Roger T. Grange Jr., Pawnee and Lower Loup Pottery. Lincoln: Nebraska State Historical Society, 1968 (Publications in Anthropology, No. 3).

This book is copyrighted by the Nebraska State Historical Society. You may download it for your personal or scholarly use. For permission to re-publish materials, or for photo ordering information, see: https://history.nebraska.gov/publications/re-use-nshs-materials

Learn more about the Nebraska State Historical Society at https://history.nebraska.gov

Digitized by Robert Bolin ~ NEBRASKA STATE HISTORICAL SOCIETY PUBLICATIONS IN ANTHROPOLOGY NUMBER THREE

PAWNEE AND LOWER LOUP POTTERY

by Roger T. Grange, Jr. Nebraska State Historical Society

PUBLICATIONS IN ANTHROPOLOGY

Number Three PAWNEE AND LOWER LOUP POTTERY Asa T. Hill 1871-1953 Nebraska State Historical Society

Publications in Anthropology

Number Three

PAWNEE AND LOWER LOUP POTTERY By

ROGER T. GRANGE, JR.

Chairman, Department of Anthropology

University of South Florida

Nebraska State Historical Society Lincoln, Nebraska 1968 Copyright 1968 by the Nebraska State Historical Society.

vi PREFACE

This research project was based on the pottery recovered from a series of archeological sites in the Central Plains excavated by the Nebraska State Historical Society and the University of Nebraska. Many of the people responsible for various phases of the excavations are cited in connection with brief descriptions of the sites. Without the fieldwork of these individuals, the present analysis would have been impossible. Nor could it have been accomplished without the previous intensive research of Mr. A. T. Hill, Dr. W. D. Strong and Dr. Waldo R. Wedel. Their basic work on the problems of Pawnee archeology provided the foundation which gave direction and order to this investigation. Marvin F. Kivett, Director of the Nebraska State Historical Society, generously made available the basic collections and records upon which this study was based. Permission to utilize the collections of the University of Nebraska Laboratory of Anthropology was granted by Dr. John L. Charnpe. Dr. Waldo R. Wedel of the U. S. National Museum made possible the use of certain materials which had been transferred to that agency. Marvin F. Kivett, Dr. Waldo R. Wedel, Dr. Carlyle S. Smith, Dr. John L. Champe, Dr. Wesley R. Hurt, Dr. Raymond H. Thompson, Mr. G. Hubert Smith, Mr. Robert Neuman and Mr. George Metcalf have all given freely their comments, advice and encouragement which at one time or another have been of assistance in some phase of the project. Dr. William D. Aeschbacher, former Director of the Nebraska State Historical Society, and Mr. Marvin F. Kivett arranged a leave of absence so that the project could be completed. Photographic reproductions were provided by the Nebraska State Historical Society and were made by staff photographer Mr. Kenneth Kopta. This publication is a revised version of a thesis submitted to the faculty of the Department of Anthropology in partial fulftllment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate College, the University of Arizona, in 1962. My thesis committee, Dr. Emil W. Haury, Chairman, Dr. Richard B. Woodbury and Dr. Harry T. Getty, who was later replaced by Dr. Frederick S. Hulse, have provided stimulation, advice, encouragement and guidance. They have, moreover, done so under the trying circumstances of geographical separation from their student coupled with the problems of an ever-closer time limit. My wife Jane and my children, Kathy, Roger and Randy, have borne the personal burdens for a considerable period of time. A portion of the time required for revision of the manuscript was made available by Dean Russell Cooper, College of Liberal Arts, University of South Florida. Marvin F. Kivett and Mrs. Kent Cowgill edited the manuscript and their assistance is gratefully acknowledged. To all the individuals Who have so generously given me aid I express my deep appreciation and gratitude. The responsibility for errors of fact and interpretation is, of course, mine alone.

