THE PRODUCTION and CONSUMPTION of MISSISSIPPIAN FINEWARE in the AMERICAN BOTTOM Author(S): Gregory D
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE PRODUCTION AND CONSUMPTION OF MISSISSIPPIAN FINEWARE IN THE AMERICAN BOTTOM Author(s): Gregory D. Wilson Reviewed work(s): Source: Southeastern Archaeology, Vol. 18, No. 2 (Winter 1999), pp. 98-109 Published by: Allen Press on behalf of the Southeastern Archaeological Conference Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40713161 . Accessed: 27/02/2013 15:20 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Allen Press and Southeastern Archaeological Conference are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Southeastern Archaeology. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded on Wed, 27 Feb 2013 15:20:19 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE PRODUCTION AND CONSUMPTION OF MISSISSIPPIAN FINEWARE IN THE AMERICAN BOTTOM GregoryD. Wilson politicaleconomic changes in Mississippian chiefdoms. Specifically,I examine Mississippian fineware ceram- ics fromthe American Bottom region of southwestern Illinois(Figure 1). Thispaper focuses on theissues of craft, style, and exchange Forthe purpose of this study the term fineware is re- as theyrelate to political-economicchange in middle-range strictedto a suiteof American Bottom vessels that share societies.Specifically, I offer a functional analysis ofMissis- affinitieswith Caddoan and Coles Creekwares such as sippianfineware from the American Bottom. Archaeological CarterEngraved, French Fork Incised, Crockett Curvi- evidencesuggests that these eating and servingwares were linearIncised, and Holly Fine Engraved(Bareis and usedprimarily within public ceremonies at regionalpolitical centers.In additionto other craft goods, fineware vessels were componentsof a structuredceremonial context in whichideas and relationshipswere negotiated and definedin theMissis- sippianworld. Diachronie changes in theproduction, distri- bution,and use of thesewares correspondwith broader political-economicchanges in theAmerican Bottom. Thestudy of prestige goods has contributedmuch to archaeologicalknowledge about nonstate political dy- namics(Brown et al. 1990;Dye 1995;Frankenstein and Rowlands1978; Steponaitis 1991; Welch 1991). As ref- erentsof status and corporategroup identity, prestige goods and othermaterial symbols provide unique in- sightinto the manner in which labor was appropriated and identitieswere constructed(Brown et al. 1990; Brumfieland Earle 1987; Earle 1990; Hayden 1998; Rees 1997;Sackett 1990). Understanding the politicaland ideologicaldimensions of these elaborately crafted ar- tifactsrequires investigating the contexts of production andthe processes of distribution (Helms 1979; Pauketat and Emerson1991; Steponaitis 1991). Indeed, several scholarsrecently have questioneda prioriassumptions thatall craftitems were prestige goods, the production and distributionof which were directly controlled by a politicalelite (Müller 1997; Saitta 1994). Archaeologists mustdiscern from where or from whom such craft items originated,whose interests they served, and whatkind ofsocioeconomic information they referenced. In thecase of the late prehistoric Southeast, it appears thatsuccess in chieflypolitical arenas was contingent upon theproduction, acquisition, and circulationof politicallycharged objects (Brown et al. 1990;Kelly 1980; Steponaitis1991; Welch 1991). These itemsplayed an importantrole in theexpression of chiefly sanctity and thelegitimation ofsocial inequality (Knight 1997; Welch 1991).The focus here is howchanges in the production, distribution,and use ofprestige goods relate to broader Figure1. The northernAmerican Bottom. 98 This content downloaded on Wed, 27 Feb 2013 15:20:19 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE PRODUCTIONAND CONSUMPTIONOF MISSISSIPPIANFINEWARE Porter1965; Holley 1989; Kelly 1980; O'Brien 1972; Incised,and Yankeetown Incised are excluded from this Pauketat1998)1. These vessels have thin walls and com- finewareclassification. pactpastes tempered with finely crushed grog and /or Based on theirquality of manufacture and elaborate- shell(Holley 1989). Vessel surfaces are slippedor bur- nessof decoration, fineware pots have been interpreted nishedand oftendecorated with curvilinear, incised as prestigegoods, the circulation of which was directly linesseparated by zoned areas of excision(Figures 2, controlledby the Cahokian elite (Kelly 1991a; Pauketat 3). In an additionalproduction step, incised and excised 1994,1998). There has been somedebate regarding the areas sometimesare embellishedwith a red or white