Portland State University PDXScholar Anthropology Faculty Publications and Presentations Anthropology 2009 Finding and Dating Cathlapotle Kenneth M. Ames Portland State University, [email protected] Elizabeth A. Sobel Missouri State University Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/anth_fac Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Citation Details 2009 Kenneth Ames with Elizabeth Sobel, Finding and Dating Cathlapotle. Archaeology in Washington 15: 9 - 32. This Article is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Anthropology Faculty Publications and Presentations by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. Archaeology in Washington, Vol. 15, 2009. FINDING AND DATING CATHLAPOTLE Kenneth M. Ames1 and Elizabeth A. Sobel2 ABSTRACT Sobel 2004, Ames et al. 1999, Ames et al. 2008 ) but we have not to date published a The people of the Cathlapotle town played a summary of those reasons. One purpose of significant role in the fur trade era history of this paper is to do so. The relevant lines of the Lower Columbia River, including Lewis evidence include ethnohistoric sources, site and Clark’s visit on March 29th, 1806. chronology, topography and site contents. Archaeologists and others have sought the town’s location for years. Long-term research A second purpose of the paper is to present a has established that archaeological site summary of the extensive chronological 45CL1 on the US Fish and Wildlife Refuge evidence developed for 45CL1 since the near Ridgefield, Washington is Cathlapotle. project there began in 1991. Several issues This determination is based on the close drive the radiocarbon dating program at match between site details with various 45CL1. Among them are these: ethnohistoric accounts of Cathlapotle. The site was occupied by ca. AD 1450 and probably 1) Did the site have a long occupation span? moved there from another nearby location. It Early assessment suggested the site was deep, was abandoned sometime in the 1830s or raising the possibility of a long occupation 1840s. This chronology is based on 54 span ending in the fur-trade era. Very few radiocarbon dates, historic trade goods such sites have been professionally tested or including glass beads and ceramics, and excavated in the Wapato Valley (aka Portland documentary accounts. Basin). To assess this, there was a focus in collecting datable samples from the site’s INTRODUCTION deepest deposits. Scholars have sought to locate and identify the 2) Had the settlement expanded through time? physical remains of Cathlapotle, a major fur- The size of the site (see below) and trade era Middle Chinookan town, for some ethnohistoric documentation (see below) time (e.g., Hudziak and Smith 1948; Minor indicated that Cathlapotle was among the and Toepel 1984, 1993; Starkey et al.1974; largest communities along the Lower Strong 1959). Portland State University has Columbia River during the fur-trade era. We conducted archaeological and ethnohistorical wished to establish the time depth of its size. research at 45CL1 (Figure 1) since 1991. That There seemed to be three possible alternatives: research identified 45CL1 as Cathlapotle early • The settlement has always been large; in the course of the project and the project has • The settlement started small but grew published on the site using the name to its documented size prior to the fur- “Cathlapotle.” Our reasons for doing so are trade; scattered across a number of documents (e.g., 1 Department of Anthropology, Portland State University, Portland, OR; [email protected] 2 Department of Anthropology, Missouri State University, Springfield, MO; [email protected] 5 Archaeology in Washington, Vol. 15, 2009. Figure 1. Map showing the location of 45CL1. • The settlement started small but 3) Were all house compartments expanded to its documented size contemporary? A number of 45CL1’s houses during the fur-trade. This latter pattern were divided into compartments. The issue might suggest the site’s recorded size was whether these compartments were built at was a product of regional population the same time or whether they had been added redistribution and aggregation caused to expand an original structure. This is issue by epidemics, the fur trade, or other #2 at the household level: if there was contact era dynamics. evidence for settlement expansion, was there also evidence for household expansion? To assess this, samples for dating were collected from widely dispersed basal deposits FINDING CATHLAPOTLE to determine whether deposition in all sampled portions of the site began at the same Minor and Toepel (1993) review the time. Samples were also collected to provide alternative locations for Cathlapotle proposed initial construction dates for houses in the by different archaeologists and others. These site’s two house rows, to determine whether alternatives focused on two sites located on both rows were always present. what is now the Carty Unit of the Ridgefield 6 Archaeology in Washington, Vol. 15, 2009. Wildlife Refuge, 45CL1, and 45CL4. 