Distribution of particle size in pastes of selected pottery types and categories Distribution of paste categories of undecorated ceramics Craig mound (Lf40) Distribution of paste categories of undecorated ceramics, Brown mound (Lf51) Distribution of paste categories of undecorated ceramics, Copple mound (Lf50) Distribution of paste categories of undecorated ceramics, Ward Mound 1 (Lf58) Distribution of paste categories of undecorated ceramics, Ward Mound 2 (Lf37) Distribution of paste categories of undecorated ceramics, village (Lf46) Association of vessel shape, thickness, and presence of grit among undecorated sherds Comparison of thin-section data with megascopic identification Hardness among classes of undecorated grog and grit tempered plain ceramics Association of thickness and presence of grit among undecorated sherds Lip form among bowls of selected ceramic types Lip form among jars of selected ceramic types Lip form among bottles of selected ceramic types Taxonomic outline of vessel shapes Proportions of major plainware types among vessel forms ix

204 204 205 205 205 206 206 206 206 207 207 207 207 208 208 208 209 216 217 218 218 219 219 220 220 220 221 221 221 221 222 222 222 222 223 223 223 224 224 224 225 226

2-49 2-50 2-51 2-52 2-53 2-54 2-55 2-56 2-57 2-58 2-59 2-60 2-61 2-62 2-63 2-64 2-65 2-66 2-67 2-68 2-69 2-70 2-71 2-72 2-73 2-74 2-75 2-76 2-77 2-78 2-79 2-80 2-81 2-82 2-83 2-84 2-85 2-86 2-87 2-88 2-89 2-90 2-91 2-92 2-93

Sizes of bowls of simple profile (including flat and convex base bowls) Sizes of everted rim jars (including miniatures) Association of bottle body shape and neck form Proportions and incidence of charred residue on either wall of the rim Distribution of sherds among Craig mound features Distribution of sherds and ceramic vessels from units of the Craig mound Distribution of sherds in the stages of the Brown mound Distribution of sherds in units of the village and the buried house mounds Distribution of sherds from the Spiro houses Distribution of sherds over all the units of the Spiro site Attributes of Williams Plain compared with Baytown Plain Association of rim form and neck junction, Williams Plain Association of form and body junction of flat bases in Williams Plain Distribution of shape classes among Williams Plain vessels Association of surface fmish and burnishing, LeFlore and Williams Plain vessels Association of thickness with burnishing among grog tempered sherds Association of rim form and body form, Williams Plain and LeFlore Plain jars Distribution of bowl shapes among Williams Plain and LeFlore Plain types Association of rim form and lip grooving on horizontal line incised types Association of the number of horizontal lines on bowl rims with lip grooving Outline of decorative devices found on Spiro Engmved vessels A comparison of different samples of Woodward Plain Association of rim form and body shape, Woodward Plain and Woodward Applique jars The distribution of color classes among temper categories of Sanders Plain Distribution of color classes among selected temper categories of Sanders Plain Frequencies of Sanders Plain sherds and vessels by temper class Association of geometrical shapes, simple carinated Sanders Plain and Sanders Engraved bowls Association of Sanders Plain vessels with temper class Association of geometrical shapes, complex bowls of Sanders Engraved and Sanders Plain Maxey Noded Redware decorative combinations on vessel shapes Association of geometric shapes, upper and lower sections of simple Poteau Plain bowls Distribution of woven cane specimens Distribution of conch shell cups Key to Spiro projectile points Spiro point types by selected geometrical attributes Projectile point cache sizes Distribution of projectile points among Craig mound features Distribution of projectile points in mounds and village Alba point dimensions Perdiz point dimensions Bonham tahlequah point dimensions Hayes short point dimensions Massard point dimensions Collier point dimensions Agee point dimensions x

226 226 227 226 228 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 237 237 237 238 238 239 239 239 239 240 241 242 244 243 244 243 244 244 244 245 245 246 247 248 249 251 252 252 252 252 253 253 253

2-94 2-95 2-96 2-97 2-98 2-99 2-100 2-101 2-102 2-103 2-104 2-105 2-106 2-107 2-108 2-109 2-110 2-111 2-112 2-113 2-114 2-115 2-116 2-117 2-118 2-119 2-120 2-121 2-122 2-123 2-124 2-125 2-126 2-127 2-128 2-129 2-130 2-131 2-132 2-133 2-134 2-135 2-136 2-137 2-138 2-139 2-140 2-141 2-142 2-143 2-144 2-145 2-146 2-147

Rockwall point dimensions Ashley point dimensions Coryell point dimensions Scallorn sattler point dimensions Scallorn B point dimensions Corner-notched B point dimensions Sallisaw point dimensions Sallisaw bokoshe point dimensions Pocola point dimensions Sequoyah point dimensions Homan point dimensions Morris point dimensions Haskell point dimensions Keota point dimensions Reed point dimensions Washita garvin point dimensions Washita chaffee point dimensions Washita peno point dimensions Mineral Springs biface dimensions Gahagan biface dimensions Kay biface dimensions Ovoid class A biface dimensions Ovoid class B biface dimensions Boatstone dimensions Effigy boatstone dimensions Bar weight dimensions Distribution of celt raw material by site unit Association of points of maximum thickness and maximum width among celts Association of celt outline and points of maximum thickness and width Celt dimensions Distribution of sociotechnic sword-form bifaces by burial Inventory of generalized bifaces Duck River type sword-biface dimensions Fusi-elliptical biface dimensions Inventory of maces Crown-shaped mace measurements Sociotechnic celts-cross-section and bit shape Dimensions of elongate and modified elongate celts Dimensions of bell-shaped and union form celts List of monolithic ax fragments recovered from excavations Monolithic ax dimensions of the cylindrical handle form Copper-faced knife dimensions Hafted bifaces Distribution of hammerstones by material Association of mano lateral sections and grinding pits Mano dimensions Distribution of manos Distribution of T-shaped pipe fragments Associations of selected attributes among T-shaped pipes Metrics of T-shaped pipes Age of T-shaped pipes in Spiro gravelots Red River pipe dimensions Elbow pipe dimensions Attributes of stemless elbow pipes xi

254 254 254 254 254 254 255 255 255 255 255 256 256 256 256 257 257 257 257 257 257 257 257 257 257 257 258 258 258 258 258 259 259 259 259 259 260 261 261 261 261 261 262 262 262 262 262 262 262 263 263 264 264 264

2-148 2-149 2-150 2-151 2-152 2-153 2-154 2-155 2-156 2-157 2-158 2-159 2-160 2-161 2-162 2-163 2-164 2-165 2-166 2-167 2-168 2-169 2-170 2-171 2-172 2-173 2-174 2-175 2-176 2-177 2-178 2-179 2-180 2-181 2-182 2-183 2-184 2-185 2-186 2-187 2-188 2-189 2-190 2-191 2-192 2-193 2-194 2-195 2-196 2-197 2-198 2-199

Small effigy pipe dimensions Human effigy pipe measurements Human face mask dimensions Inventory of seated human effigies Human head effigy rattle dimensions Discoidal dimensions Provenience of pigments and pigment-producing materials Pigment category proportions by number of burials of each phase Interassociations among pigments and pigment-producing minerals per feature Inventory of copper plates and copper-covered wood plaques The distribution of copper plate styles by phase, Craig mound Perforations on the geometric shaped plates and copper-covered wooden plaques Attributes of copper falcon plates (bird outline) Measurements of copper falcon plates Attributes of the warrior head plates Attributes of the warrior eye motif plates List of undecorated copper plates by provenience Simple copper pin attributes Dimensions and attributes of copper plumes Distribution of earspools in pairs, singles, and fragments Earspool and ear plug materials Distribution of earspools and ear plugs by burial Ear ornament distribution within site Distribution of ear and ear disc elements Dimensions of perforated pulley-shaped earspools Dimensions of unperforated pulley-shaped earspools Dimensions of pulley-shaped earspools with central boss Dimensions of pulley-ring earspools Dimensions of flanged-ring ear plugs Dimensions of ear disc components Distribution of shell beads by feature Distribution of shell beads by period Rank order of gravelots by number of beads Disc bead diameters Elliptical bead diameters Convexo-cylindrical bead lengths Spherical bead axial length Convexo-cylindrical, columella bead lengths Large elongate bead axial lengths Distribution of pierced univalves by phase Diameters of pearl beads Distribution of pearl beads Rank order of phosphate bead shape categories Phosphate bead metrics by shape class Range of metric differences within phosphate bead sets Distribution of phosphate beads by frequency and diversity of grave caches among phases Wood bead dimensions Seed bead distribution by burial and phase Inventory of textiles and cordage Distribution of nonartifactual animal bone Age distribution of deer jaws Dog skeletal measurements xii

264 265 266 266 266 266 266 267 267 268 271 271 271 271 272 272 272 272 273 274 274 274 275 276 277 277 277 277 277 277 278 283 284 284 284 285 285 285 285 285 286 286 286 286 287 287 287 287 288 289 289 289

2-200 2-201 2-202 2-203

Distribution of freshwater shellfish Artifactual uses of marine and freshwater shells Rock types of selected artifacts List of siltstone artifacts by lithological variety

xiii

290 290 291 291

Foreword Tames B. Griffin

I appreciated the opportunity to provide a foreword to The Spiro Ceremonial Center by James A. Brown It is fitting and proper that this latest statement on one of the most intriguing and important locations of prehistoric Indian groups from around A.D. 900 to 1500 should be published in Ann Arbor. While Brown did not work for the University of Michigan at any time, he was able to interact with the archaeological staff and other University facilities in formulating his ideas concerning Spiro and its place in Indian prehistory. My observations on this interaction is likely to include some first person singular reminiscences. I received an M.A. degree from the Anthropology Department of the University of Chicago in December, 1930. During the early years of the Great Depression I was unable to obtain support for a doctoral program until February, 1933, at the Museum of Anthropology Ceramic Repository for the Eastern United States, to provide a culture-historical framework for the many ceramic groups of the Eastern Woodlands. My first contact with Spiro material took place in the summer of 1933 when I visited the Ohio State Museum, then the dominant center of archaeological research in the mid-continent, under the directorship of Henry C. Shetrone. I was with Richard G. Morgan who later became one of the most able Curators of Archaeology of the Ohio State Museum. During our visit Shetrone opened a drawer and took out some copper artifacts the museum had recently obtained and asked us if we thought they belonged to the Hopewell culture complex and we did not. In those days, for us, presence of copper items usually was associated with the Hopewell culture. Shetrone told us they came from a site in eastern Oklahoma which was then being excavated for commercial purposes. Some of the recovered items were purchased by collectors, and by museums. As the Spiro material became better known in the next ten to twelve years many individuals expressed their views regarding the place of Spiro. These took place by mail, by phone, and at major and minor professional meetings. The Society of American Archaeology held its May, 1947, twelfth annual meeting in the Rackham Graduate School building at the University of Michigan. Professor Fay-Cooper Cole of the University of Chicago was Program Chairman and I was asked to be the chairman of the session which was to consider the Southeastern Ceremonial Complex, and the material from Spiro and other major sites. I called on 15 participants. A summary statement appears in "Waring Papers" (Waring 1986b). In the early 1940s, Carl E. Guthe, then Director of the Museum of Anthropology, received a letter from Henry Hamilton of Marshall, Missouri, that he would like to come to Ann Arbor and consult with him about Hamilton's growing body of information on the Spiro excavations and the distribution of the collection. Hamilton thought that his body of data should be published and he had been referred to Guthe who was well known in national professional activities and to lay archaeologists as well. As a result of their talk it was agreed that I could help in putting together a publication. Hamilton had earlier attempted to interest Professor Clements at Oklahoma in a joint effort to do much the same thing but had not received much encouragement. As Hamilton and I worked, corresponded and met, I noticed that he drank Kentucky Gentleman bourbon and I also found out that it was also Clements' preference. Since it was obvious that the Spiro site was a part of the University of Oklahoma xv

program he should be made aware of our efforts. Hamilton again approached Clements and offered to go to Norman, which he did and took with him a bottle of Kentucky Gentleman. The fmal result was the Missouri Archaeological Society published Hamilton's report and my "An Interpretation of the Place of Spiro in Southeastern Archaeology" as Volume 14 of the Missouri Archaeologist. Shortly after that publication, it became known that carbon 14 was radioactive and could be used to date prehistoric sites at the University of Chicago by Willard F. Libby and his colleagues, I approached Professor H.R. Crane of the Department of Physics at Ann Arbor to see if such a program could be developed at the University of Michigan. He did not show much enthusiasm, but after a few months, Ralph Sawyer, Dean of the Graduate School, became supportive of the possibility and as a physicist himself became interested. So it was that after writing Libby, Crane and I went to Chicago to see Libby's laboratory in the Ryerson Physics building at the University of Chicago. Libby welcomed us and showed us his dating equipment and how it worked. He then offered to build a similar one and send it to Ann Arbor. Such cooperation I had not expected and thought it a great idea. To my surprise Crane courteously thanked him but said it would not be necessary. After some additional discussion, Libby went to the outer door with us and again offered to construct a dating machine for the University of Michigan and Crane again declined. When we were outside and out of hearing I asked Crane why he had refused such a generous offer. He replied that Libby's machine was what a chemist would build and that he thought he would be able to construct a comparable, and perhaps an even better one. This brief outline is the version of how the University of Michigan Radiocarbon Laboratory became a part of the Michigan Memorial Phoenix Project for the peaceful application of atomic energy. Crane was in charge and constructed his first machine after a year or more of trial and error experiments. A committee was appointed of members of the faculty in scientific fields which could benefit from more accurate dating. The specimens which were submitted were received at the Museum of Anthropology for curatorial work and then sent to Crane's lab in the Chemistry building. Because of the critical importance of the Spiro ~ite, we received and dated five early samples (p. 154 of this volume) and ten later ones (p. 122). Jim Brown has ably discussed the total Spiro dates and their application to the cultural deposits at the several sites. It is one of the best extant analyses of radiocarbon dates and their use at a prehistoric location. It is not a task for a novice. A second major Spiro conference was held at the 23rd Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology at the University of Oklahoma in Norman on May 1-3, 1958, where one of the points of contention was the suggested priority of an early Caddoan Ceremonial Complex which preceded the Southeastern Ceremonial Complex of the Mississippian period. People working in the Caddoan area believed that evidence from northeast Texas and the Spiro area indicated the Caddoan area was earliest, while those whose work had been concentrated east of the Mississippi River believed that area had priority. I am tempted to say that the views of Spiro by the participants might be called the pre-Brown period. Robert Bell, a University of Chicago-trained archaeologist had been at the University of Oklahoma for a number of years. He recognized that a comprehensive study should be made of the Spiro area collections and submitted a research proposal to the National Science Foundation for funding, which included a major sum for an unnamed research assistant. A few years before this (1960), I had received a visit from a University of Chicago graduate student who wished to become familiar with the Museum of Anthropology collections. To my surprise he had an excellent grasp of mid-continent archaeology in terms of publications and the problems they presented. This was Jim Brown. Fortunately Brown was selected for Bell's RA position, and was able to work a number of years with Bell in attempting to understand the temporal sequence and the cultural behavior represented at the several time periods. This study and analysis resulted in the publication of several volumes, and other papers, on the nature of Spiro culture and its relationship to the greater Southeastern area. This knowledge enabled him to assist in the major monograph on the Precolumbian shell engravings from the Craig mound at Spiro, Oklahoma, with Philip Phillips. The several pub-

xvi

lications in the mid-1960s and subsequently may be said to mark the beginning of the Brown era. Federal support, especially for archaeological work in areas which were in danger of destruction for commercial and other expansion of American society, resulted in the addition of a considerable amount of information revealing prehistoric behavior. This was true in the Greater Southeast, with one example being highway construction on the eastern side of the Mississippi River east of St. Louis. This was the immediate area of the densest concentrations of Indian societies from about A.D. 700 to 1400 in North America, and a remarkable example of the growth in size and complexity of human societies with the addition of stable agricultural crops to a favorable environment. This area known as Cahokia had been known since the early nineteenth century, but had never had sufficient funding for investigations adequate to characterize it as the location of one of the most important centers of Indian life in the late prehistoric period. This cultural climax, called by archaeologists "the Mississippian," had many subdivisions in favorable locations along the Mississippi River and its tributaries. In the several area societies, definitive material cultural identities were developed, as well as the expression of religious iconography that enable archaeologists to recognize interaction and trade over much of the Southeast, and also recognize that this large Woodland area was tied together by many cultural concepts and behavior which slowly developed and spread over much the area. I have been actively involved in North American Archaeology for more than half a century, from the fall of 1928 when I began graduate study of archaeological anthropology at the University of Chicago until my retirement in 1976, and beyond. During this lengthy period I enjoyed what I took to be the free interchanges of advancement of knowledge about American prehistory during an exciting period of scholarship-a period that gave rise to lithic source identification, fossil pollen analysis, radiocarbon dating, DNA typing, and more. During the time these advances were taking place, archaeologists believed that these methodologies were providing tools to accurately document the past. I can't pretend to be anything but disturbed by recent political developments. Suddenly, the advances that my colleagues and I labored to produce are being swept aside, and competence to identify past human behavior has become a political appointment, awarded not to those trained in archaeological methodology, but to those with the right genetic inheritence, social identity, or knowledge of myths, fantasies, legends and oral histories. It is my belief that professionally trained archaeologists are in a unique position to identify and interpret the results of careful excavations from prehistoric sites, wherever those sites may be. A Polish archaeologist is better able to interpret a prehistoric American Indian site than a Cheyenne resident who happens to live near it, just as a Cheyenne archaeologist can better interpret a site in Poland than an untrained local resident. It is because of this new politicization of archaeology that volumes such as this, and the collections they describe, take on a particular importance. The present volume by Professor Brown on the Spiro Mound Group of the Fort Coffee Archaeological Region is a model report it its coverage of the local environment and documentation of the changes of the several local societies. He has benefited from the new data from recent excavations, many of which modified or enlarged on his interpretations of the 1960s to 1980s. This volume is an excellent example of archaeological interpretation at its best. It is a great pleasure to see this new interpretation of Spiro prehistory published in this Museum of Anthropology monograph years after its more modest predecessor, Spiro Studies. Congratulations to both and may the volume be widely read and integrated into a valid interpretation of Indian prehistory.

xvii

Preface With this publication a long-promised full-scale review of the archaeology of Spiro has been realized. An objective of the Spiro Focus Research Project at the University of Oklahoma that produced the descriptive statement found herein was to provide an account for the public. Under the direction of Robert Bell this three-year project (1963-66) sought to synthesize our knowledge of the site by assembling all available information recovered by university archaeologists during many years of fieldwork. This study of the archaeology of the Spiro Mound Group was a part of a coordinated research program, directed by Bob Bell, looking into several important Caddoan sites in the Arkansas drainage that had already been excavated. This task was undertaken none too soon. Some of WPA records and museum collections were scattered already. The effort amounted to a kind of salvage operation of its own. The result was publication of four reports, entitled Spiro Studies, that have served as the basis of scholarly research and site interpretation up to the present. However, these reports were printed in limited quantity, and as a consequence they have long been inaccessible to those with need for them. Hence, in 1986 when John Speth, then Director of the Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, first approached me about the desirability of reprinting the four reports of Spiro site research, I welcomed his offer as an opportune occasion on which to reorganize the fmdings in light of subsequent research while making the original reportage more widely available after being out of print for some time. In conception the beginning of this monograph goes back to the planning for the initial research project. At the time, a comprehensive report was envisioned that took into consideration all that was lost before the university archaeologists began their work. The reports issued to the National Science Foundation were regarded as interim statements on the status of ongoing research. However, as the project advanced it became apparent that my research plan for a complete and definitive study would be difficult to achieve. Various materials taken from the site were not only widely scattered in obscure places, they encompassed data sets that were too rich and complex for me to use with any degree of adequacy. Furthermore, my experience with Phil Phillips in studying Spiro's engraved shell record brought home quite forcibly how incredibly complicated Spiro was. Too many odd facts kept emerging and too many uncertainties inhered with lost records and the inevitable loss of detail from work that was already 30 years old at the time. In the end, I settled for the series of status reports, the final one of which has never been published. Indeed, as events were to show, my original conclusions respecting the site and its culture proved to be off the mark. The four volumes of Spiro reports currently stand for our knowledge of the site. But for reasons now clear in retrospect, these reports are inadequate to the task of representing Spiro archaeology. They were written as I progressed through the excavation units, artifact categories and burials. As a consequence, my view of the site's archaeology was conditioned by my research experience with each category rather than from the perspective of all categories simultaneously. This piecemeal approach to chronology in particular was born out of the impracticality of handling a large and scattered data set. When I ventured to prepare these reports for the present publication, I saw the necessity for a unified approach to the chronology. The conclusion drawn from ceramics and other data sets alone were limited by the data. These limitations could be overcome and the repetition eliminated with a more effixix

cient analytical approach to the chronology. Hence I undertook the methodological tack adopted here. The results more than justified my action. Not only was chronology-building simplified, but the results upset previous analysis and necessitated a radical rethinking of the content of Arkansas Valley Caddoan systematics and to the mortuary behavior of Spiro phase Caddoans. What has made a comprehensive report unrealistic in the first place became totally impractical with the inevitable changes in perspective that 25 years of involvement in the site's archaeology brings. Furthermore, it is unrealistic to treat the WPA investigations as if they were conducted personally, when, in fact, I had limited access to what did (and did not) take place so many years ago. Because of the paucity of records, the WPA work is and will remain a "foreign country." The mere change in archaeological investigatory approaches in the 1950s and 1960s rendered this approach forced and artificial. In retrospect this conception of the research was further burdened by my attempt to incorporate some of the essential materials recovered in the pre-WPA relic-mining efforts. The premise was sound enough: this was the material that warranted the subsequent excavations in the first place. The principal problems and prospects that these materials raised had to be addressed by an assessment of their relationship to the work conducted systematically. The two sets of data had to be reconciled in some basic ways, bearing in mind that complete assimilation of the two would be impossible. The original conception became really irrelevant with subsequent fieldwork at Spiro. The creation of a state park at the site set in motion a program of research that upset my reconstructions with the probing in 1970 for into the boundaries of the old Craig mound excavations. Later work that Dan Rogers and associates designed with contemporary problems in mind rendered the conception of a complete overview totally obsolete. Finally, came the realization of the true role of my original research, and that was to bring to closure the research questions posed in the 1930s in a form that answers today's approaches to the archaeological record. With all of the limitations of a traditional WPA field investigation, it became obvious that my approach to a Spiro overview has to concentrate on documentation of the approach taken, the notes and collections made, and the state of the materials that are presently available. In so doing I had a research obligation to arrange the confusion of collecting units in a sensible organization that took into consideration structural interrelationship (such as the parts of a single building) and stratigraphic succession. At the end, this organization should be able to help address some of the problems outstanding from the objects and the eye witness reports. Since this project is the culmination of many years of off and on work on the WPA sponsored investigations of the Spiro Mounds site, it is very much a product of the evolution of my thinking about the site and its position in Caddoan prehistory. The descriptive chapters have remained largely the way they were written originally, except for the changes that were necessary to bring them into conformity with my revised chronology. Most of Part I was written for this publication. Obviously, my reevaluation of the site owes much to discoveries that have been made there and elsewhere since the first volumes of Spiro Studies were published. The formal basis for this work is the series of research reports on the Spiro site and adjacent Caddoan sites in the Braden Bottoms-Fort Coffee area in eastern Oklahoma. These reports as volumes of the Spiro Studies reported the results of research supported by a three-year project, Caddoan Archaeology-Spiro Focus Research, from a National Science Foundation grant, GS-222. The initial year of this grant was awarded to Robert E. Bell of the University of Oklahoma. Subsequent computerized analysis owes much to support while a member of the Computer Institute for Social Science Research at Michigan State University. Data base development was supported by a faculty grant from Northwestern University. The computer-scanned text of the original reports was edited while the author held a Fellowship for University Teachers, National Endowment for the Humanities (1987-88). Partial funding for publication comes from National Science Foundation grant BNS-8705092. Support for each phase of this research and writing effort is gratefully acknowledged. xx

Acknowledgments A large number of individuals have assisted me over the course of the total enterprise. Each has left an imprint on the text and illustrations presented herein. At this time I would like to express my appreciation for each contribution large or small. So many have freely given their aid to the project and their attention to my problems that if they go unmentioned it is not because their efforts are not appreciated. First of all I would like to extend my thanks to Robert E. Bell. Bob got me started on the study of Spiro and provided guidance throughout the course of three years research. Editorial supervision of the original reports was important. lowe him a great debt for this and for freely imparting information from his personal knowledge of the Spiro excavations and the collections. Over the years I have greatly benefited from innumerable discussions about the site, its culture, and the significance of its assemblage with many individuals - David A. Baerreis, Larry Banks, Robert E. Bell, Ann Early, James B. Griffin, Henry W Hamilton, Marvin Kay, Frank C. Leonhardy, Guy Muto, Philip Phillips, Terry 1. Prewitt,1. Daniel Rogers, Martha A. Rolingson, Charles L. Rohrbaugh, Frank F. Schambach, Dee A. Story, Clarence H. Webb, Don G. Wyckoff, and others. Specific information about the excavations were contributed by 1. Joe Bauxar, Forrest E. Clements, Samuel A. Dellinger, Phil 1. Newkumet, and Kenneth G. Orr-participants and eye witnesses to the Depression-era fieldwork. Part I of the present manuscript was read critically by Dan Rogers and Charles Rohrbaugh, both of whom have retained a strong research interest on Spiro and its local culture. Dan has been particularly helpful. In 1982 I gained a great deal of insight into the physical features of the site from my brief field experience under his direction. In the years since he has extended much help in many ways for which I am very grateful. Throughout this enterprise the Oklahoma Museum of Natural History (known through most of my experience as the Stovall Museum) has always extended unstinting cooperation. From Marion T. Hall to the current director Michael Mares I have had continued support and encouragement, including use of camera-ready material prepared for the original reports as well as documents not available during for the original research. I would also like to thank Julie Droke, Museum Registrar, for her help and cooperation throughout the process leading to publication. The study of Spiro artifacts has been completed only with the assistance and cooperation of many people. First I wish to express again my gratitude to the directors of the museums curating Spiro collections for permission to study these collections in detail. To the curators and registrars responsible for the collections lowe a debt of gratitude for their full cooperation with my research demands that often entailed pulling exhibited material and otherwise disrupting their programs. Without their patience and cooperation this study would not have been possible. Since the collections have been distributed to various institutions and placed on exhibit, it was necessary to enlist the cooperation of those in charge of these collections. They were Elmer L. Fraker, administrative secretary, and William Dale, chief curator, Oklahoma Historical Society; Donald G. Humphrey, director, and Mrs. Jeanne Snodgrass, curator of Indian art, Philbrook Art Center; Patrick Patterson, director, Woolaroc Museum; and Alfred Reed of Grove, Oklahoma. While undertaking this research into materials recovered from the controlled excavations, I had the opportunity to study collections derived from the commercial digging and to work with museum curators and private owners of these Spiro pieces. They graciously extended their permission for publication. They were Paul Rossi, director, and Gregory Perino, curator, Gilcrease Institute; Charles R. McGimsey III, director, and Miss Hestor A. Davis, assistant director, University Museum, University of Arkansas; James Johnson Sweeney, director, Museum of Fine Arts, Houston; Raymond S. Baby, curator of archaeology, Ohio State Museum; J. Mett Shippee of North Kansas City, Missouri; and Harry M. Trowbridge of Kansas City, Kansas. In addition to the major collections in museums there are a number of minor collections in private hands. Each of these collectors that I visited-James H. Durham, Phil xxi

Newkumet, I Mett Shippee, and Harry Trowbridge-willingly gave me access to their collections and openly shared their knowledge of the Spiro site. Their cooperation and hospitality is greatly appreciated. I would like to acknowledge other individuals who freely gave of their time and information: Cecil Cleavenger, Muriel H. Wright, Clark Field, and Mrs. Herman A. Roeder. As with any study of this size a great debt is owed to those that have rendered professional and technical services in making the collections intelligible. Alice M. Brues, formerly of the University of Oklahoma Medical School, has undertaken the major responsibility of identifying the human skeletal remains. These materials suffered from being unprocessed until this project undertook this task. Most of these friable and fragmentary remains were identified by her. Miscellaneous bones, largely from the Great Mortuary, were identified by Richard McWilliams while they were being processed in the lab. After these bones had been tallied, Lyle W Konigsberg kindly consented to identifying the cremation remains. The results of all three efforts are brought together here. The raw materials have been identified by many. Rocks and minerals have been identified by William H. Bellis, Ronald B. Boyce, George H. Fraunfelter, William E. Ham, David A. Kotila, and Ronald H. Spiel bauer. Insight into flints comes from Larry D. Banks. Fossils were done by Carl C. Branson, director of the Oklahoma Geological Survey. Marine shells were tackled by Elmer P. Cheatum, Department of Biology, Southern Methodist University, and helpful observations have been contributed by the T. E. Pulley, director, Houston Museum of Natural History, through his correspondence with Philip Phillips. David H. Stansbery, curator of natural history, Ohio Historical Society identified the naiades. Paul W Parmalee, then assistant director, Illinois State Museum identified the animal bones. Richard A. Yarnell, then of Emory University, identified some of the wild plant material. A large amount of technical assistance was required to describe adequately some of the more technically complex artifact categories. To each of these fellow students of Spiro archaeology I wish to thank here. Henry W Hamilton and Eleanor F. Chapman greatly extended my understanding of the copper work. Philip Phillips and Eliza McFadden contributed helpful insight into the marine shell cups and gorgets. Mary Elizabeth King Black, Joan S. Gardner, Jenna Tedrick Kuttruff, Carol Rachlin provided much-needed technical expertise on the textiles. Louis Gregoire added useful details on the construction of the lidded basket. Frank Schambach generously updated the original identifications of Caddoan ceramics. A number of individuals have helped to prepare materials. William H. Harwood, Continental Oil Company, Ponca City, helped clean the copper. Charles I Mankin expedited the processing of the carbon materials for C14 dating that was performed by Kenneth A. Sargent. Several radiocarbon laboratories have accepted materials for dating gratis, and their generosity is sincerely appreciated. I would like to thank the Michigan Memorial Phoenix Project; David A. Baerreis, University of Wisconsin; the Geochemistry and Basin Geology Division, Esso Production Research Company, Houston, Texas; and Ellis E. Bray, Research Department, Socony Mobil Oil Company, Inc., Dallas, Texas. In addition, Dan Rogers has provided dates through research support from the Smithsonian. Rogers has also run dates on his own excavations that have provided important benchmarks for occupation in the village. The photographs found in these volumes have been prepared from old field negatives, borrowed ones, or new ones, and it is to the efforts of Henry W Klippell Jr. that lowe these photographs. Additional photographs were supplied through the efforts of Robert E. Bell, I Brent Wrigley, and Don G. Wyckoff. Captions with material from other institutions were updated by Margaret Hoffman, University of Arkansas Museum, Dan McPike, Gilcrease Institute, and Martha Potter Otto, Ohio Historical Society. Records checks were generously provided by Don Wyckoff, Dan Rogers, and Julie Droke. Illustrations taken from the original Spiro Studies volumes were executed by Edward L. Brown, Jr., Kenneth M. Brown, Janeth G. Davids, Martha S. Freeland, Louis Gregoire, David K. Gurley, Patrick I Homrig, Kay D. Kennedy, June F. Lipe, Peter R. Murray, xxii

Timothy Smith, and Nancy Underwood. Maps and diagrams prepared for this publication were drafted by Karen Aldenderfer. To Sally Horvath I wish to extend my gratitude for converting my manuscript into a fme publication. James A Brown 1996

xxiii

PART

I

OVERVIEW

CHAPTER

1

Introduction

Prologue

main cone of the Craig mound. Although their reports smacked too much of the archetypal mythic place for buried treasure to sound plausible to an experienced archaeologist, enough independent information was available to support the reasonable conclusion that the main cone did, in fact, contain an unusual facility. Extraordinary preservation of textiles and other highly perishable items from the "chamber" and the continuity of central "chamber" features toward the mound periphery were the basic reasons for believing that a cavity of some sort did exist. However, all evidence pointed away from this cavity as being a constructed chamber. Rather, it appeared to have been merely an accident of depositional settling that happened to take place around a nestlike distribution of upright poles. Stripped of its treasure cave setting, a very different picture emerged as to what this feature was. Spiro's claims on our interest do not end with a reinterpretation of the "central chamber." Other aspects command our attention as unusual despite the fact that the site was neither exceptionally large nor organizationally complex. One question naturally arises: why did Spiro have such a high density of exotic artifacts? Why, even today, does this site remain unparalleled in the Eastern Woodlands? Other issues follow. Spiroan exotics must have been reckoned as wealth at the time. Although some have tried to visualize the Spiro locale as a center of prestige goods production, this scenario fits poorly with a rather small site located far from the sources of raw materials used in prestige goods and one without the concentrated populations usually (but not necessarily) associated with craft specialization. The status of the site as a special locale in the prehistory of the Southeast rests only on the absence of any known collection of exotics elsewhere that rival Spiro's in sheer volume, artistic excellence and state of preservation. Thus, the archaeological record at Spiro continues to offer up one mystery after another. With the resolution of one, another arises, leading us to delve into Caddoan archaeology ever more deeply. Just how unique is Spiro? And what is the appropriate historiographic context in which to examine the site's archaeological record? The first objective of this book is to provide a framework within which the site and its artifacts can be placed. The second

The very first digging foretold the wealth of archaeological information the Spiro site was to produce. The number of rare, littleknown artifacts brought immediate attention, and material in precedent-shattering quantities instantly placed the site on the map of significant prehistoric places. Subsequent systematic investigation by a University of Oklahoma team of archaeologists confirmed the extraordinary richness of its gravelots. Suspicious reports of curious constructions within the Craig mound added an aura of notoriety. By the time the various burial mounds had been formally excavated by the University of Oklahoma, all doubts as to the scientific importance of Spiro in Eastern Woodlands prehistory had been dismissed. Since 1941, the fame of the site has continued to grow as it has become fully incorporated into Eastern Woodlands prehistory and its finds have become known to both professionals and laypeople alike. To archaeologists of the day, Spiro's richness pointed to foreign directions. In the 1930s, the sheer number of copper, marine shell and stone artifacts discovered at Spiro led archaeologists to postulate a connection between Mesoamerica and the Mississippian Culture of the Southeast. Spiro's geographical position at the western edge of the Eastern Woodlands made it an excellent candidate for this supposed "gateway" between the distant cultures of Mesoamerica and the high cultures that stood to the East. The richness of the iconography expressed on Spiroan pieces further clinched the site's foundational position in Eastern Woodlands prehistory. Visions of a prehistoric Oklahoman civilization easily rose out of these discoveries. Even today, after the site's cultural background has become much better understood as something much less than a true civilization, Spiro continues to be looked upon as the font from which flowed much of the inspiration for next best thing to such high culture-the Southeastern Ceremonial Complex. Spiro has also benefited from the mystery that still lingers around its chief earthwork. The Craig mound took on this aura from the extraordinary reports about the archaeological context in which the principal artifacts were found. Excited relic-miners reported an astounding "hollow chamber" in the center of the

3

4

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

is to provide a guide to collections which can lay the basis for future research.

Study Objectives The central task of this study is to place the site into a useful context, and to do this, we must thoroughly examine what we know about its archaeology. Since this is a case in which fresh excavations are not likely to offer much resolution of old problems, the only satisfactory way in which to resolve the question of why so many prestige goods were consumed and interred at a certain time and place is to investigate completely the evidence that laid these claims in the first place. Put baldly, the problem set before me is to address the problems set before us by the discoveries of the burials in the mounds at the Spiro site. Because of the centrality of Spiro grave goods in past research foci, it must be these that claim our attention before moving on to other matters. For that reason, the only data set that I will treat comprehensively will be the gravelots. Thobum found the first dozen of them in 1916-17. But the bulk were uncovered by the WPA teams. Later probes in the Craig mound replacement project of 1970 uncovered five more. Without claiming that the collections are complete, the sample in hand is important in itself, informing us of the special standing that the Spiro site appears to have had. The remainder of the WPA findings will be documented for the sake of completeness and as a means of furthering our understanding of the archaeological contexts of the burials.

The SUbject of the Project The subject of this study is a relatively modest mound group, composed of a ceremonial center of eleven mounds and associated occupation. The major earthwork is the famous Craig mound, also known as the "Spiro Mound" or Great Temple mound, from which relic hunters recovered unusual quantities of fine and elaborate artifacts in an exceptional state of preservation. It acquired its present name after the University of Oklahoma devised a statewide site-naming procedure to handle the recording of sites of potential for WPA sponsored excavation. This system was very unusual in employing the property tract as the site unit, irrespective of the number of individually owned tracts an area of continuous occupation was divided into. Six landowners and their multiple properties translated into 10 "site units" for Spiro. The fame of the site rests largely on the flashy artifacts found in the Craig mound. But interest in the site was considerably enhanced by reports of a "hollow chamber" within the mound. These two extraordinary points of interest coalesced to create a storybook history to the mound, and indirectly, to the site as a whole. As a consequence of the mythology surrounding the site, it is understandable that a considerable literature has grown up around the history of the discoveries and various aspects of the archaeology. The point of departure for most studies has been the artifacts. Relatively easy to approach analytically and with many points of intriguing similarity to known items elsewhere, a sizable number

of studies have focused on the finds themselves. Spiro artifacts were used in the first three decades after the mining and salvage of the Craig mound to bolster one or another theory about Eastern Woodlands prehistory. Items from the Craig mound have stimulated numerous studies and have provided recurrent discussion and controversy. At the same time, though there is a deep and farflung interest in the site on the part of both professional archaeologists and laypeople, no comprehensive description and analysis of the materials recovered under the best conditions have been brought to completion. This has created, indeed, a great gap, not only in our knowledge of Oklahoma prehistory but that of eastern North America as well. As will become evident in the subsequent discussion, Spiro and its artifacts have not suffered from a lack of interest, but the lack of time and human resources to organize this large collection have resulted in the postponement of its analysis.

PIau The Spiro Mound Group is actually a relative newcomer to the list of archaeological sites receiving more than merely local attention. The first recorded visit took place in 1914-a recent date in comparison to the early nineteenth-century records of Ohio Valley mounds. In its monumental canvas of earthworks the great mound survey, the Bureau of American Ethnology excluded the Indian Territory lands on which this site stood. Even in his monograph on the archaeology of the Arkansas River valley, Moorehead (1931:22) concluded that the "pottery belt" of the archaeologically rich Mississippi River valley did not extend into Oklahoma. With this view as to the relative marginality of the Arkansas River valley, it is all the more remarkable that within a brief span of twenty years the Spiro site rose to national prominence by challenging existing notions about the prehistory of the western edge of the Eastern Woodlands. Not long after artifact discoveries were made in 1933, the site began to attract enormous attention. Soon revisions about about the prehistory of the Mississippian Period in the Eastern Woodlands became necessary in order to accommodate the spectacular nature of those finds (Waring and Holder 1945). Archaeology has not been quite the same since. Prominent though this mound group remains in our conceptions of Eastern Woodlands prehistory, a monographic study equal to its importance has yet to be completed. Numerous articles, research reports and monographs obviously have provided muchneeded interim coverage. But the complexity of the subject requires extended treatment of all available sources of information. This project aims to fulfill the need for such a monograph. Although the core of this project is the research presented in four published and one unpublished volumes entitled Spiro Studies, these reports are inadequate in themselves. In the first place, each takes a limited perspective that does not result in a complete and integrated review of the site's archaeology. This is largely due to the stepwise progression in which the original research project was conducted. Each succeeding report revised the results of the previous ones. Secondly, the passage of time since that research format was designed has rendered it obsolete. A fresh approach to the findings of the WPA investigations is mandated by advances

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part I-Brown on a number of fronts-new archival discoveries on the site, several years' fresh archaeological investigations at the site, further detailed research on the collections, and the advantage provided by archaeological advances in the Caddoan Area and the Southeast generally. The scope of this project is large, but is one that is anchored to the WPA-sponsored research agenda. The central objectives are: 1) To place the findings on the site within an up-to-date interpretive framework that makes use of advances in our knowledge about the site, the Caddoan Area and the Greater Southeast. This widened scope of interpretation brings in information from a wide circle of sites. Notwithstanding the large pool of relevant information, the prime focus will be to interpret the major earthworks in terms of the society that made and used them. This should unravel some of the central riddles of the site. To undertake this task, old findings on the site will have to be recast in terms of contemporary perspectives on chronology, site layout, settlement patterning, and dimensions of social organization through burial analysis. 2) To describe the artifacts, burials and other features found by the University of Oklahoma-WPA expedition to the Spiro site

5

between 1936 and 1941. To this core Dody of data will be added information that can be extracted from the pre-1936 digging and collection-making. On almost every topic fresh information will be utilized that takes advantage of the field research conducted since 1979 at the site. In pursuit of these objectives, all of the existing information bearing on the Spiro mounds-the history of construction, the cultural contexts of the earthworks, their associated features, and their included objects-will be presented. This information is essential to assessing the site's contribution to an overall picture of Eastern Woodlands prehistory. The foundation for this assessment must be the WPA investigations conducted in the wake of the mess left by relic-mining. But to make sense of this primary data it has to be interpreted through knowledge gained from other investigations, including work conducted since the WPA days at the site itself. Armed with an up-to-date perspective to chronology, earthwork construction, and treatment of the dead, it is possible to present the site's archaeology in a form that addresses nagging questions held over from the earliest period of plundering as well as ones that make sense in terms of presently understood conceptions about Caddoan Area archaeology.

CHAPTER

2

The Spiro Mound Group

The Fort Coffee Archaeological Region

Regional Settlement Patterns

Before we look at the history of Spiro archaeology, let's put the site in its geographic context. Spiro and a concentration of contemporary sites occupy a stretch of the Arkansas River valley that I have designated here as the Fort Coffee Archaeological Region (Fig. 1-1). This is primarily a 6 to 7 km section of the valley on either side of a rock-framed constriction, once guarded by old Fort Coffee. This early American post stood on the rock outcrop at the south side of this narrows between 1834 and 1838 for the purpose of policing the western frontier. This narrows naturally divides the region into western (upstream) and eastern (downstream) sections. Spiro mounds dominate the downstream side, while a related, isolated mound fronts on the upstream side. Altogether these mounds serve the two halves of a regional social territory. Within a 5 km radius of Spiro, thirteen sites have been located and excavated to some extent. These are solely on the south side of the river in LeFlore County. An additional four sites lie immediately outside this catchment and are customarily included in the Fort Coffee Archaeological Region as well (Orr 1946; Rogers 1980; Rohrbaugh 1982a, 1984). Complementary settlement on the north bank in Sequoyah County is poorly known, mainly because it lacked the archaeological investigations that relief project support provided in LeFlore County during the years of the Great Depression. However, Thobum (1930) reported at least one site at Redland on the narrows opposite Fort Coffee. This cluster of sites is sufficiently compact and culturally uniform to be regarded as the settlement distribution of one or two communities over a period of several hundred years. Mounds are present in two locations, at each side of the landmass defined by a broad loop of the Arkansas River (Figs. 1-1, 1-2). Spiro stands on the eastern side with a commanding field of sight in the downstream direction. Skidgel mound (34Lf70) covers the western side by dominating the upstream direction. The two are connected by a common equinoctial alignment that presumes a common set of cosmographic principles (Sherrod and Rolingson 1987). Such a commonalty is grounds for considering each to be a coordinated part of a linked social and religious system planted in the Fort Coffee region.