local or nonlocalorigin of finewarevessels recovered slip (Holley 1989; Kelly 1991a:80).Other decorated fromthe AmericanBottom (Bareis and Porter1965; waresfound in theAmerican Bottom such as Ramey Emersonand Jackson1984; Kelly 1980, 1991a; Pauketat Incised,Mound Place Incised,Wells Engraved, Kersey 1990).Bareis and Porter's(1965) thinsection analysis y g I 1 Ay h ' ~ o io ' ^ ~y ^^r cm ^^ Figure2. Cahokianfineware vessels with Caddoan-like incised and exciseddesign fields, (a) incisedand excisedbeaker (adapted from Pauketat 1998:Figure 7.29); (b) incisedand excised constrictedbowl (adaptedfrom Holley 1989:Figure 24a). Figure3. Coles Creek-likevessel from the High Prairiesite in theimmediate uplands of the AmericanBottom (adapted from Koldehoff 1982). 99 This content downloaded on Wed, 27 Feb 2013 15:20:19 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions SOUTHEASTERNARCHAEOLOGY 18(2) WINTER1999 of an elaboratelyincised and excisedbeaker from the The Lohmannphase marksthe establishment of the Cahokiasite suggests that some fineware vessels were Cahokiachiefdom as a regionally-consolidatedMissis- acquired fromoutside the AmericanBottom, and sippianpolity (Pauketat 1994, 1997). This periodwas O'Brien(1972) classified examples of Cahokian fineware characterizedby theappearance of a hierarchicallyor- fromthe Powell tractas nonlocaltrade wares. Later ganized politicallandscape centeredon the site of studies,however, have generated evidence for localized Cahokia (Milner1990; Pauketat 1994). Pauketatand productionof finewarein the American Bottom. Lopinot(1997) report well-demarcated patterns of de- Holley's(1989:424) study of fine grog-tempered wares mographicnucleation at theCahokia site during this fromthe InterpretiveCenter Tract II revealed that time.There is also evidenceof increased craft produc- Cahokianfineware vessels have thinnerwalls and ex- tionand theconstruction of monumentalarchitecture hibita greateruse ofslipping than stylistically similar at administrativecenters (Dalan 1997;Pauketat 1997). vesselsfrom the Lower Mississippi Valley and eastern The subsequentStirling phase representsCahokia's Oklahoma.Based on thisevidence, Holley (1989) and peak ofpolitical-economic complexity (Emerson 1991; others(Pauketet 1998) have argued that most fineware Fowler1978; Kelly 1991a; Milner 1986, 1990). This pe- vesselsin theAmerican Bottom were produced locally. riodis characterizedby theestablishment of Cahokia Ongoing neutronactivation analysis of Cahokian as a sacred or divine chiefship(Knight 1997:238; finewarevessels by the author may resolve this issue in Pauketat1992:323). Archaeologists also have recognized thenear future (see Steponaitiset al. 1996). Stirling-phasetrends of decentralization in theAmeri- Archaeologistshave yet to examine systematically the canBottom (Emerson 1991; Knight 1997; Pauketat 1992; roleof Cahokian fineware pots in ceremonial foodways. Pauketatand Lopinot1997). The increasedsacraliza- To understandbetter how Mississippianfineware was tionof the Cahokianelite apparently involved a dis- usedwithin Cahokian society, I offer a functional analy- tancing of the elite from the everyday lives of sis ofvessel shapes and sizes and examinediachronic commoners(Knight 1997:238; Pauketat 1992:40). Activi- changesin the productionand distributionof these tiessuch as elaboratemortuary ritual and sweatlodge waresfor three periods of political-economic develop- ceremonialism,previously restricted toLohmann-phase mentin theAmerican Bottom - the Lohmannphase politicalcenters, began taking place in therural coun- (A.D. 1050-1100),the Stirling phase (A.D. 1100-1200), trysideof the Stirling-phase American Bottom (Emerson and theMoorehead phase (A.D. 1200-1275)(Figure 4)2. 1997a,1997b, 1997c; Emerson and Jackson1984; Kelly 1990; Pauketat 1994). The Stirlingphase also was Archaeological Developmental markedby an outmigrationof inhabitantsfrom the Phase Characteristics Cahokiasite into the rural countryside and perhaps also AD 1275 1 out of theAmerican Bottom region entirely (Emerson | 1 1991;Milner 1986; Pauketat and Lopinot1997). the late to Moorehead IntensifiedRegional Fact- During Stirlingphase early . , , ionalism.Fortification of phase,these decentralizing trends began to be played MOOrehead MoundCenters. De- outon a muchbroader scale. Fortifications were erected crease inLong-Distance aroundthe perimeters of regional political centers, and Exchange. therewas a decreasein long-distance exchange (Ander- son and Milner AD 1200 1997;Iseminger Kelly1995; Knight 1997; 1990; Pauketat 1992, 1994). In political terms,the Mooreheadphase is thoughtto representa periodof