Roger T. Grange, Jr.

vli TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ...... xi LIST OF FIGURES ...... xi LIST OF PLATES ...... xii INTRODUCTION ...... xiii

I. THE PLACE OF THE LOWER LOUP FOCUS AND HISTORICAL PAWNEE SITES IN THE CENTRAL PLAINS ARCHEOLOGICAL SEQUENCE ...... 1 The Central Plains Archeological Sub-area ...... 1 Archeological Fieldwork in the Central Plains ...... 3 The Pawnee Region ...... 6 The Central Plains Archeological Sequence ...... 10 Taxonomic Classification of Lower Loup and Pawnee Sites ...... 14 Current Status of the Lower Loup and Pawnee Sites ...... 16 II. DESCRIPTION AND IDENTIFICATION OF PAWNEE AND LOWER LOUP SITES ...... 17 Historic Pawnee Focus Sites ...... 19 The Linwood Site, 25 BU 1 ...... 19 The Bellwood Site, 25 BU 2 ...... 19 The Blue Springs Site, 25 GA 1 ...... 20 The Carmody Site, 25 HK 7 ...... 20 The Hordville Site, 25 HM 1 ...... 20 The Burial Ridge 1 Site, 25 HM 2 ...... 20 The Palmer Site, 25 HW 1 ...... 21 The Horse Creek Site, 25 NC 2 ...... 21 The Cottonwood Creek Site, 25 NC 5 ...... 21 The Genoa Site, 25 NC 6 ...... 21 The Fullerton Site, 25 NC 7 ...... 22 The Cunningham Site, 25 NC 10 ...... 22 The Vogel Site, 25 NC 11 ...... 23 The Plum Creek Site, 25 NC 14 ...... 23 The Clarks Site, 25 PK 1 ...... 23 The Petrous Nelson Site, 25 PK 2 ...... 23 The Dick Johnson Site, 25 PK 3 ...... 23 The Yutan Site, 15 SD 1 ...... 23 The Leshara Site, 25 SD 2 ...... 24 The McClaine Site, 25 SD 8 ...... 24 The Hill Site, 25 WT 1 ...... 24 The Shipman Site, 25 WT 7 ...... 25 The Kansas Monument Site, 14 RP 1 ...... 25 The James Site ...... 26 The Savannah Site ...... 26 The Archer Site ...... 26 Possible Sites in Kansas ...... 26 "Sacred Places" of the Pawnee ...... 27 Lower Loup Focus Sites...... 27 The Bellwood Site, 25 BU 2 ...... 27 The Barca! Site, 25 BU 4 ...... 27 The Ashland Site, 25 CC 1 ...... 28 The Gray Site, 25 CX 1 ...... 29 The Wolfe Site, 25 CX 2 ...... 29

ix The Fuller's Hill Site, 25 CX 3 ...... 29 The Burkett Site, 25 NC 1 ...... 29 The Wright Site, 25 NC 3 ...... 30 The Phil Cuba Site, 25 NC 4 ...... 30 The Coffin Site, 25 NC 16 ...... 30 The Larson Site, 25 PT 1 ...... 30 The Monroe Site, 25 PT 13 ...... 30 The Foley Site, 25 PT 17 ...... 31 The Lightner Site, 25 PT 18 ...... 31 The Templin Site, 25 NC 22 ...... 31 The Umbarger Site, 25 NC 21 ...... 31 Summary ...... · ...... 31

III. THE PAWNEE-LOWER LOUP PROBLEM ...... 33 Hypothesis One ...... 34 Hypothesis Two ...... 35 Hypothesis Three ...... 36 Hypothesis Four ...... 37 Hypothesis Five ...... 38 Hypothesis Six ...... 39