Most of the Caddoan sites of the region were located, tested or excavated by the WPA personnel from 1937 to 1941. These sites, which vary greatly in size, are positioned mostly on the upland bluffs. In addition there are a few large sites in the bottoms on the banks of abandoned river channels. Table 1-1. Fort Coffee Archaeological Region Components

Harlan phase components Geren (Lf36), House 6 Gertrude Bowman I (Lf42), Houses 1,2aa Choates-Holt (Lf62), Houses 2,7 a Skidgel (Lf70), House 3b Norman phase components Littlefield III (Lf64)- 6 houses Spiro phase components Edgar Moore cemetery (Lf31 [LtMrIll]) Geren (Lf36) II houses Gertrude Bowman I (Lf42) 8 houses and cemetery Littlefield I (Lf60) 13 houses Choates (Lf62) House I Choates-Holt (Lf62) S houses Littlefield II (Lf63) 3 houses Gertrude Bowman II (Lf6S) [Bowman!Prattj 4 houses Gertrude Bowman III (Lf66) 2 houses Granville Bowman (Lf67) 2 houses Squire Hall (Lf63) 4 houses Skidgel II mound (Lf70) 2 houses Hamilton (Lf78) 3 houses Garrett Ainsworth (Lf80)* 3 houses Littlefield IV (Lf82) 3 houses Fort Coffee phase components Lyman Moore cemetery (Lf31 [LtMo!]) Choates-Holt site (Lf62), Houses 4, 4a, SO Skidgel I cemetery (Lf69) Louis Jones site (Lf7S), 4 houses Source: Rohrbaugh (1982a, 1985a). *Sites more than S km from either Brown mound or Skidgel mound. aPour-center-post structures (Rohrbaugh 1982a, 1984, 1985a). bProm a habitation area south of and adjcent to the Skidgel mound (Orr 1938). Material listed by Rohrbaugh (l982a: 383-84). "The only circular, bent sapling structures.

7

Red/ond Dol/om

\

f

/

// ...

I

) .

I

I ,

2

ljrodsn Dol/om

:;;.

/

~

///////~ /( ...

Kilometers

Mil..

,

I

o

oI

Pow Pow 8ol/om

~ V~ 963 ~

d M~ . _60

Dol/om

,..........-.

".

Coif..

Figure 1-1. The Fort Coffee Archaeological Region.

-

"' ~~FO"

Meander Scar

Uplands

Bottoms

137 m. (450') Contour

fZj

o

D

~

77•

~

~

N '0

~

~

15"

"\5

~ c

So

;:s

~

~

s::

f1:)

~

So f1:)

~

5'

~

00

,,-

/' ---

,/'/

-------

Ri'l,r

~

/

~

-"

~~ -

I '-''-- . I '- - -------__., I "',,-

"

-

- =

I,

I

s~~~

___

0

__ --- --

2

"Oi~

-- -

~

==- ~~~OlIsECTION29--===--=-= -

SECTlONI9~

\\ 1

------\ \

II

~

" ~

I

... r.ET

M~H'I'IS

~ --

-----:..... 1

I

~

'\

I

2~O

Figure 1-2. Sites in the Fort Coffee and Spiro neighborhoods, showing the relationship of the principal earthworks and the detached House 1 of the Choates site (topography based on the 7.5 minute series Fort Coffee quadrangle map of 1967).

a

////

)

-

J

'''~ II --J

')

h~~~m·Q~ "

/

V ~.~~~ro/r 430~ --==-~ ..... ". -~==~i?J ' '"

_____

",

Floodplain

'-- ----~

c--~

~

,

~~ ~~. -~-~,,:::::7 ~/'\-:;-~~ /~ 1 .-.~. \JA~O--------~__________

~-~

----

C--.---~- ----~

~

-

-----.. ~ , :-----"-~~ I ~

Central chamber items italicized as in Table 1-8. ·"Copper-covered baskets" b" Bird points" Cl.'Spears" d"Copper breast plates"

X pieces of textilei 1 animal effigy pipe 1 human effigy pipe fragment 9 T -shaped pipe pieces 1 ceramic pipe stem 1 elbow pipe fragment 1 bone bird effigy 2 wooden statuette heads 3 swatches of human hair 1 wooden rattle 3 batches of quartz pebbles (probably from rattles) I stone discoidal 8 quartz crystals 3 Busycon shell cups .

2242 marine shell cup fragments' 35 marine shell inlay pieces 9 caches of mica 2 pieces of mastodon molar 1 fossil shark spine 5 stone paint palettes 6 pieces of red ochre 16 pieces of green pigment (glauconite) 4 pieces of black pigment 2 pieces of white pigment 1 piece of yellow OI,hre 29 blocks of galena I Gary knife point 1 chipped stone spade fragment 1 bone digging tip piece 3 miscellaneous worked pieces of stone 54 marine shell discs 33 immature Busycon shells and columella fragments 4 mussel shells 1 I deer bone 4 cedar pole pieces 1 lot of charcoal I stone concretion 6 stones 1 lot of burnt clay 1 chert flake 2 pieces of grey clay

C"Copper wire" fA component of shell bead category gA component of engraved shell category h"Blankets" iA component of engraved shell category l"Lead and zinc ore"

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part I-Brown larger if the containers and other artifacts were loosely and irregularly piled together. Hence, this type of deposit would be subject to natural settling after burial. This postdepositional settling is precisely what Hamilton (1952:29) thought of as the origin of the air spaces reported by the pot hunters above the "shell ring." A close examination of the row 15 proftle (Fig. 1-16) above the deposit of conch shell reveals a large irregular cavity which could well have been a result of the settling of the shell as hypothesized here. If so, it is one of the few indications of what the so-called "shell ring" may have resembled. Secondly, the amount of material attributed to the central chamber is greater by far than that derived from an equivalent number of adjacent features. It is not only greater in bulk, but it is also made up of such items as "blankets" piled upon each other that could easily settle with age. Considering the position of this cavity in the center of the floor area it was also in an advantageous place for a cavity to develop and remain supported by the soil masses around the edges of the floor area. Although the weight of evidence supports the existence of a hollow cavity in the central chamber, its dimensions and structure remain less certain. It is apparent from the previous discussion that the relic miners had distorted views of the size and nature of the features they discovered. Even with careful observation, the internal structure of the mound could easily have been misinterpreted and distances misjudged when it is considered that the relicseeking miners were accustomed to digging amazingly small and serpentine tunnels. Moreover, in their eagerness to recover as much loot as possible, they had enlarged the central chamber to such an extent that later excavators found that they had dug at least one foot below the level of what must have been the floor of the original cavity-6despite their claims to the contrary (Hamilton 1952:31). Most of the chamber was certainly their work. In Hamilton's description, a pile of earth three feet high was reported in middle of the central chamber. This block was thought to have been loosened by water action after clandestine potting had created a pit in the top of the main cone. This roof-fall leads one to suspect that the height of the chamber may have grown through this and other falls. It is even possible that the presence of vertical cedar poles concentrated in the center may have hastened this spalling after the process was under way. The breadth of the chamber can be attributed to the trained inclination of coal miners to follow a seam. One need only consult the photographic views of the cleaned-out central hollow to recognize the wedgelike burrowing that followed the central floor zone much as a miner would be trained to follow a mineral seam. Thus, one might suppose that the dimensions of the hollowed-out center supplied by Clements (1945) were the product of miners enlarging upon a natural cavity. Although the relic miners were largely oblivious to the impact they had on the archaeology of the mound core, the details of their accounts cannot be dismissed out of hand as a consequence. There is substantial evidence for the presence of upright cedar poles ringing the chamber (as opposed to those in the outer "ring" of marine shell (Fig. 1-27). The proftles adjoining the chamber do not reveal any changes from strictly horizontal bedding of the

93

strata overlying the central floor. However, these stratigraphic clues to some inner structure probably would have been destroyed with the creation of the large-sized cavity that Clements and his archaeological team measured upon re-excavation. It would seem that inward-leaning cedar poles composed an inner ring in the center of the Great Mortuary floor (Clements 1938). This framework, if it existed, would have strengthened considerably any tendency for the packed earth to form a structural vault. Now, one objection that could be raised to the existence of such a framework in the center is the absence of any space devoted to such a structure-although the absence of postmolds can be dismissed as a consequence of the destructive effects of digging into the Great Mortuary floor. More serious, however, is the problem of how a framework would have fitted the already crammed floor area. This objection was uppermost in mind when earlier interpretations were considered (Brown 1966a). However, this is a problem only if it is assumed that the poles of the framework were part of an openair, self-supporting structure. In my earlier views I was guided by analogy with classic Middle Mississippian platform mounds, and as a consequence I looked for structures and fences, without considering other kinds of structures customarily left out of the repertoire of Mississippian period constructions. In Chapter 14 a review of specialized structures in the Caddoan Area enlarges the possibilities far beyond the standard "Mississippian" pyramidal mound model. What had gone unrecognized was the absence of structures on platform mounds in the Arkansas River drainage, and the relatively late appearance of such constructions south of the Ouachitas as well. Furthermore, platform mounds typically started out as berm-banked specialized structures that resembled earthlodges-if they were not in fact earthcovered structures (Fig. 1-51). Thus, the models that would be useful for interpreting the Great Mortuary lead to very different expectations of what the structural evidence should be. Even more crucially, the analysis of the Spiro gravelot sequence has led to the realization that the Great Mortuary gravelots are an artificial creation of asynchronous grave goods drawn from earlier graves, some as old as 400 years. This new view of the Great Mortuary makes it a specific event, but without the connotation of a "typical" charnel house/temple floor. Not only does it obviate the search for foundations of a superstructure, but the necessity for having a space free for placing the central chamber pole framework is no longer important. In other words, anything could have been planted onto any of these burial arrangements since they were created for a very specific purpose unrelated to the integrity of individual graves and without regard for keeping roofed space unencumbered. The length and positioning of the upright cedar poles themselves shed light on a likely alternative function. These poles protrude high into the main mound unit and appear to have even higher poles planted on top (Figs. 1-17c, d; Duffield 1973: Fig. 3). Duffield (1973) pointed out that the length of the poles would have projected far higher than the top of the mound layer (B3) covering the Great Mortuary. For example, the heavy pole positioned at the north (and possible entryway) end of the Great Mortuary near row 20.5/alley 2.5 (Fig. 1-17c) was scaled off by

94

Memoirs of the Museum ofAnthropology, No. 29

Duffield (1973:4) to a length of 12.5 ft above the surface in the photograph that represents the Great Mortuary floor. The variable length of these poles and their irregular scatter makes little sense as uprights for a structure. To conceive of these as constructional timbers one would have to suppose that the real pattern had been concealed by the decay of many intermediate posts. Furthermore, rather than being upright most of the poles were inward leaning (Clements 1938), suggesting deliberate positioning in selected locations instead of the final repose of a decaying structure. Finally, the poles are centered without respect to graves around them. The clearest case is the pole that violated the integrity of the best defined of the litter burials, B62 (Brown 1966a:90). These four elements-centered, inward-leaning poles that overlap to defme a wooden "cone"-suggest a very different function than that of fences or screens erected on discrete use surfaces. Essentially this same set of observations led Duffield (1973) to champion an interpretation of the poles as a structural feature that physically connected the burials at the mound base with the rituals at the mound summit. He drew upon analogy with the traditional formula for mound building among the Cherokee for insight into the Craig mound case (Duffield 1973:5). Traditionally, the Cherokee let a hollow tree trunk into a hole beneath the sacred fire to communicate with an earlier (perhaps mythical) fire below, kindled at the base of the mound (Mooney 1900:396). Duffield (1973) implied that the Craig mound cedar uprights constituted an analogous line of communication from the summit of the mound to its foundational depths. This interpretation of the poles as a symbolic conduit for the sacred forces embedded at the base of the main Craig mound unit casts the central chamber into new light. The vaultlike construction of their "chamber" was formed, probably deliberately, as an avenue of access to the powers interred below. As time progressed it became the "lower story" of this symbolic conduit, which was added to as the summit grew. Thus, at anyone point in the use history of the summit, poles projected from below in a way that served as a physical connection to the underlying foundational sacra. There is little necessity for hypothesizing a physical building over the Great Mortuary (Brown 1966a). It is not that the space sparmed is too large, it is simply that the massing of asynchronous material into a deposit that was complete from the beginning removes the physical basis for believing that this material accumulated within a structure (Brown 1975). Note that a structure of the size to span the prepared area of 16.8 X 11.3 m is just a bit larger than the large structure from Hiwassee Island measuring 17.4x 10 m (Lewis and Kneberg 1946:63; Webb and Wilder 1957:252,257). The present interpretation makes this deposit to have been a single event, made up largely of reinterred dead and their grave furnishings. The brief time in which this event took place makes it possible to explain the contradictory degrees of preservation in the watertight central chamber. The purpose of this giant ossuary deposit was to serve as a foundation deposit for the mounded cemetery that was to be created above it. In other words, it was the first step toward a new mound cemetery plan that required the earlier dead in its base to properly sanctify the foundation of a new "cemetery" placed above. The breadth of deposit was framed by

the berms that I have hypothezied as lying around this mortuary space. Presumably, these berms were created and renewed in conjunction with a former mortuarylcharnel house within. But, there is no reason to think that a structure stood here when the Great Mortuary deposit was laid down.

Historical Scenario When the WPA plan of the central floor stratum is integrated with reconstructions of the central chamber (Figs. 1-28, 29), a consistent ground plan emerges (Phillips and Brown 1975a: Fig. 5). Three rows of litter burials rest upon scattered piles of disarticulated human remains and artifacts. Amongst these cedar poleframed litters are basket box burials and extended type 2c burials. Of these three formal burials, only the extended burial is a treatment contemporary with the construction of the Great Mortuary deposit. East of center was an accumulation of cedar human effigies and other charnel house furniture. Large human effigy pipes were clustered at the north end. Piles of textiles and marine shell beads were distributed throughout. On this floor were accumulations of disarticulated bones, marine shell cups and other artifacts, frequently intermixed without pattern. Parts of the same artifact were distributed throughout the mortuary deposit, even within sequential layers. A history of ritual handling is conveyed in the burnt, broken, smashed or crumpled condition of the artifacts. Underlying the deposit is a floor of parallel-running heavy split cane impressions that undulates with the underlying microtopography. In terms of the reasoning of this report, the "floor" in Hamilton's (1952:31) account should represent the surface of this deposit. The "raised places" would be small mounds of earth left by the greenish gray clay adhering to the items of phase B I . The items that were visible to the relic miners when they broke into the central chamber would belong largely to phase B 2• Such a correlation is strengthened by the report of John Hobbs, an original digger, of the floor being "covered with two layers of cedar poles" one at right angles to the other (Fig. 1-29). Hobbs thought that in at least one case the "blankets" were first laid on poles before being covered with large numbers of beads, according to a note to a drawing of the mound made September 6, 1936. The same situation is reported in the Kansas City Star feature article of the previous December. In Macdonald's version, the "room was floored with cedar poles and on top of them was laid a blanket. ... On top of this was a pile of thousands of beads." This association alludes primarily to the central group in Hamilton's sketch, and if valid, makes this group of artifacts part of a litter burial. Probably, others were found as well, although their location and artifactual associations remain, of course, hypothetical. The closing phase should not be represented in the central chamber since layer B3 was not high enough to completely bury the hollow vault. Hence it should be present only at the peripheries of the floor area (Fig. 1-30). The sequence of events can be reconstructed in the following steps. First a rectangular berm-enclosed space connected with a former specialized structure was cleared. One, possibly two, central post pits to this structure remained open. A small burial deposit was first laid down (B69). This and most other deposits

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part I-Brown +

+

+

95 +

+

R 20

~l

\ft.! B~C

9

B46A

CJ

+

R 18

+

R 16

~ +

:::~

CONCENTRATION

DCONCH SHELL DEPOSIT

@

~

CJ

~ ALLEY I

ALLEY 2

ALLEY 3

Figure 1-30. Great Mortuary floor plan.

POST HOLE FILL

C!}l PATCH o !

OF FLOOR (811

OVERLYING FILL (83) 10

5

I

FE'ET ALLEY ..

ALLEY II

96

Memoirs of the Museum ofAnthropology, No. 29

that followed appear to have been derived from disinterred graves. Some may have come from the north primary mound where three gravelots (A6, All, A14) were discovered bearing an extraordinary similarity to those from the Great Mortuary. The next step was to lay down a clean flooring of split canes laid side by side in a special orientation that was to be repeated by the succeeding burial arrangements. Upon this floor were laid clumps of human bones, and pieces of artifacts, apparently encased in the greenish gray clay clinging to some of the Great Mortuary artifacts to this day (Brown 1981a). Lying upon these clumps and between them were rows of littershaped biers on which were heaped more of the same sort of artifact pieces and the occasional human bone. On each of these litters were a few bones (mainly skull) standing for the dead memorialized by the gravelot. Among these litters were basket box burials with human remains, copper headdress plates and other artifacts. Extended type 2c burials were placed in the semicardinal directions. Unlike other burials, these extended burials probably were not exhumed-merely subjected to some excarnation. One (Fig. 2-lOa--c) was unmineralized with well-preserved hair. Other bones given distinctive attention were one or more bundle burials (specifically, a unique skull and crossbones arrangement of burial BI63b). The position of the formal burials, in particular the litter burials, was indicative of a kind of social stratification. These funeral biers rested upon the broken bones of the underlying bone and artifact layer in a manner directly analogous to the position of the litter burial in the Brown mound (BrB6a) upon its mass of partly disarticulated flexed burials. In both cases a formal burial directly overlay an ossuary mass. Whether directly superimposed on other burials or not, all of the formal burials (basket box, extended and bundle) can be regarded as conceptually "above" the ossuary bones lying directly on the floor. The mortuary treatment of these physically superior burials together with their consistent association with the greatest amount of grave wealth indicates that a superior social standing was attributed to them as well (Brown 1971a, 1981b). Additional baskets contained copper-headed axes, beads, smashed coppers and other artifacts. Thick piles of textiles were stacked in different locations, some of which seem to have been covered with mounds of shell beads. These textiles are likely to have been provided anew for the event. Elsewhere, marine shell beads filled marine shell containers. Another category was the mortuary furniture in the form of wooden statues and face masks. The final preparation of this deposit was the erection of a set of cedar uprights that were evidently concentrated in the center of the Great Mortuary deposit. This concentration facilitated the preservation of a void over this deposit and created a marker for the deposit after it was sealed. The seal was a thick bed packed on top of the Great Mortuary deposit within the berm. A few bones and artifact pieces were slipped into the comers formed between the central chamber and the berm. It is likely that for a brief time an opening to the Great Mortuary was available through the top of this vault of uprights. Subsequent elevation of the summit eventually buried the vault completely. But before the ends of the original poles were covered, new poles had been planted to carry on the

designed function of these poles as a physical connection to the Great Mortuary deposit. Thus, the Great Mortuary deposit became a living part of the subsequent use history of the Craig mound. The Graveyard Population

Within the Great Mortuary deposit, a large number of skeletons were accumulated, although it was difficult for the untrained relic hunters to discern more than a single grave. The reason is that most of these skeletons were disarticulated fragments mixed with artifacts. Although the precise number of individuals represented is no longer possible to calculate-even as MNI, an estimate can only be formulated on the basis of graves and recovered elements. To be useful, this estimate has to broken down according to facility type or context. The litter burials were arranged roughly into three rows if the four criblike forms described by the relic miners followed the pattern found by the WPA archaeologists (Fig. 1-30). (Of the four, only the southwestern [XB7] and fragmentary northeastern grave [XB8] remained to be recovered in the WPA work.) To this configuration can be added the small square-shaped accumulations of shell that were probably the remains of decomposed litters. A list of litter burials found by the salvage work can be found in Table 2-14. To the total of 12 Spiro IVA and IVB litter burials should be added the two totally removed by the relic miners. A reconstructed plan has been published previously (Phillips and Brown 1975a: Fig. 5). The estimated total number of litter burials is 14, ranging in area from 0.5 to 4 m2, and possibly larger, judging from the massiveness of the XB8 timber fragments. (Excluded from this estimate is the fragment [AI6] with human remains recovered in a position appropriate for the northern extensionlentryway as depicted in Fig. 1-20. It is difficult to determine whether this grave was broken up aboriginally or was disturbed by the relic miners whose tunnel passed nearby.) Each of these litters was the principal bier of a single individual, although a few included a few remains of another individual (Table 2-15). One (B62) contained the remains of a cremated individual cemented to a marine shell scoop. These inclusions belong with the type 5b burials of disarticulated elements mixed with marine shell and other objects. The second type of elite burial is the basket box burial. Two were recovered by the WPA work, ten baskets were tabulated by Hamilton, and six additional pieces of baskets, presumably of this burial type, are present in the WPA collections, yielding a total of 18, which is only a rough estimate since much of this is based on the presence of basket parts that were incompletely inventoried and investigated for included human remains. This estimate does not include the three from B122, redeposited on the berm surrounding the Great Mortuary. Each basket presumably held the remains of a single individual, though a bone count could not always be made (Table 2-17). Extended burials of the type 2c form make up the third elite type (Fig. 1-32a). Ten can be counted: nine were recovered in the WPA work (Table 2-7) and one is represented by the wellpreserved skull (Fig. 2-10) that probably belongs to the "skeleton" described by relic miners. This estimate excludes the individuals

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part I-Brown

97

Figure 1-31. Litter burials from the Great Mortuary. a) B 155a, b) B 156, c) B62, d) B 108e, litter burial at the lower left, the other deposits to the right; B 108b is right center; B 108d is lower left; e) closeup of B62; f) impression of lashings from B62; g) impression of lashings from B155.

redeposited on the berms surrounding the Great Mortuary (e.g., B9, B122, B162) as well as the remains of litter and other burials lying beneath the main floor (i.e., B69). The total estimated number of elite burials is 42, of which half

are accounted for in the WPA collections. The remainder is based on burial furniture of litters and basket box remains. This number is not extraordinarily large. If all are regarded as representing the remains of the sole individual holding principal leadership at any

98

Memoirs of the Museum ofAnthropology, No. 29

one time, then the spread of 42 over the 400 year period span from which they were drawn, yields an average duration of office of slightly less than 10 years. Such a number is reasonable if the elite dead in this deposit were to represent the chain of elite that existed over a 400 year history. Thus, the size of the burial deposit is in harmony with a faithful reassembly of past elite. The number of skeletons estimated to form the base mortuary layer is much greater. The sum of individuals estimated in each of the lower-level gravelots of the Great Mortuary is 101, made up of 18 type 5a, 82 type 5b, and 1 type 8d mortuary treatments (Tables 2-11, 12, 14,20). A more conservative estimate based on the most common bone, which is the femur in this case, yields an MNI of only 37. This element count however is artificially depressed by the number oflots (labeled "UB-l," etc.) that were separated from their collection bags during storage. Furthermore, these estimates cover only the skeletons mixed with shell and other objects recovered during the WPA work at the periphery of the Great Mortuary in the space not mined out beforehand. This area, untouched by the minings in the center and connecting tunnels, accounts for approximately 65% of the total. If the mined-out section held burials at the same density as the portion excavated by the WPA, the total number of lower-level burials should be increased proportionately. The resulting recalculation would then be 136 or 50 burials depending upon which method of calculation was used as a basis for estimate. The ratio of the upper layer burials to the total number of Great Mortuary burials ranges from a maximum of 46%, when a very minimal MNI count is used, to a much smaller proportion of 25% when the total is estimated by the number of individuals per gravelot. In neither case does the ratio approach the ratios of 1: 10 or 1:20 expected for social systems organized hierarchically (Peebles and Kus 1977). From one perspective, the ratio observed in the Great Mortuary is an indication of the artificial separation of elite interments from non-elites. From another this ratio points to a social context that was not strictly hierarchical but merely that of internally ranked statuses among egalitarian social groups.

The Provenience as a Problem Contrary to what might be expected of such a well-sealed deposit as the Great Mortuary context, its value as a time capsule is limited. Because of the mixture of artifacts of different age, none of the gravelots can be used as a reliable index of the deposit's time. These gravelots are important in other respects, but not for the kind of temporal cross-correlation that many might fmd so tempting. Although I have made reference to this deposit as a temporal marker repeatedly, this usage, which has found its way into many publications, is no longer valid (Brown 1971b, 1984a, 1984b). For the following reasons, the Great Mortuary deposit has lost its value as a temporal benchmark (Phillips and Brown 1975a; Rohrbaugh 1985b). This practice has accumulated so many contradictions it is no longer possible to hold out against the entirely different interpretation of the processes advanced here that led up to the deposition of such quantities of artifacts found in this single collective provenience.

1) Mixture in modes of interment. Burials represented include types for which there is no independent support for contemporaneity. The litter burials that are so prominent a feature of the Great Mortuary can only be documented independently in Spiro IT times (BrB6a). This period is so close to the time when litter burials are found in other eastern sites, including Mound 72 at Cahokia (Fowler 1974), as to raise the possibility that this mortuary treatment is confined to this range of time. The extended burial, particularly the partly disarticulated version, is present only in Spiro IV times. This is one interment whose presence is consistent with the age of the Great Mortuary. Contemporary with this feature are the extended burials that were found at Ferguson (Schambach and Early 1985). Lastly, a bit of cremation fixed in frothy silicate slag is clearly out of place as a document for the practice of cremation, which independent evidence supports for no later than Spiro ill times. In line with this assortment of noncontemporaneous burial modes is the treatment of bundle burials. In contrast to the stereotypic form of such burial treatment, each of the Great Mortuary bundle burials is highly idiosyncratic (Chapter 18). This coupled with the anachronistic union of different burial types points to the contrived nature of all interments in the Great Mortuary deposit. 2) Mixture of preservation. Different degrees of preservation point to multiple histories for individual burials. The conditions of preservation within the Great Mortuary itself are uniformly good, particularly in the hollow chamber core. Wood, basketry and fabrics were preserved in excellent shape, without the benefit of copper salts or other kinds of chemical preservation. Yet the condition of human bone can differ greatly. Most of the disarticulated bones were excellently preserved because of heavy mineralization. However, other burials, such as one observed in B163, had the consistency of sawdust when first uncovered. Other inconsistencies exist. Despite the fact that much of the marine shell was in fme shape, many cups were eroded or eaten away in the center where they would have been most vulnerable to erosion if water accumulated within (Phillips and Brown 1975). Yet, the deposit was conspicuously dry. In fact, uncarbonized textiles would not have held up to the least amount of dampness. Baskets were often broken out and eroded in the center of their bottoms although the rest of the basket, including the color of the splits, was in excellent condition. Uncarbonized fabrics had great integrity, with different colors preserved in great subtlety. If anything, their condition has worsened with postexcavation exposure to the elements (Gardner 1980). The wood of handles and human effigies are only a bit splintered from dehydration. In so many different categories, well-preserved perishables have holes or other indications that indicate these items had spent time in another, less benign, environment before their fmal repose in the dryness of the Great Mortuary deposit. 3) Breakage patterns. The pattern of crossmends among the engraved shell has been cited above for its help in unifying the Great Mortuary gravelots. At least 950 different shell cups and gorgets are involved although, for the most part, broken items are distributed among more than one gravelot rather than being concentrated in any single one (Phillips and Brown 1983: xi). As

Figure 1-32. Great Mortuary burial types. a) Extended burial (type 2c), B46a; b) burial deposit (type 5b), B44; c) burial deposit (type 5b), Bill; d) view south across B54, showing small burial deposits (type 5b); the disturbed area was beneath the "central chamber" to the right center; the litter burial XB7 is in the right background.

\C \C

§

c:1

Ie;,

4-

~

:ot

~

[ ~ ;:s

c ;:s

~ ~

~

a'

~

~

~

a

Figure 1-33. Feature details of the central floor zone. a) Spiro IVA burial B69a in foreground with remnants of litter burial behind it. This feature is represented by the irregUlarities in the B68 section of the floor shown in (d); b) cast of a twilled cane mat from B68; c) the twilled cane mat impression shown overlying material on the central floor, B68; d) a section of the central floor, B68, see (a) above.

\C

N

~

~

~ S' OQ

~

So

;::s

)a.

~

3

~

~ ~

~

~ So ~

5'

~ ~

§

The Spiro Ceremonial Center; Part I-Brown a consequence, almost all of the Great Mortuary gravelots crossmend with each other (Table 1-20). This pattern does not appear to be happenstance. The number of connections a gravelot has appears to be dependent upon the absolute number of shells in each sample. The gravelot with the largest inventory, B62, is connected through crossmends to the greatest number of other Great Mortuary features; none with a small inventory of engraved shell is so connected with another. The conclusion to be drawn from this is that the sample of engraved shell was thoroughly mixed or resorted before it was distributed into Great Mortuary gravelots. Furthermore, the mixing took place at one time and the placement of the mixture was a single act made with little regard for placing objects in their original order. Breakage patterns on large bifaces testify to a similar pattern, only on a smaller scale. Again, pieces within a gravelot cannot be crossmended. Although the massive effort required to reassemble these artifacts faithfully has not been attempted, what little attempt has been ventured indicates that the widest pool of gravelots would be necessary for success. From what little we know it is apparent that lithics were mixed and resorted into their final resting places. One additional detail is available from these artifacts. Deliberate destruction was undertaken: several ceremonial bifaces show continued whacking away at the edges before they broke. A number of artifacts are unbroken except for one or two pieces. These were probably introduced into the Great Mortuary somewhat like garbage, totally unlike the pattern of grave good deposition prevailing in other graves. Other types of destruction point to ritual consumption before final interment. Copper plates were routinely crumpled, folded or otherwise ruined (Hamilton, Hamilton and Chapman 1974). Some marine shell beads were fire-blackened. Although only a small minority show this condition, fife-blackening was distributed among many provenience units in all three layers of the Great Mortuary. Scorching and smudging, however, appear to have been associated with: (1) nonburial deposits (A21, A26, A28), and (2) burials of the "redeposited" type (B44, B49, B54, BIOI, BIll, B 150, B 176), with the possible exception of B48. Fire-blackening of a small portion of the beads in each of the above lots indicates minor exposure to fire without major destruction through scorching and splintering. The source of this burning was not in the Great Mortuary itself since no record or rumor has ever indicated that a fife basin once existed there. Other objects reveal similar exposure without outright destruction. Chipped stone artifacts (e.g., maces) show traces of smoking and surface crazing. These bits of blackened and scorched items found in a context completely lacking in evidence of any fife, or use of fire, points to the beads as well as other burnt items as having been transported into the Great Mortuary after burning. 4) Stylistic contradictions. Ceramic attributes co-occur in the Great Mortuary that otherwise are not found in the same period. First of all, the proportion of grit and grog tempered plainwares to shell tempered ones is much greater than expected for an early fifteenth century deposit (Rohrbaugh 1985b). Secondly, a tapered neck bottle of Hickory Engraved (B62-54) coexists with straight necked bottles of Haley and Glassell Engraved (Bell 1953a). Although these types of body decoration may have overlapped,

101

the neck shapes surely did not. Thirdly, a restorable carinated Sanders Engraved bowl (B36-39) possesses a straight rim typical of Spiro II time vessels found at the Sanders site (Krieger 1946). But shouldered examples of this type in other Spiro IV gravelots (BI40) are inslanted instead. The change in bowl rim profile that Krieger (1946) established for the Red River drainage was already under way by Spiro ill times. Lastly, strap handles on a Handy Engraved bowl (B54-60) represent a ceramic attribute well established by Spiro ill times, long after the time when pottery was characterized by tapered bottle necks and straight-rimmed carinated bowls. In short, the Great Mortuary ceramic assemblage is an anachronistic mixture of styles from different times. Chunks of vegetable ash slag containing human bone and bits of human cremation adhering to bits of fire-smoked shell reveal the existence of even more severe exposure to fire than most of the osseous remains from the Great Mortuary would ever indicate. These bits of cremation-related burning activity are not likely to be of Spiro IV age. Although cremation was not a disposal-of-thedead practice of this period, it does coincide in context with evidence of artifact burning. Both are confined to the Great Mortuary. General practice and the appropriate facilities for fires of such intensity place this activity in the Spiro II and ill periods. Artifact associations place the crematory basin, B 187, in an earlier period. This evidence for burning is therefore a carryover from an earlier period into the Great Mortuary. Thus, fife-blackening of shaped shell beads can be related to the scavenging of ancient skeletons and grave goods that led to the creation of the skeletal and artifactual mixtures identified as the distinctive type 5b burials of the Great Mortuary. 5) Contradictory crossties. The assemblage of artifacts from the gravelots has crossties to different periods. The long-nosed god maskette from the subfloor gravelot (B69) has to be connected with the deposits upon this floor in the Great Mortuary because of the engraved shell crossmend (Fig. 1-20). This ear ornament is a conspicuous crosstie to Gahagan, Harlan, and sites in the Cahokia area and further north that were occupied between A.D. 1150 and 1250 (Anderson 1975; Ham 1975). Its age is over one hundred years earlier than the age of the Great Mortuary. There are other, less publicized, crossties of comparable disparity. The "Big Boy" pipe (Fig. 2-99) mentioned in all accounts as one of the first discoveries in the "hollow chamber" is in the same sculptural style as the "Birger" figurine from an early Stirling phase component (A.D. 1050-1100) at the BBB Motor site in the American Bottom (Emerson 1982). Even within the Spiro gravelots, Big Boy is deposited in a later context than the stylistically similar "Lucifer" pipe from the Spiro ill gravelot, B99. There exist other early pipes in the Great Mortuary. The "woman at the mortar" pipe (Burnett 1945: PI. 8, 9), which is definitely a modified figurine, has a number of correspondences with the Keller figurine from the same BBB Motor site: in composition, treatment of head and grinding implements placed before the squatting figure (Emerson 1989). The Keller figurine woman has her hands on what appears to be a grinding stone (Emerson 1989). In the case of the Spiro pipe of similar style, the woman holds an ear of com in one hand and a grinding-stone-looking object in the other.

102

Memoirs of the Museum ofAnthropology, No. 29

Certain objects are more at home in much earlier contexts than the early ftfteenth century Great Mortuary. These include the galena balls, the phosphate nodule beads, the seed beads, and the Sallisaw, Agee, and Gary points. Except for the ftrst, each of these artifacts have been employed as a time-sensitive indicator. Hence, their appearance in the Great Mortuary constitutes a major discordance in the chronological sequencing of these types (Fig. 1-47). To these discordances can be added others whose typological crossties point to early contexts elsewhere, namely the rectangular floatweave baskets with reinforced lids that have been recovered from waterlogged graves at Mounds Plantation (Webb and McKinney 1975), the face mask from the Groseclose mound (Orr 1941), and the copper-sheathed wooden knife from the same mound (Orr 1941). Thus, the number of anachronistic elements is not only uncomfortably large, but the present incomplete state of our knowledge of artifact chronology is likely to mask an even larger number of out-of-place objects as well. When one switches to later time markers contemporary with the Great Mortuary deposition, few objects persuasively jump out as early ftfteenth century in provenience. Perhaps the most convincing is the perforated spatulate celt usually dated after the elongate ceremonial celt types. A nearly identical specimen is illustrated from Burial 35 at Etowah Mound C (Moorehead 1932: PI. 50a). Their appearance at Wilbanks phase Etowah (Larson 1971:63) and Moundville (Moore 1907:393-94) would place early exemplars of this sociotechnic ax form around A.D. 1350 although they persist into the seventeenth century (Smith 1989:144). The monolithic ax likewise should be placed here considering its late context at the Etowah site (Larson 1971). Another artifact having a more limited lifespan but co-occurring with these in Wilbanks phase Etowah is the "Mound C" or "Hightower" style engraved shell gorget (Muller 1989:20) that was found fragmented in the Great Mortuary (Phillips and Brown 1983: A-lb). To this list can be added the annular gorget-known from the Great Mortuary collection-which was found in the late shaft grave of the Sam Kaufman site (Skinner, Harris and Anderson 1969), although this unspeciftc form may not be as temporally sensitive as engraved gorgets. In sum, we have a few objects from the Great Mortuary that are Spiro III in age. 6) Telltale clay smears. A distinctive grey-green clay commonly adheres to objects from the Great Mortuary deposit. This material is present on biface fragments and many unwashed pieces, including sherds (Brown 1981a). An even larger list of objects probably once had this clay before they were cleaned. The large, well-preserved wooden mortuary figure now shown in cleaned appearance was once smeared with sticky clay (Brown 1975: Fig. 8; Brose, Brown and Penney 1985: PI. 96; Hamilton 1952: PI. 26 left). The flat floatweave baskets also contain traces of this grayish clay. What appears to be this clay are two lumps catalogued as pigment (B36-41, B54-56) (Table 1-9). The presence of this sticky clay as a Great Mortuary diagnostic came to the author's attention while supervising the washing and preparation of the human skeletal remains from the WPA excavations. None of this material had been touched prior to 1963 when the Spiro research project began. What was striking about the bone was the condition of the examples from the Great Mortuary.

They were heavily mineralized and smeared with grayish green clay, which was thought at the time to be the same as the green glauconite found as grave goods (Brown 1981a). Bone from other gravelots did not have this clay smear. Heavy mineralization was likewise restricted to this provenience although other gravelots appeared to have streaks of brown staining reminiscent of this mineralization. Considering the connection between the mineralization, which Brues attributed at the time of her analysis to be the result of submersion in waterlogged burial context, and the clay smears, a simple conclusion would be to attribute the two to the same circumstances-burial in gleyed soils found in habitually waterlogged deposits. If we can extend the connection beyond human bone to other objects, the implication is clear that bones and artifacts alike were excavated by Spiroans from graves in waterlogged ground. In contrast to this watery connection indicated by so many clues, the Great Mortuary provenience itself was dry enough to preserve textiles. 7) Shell pile structure. The piling of shell beads is further indication of gravelot contexts totally unlike those outside of the Great Mortuary, with the exception of two suspicious gravelots (A6 and All, see below). In bead-rich burials outside of the Great Mortuary these ornaments occur in homogeneous lots. Burial BrB6a has two lots of disc beads (55 and 3200 respectively, and also one lot of 30 pearl beads) which were placed within the litter square edged by shell cups. The later burial BrB3/5 contained one lot of 4675 disc beads and the contemporary burial B140 contained a one lot of 1397 disc beads. A stray bead of two types are also catalogued under this gravelot. Generally, other burials did not contain large groups of either shell or pearl beads. It is noteworthy that in the case of gravelot All, one shell cup was said to have contained one lot of over 130 pearl beads. When we tum to the gravelots of the Great Mortuary a different pattern obtains. The litter burial, B62, contained a great number of bead piles. In the center, cups contained two lots of convexo-cylindrical beads (15,575 and 20,680 beads) together with 15 pearl and 3 disc beads. A second pile of 263 pearl beads were found beneath this central cluster. It is notable that the shell bead lots in this litter burial contain a mixture of bead types. This and the mixture of shell beads with shell cup fragments is typical of the shell bead piles in the Great Mortuary. Additional examples of a minority of different beads in a pile dominated by a single type are the piles from the Great Mortuary floor. One concentration (B54) consisted of 103 convexo-cylindrical beads admixed with a 1:12 ratio of each of four other types. Another (B 163) was dominated by 193 disc beads and a minority of 87 convexo-cylindrical, and small numbers of elliptical, cylindrical, olivella and gastropod beads. In this pile shell cup fragments and other objects were recovered that implicate all of these piles as secondary accumulations rather than primary deposits. These contexts differ greatly from the placement of beads in gravelots outside the Great Mortuary time period. 8) Similarities to other problematic grave lots. The striking similarity of Great Mortuary gravelots to certain ones in other locations increases rather than diminishes the ambiguity of the former. Three gravelots in and near the north primary mound stand in particularly close relation to Great Mortuary prove-

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part I-Brown

niences. One of these (All) is a conch shell burial that has not only all the formal features of a litter burial, but also artifacts and artifact treatment replicating that present among litter burials in the Great Mortuary, including a complete engraved shell cup, shell cup fragments, rare concavo-cylindrical beads, twined tapestry, a generalized biface fragment, and copper pins. The pins were bent and doubled over in a manner reminiscent of the treatment of copper in the Great Mortuary. This together with the large number of fragmentary material (shell cup fragments, biface, Tshaped pipe stem, and pulley-shaped earspool outer face) conforms to the pattern of treatment that scavenged artifacts received in the accumulation of the Great Mortuary hoard. This pattern of breakage contrasts to the orderliness of the shells composing the burial square, and to the placement of pearl beads in one shell and red ochre in another. In conformity with the wide-ranging age of objects brought together in the Great Mortuary, gravelots A6 and A14 have similar anachronistic assortments. A Spiro II Old Town Red bowl was found in the same loosely defined A14 gravelot as Spiro IIIIIV Poteau Plain. Nearby were three T-shaped pipes, one of which was a special double-bowled form assignable to Spiro II. To complete the tie to the Great Mortuary a rim sherd (S156) joins sherds from the gravelot B62. Gravelot A6 contains items of differing ages as well. A floatweave basket, radiocarbon-dated to A.D. 1520 (Beta31101), contained copper repousse hawk plates of an early type and polychrome cloth that duplicate Great Mortuary objects laid down at the same time. Nearby was a cache of undecorated shell cups and core pendants. A third pile of materials included a Tshaped pipe of the same type found in the All and A14 gravelots. The pattern of associations among objects places early Spiro II items in later archaeological contexts. Specifically, the A6 cordage dates radiometrically to the late fourteenth century, and ceramic crossmends places the material catalogued as "All" at the same time as the construction of the Great Mortuary. In sum, these three gravelots not only have an assortment of objects similar to those found in the Great Mortuary, but their stratigraphic age and their treatment is similar to that of this major provenience. Thus, they seem to be the recipients of the same set of behaviors that entered into the creation of the Great Mortuary. Whether these three gravelots to the north of the Great Mortuary

103

are one of the sources of material for the latter or are a residue of the same reworking of source material cannot be determined from the scanty evidence at hand. It is probably not coincidental that the three gravelots are positioned on the slopes of a primary mound whose graves date to the Spiro m period immediately preceding the advent of Spiro II grave building. Perhaps these three gravelots are the remains of burials scavenged from the north primary mound that had not been transported into the Great Mortuary but had been covered over in place without further attempt to provide them with a new home. If this is the case, then the late date of the floatweave box requires special explanation. Here there may have been an attempt to renew the burial containers in some manner. 9) Condition of artifacts. A substantial number of objects have the look of miscellaneous midden inclusions: various stones, food refuse, and chert flake. More importantly they are a particular kind of midden. The mussel shell and deer bone resemble marine shell and human bone. Thus one could interpret this miscellaneous assemblage of midden items as objects accidentally included among the sought-after burials when they were dug out of their original graves. The deer bone specifically consists of the articular ends of long bones-those that resemble the corresponding joints of human skeletons to the anatomically naive (Table 1-21). Thus, if the human bone had been recovered secondarily after being interred in the ground for some time, it would be expectable that it would be difficult to discriminate between human and certain animal bones, and consequently, look-alike animal bone would be mistakenly included with human bone that had been recovered from long-buried graves. The broken up condition of many objects reinforces the general picture of an accumulation of human bone and grave goods retrieved without great concern for completeness or fidelity to original association. Thus, twelve of the earspools are without mates, a condition unknown in other graves. Broken artifacts include the celts, maces, monolithic axes, ceremonial celts, Tshaped pipes, effigy pipes, earspool fragments. Finally, the conclusion that the Great Mortuary deposit was dug out from older graves is reinforced by the presence of a bison tibia digging stick tip and a stone hoe chip, both items expectable as cast-off items produced by the work of cutting down into old graves.