45CL1 in two small boats up the Columbia River was originally placed in a meadow on what from its mouth – the first known Europeans on was then private land near the confluences of the river. During this venture, Broughton and Gee Creek, Lake River, the Lewis River, and his men arguably met Cathlapotle residents. the Columbia River (Hudziak and Smith As told to him by Broughton, Vancouver 1948). A second survey of the area concluded relates the following: that this location was not an archaeological site and proposed that 45CL4, which is About three miles and a half from Oak located on Lake River about 3 km above Point Mr. Broughton arrived at 45CL1, also on the Carty Unit (Ross and another, which he called Point Starkey 1975), represents Cathlapotle. Warrior, in Consequence of being Subsequent work (Abramowitz 1980) there surrounded by twenty-three reinforced that opinion. In 1984, Minor and canoes, carrying from three to twelve Toepel tested 45CL4 and concluded that it persons each, all attired in their war was the location of several small camps and garments, and in every other respect was probably the campsite for the Lewis and prepared for combat. On these Clark expedition on the night of March 29- strangers discoursing with the friendly March 30, 1806, after their visit to Cathlapotle Indians who had attended our party, (Minor and Toepel 1984, 1993). This they soon took off their war dress, and assignment was not based on archaeological with great civility disposed of their data but on the fit between the description of arms and other articles for such the camp locale in the Lewis and Clark valuables as we presented to them, but journals (Moulton 1991) and the physical would neither part with their copper setting of 45CL4. They found no swords, nor a kind of battle axe made archaeological support for 45CL4 being the of iron [Vancouver 1798:61]. large village described in various fur-trade documents. From this they concluded that At Point Warrior the river is divided Cathlapotle had to be in the vicinity of 45CL1. into three branches; the middle one was the largest, about a quarter of a ETHNOHISTORICAL AND mile wide, and was considered as the ETHNOGRAPHIC DOCUMENTATION main branch; the next most capacious OF CATHLAPOTLE took an easterly direction, and seemed extensive, to this the name of While Cathlapotle is mentioned in many Rushleigh’s River was given; and the documents dating between ca. 1792 and the other that stretched to the s.s.w. was 1840s (see Sobel 2004), two lengthy, early distinguished by the name of Call’s accounts provide virtually all of the available River [Vancouver 1798:61]. detailed fur-trade era descriptions. On the banks of Rushleigh’s River was Broughton, 1792 seen a very large Indian Village, and such of the strangers as seemed to The earliest possible references date to 1792 belong to it strongly solicited the party and come from journals of George to proceed thither; and, to enforce their Vancouver’s British exploring party. On the request, very unequivocally evening of October 28th, Lieutenant William represented, that if the party persisted R. Broughton led a group of Vancouver’s men in going to the southward they would 7 Archaeology in Washington, Vol. 15, 2009. have their heads cut off. The same his side, together with a Cutlass, entreaties, urged by similar warnings, Pistols &c. Mr. Broughton by way of had before been experienced by Mr. shewing them that our Arms were Broughton during his excursion, but loaded and in good order, fired a having found them to be unnecessary Musket with a Ball in it into the Water, cautions, he proceeded up that which which at first seem’d to terrify the he considered to be the main branch of Chief, and all the Indians, for they the river, until eight in the evening; immediately hid their heads beneath when, under the shelter of some the Gunwhales of the Canoes, and it willows, they took up their lodging for was some time before they could be the night on a low sandy point, persuaded to hold them up again. accompanied by twelve of the natives Soon after this perceiving that our in a canoe, who fixed their abode very intentions were peaceable, as their near to them [Vancouver 1798:61]. own, they took off all their War Garments, and every man seem’d In this account, “Call’s River” undoubtedly eager to dispose of Bows and Arrows refers to Multnomah channel, “Rushleigh’s for old Buttons, Beads, &c. nor was River” likely refers to the Lewis River, and the Chief the least eager among the the “Indian Village” to Cathlapotle (Barry number.