IV. PAWNEE AND LOWER LOUP POTTERY TYPES ...... •.43 Pawnee and Lower Loup Pottery ...... 43 General Descriptive Data ...... •...... 44 Pottery Types ...... 4 7 Nance Flared Plain ...... •...... 4 7 Nance Flared Decorated ...... 50 Nance Straight Rim Plain ...... 51 Nance Straight Rim Decorated ...... 52 Nance Flanged Lip ...... 53 Nance Thickened Lip ...... , ...... 53 Burkett S· Collared ...... 54 Wright Collared Ware ...... 55 Burkett Ridged Rim ...... 56 Wright Folded Lip ...... 57 Colfax Braced ...... , ...... 58 Butler Braced ...... 60 Webster Collar Braced ...... •...... 61 Burkett Cord Roughened ...... 63 Burkett Collared ...... 64 Unnamed Shell Tempered Ware ...... 65 Walnut Decorated Lip ...... 66 Webster Bowl Ware ...... 67 Webster Bowl Lids ...... 67 Miniature Vessels ...... •...... •...... 68 Miscellaneous Vessels ...... 68 Spouted Vessels ...... 68 Lower Walnut Focus Shell Tempered Ware ...... 68 Cowley Plain ....•...... •...... •...... 68 Stanley Cord Impressed ...... 69 Unclassified ...... 69

V. THE PAWNEE AND LOWER LOUP CERAMIC TRADITION AND SYTE SERIATION ...... 71 The Pawnee and Lower Loup Ceramic Tradition ...... 71 Seriation of Pawnee and Lower Loup Sites ...... 78

VI. TESTING AND REVISING THE SITE UNIT SERIATION ...... 109

X VII. DATING THE CERAMIC SEQUENCES ...... 117 Historical Dating ...... --- ...... 118 Archeological Comparisons and Dating ...... 121 Dating the Lower Loup and Pawnee Sequence ...... 127 Carbon-14 Dating ...... 129 VIII. GEOGRAPHICAL AND CULTURAL VARIATIONS ...... 131 IX. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS .... ---.- ...... 147 BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... - ...... 155 PLATES ...... - ...... 163

LIST OF TABLES

1. Historic Pawnee Archeological Sites ...... 4 2. Lower Loup Focus Archeological Sites ...... 6 3. Central Plains Archeological Sequence and Classification ...... 13 4. Identification of Historic Pawnee Sites ...... 18 5. Lower Loup Focus Sites ...... , .28 6. Modes of Bodysherd Surface Treatment ...... 72 7. Modes of Rim Form ...... 73 8. Modes of Rim Decoration ...... 74 9. Modes of Lip Decoration ...... 75 l 0. Modes of Vessel Shoulder Decoration ...... _ .. __ .75 11. Pottery Types and Wares ...... 76 12. Distribution of Pottery Categories in Site and Excavation Units ...... 79 13. Approximate Historical Sequence of Pawnee Sites ...... 111 14. Sites Arranged in Order of Increasing Proportion of Trade Materials ...... 111 15. Comparison of Site Unit Seriations ...... 113 16. Dating the Lower Loup and Pawnee Sequence ...... 130 17. Lower Loup and Pawnee Sites Listed by Band, Local Sequence by Period of Major Occupation .. 134 18. Modes of Bodysherd Surface Treatment by Site ...... 138 19. Modes of Lip Decoration by Site ...... 139 20. Modes of Rim Decoration on Colfax Braced Rims ...... 140 21. Modes of Rim Design on Nance Flared Decorated and Nance Straight Decorated Rims ...... 141

LIST OF FIGURES

1. Archeological Sub-areas in the Plains ...... 2 2. Historic Pawnee Sites ...... 5 3. Lower Loup Focus Sites ...... , ...... 7 4. The Pawnee Archeological Region ...... , ...... 9 5. Seriation of Stratigraphic Excavation Units ...... 103 6. Seriation of Excavation Units ...... 105

xi 7. Time Spans of Lower Loup Sites ...... 107 8. Revised Site Unit Seriation ...... 115 9. Locations of Archeological Sites Used in Comparisons ...... 128 10. Seriation of Band and Local Sequences ...... 135