CHAPTER

9

The Platform Mounds

The Brown Mound

The procedures used in excavating this mound conformed to the methods employed in other mound work (see above). The northern section was laid out in a grid of rows and alleys (Fig. 134). The mound was excavated by slicing row-wise starting from row 1 and progressing southward, thus producing profiles through the mound (hence, the term "profile system," employed frequently at the time for the method). Excavation strips were five feet wide in conformity with the grid interval used in this project. The interval used for the Craig mound was 10 feet wide. The sequence of cuts started at row 1 and continued to row 9 before shifting to the east and taking a 10 foot cut between rows 14 and 16 from alley 31 into the center. There are on record profiles drawn of each row (1-13), some of the alleys, and the profile around the central crater. After this exploratory trench was made, the alleys on the east were removed at the same time the rows to the north were dug. The excavations along the rows progressed up to row 13 completely across the mound. At this point it was realized that there would be insufficient time to complete the exc. iation of this section of the mound. The profiles along the edges of the central crater were then cleaned off and a little work was done in the southwestern edges of the excavation. This work disclosed part of a structure (House 14) underlying the primary mound stage, which time did not allow opportunity to explore further into the profile. In 1982, re-exploration of this area of the mound disclosed a large post pit that appears to belong to the same structure. Although there was some interest in cleaning out the central crater and determining the nature of the feature reported for it, an unusually wet field season kept the pit waterlogged, and time limitations placed on the duration of the fieldwork kept the work concentrated on the mound itself. Hence, this intriguing feature remains uninvestigated at this date. At present (1995) the mound is partly filled in but the unexcavated portions (about 10 feet wide) straddling the property line still stand to nearly their former height.

Description

This is the large pyramidal mound that stood on the crest of the upland to the west northwest of the Craig mound. According to Orr (1946:230) the mound measured about 200 feet north-south, about 175 feet east-west, and 15 feet high. Clements (1945:64) has described it as appearing as a "dome-shaped mound rising to 18 feet above the level of the field in which it stood" prior to the digging done in it in 1935. Clements' (1945:64) estimate of the diameter at 125 feet is much too small, as is Bauxar's (1953). From the photograph taken before its silhouette was altered by excavations this was a flat-topped mound, despite the fact that it had been plowed and planted in cotton for many years previously (Fig. 1-8a). Evidently, it once stood much higher since three to five stages of the mound were truncated at the top when the University crews dug there in 1938 (Figs. 1-35,36). Excavation Narrative

The mound was first dug into seriously during August, 1935, by the "Pocola Mining Company," who were interested in getting into the center of the mound with the greatest possible dispatch. Their digging created a large crater in the center of aT-shaped trench that has been described by Bauxar (1953) and Hamilton (1952:27). A sketch of the trench has been provided by Bauxar (1953: Fig. 58) that fits the contour map recorded in 1938 (Fig. 134). The WPA excavation was undertaken in two phases because of problems over the leases. The third of the mound south of the property line (LfCrill) was dug into first without recovering much material. No notes have survived from this phase of activity. Excavations in the two-thirds of the mound located north of the property line (LfBrill) began Dec. 27, 1937, and closed March 22, 1938, at the expiration of the lease. Although more work remained to be accomplished, investigations ceased because the owner was uncooperative. K. G. Orr was supervisor of the later excavation, and the notes he left have provided the most useful stratigraphic information of any of the mounds excavated by the WPA program.

Physical Stratigraphy

When the pot hunters dug into the mound they found very little to reward their effort. Hamilton (1952:43, Pl. 45 right), however, reported one long chipped blade to have come from these mound 105

ology, useum ofAnthrop M em oi rs of the M

106

No. 29

o

5

20

15

10

::::::J -SC AL E IN FE ET

-

NO RT H

CO NT OU RS

;AWCNE T~"ERE ~'60~ ~~ING~~~:S S~~ _455-

ES TIM AT ED

RO YE NO T DE ST

-----EX CA VA TI ON

lfB rlI T

OF

DA TA

LfCrIII sections.

D

EX CA VA TIO

ES TIM AT ED

EX CA VA TI ON NO

d w of the LfBrIII an d, 34LfS1. Plan vie un mo n ow Br 4. Figure 1-3

LIM ITS

N

PR OP ER Ty

Lf Cr JI [

LIN E

RoW I

,/'

GREY FILL

u~ " ---------,. '\

_...... ~

\' ...

COARSE SAND

/

, •• , pit)

(bottom of

CLAY WALL PLASTER

./

COARSE SAND

FILL OF INTRUSIVE 'IT

//'

······························· ..····7"·····._ ..-.... •• timoted or1,llIol surfoce

STAGE.

]

GLAY SUI SOIL

Composite Profi!e of Alley 20. drawn from individual row profiles Feb.-March 1938 ........ ~- ..... ~·~~~AGE E----

(trueleVillI of pre_mound surface)

CLAY SU8S01 L.

=======::::;71 \ ",

TOPSOIL

(LOESS. LIKE

1938)~ ,.......-R£O GLAY FEATURE

mound';::.:>'. .· ·

'0 •• 11 ••

STAGE'

,f.". PRE-MOUND

.... ........... -

/" ",/

'nt,,,',,.It

.....' ,•• '6

CUNRECORDED ,

".".,

'7

'8

'9

STAGE.

20

,"" -- .-- --.-- -----.-,

=:::

2'

-4e6

='460

Figure 1-35. Two versions of Brown mound stratigraphy (taken in 1933 and 1938).

10

.

10

SCALE IN

I~

'"

FEET

If)

---"'=----_

=-46i............ ' =. ----. - 466 - - - - - -~

-478

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~. ~~~~~~~~~~mmam~;K~~~mv DX~~2~~~~~!~~~ ~~a .. . ,. ,. '2

/

...../ .

~;-. , /

/,/

~,,~"

I

fOp 01

.......

-I~ .~~._~;::i4~;==------------------------r-----~

(level of mound lop

(d.timoted

/

Sketch of Northern Profile of Pot-Hunter Trench as recorded by Bauxar (1953) Aug, 1933

- - - ...

"

.... S

r

I

::$.

~

.:-t

;:s ~

g

§:

~

~

g

~r

~

~

Memoirs of the Museum ofAnthropology, No. 29

108

POT HUNTER

CRATER

ALLEYS

Ro" 13

,

SCIIII.

1ft

HATCHED

F..,

STAGIE

POT HUNTER

UYEAS "Rf CLAT CAPS

•

CRATER

...

.~

Row I t

Facing

"

..

:

South

ALLEYS

Figure 1-36. Brown mound profiles through rows 13 and 11 (LfBrIII).

diggings. A large feature of disturbed earth was located in the center that went deeper than the relic hunters could reach. This feature was observed by Bauxar (1953:169) in an exposure that had been sunk at the edge of the feature to a depth of 20 feet. It seems that after his visit an attempt was made to reach this floor, but it was abandoned, presumably because it was not possible to remove the accumulated water. The basic stratigraphy was flrst reported by Bauxar (1953) on observations made at the time of the pot hunter digging by slip and team in August, 1935. 1bree years later the WPA excavations revealed a primary mound beneath the trench cuts (Fig. 1-35). A comparison of Bauxar's profIle with the one compiled from Orr's row profIles through some of the same area discloses the compatibility of the two-the major difference being the absence in Bauxar's of a cross section that reached completely to subsoil. A sequence of similar soils is recorded in both (Table 1-10). The central intrusive pit is recorded in both although Bauxar observed much more of the pit flll than did Orr. Bauxar (1953) recorded the accompanying disturbance as extending from the last surviving mound stage. At the time of Bauxar's visit, the trench wall was only 9 or 10 feet high and rested one foot into what he considered "topsoil" (Figs. 1-37a, b). It is evident from the contour map and the profIles that the pot hunters had only penetrated to a level flve feet above the position of the original ground level. For this reason it is understandable that what Bauxar saw was only part of what was recorded in 1938 by Orr. It should be pointed out that profIles taken in 1938 show that the mound was made up of successive pyramidal mound layers, which have been designated stages A through E. Only stage A, the primary mound, was found with an identiflable part of its top intact. The mantles to the successive

mound stages following stage A were not identified by Bauxar although he described soils of the same color and texture as Orr. This difference could be explained by an obscured profIle in the pot hunters' trench. Constructional Sequence

Prior to the construction of this mound, the location was occupied by a straight-sided building of unknown shape (House 14). Although largely obliterated by the central intrusive crater, a profIle section associated with this building was a midden which was only partly recovered (Fig. 1-38). A few artifacts were found on this old surface that appear to represent a contemporary occupation. The first mound stage (A) was a pyramidal mound from six to seven feet high (Fig. 1-38). Two and perhaps three of its sides were steep-sided to the point of being nearly vertical (Fig. 1-37a). One side, facing north in towards the center of the upland ring of mounds had a more gentle slope along its front. This side may well have constituted the point of access to the top. The interlayering of clay and midden that characterizes the composition of this mound appears to be the result of resurfacing the top and extending the sides. The baked clay floor which was noticed by Orr and Bauxar is evidently associated with the second phase. Since the pot hunter crater and the central pit were so large, they obliterated the area where any sort of surface structure would have been found. Hence we are deprived of either positive or negative evidence as to the presence of structures here. There do appear, however, to be two pits extant at the edges of the mound top. The pits were about 3.0 feet in diameter and 3.5 feet deep, and they were filled with ash, animal bone, and artifacts. Bauxar (1953) interprets the central pit as originating from this surface although this pit could just as

7;< """~

- - ~~~~~ ;.,;:;- 2'::"~:

-?:.-.

.

«~~~~ ...~:

Figure 1-37. Views of the Brown mound. a) Section along row 19 and alley 12 showing the edge of the stage A mound. The western slip trench made by pot hunters is in the upper right. Note that it does not penetrate stage A. b) View of the central crater, prior to the WPA excavation, taken from the western slip trench. The division between stage A and the overlying stages is clearly seen. c) Row 11 profile, east end; d) row 11 profile, west end.

f6

....-

§

~

~

I

::t

~

~~

~

~ ;:s

[

~ ~ ~ ;:s

~

~.

~

~

~

Memoirs of the Museum ofAnthropology, No. 29

110

~CAfllIACW".IO CUT'LOOII

ncolIDI• ..,

"U.d,

........ 1.0

4.0

:'1.5

pit pit

pit? pit?

Adult

870 871a

Adull Adult?

B112

Adult

inhum. 2 cram .. 3.5

2.2

2:0.8

pit

843b 846a 847a

Oeposltlonal

Context

Ad YAd Ad MAd? Ad?

pair of femurs skull, lamurs, lib skull, mand., hum., fem., lib. skull, limb bones lunccllecL] skull, upper 11mb bonas [uncollect) Ad skulL uppar 11mb bones [uncoliacL] Ad skull, limb bones [unccllacL]

quartz pebbles.

B54a B158b 8158C

charcoal charcoal

B158d? 8163.

jar, shell and pearl

8rB3/SlIl MAd akull, vert. coli., pelVIs 8rB3/5it2 Ch? clavicla

baad, pipa

Ig~

bsads

867a

Skaletal

Composition

Associations

Md layar lar and larga 2.7

Skal.tol Age

Ad skull, 11mb bona. [unccllect.] Ad? skull, upper 11mb bon.. [uncollect.]

noor

Great Mortuary

Iloor

Great Mortuary

floor

Great Mortuary

layer

Great Mortuary

floor

Great Mortuary

lIoor

Great Mortuary

floor

Great Mortuary

floor

Great Mortuary

layar

Great Mortuary

pit

with 6. burials (2)

pit

with 6a burials (2)

beads, quartz pebbles. charcoal disturbed?

Md layer

• These cremations are tallied -

baM, matting

Table 2-8. Skale"'n Number and Grava Size of Type Burial

Table 2.

JIb B9 Bl0 B23

Table 2-6. Elements Present in Extended Burials (Type 2b). Burial

...,

864. B90s

Skeleton Age

2 Ad

Ad

Composition

skulls, rib., "'av. ?

Depositional Context Grave Size Associations NS f!N Thick

7.6

7.0

1.8

pit?

7.0

5.0

1.7

pit

with jar & bowl burials

899 Bl03

Ad Ad

B175a B182

Ad YAd YAd

Pb82

skull, 11mb bones skulL 11mb bons. Ikull, POll cranial skull, lower limbs skull, femur Irgts

10.0

7.0

0.4

pit

5.0

1.6

0.4

3.0 4.9 3.7

5.7

0.6 0.8 0.3

? ?

1.5

2.8

with 8a burial

Skeleton No Field

Lab

11

6 x

4

Grave Size

lIS

eN

10.8

8.5

10.6

15.0

Thick

sa Burials

Depositional Context mound layer

6

Skeletal Disposition

extended?

?

extended?

pit?

? flexed

B32

8

3.6

4.7

B38 B50

4 5

5.0

4.0

0.5

2

? ? ?

9.4 7.0 8.5 6.6 8.0 8.6 9.0 10.6

8.0 7.0

1.8 1.0

pit pit, probably

flexed

6.6

0.2

?

?

8.9 8.2 6.6 11.6 7.4

2.1 1.2

layer

flexed

851 a

11

2

B60 B76 B115

9 7 5

6

B122 B136 B137 B161

7

7

8 21 11

5

B167

12

B172 B177 B181 B185t B188

2

B189

t

13 10 14/2

14 9 10

15.8 6.1

3

9.4 7.0

5.5

5

4 10/2 4

31

13

1.6 1.2 1.6

16.5 9.5 14.6

0.5 0.7

6.3

6.5 6.0 4.0

0.4 0.35

12.0

12.9

0.5

divided into two distinct graves.

mound layer

? ? mound layer

? ? ?

? flexed flexad? axtended & flexed

mound layer

flexed

?

?

mound layer

extended & flexad

pit?

disarticulated? flaxed flexed

two pits ? ?

?

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown

Tabla 2-10. Skeleton Number and Grave Size of Multiple Extended Burials (Type 4).

Table 2-9. Sketaton Number and Grave Size of Type 3b Burieta Burial jib

B3/4 B5 B6 B7 B40 B61a B93 Bl07 PbBl BrB6a

GravaSize

Skelaton No

Field

Lab

14 28 18

5 10 6

13 7 9 8 32 13

6 1

5

2 5

loS

eN

Thick

8.0 14.1 7.9 9.8 9.3 3.9 5.3 7.0 10.0 13.0

9.5 9.1 8.6 12.7 6.5 4.3 7.8 9.0 10.0 13.0

1.2 0.7 0.4 0.7 0.9 0.5 0.8 0.3 0.7 0.5

Burial

Depositional Skeletal Disposition Contaxt

pit pit pit pit pit pit pit

? pit

205

B42 B94a B120 B132

extended & flexed extended & flexed extended, & flexed extended & flexed extended & flexed extended & flexed

Grave Size

SkaletonNo

No

Field

Lab

loS

eN

Thick

6

4 8 2 2

7.0 7.4 5.8 5.3

4.8 5.2 6.7 4.3

0.3 2.3 0.8 0.8

18 4

2

Depositional Skeletal Context Disposition

? pit pit

?

? flexed extended & flexed extended & flexed

Table 2~11. Minimum Number ollndlviduafs and Grave Size of Type 5a Burials

Burial

Skeleton No

Disposition

I>b

Field

of Remains

Lab

Oeposltlonal Context

A12

cluslered?

Bll

scattered scattered scattered?

pl1?

scaltered

pit?

B12 B13 B17 B18 B19 B20 B21

B.Bb

NPM?

scattered clustered

scattered scattered scattered

B28 B27 B31 839a B46b

/oINCZ CFZ

clustered clustered

MSZ MSZ MSZ MSZ MSZ MSZ MSZ MSZ NPM NPM

8caltered scattered 3 clusters

1 2?

Stratigraphic Unit

CP.l

lIoor?

CP.l

CFZ

8538 B55

clustered layer scattered 2 clusters clustered layer pile of skulls & limbs cluetered scattered

B56 B6' B69b B71b 8710 B72 B74

clustered clustered

B7S B78 B79

clustered

B81

clustered

B82 B84

clustered

8caUered

8caUered

CP.l

CFZ PMC CP.l

PMC PMC PMC PMC PMC PFZ PFZ CFZ CFZ CFZ

t:S117 8118 9119 8121

pit? layer

8124c

scattered

9125

scattered

8127

scallered

9131 8133 8139 8141 9142 9143 9147 9HB 8152 8163 9159 8184 9166 9189 8170 8173. 8175b 8178 8179 Pb94

scattered

md'lank

PFZ PFZ

scausred

layer

CP.l

layer

CP.l

scattered

9100 8105 8109 Bl13

scattered

scattered

pit? pil?

MSZ

scattered scaltered

3

2

scattered

3

3

scattered scattered scatlered scattered scattered clustered

1

clustered

3

scaUered

PFZ PFZ 9N

scattered

s:::z s:::z

scattered scallered

BrB3/5'"

scattered

md layer md layer

scsHered clustered scaHered cluslered scaHered clustered clustered clustered

CP.l

MSZ CFZ CFZ MSZ MSZ MSZ PMC PMC MPM

clustered

896

$Callered

layer

ph wJtype 2c

WaB4 WaBS WaB7 WdBl WdB2 WdB3 eIB2 eIB3

clustered

scattered

ph wltype 2c

MSZ

1+ 1+

MSZ

clustered

clustered

scattefed

8116

MSZ

1

892

B114

scaltered

clustered

BrB3/5'3

scattered

1

3 3

MSZ

pit?

scaltered

8r81 8rB2

9N PFZ

scallered

MSZ

scattered

3

PbB.

scaUered

MSZ MSZ CFZ MSZ PFZ PMC PMC

MSZ CFZ MSZ MSZ

scattered

clustered

pil pl1?

PFZ

2 clusters clustered

B86

scallered

clustered

8123

888a B89 891

clustered

MSZ MSZ

scallered

3

pl1? p.lI?

206

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

Table 2-12. Minimum Number of Individuals and Grave Size of Type 5b Burials Burial I'b B33 B38a B45 B47b B49 B54b B58 B59 B68 B77 B80 BIOI Bl04 Bl08a Bl08d Bll0 BIll B145a B150 B154b B155c B163c B176 MNI

SkaiatonNo Lab

4 2

Depositional Context

Burial I'b

1.5 X 4.5

3rd layer 1st layer 2nd layer 2nd layer 3rd layer 1st layer 1st layer 1st layer 1st layer extraction pit of B807

Type 7- simple IDng bone bundle: B2 17 ? 7 B14 ? 7 B87b ? B124a 1.0 0.5 WaBl 0.5 0.5 Type IJa. loose bundle of long bones: B22 1 1 1.5 1.5 B24a 3 ? B130 1 1.9 2.0 1.2 1.1 B134 PbB3 1.5 1.7 Type 8b- long bones, pelvis & skull: B15 1 1 1.3 1.3 B128 3 3 3.3 1.6 B138 0.8 1.7 B149 1.3 2 1.0 Type Be- stacked pile: B98 3 1 1.9 1.6 Type 8c1- long bone bundle & skull: B16 1 2.5 2.0 B95 1 1.5 1.3 B97 1.6 1.7 Bl02b ? B124b 0.5 1.0 B163b 7 7 WaB2 0.9 3.7 1 1.2 WaB3 2.6 WaB8 1.6 2.0 2

2.9 x 3.7 10.1 x 10.3 many small deposits· 2.9 x 4.4 1.6 x 3.0 several deposits 2.2 x 2.0 1.8 x 1.7 3.3 x 3.8 1.5 x 1.5

4

10

12 1

1 5 3 2

2

2

4 3 2

5 3 2

2.8

x 3.3

2.4 x 2.5

19

3

3 5

Skeleton No Lab Fieid

Deposit Size

Fieid

4

Table 2-14. Skeleton Number and Grave Size of Type 7 and 8 Burials

many small deposits 2.9 x 5.5

postp~ofGM

2nd layer 1st layer 2nd layer· 2nd layer 1st layer 1at layer 3rd layer 3rd layer 2nd layer 2nd layer 1st layer 1st layer

= 82 individuals

Collection Space lIS eN Thick

Depositional Context

7 Mound Summit Zone Mound Summ~ Zone Mound Summit Zone Ward (mound layer)

0.3

Mound Summit Zone North Primary Mound Mound Summit Zone Mound Summit Zone South Cluster Zone

? 0.3 0.3 0.6

Mound Summit Zone Mound Summit Zone Mound Summit Zone Mound Summit Zone

0.2

Mound Summ~ Zone

7 0.7

0.5

0.2 0.3 7

? 0.6 0.3 0.35

Mound Summit Zone Mound Summit Zone Mound Summit Zone Central Floor Zone Mound Summ~ Zone Central Roor Zone (2) Ward (mound fill) Ward (mound fill) Ward (mound fill)

Table 2-13. Frequency of Individuals In Disarticulated Burials Unspeclalized Disarticulated Burial Type5a: Single pile burial . . . . Scallered burial • • • • •

Number of Individuals per Burial 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Total otType

Burial

17 18

8 12

15

2

3 9

2

3 7

32 49

Type 6: Skull(s) burial • • . . •• Type 7: Long bone bundle ....• Type 8: Various bundle. . • . . . •

Table 2-15. Summary Uller Burial Structure (Types 9a & 9b)

No. A16.

18

5 14

5

2

18

Poles

litter

Present

Size

P

Context

GM3

Skele'sl Location teeth discovered in the lab

B8

3.5 • 3.3t

NPM?

·small number of bones beneath shells·

B44

2.3 • 3.St 4.0. 3.5t

GMl

remains unlocated

GMl

shell artifacts mixed with skeletal remains

x

GM2

skull with earspools in center

B481 B628

p

7.0

B698

S.O

P

:'6.0.7.0

pra-GM

disturbed remains unlocated

Bl08b Bl08e

GM2

remains unlocated in feature

p

2.0 x 2.ot 5.0. 4.0

GM2

remains unlocated in feature

B1558

P

2.5 x 2.5

remains unlocated in featUre

B158

P

3.0 x 3.0

GM2 GM2 GM2 GM2

B 157

:'3.4x3.0

B1588?

XB7

6.0 • 5.0

XB8 BrBS8

3.3 x 3.3

remains unlocated In feature mixed with grave goods uncertain. destroyed by tunnels

GM

empty

GM

very dls1urbed

pit burial

remains in center with charcoal

t size estimated In absence of poles.

207

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown

Table 2-18. Skeletal Parts Present in Copper Plate (Type 10) Burials

Table 2-16. Skeletal Parts Present in Litter (Types 9a & 9b) Burials

Burials Skull Teeth Mandibte Vertebrae Clavicle Ribs Acromlum Innominate Scapula Femora

Burials

Skull

Teeth

Maxillai

Humarus

Femur

Ulna

mandible

Feet &

Clavicla

hands

A16a

A6 All B27b B29b

B44 B62a

B51b B52 t B88b

B156a B156 B157 BrB6a

B122b B155b t

Nota: skelatal material from 8108c, XB7 and XB8 war. not available for study.

t indicate. children

Material from B69 was excluded because of prehistoric disturbance.

Nota: 853 represented by a mixed collection of skeletal materiat difficult to allocate to 853a and b parts.

Table 2-19. Perishables and Other Materials PreslIIVed in Copper Plate Burials.

Table 2-17. Litter Burial Structure. No. of CUps

Burial

No.

Burial

Organization of Remains

Cane TwillwQrk

Leather

Textile Other Matarials

Whole Nurly Whole cordage. human hair bone piale fg!.. shell dlSG

AS An

Typa 98· A18. B62a B89a

2 7

1

AIS.

several cups near central interment held shell beads

B27b* B29b

convexo-cylindrical shell & wood beads,

B51b

cordage shell disc & elliptical? buds. f••th.... aarapools wooden plaq.... _. shell & pearl baed&,

grouped along the

sau~h

t

edge with small columella pendants

B155a B15S

largest shell placed in southwest comer

B157

disposition not known

B52

XB7

disturbed. poles only disturbed. poles only shells arranged in a hollow square around the interment

B53b B88b

large shells ·with ends pointing out in star fashion-

B122b B122.

2 or 3 openin9 up & filled with shell beads

B154b

large shells arranged in a hollow cirde around the interment

XBS

27t

Type 9b-

B8 B44

S'

B48a

frags

Bl0Sb B158a1

frags

cordage, aarapools wooden plaque 'gts. mica. shell disc bead ·organic frgts· cordage

earspools bane hair pin., shell beads. pearls, cup & gorgel frgts

B155c

frags1

* t many now prallnt incompletely • ·large shens-

conch shell. lead block

no shell. part of cedar log with lashings only no shell, parts of cedar long framework only

Bl0So

BrBSa

•

Too poorly preserved to be collected. Not carried forward in tabulations.

1

indefln~eiy aalablished t

208

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

Table 2 20. Composite Burial Combinations w

1st Component

Burials

Type

No.

2nd Component

Type

No.

10

!P

A16

10?

9.

no t

810

3a

101

§

824

6 5.

8a

3

2

10

1

10

839

Sa

6

11

846

2c

847

2c

848

9b

1

5a

2?

851

3.

2

10

1

853

sa?

2

10

854

2c

861

3b

7

12

2

12

A6

827 829

Table 2-2'. Burial Types in the Upper- and Lower Members of Composite Graves

3rd Component

Type

No.

4th Component

Type

No.

5th Component

Type

lower Group of Burials

No. 'b

38

3b

4

Greot Mortuary BrB6

Other Graves

Upper Group

Sa

5b

,2

82

ad

2c

90

,0

a§

,5

3

13 3

6

1 3

2

excluding 8r8315 § including one that the poor records cannot help distinguish from a Lower Group

17

5.

context.

ill

no

5b

5b

12

B62

9.

867

1b

12

Table 2-22. Skull-Posteranial Associations Among Burials.

869

9.

5.

B66

5.

10

Skull and Post-cranial: Mainly Skull Present:

890

2b

11

B94

4

B100

5.

5

!P

-----------------------------------------------------------------

11

Bl08

5b

2

9b

9.

B122

3.

7

10

10

8145

5b

2

~

8154

5b

10?

8155

9a

8158

5b/9b

ill 2c

81S3

2c

Bd

8173

5.

11

8175

2b

5.

8r83/5

2c

2c?

8r8S

9a

3b

number nol known

Types Sa,

-----------------------------------------------------------------

no

no

3a, 3b, 4, 8b, and 8d 9a, 9b, 10, and 12

Types la, lb, 2b, 2c,

Variable Presence of Skull: Type 5b Skull Only Present: Type 6 Post-cranial Bones only: Types 7, sa, and 11

121

7

10

1?

2c 5b

5b

19

Sa?

2c?

1

~

12?

3

ill

Sa?

9P

13 only' idantifed in lab

total identified: 6

na

na

3

2

1 2

1

2

1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1

2

4 2 4

.u

QJ

E

Co

0

""'"

2 8 6 4 4

'>"

::l

.....w

....

4-
'-'

AXIAL

E

1

1

Co

2 4 1

2

1 5 1 3

1 3

2

1 2 2 1 5 1 1 1

5 10 5 3 5 2

1

E

1

1

2 1

1

3

0

QJ QJ ..."" ""QJ> .... VJ '" c:: ....'" .... .... VJ '-' '" "'QJ..c:....'" '-'QJQJ .u'0" ....VJu .VJ... .....u< Co .u 0

~ g) el tl()

LOWER EXTREMITY

....QJ .... VJ '" c:: ::l'" ....u .... .... ::l u '" Co > ....'t:l:::l ....os ....:::l'" VJ::l QJ Co "" "" "' .... § .u '-' '0" E::l

......

Q)

'"

3

1 1 1

'"

0.

.j..J

0.

3

1

1

1

5

1

3

-

1 1

8

1 1 1 3 1

1

3

1 13 1

1 2 3 1 1

2 2 4 6 2 2

.j..J

oj

1

1 1 1

..... ..... .....III ..... Q) .....> ...,'" IIILl .....rn ..... X Q) 0

Q)

X

...,1-1

Q)

8

'"

2

1 1 1

oj

.j..J

......

.,

1

0

....,

1

1

0

.j..J

..c:

Q)

Q) ..c:

1-1

>

Q)

1-1

Ll

Q)

..., > 1-1 1-1

>

1-1

1

1-1

1

-

-

-

-

rn

Q)

......0 ...,

III

::l

I'l

8

>.

1-1

1 2 l3 1 1 1 1 6 1 3 1 2 1 1 1 5 1

l.l

0

Q)

1

2 1 ? 10 5

6 2

13 -

? 1 4

....

1 4 5 4 1 3

7 1 1

9

1 1 11 1 1 2 1

-

1

1

-

1

8

'"

I Q)

0{)

oj

1 1 4 1

'~"

.j..J

::l

1-1

Q)

'"

0{)

Q)

~

1

(2)

-"l:

-*

. 18,10)

(17)

(6)

(14)

(9) (18 )

>. .....

::l 0

I'l

0{)

'"

::l '0

2 10 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2

2 3

2 2 5 3 2 1 1

..., ..... ..... ..... '0 Q) '0 '0 ..... ..... ..... '0::l '0

21. 11

1 2 2 4 6 4 2 1 1 1 3 4 2

.....

oj

'"

1-1 0 ..0

...,0

'0

..., ....

~

10

I\,)

~

~

~ c C-

So ....

~ :l:

~

§

~

~

;::,..

... "'

~

~.

c

~

o

tv

-

1

3 3

3

2 3

1

1

2 2

2 2

2 1

2

1 1 2 5 5

1 1

2

1

1 1 5 1

1

1 1 1 1 2

1

2 5

1 1 1

1 1 1 1 2

0

.... ....

Q) Q)

.... .... '"

..c::

1 1 1

1

'~"

""''" ....,'"

U

Q)

.....

1 1 1

-

3

2

1

1 1

1 3

1

B-72 B-74 B-76 B-77 B-79 B-80 B-86 B-88 B-89 B-90 B-91 B-92 B-93 B-94 B-95 B-96 B-97 B-98 B-99 B-I00 B-101 B-I02 B-I03 B-104 B-I05 B-107 B-I08 B-109 B-110 B-l11 B-I12 B-115 B-116 B-117

1

'"

Q)

S

> ....

::J

'"

1-1 0 0..

No.

Burial

.... .....

.....rn

1

1 1

6

1

..c::

;:J

S

Q)

1-1

~

'"

1

2 1

3

1-1

'"

.....::J'" "0 U

::J

1

4 2

1

2

ctJ

p..

'::J"

2

1-1

.....c::'" S

1 1 1

1 1

1

p..

1

1

1

'" '" '"

1-1 bD

u

'-'

L 1

1 1 4 2

1 1 1

1 6

1 1 1

1 1

.....Q) '" c:: .....::J'" .....u ..... U '" "' ..... p.. > ....Q)..c:: u .....Ol ....'0"

5.~

rn

~

.0

::J .0

::J

rn

1

2 1 1

1 2 1

1 1

1 1 7

3 1 1

1

Q)

1 1 1

2

1

3

1 1

1 1 1

1

2 1 1 1

5

1

1-1

2 1 1 1

1

1

p..

Q)..c::

.....

'" c::

.....

3

p..

Q)

Q)

0

2

p..

2 1 2 1 1 1

1 2

1 1

1 1 7

3 1 1

.,.,'" .....'" '" ...."' '" .....'" .....'"> ..... S ..... ..... '" .... '" .... ..... ....'" '-' '-' '" ""' ""' '-''" S 1-1

~

rn '" Q) 1-1 bD

)(

1

1

1

1

1

S

u

.....rn

Q)

....1-1

S Q)

Q)

2

1

0

'-'

1-1 ..c::

Vl

'-'

......

'" '" '"

)(

.....'"

U

Q)

1-1

1 1

0

....

..c::

Q)

1-1

>

Q)

> ....1-1

>

c::

1

'"

Q)

1-1 .,.,'" .... 1-1

.0

1 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 2 2 1 2 5 7 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 3 1 5 3 1 1 1 1

.....

ctJ

'"

1-1 0 .0

>1-1

0 e::J ....

0

1 8 4 1 4 3 1 5 1 2

7 5+ 9 17 1 1 1 6 1 5 1

2 2 7 3 1 1 3 2 1

""'

Q)

~·I

S

"0

Q)

.,., "0 ..... "0 .....

"0

'" ..... I

bD

Q)

"0

1 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1

4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1

2 2 1

'"

::J "0

....

.....

bD

'"

....

1-1 ::J

Q)

'"

bD

Q)

~

1 1

5

1

(12)

(15 )

(18)

(16 )

-~.

(16)

>- .....~ ::J 0

c::

'"

::J "0

.........

~ :3 ....

tv ..... .....

~~

::;::

........~

Q ....'" :3 .....

~.

0

Q

~.

~

~

Burial

B-118 B-119 B-120 B-121 B-122 B-123 B-124 B-125 B-126 B-128 B-129 B-130 B-131 B-132 B-133 B-135 B-136 B-137 B-138 B-139 B-140 B-141 B-142 B-143 B-144 B-145 B-146 B-147 B-148 B-149 B-150 B-151

No.

Q)

S

I-< 0 0-

~

C= clay; G::s grit; S= shell; B. bona; Ls. limestone; + =- leached; ( ) parentheses enclose the tampar of the grog.

ron

on

........ ....o

In

o

N

CD ....

..,

o

...

..,'"

rr-

CD

'"ono

.,

'" .c k

Q)

., c

~

'"

'" N

In

224

Table 2-44

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

Lip Form Among Bowls of Selected Ceramic Types

n1

Table 2-45

n1 r12

II 1\ f\ MI""I6 M (')8 n (1 2 3457910

Williams Plain LeF lore Plain

Lip Form Among Jars of Selee ted Ceramic Types

h()M(J("\(1 3478910

r"I 11

Williams Plain:

evened rim modified barrel

4

Paris Plain

10

14

17

2

-

2

1

16

12

16

Williams Plain (shell): everted rim

Woodward Plain

LeF lore Plain Neeley's Ferry Plain

Beaver Pinched

Sanders Plain

Nash Neck Banded

Old Town Red Woodward Plain Sanders Engraved

Woodward App lique

Poteau. Plain

3

1*-

11

13

Poteau Engraved Coles Creek Incised

Davis Incised Eas t lncis ed

Table 2-46

Lip Form Among Bottles of Selected Ceramic Types

Fren·ch Fork Incised Crocket Curvilinear Incised

nAn!")

4

Hickory Engraved

Sanders Plain

Spiro Engraved

Poteau Plain

Maxey Noded R. *notched

a-a globular jar b-l barrel-shaped jar

(1

n

1491011

Woodward Applique

Spiro Engraved Hickory Engraved Friendship Engraved

3

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown

225

Table 2-47. Taxonomic Outline of Vessel Shapes. t. Bowls 1.1 Simple Construction 1. 1. 1 Round Base 1.1.1.1

2.1.1 Flat Base

Unrestricted and slightly (simple) restricted

1.1.1.1.1

With axis of revolution (see Shepard 1957: 228)

1.1.1.1.1.1 ~ 1.1.1.1.1.2 Globylar and Semjglobylar 1.1.1.1.2 Without axis of revolution 1.1.1.1.2.1 ~ 1.1.1.1.2.2 Boat-shaped 1.1.1.1.2.3 Trjagular 1.1.1.1.2.4 Gourd-sect jon 1.1.1.1.3 Special appendages 1.1.1.1.3.1

2. Jars 2.1 Independent Restricted

Rjm eWgy'

1.1.1.1.3.2 Cup wjth handle 1.1.1.1.3.3 Spouted vessel 1.1.1.2 Very restricted (simple) 1.1 .1.2.1 With axis of revolution 1.1.1.2.1.1 'Seed Bowl" 1.1.2 Flat Disc Base 1.1.2.1 Unrestricted and slightly (simple) restricted 1.1.2.1.1 With axis of revolution 1.1.2.1.1.1 Simple 1.1.2.1.1.2 G.I2b..u.lar and Semjolobular 1.1.2.1.2 Without axis of revolution 1.1.2.1.2.1 Ovaloid (semiglobular) 1.1.2.1.2.2 Rectangylar (simple) 1.2 Complex Construction 1.2.1 Rounded Base 1.2.1.1 Low-waisted carinated form group 1.2.1.1.1 Unrestricted 1.2.1.1.1.1 Cylindrical 1.2.1 .1 .1.2 Q.Q.n.i& 1.2.1.1.1.3 Everted Rim 1.2.1.1.2 Dependent restricted 1.2.1.1.2.1 G.I2b..u.lar and Semjglobular 1.2.1.1.3 Independent restricted 1.2.1.1.3.1 Subcylindrjcal 1.2.1.2 Carinated form group 1.2.1.3 Shallow bowl form group 1.2.1.3.1 Corner point junction between sections 1.2.1.3.2.1 Deep Plate' 1.2.1.3.2 Without corner point junction 1.2.1.3.2.1 Shallow plate' 1.2.1.4 Ring section form group 1.2.1.4.1 Ring Section Bowl 1.2.1.5 Vertical compound form group 1.2.1.5.1 Compound Globular Bowl 1.2.2 Flat Disc Base 1.2.2.1 Carinated form group 1.2.2.1.1 Unrestricted (composite contour) and slightly (dependent)restricted 1.2.2.1.1.1 Simple Carinated 1.2.2.1.2 Independent restricted 1.2.2.1.2.1 Complex Carinated

2.1.1.1 Without a stand appendage 2.1.1.1.1 ~ 2.1.1.1.2 Miniature 2.1.1.2 With stand appendages 2.1.1.2.1 Large With pedestal 2.1.2 Round Base 2.1.2.1 Without a stand appendage 2.1.2.1.1 ~. 2.2 Unrestricted/Dependent Restricted/Independent Restricted 2.2.1 Flat Base 2.2.1.1 Simple Profile 2.2.1.1.1 Barrel 2.2.1.2 Composite profile 2.2.1.2.1 Modified Barrel 3. Bottles 3.1 Dependent Restricted 3.1.1 Narrow-mouthed 3.1.1.1'~"

3.2 Independent Restricted 3.2.1 Narrow-mouthed 3.2.1.1 With axis of revolution 3.2.1.1.1 Necklbody class 3.2.1.1.1.1 ~ Simple Body 3.2.1.1.1.2 ~,Carinated Body 3.2.1.1.1.3 ~ Simple Body 3.2.1.1. 1.4 ~ Barrel-shaped Body' 3.2.1.1.1.5~,

Vertical Compound Body'

3.2.1.2 Without axis of revolution 3.2.1.2.1 f!!im£ 3.2.2 Wide-mouthed 3.2.2.1 Flaring Rim 3.2.2.2 Eyerted Rim' 3.2.2.3 Straight Rim' , Probable exotic forms to Spiro

226

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

Table 2~8. Proportions of Major Plainware Typas Among Vessel Forms

Table 2·50. Sizes of Evarted rim jars (including miniaturas)

WIlliams LaFl... WoodWard Plain Plain Plain Bowls:

Globular bowIa wlih roundad b.... Saad bowIa Simple bowl. with roundad b.... Cup wtIh handla SImple bowl. with flat base. Simple carinatad bowts Rlng-socli.n bowls Jars: Independant restricted (large) Independent ..strictad (miniature) Modftad barrel Bottla.: O_ndant ras1rlcted ("..ad jars") Narr........uthad b.ttles (cia.. 1) Wlde-mouthad bottles (liarad rim)

6.0 1.7

42.1 2.6 2.6

orifice diameter

&ppIQlL

no.

glOUp8

Williams Plain LeFIo.. Plain

20.20 1 8.74

8.0 • 44.0 10.0 • 30.0

2·3 2·3

Woodward sariaa

30. 17

5.0 • 54.5

3·8

10.0 1.8 75.0 T 18.7

outer orifice

26.3

leflore Plain

WIlliams Plain

21.58

Woodward sarlea

5.87 27.22 36.48

5.3· B.O 5.2 • 46.0 10.8 • 58.0

83.3 1.8

1.6 10.5 2.8

_no.

diameter rang. 01 liz.

7.0·44.0 7.5·40.0

Poteau sari••

auler orifice

diameter range of .in

10.5

28.79

Sanders aeries

au...-

T

Tabla 2-49. 51... of Bowls of Simple Profile (Including IIat and convex bale bowla) average outer

average

orifice diameter

gnKIpai

2·3 3 2·4 2·5

Table 2·52. Proportions and Incidence of Charred Rasidue on Eilher Wall of ilia Rim. WoodWard Plain Woodward Applique Williams Plain LeFior. Plain

Williams Plain, l!&t.

~

39/51

76.5%

5111 20/44

45.4% 45.4%

711 0 4/5

70.0% 80.0%

everted asymmetrical hyperboloid, CP undel. standing hyperboloid/CP undel. everted asymmetrical hyperboloid. CP del. '"S·· section)

everted asymmetrical hyperboloid.IP cylindrical

standing asynvnelrical hyperboloid. IP undel. standing asymmetrical hyperboloid. IP del. standing asymmetrical. hyperboloid. CP del.

ovaloid. CP del.

cone. CP undel. cone. CP del. inverted ovaloid. CP del. ovaloid. CP undel.

Spiro

inverted ovaloid mellory

_

Spiro

Spiro Smithport

Spiro

Spiro

Poteau

med spheroid/lP undel.. med. sph.1 undel. med. sph. Spiro

Body Shapes

FriendShiji------------------ ____

_ _

Hickory

Poteau

Table 2·51. Association 01 Bottle Body Shape and Neck Form

ovaloid

I I I

I

I l I

I

I

I: I

I

Maxey Noded

Maddox

~mplex

apphquA I undesignated .!I Friendship engraved

undesignated complex engraved

i uiiiliiS(9nBied - - - J Haley

Spiro Sanders Hickory

Smithport Hickory Spiro LeFlore

Sanders

unknown

N N

-.l

~

~

I

:;:::

~

~

....~

::

Q

-.

~.

~ ~

Q

c::s

::;.

~

'" ~

21

2

1

3

7

1

16

3

• Includes restored Coles Creek Incised. vaT. Keo.

TOTALS

Poteau Engraved

Poteau Plain

Maxey Noded Redware

Sanders Engraved

Sanders Plain

Nashville Negative Painted

Hiwassee Island Red-Buff

shell effigy ware

Woodward Applique

Parkin Punctated

Woodward Incised

shell-tempered appendages

Woodward Plain

miscellaneous engraved

Glassell Engraved

Handy Engraved

Haley Engraved

Spiro Engraved

Hickory Engraved

punctated

appliqued

undesignated incised

Ward Incised

Crockett Curvilinear Incised

Davis Incised

Coles Creek Incised

Coles Creek Polished Plain

micaceous paste plain

4

2

42

29

3

11

4

1

2

2

5

2

7

2

2

3

3

B8

indeterminate plain

7

4"

6

A27 A29 83/4 87

miscellaneous plain

Paris Plain

5mithport Plain

LeFlore Plain

Williams Plain, vat. Craig

Williams Plain

A15 A18A25A26

Table 2-53_ Distribution of Pottery Sherds among Craig Mound Features_

2

36

6

9

3

7

2

2

2

5

3

27

4

17

2

2

BID Bll B12 B14 B18 B19 B21

1

3

4

99

4

5

87

22

3

19

27

4

23

6

4

6

3

12

2

2

3

2

6

3

B24 827 B29 834 B36 B39 B40 B42 B43aB45

6

5

19

2

10

B46 848 B49 B51

9

5

2

36

2

4

11

5

2

2

2

2

B62 863 854 855

IV IV

~

\0

N

~

~

e-

~ C

~

S.

::o!

;t,..

~

§

~

~

~

S.

~

~.

C

~

00

TOTALS

Poteau Engraved

Poteau Plain

Maxey Noded Redware

Sanders Engraved

Sanders Plain

Nashville Negative Painted

Hiwassee Island Red-8uff

shell effigy ware

Woodward Applique

Parkin Punctated

Woodward Incised

shell-tempered appendages

Woodward Plain

miscellaneous engraved

Glassel Engraved

Handy Engraved

Haley Engraved

Spiro Engraved

Hickory Engraved

punctated

appliqued

undesignated incised

Ward Incised

Crockett Curvilinear Incised

Davis Incised

Coles Creek Incised

Coles Creek Polished Plain

micaceous paste plain

indeterminate plain

miscellaneous plain

Paris Plain

Smithport Plain

LeFlore Plain

Williams Plain, vaT. Craig

Williams Plain

2

9

65 128

21

12

36 101

6

53

14

38

2

B56 B62 B64 B65

6

3

B67 B69

2

2

14

13

2

B70 B79 B80

16

3

2

18

10

B82 B86 B89 890 891

Table 2-53_ Distribution of Pottery Sherds among Craig Mound Features IContinuedl

2

2

893

36

3

31

3

3

6

2

2

9

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

25

2

14

2

3

4

4

5

2

4

2

7

3

38

2

13

22

894 899 810381048108811081118112811381188120 8121 8124B132B133B1358136 81398140

0

~

:s

~

~~

:;::

... ....

~

....~

Q

:s

-

:s l:5

C

~ ~

Q

~o

~

~ (\)

4

2

4

12

2

4

4

4

4

2

4

6

2

6

32

2

3

2

2

2

16

38

2

56

10

223

TOTALS

Poteau Engraved

Poteau Plain

Maxey Noded Redware

Sanders Engraved

Sanders Plain

Nashville Negative Painted

Hiwassee Island Red-Buff

55 4

10

13

5 29

6

47

5

2

3

Woodward Applique

4

7

1140

99

8

19

221

4

1

Parkin Punctated

6

2

Woodward Incised

shell effigy ware

3

376

shell-tempered appendages

Woodward Plain

10

1

Glassel Engraved

miscellaneous engraved

1

8

8

Handy Engraved

Haley Engravad

Spiro Engraved

Hickory Engraved

punctated

2 4

appliqued

4

undesignated incised

Ward Incised

Crockett Curvilinear Incised

Davis Incised

2

20

2

Coles Creek Incised

11

11

3

4

2

2

Colas Creek Polished Plain

3

4

3

48

4

micaceous paste plain

indeterminate plain

miscellaneous plain

Paris Plain

Smithport Plain

LeFlore Plain

Williams Plain, var. Craig

Williams Plain

814181468147815381558156815881608162 816381658166817081758177 B178 B179 B180 B181B182B184 B185818681878189 UBI U88 U813U814U817UB26UB48 X85 Total

Table 2·53. Distribution of Pottery Shards among Craig Mound Faatures (Continued)

~

t-.l '0

~

~

15"

C

.g

S....

~

~

~

~

~ '"§

~

S-

~

~.

C

~

....otv

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown

231

Table 2-54. Distribution af Bhertls and Ceramic Vessels from Units af the Craig Mound.

-

F_

""'"

TOTAL

""" 897

Williams Plain

-~ T_ UCrlI

"""

10

64

IMIliama Plain, WIT. Craig

11

LeFiantPIain

853

29

T_

7~

1653

223

15

79 745

10

89

ee

801

2

2

4

83

1

Smllhport Plain

-

.... """'" ....

v_"""'"

1876

Paris Plain

1

Ouachita Mountain Seed Jar

2 135

CoJes Creek Polished Plain

10

145

4

149

38

497 828

38

535

171

18

644

2

33

3

38

Shale-tempered Plain

435 438 31

Undeeignated Plain

indeterminant pfain micaceous_plain

24 19

abemlntgritplain

appendages (grog telllP"f1ld)

1_

4

Col.. Creek Incised (V8I1I.)

4

12

3

3

3 12

3 14

16

18

Davis Incised East

1_

18 1

Horizontal Un. Incised Agee Incised CtocIcOU Curvilinear

(Vars.)

13

14

Pennington PunClata Incised

73 11

4

4

79

11

Wanllncised

83 11 2

Undesignated Incised

4 29

Unaasigned Inciled/pUnctale

miscellaneous punctate Hallyknowa Ridge Pindled

6 1

Nash Neck Banded

2

4

8 30

29

2

undesignated apJ)ljqu8

9

4

Kameck Brushed

13

2

undellgnatad cordmarked 18

Hickory engraved Spiro Engraved

13

18

20

72

17

2S

93

101

Holly Fine Engraved

Arkadelphia Engraved

FriendShip Engraved

2

2

Adair Engraved (vars)

5 2

Hempstead Engraved Hodg•• Engraved

5

2

3 5

Haley Engraved Handy Engraved

Redland Engraved Avery Engraved GI.....I Engraved

Mineral Springs Engraved Walls Engraved

10

10

undesignated engraved

10

miscellaneous engraved

105

32

139

10

149

1782

123

1891

376

22&7

unidentified red-on-orange unident. red paint an potished surface Woodward Plain

13

13

Powell Plain MlssisslpplPlaln

Ball Plain Shell-tempered appendages

20

21

24

WoodwardlBarton Incised

10

10

12

69

69

Braden Punctated Parkin Punctated Undesignated Horizontal Incised Woodward Appllqua

10

11

76 -0

Undesignated Noded

Shell-tempered effigy ware

4

Hiwassee Island Red-on-Buff

13

Nashville Negative Painted

2 1

undesignated red-on-white

1

1

undesignated polychrome Sanders Plain

22

25

2200

OldTown Red

10

10

16

16

Sanders Engraved

6

42

43

Maxey Noded Redware

2

19

19

22

970

Poteau Plain

22

16

123

22

2339

221

2560 1&

19

62

99

1091

992

2

Poteau Engraved Totals

27

Vessels:

190

Sherds:

10814

232

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29 Table 2-55. Mound

Distribution of Sherds in the Stages of the Brown

Pre-mound Phase C Phase D Phase E Cache Pi t s

Mound Fill

Total

---_ .. ------_ .......................... _ ..... _ ......... _--- ... -------------_ ..... ----_ ... ------Wi II i ams Plain

8a

12

5

134

159

11

12

84

91

14

17

62

73

Williams Plain, l!.ll..

~

5

LeFlore Plain miscellaneous plain indeterminate plain *

8

2

5

micaeous plain aberrant g r it pIa i n

15

15

Coles Creek polished P I a i n

36

36

Coles Creek Incised

7

7

Agee Incised

2

2

6

6

6

6

6

8

53

61

Sanders Engraved

3

4

Poteau P I a i n

2

2

447

507

Crockett Curvi linear-Incised undesignated applique Hickory Engraved Spiro Engraved miscellaneous engraved Woodward P I a i n

1b

Sanders P I a in

Totals

6

13

2

15

3

27

* This category consists of distinctive polished and slipped sherds. a) 6 are from House 14. b) a nearly complete jar (Lf51/30) has been described as "S P i ro D" by Orr (1946:235). The estimated height is 19 cm.

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown

233

Table 2-56. Distribution of Sherds in Units of the Village and Buried House Mounds.

Williams Plain

Md.l

Md.2

259

22

Williams Plain, var. Craig

Md.3

Md.4 BrlV

85

15

2

9

LeFlore Plain

44

indeterminate plain

117

miscellaneous plain

5

11 14

13

3

Evl

Evil

Evlll

CriV

299

63 1681

628

4

7

7

CII

719

79

2

31

136

10

96

24

439

252

148

15

3

5

micaceous paste plain

Wall I

35

? Totals

4

3812

2

29

8

1115

317

30 2

2

grog/grit appendages Coles Creek Incised

4

horizontal incised

8

8

2

12

Williams Incised Crockett Curvilinear Incised

5

3

Pennington Punctae-Incised Chickashae Combed undesignated incised/punctate

-

misc. incised/punctated

4

5

11

2

Hollyknowe Ridged Piched undesignated appliqued cordmarked

2

Arkadelphia Engraved Friendship Engraved

2

miscellaneous engraved Woodward Plain

16

18

12

5

90

7

13

145

29

14

2

71

shell-tempered appendages Sanders Plain Poteau Plain

TOTALS

8

14

472

37

109

19

4

511

101 2330 1055

18

899

46

6

5589

1

Ie

Sanders Plain

5

ld

7 [I]

Houses 9-10

I

includes one bowl.

is a base of a burnished, even-surfaced bowl.

a bowl with a lip groove.

bowls.

slipped externally, the apparent temper is clay and bone.

[b]

[c]

[d]

[e]

[f]

.3

3.9

.3

.3

.3

.3

1.8

.3

92.4

Percents

sherds of one large jar, one thin bowl, and one complete miniature jar [Fig. 2-18] are represented.

1

13

1

1

6

1

306

Totals

[a]

Notes: brackets [ ] enclose estimates of minimum vessel numbers

Totals:

1

Woodward Plain

Hollyknowe Ridge Pinched

complex incised

7

53 [3]

House 8

1

49 [2]

House 7

Ie

1

3 [I]

House 5

1

2

64 [2]b

House 4

Ie

1

65 [3]

House 3

horizontal incised

I

33 [4] a

House 2

lC

2

32 [2]

1

miscellaneous plain

LeFlore Plain

Williams Plain [Shell in grog variety]

I !

! House I

Distribution of Sherds from the Spiro Houses

Williams Plain total

Table 2-57

.

~

~

~

C"

>§

So ...

::!

~

~

~

~

So

~

~

~ ::!

oj:>.

w

tv

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown

235

Table 2-58. DistribUtion of Sherds over all the Unils of the Spiro Site•

...... " - ,...

c,.;g

WllUamsP....

VViliiams Plain. vat: Craig LeFloAt Plain

Md

Md

1876

159

89

12

801

91

SmiUtpon Plain Paris Plain Ou....1ta Mountain Seed Jar

Md

72

Wool

Md'

Md,

438

115

24

\Ii_

..... 3812

134

317

1241 4

undesignatedplain

535

17

i"determinant plain mlcacaous paste plain abemln1 grtt pla/n

844

73

Coles Creek Polished Plain

149

13

61

30

584

1115

1909

2

5 15

4

44

29 185

36

appendages Cales Creek Incised

6472

29

4

36

TOTAlS

6 14

31

Davis Incised

horizontat line incised

16

12

WIlliams Incised

28 1

Agaalndsed Crockett Curvilinear Incised (vars.)

83

92

Pennington Punctate Incised

11

12

1

Wardlndsed Chickashaa Combed Undoslgnatad Incised

Unassigned Incised/punctate

30

33

miscellaneoua punctate

11

17

Holtyknowe Ridge Pinched Nash Neck Banded Undesignated applique Karnack brushed

13

6

22

2

Undasignated cordmarked

Hickory Engraved Spiro Engraved Holly Fine Engraved

25

26

101

108

1

Friendship Engraved Adair engraved Arkadelphia Engraved

Hempstead Engraved Hodges Engraved

Haley Engraved Handy Engraved Glassell EngraVed MineraI Springs Engraved Walls Engraved

1

undesignated engraved

10

10

miscellaneous engraved

149

152

unidentified red~n-orange unidenl red paint on polished surface Woodward Plain

1 1 2287

145

2428

Powell Plain Shall-tempered appendages

24

25

Woodward Incised

12

12

Braden Punctated

2

Parkin Punctated Woodward Applique

1

76

76

ShelJ..rempered effigy ware Hiawassee Island Red..gn-Buff

2 4

Nashville Negative Painted

13

13

undesignated red-on-white

2

2

undesignatad polychrome Sanders Plain

2560

OldTown Red

16

16

Sanders Engraved

62

68

Maxey Noded Redware Poteau Plain Poteau Engraved Totals

61

4

71

27

2696

28

1091

18

1112

5589

17693

2 10814

507

154

492

137

236

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

Table 2-59

Attributes of Williams Plain Compared with Baytown Plain (after Greengo 1964: Tab. 28) Williams Plain

Spiro site

Baytown Plain Mississippi Lower Valley Survey

Levels 8-14

Manny site Levels 1-7

Manny site

Method of manufacture

coiled

coiled

coiled

coiled

Temper

clay, qrit, bone

predominantly clay

clay, grit

clay, grit

Core Texture

coarse

irregularly contorted

coarse

coarse

Surface treatment, outer

smoothed even and uneven, burnished uneven

smooth

smooth, temper does not protrude

Slip, outer

none recoqnized

none recoqnized

thin, light brown in some

thin, light brown in some

Surface color, outer

reddish 87%

pale brown

gray, red to yellow

gray, red to yellow

Surface color, inner

reddish 43%, black 29%, grays 27%

pale brown

darker gray

darker gray

Core color

grays 51%, reddish

gray 74%, light gray 36%, dark gray 38%

gray 74%, light gray 36%, dark gray 38%

36\, black 13% Thickness range

(mm)

Thickness mean (mm)

smooth, temper does not protrude

5.9 - 17.8

4 - 13

4 - 11

4 -

11.26 body

8.1 north, 7.5 middle,

7.66 body, 7.19 bo~y.part of rim

7.59 body

7.1 south Thickness mode (mm)

12.0 - 12.9

Hardness, range/mean

2 - 4.5/2.3 - 2.5

2 - 4.5/2.9

Form (predominan t)

independent,

Simple bowls, 43.8%

restricted jars, with flared rim, 76. "

14

NR - 5/2.27 unrestricted, 81.1%

- 5/2.2 unrestricted

80.8%

(Second)

modified barrelshaped jars, 16.7%

(Third)

restricted, simple, jars, 26.5%, of which 1.7% and unreindependent most stricted bowls, 5% common

restricted, indep. 3.4% (jars)

restricted indep. 3.1% (jars)

Rim Diameter range (em)

9.8 - 44

10 - 96

11 - 51+

11 - 51+

Rim diameter mean

20.20 (jars)

36.8

26.48

28.54

::lim

unthickened thickened 3.4i all classes of modification

without decoration

thickened 51.5%, in these, moderately thickened predOminate

thickened 69%, (mainly moderate)

Lip

rounded most frequent beveling

Mostly rounded, some rim folding

rounded most frequent beveling 7. 7%

rounded mos t frequent beveling decreases

flat on jars, rounded and flat; 7.5% rounded on bowls1 of rims flat circular 88.6% flat square 10.5% of 352 base sherds

all rounded and flat: 25.6% of rims, flat circular 2.1%; flat square 15.6% of 96 base shards

all rOWlded and

one cup handle

triangular lugs, some

trianqular lugs 4.8%

triangular lugs 5.8%

nicked and incised

nicked-pinched 3.9%

none

(em)

11.9%

Base

Appendages

incurved bowls, 29.5%

no luqs or rim spouts Decoration, lips

none

Remarks

coiled basket impressions on the base of 1.5%

restricted, Simple restricted, 15.5% (incurved bowls) simple 16.1% (incurved bowls)

little or no punctation on outer rim

flat: 34.3% of rims; flat circular 3.6%, flat square 16.9% of 83 base sherds

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown

Table 2-60. Association of Rim Form and Neck Junction on Independent Restricted Vessels of Williams Plain

237

Table 2-62. Dislribulian of Shape Classes Among Williams Plain Vessels Excavation Unit

Neck Juncture Form (between Rim and Body) IP CP CP undefined undefined defined Totals Modified Barrel-shaped Jar: Standinq Asymmetrical Hyperboloid

LI40 Lt48 LI58 LI51 Tol.ls Unrestricted (simple bowls)· Simple. dependant restricted

2

Everted Rim Jar: Everted Asymmetrical Hyperboloid

20

4

Everted Asymmetrical Hyperboloid

9

1

(globular bowls)

10

Modified barral-shaped (jars)

Everted Cone Totals

31

2

Independent restricuted (lars),

26 10

1

2

3

6

4

41

with averted rimb

21

22

Totals

32

24

48 3

&0

a includea the cUP. PbB6-2

includes miniature Jar

Table 2-61. Association of Form and Body Junction of Flat Bases in Williams Plain Junction Form

Base Form

Round (IP)

Anqles (CP)

stilt

Circular Square Unknown

72

83

157

Totals

84

12

13 83

170

Unknown 312 12

37

60

60 409

Table 2-63. Asaociation of Surface Finish and Burnishing Among LaFlore and Williams Plalnwars Vassels

aav

Qoy-

Clay-

Qoy-

bon.

gril

grit~bon.

Unburnished & uneven 1 1 Unburnished & even Burnished & uneven 3 Burnished & even

5

7

6

29

3

21

9

36

Totals

8

15

0

I

28

15

Burnished/Unburnished VS GritiNon-grit tempered classes has a X2

Totale

=7.405, .01 > P < .005

66

238

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

Table 2-64

Association of Thickness with Burnishing Among Grog-tempered Sherds

Village Lf46

Brown Md.

LfSl

Craid Md. Lf40

Copple Md. LfSO

Ward Md. No.1

Ward Md. No.2

TOTALS

Lf37

LfS8

Clay, Clay bone: Unburnished

3877

101

1053

51

364

302

104

455

17

64

529

60

505

56

190

65

1427

21

4898

330

3440

99

5~45

(Thick and thin) Burnished

947

(Thick and thin) ::lay grit, Clay

'E!!.

bone:

Unburnished

14

1164

(Thick and thin) Burnished

1706

(Thick and thin) rotals:

Table 2-65

Inv. Ovaloid

Ovaloid

Unkn.

19

10

Everted assymetrical

hyperboloid/CP, df. Everted asymmetrical

hyperboloid/CP, undf. Standing asymmetrical

hyperboloid/IP, undf.

2

Standing asy~etrical hyperboloid/CP, undf.

1

Everted symmetrical

hyperboloid/IP, undf. Everted symmetrical

hyperboloid/CP undf. Everted symmetrical

1

hyperboloid/CP def. 1

Everted cone/CP undf.

1

Everted cone/CP df. Unrestricted: Medium spheroid 1

Ovaloid

Cone/IP undf.

1

Asynunetrical

hyperboloid/IP undf.

121

LeFlore Plain

Dependent Restricted: Everted asymmetrical

505

9362

Association of Rim Form and Body Form Among Williams Plain and LeFlore Plain Jars

Williams Plain

hyperboloid/IP, undf.

68

1

Inv. Ovaloid

Ovaloid

Unkn.

Williams Plain (shell in grog) Inv. Ovaloid Unkn.

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown

Table 2·66. Dislribution 01 Simple Bowl Shapes Among Williams Plain and LeFlora Plain Types. Williams

Plain

4

8 2 2

Extreme spheroid Inverted oval aid

Number of Horizontal Lines on the Rim· o

SimDla UorgBtricted Medium spheroid

Table 2-68. Association 01 the Number of Horizontal Lines on Bowl Rims with Lip Grooving.

LeFlore Undasignatad

Plain

Symmelrlcal hyperbolcld

239

1

Ungraavad lip top

70·

One lip groova Two lip grooves

4b

6

Totals

74

7

2

3

4

5

Tolals

84 23

13

11

113

Everted asymmetrical hyperboloid

• Including overhanging lowar lines.

pegRadeD' Restricted

a) La Flora Plain. Williams Plain. and undesignated plain types

Everted Extreme Spharold

b) La Flore Plain (now reclassified as Coles Creek InCised

va,.

Keo In the Toltec site study (Stewart-Abernathy 1982). c) ona. (Fig. 2-211)

d) (Figs. 2-21d, a)

Table 2-67. Association of Rim Form and Lip Grooving on Horizontal Line Incised Types.

Tabla 2-69. Oudlne 01 Decorative Devieea Found on Spiro Engraved Vessels. Bsp,tjtiva Yojts

Direct

Ccliarod Combarod

Rm

Rim

Total

Rim

Overhanding Simple

Lower lin. Lin.. Ungroovad lip top One lip graave

2"

13

6

9

Twa lip grooves

2

2

10

24

Totals

4b 3

19

8

43

0) Coles C.eek Inclsad b) 1 Coles Creek Incised, 3 East Incised.

18

Divided in Panel. Vertical boundaries Spiral (Figs. 14a,b) Circles Chavrons on arcs and semicircles (Fig. 141) Diagonals on nested rectangles (Fig. 17a) Diagonal boundaries Spiral (Fig. 141) Opposed concentric (Fig. 14d) Circles (Fig. 14h) Undivided in panels Running scroll, single row (Figs. 14e,g) Running scroll, double row (Fig. 16j) Arches (Fig. 14k) Festoons (Fig. 16b) Alternating opposed diagonals and ciroles (Fig. 14) Altemating opposed diagonals and complex elements (1'"19. 16g) Nested rectangles (Fig. 17a) Vertical scroll (Fig. 14c) NQorepetitiv' Units

Scrolls (Fig. 14i)

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

240

Table 2-70

A Comparison of Different Samples of Woodward Plain Woodward Plain, Reed variety*

Woodward Plain (Spiro sample)

Woodward Plain, Neosho variety*

Method of Manufacture

coiled

coiled

coiled

Temper

shell, occasionally sparse grit

shell, occasionally sparse grit

shell, occasionally sparse grit

Temper size

minute to 5 mm. diam.

0.5 mm. to 3.0 mm.

minute to 5 mm. diam.

Texture (core)

contorted, variable density, temper visible

contorted, moderate density, temper visible

contorted, variable density, temper visible

Surface Treatment

poorly smoothed, uneven to burnished, 5.5% polished

poorly smoothed

irregularly smoothed to burnished, uneven

rims Slip, outer

none observed

none observed

none (by definition)

Surface color (outer)

grey, light buff to reds and browns

red-brown, orange-brown

greys to reddish color

Sufface color (inner)

same

same

grey to black

Core Color

same, more dark greayand dark brown cores

same, more grey

grey

grey-black

Thickness, range(mm.)

4 - 10 (body)

3 - 15

5.0 - 11. 2

Thickness, mean (mm.)

6.7

6.3

7.48

Hardness range, mean

2 - 5, 3.0

2 - 3.5

Vessel Forms

simple restricted bowls 5.2%

simple unrestricted bowls 26.3%

jars 94.8%

jars 73.8%

Bowl Forms

simple unrestricted 100%

simple dependent unrestricted 98.6% complex dependent restricted (carinated) 1.4%

simple unrestricted 100%

Jar Forms

independent restricted 100%

independent restricted 100%

independent restricted 100%

Size (of orifice)

bowls:x=ls.4cm., 10-20cm. jars:x=21.2cm., 10-40cm.

bowls:x=20.7cm., l2-36cm. miniature bowls, 6-7cm. jars:x=19.0cm., 12-32cm. miniature jars, 6.6-7.0cm.

bowls:x=17.scm.,12.6-22.0cm. jars:x=29.3cm., s.0-54.5cm. seed jar:50 aberrant form:15.scm.

Rim

"high" rim present (40cm.) everted rim (Jars B-D)77.s%

"high fI rim absent everted rim 58.1%

standing rim (Jar A) 22.5%

standing rim 40.4%

"high" rim present everted asymmetrical and symmetrical hyperboloid (IP,CP) 98.1% standing asymmetrical hyperboloid (IP)1.9%

Lip

flat/rounded, mainly unthinned

flat/rounded, mainly unthinned

Irregularly rounded predominantly; partly rounded flat

Base

flat, circular surface slightly concave diameter x=8.6cm.,6-l6cm.,

flat, circular diameter x=9.9cm.,4-l6cm.

flat, circular diameter x=14.7scm., 4.0-2s.0cm. coil and mat impressions

Appendages

handles (loop,strap) , rim peaks, vertical rim

handles (loop, strap), rim tabs (vertical, horizontal)

handles (loop, strap) rim peaks ~andles join lip top to upper shoulder

Thickness, mode (mm.)

7.0 - 7.9

tabs,

di vided handle handles ioin lip top to upper shoulder

*abstracted from Freeman and Buck 1960

simple unrestricted bowls 9.5% jars 86.9% seed jar 1.8% aberrant form 1.8%

Icp Icp undf.

def.

def.

def. (1)

3 (1)

3 (2)

1

1

Ovaloid

1

(1)

spheroid

Medium

* ** ***

Includes a jar with a very high rim from the Ev2 tract (Fig. 2-341) Includes a rim with a horizontal fillet along the IP (Fig. 2-36d) This is the aberrant jar, A25-4 (Fig. 2-34e)

The type Woodward Applique is represented by the figures in parentheses.

Totals •.•••.••••..••••..•••••••••...•..... 17

Medium spheroid ICP def.

Standing asymmetrical hyperboloid

Standing Rim Group:

Everted cone

Everted cone

Icp

I?

Everted asymmetrical hyperboloid

Symmetrical hyperboloid lIP undf.

Icp

Everted asymmetrical hyperboloid

4

Everted asymmetrical hyperboloid ICP undf. (1)

7 (5) *

Everted asymmetrical hyperboloid lIP undf.

I

Everted Rim Group:

Ovaloid

Inverted

1

1***

asymmetrical Hyper.

Inverted ovaloid I

Lower Solid or Body Shape

33

1

2

63

1

1

2

6

21

15 2

3

1

10

18

Totals

3

4

6**

Unknown

Association of Rim Form and Body Shape Among Woodward Plain and Woodward Applique Jars

Upper Solid or Rim Form

Table 2-71

~

-

~

~~

~

::t

~

....~

::t

Q

l::i" .....

~

~

Q

~.

~

~ !1>

i

TOTAL

Note:

bottles--

34

19

30

223

160

27

=

Light red

light red, pink, very pale brown.

reddish gray, dark reddish gray, dark gray ish brown, weak red.

dark red, dusky red.

Red = red.

Purple

Maroon

The above color classes are equivalent to the following color name categories in the Munsell system.

28

110

96

bottles--

C1ay-Grit-Shell-Bone bowls--

404

Clay-Gri t-She11 bowls--

bottles--

Clay-Gri t-Bone-Mica bowls--

23 10

1

39

233

bottles--

220

I 258

Clay-Gri t-Bone bowls--

13

268

46

196

144

1092

13

233

273

198

I 198

Clay-Grit-Bone-Kaolin? bottles--

Minimum

48

122

16

19

40

15

vessel Total nwnber

I 260 12

Very Light Light Maroon, Light Light Mottled Red, Red/ Black, Black/ Black,Red/ Black, Light Red, Mottled Purple/ Light Red, Red Maroon Light Red Red Red Purple Purple Maroon Black M.aroon Red Red Maroon Dark Brown Black Black

The Distribution of Color Classes Among Temper Categories of Sanders Plain Sherds

bottles--

Clay-Grit: bowls--

Nonplastic Inclusions

Table 2-72

~

I

~

~

~

C'

So Cl ~

;:

~

~

~

So ~

~

~.

~

~

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown

Table 2-74

243

Frequencies of Sanders Plain Sherds and Vessels by Temper Class SLIPPED BOTH SURFACES SHERDS VESSELS min. no. raw fre- No Pro- Provevessels quency venience nience

Temper Class

Clay (C)

SHERDS VESSELS min. no. raw fre- No Pro- Provevessels quency venience nience

1

Clay-Grit (CG) Clay-Grit-Bone (CGB) Clay-Grit-Bone-Kaolin (?)

15

198

1

8

40

268

19

273

1

2

16

238

1

13

3

3

8

144

(CGBKl)

Clay-Grit-Bone-Mica (CGBM) Clay-Grit-Shell (CGS) Clay-Grit-Shell-Bone (CGSB)

----------+-

TOTAL Total Raw Sherd Frequency Minimum no. of Vessels

1

1

122

1092

48

196

205

1760

5 3 3

18

---

5

~-

I

----,-----

73

278

1

43

._-_._---- ---

709

2

ratio 9.2 to 1

23

Association of Sanders Plain Vessels with Temper Class

C. SLIPPED BOTH SURFACES Sl.mple bowls (spherical) (conical)

CG. _2 13

CGB.

CGBKI.

CGBM.

CGS.

Simple bowls (rectangular plan) Simple Carinated Complex Carinated Unclassified SLIPPED OUTER SURFACE Narrow-mouthed bottles Wide-mouthed bottles (flaring rim) Bottles (wide/narrow)

CGSB.

18 ac 42

5

7

Totals 53 72 9 1

7

Globular bowls Globular bowls (ovaloid plan)

1

4 1

1

2 2

1

6

15

10

1

33

2

26

6

2 5

29 14

6

47

7 1

3

Totals a) b) c) d) e)

1

2568

Restored Vessels

Table 2-76

SLIPPED OUTER SURFACE

Rim adornos present; lCG; 3 CGS. Another specimen (B90-2, WM) was not examined for temper. Two rims are scalloped, one of which projects horizontally. One has an everted rim, another an incised lip ("rope-shaped"). One vessel has everted rim tabs, with curve at top intermediate to simple carinated.

3 2

32 5

38

244

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

Table 2-73. Distribution 01 Color Classes among Selected Temper Categories of Sanders Plain (by Minimum No. of V...els).

Bowl

Color categories

Red Light Red Ve .35 6. Racurved Blade

CATAHOULA

ASHLEY (ASHLEY CHOCOViLLE)

6'. Ovala Blade

OOFIVEU.

4'. Blado WidlhlBa.e Width Ratio (BBW) < 1.6 and > 1.3 5.

Narrow LengthIWidth Ratio

5'. Broed LengthlWldth Ratio

SEQJOYNi

HOMAN

4". Blade WldlhlBasa Width Ratio (BeW) < 1.3

5. Acute Angular Medial Haft Juncture (MHJ)

a.

Straight Ba.e

7. Triangular Point Outline

T. OVate Point Outiln. 6'. Concav. or V-shaped Base

SCALLORN SATTLER SCALLORNB SALLISAW (SALLISAW BOKOSHE)

5'. Complex Modlal Haft Juncture (MHJ) 6. Concave Base

PCXXlLA (POCOLA JASPER)

6'. Straight to convex Base

POCOLA BRAZIL

3'. ellA..>: 550 4. ShortTang

c:. .S5em

(paints with low sidenotches)

5. Concave Base 6. Circular Basal Carner

MORRIS

6'. Angular Basal Corner

HASKELL

5'. Convex Base

KEOTA

S",Straight Base

fEB)

4'. Long Tang

~

.65 em (Points with high side notches)

5. Relatively Low Tang Length/Blade Width Ratio (lIB) 6. Unnotched 8ase

7. Straight Base

WASHITA GARVIN

T. Concave Base

WASHITA PENO

(HUFFAKER) 6'. Notched Ba.e

HARRELL

5'. Rolatively High Tang Length/Blade Width Ratio (T/B) WASHITA CHAFFEE I'. Unshould"ed Points (and without definably tang)

2. OVate Point Oudlne

3. LJW Broad Points 3', lJW Narrow POints 2'. Triangular Point Outline

~

40.2 B1.1 48.6 72.1

3.2 (6)

3.1 4.0 11.4 1.1

(1)

35.B

(6)

55.7

12.2

37.1

25.5

(12)

Pocola

Sequoyah

Homan

Morris

Haskell

Keota

Reed

.'lashita garvin

1.3

3.2

1.9

(19)

46.3

(2)

68.S

1.0

(6)

(1)

1.3

2.1

0.0

~~

.... ...." ......"

....

1

~~

2.9

(7)

6.3

(3)

36.4

2.6

1.9

34.5

37.1

(3)

(17)

Ol·...

,. 0::

00

1111 ~ ~

1

1.1

1.1

2.1

3.0

1.3

2.8

1. 3

2.9

H

~

.~

"~

....

(18)

(8)

2.9 3.5

8.6 1.1

4.6 (7)

87.2 (17)

(7)

7S.7

14.8

17.1

71.4

1.3

16.1

9.3

(2)

(16)

(S)

40.4

3.1

1.3

11on

y

~

..o~

2.7

4.6

43.7

(7)

2.1

9.4

2.6

5.6

14.3

34.5

(2)

(5)

(5)

67.6

(6)

21.9

(2)

44.4 80.3

44.4 14.S

46.6

20.0

(2)

(4)

(5)

64.5

15.2

2.5

(8)

(13)

U

70.3

(3)

11on

~ ~

~~

17.2

1.6

(5)

....

.t; .... oS tI on

~

Base

Figures are percentages within types, parentheses enclose numbers of points.

3 are irregular

(6)

(5)

27.8

Sallisaw

1.9

(4)

Scallorn 13

(1)

(1)

(7)

3.0

(1)

Coryell

30.3

(6)

1.3

2S.0

1.9

00

",. H"

~~

...... ""

1

16.9

9.1

(16)

27.7 45.5

(4)

Agee

(10)

54.3

18.2

32.5

Massard C

4.7

.~shley

44.4

B

Massard

17.7

A'jee A

(5)

3S.2

Massard A

2.8

24.0

22.8

lJayes

sho~t

Hayes 10.0

27.1

22.9

(1)

(2)

Alba (1)

~

....~

(3)

H

"

o

!l

(*3)

.,,.~

!l

Blade Shape

Spiro Point Types by Selected Geometrical Attributes

Donham tahlequah

~

.." 3 g......

Table 2-83

~

1.3

13.3

(3)

8.5

(1)

U

o

g

(4)

*

4.0

1.3

73.2

(1)

16.3

5.7

22.9

(30)

4.0 S1.4

5.7

95.9

21.9

(1)

(2)

1.0

18.9

1.1

16.7

62.5

(4)

(3)

1.1

11.4

10.4

(13)

60.0

13.5

71.2

3.8

(20)

(6)

43.8

(1)

5.4

44.4

(4)

(6)

(1)

16.6 1.4

77.1

(10) (5)

14.3

27.8

7.6

29.2

4.5

3.1

1.4

19.4

2.8

1. 5

(8)

(7)

~~

0 ....

2.9

4.2

(5)

3.3

(2)

25.0

(4)

43.2

16.6

-

40.5

44.6

(8)

Oil UJ!

5.7

(4)

(2)

28.1

(5)

48.6

2.8

17.7

21.5

(2)

In

In

...... j .... " .... ....f Il'" ...."". ...... " .. .... .. I

1 ....g-0:: .... .......

(3)

3.1

..:IU

",0

...."" ....

,",u

Ii ....' ......"

....

(1)

~

!l

~

....f

~

'iil

(1)

3.5

18.9

1.3

(1)

(1)

18.8

~~

"" !l!l

....

1 ........

~

!l

11

:!

~

10.6

1.3

o

'"

....~

....

73.3 1.3

2.8

18.8

10.9

~

....~

.3"

..

....

1.3

1.2

38.3

2.8

.9

o

....

.t

B o

..

....

Haft Juncture

3.5

-

-

5.6

5.0

-

(1)

H

'g"

~ ~ ....

31

86

168

74

100

25

86

11

60

26

10

32

11

226

36

105

15

79

12

22

,\!

~

-...l

c~ ~

I

:;::

~ :::t

.:-0

;:;;-

g ;:s

§:

~

g

~.

~

(\)

;!

248

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

Table 2·84. Projectile Point Cache Sizes No.

Point Type

206 Morris

lndltx· Cache No.

.02

Phase

calegory

tI

deposit

Al0·5

22

163 Agee

.04

B23-1

IB

.05

B29-8

III

(+ 44 Heskell) 122 Agee

.02

M-9

II

30

Morris

85

Haskell

20

Hayes short

19

Morris

19

Agee

.02

A5-2

II

19

Scallorn B

III

2b

.06 .07 . 31

BrB3-3 A3-2 B31-5

IV II II

2c. 5. doposll

II

.06

B29-88

III

711 0 15

Morris

.07

B31-5

. 03

B99-15.

III

2b

15

Agee

.18

WeA3-5

14 14

Coryell Agee

.07 .17

A6-2 A 11-4

14

Morris

14

Morris

.07 .07 .07 .07 .13

A27-1 II B23-20 IB B122-2 III B 162-4 IV B93-2b 111111

deposit 3• 3.110

.14

WeA3-4

deposit

.26

B31-18

2b

51

Massard B

.03

8r83-1

IV

2c

.03 . 20

B99-18. Bl0-21

til tI

2b 3.110

.04 .09

B27-3 B29-9

IB til

17

Read

16

(+ olhers) Massard B

15

Agee

15

Sallisaw

5•

(+ olhers)

5• deposit

(+ others)

111111 II

10lgroup 10

(+ others)

(+ others)

(+ others)

7110

14

Morris

14

Collier ICNA) Read

13

(+ others)

3b

(+ others)

.04 .04 .07

B31-18 A25-5 A25-9

Morris

. 04

831·17

26

Agee

.04

B161-6

26 25

Collier ICNA) Agee

II

III III

Sa group

13

Agee

group

12

Massafd A

5•

12

Keota

3•

10

Read

.10

A25-10

10

Agee

.46

Bl0-22

10

Hayes short

..15

B39-6

III/IV

.10

B56-4

IV

(+ others)

(+ others)

II

Sa

(+ others)

.04 .08

III IA

B174-2 B115-5

III IA

.04 .04 .04

B161-8 BrB6-1 BrB6-16

III II II

• Index 01 diversity Is equal 10 the number 01 recognized

divldod by the lotal number in that group. A low 'Igure is an Indication 01 the taxonomic homogeneity of bearing a single catalogue number.

8

point collection

B39-5

IIIIIV III

50112 group

3.'10 58/12

(+ 10 MBssard C)

3.

taxons boarlng a par1lcular catalogue number (e.g., 910-21)

.19

(+ others)

3.

(+ others)

SalllsBW

B99-16b

2b

til

Massard A

.15

III

B99-17.

23

II

B99-20.

.02

Agee

BrB6-22

.02

S.lIls.w (+ othera)

(+ others)

25 24

.12

2b

Washita

26

3.

ttl

55

Read Read

B137-1 111111

B99-13

(+ 22 Hoskoll)

Morris

.10

.02

18

Washita

26 26

deposll 616.

2b

72

27

3b

A2-2 111111 B24-10 IB

III

(+ others)

Agee H.skell

B93-2. 111111

.05 .08

B99-19.

Keota

28 27

.10

.03

75

Sequoyah

416

(+ others)

Read

29

IV

B7-4

(+ others)

Keota

B94-14

deposit

.03

61

37

.12

II

(+ others)

deposit

(+ others)

W.shlt.

A10-3

(+ others)

(+ 11 Agee)

81

Agee

XII

(+ others)

88

21

deposit

(+ others)

s116 Agee

.11

(+ others)

(+ 15 Homan) Keota

133

Sallisaw bokoshe (+ others)

(+ others)

10

Sequoyah

5.

A5

5

14

3

14

2

11t

1

3

88t

7

t

19

10

§

14 128 305

40

uncertain assignment.

15 124 137

probably a catalogue error.

TOTALS

Unknown/Lost/Frgt.

Fresno

Harrell

Huffaker

Washita chaffee Washita peno

77

14

6 100

• field photos show at least 7.

18

12 10

85

8 203

33

5

12

4

3

68

8

15

10

2 23

28 346 154

6

7 2

Washita garvin

216 2

4

2

3

Keota

15

2

28

Read 62

2

30

10

23

93

7

4 4 -103 1 207

5

14

163

7

Haskell

Morris

Sequoyah Homan

Pocola jasper Howard

Sallisaw bokoshe Pocola Pocola brazil

x' x

Sanisaw

5 22

3

6

2

16

Comer-notched B

7

5

2

8

3

2

1

5

9

2

8

4

4

65

3

16 11

14

20

1

5

2

2

2

2

2

7

7

2

32

10 5

3

13

33

33 11

7

3

10

10

B9 Bl0 B12 B23 B24 B26 B27 B29 B31 832 B38 839 840 B42 B47 B48 B49 B50 B51 B54 B56

ScaliomB

Scallom sattler

Ashley chocoville Coryell

Ashley

Rockwall Agee neffs

Collier Agee 1

B7

3

9

A9 Al0 All A15 A25 A27B3/4

Massard AlB MassardC

14

A6

2

19

A4

15 122 118

A3

Hayes short

Bonham Tahlequah Hayes

Perdiz

Alba

A2

Table 2-85. Distribution of Projectile Points among Craig Mound Features.

-

~

\0

§

~

~

:;::

...~ ....

~

Q ....~

l:;.

~

:sc~

Q

~.

~

~

~

2

882

20

893

23

894

2

13

7

5

14

2

14

36

21

4

6

20

16

2

6

31

5

4

2

2

4

~ 2!