ll ST OF PLATES

I. Cord Roughened Bodysherds ...... 164 II. Simple Stamped Bodysherds ...... 166 III. Check Stamped Bodysherds ...... 168 IV. Smoothed Bodysherds ...... 170 V. Decorated Shoulder Bodysherds ...... 172 VI. Nance Flared Plain, Restored Vessels ...... 174 VII. Nance Flared Plain ...... 176 VIII. Nance Flared Plain ...... 178 IX. Nance Flared Plain ...... 180 X. Nance Flared Plain, Associated Body Treatment ...... 182 XI. Nance Flared Plain, Handles ...... 184 XII. Nance Flared Decorated, Restored Vessels ...... 186 XIII. Nance Flared Decorated ...... 188 XIV. Nance Flared Decorated ...... 190 XV. Nance Straight Rim Plain and Nance Straight Rim Decorated ...... 192 XVI. Nance Flanged Lip ...... 194 XVII. Nance Thickened Lip and Burkett Ridged Rim ...... 196 XVIII. Burkett S-Collared ...... 198 XIX. Wright Collared Ware, Restored Vessels ...... 200 XX. Wright Collared Ware ...... 202 XXI. Wright Collared Ware ...... 204 XXII. Wright Folded Lip and Colfax Braced ...... 206 XXIII. Colfax Braced, Restored Vessel ...... 208 XXIV. Colfax Braced ...... 210 XXV. Colfax Braced ...... 212 XXVI. Butler Braced, Restored Vessel ...... 214 XXVII. Transitional Series ...... 216 XXVIII. Webster Collar Braced, Restored Vessels ...... 218 XXIX. Webster Collar Braced ...... 220 XXX. Burkett Cord Roughened and Burkett Collared ...... 222 XXXI. Burkett Collared, Restored Vessel ...... 224 XXXII. Shell Tempered Bodysherds ...... 226 XXXIII. Shell Tempered Ware and Walnut Decorated Lip ...... 228 XXXIV. Webster Bowl Ware and Bowl Lids ...... 230 XXXV. Miscellaneous ...... 232 XXXVI. Rim Profiles ...... 234

xii INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this ceramic analysis is the investigation of some of the relationships between the Lower Loup and Pawnee archeological sites in the Central Plains. Information concerning 41 sites, components or locations has been considered and over 50,000 potsherds have been described and classified. The Pawnee and Lower Loup sites have been arranged in chronological order. Sequences of sites occupied by the four historic Pawnee bands have been established and related to local sequences of Lower Loup sites, thereby extending identifications o[ Pawnee bands back in time to the protohistoric period. New ceramic evidence linking the Lower Loup Focus with archeological complexes outside of the Central Plains confirmed previously suggested hypothses regarding the broader relationships of the protohistoric Pawnee. Comparative analysis, stratigraphic study, ceramic seriation and the direct historical approach were the methods of investigation used to refine the chronological and cultural relationships of the sites from which the pottery was recovered.

xiii Chapter I

THE PLACE OF THE LOWER LOUP FOCUS AND PAWNEE SITES IN THE CENTRAL PLAINS ARCHEOLOGICAL SEQUENCE

THE CENTRAL PLAINS ARCHEOLOGICAL SUBAREA

Willey and Phillips have defined a series of 1961: 23, Fig. 1). A different subarea and region geographical categories which are useful in the formulation has been proposed by Lehmer and ordering of archeological data. These spatial Caldwell (1966), but has not been adopted in divisions are the site, locality, region, subarea and this study. area (Willey and Phillips 1958: 18-21). The Great The archeological materials which are the Plains of central North America, stretching from subject of this ceramic study occur within the Texas on the south into Canada on the north and Central Plains subarea. They were excavated from the Rocky Mountains eastward to the from historic sites occupied by the Pawnee Mississippi-Missouri valleys, constitutes an area of Indians and from earlier sites, designated as the major interest in American archeology. Wedel has Lower Loup Focus, which represent the proto­ recently summarized archeological knowledge of historic phase of Pawnee culture (Wedel 1938). this vast area in terms of five convenient sub­ The Central Plains area, or subarea in the areas; these are the Northwestern Plains, the Willey-Phillips terminology, has been a focal Middle Missouri, the Northeastern Periphery, the point and unit of archeological study for more Central Plains and the Southern Plains (Wedel than 25 years. Strong's initial summary of