~

"~a

5.9

8.1

18.5

18.9

13.5

17.8

2.1

20.3

20.5

1.8

0.8-1.2

1.4-1.8

1.1

Bowl Height

~~~::~~~f~~~~~~~f:::~~~f.~f.~~~f.:f.~~~f.~~f.

2.7-3.0

2.6-3.2

1.4-1.5 1.3-1.4

2.8-2.9

2.9-3.2

2.6

3.1-3.7

1.6

1.4-1.5

1 .1

1.3

1.3-1.4

3.1-3.3

23.2

1.9-2.3

1.4

10.2

2.3-2.8

17.3

2.9-3.1

14.1

1.4

2.6

1.2

Projection

ProJection Bowl

of Stem

Stem

End

Diameter

Length of

1.5

Bowl

of Stem

Length

End

Length Diameter of Stem

Maximum

Table 2-143. Metrics of T-shaped Pipes.

0'1 W

N

:=

'"

ti

~

:;::

::t

~

....'"

:= ....

-Q

~

:= ;::.

Q

~.

~

'" ~

264

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

Table 2-145. Red River Pipe Dimensions

Table 2-147. Attributes of Stemless Elbow Pipes.

Stem

No.

Total

Projection

Stem

Stem

Bowl

Bowl

Length

Length

Diameter

Bore

Height

Diameter

em

em

mm

mm

em

em

B88-1 B122-8 B8-2

Type 1:

X

grog/shell

?

10

5

3.1

2.9

10

5

2.2

2.9

10

6

1.6

2.1

.

burnished

C

1.8

eroded bumished

red slip

& bulbous A:

1.1

grog/bono

cylindrical B

D-B

1.1

X

slightly expand

69-3

B162-8

lustrous burnished

slightly expand

B131-3

2.35

2.5

shell shell

obtuse

2.9

3.1

B162-7

Slightly expand slighUy expand

right (ang)

3.0a

5-6

Tobacco

obtuse obtuse

shell

10 B-9

Surface

right (rdd)

A

1.5

Type 2:

Temper

slightly expand

2.5

4.3

Projection

right (rdd)

7.4

6

Stem Shape

B122-9

B189-14 9.0

B99-8

Stern/Bowl Angle

two -feef'. 8 mm long; B: small and blunt C: wedge-shaped

a) 2.2 em. above top 0/ stem some bone, ceke in bowl• missing

Table 2-146. Elbow Pipe Dimensions (em)

Table 2-148. Small Effigy Pipe Dimensions (em).

Stem

Stem

Stam

Bowl

Bowl

Length

Diameter

Bore

Height

Diameter

Diameter

through pipe axis

2.6

9.5

4.4-4.8

A17-1

7.6

4.1-4.3

No.

Length

Height

Width

Bowl

Stem Hole

Basal

Diameter

DIameter

Dimensions

Puma/Jaguar Pipes:

688-1

8.0

3.8-3.9

B122-3

7.8

3.0

B9-2

B.5

3.4-3.6

1.9

6.0

4.5-4.6

A17-2 8.7 Bird-over-Man Pipes:

2.9-3.7

2.0-2.8

7.4

4.8

610-14

15.7

6.7

4.3-3.9

078

14.7

6.3

4.3-3.9

B122-9 6131-3 B9-3

9.6 11.9

3.6-3.8

(conic)

10.3

2.5

7.3 x 3.8

5.6

4.1

3.0

5.1

4.5

3.3

10.1

8.3

3.2

2.6

13.5 x 6.5

12.5

8.1

3.6

2.8

est.14.S x 7.0

23.9 13.0

20.5

23.4

26.0

lB.5

B 99-2

B 99-3

U.A. 47-2-1

GI

U.A. 37-1-1

16.6

27.2

B 99-1

11. 3

14.5

13.1

10.7

24.5

A 9-2

9.3

22.4

A 9-1

13.3

14.5

20.1

17.1

36.5

22.4

14.3

22.0 9.3

6.0)

14.0

14.0

IB.O

21. 5

10.B

10.B

11.5

10.6

est.1B.513.5

14.5

(17.5

*

loB

loB

4.7

2.5

bauxite bauxite bauxite

3.3 3.0 3.0

rear

bauxite soft limestone

3.2 3.2

back back back

3.6-3.7 4.2 4.2

back back back

biconical biconical biconical

biconical

back

4.5

bauxite 3.6 back

3. B

soft limestone back

3.B

3.7

fine-grained sandstone

Material

4.5

back (dorsal)

back

back

Stem hole Bowl Bowl Location Opening Location Size

top of head

biconical

biconical

biconical

separate pipe (see text)

Pedestal Pipe Length Width Thickness Construction

Human Effigy Pipe Measurements

Overall Overall Height Breadth Length

Table 2-149

~

N 0\ VI

;:s

~

($

~

:;::

::t

~

:

~

.

....

..... Q ;:s

i:;'

;:s

:s

~

Q

~.

~

~

266

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29 Tabla 2-154. Provenience of Pigments and Pigment Producing Materials Rod

Green

B1ack

Yellow

Table 2-150. Human Face Mask Dimensions. Length

Widlh

Doplh

17.2 11.6

lB.S 13.4

7.7

810-16 810-17

White

Gray-

Lead

Spiro I: W0S4 WaB6 Spiro IA: B115

7.0

17

B135 8181 8187

Table 2-151. Inventory of Seated Human Effigies. Height

CaL No.

B173 BI77 S,lr. IB: B23 B27 Spiro 1111:

7

PbS5

131-7325.3 USNM-448892

32.5 Width 18.8 em.; head measures 10.8 em. high.

USNM-448B90 USNM-44BB91

28.5 Head (USNM-448896) 38.7 Tenon measures 11.8 em. lang.

18.9 Base measures 6.6 x 4.5 x 2.2 em.

810B-133a

Head measu ... 5.2 em high, 2.0 broad, 1.7 Ih

810B-133b

Head measures 4.6 em high, 1,7 broad, 1.6 Ih

WaXBl

1

II:

Spiro Al0 Bl0

B31 B78 BB2 8107

B137 8172 BrBl BrXBl WaBS Table 2-152. Human Head Effigy RatUe Dimensions estimated estimated

helghl

depth

undlstorted width

Spiro All Spiro

II? 1 11/111:

B93 81BO B184

B122-13 a#1 b#2 b#3

ca. 12.0 ca. 11.0

5.0 4.0

ca. 6.5 B.O

ca. 11.07

Bl08-7

3.0

1.6

2.9

8185 B189

Spiro

III:

828 850 851 8119 B122

12

S174

8187 Spiro

III/IV:

88 838/39

Table 2-153. Discoidal Dimensions Rim

Diameter

Thickness

-

B17B Spiro

Maximum

Center Foco Thickness Diameter

IV:

840 28

B•• 8132

A14-2

1.1

10.7 B62-22 OHS#5171 7.2 5.4 Cooper

2.8

1.3

1.4 2.0-1.85

3.4

2.2

1.2 0.6

Hamatit.

Brown

7.5-8.0 5.15

8162 8r83/5

Spiro

IV?

B53 Spiro

IVB:

A18 A21 A2B

A2. B36 B'3 B44

B45 B46 B47 B••

8'. 85. B62

Bl0. 8110

8145 B155 8158 B183

Spiro

1

IVe:

a13

B,.

Unc.rtaln:

We83

19

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown

267

Table 2-155. Pigment Category Proportions by Number of Burials of Each Phase Red

Green

Black

Yellow

White

Gray-

Laad

Hematite

Brown

Spiro I 20%

Spiro 1111 (2)

1

1

50%

50%

Spiro II (11) Spiro IlIiIi (6) Spiro 1/1 (7) Spiro IIIIIV (3) Spiro IV (8)

2

1

(10)

20%

10%

50%

20%

8 73%

360/.

9%

9%

18%

2 33%

17%

22%

5

2

1

28%

14%

71%

57%

14%

1

1

33%

33%

33%

5

5

62%

62%

12'0/_

22%

22%

28% 33%

33%

12%

12%

25"10

1

1

7

5%

350;.

Spiro IVB (20)

150/.

Totals (67)

27

23

7

6

5

4

21

13

40%

34%

10%

9%

7%

6%

31%

19%

300/.

15%

5%

10%

45%

Table 2-156. Inter-Associations among Pigments and Pigment-producing Minerals per Feature. Laad Laad Red Green

a.!!

Red

Green

Black

White

Gray-Sr.

18

3

10.0

3.0

2.8

2.8

8

2

3

3

8.7

2.8

2.3

2.3

.2.§.

1.7 1

1.9

1.5

2.0

2.0

1.7

1.3

0.6

0.6

0.5

0.4

~

1

1

0.5 Gray-Brown

2.2

1

1

U

Yellow Hematite

a

7 11.3

2.3

Black

White

0.4 0.4

Yellow

0.3

a

~

0.3

Q.

0.3 Hematite Uppar figure represents the actual observed number of associations; the lowar figure represents the expected frequency (basad on the marginal totals).

~

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

268

Table 2-157. Inventory of Copper Plates and Copper-covered Wood Plaques Geometric Outline Plates: Hawk Motif, Diamond OHS JAB: Tab. 53 2

Warrior Head Motif, Unknown shape

UA

PP: 357, Fig. 31; HHC: 84, Fig. 49 3

Head Motif, Circular OHS 34901281 JAB: --; HHC: 84,86, Fig.

50a

4

Head Motil, Rectangular OHS 3490/258

JAB:--; HHC: 86, Fig. SOb

5

Head Motif, Rectanguloid GI-UT B122-18

JAB: Fig.

6

Warrior Head Motif, Rectangular MAl 201699

EKB: P1.75; HHC: Fig. 51d

7

Warrior Head Motif, Rectangular MAl 201700

EKB: P1.75; HHC: Fig. 51c

8

Fringed Eye Motil, Square outline OHS 3490/257

HHC: Fig. 53a

9

84~

HHC: 86,89, Fig. 51a,b

Forked Eye Motil, Unknown shape GI HHC: 93, Fig. 54b

10

Forked Eye and Blade-eye Motif MAl 201701

HHC: 93, Fig. 54c

11

Forked Eye Motif, Recl. (CCW) OHS 34901274

HHC: 97, Fig. 56c

12

Eye and Blade Motif, Square? Outline, Stock 10

HHC: 129, 131, Fig. 79

13

Eye and Ogee Motif, Unkn, Stockpile 15 UA

HHC; 133-136, Fig. 82

14

Unclassified Motif, Unknown shape HDH

HHC: 96, Fig. 55

15

Disc Motif, Circular OHS 3490/280 JAB: 441,4, Fig. 86a; HHC: Fig. 54a

16

Nested Astroids, Rect. (CCW) OHS 3490/274

HWH: PI. 77, lower left; HHC

17

Nested AstrGids, Rectangular (CCW)

G/

HHC: Fig. 56a HHC: 128-129, Fig. 78

18

Nested Squares, Square Outline, Stockpile 1

19

Nested Squares, Square Outline, Stockpile 2

HHC: 129, Fig. 78

20

Nested Squares, Square Outline, Stockpile 3

HHC: 129, Fig. 78

21

Nested Squares, Square Outline, Stockpile 4

HHC: 129, Fig. 78

22

Nested Squares, Square Outline, Stockpile 16

HHC: 136

23

Nested Squares, Square Outline, Stockpile 17

HHC: 136

24

Cruciform? Motif, unknown outline, Stock 12

HHC: 131, 133, Fig. 80

25

Cruciform? Motif, unknown outline, Stock 13

HHC: 133, Fig. 80

26

Sun Circle, Circular outline OU LfCrl B122-26

JAB: 440, Fig. 871

27

Sun Circle with bordering bands, ovoid TO

HHC: 93, Fig. 53b

28

Sun Circle with Woodpecker Heads B122-29b

JAB: 440-1, Fig. 87a

29

Sun Circle with Woodpecker Heads B122-29a

JAB: 440-1, Fig. 87b

30 Sun Circle with Woodpecker Heads B122-25 Figure Outline Plates:

JAB: 440-1, Fig. 87d

33

G/

Hawk Motif, Stack Plate 8 HHC: 32-33, Figs. 16,17

34

Hawk? Motif, Stack Plate 9

G/

HHC: 33, Figs. 18,19 35

Hawk Motif, Stack Plate 15

G/

HHC: 50-51, Figs. 28,29 36

Hawk Motif, Hawk outline HMFA HHC: 112-113, Figs. 63, 64

37

Hawk Motif, Hawk outline (Irag) HMFA

38

Hawk Motif, Hawk outline (Irag) GI HHC: 108, Fig. 61a

39

Hawk Motil, Hawk outline (Irag) GI HHC: 108, Fig. 61b

HHC: 108, Fig. 62

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown 40

Hawk Motil, Hawk outline (Irag) HMFA

41

Hawk Motil, Hawk outline (Irag) GI

HHC: 108, Fig. 61c

HHC: 103, Fig. 60a 42

Hawk Motil, Hawk outline (Irag) GI

43

Hawk Molil, Hawk outline (Irag) GI

HHC: 103, Fig. 60b HHC: 103, Fig. 60c 44

Hawk Motif, Hawk outline (Irag) GI

45

Anthropomorphized Hawk Motif LfCrl A6-4

JAB: Fig. 83b; HHC: Fig.46a; VOW:

46

Anthropomorphized Hawk Molil LICrl A6-5

JAB: Fig. 83d; HHC: Fig.45a; VOW:

47

Anthropomorphized Hawk Motif LfCrl A6-6

JAB: Fig. 83c; HHC: Fig.46b; VOW:

48

Anthropomorphized Hawk Motif LfCrl A6-7

JAB: Fig. 83t; HHC: Fig.44; VOW:

49

Anthropomorphized Hawk Motif LfCrl A6-8

JAB: Fig. 83g; HHC: Fig.47; VOW:

50

Anthropomorphized Hawk Motif LfCrl A6-9

JAB: Fig. 83e; HHC: Fig.45Q; VOW:

51

Hawk Molif LfCrl A6-10

HHC: 108, Fig. 60d 67

71

JAB: Fig. 83a; HHC: Fig.46a; VOW: 73 52

Hawk MOlil (CCW) LfCrl B52-3 JAB: 426, Fig. 87j

53

Hawk Motif LfCrl B88-3 JAB: Tab.53

54 55

Hawk Motil GI-H.T.Bell HWH: Fig.76; HHC: -, Fig.48 Hawk Motif (pieces of 2) HMFA B&H: Figs.l0-ll.

56

Hawk Motil (2 pieces) Lf40/692

57

Hawk Dancer, ? outline HMFA

58

Hawk Dancer, Hawk? outline MAl 18/9332

EKB: 39; HHC: 120-121, Fig. 70

59

Hawk Dancer Molil, Hawk outline HMFA

HHC: 118, Figs. 68,69

60

Hawk Dancer Motit, Hawk? outline (trag) HMFA

HHC: 118, Figs. 67

61

Hawk Dancer Motlt, Hawk? outline (Irag) GI

HHC: 118, Figs. 66c,d

62

Hawk Dancer Motit, Hawk? outline (trag) GI

HHC: 118, Figs. 66a,b

63

Hawk + Hawk Dancer riveted together GI

HHC: 113, Fig. 65

64

Kilted Dancer, Stack Plate 4

GI

B&H: 55; HHC: 121, Fig. 71

HHC: 20-21, Figs. 8,9 65

Kilted Dancer, Stack Plate 13

GI

HHC: 44-45, Figs. 24,25 66

Elder in Hawk Regalia, Slack Plate 1

GI

HHC: 8-13, Figs. 2,3 67

Elder in Hawk Regalia, Stack Plate 2

GI

HHC: 13-17, Figs. 4,5 68

Elder in Hawk Regalia Stack Plale 3

GI

HHC: 17-20, Figs. 6,7 69

Elder in Hawk Regalia, Stack Plate 5

GI

HHC: 21-26, Figs. 10,11 70

Elder in Hawk Regalia, Stack Plate 6

GI

HHC: 26-27, Figs. 12,13 71

Elder in Hawk Regalia?, Stack Plate 10 GI

HHC: 38, Figs. 18,19

72

Elder in Hawk Regalia, Stack Plate 11

GI

HHC: 38-39, Figs. 20,21

269

270

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

73

Elder in Hawk Regalia, Stack Plate 12

GI

HHC: 39-44, Figs. 22,23 74

Elder in Hawk Regalia, Stack Plate 14

GI

HHC: 45-50, Figs. 26,27 75

Elder in Hawk Regalia, Stack Plate 16

GI

HHC: 54, Figs. 30,31 76

Elder in Hawk Regalia, Stack Plate 17

GI

HHC: 54-55, Figs. 32,33 77

Elder in Hawk Regalia, Stack Plate 18

GI

HHC: 55-61, Figs. 34 78 79

Elder in Hawk Regalia, Stack Plate 19 HHC: 61-64, Figs. 35,36

GI

Elder in Hawk Regalia

GI

HHC: 64-66, Fig. 37 80

Elder in Hawk Regalia (2 unconnected)

GI

HHC: 66, Fig. 38 81

Man in Hawk Re9alia

GI

HHC: 66-67, Fig. 39 82

Elder in Hawk Regalia

GI

HHC: 68-71, Fig. 40 83

Man in Hawk Regalia, misc., (13 fragments) GI

84

Hawk/snake

85

HHC: 71-74, Fig. 41-43

HaWk/snake OU 'New Trier' B&R

86

Heart-shaped Apron, Stack Plate 7

GI

HHC: 27-32, Figs. 14,15 HHC: Hamilton, Hamilton & Chapman 1974. HWH: Hamilton 1952. VOW: Watson 1950. B&H: Brown and Hamilton 1962 JAB: Brown 1976b EKB: Burnett 1945 PP: Phillips 1940 B&R: Brown & Rogers 1989 Copper plates have been part of 'stacks' or caches that have either been discovered this way (as in the case of burial A-6) or have been recovered from corroded and compacted lumps placed in museums. Of the later Henry W. Hamilton and his coworkers (1974) have been primarily instrumental in salvaging individual plates from these masses. First among them is the collection of 19 plates from the 'Stack' a corroded and cemented mass in the University of Arkansas museum collections. A second is mentioned by Hamilton et al. (1974:6-7) as not having been located. A third is called the 'Stockpile' by the Hamiltons. U. Arkansas museum again. Other groups are known: the three major plates from the Wehrle collection bore stains on their surfaces that revealed that they were part of a group of plates, partially folded over onto each other. Eight lots of corroded copper adhering to basketry, matting etc. in the UA museum are identified with the 'copper covered reed baskets' of Hobbs and the 'baskets containing copper' which Dellinger purchased. Note the fragments of decorated pieces (Fig. 73, 75) are not represented in the inventory. [Note: Burnett, Brown, Watson, Brown & Hamilton, Hamilton '52, and Hamilton et al have to be closely collated here to eliminate oversights and duplicate counting]

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown

Table 2-158. The Distribution 01 Copper Ptete Styles by Phase, Craig Mound. 111111

Gravaperiods

III

B52

B8S

Falcon

IIIIIV

Asab X?

B122

X?

Warrior Eye Motifa

Eye and Hands MoUf Nested Astroids Naeled Squaras Nested Squares snd Step Design

Rectilinear Motif B122

Sun Circle

Sun Circle with Bordering Bands

B122

Sun Circle with Woodpeckers Disc Motif" Apron-shaped. Loop design

Unknown daoorated.

Plain.

B27'

All

B29 B38/9 651

B52

Table 2-160. Attributes of Copper Falcon Plates (Bird OuHine).

IVB

Falcon Dancer Warrior Heada

271

Bl08 B155 B163 AIS B13 c B36 B44 B48 653' B54 B68 B145 B154 B155

a Examples probably from the Great Mortuary that were found folded together

(Werhle cell.) (see text). b Probably a Spiro IV part of the AS gravelot.

C this piace is from a Spiro IVC gravelot • Coppar-covered wood plaques.

AS-4

HID18II Head FaIoon Head Forked Eye

AS-5 AS-S AS-7 AS·S AS-9 AS-l 0

p

Pupils circularl diamond shaped Both forks pointed, arms equal Short arm rounded, long arm pointed Zigzag line from eye to collar Dinactlon heed laces Double-headed, lacing differently Lines with lower beak Lines back of upper pan of beak Mouth open Number of creat leathers Ralaed dots on crest feathers Double line inside feathers Occipital hair knot Ear spool

Tassaled ear spool Hair emblem Beeded forelock Necklace Collar, strand number Ventrally located spots. number Semi-oval marks at sides 01 stomach Sami-oval marks above wings Underwing coven feather markings (angular, rounded) Vertical wings, staggered rows

of semi-circles on primary leathers (row number) Number 01 lines under body Number of grooves in tail feathers l.sgs Three-clawed leet Maximum breadth at shouldar Maximum breadth at middle

p p p[d)

p

P

p p

P

p[d)

P d p

P p

p

R

L

p p

p p

p p p

p

L

p

L

L

P

P

? P

P

p p

?

3

27

4

ms

p

p

pp

pp

p

L

P

37

3

L p[on)

P

7 p

p p p p

P

7

p3 p2

P

p

pp

p

7

p?

p2 p2

p7 p2

P

P

P

P

P

pp

p p3 p2

p2 p2

p2 p2

P

P

P

P

P

P

p2 p2

p,r7 p,a? p,a

p,a? p,a

pa

p pa?

p3

p2

p2

p2

p2

p2?

p2

p3 p3

p2 p3

p2 p3

p2 p2

p2 p2

p2 P

p2

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P P

P

P

P

P

P

p

p

p

p

p

p

P

Table 2-161. Copper Falcon Plates (Bird Oudine) Metrics. Table 2-159. Number and Poaition of Perforations on the Geometic Plates and A6-4

Copper-coverad Wooden Plaques

Nona

Maximum Length Maximum Breadth Maximum Thickness (mm)

0(2)

Head and Neck Length

Arrangement of Perforations

Oaelgno

Top (cantral)

lop (horiz)

Vertical

Fsicon Warrior Head

0(1)

Warrior Eye

RS (1)

Nested Astroids

R (1)

C (2)

Body Lengtha Body Width

R (2)

Tall Langth Longth of Lag 10 Foot Haight of Top Spot

A6-5

A6-8

A6·7

A6-8

A6-9 A6-10

39.2· 31.5' 35.1 16.5 0.9 15.3 .4 9.2 8.3 8.2

34.5 11.2

33.8 11.0

33.1 11.9 .3

.8

9.0

8.0

8.3

10.2

18.0 12.1 5.0 4.1 7.5· 5.5

12.6 4.0 4.8

11.5 3.7

9.8 3.2

5.5 2.8

C: Circular outline; 0: Diamond outline; R: rectangular outline: S: Square outline.

Breadth of Top Spot Heighl of Bottom Spot Breadth of Bottom Spot Length of Long Arm of Forked Eye Length of Short Arm of Forked Eya

2.4 3.0 2.0 7.8 5.4

1.3 2.5 1.4 3.7 3.4

Number of perforations within parentheses.

Diameter of PupiJ

1.3 0.7-0.8 5.9 4.5

Sun Circle

C (2)

Sun Circle with Woodpecker Heads

C (2)

Disc Motif

C (?)

Hand and Eye

probably

Nested Squares

8(?)

Distance between the Perforations estimated measurement a (base of neck to ventral ·V·)

14.7 5.5 7.0'

3.5 2.3 6.8 3.2

.4

6.7 2.6 1.2 2.6 1.1 3.8

.3 0.4-0.5 8.3 3.8

36.8 12.7

12.0· 14.5 4.7 4.2 5.1

5.5 7.3 3.6

2.4

2.5

1.4 2.4 1. 1 4.5 2.5

1.4

1.6

2.5 1.3 4.0 3.8

3.1 1.5 2.5

0.6 5.1

0.6 5.6

0.8 5.0

272

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

Table 2-164. List of Undecorated Copper Plates by Provenience

Table 2-162. Attributes of the Warrior Head Plates MAl OSM 0ElM 3490/281 3480/25820/888 Shape

Dimensions (mm) Thielen ... (mm) Orientation of head Openmculh Eye execution Eye marking Beadod forelock Roached hair

f

Figure 2-116. Composite copper hair pin terminals. Modes of attachment of composite copper hair pins and copper plumes: a) small cover piece; b) split plate. Copper terminal forms: c) Craig mound (GI 6325.658); d) Craig mound (GI 6325.439); e) Craig mound (GI 6325.432); t) Craig mound (OU) (c-e drawn after Hamilton 1952: PI. 69a).

Provenience: From the commercially derived collections now in the Ohio Historical Society.

Copper Hair Pins Simple (Figs. 2-115a-e)

Simple copper hair pins are spindle-shaped rods that taper from the middle to the ends. Pins exist with both ends pointed; others have one end pointed, the other flat, and squared or rectangular cross sections. Copper hair pins are never of constant diameter although many cigar-shaped "pins" of wirelike evenness have been passed off as genuine. Bogus hair pins are illustrated in Hamilton (1952: PI. 6ge). All hair pins recovered in situ are from burials and are complete with the exception of a fragment from a mound top gravelot (BI9). All other (21) fragments from the WPA excavations belong to the Craig mound general collection. Most pins are straight; those that depart from this form and

were not bent before burial are serpentine in shape (Table 2165). A fragment 5.0 cm long is contained in the WPA general collection from the Craig mound; others are illustrated here (Fig. 2-115b) and elsewhere (Hamilton 1952: PI. 69b). The length of complete pins ranges from 53.6 cm to 6.0 em--or even 5.5 cm although the latter may be missing some of its length. Fragments range in length from 17.4 em to 2.2 cm. The maximum diameters or widths range from 7.0 to 1.7 em and around a mean of 4.28 cm. Comments: The copper rods described here have been identified as hair pins or hair ornaments on the strength of such known associations with the back of the skull as instanced by the location in Burial 5 at the Huffaker site (Baerreis 1954:36). The association of pins and copper plates together in two (A6a, B51) of the six burials in which both pins and plates occur happily reinforces the functional inference made separately for each: that they were employed as hair ornaments and as parts of headdresses. Copper pins have also been found at both the Harlan (Bell 1972:241) and Norman sites (Finklestein 1940).

558

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

a

b

f

c

9

d

e

h

Figure 2-117. Copper headdress plumes. a) OHM I 393/-E; b) OHM I 393/-A; c) OHM 13931l-B; d) OHM 34901259; e) OHM 3490/260; f) OHM 1393/-Da; g) OHM I 393/-Ca; h) OHM 3490/282; i) OHM 1393/-Db; j) OHM 1393/-Cb.

Provenience: From gravelots of Spiro II (A 11), Spiro 111111 (A6a), Spiro III (B51, BI22), Spiro III/IV (B9), Spiro IV (BI9, B 162), and Spiro !VB (B 108) periods. One pin fragment was found in the fill of the Brown mound. A complete pin 35.5 cm long was reported from Ward Mound 1 (Tho burn 1930:40).

leaves of the terminal or fmial. This is the split plate technique of pin attachment (Fig. 2-116b). The terminals were 5.4 cm high and 5.0 cm broad. Each was mounted on an ovoid pin 8 mm in maximum diameter. Provenience: Derived from the looted materials and assigned to the Craig mound general collection.

Composite (Figs. 2-116c-f)

Copper Plume Hair Ornaments (Fig. 2-117) Composite copper hair pins are known only from the existence of some copper plate terminals attached to a portion of the slender copper pins. One series in the collections of the University of Arkansas in corroded together as if they were the remains of a single headdress. Another series is in the Gilcrease Institute collection; they are illustrated (Fig. 2-116c-e). The series of six pin terminals in the University of Arkansas collection were D-shaped pieces of sheet copper that were mounted by the insertion of the copper pins between the plate

Sheet copper feather ornaments occur in four basic forms: crescentic, serpentine, straight, and fan-shaped. Each of these ornaments was attached to a pin of different material even though it is often not preserved. Wood, bone, and cane pins have been reported (see Hair Pins). The techniques for attachment of the pins is either one of two types. One consists of lashing the pin to the copper sheet with fibrous material through two to six pairs of holes along a pin track. The other

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown

consists of securing the pin between a small copper plate riveted to the ornament (Fig. 2-116a). Although the first technique is most common, the second is known in examples of several different types of hair ornaments. This technique was used on the feather bunch ornament (Fig. 2-117d) and on one of the crescentic plumes (Fig. 2-117e). The crescentic plumes, which are the most common form, range from 13.8 to 27.0 em long, and are the most diverse stylistically of all three basic forms. Some bear a dorsal offset near the base. Two are decorated in repousse devices simulating feather patterns. The small plume with an hourglass midsection has two superimposed rivet patches and carries a bone pin in place. The serpentine plumes are relatively uniform series, all with a dorsal offset near the base. Measurements show them to make up the longest plume form (Table 2-166). The third form consists of a simple straight feather with a dorsal offset. The fourth form is fan shaped and looks like the complete tail of a hawk (Fig. 2-107). It (OSM 34961260b) is 18.0 cm high and 16.0 em broad. The repousse decoration consists of two arc bands of five lines each (Fig. 2-117d). The base is thoroughly covered with riveted patches, one of which holds a bone pin. Comments: The use of these feather-shaped ornaments is unambiguously illustrated in profile depictions of warriors on copper plates and shell cups (Fig. 2-109b; Hamilton 1952: PI. 73, 104b). An in situ association of a copper plume with the head was provided by the finding of a copper plume complete with lashings for a pin under the skull of an Etowah skeleton (Thomas 1894:306). This Etowah plume is very similar to a Spiro plume illustrated in Fig. 2-117b. Both crescentic and serpentine plumes have been found at Etowah (Moorehead 1932: Fig. 19; Thomas 1894: Fig. 188) and in Jackson County, Alabama (Fundaburk and Foreman 1957: PI. 108). Straight plumes with dorsal offset have been reported from Moundville (Moore 1905: Fig. 45). Provenience: The commercially derived collection from the Craig mound. The five serpentine and three of the crescentic plumes were part of a single cache that one time were in the Wehrle collection. Fixed to this series were four fragments of cane twillwork stained with impressions of some of the other plumes, some shell beads and other unidentified artifacts. Since this large collection was recovered uncrushed and in good condition, we can infer that it came from the Great Mortuary. Fan-Shaped Spangle Hair Ornaments (Figs. 2-12ge, 1) Fan-shaped spangles or symbol badges have been found made of both bone and marine shell. The bone set (BIO-35) has a cross bar near the base of the fan that makes them look like crosses. The bone comes from naturally thin material that has been carefully ground and smoothed. A single perforation is present in the upper arm (Fig. 2-129t). Most of four spangles are present and parts of another four are in the lot. They are at least 11.0 cm long.

559

The shell spangles, of which there are at least four (B36-5, 52, 57, 51,49), combine a disc with the fan device (Fig. 2-12ge). The spangles are ground flat and engraved on both surfaces. There are perforations in the upper arm and in the disc. The overall lengths are 7.25 and 6.6 cm on the two nearly complete spangles. The thickness is 3 to 3.5 mm. The disc is 2.9 and 2.35 cm in diameter and the fan width is estimated at 3.9 and 3.0 em. Comments: These spangles sufficiently resemble the end and midsection of the crown-shaped mace to make the latter a likely source for the motif. It is possible that these spangles were decorative terminals for hair pins or even headdress statTs such as the Etowah headdress reconstructed by Larson (1959) for a group of similarly shaped copper spangles. There may be other uses however: Duffield (1964: 10, PI. XIII: 1) has called attention to the shell engraving in Hamilton (1952: PI. 106) showing almost identical spangles suspended from the earspools of a figure wearing a "homed headdress." The contexts in which the spangles have been found at Spiro do not offer conclusive evidence as to which is the proper interpretation. The rmding of more than two in each cache possibly argues for their use as parts of headdresses. Provenience: The bone set is from a Spiro II (B 10) gravelot, and the shell set is from a Spiro IYB (B36) feature. Hawk Head Effigy Spangle Hair Ornaments (Fig. 2-131e) A pair of hawk heads are cut out of sheet copper and decorated in the repousse technique (OSM) (Hamilton 1952: PI. 77, top). They face in opposite directions and are not part of larger falcon plates. Both are of the same size and have the typical hawk outline with the equally diagnostic "forked eye" marking, which in these applications are drafted with arms of unequal length and squared off on the lower arm. The hawk head effigies are sufficiently similar to the spangle form described by Larson (1959) from Etowah to allow their interpretation as headdress parts. Provenience: The commercial collections from the Craig mound. Comb A cane comb made by lashing together 13 strips of cane bent in a tight V shape was preserved next to a copper plate (Burnett 1945:42, PI. 83; Hamilton 1952:19, PI. 64). The pattern of binding with paired cords is complex but has not been examined to determine technique. The length is 9.5 cm and the maximum width at the base is 6.4 cm. According to Scholtz (1975:137), the cord binding appears to be weft-wrapped, wherein the cordage alternates back and forth between rows (hence the rows are "countered"). Comments: Similar to two combs reported from Cob and Poole shelters in the Ozarks (Scholtz 1975:135-37). The former site produced the unusual floatweave patterns that relate to the patterns from Spiro. Provenience: Commercial collections from the Craig mound.

560

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

Copper Conical Terminal

A simple conical terminal is about 12.3 cm long and about 2.3 cm in diameter at the open end. This piece has been called a copper cone spear point, though there are no confirmatory details (Hamilton 1952: PI. 69c). The shape alone permits us to draw an analogy with antler conical points. However, there

does exist the possibility that it may be a specialized "point" for a striped pole or a chunky pole. Otherwise we must allow that the pointed shape in copper is more likely to be a hair ornament terminal. Too little is known of its other attributes and its burial context to classify it conclusively. Provenience: Acquired in the looting operations and assigned to the Craig mound general collection.

CHAPTER

35

Ear Ornaments

Introduction

EarspooIs

Ear ornaments are a numerous class embracing a wide variety of forms and decorative detail. The classification presented below is basically organized around constructional technique first, and around stylistic features second. There is ample evidence to justify the ear ornament label for the list of forms included within this functional category. The human figures sculptured in human effigy pipes bear earspools and other ornaments in the ear lobes. Among these ornaments are pulley-shaped earspools (Fig. 2-98), and L-shaped ear plugs (Fig. 2-97), among other forms. Clearly delineated perforated pulley-shaped earspools are drawn on the ear lobes of warrior figures on copper plates and both schools of marine shell art (Phillips and Brown 1975a). Finally, earspools and other ear ornaments have been found located in the ear region of burials at Spiro and elsewhere. All told, this evidence is sufficient to demonstrate that these ornaments were actually worn even though the great size and heaviness of some might imply otherwise. Direct association of earspools with the ear region of skulls is not very common at Spiro, because of the poor preservation of the disarticulated and partly disarticulated skeletal remains and because of the mortuary treatment of burials that promoted jumbling of skeletal remains before final interment. In one case, a "long-nosed god" maskette ornament was recovered in the lab during cleaning of the skeletal remains. It was found in the dirt of the ear region of an unwashed skull. This discovery is particularly helpful in establishing the fact that all the various forms included in the ear ornament category were actually worn. If there remain any further reservations as to the function of the maskette class, they should be dispelled by the depiction of long-nosed god maskettes at the ears of a warrior on Spiro copperwork (Fig. 2-108) and shell art (phillips and Brown 1975a:190, PI. 17). Maskettes with "ordinary noses" on the Big Boy pipe should be included as well (Fig. 2-99).

The common ear ornament at Spiro is the earspool, which is constructed with a distinct inner and outer flange separated by a core (Fig. 2-118). The surfaces of the earspool are called inner and outer faces following the terminology of Baerreis (1943, 1957). There are several constructional variations that form the basis of classification. The study of earspools by Baerreis (1943, 1957) is the essential basis for the following discussion. Although all evidence points to the wearing of the earspool in the ear lobe or around the ear by some other means of attachment, the large size and the relatively heavy weight of some of the large stone ornaments seem to have promoted special modification of the standard pulley-shaped earspool form. In these cases the inner pulley flange was chipped and ground down. Notches were even ground into the inner flange to accommodate a separate sling attachment (Baerreis 1957: Fig. 3C). Condition: Although most earspools survived interment intact, a surprising number were found broken. Damage to earspools from most burials was minor and reasonably attributed to the pressure of overlying earth. A residual group of ornaments, however, were found in pieces only (Table 2-167). As one would expect, most of these isolated fragments occurred in mound fill (64%). But a substantial minority were found in deposits of the Great Mortuary, mixed with jumbled skeletal remains and other broken artifacts deposited in litters and on the structure floor. Only one of the isolated fragments (BI0-29) that was not due to breakage in excavation was discovered outside the Great Mortuary (Table 2-168). All of the cases of broken earspools at Spiro occur in contexts that are associated with elaborate mortuary treatment of the dead and imply extended periods of curation of the remains of the dead. Both the form of mortuary handling and the lengthy duration of curation before final interment are suf-

561

562

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

c Outer Flange"

/Inner Flange

PerforationInner Face

o

Outer Face

E

4

5

IIiiiiEEiiiiiII

Scale

fl

em

G

Figure 2-118. Pulley-shaped earspool forms. Perforated type: a) undecorated, cupped outer face, PAC P/524; b) decorated, large perforation, 851-8; c) decorated, small (standard) perforation, 851-23; d) undecorated, trimmed inner flange, 836-4; e) undecorated, wood, OHMI254. Unperforated type: f) relief decoration (Durham colI.); g) undecorated, cupped outer face, divided inner flange, 894-3.

ficient to explain the fragmentary condition of earspools. Normally, even the unmatched earspools remained at the ear positions, thus testifying further to the atypical histories of corpse handling evidenced in the Great Mortuary sample. The fact that in most Spiro graves earspools were found in pairs argues for their being carefully curated with the dead under normal conditions or under conditions that did not rough up the corpse. In other burial samples from the Norman, Hughes, Groseclose and minor sites, earspools are found complete and generally in pairs around the skull. Detailed information on associations at the Harlan site burial mound provides particularly pertinent information. Bell (1972:238) reported that in the mound most earspools were found in matched pairs at or near the ear regions of skulls. But true to the the effects of rough handling of the dead, there are cases of separation of ear

ornaments, in which one of the pair is next to the skull whereas the mate is a few meters away. This implies that the damaged and unmatched earspools in the mound fill are possibly more extreme cases of separation consequent upon repeated shifting of the corpse. Since this mound was composed solely of secondary burials and was constructed in phases out of primary burials and other sources (presumably from a mortuary), it is expectable that earspools and other grave goods would be damaged and separated from original contexts. Fortunately, the excellent archaeological control of the Harlan site excavations allows us to interpret similar conditions at the Spiro site. The finding of unmatched stone earspools in a few burials that are otherwise complete is really another problem. The high theft rate experienced during the Spiro excavations, and not aboriginal mortuary behavior, is probably responsible for the

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown

unmatched earspools. The preceding observations pertain to stone earspools. Conditions of preservation are the determining factors in the distribution of wood earspools. Although wooden earspools were preserved in number, they were not that consistently preserved to allow the kind of observations on the cultural conditions of preservation possible for stone earspools. Comments: Although Spiro has produced most of the known pulley-shaped earspools, earspools do have a far-flung distribution in the Eastern Woodlands during the early part of the Mississippian period (A.D. 1000-1200). The great number found at Spiro and to a lesser extent at other Arkansas Valley Caddoan sites has led some to the conclusion that both the perforated and unperforated forms are associated with Spiro and Spiro culture. According to Griffin (1952:98): One of the most distinctive Spiro features, almost amounting to a diagnostic cultural element, is the extraordinary number of pulley type earspools found either at the Spiro locality or in the area in closely related sites. When a site has earspools of the pulley type with concentric rings, weeping eye, four quarter and other decorative devices, a connection with Spiro of some sort may be assumed.

Griffin has proceeded to document the distribution of pulley-shaped earspools in the eastern United States according to the evidence available then. His pulley-shaped form, however, embraces the perforated, unperforated and pulley ring forms of the present study. Pulley-shaped earspools have an extensive distribution from Aztalan on the north, to George C. Davis on the west, and east Florida on the east. Although there is a tendency to ascribe pulley-shaped earspools to a Spiro origin wherever they are found, the evidence for such a monopoly on construction does not exist. In fact, Shafer (1973:288) has identified a sequence of manufacture at the George C. Davis site. There, as well as at Spiro, earspools were made of local stones. There is sound reason for believing these ornaments to be very common. Earspools are ubiquitous as ear ornaments in both Braden and Craig style shell engraving and copper work (Phillips and Brown 1975, 1979, 1980, 1983). Shafer (1973) has assembled information to show that these ornaments were worn by both sexes. Material: Earspools were found made of stone, pottery, cedar wood, and marine shell (Table 2-168). Stone is by far the most common material found in collections from Spiro, far outranking in number other imperishable materials although the proportion of wood earspools may well have been much greater than the number surviving in collections indicate. The predominant stone is a fine-grained sandstone, which is very much like, if not identical to, the material used to make the Tshaped pipes. Other lithic materials are a soft porous limestone, a hard shale, and an indurated clay. The limestone has almost the consistency of chalk and is a material exotic to the Spiro area. The material is mainly present in the lug-form construction ("Foster") type of earspool that is indigenous to the Red

563

River area where soft limestone is naturally available. A key constructional detail entailed the surfacing of the outer face of both wooden and stone earspools with a thin sheet of copper. All of the wood pairs and isolated specimens of stone in the WPA collection have traces of copper. Copper appears on all the styles except the "Foster" type and the stone forms of small pulley-shaped earspools with central bosses. Stratigraphic position: Ear ornaments first appear in the Spiro II gravelots (Tables 2-169, 170, 171). They are conspicuously absent in the Spiro I period. The earliest types are the perforated and central bossed pulley-shaped earspools, which predominate in Spiro II and continue into Spiro III. In the latter period the perforated pulley-shaped earspool is usually decorated, in contrast to the preference towards plain surfaces in Spiro II. During Spiro II times the pulley-ring and the flanged ring earspools were probably introduced. During Spiro III times the unperforated earspool was introduced, either in the form of the exotic Foster type or the typical pulley-shaped constructions lacking a central perforation. General sequence: The Spiro sequence of ear ornament styles is duplicated in the three "layers" of the Harlan site burial mound (Bell 1972:238). The first layer with its Evans phase and Coles CreekIPlum Bayou markers lacks ear ornaments of any kind. The following two layers produced examples of earspools of the nesting half, pulley ring, flanged ring ("napkin ring"), and perforated pUlley-shaped types (Bell 1972). The perforated pulley-shaped earspool occurred in both stone and copper-covered wood materials (Bell 1972). Conspicuously absent are decoratively incised versions. Existing evidence from Spiro indicates that during Spiro II, incised surface decoration was rare, whereas in Spiro III, decoration was not only more common but was augmented with sculptured surface in relief. Furthermore, only simple geometric incising is known for Spiro II, whereas complicated abstractions and figural decoration appear in Spiro III. In short, distinctive decorations define the ornamented pulley-shaped earspool of the Spiro III period. The contexts of the decorated form from Norman, Reed, Groseclose, Brackett, and Huffaker can reasonably be interpreted to fall into this time. In the South Caddoan area the decorated form occurs in contemporary Haley phase burials at the Crenshaw site (Wood 1963: Fig. 31). At the George C. Davis site earspools were found in the earliest foundational burial pit as well as later burials (Shafer 1973; Story 1972). Although the former context predates the Mississippian period, it has yielded a pair of earspools with incised concentric rings (Shafer 1973). The other ear ornament forms found at Davis site were the hollow cylinder and flanged ring earspools which were distributed through all phases (Newell and Krieger 1949:146; Shafer 1973). At the contemporary Gahagan site a large series of ear ornaments were found. But only the undecorated form of the pulleyshaped earspool (both perforated and unperforated) was present in the large assemblage of grave furnishings that are indisputably from an early period at this mound. The decorated

564

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

pulley-shaped earspools of the common perforated shape were found in a grave that looks like an intrusive burial confmed to a small area above the floor of the large shaft grave (Webb and Dodd 1939:95, PI. 28, Fig. 3). Presumably, this burial was sunk into the fill of the shaft grave. Alba points were associated with the burial that held the pair of decorated earspools. The earliest ear ornament forms are the undecorated pulley-shaped earspools, the hollow cylinder earspools, the flanged ring earspools, and the pulley ring earspools in nesting halves. These are the forms found in the Harlan phase in the Arkansas River valley and in contemporaneous Caddo I contexts elsewhere. An ear ornament of distinctive construction is the Foster type earspool, which makes its appearance at Spiro in the Spiro III period. This constructional form was established in Late Caddoan period burials of the Red River drainage (Moore 1912:601). A pair of comparable age is known from the major shaft grave in the early "McCurtain focus" Clements mound. This particular grave appears to be contemporary with Spiro III because of the ceramic crosstie between the two sites. A carinated bowl with a distinctive style of engraving was found in both this shaft grave and in a Spiro III gravelot (B50) (Fig. 2301). The engraved shell gorget in the same Clements mound grave, however, is without a defmable stylistic connection to Spiro. Some ear ornaments are not found at Spiro because they came into vogue after the site was abandoned. The most important of these is the shell pin ear plug of the "nail" or "spike" shape which has such an extensive distribution in the Southeast, including the Belcher phase at the Belcher site (Webb 1959), that its absence at Spiro is particularly significant. Belcher phase earspools that are present at Spiro are composite earspools ("napkin ring" with disc facings), solid ceramic ear plugs, and solid grooved bone cylinders (Webb 1959:168, 176, 193, Figs. 56, 128, 138b, c). The copper long-nosed god maskette from an early Spiro IVA (B69a) gravelot places this form significantly later than the same maskette type from Harlan (Bell 1965, 1972). I am inclined to place the true age of the maskette earlier at Spiro as well. The representations on a copper plate are in a Spiro III (BI22) context. There is contrary evidence in the maskettes carved on the "Big Boy" human effigy pipe, which was supposed to have been taken from the Great Mortuary (Spiro IVB), but I am persuaded by the formal resemblance of this piece to the pipes from a Spiro III (B99) gravelot that this item is as out of place as the copper maskettes themselves. Despite the preponderance of association with Spiro III gravelots, a context in Spiro II would be more compatible with the period in which long-nosed god maskettes were common in the Mississippi River drainage (Williams and Goggin 1957). Perforated Pulley-Shaped EarspooIs (Figs. 2-118a-e, 2-119) This earspool type is defined by the smooth central hole that produces a resemblance to a pulley wheel. In the stone exam-

pIes, the flanges are deep and the walls of the flanges next to the cores are nearly parallel, giving the flanges a degree of fragility not found among other ear ornament forms, even some of the wooden counterparts. This type encompasses types A and C of Baerreis (1957: Fig. 2). There are several variations in the cross section of the outer flange, one of which is described below. The common form has outer faces that are flat, slightly concave, or even slightly convex. The concavities are slight depressions that cover the outer face. Over one third (36%) of sample of 122 has concave outer faces. The average depth is 1.953 mm (s.d = 1.111), the range is from 1 to 5 mm (n = 43). An inspection of Table 2-168 shows that the proportion of convex outer faces differs among the various raw materials. The flat face is by far the most common surface among limestone, clay and wood materials. But the outer surfaces of sandstone earspools are equally divided between flat and concave. Note also that the sandstone ornaments are far more diverse also in the frequency of designs incised or cut in relief. Chisquare tests clearly support the differential association of limestone and sandstone among outer face shapes. One of the variations in the outer face possesses a depressed area in the center of the face (type C of Baerreis 1957). There are two styles encompassed in this form. One, for which there are two examples, has a rim that is large (measuring 0.75 em and 0.3 cm wide; Fig. 2-119f). This style occurs with copper facing. The other, for which there are three examples, has a rim that is narrow (ca. 0.1 em wide; Fig. 2-119g). The face of this style is roughly finished to the point of retaining gouge marks, and its surface is carried in a continuous curve into the perforation. This style is evidently associated with a different decorative treatment of the face and is one that would probably contain an inlay of pigment or other colored material, especially since none of these examples have a copper facing (Baerreis 1957:30). The central perforation is mainly cylindrical in shape, although there are a number that contract from the outer to inner face, and a few that either contract from both faces to the middle. In one of the few examples, in the collections of the Museum of the American Indian, that retains a partly finished perforation, the perforation has been started from both faces (Burnett 1945:17). However, the perforations are generally well smoothed and it appears that an effort was made in most cases to carry the smooth finish of the outer face into the perforation and to the inner face as well. There are few examples of indifferent work. Smooth-surfaced earspools of the perforated pulley-shaped form are twice as numerous as the decorated ones. Many have been found with copper faces, but a few were apparently treated in a different fashion. One pair (B188-1) of white limestone is decorated with painted black lines. Unfortunately, the material has eroded beyond the point where the design can be recognized. Decoration: An extensive corpus of motifs have been found on the perforated pulley-shaped earspools from Spiro, both in

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown

a

b

c

o

m

I

Sc:t.,,!

4

5

n

r

q

e

d

h

9

p

565

0

S

y

z u

v

w

x

a'

Figure 2-119. Decoration on perforated pulley-shaped earspools. Excised elements: a) D307; b) D169-7; c) B162-9; d) BI74-1b; e) B108-14. Incised elements: f) B29-1; g) B36-26; h) D7; i) D50;j) B50-6; k) D169a; I) BI81-1; m) B31-1; n) B165-1; 0) D47; p) B108-8; q) B165-5; r) B9-1; s) D289; t) BI08-11; u) B108-5; v) B108-13; w) B51-8; x) B51-23b; y) D75-2; z) D75-5; a') D75-6.

566

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

the controlled excavations and in the general collections. Incised lines and excised areas are the two decorative techniques found on this earspool type. Illustrations of almost all known examples can be found in at least one of three works: this study, Burnett (1945) or Hamilton (1952). Although there is great decorative diversity, some motifs appear much more frequently than others. The concentric circle motif is most common, and is followed by the cruciform and the "sunburst." Pictorial designs are rare, and completely lacking in the WPA collections from Spiro. Almost all the visual effects depend on differences in relief. But in one example, white pigment has been used to fill in areas within and outside an incised cross (047; Fig. 2-1190). The number of distinct decorative combinations that are known for Spiro are listed below together with reference to publication. Excised Elements: Ring (Hamilton, 1952: PI. 80, second row right) Vortex, four-armed (Hamilton, 1952: PI. 81; Burnett 1945: PI. X) Vortex, expanding four-armed, PI. 2-119b Angular spiral, eight-armed, PI. 2-119a Four-pointed star, PI. 2-119c Sunburst within border, PI. 2-119d Two concentric sunbursts within border (two nested lines on inner; Hamilton 1952: PI. 81) Cross within decorative border, PI. 2-11ge Incised Elements: Two-lined cross, PI. 2-1191 Two-lined cross, with circle at center, (Hamilton 1952: PI. 79) Two-lined cross, with chevrons, PI. 2-119m Three-lined cross, PI. 2-119n (Hamilton 1952: PI. 80) Multi-lined cross, PI. 2-1190 Multi-lined cross, with repetitions filling field, PI. 2-119p, q,y Four-lined cross over field of concentric circles (Burnett 1945: PI. XII) Two-lined cross with quarters of field alternating between concentric arcs and right angle repetitions (Burnett 1945: PI. XII) Three-lined cross with two lines of concentric circles in quarters (Burnett 1945: PI. XI) Multi-lined vortex, PI. 2-119r, s Vortex in double-lined circle, PI. 2-119z Five-pointed star in five repetitions (Hamilton 1952: PI. 81; Burnett 1945: PI. XI) Six-pointed star superimposed on circle, PI. 2-119t, a' Eight-pointed star, with ogive in center, PI. 2-119u Five-lobed double-lined meander (Hamilton 1952: PI. 81) Five-petaled "sunflower", PI. 2-119v Looped square (double-lined); (Hamilton 1952: PI. 81; Burnett 1945: PI. X) Linked chain (Hamilton 1952: PI. 81; Burnett 1945: PI. X) Interlocking scrolls, PI. 2-119w

Interlocking scrolls and circles, PI. 2-119x "Forked eye," four repetitions (Hamilton, 1952: PI. 81; Burnett 1945: PI. X) Standing warrior (Hamilton 1952: PI. 81) Heraldic bird (Hamilton 1952: PI. 81) Dimensions: See Table 2-172. Material: The WPA collection consists largely of fine grained sandstones (134), and secondly, soft, fine limestones (14), cedar(?) wood (5), shale (1), and indurated clay (1). A shell overlay is present on one wood example (017). Copper is associated with nearly all of the remainder. In most cases the copper is represented by merely a stain or an oxide deposit, but in a few examples, the copper is a firm sheet that can be lifted free from the stone base (Burnett 1945:13-14). Earspools in the collections of the Houston Museum of Fine Arts, the Ohio Historical Society, and the Museum of the American Indian possess solid sheet copper faces. They have been placed over the exterior and incised and chased to conform to the design in the stone, if there is a design, and a small amount is left around the edges to crimp around the perimeter of the flange and to push about 1.0 em down into the earspool perforation (Burnett 1945:13-15). Comments: The perforated pulley-shaped earspool has an extensive distribution outside of Spiro and the Caddoan area. In the Upper Mississippi Valley it has been found in large numbers in the A.D. 1000 to 1200 period (Barrett 1933:348-54, PI. 70; Bennett 1945:149-50; Griffin and Morse 1961: Fig. 4; Moorehead 1928; Perino 1971c:130-32). They have been reported for the Hiwassee Island phase of the site of that name (Lewis and Kneberg 1946: 119, PI. 70c) as well as other undated contexts in the Tennessee-Cumberland area (Thruston 1897:288, Fig. 197). An important find at the Georgian Wilbanks site places the figure-incised earspool in the Etowah IV (now Wilbanks) period (Sears 1958:163, PI. 45, #4). The well-known Mississippian Period sites of Mount Royal and Grant in Florida have also produced this earspool form (Goggin 1952: PI. 9H, I; Moore 1894a:33). Westward in the Mississippi lowland they have been reported from a Jackson County, Arkansas, site (Thomas 1894:225). In the Trans-Mississippi South they have been found widely after A.D. 950 (Skinner et al. 1969; Sly 1958:91) in Alto phase George C. Davis (Story 1972) and Haley phase Crenshaw (Wood 1963c). In Oklahoma, earspools have been reported from every major Caddoan site in the Arkansas River valley: Harlan (Bell 1972), Reed, Huffaker, Hughes, Brackett, Groseclose, and Norman sites (Baerreis 1957: Table 1), also Lundy (perino 1971b). They also occur in some Plains agricultural sites further west (Schaeffer 1957; Sharrock 1961:15, PI. X, Fig. 4). All of these examples fall within the Spiro II and III periods. The elaborately incised and relief modeled decorations fall into the later period. Although examples are present in Spiro IV gravelots at the Spiro site, the actual use of these ornament forms is problematical for this period, particularly since the Great Mortuary cases appear to be deliberately redeposited from earlier con-

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part /I-Brown texts. These earspools do not appear to be used later than the period of the Haley and Spiro phases in the Trans-Mississippian South since this ear ornament form is absent from later Caddoan sites, and at the Belcher site other ear ornament types occur instead. The relatively few decorated earspools carry incised geometric designs, the most common being the concentric ring motif (Baerreis 1957; Bennett 1945; Moorehead 1928: PI. XXVII, Fig. 6; Shafer 1973; Webb and Dodd 1939: PI. 23, Fig. 3; Wood 1963d: Fig. 3i). Other simple motifs (Baerreis 1957; Barrett 1933) are also found and they are more common than figurative decoration, which is as rare at Spiro (Hamilton 1952: PI. 81; Burnett 1945: PI. X) as it is elsewhere. One Mississippian style warrior head that is executed in relief is known from the Wilbanks site (Sears 1958), and a pair bearing an incised group of four warrior heads is known from the Norman site (Baerreis 1957). Provenience: Mainly an artifact associated with the Spiro II and Spiro III periods although some were present in Spiro IV gravelots, particularly in the Great Mortuary. Undecorated earspools are present in gravelots of the Spiro II (A4, All, BIO, B31, B137, BI72), Spiro 111111 (B93, PbB2), Spiro III (B29, B50, B51, B99, B122, BI87), Spiro III/IV (B8, B9, B52), and Spiro !VB (B36, B48, B49, B62, B68, BI08, BIll) periods. The decorated earspools are present in Spiro II (B31), Spiro 111111 (BI65, B181, BI88), Spiro III (B50, B51), Spiro III/IV (B9, BI74), Spiro IV (BI62), and Spiro IVB (B48, B54, BI08) gravelots. Both decorated and undecorated examples are present in great numbers in the Craig mound general collection and in the commercially derived materials. Hamilton (1952:37) estimates that 400 stone and 20 cedar earspools of all types were taken from the Craig mound in the relic mining period. Both forms were found by Thoburn in Ward Mound I. The village deposits and the fill of Brown mound have produced decorated fragments. Unperforated Pulley-Shaped Earspools (Figs. 2-118f, g, 2-120) This earspool type, which is equivalent to type B of Baerreis (1957), is similar in all respects to the perforated pulley-shaped earspool except that it lacks a central perforation. Associated with this type of construction is the uniform presence of decoration, almost entirely executed in relief, although a few incised examples are known from Spiro (Burnett 1945: PI. 12; Thoburn 1931: Fig. 26) and other sites (Baerreis 1957:30). The largest and heaviest earspools belong to this type. The weight is mainly due to the absence of a perforation on an earspool of such great size. Because of their weight and size, it is not surprising to find that the inner flange of some specimens has been cut down with an incomplete attempt to smooth the rough edges. The motifs found on this form exploit the uninterrupted space on the outer surface with large, bold designs. The most common consists of a series of nodes in one or two concentric rings around a central node. The field of nodes is always surrounded

567

by a rim. Usually the execution of the decoration is precise and the curved surfaces are well smoothed, although a few examples with two rings of nodes are incompletely smoothed. The distinctive decorative combinations that are known for Spiro are listed below together with publication reference. Elements in Relief Large central node, boss in concave center (Burnett 1945: PI. XIII) Single central node with ring of 6 nodes, Fig. 2-120a (Burnett 1945: PI. XIII) Single central node with ring of 7 nodes (Burnett 1945: PI. XIII) Single central node with ring of 9 nodes, Fig. 2-120d Single central node with 2 rings of 15 nodes Single central node with 2 rings of 16 nodes, Fig. 2-120b Single central node with 2 rings of 17 nodes Single central node with 2 rings of 19 nodes, Fig. 2-120c Sunburst with excised center surrounded by 2 concentric rings. (Thoburn 1931: Fig. 26) Two raised rings around central raised disc (Thoburn 1931: Fig. 26) Cross quadrating field of 12 nodes, Fig. 2-120f (Burnett 1945: PI. XIII) Cross within relief border bearing 3 concentric incised lines (Burnett 1945: PI. XIII) Double-barred cross quadrating field with 4 raised circles. Fig.2-120e Cross (Burnett 1945: PI. LXXXVI) Incised Elements: Rectangular grid (Thoburn 1931: Fig. 26) Double-lined cross with intersecting lines (Thoburn 1931: Fig. 26) Dimensions: See Table 2-173. Material: A fine-grained sandstone in almost all cases. One wooden earspool has been reported by Burnett (1945: PI. 86d). Comments: The unperforated pulley-shaped earspool is not commonly found in other sites. A pair each are known from the Norman, Reed, and Groseclose sites (Baerreis 1957), and three have come to my attention from Arkansas (Brown 1976b; Harrington 1920: PI. CXXIX). To the extent that these ornaments are datable, all appear to be consistent with the Spiro III period. Provenience: Present in gravelots of the Spiro II/III (B 181), Spiro III (BI22), Spiro III/IV (B39, B174), Spiro IV (B131), and Spiro IVB (B36) periods. This type is well known from the Craig mound general collection and from collections acquired from the commercial digging. It has been found in Ward Mound 1 (Thoburn 1931: Fig. 26). Pulley-Shaped EarspooIs with Central Boss (Figs. 2-121a, b, c) This form is a relatively small pulley-shaped earspool with shallow flanges and a characteristically large projection or boss in the center of the outer face. The boss takes on conical and

568

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

a

Figure 2-120. Decoration on un perforated pUlley-shaped earspools. a) 045; b) 0174-2; c) BI22-12; d) BI74-8; e) 018; f) BI81-3.

'

I

€

~

8

a

,

"

..

I

~

~,

I

',1

b

C 0

----

I

----

4 Scalel' em

5

0 ~ e

9

h

Figure 2-121. Other earspool types. a) Pulley-shaped earspool with central boss (016); b) pUlley-shaped earspool with central boss (B62-18); c) pulley-shaped earspool with central boss (BlO-30); d) effigy-faced earspool (UC photo collection); e) Foster earspool (B178-1); f) pulley-ring ears pool (0169-4); g) pUlley-ring earspool, nesting half (0169-16); b) Pulley-ring earspool, nesting half (Lf58/I5); i) flanged ring ear plug (BI89-2).

hemispherical forms, or even a section of a hyperboloid. The inner face is flat except for one stone example (D 16) that is recessed on the inner face. There are two styles, one of which consists simply of a shallow-flanged earspool in wood or stone with a large boss on the outer face. The stone examples have a small perforation in the center of the boss that is probably for

some auxiliary decoration. Although at least one wood earspool (VA) of simple construction exists, most of the wooden ones are joined to shell bosses that were let into a recess on the outer face. A series of at least seven without the shell bosses were found in a mass in a Spiro III grave (B51). The second style consists of a smaller central boss surrounded either with a

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown

ring of small bosses or a raised device. In the first instance (UA collection) the bosses are actually ends of small dowels running through the body of the earspool. In the second (B62-18) the central boss is surrounded by a six-pointed star carved in relief. Dimensions: See Table 2-174 for measurements of the first style with a single large boss. An earspool of the second style has a large boss 1.3 cm in diameter and smaller peripheral dowels are 0.5 cm in diameter. Material: Fine-grained sandstone (B62-19, D16) and wood (B36-11, B51-7, BI57-7b, BI0-30, B62-18, BI72-8, D289). Marine shell bosses are found on one pair (B1O-30). Comments: This type comprises a combination of the pulley spool construction with a more widespread stylistic device expressed in different ear ornament construction at Spiro and the rest of the Southeast. The ear disc form is almost entirely made up of this "bossed" style, which is described under the ear disc category. There are examples from Spiro of a perforated pulley earspool of this style (Hamilton 1952: PI. 80B, left) and an unperforated pulley earspool (Burnett 1945: PI. XII, lower left). Pulley-shaped earspools with a central boss have a widespread distribution. Examples with copper outer facings are known from the Sanders site (Krieger 1946: PI. 22a, b) and the Tennessee-Cumberland area (Thruston 1897:303). This device is, however, more frequently associated with variants of the ear disc form. Provenience: Present in gravelots of the Spiro II (B1O, B137, BI72), Spiro III (B51), and Spiro IVB (B36, B62, B157) periods. The form is also known from the Craig mound general collection and the commercial collections. Effigy-Faced Earspools (Fig. 2-121d)

This rare form of earspool decorative treatment is represented by two wooden specimens from the commercial material. The earspools are unperforated" and possess equal-sized flanges. In the example illustrated a large carved raptorial bird head with shell inset eyes projects from the outer face. This example comes from the archaeological photo albums collected by the Department of Anthropology, University of Chicago. Another example of a pair of dog head facings is illustrated by Hamilton (1952: Fig. 30a). Dimensions: Unknown. Material: Wood with marine shell(?) insets. Provenience: The commercial derived collections from the Craig mound. Foster Earspools (Fig. 2-121e)

This is an unperforated earspool with a relatively large outer face with lugs in the rear (equivalent to type F of Baerreis 1957) that is named after the Foster Place, Lafayette County, Arkansas. This Belcher phase site in the Red River valley was where Moore (1912: Figs. 96, 97) found two particularly large

569

examples. This type has a medium sized core and a small or even nonexistent inner flange. The core behind the outer flange is bisected by a deep and relatively wide slot that separates the elements into two semicircular lugs. This type represents a basically different form of attachment to the ear, and it is not surprising to find that it is largely associated with the Caddoan sites of the Red River valley. Only two burials from the Craig mound contained a pair and the odd earspool in this collection. The single earspool (B94-3) bears a marked inner flange and may be a modified unperforated earspool. It should be noted that the only other example of the lug-attachment form from Spiro that has come to my attention is illustrated in Hamilton (1952: PI. 79, lower row) and is quite clearly a modified unperforated earspool in which the broad inner flange is retained. The outer faces of the examples in this collection are slightly concave, undecorated, and copper covered. Dimensions: Earspool B94-3 has an outer flange diameter 5.9 cm, a modified inner flange 4.3 x 5.4 cm, a modified core 3.2 x 4.3 cm, and a groove 1.2 cm wide. It is 1.8 cm thick. B1781 has outer flange diameters of 6.1 em and lugs that are 3.4 cm high, 1.4 cm wide, and separated by 1.6 cm. The thickness is 1.7 cm. Material: A fine-grained sandstone (B94-3) and a fme-textured limestone (B 178-1) that resembles superficially the limestone of the Gulf Coastal Plain. Comments: Foster earspools have been recorded from the Ozan #5 site (Harrington 1920: PI. CXXVIII) and sites of the same age in the Red River valley. At the type site, Foster Place, this form was associated with Avery Engraved and presumably an early assemblage of McCurtain phase material, including vessels that tie in with Spiro IV period (Bell and Baerreis 1951: PI. 10, #13; data in the University of Oklahoma Museum). They have also been found at A. W Davis site (Wilson 1962:113, PI. 53, Figs. 1,2). A record of modified unperforated pulley-shaped earspools comes from a grave association at the Smith mound (McMiIland Place) (Brown 1976b:292). The Red River area appears to be the geographic locus of this type and the pair of limestone earspools at Spiro probably came from this area. Provenience: Present in gravelots of Spiro III (B178) and Spiro IIIIIV (B94) periods. Pulley-Ring Earspools (Fig. 2-1211)

This earspool type (equivalent to type E of Baerreis 1957) combines the attributes of a ring in its large ratio of perforation to maximum diameter and a pulley in its relatively large outer flange. In most specimens the outer surface of the flange joins in a continuous curve with the perforation. In two cases, the outer face has a raised rim about 4 mm wide. The surfaces are smooth and undecorated, and the outer faces do not show traces of copper. Dimensions: See Table 2-175. Material: Fine-grained sandstone only.

570

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

Comments: Pulley-ring earspools have been found in the Tennessee-Cumberland area (Thruston 1897: Figs, 74, 75; PI. XVA, #4, 5), in the main component at the Gahagan site (Webb and Dodd 1939: PI. 28, Fig. 3, #5), and Bradley Place (Moore 1910:428). Provenience: Craig mound general collection.

Comments: Other examples have been reported from the Mississippian Period sites of Dallas phase Hiwassee Island (Lewis and Kneberg 1946:121) and Angel (Black 1967:453). Provenience: Present in a Spiro III/IV gravelot (B52).

Pulley-Ring Earspools, Nesting Halves (Figs. 2-121g, h)

This type consists of solid cylinders that have a shallow Vshaped groove around the circumference. Dimensions: Diameters at ends are 2.85 and 3.15 em. The groove diameters are 2.14 and 2.6 em. The length is 1.3 cm in each case. Material: Limestone. Comments: Examples have been reported from Angel mounds (Black 1967:445, 449) and Belcher (Belcher phase) (Webb 1959:193, Fig. 138b, c). The latter are a black polished ceramic. Provenience: From the Craig mound general collection (0170-1, -2).

This is a pulley-ring earspool of the form described above except that the earspool is in two sections that nest together at the core flanges. The face is either flat and meets the perforation at an angle, or the face is curved continuously into the perforation. This design is not common, but makes insertion into the ear lobe much easier. Dimensions: See Table 2-175. Material: Fine-grained sandstone (0246, Lf58/15), fme-textured limestone (0169-16), and wood (BI37-3a-c, 0314-6). Copper stains are present on all but one. Comments: Also known from the Groseclose mound. Provenience: Present in a Spiro II gravelot (B137) and the Craig mound general collection. One is known from the Ward Mound 1 (Lf58/15). Flanged Ring Ear Plugs (Fig. 2-12li) This type has the proportions of a ring in its high ratio of perforation to maximum diameter (equivalent to type E of Baerreis 1957). The flanges are shallow in every case and they form an edge at the junction with the perforation. One complete ear plug (BI89-2) has slightly convex faces and perforation. Another fragmentary example has flat faces and a convex-surfaced perforation. The perforation is painted red. Dimensions: See Table 2-176. Material: Tho are ceramic and one is a fine-grained sandstone. One of the ceramic ear plugs (B 189-2) is burnished black in finish and probably tempered with grog (clay-grit-bone). Hardness is 3.5. Comments: The flanged ring ear plug has been found in other sites, namely Hiwassee Island in the Dallas phase (Lewis and Kneberg 1946:120, PI. 72B), and Kincaid (Cole et al. 1952:121, Fig. 40, #10). Provenience: Present in a Spiro IIIIII gravelot (BI89) and the Craig mound general collection. Hollow Cylinder Ear Plug (Fig. 2-122a) This type is essentially a hollow cylinder that is only slightly concave on the outer surface. One example from the controlled excavations is a one-sixth section of a red-slipped ceramic cylinder. Dimensions: Estimated diameter is 5 em. Breadth is 2.0 cm, thickness 3-5 mm; existing length of fragment is 3.1 cm. Material: Ceramic, evidently grog tempered with "apparent temper" of clay, grit, and bone.

Grooved Cylinder Ear Plug (Fig. 2-122b)

Stud-Shaped Ear Plug (Fig. 2-122c) This type is shaped like a large "shirt stud." The smoothed, undecorated (outer) surface is concave in the center, presumably as a result of the original shell of the shell (B36-7). Dimensions: Diameter of (outer) flange is 3.5 cm; diameter of the near projection is 2.1 em, and thickness is 0.8 cm. Material: Marine shell. Provenience: Present in a Spiro IVB feature (B36). Knobbed Ear Plug (Fig. 2-122d) This is the common Mississippian "mushroom" ear ornament. Both ends are convex although one is broader and flatter. Dimensions: Length is 2.49 cm; diameter of head is 1.99 cm. Material: Temper is grog with some bone. The ware is soft and the paste is crumbly. Comments: One Caddoan site producing this ear plug type is Belcher (Webb 1959:193, Fig. 138a) during the Belcher phase. Contemporary with this example are the instances of shell tempered examples from the Lake George site where they are called expanded ear plugs (Williams and Brain 1983:218-19). The Dallas phase at Hiwassee Island has also produced this type (Lewis and Kneberg: 1947:177), as well as phases extending later in time (Cole et al. 1952). Provenience: From disturbed deposits in the Brown mound. Biconical Ear Plug (Fig. 2-122e) The male element of a two-part biconical wooden ear plug is present (Boudeman collection, GI). The dowel-shaped pin evidently was inserted through the ear lobe and into a conical female element. Dimensions: The cone measures 5.3 em long and 2.3 to 2.8

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown

571

~

~'\ I I I

a

I I I

c

b

d 1- - • - -

-\,.J - - - "

I

e

,

f o

2

3

4

5I

Seale in em.

9

h

J

Figure 2-122. Ear plugs and ear discs. a) Hollow cylinder ear plug (Lf40/120); b) grooved cylinder ear plug (DI70-1); c) stud-shaped ear plug (B36-6); d) knobbed ear plug (Lf 51/); e) biconical ear plug (GI 7325.39); t) long-nosed god maskette (B69/898); g) composite ear disc, stone core and shell ring (B51-43a); h) composite ear disc, stone core, incised (D216-1); i) composite ear disc, wooden back (BI81-4);j) composite ear disc, wooden.

em maximum at the base. An estimated 0.4 em is missing from the tip. The pin is 3.0 em long and tapers from 19 to 18 em in diameter. Material: Copper-sheathed wood. Comments: These dimensions compare closely with those specimens from the Powell mound, Cahokia (Titterington 1938:15, Fig. 48), and the Grant mound (Moore 1895:485; Goggin 1952: PI. 9P). The appearance of this ear plug has provided a much-cited chronological link among these sites in remarks about the temporal position of Spiro in the Southeast (Williams and Goggin 1956:54; Griffin 1952:96; Goggin 1952:54). Provenience: From the commercial collections from the Craig mound.

Long-Nosed God Maskettes (Fig. 2-122f)

Two maskettes are known from the Craig mound. One was found in the laboratory while cleaning a skull (B69a). It consists of a concavoconvex piece of copper in which the doublecrested crown is indicated by the cut outline, and the crown, eyes, and mouth are depicted by incised lines. The nose is missing but a slot for a nose is present in the extruded base of the nose. The second specimen appeared in photographic records of commercial digging material, and is not available for inspection. Dimensions: The existing height is 4.5 cm, and width is 3.8 cm. The estimated original width is 4.6 cm. The base of the nose is approximately 3.0 cm and is 1.3 cm deep. The maskette

572

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology. No. 29

is small compared to the examples from Gahagan, Grant mound, and Aztalan (Williams and Goggin 1956: Table 1). Material: Copper. Comments: The distribution of this distinctive ear ornament has been discussed in several publications (Anderson 1975; Bareis and Gardner 1968; Ham 1975; Williams and Goggin 1956). The construction is the same as the Grant mound specimen no. 1 (Moore 1895: Fig. 39,40; Williams and Goggin 1956:24, 25) and the Harlan example (Bell 1972). It is without the backing sheet of the second Grant mound specimen (Moore 1895: Figs. 41, 42). Representations of the long-nosed god maskette occur on a copper plate and the Big Boy pipe, if we allow the small noses on the latter as due to limitations of stone sculpture. The former was found in Spiro III and the latter in Spiro IVA proveniences, both of which were redeposited contexts, particularly the Great Mortuary deposit (Chapter 8). On the plate, the maskette is a warrior's ear ornament that is drafted in an unusual three-dimensional fashion (Fig. 2-108). The core attributes present in the illustration are present also on the artifacts themselves, namely, a double-crested crown, large circular eyes with a point for a pupil, and a straight line mouth beneath the large nose. The nose in the drawing is unusual in that it is not straight but forms an upward-turning hook. Another possible representation occurs on the Big Boy human effigy pipe where the obvious limitations of stone sculpture would not allow for the presence of the diagnostic long nose. Irrespective of whether the length of the nose is important in this case (Griffin and Morse 1961), other facial details places the Big Boy ear ornament squarely within the definition of the long-nosed god maskette. The maskettes were probably held in place by means of a cord running through perforations at the side, such as those present on the Grant mound no. 2 specimens (Moore 1895: Fig. 39). Further, the Big Boy pipe sculpture shows that such a cord looped around a stout pin behind the ear lobe made a toggle fastener for the maskette (Fig. 2-99). Provenience: Present in a Spiro IVA gravelot (B69) and from the commercially collected material. Composite Ear Discs (Figs. 2-122g, h, i)

Ear discs are ornaments that are simply disc shaped. Most of the Spiro specimens are composites, consisting of two elements: a button-shaped core set within a shell ring. The disclike "button," or central element, is planoconvex. The shell rings are simple doughnut-shaped rings that are found both with their cones in composite examples and separately. One of the stone "buttons" (diameter 3.4 cm) is deeply incised with a Maltese cross. Dimensions: See Table 2-177. Material: The central cores are either a fine-grained sandstone or wood. Both usually bear traces of copper sheathing.

The rings are made of marine shell that is stained mostly from the presence of copper sheathing over the disc core. Comments: The convex outer surface of the central disc places this form within the important and widespread Mississippian ear ornament group of the central boss type. This particular form of ear ornament has not been singled out in the archaeological literature, but it has close pamllels with wooden earspools with copper facing bearing the central boss motif, usually with the accompanying peripheral bosses, a form found in the central boss form of earspool at Spiro. A copper sheathed wooden form has been found at Moundville (DeJarnette 1952: Fig. 151, #20, 29; Fundaburk and Foreman 1957: PI. 108 above, upper center), the Koger's Island site (Webb and Dejarnette 1942:227-28, PIs. 253, 254), the Peachtree mound (Setzler and Jennings 1941: Fig. 9), and the Grant mound (Goggin 1952: PI. 9f). Many show that the copper facing was attached to a wooden disc and probably also the ear lobe, as well, by means of a bone pin running perpendicularly through the center. Thes!-'l specimens fall in approximately the same time period as Spiro, and it is instructive to point out that the Koger's Island site burial (#23) was also accompanied by a group of nine copper pendants or hair ornaments similar to Spiro and Etowah examples. Provenience: Present in gmvelots of the Spiro II (All), Spiro 111111 (BI81), Spiro III (B51), Spiro III/IV (B9), Spiro IV (B53), and Spiro IVC (BI60) periods. Wooden Composite Ear Disc (Fig. 2-122j)

A simple wood disc (JHD collection) possesses eight oval perforations around the edge of the face that are plugged with dowels. The surface is copper stained. Dimensions: 4.3 cm in diameter and 0.5 cm in thickness. Provenience: The Craig mound commercially derived collections. Simple Shell Discs

Marine shell discs that may be either shell disc cores of the composite type (above) or elements of composite disc in which the core is placed on top of the shell disc backing. The latter type is known from the description of the Haley site ear discs (Moore 1912:547). A probable example of the former class (BlO-31) was found with a well-preserved sheath. There are a number of shell discs that may also be part of earspools. The unperforated discs, all of which are unprovenienced, fall into five classes, based on shape: planoconvex, concavoconvex, biconvex, biplano, flat (and elliptical). In size they vary from 1.7 to 6.0 cm in diameter with a mean diameter of 2.5 cm. The small specimens range from 1.7 to 2.2 cm in diameter and are consistently copper stained. It is this series that is more likely to be the disc elements of ear discs. The larger may constitute the backing elements.

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown

Among the two perforated discs (B36-6), the diameters (3.6 to 2.9 em) fall outside the range of the copper-stained unperforated discs, and these latter discs could qualify for inclusion within the proposed ear disc backing group of artifacts. Neither of the perforated pieces are copper stained.

573

Provenience: Present in gravelots of Spiro II (All, BIO), Spiro IV (B140), and Spiro IVB (B36, BllO, B145) periods. Present also in the Craig mound general collection.

CHAPTER

36

Beads

Introduction to Shaped Shell Beads

Holmes, in his great work Art in Shell of the Ancient Americans (I883), divided shell artifacts into three groups based on the shell part represented and the degree of alteration. Two of the three types are altered beads that are derived from different parts of the shell and are the subject of this section. Those manufactured from the shells of bivalves and the outer walls of univalves are discoidal (Holmes 1883:219-23). Other beads taken from the columellae of large univalves are the massive beads. His classification places priority on the steps in manufacture over those of form. Although it is more comprehensive than one based on form alone, it is not always easy to apply, particularly when collections consist of heavily modified, polished, or small-sized beads. Holmes' (1883: PI. XXIX) solution to this difficulty was to determine the shell part the bead was taken from by the orientation of the shell grain. Thus, beads with the grain running perpendicular to the perforation were classified as discoidal beads. For these beads the thickness dimension would be governed by the thickness of the shell itself. On the other hand, beads with grain running in the opposite direction (i.e., parallel to, or at angles to, the perforation) constitute the massive category. The latter presents an easier task to classify since the principal forms he had in mind were the large columella beads that were: Large and massive, and rarely symmetrical in outline, being sections of roughly dressed columns. They are somewhat cylindrical, and often retain the spiral groove as well as other portions of the natural surface. [Holmes 1883: 223]

It is not easy to transform unambiguously Holmes' classification into the formal classification used here since some of the highly modified beads are also highly polished. In these cases, it is not readily apparent whether the columella or an unusually thick and heavy section of wall was used as raw material. Keeping in mind these ambiguities, we can place types 1-4 and 14-18 into a wall-derived group, and types 5-l3 into a col-

umella-derived group. Type 19 is insufficiently understood to be placed in either. Type 16 (face mask) probably comes from the heavy apical portions of the shell. Information available on the steps of manufacture of Spiro shell beads reveals that they were first roughed out of raw shell before they were perforated with a drill bit of uniform diameter. Some of the exceptionally long beads have slightly tapering holes consistent with the use of chipped stone drills. After these steps were completed, further work gave the beads their individual shape and finish. Shell Bead Contexts

Aside from the typical unpatterned associations, shell beads have been recovered in three specific situations: strung on strings, strung on the warps of fabrics, and piled in unstrung lots. In the first context a limited number of beads were actually found on strings. Shell disc beads were found strung on a string 4.2 cm long (B31-12), a string supposedly 30 em long (B27-7), and on a string 16 cm long (BI81-7). Large elongate beads (BI81-1O) were preserved on a string 20.2 em long. A string of unrecorded length was also found inside shell beads of another gravelot (B66-4). These burial contexts belong to the early periods, namely Spiro IB, II, and 111111 periods. Some shell beads were discovered as necklaces and bracelets. A necklace of disc beads (B 181-7, above) were found strung in situ, and one gravelot (B9) contained four bracelets of disc beads averaging 55.6 beads per bracelet and a convexo-cylindrical bracelet of 12 beads. These associations which were present in Spiro 111111 and I1I1IV contexts, respectively, verify the integrity of beads as parts of strings in the Spiro archaeological record. The second context is a minor one in which small shell disc beads (B 122-7) are strung on the warps of a plaited sashlike fabric (Fig. 2-156a). More important is the third context, in which bead lots are found with shell cups and cup fragments in litter burials. The same pattern reappears later in the litter burials of the Great Mortuary deposit. Archetypical is the case of gravelot B62,

575

576

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

which contained the greatest recorded number of bead piles (although some of the larger litters in the central chamber probably exceeded this number). Cups in the center of this grave contained two lots of convexo-cylindrical beads (15,575 and 20,680 beads) together with 15 pearl and 3 disc beads. A second pile of 263 pearl beads was found beneath this central cluster. However, in contrast to the uniformity of bead type in each of the cups, B62 and other gravelots from the Great Mortuary (and interconnected proveniences) in their totality encompass the widest diversity recorded at Spiro. Although in some cases each type was present in substantial numbers, more typically a gravelot would be dominated by a single bead type, with a minority of several other types included. One concentration (B54) consisted of 103 convexo-cylindrical beads admixed with a 1 to 12 each of four other types. Another (B163) was dominated by 193 disc beads and a minority of 87 convexo-cylindrical, and small numbers of elliptical, cylindrical, olivella and gastropod beads. These figures point to the absence of any sorting by type, with the exception of some of the B62 cupfuls. Otherwise, beads are as mixed with each other as they are commingled with shell cup fragments, human bones and other objects. This unsorted patterning in the Great Mortuary gravelots indicates that these piles are secondary accumulations rather than primary deposits. The instances in which the uniform shell types are present in gravelots reveal two patterns. In the case of the Spiro II litter burial BrB6a, two lots of disc beads (55 and 3200, and also 30 pearl beads) were placed within the square formed by the shell cups. This pattern appears to have been connected with the treatment of shell beads in the litter burials of the Great Mortuary (as above). In the second case, the Spiro IV gravelots BrB3/5 and B140 contain a single bead type only, excluding a single stray bead or two that could have been an accidental inclusion. To this pattern can be joined the gravelots that contain two predominating types. A large number of graves contain fewer than four beads, a number so small as to be easily put down to accidental inclusion. The remainder of the cases have a mixed assortment of types. These cases have for all practical purposes the same pattern seen in the Great Mortuary gravelots. These gravelots belong to the grave types that are interpreted as secondary burials of the ossuary type. Hence, these gravelots are mixtures of formerly primary burials with their own grave goods. Although beads in these gravelots may have been strung originally, it is very difficult to determine from photographs whether they were parts of costumery or simply unstrung piles at the time of deposition. With the exception of a few stray beads of a different type, other gravelots are monotypic as well. This includes the large lots such as BrB3/5 and BI40. Depictions of individuals on engraved shell amply document the use of beads as part of costumery. In addition to the use of strings of beads around various parts of the limbs-as armlets, anklets, thighlets-beads are found employed as ear ornaments

and as hair ornaments. A stone effigy pipe illustrates the placement of large rounded shell beads in locks of hair (Fig. 2-94). Two were placed in hairlocks on each side of the head and one was on a large forelock. The forelock position is so commonplace in depictions that it has been given the name the "beaded forelock" (Phillips and Brown 1975a: 83-86). The solitary occurrences of the large spherical, spherical columella, large convexo-cylindrical, and convexo-cylindrical columella beads are probably instances of hair ornaments, particularly the beaded forelock. Some beads from Great Mortuary gravelots are fire blackened. Although only a small minority are so blemished, fire blackening was distributed across many gravelots in all three layers of the Great Mortuary. Scorching and smudging appear to have been restricted to nonburial deposits (A21, A26, A28) and burials of the "redeposited" type (B44, B49, B54, BIOI, BIll, B150, B176)-with the possible exception of B48. This treatment does not belong to the Great Mortuary context where there is no other indication of fire building that would have produced even the minor scorching and the degree of smoking found. It is safe to attribute these beads to other gravelots originally, most likely to an earlier period such as Spiro II times, when cremation was a treatment for elite dead. The distribution of fire blackening probably points to sources for these beads different from those that contributed to the vast bead deposits on the litter burials. Chronology: A consideration of the distribution of shaped shell bead types by chronological phases shows that most come from gravelots of the Great Mortuary, where they are nearly Ubiquitous in all gravelots. Only in this deposit are all 19 bead types present-although in Spiro II gravelots 10 of the 19 are found. Other periods exhibit a much more reduced showing of these types. Spiro IB has 2 types, Spiro III has 6, and Spiro IV has 4. Likewise, there are great differences in the concentration of beads. In the Great Mortuary, 72% of the beads (by count) are grave goods in a single gravelot, B62. The rank order of bead frequency also differs. The most common bead in these gravelots is the convexo-cylindrical (barrel shaped) bead (80%), whereas disc beads constitute a low second (14%). Just the reverse obtains in all other grave periods, where disc beads rank first (94%) and convexo-cylindrical rank a poor second (3%). Within individual gravelots the larger the quantity of beads, the more typologically diverse they're likely to be (Table 2-180). This relationship fits the Great Mortuary sample where collections are thought to have been gathered from older gravelots. In other graves, the contrary holds: the most abundant collections are relatively uniform (Table 2-180). Except for the Ubiquitous disc and convexo-cylindrical types, many of the types appear to have distinct temporal ranges. Of those that are found outside of the Great Mortuary deposit, Spiro II is the period of the mussel shell disc, the phalange, compound cylindrical, convexo-cylindrical columella, and columella beads. The flat circular and elliptical beads occur mainly in Spiro III times, the spherical and large elongate beads