-1- ······ ::::::

•I.~2.-L.LS..~,. "' }~"N"''L ""' .. -··-··-··-··-··-r-··-··-.._.\-;: ·-· ••••..• ·-·~·' !~&" •••••• [.•.•• •~E .. •. • .., i ~ill~ \

:: ::...... al Subareas in the Plams Figure 1. Archeolog~c

-2- archeological materials in the subarea was with the 97th or 1OOth meridian marking tne confined largely to the state of Nebraska (Strong approximate dividing line between these two 193 5: 6), and more recently Spaulding has used a physiographic units (Kroeber 1947: 185-86). similar definition (Spaulding 1956: 67). In 1940 East of the I OOth meridian the loess plains have Wedel included Nebraska and contiguous parts of been increasingly dissected by erosion as the Kansas, Missouri and Iowa in his discussion of Missouri River is approached and has more cultural sequences in the Central Plains (Wedel precipitation, more surface water and more plant 1940: 291), and in 1953 defined the Central and animal life than in the High Plains (~edel Plains as the region between the Missouri River 1961: 80). and the Rocky Mountains encompassing the The historic Pawnee habitat is in the prairies watersheds of the Niobrara, Platte, Kansas and of the middle Platte drainage (Kroeber 1947: 75) upper Arkansas rivers and including the area of near the indistinct boundary between the Great the states of Nebraska, Kansas and eastern Plains and Central Lowland physiographic pro­ Colorado (Wedel 1953: 499). Figure 1 vinces. Kroeber suggested that his classification illustrates the relationship of the Central Plains would be more satisfactory if the eastern archeological subarea to the large Plains area. boundary of the Great Plains province were so The environmental setting of the Central drawn as to transfer the Pawnee to the Central Plains has been outlined several times by Strong Lowland province (Kroeber 1947: 187). Wedel and Wedel. Like other sections of the Great noted a correlation between subsistence Plains province, it can be described as a land of economy and environment in the Central Plains low relief with few trees, dry cold winters, hot during the historic period when the permanent summers, strong winds and marked variations of villages of the horticultural tribes of Kansas and temperature and precipitation (Wedel1961: 24). Nebraska, including the Osage, Kansa, Oto, Oma­ However, there are variations from section to ha, Ponca and Pawnee, were ali east of the 99th section within the Central Plains (Wedel 194 7: meridian in the subhumid tall grass prairie 2). These include high plains terrain, sandhills, environment. The nomadic bison hunters such as loess plains and till plains (Strong 1935: 9, Fig. the Comanche, Kiowa, Cheyenne, Arapaho and 2, 30-40; Wedel1947: 2-3; Wedel1959: 6, 3-19). Dakota lived to the west in the High Plains area The Central Plains is divided between two (Wedel 1953: 503). The historic Pawnee and major physiographic provinces. An extension of protohistoric Lower Loup Focus sites under the Central Lowland province in the east con­ consideration here are thus within the prairie trasts with the Great Plains province in the west, habitat of the Central Plains (Wedel 194 7: 6).

ARCHEOLOGICAL FIELDWORK IN THE CENTRAL PLAINS

Much of the archeological data regarding the t Wedel 1961: 83). Little work was accomplished Central Plains has been the result of fieldwork between 1914 and 1929 (Strong 1935: 50), but carried out since 1925 (Wedel 1961: 81), al­ with the establishment of the University of though some important research was ac­ Nebraska Archeological Survey in 1929 (Strong complished during the late nineteenth century 1935: 55), professional archeology was on a firm (Wedel1961: 82). footing (Wedel1961: 25). After 1900 the work of Gilder and Sterns and A. T. Hill became the Nebraska State His­ Fowke in Nebraska Culture and other sites along torical Society's Director of the Museum and the Missouri marked the beginning of interest in Field Archeology and initiated :an archeological the area by professional archeologists (Strong field program in 1933. Relief programs of the 1935: 48-50). At the same time individuals late 1930's made possible a great increase in without formal training, Schultz and Jones in fieldwork by the Society under Hill's direction Kansas and Blackman and Hill in Nebraska, (Wedel 1953: 75). investigated areas farther west of the Missouri Wedel did extensive work in Kansas for the

-3- U.S. National Museum in 1937, 1939 and 1940 identifying historic Pawnee sites had begun as (Wedel 1959: xiii). In 1940 the Laboratory of early as 1906 (Wedel 1953: 72). Anthropology replaced the University of Ne­ Historic Pawnee and Lower Loup Focus sites braska Archeological Survey (Champe 1949: 14), were excavated by Strong and Wedel of the but the end of relief work funds and World War University of Nebraska Archeological Survey in II brought fieldwork to a temporary standstill 1930 and 1931, but the bulk of the collections {Champe 1949: 14; Wedel 1953: 75). available for study today resulted from Hill's Following the war the Missouri River Basin fieldwork in the period 193 5 to 1941. During Survey of the Smithsonian Institution was this time Hill's program was one of intensive established. Research continues to be done by survey involving limited excavations at many that agency and several others, including the sites {Wedel 1961: 25). This procedure has University of Nebraska Laboratory of provided controlled samples of reasonable size Anthropology, the University of Kansas, the from a great numb~r of sites. The archeological Kansas State Historical Society and the Nebraska fieldwork directed by Hill systematically ex­ State Historical Society. plored many areas of Nebraska and has provided Fieldwork on historic Pawnee and protohis­ much of the basic data for Central Plains toric Lower Loup sites has been a long term archeology (Wedel1953: 74-75). activity. Hayden collected sherds from one of the Although his fieldwork and investigations Lower Loup sites in 1867 (Wedel 1936: 40). were directed toward all aspects of Nebraska's State Archeologist Blackman identified several of archeological problems, Hill's major interest the historic Pawnee sites and discovered several remained the problem of Pawnee archeology other sites now recognized as belonging to the (Kivett 1953: 87). Lower Loup Focus during his fieldwork between The following tables and maps identify the 1901 and 1907 (Strong 1935: 48). Strong made historic Pawnee and Lower Loup Focus sites and specific application of the direct historical meth­ indicate the major excavations. od {Strong 1935: 55), but Hill's interest in It will be seen from these tables that the

TABLE 1. HISTORIC PAWNEE ARCHEOLOGICAL SITES

Site Site Year of Major Number Name Institution Excavation

25 BU 1 Linwood University of Nebraska 1930 and Historical Society 1939 25 BU 2 Bellwood Historical Society 1936 25 GA 1 Blue Springs Historical Society 1935 25 HK 7 Carmody, Cat. A Historical Society 1950 25 HM 1 Hordville Not excavated 25 HM 2 Burial Hill Historical Society 1940 25 HW 1 Palmer Not excavated 25 NC2 Horse Creek Historical Society 1940 25 NC 5 Cottonwood Creek Historical Society 1940 25 NC 6 Genoa Not excavated 25 NC7 Fullerton Historical Society 1940 25 NC 10 Cunningham Historical Society 1940 25 NC 11 Vogel Historical Society 1940 25 NC 14 Plum Creek Historical Society 1940 25 PK 1 Clarks Historical Society 1940 25 PK 2 Nelson Historical Society 1940 25 PK 3 Johnson Historical Society 1940 25 SD 1 Yutan Historical Society 1935, 1958 25 SD 2 Leshara Historical Society 1935 25 SD 8 McClaine Not excavated 25WT 1 Hill University of Nebraska 1930 and Historical Society 1941 25 WT 7 Shipman Historical Society 1941 14 RP 1 Kansas Monument University of Kansas 1949 and Kansas Historical Society 1965, 1966 Archer Single specimen, no site