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part /I-Brown

in Spiro II and III. The flattened hexagonal bead is probably a Spiro II type with an appearance in one Spiro IV gravelot. In sum, the temporal sorting of types points to the Spiro II period as the heyday of shaped bead diversity, with a tapering off in number during Spiro III times, and a narrowing of diversity in Spiro IV, reminiscent of Spiro I. If this pattern holds true, it would reinforce the conviction expressed above (and elsewhere) that the great diversity of beads in the Great Mortuary are a product of the conflation of the bead types specific to particular periods-not the diversity that was current at any single time. Function: The fact that the diversity of shell bead types changes over time cannot be attributed simply to style change leaves us with the problem as to the reasons for this diversity. There are two dimensions to this problem that deserve introduction here even though the problem is out of place in this section on classification. First, there are vastly different orders of abundance of these shell bead types, speaking regionally. The disc type (type 1) is commonest among Mississippian sites and the convexo-cylindrical bead (type 5) is second. Others are much less frequently found in Mississippian sites. Three are very rare. The compound bead (type 10) and the shell tooth bead (type 17) are restricted in distribution to Spiro. A third, the phalange or "hourglass," shaped bead is sufficiently rare as to be reported only from a high ranking burial at Moundville (Moore 1905:194, Fig. 101). The gross disparity in distribution and abundance of different shell beads is undoubtedly indicative of differences in the context of utilization and in the economic factors governing bead distribution among Mississippian sites. The second aspect pertains to the amount of information (in the technical sense of information theory) encoded in the shaped bead classification. The presence and absence of five key attributes are responsible for the distinctions among shell bead types (Brown 1976b:344). A few of the bead types (e.g., the disc-form types 1 through 4; the columella-form types 11 through 13; and the plate-form types 17 and 18) can be predicted from the shape of the shell they were taken from. The mussel shell disc bead (type 2) is dependent on difference in raw material. The flattened forms (types 14 through 18) are from the same source as the disc beads, but are drilled longitudinally instead of transversely. The remainder are distinguished by differences in fmished form. The columellar forms (11 through 13) that retain the stump of the inner walls are less fmished than the smooth massive spherical beads that came from the same source. Then there are the remainder that are carved to distinctive shapes. The differences that are involved here are differences in the amount of effort devoted to working the bead. The disc beads are relatively simple to produce compared to beads that have a greater surface area to be worked (e.g., cylindrical beads). In addition, the symmetrical beads, such as the disc and cylindrical beads, require less work to complete than the asymmetrical beads which cannot be turned out on a lathe. Not only are there differences in the amount of work involved in pro-

577

ducing different types, but the source material comes from parts of shell that naturally differ in abundance. For instance, in beads of equal size, the outer wall of a single whelk can produce many more beads than its columella. Now, one of the conclusions that can be drawn from this consideration of differences in labor input and the relative scarcity of shell parts is that the relative number of bead types is related to value. The relative abundance of bead types could very well be related to the proportion of a shell that can produce a given shell type. Thus, the archaeological abundance of the disc bead can be inferred from the relatively large portion of wall material suitable for such beads. Since the columella of the same shell can produce far fewer beads of any shape, it follows that a single shell will produce a smaller number of such columella beads relative to disc beads. From this disproportion in production lies the seeds of difference in value. The introduction of time and effort differences potentially creates another dimension along which more effort-intensive types will be more naturally valuable than easier to produce beads. Again, the disc beads would lend themselves to quicker production by being easier to break into blanks than the columella beads that have to be cut out of the hard core of the shell. With such latent differences in potential abundance and associated production labor, it is worthwhile to raise the question as to whether this potential was translated into an exchange system. The economic role of shell beads in transactions within and between local productive units deserves greater attention than can be devoted here. Our knowledge of the moneylike behavior of shell beads is well known in the case of the Eastern United States wampum (Ceci 1982; Herman 1956; Speck 1919), but we lack for the East the detail in economic transactions that are available for the West Coast Chumash and other tribes (Vayda 1967; Chagnon 1970). Among the Chumash, the economic role of shell beads is sufficiently critical that Chester King (1973) has been able to relate differences in the exchange value of different bead types to production costs and the degree of elaboration. But the number of types turns out to be relatable to the number of economic flows. Hence, King has hypothesized that the distinctions among shell beads is directly relatable to symbolic requirements in insulating different kinds of economic exchanges. Exchanges that are symbolized include differences in transactional importance and different directions of the transactional flow. There are a sufficient number of points of similarity between the Mississippian case and the Chumash/West Coast case to provide a solid basis for explanatory hypotheses that will take care of the diversity and abundance of shell beads, particularly in the Spiro II and III periods. Further work is obviously necessary. Disc Shell Beads (Fig. 2-123, #1)

This form is defmed by an axial dimension (thickness) that is less than the diameter. The edges may be either flat or slightly

578

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

8

0

~

CI~'" 'I:,:'I,::~

~

1,2

3

4

7

6

5

~~" tl~1 I.

e

9

10

12

J3

11

L

0

]

(

{OJ

J

co~

@

19

J4 15

-16

17

18

Figure 2-123. Shell bead types. 1,2) Disc; 3) elliptical; 4) convex disc; 5) convexo-cylindrical; 6) convexo-cylindrical, sculptured; 7) spherical; 8) cylindrical; 9) concavo-cylindrical; 10) compound cylindrical; 11) convexo-cylindrical, columella; 12) spherical columella; 13) columella; 14) flattened circular; 15) flattened hexagonal; 16) shell mask; 17) thin elongate; 18) large elongate; 19) shell tooth.

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown convex. A sample of measured beads reveals that there are two major size groups. The large series consists of the following measured beads: A16-29, A21-2c, 2f, B24-11, B33-26a, B43-4c, B44-56a, B48-41 (part), B50-5, B51-6a (part), B58-2, B62-47, B68-11, B78-1, B100-3a (part), B101-7b, B145-15c, B158-9b, B162-2, B163-5a, and B177-15a. The small series consists of the following collection lots of measured beads: A16-23, A26-5c, A28-1a, B40-3, B47-3b, B4841 (part), B49-27, B51-6a (part), B53-lOa, B54-62, B56-5, B62462, 463a, b, B69-5, B77-1b, BlOO-3a (part), BI08-64, B11l-4a, B122-16b, B140-7, B145-15d, g, B154-4b, B156-1, B161-3, B176-2b, and B181-9. A number of disc beads of the large size retain the surface engraving from the shell cup they were produced from (2: "A 1122"; 8: A21-2e; 3: B145-l6; 1: B163-5c) (Fig. 2-l27c). Also, a portion of the beads from the Great Mortuary exhibit fire blackening. Dimensions: Overall dimensions are: diameter mean 1.35 cm (0.3-4.0 cm), average axial length 0.506 cm, average perforation diameter 0.234 cm. There are at least two size groups within the series. The smaller is largely within the diameters of 3 to 8 mm, with a mode of 4.6 mm; the larger from 9 to 40 mm, with a mode of 12 mm. An example of the smaller size is B54-62j which has a mean diameter of 6.13 rom (see below), a mean thickness of 3.33 rom, and an average perforation diameter of 2.34 mm. The larger size is represented by: one lot (B43-4c) with a mean diameter of 14.37 mm, mean thickness of 5.06 rom, and a lot (A16-29) with a mean diameter of 13.55 mm, and a mean thickness of 4.72 rom. The average diameter of the "engraved" disc beads is 21.33 mm (range: 19-23 mm). Table 2181 records statistics on disc bead diameters. Provenience: Disc beads are present in gravelots of the Spiro IA (B16l, BI77), Spiro IB (B24, B27), Spiro II (AIO, All, BIO, B31, BI07, PbB3, BrB6), Spiro II/I11 (B180, B181), Spiro III (B50, B51, BIOO, BI22), Spiro IIIIV (A6), Spiro IIIIIV (B9, B38/39, B52), Spiro IV (B5, B6, B40, B53, B56, B94, B140, B162, B166, BrB3/5), Spiro IVA (B69a), Spiro IVB (A16, A2l, A26, A28, B33, B36, B43a, B44, B45, B47a, B48a, B49, B53, B54, B58, B62, B68, B77, B80, BIOI, B104, B108, BllO, BIll, B145, B154, BI55, B156, B157, BI58, BI63, B176), Spiro Ive (B13), and unclassified (B78, XB5) periods. Disc beads bearing the engraved lines from recycled decorated cups were found in Spiro II (All) and Spiro IVB period gravelots (A21, B145, B163). The large series is found in gravelots of the Spiro IA (B 177), Spiro IB (B24), Spiro III (B50, B51, BIOO), Spiro IV (BI62), Spiro IVB (A16, A21, B33, B43, B44, B48, B58, B62, B68, BIOI, B145, B158, B163), and unclassified (B78) periods. The small series is present in gravelots of the Spiro IA (B16l), Spiro II (BrB6), Spiro IIIIII (B18l), Spiro III (B5l, BIOO, BI22), Spiro IV (B40, B56, B140, BrB3/5), Spiro IVA (B69), and Spiro IVB (A16, A26, A28, B47, B48, B49, B53, B54, B62, B77, Bl08, BIll, B145, B154, B156, B176) periods.

579

Mussel Shell Disc Beads (Fig. 2-123, #2) This type is composed of disc beads of relatively irregular shape. The material is mussel shell and frequently the ends of the beads have not been ground flat and parallel. Dimensions: Average diameter (n = 16) is 6.625 mm; average thickness is 1.794 rom. Provenience: Present in gravelots of the Spiro 1111 (B66), Spiro II (B 10) and Spiro IVB (B43a, B54) periods. This is one of the bead types whose presence in the Great Mortuary gravelots points to an earlier Spiro II source. Elliptical Shell Beads (Fig. 2-123, #3) This type has an elliptical or flattened elliptical cross section and is broader in diameter than axial length. Perforations are biconical and cylindrical. Five of the six beads in the series, B68-9, have a copper sheath. All are greater than 3 cm in diameter. Dimensions: Most of the beads range between 5 and 21 mm in diameter (x = 10.37 mm). There is a group from B36, B51, B62, B68, B145 that range between 27 and 43 rom in diameter (x 33.55 rom). Table 2-182 records statistics on bead diameters series containing 5 or more beads. Provenience: Present in gravelots of the Spiro II (A10), Spiro III (B51), Spiro III/IV (B38/39), and Spiro IVB (A16, A2l, A26, B43a, B54, B108, BIll, B145, B154, B155, B158, B163) periods.

=

Convex Disc Shell Beads (Fig. 2-123, #4) This type has a greater diameter than thickness (axial length) but differs from the flat-ended disc bead in being planoconvex or concavoconvex in section. This type of bead is evidently from an area of the conch wall with a short radius curvature. Dimensions: Mean diameter is 2.113 cm (range: 0.5-4.3 em), axial length mean is 0.489 cm (range: 0.2-0.9 cm). Provenience: Present only in gravelots of the Spiro IVB (A16, A26) period. Convexo-Cylindrical Shell Beads (Fig. 2-123, #5) This is a convex-sided bead longer than its breadth. It is the "barrel-shaped" bead of the literature. Some have flat sides instead of continuous curves and are properly sections of two cones (e.g., A16-l4). All ends are flat and the perforations are biconical. In the Great Mortuary collection there are significant size differences. There is a short series (B62-464, B51-6f, B54-62k, B54-62a, B49-24, B47-3c, B44-58, A26-5a, AI6-16, A16-14, B163-5f, BI57-2, B155-3a, B154-4a, Blll-4b, BI0856) and a long series (BI63-5j, B158-9d, B158-9a, B145-15b, B68-l2, B44-57, A16-1l), whose metrics are taken up separately below. Two series of extra large beads (AIO-IO, B29-11b) are copper-sheathed as well. The short series appears in Spiro

580

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

III (BI22-16a) and Spiro IV (B40-12) gravelots and in a postpit of the Spiro IVB period (B77-1c). There remain other bead lots of the Spiro 111111 period (BI80-1) and the Great Mortuary (A21-1a) that do not fall within either series, but instead are drawn from both. Dimensions: The dimensions of the pooled sample (except the large beads) are the following: average diameter is 0.852 em (0.4-2.1 cm), average axial length is 1.255 em (0.5-2.8 cm range), mean diameter of perforation is 0.304 cm (0.1-0.6). The large series averages 1.756 cm long (n = 296) within a range of 1.0-2.5 cm. The small series averages 0.950 cm (n 823) within a range of 0.5-1.9 em. The extra large beads measure a maximum length of 6.7 em, diameter 3.0 cm, and perforation 0.8 cm (0118). Other lengths are 5.7 cm (B29-11b), 3.6 cm, and 3.2 cm (AIO-lO). Table 2-183 records the lengths of beads in series with five or more beads. Condition: None are smoked or blackened. Provenience: Present in gravelots of the Spiro IB (B27), Spiro II (AIO, BIO), Spiro Imll (BI65, B180, BI85a), Spiro III (B29, B51, BlOO, BI22), Spiro Imv (A6), Spiro IIIIIV (B9, B38/39, B52), Spiro IV (B40, B64, B94, B124, B162, BI66), Spiro IVA (B69), and Spiro IVB (AI6, A21, A26, A28, B36, B43a, B44, B47a, B48a, B49, B53, B54, B55, B58, B59, B62, B68, B77, B80, BIOI, BI04, BI08, BllO, BIll, B145, B150, B154, B155, B157, B158, B163, B176) periods. The extra large form occurs in Spiro II (AIO) and Spiro III (B29) gravelots.

=

Convexo-Cylindrical, Sculptured, Shell Beads (Figs. 2-123, #6, 2-127p) A convexo-cylindrical bead is carved to represent the spiral of the columella. Dimensions: Length is 6.0 cm, maximum diameter is 2.2 cm, diameter of perforation is 0.7 cm. Provenience: Present in a Spiro IVB period feature (B36). Spherical Shell Bead (Fig. 2-123, #7) This is a spherical bead with approximately equal length and breadth. Ends are either rounded or flattened. Dimensions: Overall average axial length is 0.886 cm (range: 0.4-2.3 cm), average diameter differences of 0.097 cm (range: 0-0.4), average diameter of perforation is 0.352 cm (range: 0.1-0.5 em). The average difference between axial length and maximum diameter is 0.097 em within a range of -4 to +4 mm. Table 2-184 records axial lengths of two series. Condition: Some beads from Great Mortuary units (A26, A28, B44, B48, B49, B54, BIOI, Blll, B150, B176) are fire blackened. Provenience: Present in gravelots of the Spiro 1111 (B66), Spiro III (B51), Spiro IIIIIV (B38/39) and Spiro IVB (AI6, A21, A26, A28, B36, B44, B47a, B48a, B49, B54, B62, B68, BIOI, B108, Bill, B150, B154) periods.

Cylindrical Shell Beads (Fig. 2-123, #8) This shell bead is a simple straight-sided cylinder in which the length is greater than the breadth. The ends are flat. The longitudinal perforations taper slightly from both ends. Dimensions: Average axial length is 1.998 cm (range: 1.4-3.6 cm), average diameter is 1.217 cm (range: 1.0-1.3 em), average diameter of perforation is 0.439 cm (range: 3.-0.7 cm). The range in length (1.4-3.6 cm) can be found in one lot (BI45-15i). Provenience: Present in gravelots of the Spiro IVB (AI6, B44, B62, B68, B108, B145, B163, B176) period and an unclassified burial (B78). Concavo-Cylindrical Shell Beads (Fig. 2-123, #9) This bead takes on an "hourglass" shape, or a concave-surfaced solid in geometrical terms. Longer than its breadth, the ends of the bead are usually flat, but there are samples from All and the Great Mortuary in which the ends are grooved or otherwise altered to resemble articular ends of animal bone. This bead class would appear to be a shell copy of human phalanges. Sections are circular to elliptical. The perforations taper from both ends. Dimensions: Average axial length is 1.829 cm (range: 0.9-4.2 cm), average maximum diameter is 0.973 cm (range: 0.6-1.4 cm), average perforation diameter is 0.433 cm (range: 0.3-0.6 cm). Provenience: Present in gravelots of the Spiro II (AIO, All) and Spiro IVB (AI6, A21, B44, B48a, B49, B54, B62, BIOI, B104, BIll, B155) periods. This is another bead type present in the Great Mortuary gravelots that points to earlier Spiro II sources for the grave goods. Compound Cylindrical Shell Beads (Fig. 2-123, #10) This type consists of relatively uniform beads having three spheroidal solids stacked on the axis. The two end sections are thin ellipsoids or discs and the center one is a spheroid. This bead in some cases looks like two disc beads fixed to each end of a spherical bead. Condition: Found fire blackened or burnt in three lots from the Great Mortuary (A21, A26, B54). Dimensions: Average length is 1.223 em (range: 0.8-2.9 em), average maximum diameter is 0.981 cm (range: 0.6-2.3 em), and average perforation diameter is 0.382 cm (range: 0.2-0.9 cm). Most beads range between 0.8 and 1.6 cm in length. There are very large examples from B 145 that are 2.7 and 2.9 cm long, and one from B44 that is 3.3 cm long. Provenience: Present in gravelots of the Spiro II (AIO), Spiro III (B51), and Spiro IVB (AI6, A21, A26, A28, B44, B48a, B49, B54, B62, BIOI, BI04, B111, B155) periods. This is another bead type present in the Great Mortuary that appears to come originally from Spiro IIIIII sources.

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown

Convexo-Cylindrical Columella Shell Beads (Fig. 2-123, #11) This type is a bead of convexo-cylindrical shape that retains the natural grooves of the columella. Condition: None known to be burnt. Dimensions: Average length is 2.464 cm (range: 1.5-6.5 cm), mean maximum diameter is 1.764 em (range: 1.1-2.4 em), and mean perforation diameter is 0.562 cm (range: 0.5-0.8 cm). The majority range in length from 1.5 to 2.9 cm. Only one from B36 is known to be extremely large (6.5 cm long). Table 2-185 records lengths of beads in series containing five or more. Provenience: Present in gravelots of the Spiro II (AlO, BI0) and Spiro IVB (B33, B36, B54, B62, B77, B108, B111, B157) periods. This is another bead type from the Great Mortuary gravelots that seems to have been taken from Spiro II sources. Spherical Columella Shell Beads (Fig. 2-123, #12) This is a bead of spherical shape that retains the natural grooves of the columella. Dimensions: Average axial length is 2.0 cm (range: 1.7-2.0 em), mean perforation diameter is 4.667 cm (range: 0.4-0.5 cm). Provenience: Present in gravelots of the Spiro IVB (B47a, B62, B145, B155) period.

581

Spiro III (B51), Spiro IVA (B69a), and Spiro IVB (A16, B43a, B62, B68) periods. This is another bead type from the Great Mortuary gravelots that appears to have been taken from Spiro II sources. Flattened Hexagonal Shell Beads (Fig. 2-123, #15) This is a flat-faced bead that is hexagonal in outline. Some are planoconvex or concavoconvex in longitudinal section since the curvature of the shell is not completely eliminated. Dimensions: Average axial length is 3.417 cm (range: 2.8-4.1 cm), mean maximum breadth is 1.767 cm (range: 1.1-2.3 em), mean maximum thickness is 0.733 em (range: 0.5-1.0 cm), and mean diameter of perforation is 0.450 cm (range: 0.3-0.6 cm). Provenience: Present in gravelots of the Spiro II CAlO), Spiro III/IV (B38/39), Spiro IV (B40), and Spiro IVB (B54, B62) periods. Shell Mask Beads (Figs. 2-123, #16, 2-127d-g, 2-103 g, h)

This is a bead made out of longitudinally perforated sections of partially ground and smoothed columella. Dimensions: The average length of the small series (measuring from AI6-8, B36-17, B49-5) is 2.403 cm (range: 2.1-3.0 em), mean maximum breadth is 2.017 cm (range: 1.7-2.6 em), and mean diameter of perforation is 0.571 cm (range: 0.5-0.7 cm). The average length of the large series (measuring from B48-39a) is 7.600 em (range: 6.6-10.7 em), mean maximum breadth is 2.014 (range: 1.0-3.3 em), and mean diameter of perforation is 0.640 cm (range: 0.5-0.8 cm). Comments: Note how small the larger series is compared with the large columella beads from the Hamilton focus (Lewis and Kneberg 1946:127) that range from 12.5 to 20.0 cm. Provenience: Present in gravelots of the Spiro II (BlO), and Spiro IVB (AI6, B44, B48a, B49, B54, B155, B157) periods.

Shell beads displaying a human face are placed on flattened circular beads (Hamilton 1952: PI. 66, top left). A complete set of rubbings can be found in Phillips and Brown (1983, PI. B-11) where a greater range of variability is recorded. Four out of six in the Oklahoma University collections display a concavoconvex cross section. The existing examples display some diversity in figurative design. The smaller examples are simpler with great emphasis on the eyes, nose, and mouth, complete with teeth as in funerary masks and face maskettes. The larger examples exhibit greater attention to proportion and show considerable detail. Carving is in low relief that barely rises above the engraving on the convex face(s), and in the case of the larger examples, it is found on the sides as well. Both Craig B and C styles are represented. Dimensions: The most complete of the larger beads (B62138) has an existing length of 5.6 cm, a width of 4.2 cm, and a maximum thickness of 1.35 cm. A small bead (D251-1) has a length of 3.15 em, a width of 2.87 cm, and a thickness of 0.9 cm. Provenience: Present in gravelots of the Spiro IVB (B48, B62) period. Note that "B42-2" in Phillips and Brown (1983: PI. B-llg) is B48-2. Also, present in the Craig mound general collection.

Flattened Circular Shell Beads (Fig. 2-123, #14)

Thin Elongate Shell Beads (Fig. 2-123, #17)

This is a bead that is flat-faced but circular in outline. It is a large disc bead that has a longitudinal perforation parallel with the flat faces. The beads are usually parallel-faced, but some are slightly convex and concave following the curvature of the conch shell body. Dimensions: Lengths of 1.5,2.0, and 4.0 cm; thicknesses of 0.8 and 0.9; and perforations of 0.4 and 0.5 em have been recorded. Provenience: Present in gravelots of the Spiro WIll (B88),

This is a relatively long and thin bead that lacks symmetry around its axis. The sides are gently excurvate and appear to conform to the natural curvature of the wall of the marine shell. Dimensions: Average axial length is 2.631 cm (range: 1.7-3.5 cm), mean maximum diameter is 0.536 cm (range: 0.4-0.8 cm), mean diameter of perforation is 0.300 em (range: 0.2-0.4 cm). Provenience: Present only in gravelots of the Spiro IVB (A16, B36) period.

Columella Beads (Fig. 2-123, #13)

582

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

Large Elongate Shell Beads (Fig. 2-123, #18)

Rockshell Beads (Fig. 2-124g)

This long and relatively thin, curved bead lacks symmetry around its axis. It is larger than the thin elongate bead. Dimensions: Average axial length is 5.144 cm (range: 1.8-9.5 cm), mean diameter is 1.374 cm (range: 0.6-2.1 em), mean diameter of perforation is 0.542 cm (range: O.4-0.S em). This type ranges in length from 2.4 cm to 5.3 cm, although there are two exceptional sets of beads, one from B181 (see below) and another 6.3 cm long (BI40). Table 2-186 records axial lengths in series containing at least five beads. Provenience: Present in gravelots of the Spiro II (B31), Spiro IIIIII (BI65, BI81), Spiro III (BI22), Spiro III/IV (B38/39), Spiro IV (B140), and Spiro IVB (AI6, A21, B33, B44, B48a, B62, BI08, B155) periods.

Beads were produced from a species of the rockshell (Drupa or Thais) by breaking a hole above the natural aperture. Most of the perforations are irregular rather than a smooth-bored. Dimensions: The mean length is 16.130 mm (range: 11.0-28.0 mm, n = 146), the average maximum diameter is 11.390 mm (range: 8.0-15.0 mm). Provenience: Present in gravelots of the Spiro IA (BI61, B167, BI77) and Spiro IVB (AI6) periods. This is another bead type from the Great Mortuary that points to the presence of early sources in the later gravelots (Table 2-187).

Shell Tooth Beads (Fig. 2-123, #19) This shell bead type is essentially a three-sided pyramid that resembles a canine tooth. The perforation is produced by two intersecting holes made into the top and the broad back face. Dimensions: The length averages 2.220 cm within a range of 1.6-1 2.8 cm, width mean is 1.300 cm (range: 1.2-1.4 em), and perforation diameter mean is 0.3S0 cm (range: 0.3--0.4 cm). Provenience: Present in gravelots of the Spiro IVB (AI6, B43, B44a) period.

Olivella Beads (Figs. 2-124h, j) Olivella beads were produced by grinding away the apical end of the West Indian dwarf olive (Olivella nivea) for an opening. Some of these beads have been classified as engraved (Brown 1976b: Figs. 75a, b) through the mistaken identification of well-marked growth lines along the outer shell wall as artificial. Dimensions: The mean length is 14.014 mm (range: 11.0-19.0 mm, n 14S), the mean maximum diameter is 6.633 mm (range: 5.0-9.0 rom). Provenience: Present in gravelots of the Spiro IA (BI61), Spiro III (B51), Spiro IV (B40, B64, BI40), and Spiro IVB (AI6, A21, A26, B36, B44, B47a, B4Sa, B49, B54, B62, B145, B154, B163) periods (Table 2-1S7).

=

Marginella Beads (Fig. 2-124k) Olive Shell Beads (Fig. 2-124i) Marginella beads of the common type are produced by grinding a hole on the body whorl below the apex of a Common Atlantic Marginella shell (Marginella apicina). Dimensions: The mean length is 13.511 cm (range: 11.0-28.0 cm, n = 141), maximum diameter is 8.844 cm (range: 6.0-21.0 cm). Provenience: Present in gravelots of the Spiro IIIIV (A6), Spiro IV (B40, B53, B64), and Spiro IVB (AI6, B48a, BIOS) periods (Table 2-187).

Beads were produced by grinding the apical end of a species of the olive shell (Oliva sp.), perhaps 0. recticularis or O. sayana. both of which have been identified among the pendants. Dimensions: The mean length is 20.857 mm (range: 16.0-24.0 mm, n = 7); the average maximum diameter is 9.571 mm (range: 7.0-11.0 mm). Provenience: Present in a Spiro III gravelot (B51) and from unprovenienced Craig mound collections (Burnett 1945: PI. LXVIIId).

Volvarina Beads (Fig. 2-1241) Freshwater Branchiate Beads (Fig. 2-124t) A small marginella bead was produced from the thin and delicate shell of the orange-banded marginella (Volvarina avena). In the collection from B51 the apex of the shell appears to have been ground away to allow for stringing. In 25 from this collection, both the apical and canal ends were ground away to produce midsection beads. Dimensions: The mean length is 4.560 rom (range: 4.0-5.0 mm, n = 25), the maximum diameter is 2.S00 mm (range: 2.0-4.0 mm). Provenience: Present only in a Spiro III gravelot (B51).

Beads were produced from a species of Campeloma by grinding through the fIrst whorl above the natural aperture. Another species (either Pleurocera or Goniobasis sp.) has also been identified. Dimensions: The mean length of the Campeloma sp. beads is 24.8 mm (range: 16.0-54.0 mm, n = 40); maximum diameter is 16.0 rom (range: 11.0-29.0 mm). Comments: Campeloma sp. beads are known from Hamilton focus contexts in Tennessee (Lewis and Kneberg 1947:128, PI. 80B).

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown

583

d

c

a

9

e

2 em.

,

,

h f

J

k

Figure 2-124. Whole shell beads and pearls. Perforated shells (univalves and bivalves) pendants: a) Oliva sayana (D250-20); b) Murexfu/vescens (B54-33); c) Sinum perspectivum (40/698); d) Anadara transversa (D222); e) Trachycardium muricatum (B62-121); beads: f) Campe/oma sp. (NP); g) Drupa or Thaias (NP); h) Olivella mutica (NP); i) Oliva reticu/aris (NP); j) Olivella nivea (B145-1a); k) Marginella apicina (NP); 1) Vo/varina avena (B51-6i).

Provenience: The Campeloma sp. beads are present in gravelots of the Spiro II (All), Spiro III (B51) and Spiro IYB (A26, B47a, B54, B104, Bill, B150, B163) periods. The Pleuroceral Goniobasis sp. bead is present in Spiro III (B51) and Spiro IVB (A16) gravelots (Table 2-187).

Pearl Beads (Figs. 2-125,2-126) Large numbers of pearl beads have been recovered from Spiro and the Craig mound in particular. Examination of the WPA collection shows that both spherical and irregular "blister" pearls were used as beads, although the former predominate (790/0). There are also an uncounted number of unperforated nuggets that were found with the beads in gravelot B66. Most of the "gem quality" beads are nearly spherical, although some (70/0) are slightly flattened at the ends, possibly due to pressure from the perforating process. Perforations originating at either a single or both ends are represented. Straight perforations are standard, although there is one large "blister" bead that has perforations meeting at right angles (BI55-10b).

Most bead lots in a grave are relatively even in size with the modal class between 5.0 and 5.9 mm in each tally (Table 2-188). Two major lots for which there are measurements have skewed distributions extending to relatively large beads (e.g., B51 sample). The spherical beads range between 2 and 12 mm, and the "blister" beads have a broader size range from 3 to 33 mm. Provenience: Present in gravelots of the Spiro I (B66), Spiro II (All, BrB6a), Spiro III (B51, B122), and Spiro IVB (B36, B44, B48, B62, B108, B154, B155) periods (Table 2-189). Other beads are in the Craig mound general collection. Thobum (1930:41) reported pearl beads from Ward Mound 1. Pearl beads were recovered primarily from the Great Mortuary features, which accounted for 550/0 of the provenienced beads in the WPA collection. As much as half of the two gallons of pearl beads found by the commercial excavators are attributed to the "hollow chamber" part of the Great Mortuary (Hamilton 1952:30, 87).

5S4

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

a

b

c o !

2

3

4

5I

Scale in em .

Figure 2-125. Pearl nuggets and beads (B51-6k).

Phosphate Nodule Beads (Figs. 2-127i, 2-128) This category is restricted to beads produced from dark-colored or black phosphate nodules. The amount of modification of the natural nodule varies considerably with the less-modified examples tending to be massive "ball-shaped" beads, some of which are simply drilled nodules. Most are rounded over the entire surface by whatever degree of grinding and rubbing it took to produce a spherical, ellipsoidal, or even convexo-cylindrical shape. Of the small number of shapes remaining, the disc and cylindrical differ sufficiently from the generalized ballshaped bead to be regarded as requiring additional steps in their manufacture. The perforations in the larger specimens are biconical and, hence, were drilled from both ends with a tapered borer. Smaller beads have an even-gauged bore (Fig. 212S). For purposes of analysis, six classes have been recognized (Table 2-190). The predominant class consists of shapes gener-

ally rounded over the entire surface and includes basically spherical and ellipsoidal forms, although similar shapes with flattened ends are also included. The other classes are listed in Table 2-190. Elongate beads with straight and convex sides are grouped into cylindrical and convexo-cylindrical classes. Scarce shapes constitute distinct classes of the disc, bispherical, and hemispheric forms. At least some of the disc and hemispheric beads are clearly reworked pieces of the commoner spherical/ellipsoidal class. There is only a single spherical bead in this sample. The diversity in bead shape within each cache or bead set is roughly proportional to the cache size (Tables 2-192, 193). Three burial caches (B65, B167, WaXB1) are the most diverse in shape (Fig. 2-129), whereas three other caches contain relatively uniform beads (B76, B161, WaBS). Beads occurring in most sets are graded in size, especially in B32 (2a series), B161, B163, and WaBS. One large series of 57 beads cached in Ward Mound 1 (Lf5SI

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown

Figure 2-126. Pearl beads (B62-15), restrung.

585

586

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

~ @ ~ ~

.:?

~ ~

~

~

.~ a

@ @

\ ) !fl

~

~

'-'":..,-

®

b

e

c

f o !

2

3

4

5I

Scale in em .

i

.~

/

r

k

J

h

m

o

n

p

Figure 2-127. Beads of different materials. a, b) Olivella beads, with strong growth lines (BI45-1b); c) shell disc bead with trace of engraved cup surface (BI45-16); d) shell mask bead, Craig AlB style (D303-2i); e) shell mask bead, Craig C style; f) shell mask bead, Craig C style (D251-1); g) shell mask bead, Craig B style (B62-138); h) fossil echinoid bead (B29-3); i) phosphate nodule bead (NP);j) copper ellipsoidal beads (NP); k) glauconitic clay bead (B76-7); 1) ceramic bead (B23-15c); m) wooden bulging cylindrical bead (B29-11 a); n) wooden convexo-cylindrical bead (B29-1Ia); 0) sandstone bead, modified from pipe stem (D35); p) shell convexo-cylindrical, sculptured bead (B36-8).

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown

587

I~~~ftf:t ~~Il~1

a

c

b

d

h

f

e

i

9

.

J

k

I

Figure 2-128. Phosphate bead cross sections by form. a) Disc (B65-3b); b) bispherical (B65-3k); c) bispherical (BI67-1f); d) cylindrical (B65-3a); e) cylindrical (B65-3c); f) convexo-cylindrical (B65-3d); g) convexo-cylindrical (B65-3f); h) elliptical (B65-3e); i) elliptical with flattened ends (B65-3g); j) elliptical (B65-3h); k) elliptical (B65-3i); I) elliptical (B65-3j).

50) is distinctive in their unusually small size and uniformity. The beads are short and convexo-cylindrical. They resemble the short convexo-cylindrical shell beads in size, shape, and the nonparallel orientation of the flat ends of some beads. Dimensions: The size of beads in each of the shape classes (except the bispherical) is shown in Table 2-191. The range in diameter of beads from a single cache (or "string") is shown in Table 48b where a difference as great as 1.6 cm is present. Material: Black phosphate nodules were used as the raw material for the stone beads under consideration here. The

material is a dark gray to black lustrous fine-grained stone of medium hardness (about 0.5 Moh scale). It is sometimes variegated with thin bands of impurities. An X-ray diffraction pattern of one specimen revealed the material to be a type of phosphate called carbonate fluorapatite. These phosphate nodules and plates are known to occur in the Upper Middle Pennsylvanian shales at their contact with the underlying Mississippian in eastern Oklahoma and Kansas (Oakes 1938; Runnels 1949). The nodules are not difficult to procure, and sources probably exist in the area south of Spiro. This material has

588

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

been incorrectly referred to in the archaeological literature of eastern Oklahoma as "Webbers Falls argillite" (fhoburn 1931; Bell 1947; Shaeffer 1957a) on the basis of its resemblance to the silicified siltstones of eastern Oklahoma frequently used for chipped stone implements. The beads were probably produced locally since the requisite quarry locales are not too far away and raw material has been recovered from the site. One unperforated nodule and one partly perforated piece have been found at Spiro, namely from Craig mound fill (Lf40: 4 specimens), a gravelot (B26: 1 specimen), and the village (House 4: 1 specimen). Provenience: Present in gravelots of the Spiro I (B65), Spiro IA (B161, B167, B173, BI77), Spiro IB (B27), Spiro 1111 (B32, B37, WaB8) , Spiro II (BI0, B31, B67, B76, BI07, B168, WaXB 1), Spiro III (B51), Spiro IV (B 166), and Spiro IVB (AI6, A26, B43, B163) periods. They are also found in the Brown mound, Ward Mound 1, Ward Mound 2, and the village, including House 8. Phosphate beads occur predominantly in the Spiro I and II periods-92.5% out of 216 phosphate beads are from contexts antedating the Spiro phase. Minor numbers are found in either Spiro III or Spiro IVB (6.1%) gravelots. The finds in the Ward mounds, especially in Mound 1 (Thobum 1930, for other examples) and the village, confirm the relative dating of this type bead in the Craig mound sequence. Large numbers have been found at Craig: Hamilton (1952:87) has estimated that one gallon was removed by the commercial diggers. Reports of such beads at Harlan (Bell 1949) and Groseclose (Orr 1941) are from contexts that agree in age with the evidence from Spiro. It is noteworthy that phosphate beads have not been reported from the Norman site burials (Finklestein 1940) of Spiro III age. Cannel Coal Beads

Nine cannel coal beads are present in the WPA collections. They occur in the same shape classes as the phosphate beads: spherical, disc, and flattened ellipsoidal. Perforations are biconical. This type differs from the phosphate beads only in material. The spherical beads range in size from 3.5 to 2.4 cm; the disc range in size from 3.5 x 1.6 cm to 1.4 x 0.4 em. The ellipsoidal bead measures 2.1 x 1.5 cm. A pebble of the same material was found in the Ctl section of the village. Provenience: A set of six beads was found in a Spiro IB period gravelot (B27). Others came from general collections from the Craig mound and from the fill of Buried House Mound 1. Red Pipestone Bead

A single cylindrical bead of an unidentified red pipestone is present. It is 2.3 cm long and 2.2 cm in diameter. The perforation is biconical and 1.28 to 1.25 cm in diameter. Provenience: The general collections from the Craig mound.

Hematite Bead

A single cylindrical bead of hematite is present in the WPA collections. It measures 4.85 cm long and 2.3 cm in diameter. The biconical perforation is 1.25 em in diameter. Another cylindrical hematite bead is described by Burnett (1945:21, PI. XXVa). Provenience: Present in a Spiro IVB period gravelot (B68). Limestone Beads

Two eroded limestone beads are present in the WPA collections. They are roughly cylindrical, measuring 1.10 x 1.4 cm and 2.6 x 1.0 cm. Both have biconical perforations about 5 mm in diameter at the opening. Provenience: Present in a Spiro IA period gravelot (BI67). Sandstone Beads (Fig. 2-1270)

Seven beads are present made of fme-grained sandstone, and one of coarse-grained sandstone. Shapes that are present are conic sectioned, convexo-cylindrical, cylindrical, and disc beads. Perforations are cylindrical in all cases except one conic section and the coarse-grained cylindrical bead, both without provenience. The cylindrically drilled beads are undoubtedly reworked stems of T-shaped pipes. At least two holes are off center in the same way, as many of the stem bores of the pipes are. Certainly, the stone beads otherwise found at Spiro are almost exclusively drilled with a V-shaped borer that leaves a biconical hole. The fine~grained sandstone beads are of the same material as the T-shaped pipes. The largest bead of convexo-cylindrical form (035; Fig. 21270), is 10.3 em long and expands in diameter from 1.4-1.6 cm to 2.4 cm. The perforation of the cylindrical bores averages 7.942 mm and ranges from 5.8 to 10.0 mm in diameter. They closely approximate the bore diameters of the T-shaped pipes from which they were presumably derived (Table 2-143). The biconical perforations are 3.5 and 10.0 mm in diameter. Except for the large bead above, this type conforms to dimensions of the cannel coal and phosphate beads. Provenience: Present in gravelots of the Spiro IB (B23) and Spiro IVB (B68) periods. Otherwise, the beads are from the Craig mound general collections and the fill of the Ward Mound 1. Fossil Echinoid Beads (Fig. 2-127h)

Two beads were made of the limestone echinoid fossils, probably of an urchin, Phymosoma texanum. More certain identification cannot be made because the bead hole passes through the central and diagnostic part of the fossil. The diameters are 5.1 and 3.7 cm; perforations are 0.8 and 1.5 cm; thicknesses are 2.0 and 1.5 cm. Provenience: Present in a Spiro III period (B29) gravelot.

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown Crinoid Stem Beads

589

Small sections of fossil crinoid stems are present from burials without other indications of alteration. They are often found mingled with the shell disc beads of about the same size. They measure about 6.0-8.0 mm in diameter, and range in thickness from 1.0 to 3.0 Mm. Provenience: Present only in gravelots of the Spiro IVB period (B49, B54, BllO, BIll). Others are known from the Craig mound general collection.

in any other bead at Spiro. According to Burnett (1945:43), "Although they are drilled throughout they do not appear to have been strung in the usual manner. In several of them there exists in one end a length of cane splint about 1/8 inch [3 mm] wide which is plugged into the drilling by a wrapped wad of fabric. It would appear that by these splints the beads were connected in series." Dimensions: See Table 2-194. Provenience: Present from gravelots of the Spiro III (B29, B38, B51) and Spiro IV (B53) periods.

Ceramic Beads (Fig. 2-1271)

Copper Beads (Fig. 2-127j)

Two gray ceramic beads superficially resemble the more common fine sandstone beads, with which they were associated in the same grave. The ceramic beads are grog and bone tempered and are smooth surfaced and gray colored with irregular black firing clouds. One is convexo-cylindrical and measures 5.9 x 2.0 cm. The other is cylindrical and 4.3 x 1.6 em in size. The holes of both are 5.5 mm in diameter. Provenience: Present in a Spiro IB gravelot (B23). They are also reported from other collections (Burnett 1945:37).

Two types have been found at Spiro. One is a massive ellipsoidal bead and the other is a tubular sheet copper bead. Both are relatively rare considering the amount of copper devoted to hair pins, hair ornaments, and large plates. Four are elliptical in axial section and round in lateral section. In each, the perforation is filled with the preserved part of twisted cordage. The mean diameter is 17.0 mm, thickness 9.0 mm, and perforation is 5.0mm. One tubular bead is present in the WPA collection and another was reported by Thoburn (1930:40) from his excavations into Ward Mound 1. The former is a rolled sheet copper bead slightly convexo-cylindrical in shape. It is 4.5 cm long and 1.0 to 0.9 cm in outside diameter. The inside diameter is about 0.7 cm and contains remains of a fine twisted cord. The copper disc beads that have been reported are fake (Hamilton 1952:50, PI. 69d). Ellipsoidal or spherical copper beads are known from Harlan (Bell 1972) and from earlier sites in the Southeast (Webb 1968:316). Provenience: The globular beads come from the Craig mound general collection, and the tubular bead comes from the WPA work in the cn section of the village. Thoburn (1930: 40) reported one from the work in Ward Mound 1.