-4- Figure 2. Historic Pawnee Sites: 1, Palmer (25 HW 1); 2, Cottonwood Creek (25 NC 5); 3, Horse Creek (25 NC 2); 4, Fullerton (25 NC 7); 5, Vogel (25 NC 11); 6, Cunningham (25 NC 10); 7, .Plum Creek (25 NC 14); 8, Genoa (25 NC 6); 9, Bellwood (25 BU 2); 10, Linwood (25 BU 1); 11, McClaine (25 SD 8);12, Leshara (25 SD 2); 13, Yutan (25 SD 1); 14, Archer; 15, Burial Hill 1 (25 HM 2); 16, Hordville (25 HM 1); 17, Nelson (25 PK 2); 18, Johnson (25 PK 3); 19, Clarks (25 PK 1); 20, Blue Springs (25 GA 1); 21, Hill (25 WT 1); 22, Shipman (25 WT 7); 23, Kansas Monument (14 RP 1).

-5- TABLE 2. LOWER LOUP FOCUS ARCHEOLOGICAL SITES s ite Site Year of Majof N umber Name Institution Excavation

25 BU 2 Bellwood Historical Society 1936 25 BU 4 Barcal Historical Soceity 1939 25 cc 1 Ashland Historical Society 1937 25 ex 1 Gray (Schuyler) University of Nebraska 1931" 25 ex 2 Wolfe University of Nebraska 1931 2 5 ex 3 Fuller's Hill Not excavated 25 NC 1 Burkett Historical Society 1906 University of Nebraska 1931 and Historical Society 1940 25 NC 3 Wright Historical Society 1936 25 NC4 Cuba Historical Society 1936 25 NC 16 Coffin Not excavated 25 NC 22 Templin Not excavated 25 NC 21 Umbarger I Not excavated 25 PT 1 Larson Historical Society 1936 25 PT 13 Monroe Historical Society 1941 2 5 PT 17 Foley Not excavated 25 PT 18 I Lightner Not excavated extensive excavations of Lower Loup Focus sites nee sites are concentrated on the lower portion took place in the 1930's. However, the largest of the Loup River and on the Platte River number of historic Pawnee site excavations were nearby. The Lower Loup sites are found in a carried out in 1940 after a lapse of a few years more restricted locality than are the historic following the initial site explorations in the sites, some of which are on the Blue, the 1930's. Reference to the accompanying maps R,~publican and the Platte rivers some distance (Figures 2 and 3) will clearly illustrate the point from the Loup fork. that both Lower Loup Focus and historic Paw-

THE PAWNEE REGION

The location and a brief description of the the archeological region, a concept applied here Plains archeological area and the Central Plains specifically to the geographical location of the subarea as defined by Wedel and others have Pawnee and Lower Loup sites of the proto­ been presented above. The distribution of the historic and historic time periods. Pawnee and Lower Loup sites within 'the Central The Pawnee claimed a large territory, includ­ Plains (Figures 2 and 3) represent two of the ing almost all of the archeological subarea termed smaller spatial units for ordering archeological the Central Plains. Wedel described the territory data, the site and locality. It remains to consider they claimed as " ... bounded on the north by the the region, which Willey and Phillips suggest is Niobrara River, on the south by the Arkansas or the space " ... that might be occupied by a social possibly the Canadian, on the east by the unit larger than the community, a unit to which Missouri, and on the west extended rather we may with extreme trepidation apply the term indefinitely toward the Rockies" (Wedel 1936: 'tribe' or 'society.' " (Willey and Phillips 1958: 34). Wedel also indicated that the Pawnee did 19-20). The widest distribution of the historic not actually control such a vast area, for within Pawnee sites may be taken as representative of this segment of the Central Plains were other

-6- 0 Miles 30 .. I

S h ejj

Figure 3. Lower Loup Focus Sites: 1, Burkett (25 NC 1); 2, Wright (25 NC 3); 3, Cuba (25 NC 4); 4, Umbarger (25 NC 21); 5, Templin (25 NC 22); 6, Coffin (25 NC 16); 7, Larson (25 PT 1); 8, Lightner (25 PT 18); 9, Foley (25 PT 17); 10, Monroe (25 PT 13); 11, Ashland (25 CC 1); 12, Bellwood (25 BU 2); 13, Barcal (25 BU 4); 14, Wolfe (25 CX 2); 15, Gray (25 CX 1); 16, Fuller's Hill (25 CX 3).