Glauconitic Clay Beads (Fig. 2-127k) A series of convexo-cylindrical beads molded from the green glauconitic clay are present. There are six nearly complete specimens, four large pieces and many small fragments comprising the series. They range from 3.7 to 3.0 in length, and about 2.2 to 2.6 cm in diameter. Provenience: Present in a Spiro II period gravelot (B76). Bone Beads Tubular bone beads have been found in limited numbers (Hamilton 1952:50). One is present in the WPA collection that consists of the long bone of a bird, measuring 2.3 cm long and 0.95 em in diameter. Provenience: Present in a Spiro IVB period gravelot (B77).

Galena Bead? A galena bead of cylindrical shape was reported from the MAl collection (Burnett 1945:21, PI. XXVc) ..

Wood Beads (Figs. 2-127m, n) Seed Beads A number of copper-covered wooden beads have come from the Craig mound. Most of them are warped, crushed, and cracked, if not quite fragmentary. One group found in the WPA excavations was composed of 19 fairly well-preserved specimens (B29), and a series of 44 was found in the commercial excavations preserved in a cane floatweave container (Burnett 1945:43, PI. LXXXIV). Another wood bead (Burnett 1945:43, PI. LXXXV) is a long (10.2 cm) convexo-cylindrical bead with insets for six triangular shell inlay strips, of which four were in place. The series in the container in the Museum of the American Indian illustrates a type of attachment that has not been found

These beads consist of perforated specimens of the small hardshelled spherical nutlets or seeds of plants of the borage family (Boraginaceae) or a sedge (Scleria sp.). They are usually used in their natural lustrous white condition although four beads (B66-2) are colored red. These measure 0.1-0.3 cm in diameter. Two different lots were identified by Hugh C. Cutler in 1947 when he was Curator of Economic Botany, Chicago Natural History Museum. One from B161 was identified as Onosmodium and another B189-20 as Scleria pauviflora Muhl, the nut rush. The former specimens are very close to Lithospermum seeds also of the same family. Specimens in the Museum of the

590

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

American Indian have been identified as Onosmodium subsetosum (Burnett 1945:37). Seed beads of the borage family have been identified before in the Ozarks. The Ozark gromwell (Onosmodium subsetosum Mack. and Bush) has been found in Ozark bluff shelters by Harrington (1960:169) according to Gilmore (1931). In the Mississippi River valley seed beads not specifically identifiable have been found by Perino (1966) at the Banks site and the Cherry Valley mounds. Other unidentified beads answering to this description were found in the Hopewellian mound C at Helena, Arkansas (Ford 1963:19-20). In four lots these beads were recovered with fragments of the cordage on which they were strung (B24, B52, B107, BI61). The beads were most often found with interments, although one lot came from a cremation (B66) and two other lots were found in two large caches, one in the LfCrII segment of the

Craig mound (/852) and the other on the flank of the Brown mound (BrA 1). The burial fmds contain an estimated 50 to 500 beads (Table 2-195). The Craig mound cache numbers 23,685 beads; the Brown mound, 9,050 beads. In one case, the seed beads were massed in beadwork rows next to a skull with the copper long-nosed god maskette (B69). In another, the beads were found and recovered grouped at the shoulder area of the wooden plaque in strands suggesting a solid band of beadwork (B52-5). Provenience: Present in gravelots of the Spiro IA (BI61, B167, B173), Spiro IB (A15, B24, B25), Spiro IIlI (B66, B70), Spiro II (B67, B107), Spiro III (BI89), Spiro IIIIlV (B52), and Spiro IVA (B69) periods. A Craig mound cache is simply unassigned (Lf40/898). The cache on stage D of the Brown mound is Spiro II in age.

CHAPTER

37

Pendants and Gorgets

Shell Core Pendant (Figs. 2-130 b, c, d)

Whole Shell Pendants (Figs. 2-124a-e)

These pendants are an important and numerous class produced from the apex and columella of whelks (Busycon sinistrum) and more rarely conchs (Pleuroploca gigantea). This pendant form is made up of what is left after most of the body adjoining the outer lip is removed up to at least the junction of the body with the posterior of the anal canal. The apical and posterior ends are ground smooth, and the shank is usually perforated for suspension. One in every six artifacts, however, remain unperforated. Among the available sample of well-preserved pendants of Busycon. the length ranges from 6.9 to 23.6 em (x 12.27 em) and the breadth 2.4-11.6 cm (x = 5.58 em). The average diameter of the perforation is 3.28 mm (range: 2.1-4.5 mm). The illustrated conch pendant is 26.7 cm long and 8.6 cm broad. Comments: The core pendant is one of the artifacts that can be produced after the wall of the conch is stripped away. The conch wall cannot be used for a cup, but can only be used fragmented as beads, gorgets or other artifacts. What remains of the columella after a cup is produced is sufficient only for columella artifacts. The core pendant is one of the few shell artifacts that can be identified in prehistoric iconography. At Spiro it is shown in beaded necklaces (Figs. 94h, 95n', 0'; Hamilton 1952: PIs. 88d, 9a, c, 100, 118, 120a). Even more detailed depictions of this form of costumery is found on Etowah copper, and at this same site the core pendant has been found in place on the breast of a primary interment (Larson 1971). Hamilton (1952) and Burnett (1945: PI. LXVI) iIlustrate other examples of this artifact, and Hamilton (1952:56,87) estimates that 500 pendants of this type were removed prior to the WPA work. Provenience: Present in gravelots of the Spiro II (All, BI0), Spiro IIIIII (B88), Spiro IIIIV (A6), Spiro III/IV (B38/39), Spiro IV (B53), and Spiro IVB (AI6, A26, B36, B49, B54, B59, B62, B108, B155, B157, B158) periods. Also present in the Craig mound general collection and from collections derived from the commercial work.

Perforated marine shells that are otherwise unaltered are classed together as shell pendants. Three Oliva shells are known (B62; Burnett 1945:37, PI. LXIIId) as well as two cockle shell valves (Cardium muricatium) (B62-121), and one Murex shell (BI55-78). An unidentified shell came from B62. Provenience: Present in gravelots of the Spiro IVB period (B62, BI55).

=

Ca"ed Shell Pendants (Figs. 2-129h, 2-131) This pendant class consists of sculpted animal and human representations perforated at one end. Some are modeled in the round and others are simply flat, incised cutout forms. The pendants carved in the round represent one human figurine and two bird heads. The human figurine (B36-3) is a man sculpted in costume (Figs. 2-131a, b; Duffield 1964: PI. XIII, 12; Fundaburk and Foreman 1957: PI. 157; Phillips and Brown 1983: PI. B-l1m). The suspension hole is drilled vertically through a section of the back. One of the two bird heads has an elongate beak and eyes that are delimited by incised lines. A hole is in the proximal end and three encircling lines are incised below the perforation. Length is 5.7 cm, maximum width is 1.3, and thickness is 1.1 em (Duffield 1964: PI. XXIY, 9). A second iIlustrated by Hamilton (1952: PI. 82B, right) is very similar to the first, but has only two encircling lines around the proximal end. It is 50% longer and measures 3.5 inches long. One elongate and marine shell bulbous pendant (Fig. 2-129 h) is broken and the engraved lines are very eroded, although the piece resembles a snake head with its pear-shaped eye markings (Dl31). Its perforation is at the thin end. Maximum length is 8.0 cm, width is 1.7 cm, and thickness is 1.2 cm. A fourth pendant represents a undetermined animal form (PhiIlips and Brown 1983: PI. B-l1c). Undulant streamers are attached to the eyes.

591

592

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

00'

",

a

c o!

2

3

d

4

5!

Seale in em .

J '

(~~! .~ .I~~d ,

e

h

f ..

-~ )

~

'

Figure 2-129. Pendants. a) Engraved pendant(?), marine shell (GI 9025.589); b) perforated terminal, marine shell (0251-3); c) stone gorget/pendant (NP); d) pipestone pendant (Lf40/847); e) engraved shell bangle(?) (B36-5); f) bone bangle(?), reconstructed from fragments (BlO-35); g) engraved shell pendant (B47-13); h) engraved shell pendant (0131); i) phosphate nodule pendant (PbBl-9=Lf40/359).

Flat pendants are represented by two "rattlesnake" rattle tail sections that are perforated at the proximal end. Length is about 9 cm (Burnett 1945: PI. 82B, left; Hamilton 1952: PI. 82B). Another pendant type is a warrior figurine costumed in headdress and earspools, but whose trunk is substituted by a "sun disc" (Fig. 2-131k). The suspension hole is a transverse perforation located above the head in a completely preserved example (Burnett 1945:35, PI. LXV). Provenience: Present in Spiro IVB (B36) gravelot; others belong to the Craig mound general collection.

Wood Pendants

One is a wooden rattlesnake rattle that has been described and illustrated (Burnett 1945:43, PI. LXXXV) as measuring 7.3 cm long. A second is a copper-sheathed bear tooth pendant (7.0 cm long). Another is a set of teeth mounted on a headdress (Burnett 1945:43, PIs. LXXXI, LXXXII). Provenience: The relic miner collections from the Craig mound.

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown Tooth Pendants

593

given rise to the name gorget through analogy with the "gorge" section of European armor. The derivation of gorgets in this At least three large mammal incisors are either drilled at the tip analysis from the walls and apical sections of marine univalves of the root (40/691) or both drilled and encircled with a sus- distinguishes them, on the one hand, from pendants that use pension groove (0122, D258). Maximum length is 3.4 cm. the whole shell, and on the other, from pendants that are proThere is also a human first premolar (0258) that is perforated duced from the columella (see Shell Pendants). at the root tip and has an encircling groove just above it. Major attributes used to classify the Spiro gorgets are the Length is 2.7 cm. location of modification on the interior or exterior, shape, presProvenience: Craig mound, none with associations. ence of engraving, the use of perforations not related to suspension (including fenestrations) and relief carving. Each of Stone Pendants (Figs. 2-129c, d, i) the attributes has been described by Duffield (1964:5-6) with particular attention to the techniques of engraving, fenestraFive pendant classes are recognized. The first class consists of tion, and relief carving techniques, which are particularly releflat stones perforated at one end. One example is a flat phos- vant to surface modification. For the purpose of this classificaphate nodule (Fig. 2-129i). Another is a ground and polished tion a distinction will be maintained between simple section of pipestone (Fig. 2-129d) that is a reworked stem pro- perforation, which is just an unelaborated drilled hole, and fenjection of a T-shaped pipe, probably of the Chandler type. Per- estration, which is an enlargement of the drilled hole that forations are made by drilling from both faces. includes asymmetrical shapes. See Phillips and Brown (1975a) The second class consists of a piece of a circular(?) cannel for further details. coal pendant or gorget (Fig. 2-129c) with double perforations. The classification can be represented by a key (Brown 1976b: The third class consists of three rectangular pieces of phos- Table 51). Ten formal classes or types can be distinguished. phate and hematite with grooves or perforations around one Each of these types are probably the result of different end. The hematite grooved specimen is 8.2 cm long, and 2.3 to amounts of work invested, although at this stage in analysis the 2.5 em wide. extent of difference is even less clear than in the case of shell The fourth is made up of a concretion with a perforated end. beads. An inventory of shell gorgets and gorget fragments is A tusk-shaped hematite concretion was drilled at the broadest contained in Figs. 2-150 to 152. For general comments on this end from both sides. Length is 5.7 cm, width is 2.2 x 1.6 cm. To corpus, see Shell Cups. this class probably belongs the limonite concretion with an Comments: Shell gorgets have been depicted at the throat of incised meander illustrated by Burnett (1945:21, PI. XXIVi). figures engraved on shell (Hamilton 1952: PI. 96,118) and indeA fifth class consists of two grooved sandstone pebbles that pendent archaeological confirmation has been forthcoming from the locations of the gorgets in burials from the Sanders are naturally irregular. Length ranges from 7.9 to 3.8 cm. In addition, there are three incompletely drilled and shallowly site (Krieger 1946:117) and the Belcher mound (Webb grooved pieces of phosphate and cannel coal known from the 1959:107). Craig mound (2 specimens) and the village (1 specimen). Provenience: Stone pendants are widely distributed over the Type 1 Gorget (Figs. 2-133a-f, 2-134g) Spiro site, being known from the Craig, Ward Mounds 1 and 2, and the village. Most come from disturbed portions of the The common shell gorget is circular in form, engraved on the Craig mound but two are found with burials. One class 1 pen- interior surface and cut through, or fenestrated, around the dant (phosphate nodule) is present in a Spiro IA gravelot engraved design. Some of the wall sections of the conchs or (BI67) and the other is a tusk-shaped pendant from a Spiro III whelks used were very large, to judge from the gorget curvaperiod gravelot (B51). The phosphate nodule pendants of both tures (Phillips and Brown 1975a). Gorget type 1 has been illusclasses 1 and 2 are probably contemporary with the beads of trated repeatedly. The most complete listing can be found in the the same material found in the Spiro I and II periods. A class 3 compendium by Phillips and Brown (1975a, 1975b, 1975c, pendant is present in a gravelot of the Spiro 111111 period 1979, 1980, 1983). All examples of this type were found fragmented in the WPA excavations. Because of their physical deli(PbBl). cacy only a few have been restored. Since these gorgets had to be restored to make them preShell Gorgets sentable, restorations sometimes went beyond the bounds justiShell gorgets are defined as a class of pendant produced from fied by the pieces available. Extrapolative engraving tended to the walls of marine univalves (whelks or conchs). A wide range be creative. The worst cases are three gorgets with nonrepetitive of formal diversity is included in this class of suspended figural representations illustrated as rubbings from the original marine shell artifact. Form, not function, defines this class fragments by Phillips and Brown (1979: PIs. 130, 137). Highly since only the common circular forms are demonstrably known misleading reconstructions produced by the WPA lab have to have been worn at the throat, which is the location that has been illustrated many times, including Duffield (1964: PI. V, 5,

594

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

12; VI, 5) and Fundaburk and Foreman (1957: PI. 23, upper left and right). Two others are more securely reconstructed-compare the restorations illustrated in Duffield (1964: PI. XXV, 6; XXX, 3) and Fundaburk and Foreman (1957: PI. 23, lower left and center left) with the rubbings in Phillips and Brown (1980: PIs. 276, 277). The type 1 gorget form embraces several identifiable styles. Phillips and Brown (1975, 1979, 1980, 1983) identify most as probably belonging to one of the three phases of the Craig school. Three were assigned to the St. Mary's Chunkey Player group (Fig. 2-133d) although they were placed in the Craig A section of the Spiro engraved shell monograph (Phillips and Brown 1979: PI. 149A, B, C). Three others can be assigned to the "Mound C Etowah" or Hightower style (Muller 1989: Fig. 6; Phillips and Brown 1975: 185). A large fragmentary piece (Fig. 2133a) features the seated birdman theme (Kneberg 1959:4; Phillips and Brown 1983: PI. A-lb). It measures 9.7 em in diameter. Two others are of the kneeling birdman (Phillips and Brown 1979: PI. 151D; 1980: PI. 275A). Both themes have been recovered from Wilbanks phase graves at Etowah Mound C. Three gorgets of the "sunburst" design are tentatively placed in the Craig school. The largest which measures 9.7 cm in diameter resembles the "Moundville Circle" (Fig. 2-133b; Phillips and Brown 1983: PI. B-lOc). Others are 6.4 cm in diameter (Hamilton 1952: PI. 88-b) and 5.5 cm in diameter (Fig. 2134g). Fragments of the same type exist (Fig. 2-150c'; Duffield 1964: PI. XXXVI, 1; Phillips and Brown 1979: PI. 1521). Other minority styles probably exist, principally the stylistically simple gorgets with small perforations (Burnett 1945: PI. LXIV) that measure 5.4-5.7 cm in diameter. Provenience: Present mainly in the gravelots of Spiro IVB collected by the relic miners and excavated by the WPA crews. A crescent-shaped piece present in a Spiro II period gravelot (BI0) may represent an earlier provenience. This fragment has a curved, smooth outer edge and an irregularly broken inside edge that probably represents the rim of a gorget of this type. Extant length is 12.0 cm, maximum width is 2.5 cm. Finds from the Great Mortuary consist of examples from A26, B44, B47, B62, BI08, B155, B156, and B163. The following is a list of gorget fragments from the WPA collections belonging to type 1: A26-23; B44-2, 20, 21, 27; B47-11, 15, 16 (probably), 17; B62-2, 5,57,86,96,101,187,/4,/34; BI08-4, 9, 34,75,76, 77a, 77b, 78, 79,80,110,81,82,85,86,87,89,91,94, 97,98, 106,99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 105, 107, 108, 109, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 124, 126, 127, 135; BI55-11; BI56-7, 10; BI63-16, 17; Dl; D2; D14; D82-1; D192; D282-1, 4; D2826; D285-5; D283-83; D302-1a, b, c, f, g, k. Type 2 Gorget (Fig. 2-135c) This type is a solid (unfenestrated) circular gorget engraved on the inner shell face. There is at least one gorget of this type from the controlled excavations. Two rim fragments (B62-112a,

b) bear a band of warrior faces connected by knotted raccoons. The warrior faces are oriented on the same axis and not radial to the center. The edge is scalloped in apparent simulation of a string of shell beads (Phillips and Brown 1979: PI. 145). Other examples are from the commercial diggings. A man in motion is costumed in ceremonial dress (Burnett 1945: PI. LX). Others are illustrated by Hamilton (1952: PI. 88c, 102b) and Duffield (1964: PI. XXIV, 2 and XIX, 2). One of this type allegedly from Spiro is probably the McAdams gorget of southern Illinois, first identified in 1893 (Duffield 1964: PI. VI, 2; Phillips and Brown 1975a:174). This specimen is catalogued in the University of Arkansas Museum as coming from the King collection without provenience (Margaret Hoffman, pers. comm.). Comments: The unfenestrated gorget has appeared elsewhere. Other well-known examples bearing warriors are the Moundville gorget (Moore 1907:397, 398), the Castalian Springs gorget (Myers 1917: PI. 6), and the Eddyville gorget (MacCurdy 1913: Fig. 71). Provenience: Present in a single gravelot of the Spiro IYB period (B62). Type 3 Gorgets (Figs. 2-134a-c, e, j) There is a diverse class of gorgets in which the outline of the shell plaque is shaped to conform with the engraved design on the shell interior. There are six clearly dermed forms among the various pieces that are known from the Craig mound. Perforations of limited size are part of the overall design of some gorgets. Serpentine: An S-shaped plaque describes a serpent's body (B62-94, 81, 76 and minor fragments with no record). There are two good examples of this form (phillips and Brown 1979: PI. 145A, B). Both are assigned to the Craig A style. The largest extant piece that is of a serpent's tail is 17.3 cm long and 11.3 em wide (Figs. 2-150r, t, a', b ' ). Keyhole: An inverted teardrop shape is created with the wrapping of a "sun circle" central motif by a patterned border (Fig. 2-134j). The sole example of this type is 16.35 em long and occupies nearly one-half of a shell wall. The inner face is copper stained. It has been illustrated in Brown and Hamilton (1965: PI. 4) (HMFA). This particular design is a form of the "bellows-shaped apron," in which a border panel surrounds a circular disc instead of a rectangular motif (Phillips and Brown 1975: 147). This gorget belongs in the Craig C style group (phillips and Brown 1983: PI. 338A). The motif is frequently expressed on Moundville copper pendants (Moore 1905: Figs. 32,41; Fundaburk and Foreman 1957: PI. 110, bottom). Square cross: The overlapping arms of four poles form the outline of this form (Fig. 2-134a). The criblike design contains a concentric circle device in the center instead of the cruciform devices present on the Tennessee shell gorgets of the Bennett type (Kneberg 1959:4-5; Muller 1989; Phillips and Brown

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown

595

1975: Fig. 237). The width of the Spiro gorget is 9.5 cm. This example of the exotic Bennett style is placed in Tennessee among the earliest engraved gorget form on account of an association with Hiwassee Island Red-on-Buff (Kneberg 1959:5; Moore 1915:347). Pair of hands: A gorget composed of a pair of hands (palms up) is pendant from a hand of brickwork that probably represents shell bead wrist bands (Fig. 2-134c). This piece is placed in Craig C (Phillips and Brown 1983: PI. 338B). The height is 8.6 em (Hamilton 1952: PI. 82d, 91c). Falcon: The falconid outline is employed in this gorget form in a manner reminiscent of the falcon or hawk plates in copper (Fig. 2-134h). The falcon is displayed ventrally with wings presumably folded back in the manner depicted in the Wulfmg plates and similar copper plates from Spiro. The extant height of the illustrated piece is 6.7 em (Hamilton 1952: PI. 102a). A second example is illustrated in Phillips and Brown (1979: PI. 152E, F). Both are assigned to the Craig A style. Woodpecker: One irregularly outlined gorget has bird heads sticking partially out from the circular frame of shell (014; Fig. 2-134b; Duffield 1964: PI. XXIV, 6, 7). The central swirl motif is fenestrated. This piece is unclassified by Phillips and Brown (1983: PI. Ala). It is similar to the Cox Island shell gorgets in theme (Muller 1989: Fig. 13). Both this and the Cox Island gorgets bear compositional similarity with the Spiro copper plates with woodpeckers from a Spiro III provenience. Length of this gorget is 9.7 cm, width is 9.3 cm. Ovoid: One ovoid section (B47-13) that is perforated at the tip has engraved "notches" running partially around the edge. Estimated length of this broken, otherwise unengraved gorget is 12.0-13.0 cm long and about 7.0 cm wide (Duffield 1964: PI. 13, #5). Provenience: Present in gravelots of the Spiro IVB (B47, B62) period and the relic-miner collections from the Craig mound.

127,0221-1). Comments: Note that the same type appears at the Sanders site (Krieger 1946: PI. 1ge). Provenience: Present in gravelots of the Spiro IVB period (B36, B54, B62, B145), the Craig mound general collection, and from relic miner collections.

Type 4 Gorgets, Annular (Fig. 2-134i)

This unengraved type consists of circular and modified circular forms that are fenestrated and perforated. The basic motif associated with this type is that of a cross within a ring. In one case, the arms of the cross extend slightly beyond the circular border of the gorget (Hamilton 1952: PI. 82-c). Perforations exist along the circular ring in two. Provenience: Three are known from the relic miner collections from the Craig mound (UA, 2).

This unengraved gorget form is a simple ring of shell with two marginal perforations for suspension. There is a single large hole in the center. One nearly complete gorget measures 16-17 cm in outer diameters, with the hole 4.9 cm in diameter (Brown and Hamilton 1965:41). A second (B36-23) measures 13.5 em in outer diameter, 3.9 cm in inner diameter. The perforations are 2.4 cm apart and 5.5 mm in diameter. The edges of this gorget have been modified to give it a "bell" shape. The concave edges have been roughly smoothed. A third example (UA) is 11.0 cm in outer diameter, 3.0 cm in inner diameter. The perforations are 2.8 cm apart and 3 mm in diameter. A mussel shell gorget of this same type (B145-11a, b) has an estimated outer diameter of 4.0 em and an inner diameter of about 1.0 cm. The two marginal perforations are 1.8 cm apart. Numerous fragments can probably be assigned to this style (B36-23, B54-25, B62,/4, BI45-11, UB41, 1549, and unprovenienced fragments

Type 5 Gorgets (Figs. 2-134d, 2-135a, b) This unengraved gorget form bears many decorative perforations on a small shell disc. 1) One example (B33-2) consists of eight small holes placed in a central cluster surrounded by a ring of eight larger holes that are projections of the central cluster (Fig. 2-135b). There are some unpatterned engraved lines near the outer margin. The outer diameter is 7.35 cm. Perforations range in size up to 1.45 em. 2) The perforation arrangement of B54-21 consists of a large central hole 1.2 cm in diameter with six smaller perforations out of an estimated ten in an outer ring (Fig. 2-135a). Estimated outer diameter is 6.0 cm, perforations are 3 mm in diameter. Thickness of gorget is 4 mm. 3) A central perforation surrounded by four remaining perforations is present in this incomplete gorget (BI58-12; Fig. 2134g). Outer diameter is 4.8 cm, central perforation is 6 mm in diameter. 4) A relatively dense concentration of perforations is represented in one gorget (B62-20) with a central cluster of five surrounded by an estimated 18 marginal perforations. Outer diameter is 5.7 to 6.0 cm. Provenience: Present in gravelots of the Spiro IVB period (B33, B54, B62, BI58). Type 6 Gorgets (Figs. 2-134b, b)

Type 7 Gorgets (Fig. 2-135g) This gorget form is engraved on the exterior surface that is carved in relief. Fenestrations are not present. There is one complete example of this type which is unfortunately eroded over much of its surface (B62-1; Fig. 2-135g). The relief is worked out on three planes (phillips and Brown 1983: B-lOa). The center (highest) is occupied by a warrior face engraved in relief. Surrounding the central head is a seven-pointed star-

596

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

d

a

Figure 2-130. Shell pendants and gorgets. a) Wall section shell gorget (type 9) (B 155 = Lf40/15); b) shell core pendant (Pleuroploca g~gantea) (UAM 37-1-67); c) shell core pendant, large (Busycon sinistrum) (GI 9025.684); d) shell core pendant, small (Busycon sinistrum) (GI 9025.540A).

shaped device that pointed with abbreviated arrow form cusps at the tips. Surrounding this plane is the lowest level with engraved hands (palms up) running counterclockwise (Duffield 1964: Pl. XXX, 1). The estimated diameter is 10.0 cm. A third example consists of a complete gorget bearing five engraved faces (or face masks) in relief within an engraved cross (Burnett 1945: PI. LIX). The diameter is 12.0 cm. Burnett (1945:35, PI. XVI) illustrates an incomplete example of this type. Comments: There exists strong formal resemblance between the type 7 gorget face representations and the small shell maskettes (q.u.), one of which is antlered (BI54-5b-e). Other examples of small face masks are known (Hamilton 1952: PI. 97b). Provenience: Present in gravelots of the Spiro IYB period (B62) and in collections of the relic miners.

Type 8 Gorgets (Fig. 2-135d)

These are gorgets that are carved in relief on the exterior only and are not supplemented by engraving (Hamilton 1952: PI. 84a, b). A portion of the spire is included with a section of the whelk wall. The suspension perforation is near the apex of the shell. Provenience: From the commercial collections of the Craig mound. Type 9 Gorgets, Wall Section (Figs. 2-130a, 2-135a)

The undecorated sections of the outer wall of the whelk constitute this gorget type. In one large trianguloid example (B826) the anterior end as well as part of the edge of the apical end

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown

a

597

c

b

e

f o

3

4

9

Scale in em.

J Figure 2-131. Pendants and figurines. a, b) Human effigy pendant of marine shell (B36-3); c) bird head pendant of marine shell (B36-2); d) engraved shell figurine pendant (Craig mound); e) falcon head cut-out ornament in copper (Craig mound); f) bird figurine for staff in bone (Lf401740 =BI63); g) bird figurine on staff in wood (BrB6-9); h) hand from seated human effigy in wood (Craig mound); i) human effigy head (BI08-133a);j) human effigy head (BI08-133a); k, I) shell figurine pendant, Craig B style (front and rear) (BI08-52).

598

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

Perforated: (fenestrated)

TYPE I

Unperforated: .(solid)

TYPE 2

Ci rcular shape [

Engraved

Other shapes -

Unperforated and Limi ted Per fora t ions:

TYPE 3

Central Hole Perforations:

TYPE 4

Multiple Hole Perforations:

TYPE 5

Perforo ted a Fenestrated:

TYPE 6

Interior worked

Unengraved circular shape Sur face Modified

Exterior worked -

Engraved

TYPE 7

Unengraved

TYPE 8

Modeled (sur face relief)

Wall

Section:

TYPE 9

Apical

Sect ion:

TY PE 10

Surface { Unmodified

Figure 2-132. Shell gorget key.

is included. The edges are ground smooth. There are three perforations present near the apical edge and there may have existed a fourth which has been broken away. Length is 20.6 cm, width is 15.8 cm. There are other smaller examples. One (Lf401755) consists of a fragment of the side and part of the top that has two perforations on the side. The side measures 15.5 cm long. A third (Burnett 1945: PI. LXVI, middle) has an approximate length of 16.0 cm. In this example the perforation is at the comers of the shell wall and in the anterior end. A fourth is trapezoidal (Fig. 2-130a) and has three uncentered perforations along the top edge. Dimensions are 10.0 cm vertically, 6.2 cm broad at the top, and 8.5 cm at the base (BI55).

Provenience: Present in gravelots of the Spiro IIIIIV (B8) and Spiro IVB (B155) periods. Also present in the debris from the floor of a commercial tunnel, and the commercial collections from Craig mound.

Type 10 Gorgets, Apical End

Apical ends of whelks (Busycon) have been completely cut away from the body of the shell and the edges are ground smooth. At least one perforation is present at the apical edge. Other perforations are present in the columella wall near the center of the pendant. In the case of the pieces from B62, there

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown

599

OJ '"

b

c I

2 Scale

3 fl

4

5

em

f Figure 2-133. Shell gorgets (type 1). a) B108-80 and D282-2; b) UAM 37-1-142; e) Dl; d) D302-1a, -Ib, -Ie; e) BI55-11; f) D2.

600

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

c

a

f

2

3

Scole In em

----

4

5

Figure 2-134. Shell gorgets. Type 1: g) UAM 37-1-26. Type 3: a) GI 9025.20; b) D14; c) GI 9025.451; e) GI 1096; j) HMFA 63-213. Type 4: i) B36-23. Type 5: d) B158-12. Type 6: t) UAM 37-1-25; h) UAM 37-1-27.

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown

601

--a

c \ \

\

\ ~

1

\

b

~

d e

o

4 Scale in em .

9 Figure 2-135. Shell gorgets and bowl. Type 2: c) UAM 47-6-979 "McAdams gorget" (Phillips and Brown 1975a: 174-75). Type 5: a) B54-21; b) B33-2. Type 7: g) B62-1. Type 8: d) GI 9025.19. Wall section gorget: e) B8-26. Interior bowl scratches: f) Lf40/17.

602

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

w

v

u

~, ;,.'

e'

'--___ d'

...

o

!

r!

1d

em.

b'

z

e'

Figure 2-136. Engraved shell cup designs. a) Lf 40/692; b) B62-85; c) B47-1; d) Lf 40/692; e) B23-54; f) B49-15; g) BI08-83; h) D303-2f; i) B62114;j) B62-305; k) B62-74; I) BI08-20; m) B62-75; n) D87-6; 0) B36-1; p) B36-9; q) B62-4; r) B150-3; s) B162-3; t) B62-155; u) B62-14; v) B628; w) BI08-20; x) B23-37; y) B62-106; z) B62-99; a') BI08-34; b') B44-29; c') D83-5; d') DI88; e') B49-12; f) D283-50; g') A26-21; h') B62-271, D303-lj.

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown

(t-"

603

~----...'

,

,

.'

.

.: --.I

a

l~·····-~\\ ..,..:/~~r

;~--'

.•..." . ;,:\

...

~

L\

/

\....

.

I

'.

__;'

• " . ..--

_--.. '~-.- .....

I

t

~Er$tf/

~

: k -'- ,

)/··/~:7--r·.

"7

I':

.,.." ~/

,£}

P

. _I

" .. :., .'

q

f

r.·. .;;_ . \ ~.~_

....\

\\

:'

\~\d':' .... '.!.~ ;'

c..O....::1~

--

,

"

\

...J

'- '.

.

'J/

' /

_"', .......

~"') \:')}1

c_,'''-

r . . ,.'

. . . . ~.'.~.,·;;:~r\ . . - . ,~

{·!w1\······· ........

t .

.

"A':

r-

=-.,

o

" , -'... I

J

f~) m

:'

' .• _.. p,

h"'-.. . . .y,k.,f'

~/.~.

.,

,", \ "

(ly ~./'.)

./'\Jt I\ (\) .. ,/

c.~

~, .'

.\

\}'\

,

I I

,

•

I

I

h'

I

,I

I

(~---.--n~ ...--...... /_......

\\. ~ \

f··r

J

(

\.

~ I'l. /_...................•_'" ~I . ..._.....

Figure 2-137. Engraved shell cup designs, a) B62-153; b) B44-15; c) B62-7; d) A26-19; e) B62-22\4; f) D303-1b; g) A26-16; h) BI55-35; i) B36-15c, BI55-77;j) B62-13; k) B62-136; 1) B62-325; m) D191; n) Lf 40/692 NP; 0) B4S-26; p) DlSO; r) B36-15a; s) B44-13; t) B23-43; u) B62-231; v) DS92; w) B62-150; x) B62-331; y) B62-195; z) B4S-2S; a') B62-116; b') B62-406; c') B62-100; d') B62-337; e') B62-270; f) B62-303; g') D303-10; h') B44-26; i') D303-1w;j') B54-9d; k') Lf 40/692 NP; 1') B62-73; m') B62-206,

604

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

f!.~ a

\\

~ ------... 1~ ... ~!m.-.

\~ '. -',

,~, -.. 21 --..........

i~..-7!--' '''';''-'' t, cJ \

(l ", -'. 'i>......-........ ~ IJ ~ ........" ... _--- ....-: _...

•

f

1/

9

."

.\

~ j i ,. .\

~.

i

t / (~, s

~l

..

\ -.'

h

.J. . . ,. /. . ;

\~

/' '-...../\

..

!

( '..

u

'\

I

\

I ...... _.-1 ..

V

Figure 2-138. Engraved shell cup designs. a) B62-103; b) B62-5; c) B62-154; d) D92-4; e) B62-135; f) D92-8; g) B62-220; h) B62-129; i) B62-413; j) B62-344; k) D92-1; I) B47-1O, D303-lq; m) Phillips Coil.; n) B62-145; 0) B62-249; p) D82-2; q) B23-36; r) B62-53; s) B62-326; t) DI90; u) B62376, -418; v) B62-258; w) D86-2; x) B80-5a; y) B62-148; z) DI85; a') BI08-53; b') B23-94; c') B62-208; d') B62-411; e') B44-17; P) B62-123; g') DI86; h') B155-39; i') B62-122c;j') B23-48; k') B35-15a; I') B62-227; m') D90-1; n') B62-226; 0') B108-47; p') D83-1; q') B62-349.

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown

605

b

h

,..... -..

~

.--.---..-.-.... -~ ..;:;:::c;t'P.,

:"-'

.=:a,

\\~\ ~?

"~"\ ..~ """ i·······..... ··· ...;

'e1---------. : 0 '" .: 'I. ;

l ... '.. j o

If'

4

5

e ....

r" o

. ..,, .i~\. o ,,

\~; \ :' ~

.

l

:

............. - ...

q

y

Figure 2-139. Engraved shell cup designs. a) B54-9h; b) B36-14a; c) B62-63; d) B36-14d; e) BI08-56; f) D283-26; g) B36-14b; h) B62-119; i) A2617; j) A26-44; k) B62-72; I) D86-3; m) A26-13; n) BIII-16; 0) B62-389; p) B36-14c; q) B69-3; r) B62-230; s) B62-228; t) B23-70; u) B62-50; v) AII-7; w) B44-5; x) B54-9g; y) BI55-38, -94; z) B62-207.

606

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

h

9

c

o

!

i

;,

1

5

em.

Figure 2-140. Engraved shell cup designs. a) A26-24; b) 848-18; c) D283-64;d) A26-18, 862-60, 8155-37, D303-2m; e) 849-1; f) 862-312; g) 8697; h) D283-13; i) 862-61;j) 862-295; k) 8145-8; 1) 8155-36; m) A26-60; n) 862-415; 0) 849-17; p) D283-63; q) 862-95; r) 862-221; s) 8155-2; t) D283-23; u) D283-24; v) D175; w) 823-87; x) D283-15; y) 862-57; z) 862-156; a') 8108-87; h') D283-57; c') 862-97; d') 862-11; e') 862-12; f) B23-42.

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown

607

(:];~\ ~(W//)~~; a.

f

5..\

~

~. •...•......•.. ~ "

b

................. _.._.-.....

9

~

em.

n'

j'

1·'·· ·

~ i~

&'

,

8/

.

..

.

9.:'

r ~ ...-

s·

Figure 2-141. Engraved shell cup designs. a) B23-49; b) B62-64; c) B23-39, -47; d) BIII-7; e) D283-28; 1) B108-120; g) B62-89; h) B62-420; i) B62-84;j) D303-ld; k) B62-103; I) B44-11; m) B62-120; n) B62-316; 0) B62-338; p) B47-8; q) B62-345; r) B62-133; s) BI45-26; t) B49-16; u) B62140; v) D283-36; w) A26-36; x) B62-83; y) B62-211; z) B23-44; a') D283-54; b') D283-8; e') B62-311; d') Dl82; e') B23-38; r) B23-57, B44-12, B62-423; g') BI08-48; h') B23-41, 77, -93; i') D86-5;j') B62-69; k') B54-9a; I') B23-45, B62-147; m') BI45-7; n') B62-253; 0') B23-50; p') D86-1; q') D87-3; r') B54-9i; s') D303-1f.

608

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

c

...........-.......

~ ~\:

-.~,

{ ..,

t,~! f

e

~~"'"' -

\~ .:?j

............

()

'

\ . . ,'

.. -.---'

tu le··.··

..

i

.'-.

P!JJfij-------(] .~-- ---,,:,> k

".-

n

, . ~ ~ , ~

~'."'." ..'-\, , ~

.

z

.....:........__ .............._.. ...... __...1

:~-----------

:\~

(~.i

.....................

C(.~ . ;:_~ ,/

a'

b'

~_.

___

p"

~J~ . •••••.• i

'F' c, .._------·---..

e'

Figure 2-142. Engraved shell cup designs. a) A26-55, B155-4l, -44, B163-l5; b) B62-66; c) D87-4, -5; d) D283-37; e) B54-6e; f) B62-82; g) B62223; h) B62-293; i) B44-24, interior gorget surface to right;j) B62-433; k) D83-6; 1) B62-65; m) A26-40; n) B62-35l; 0) B62-273; p) B62-l3l; q) B62-97; r) D303-li; s) Blll-l2; t) B62-l22; u) B62-l22; v) B62-365; w) B62-117; x) B155-29; y) B62-26; z) B62-l25, -408; a') B23-58; b') B10849; c') B1 08-54; d') B62-93; e') B62-9a; f) A26-20, interior gorget surface below.

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown

609

~~1

\~ ....... ./;::[._......) ... k ....-.... -

o

!

r

i '

i!

em.

n'

,.-.....-.

h'

(ii{

\', 0'

s'

t'

Figure 2-143. Engraved shell cup designs. a) B62-429; b) B62-295; c) D283-32; d) D283-51; e) B23-60, B62-198; t) B62-291; g) B62-318; h) D28395; i) B49-18;j) B44-IO; k) B44-9; 1) BI55-59; m) B62-229; n) B62-16O; 0) B54-6i; p) D283-52, -76; q) BI55-88; r) D283-49; s) B62-215; t) B1111; u) B62-315; v) A26-46; w) D283-82; x) D83-13; y) B62-114; z) D87-1; a') 0283-53; b') B48-23, BI08-55; c') B62-431; d') B62-281; e') BI55-31; f) B62-369; g') B62-152; h') Lf 40/692; i') B44-6;j') B62-1O; k') 0303-1e; 1') B23-59; m') B49-13; n') B62-181; 0') 0283-55; p') 081-5; q') DI84; r') 090-9; s') B62-67; t') DI81.

610

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

Ii!~::' ~ b

a

d

g"

""""'l"" .'''-, '\,1 1...... '\, \ J)

~

./

m .....

~~...

,-,'

:

I~~.

__

..

n

:-..;~'::': ..--\

i "··

,

".... : .'~~; .:. .:::~i -,. ~

w

~

. .. . :-.. ~

.~

._-/

~ - ..J

a'

Figure 2-144. Engraved shell cup designs. a) B62-222; b) D92-3; c) D92-6; d) B62-52; e) B62-287; f) B62-268; g) B62-323; h) D303-1h; i) B10850;j) B36-15d, B62-70; k) BI55-1; I) BI55-30; m) BI08-22; n) BI55-26; 0) B23-53; p) B108-121; q) B23-79; r) B62-87; s) B48-21; t) B62-68; u) A26-14; v) B49-14; w) B62-6; x) B62-90; y) B23-75; z) D84-4; a') D303-2e; b') BI58-14; e') B62-62; d') D81-3, -14; e') B23-95; f) D83-8; g') Lf40/692; h') D283-34; i') B54-9b;j') B62-58; k') B62-115; I') BI45-25; m') B54-6c.

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown

611 /'

•

( 1j~

.

.

, .. ~ \ I',

~

\

.~)

~

a "''''''':'\ -

d

c \ ...

~

~........j

....

...j

~ I

\

9

/

.

··~i \L./

p j

o

!

f

t

1

,

eM• .

x

y

Figure 2-145. Engraved shell cup designs. a) Lf40/692; b) Lf40/692; c) BI08-51; d) BI08-51; e) B62-412; t) B69-8; g) B62-259; h) B62-299; i) BI55-52;j) B23-40j; k) B62-182; I) A26-43; m) B62-146; n) B47-12; 0) B62-267; p) D83-7; r) B23-46; s) B23-78; t) B62-151; u) B62-143, -201, -272, -404; v) B62-250; w) D87-IO; x) D92-2; y) B62-356; z) D283-9; a') B62-308; b') B23-81; c') B33-17; d') B62-373; e') D303-lt; f) B62-324; g') B62-289; h') A26-33; i') B23-22; j') D86-4; k') B62-213; I') B62-335; m') B62-400; n') B62-346; 0') B62-134; p') B62-126; r') B23-55, B 156-9; s') BI55-28, -54, BI56-9; t') D179; u') B36-14e; v') BI55-27.

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

612

a

9

:~.-\~~.~ '~glb"'"

~

m

'I..""

k i n

h

y\~k

~, CA.. ...•.

o

,~ fIB" t~ ~.~ ~:

~. :-=:r-::••:t'-

p

5

u

w

v

x

y

n' ~,-r'"

(;~ ~e JR. ~ ~

U~·'

c-U'"

/~. ,.~

(;~~:, .. "(,,

I"

Figure 2-146. Engraved shell cup designs. a) B33-22; b) A26-22; e) B62-78; d) B44-8; e) Lf40/692; f) B33-20; g) D303-2g; h) B62-14I; i) B33-2I, -24;j) B33-18; k) B62-169; 1) B62-169; m) B23-72; n) B62-246; 0) B62-24I; p) B62-199; q) B62-208; r) D302-Ij (reverse of gorget Figure 108h'); s) B48-27; t) B62-272; u) A26-52; v) D303-Ix; w) B62-30I; x) BI45-24; y) A26-58; z) D87-2; a') BI55-6I; b') B62-80; e') BI58-6; d') BI55-53; e') A26-45; P) D283-17; g') B62-322; h') B23-61, B54-6h; i') B54-9f;j') B54-ge; k') B62-118, BIII-8; 1') BI63-II; m') B62-262; n') B36-15e; 0') B54ge; p') A26-2, -14; q') D283-II; r') B54-6a, -69; s') A28-4b; t') BIII-I5; u') B54-9k; v') B44-14; w') D87-7; x') B62-284; y') BI55-33; z') B36-44; a") B53-II; b") D283-93; e") D303-2q; d") BI08-93; elf) D283-37; P') A26-53; g") A26-32; h") B54-9j; iff) B48-20; kIf) B62-175; 1") B23-96; m") A26-29.

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part II-Brown

613

l"Op--.?!"1 .. ~1....\J}J

SY

b"

a"

1/"

:,pl\)\.,

\",,""""

. .~...-...... a""

z'" "~"

h

b''''

c''',

\

"")

Figure 2-148. Engraved shell cup designs. a) D283-94; b) B62-380; c) B62-428; d) D283-6; e) B62-191; f) D303-1n; g) B33-23; h) BI08-103; i) D283-68;j) D87-8; k) BI08-90; I) B62-264; m) B62-358; n) BI08-84b; 0) duplicate; p) D283-92; q) B62-276; r) A26-60; s) D87-9; t) D283-68; u) D283-73; v) B62-390; w) ?; x) B62-179; y) B62-236; z) D84-8; a') D283-21; b') B62-124; e') B62-422; d') B62-263; e') B23-84; f) B62-426; g') BI62-5; h') B62-166; i') D87-1O; j/) B54-12; k') B62-306; I') B62-182; m') B62-386; n') B62-188; 0') B23-80; p') D90-8; q/) BI55-47; r') B62-329; s') A26-31; t') B23-86; u') A26-61; v') D283-25; w') B62-378; x') B49-21; y') A26-17; z') 862-190; a") 883-10; b") A26-49; e") 848-19; d") 862240; e") D283-1O; f') 823-90; gil) A26-56; h") 862-382; i") 862-407;j") Bl08-113; kIf) D81-7; I") D84-7; mil) B62-393; nil) D303-1m; Oil) 862164; p") B36-45; q") D283-86; r") B62-375; s") D303-2a; t") B62-377; u") D303-1z; v") 862-254; w") B62-309; x") B62-383; y") D283-62; z")?; alii) D283-17; bill) B62-387; e"') 862-280; dIll) B62-177; e"') B62-385; f") D303-21; gIll) B62-388; hIlI) 862-304; i"') D303-2d; jIll) D283-27; kIll) A26-27; I"') D81-2; mIll) B62-247; n"') D177; 0"') D92-5; p",) D84-6; q"') D81-6; rIll) B62-238; SIll) D84-4; tIll) 880-5b; u"') B62-381; v"') 862346; Will) B62-232; XIII) BI08-96; y"') B62-217; 'E") 8108-58; a"") B62-393; b"") B62-391; e"") B62-403.

The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Part /I-Brown

1~~

,~ U, ,~-

~l

\~! 'b..... l

a

/

b

."".' ;..R". . II ;' ' ""ff'

(,""::1 ) "--'j',J/

615

Q]

')

t ..___ . '/

9

"

h

~~

:~(':..

'.

\ ...,

>

fj

v

C'

/·. ·'1

n

I

....

,

,

t 1

,

"\

~: /".

......... j

v'

~ \.-'. , ...... :t)

ifI

(rr'~\

Il'~ .. :

\ ................/ k"

\J~ ,_ w

q"

iE" ....' \/} l . . .~..

:'E\"

~J\ f"·

e'"

Figure 2-149. Engraved shell cup designs. a) B62-266; b) B62-392; c) B62-279; d) B49-23; e) B62-420; f) B62-363; g) D303-lv; h) B62-282; i) BI08-95;j) B62-59 (verso of t); k) D88-4; I) D90-3; m) B62-328; n} D84-9; o} B62-185; p} B62-430; q} B62-170; r} B62-341; s) B62-247; t) B6259 (verso of j); u) B62-132; v} D90-6; w) B62-130; x} B62-127; y} B62-225; z} D83-4; a'} B36-42; b'} D283-33; e') B62-427; d') D87-1 I; e'} B62398; P) B23-65; g'} BIII-14; h'} B48-22; i') B23-63;j'} B49-21; k') B62-253; 1') D303-lg; m') D283-64; n'} B62-274; 0') B62-364; p') B62-275; q') D81-4; r') B62-360; s') B62-437; t'} B62-172; u') B62-419; v') B62-333; w') B62-174; x') B62-351; y') D283-74; z'} D283-67; a"} D283-79; b") D283-42; e") D283-4; d"} B23-68; e") D283-72; P') B62-175; g") B62-157; h") D88-3; i"} B62-340;j") B62-368; k") B62-330; I") B62-243; m") B23-64; n") B23-64; 0") B62-339; p") D302-le (gorget); q") B48-24; r") B62-306; s"} B62-102; t") B62-261; u") A26-35; v") B62-384; w") B15546; x") B163-14; y") A26-47; Z") B62-265; a"') D283-45; b"'} B62-319; e"') B62-397; d"') B62-342; e"') B36-15f; P"} D283-60.

616

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 29

e

--_.,\,rTT--f\

1

1

•

•

l\ hI s---: /) .....,..-----,,-1

1

"\

I

\I

1 I

"

I

1\\

i1

m

1

1 \

k

~ .

\.

«

n

0

\

........

r

~

.......•. ,,'

.

~'~'\ ...1@ " . . .,~ ~

u ".

l\I'. ··~,·.

- -I~~

\

..t::(.'

Y\ •....,>

~~~...

I

Broken

) :;:J 7

Effigy Pipe (-I)

Broken Effigy Pipe (-2)

"--"

I I I

16:8

I

I

I \

I

(A-22 Section)

t