-7- people. The Cheyenne, Arapaho and Teton Da­ the Kansas River, the loess plain has been less kota limited the Pawnee range to the west, while eroded and is incised by short tributaries of the the Oto, Kansa and Osage on the east and the Platte and the Republican. In the eastern portion Omaha on the north and east further circum­ of this section is the Blue River. All of the major scribed the Pawnee region. The area over which streams carry water all year. the Pawnee hunted and had chief control Wedel The alluvial valleys of the streams are broad defines as a strip running southward from the and flat, ranging in width from three to 15 miles. Niobrara River in Nebraska to the upper reaches The valleys are bordered by relatively high bluffs of the Arkansas in Kansas. In width the area (Wedel 1936: 4-6). "Above the mouth of Shell extended from about the forks of the Platte on Creek the native towns stood on terraces or the west to the confluence of Shell Creek and the second bottoms well out of reach of floods; Platte on the east (Wedel 1936: 4, Map 1). This below this point suitable terraces are mostly area is much the same as that assigned to the lacking and the sites are situated on the bluffs Pawnee by Kroeber except for the extension with the river sweeping past their bases" (Wedel southward from the Kansas River to the upper 1938: 2). The tree fringed water courses contrast Arkansas which Kroeber omits in his classifica­ greatly with the rolling, grassy uplands which tion of the Pawnee territory as the Middle Platte were utilized as hunting grounds. The fertile river culture area (Kroeber 1947: 76, Table 18, Map bottoms were most important for village loca­ 6). tions since they provided arable ground, wood Even these relatively large hunting and for construction and fuel and water near the wintering grounds were not exclusively under terrace locations selected for village sites. Grasses Pawnee control (Wedel 1936: 4). The real do­ were the dominant vegetation of the uplands; main of the Pawnee centered along a 120-mile within the river and stream valleys cottonwood, stretch of the Platte River Valley from about the oak, elm, walnut, locust, hackberry, box elder: north fork of the Loup River on the west to ash and red cedar or juniper trees were available. about the confluence of the Elkhorn and the Chokecherries, wild plums, grapes, wild potatoes Platte on the east. Three villages to the south, and turnips were among the native plantfoods two on the Republican and one on the Blue available in the vicinity of the Pawnee village River, mark the extreme southern limits of the locations in the sandy valleys of the Loup, the Pawnee territory as delineated by historically and Platte and the Republican. Game available on the archeologically identified village locations. "His­ plains and in the valley habitat included bison, toric maps and documents show that the Pawnee beaver, elk, deer, bear, wolves, wildcats, rabbits, villages since virtually the earliest contact times opossums, raccoons, squirrels, ducks and geese were localized in and about this region" (Wedel (Wedel 1936: 4-6). 1938: 20). The distribution of the historic Climatic conditions permitted horticulture; Pawnee and protohistoric Lower Loup Focus and maize, beans, squash and sunflowers were sites within this region has already been indicated cultivated (Wedel 1953: 502). on the two maps presented above (Figures 2 and The Pawnee and Lower Loup archeological 3) and defined as the Pawnee archeological sites may thus be placed within the broad region. The following map (Figure 4) will serve archeological area of the Great Plains, more to indicate the position of the Pawnee region specifically within the Central Plains subarea, and within the Central Plains subarea; examination still more precisely in the region of the prairies of will reveal that the Pawnee region is in the east the middle Platte River with village sites located central portion of the Central Plains. The study on bluffs and terraces above the major streams, of the pottery recovered from the historic and specifically along the lower segment of the Loup protohistoric sites within this region is the focal River, along the Platte and on the Republican point of the present investigation. and Blue rivers south of the Platte. Physiographi­ The region may be characterized as a dry, cally, their villages were in the area where the grass covered series of loess plains interspersed Great Plains and the Central Lowland provinces with river valleys. North of the Platte the loess meet, in a habitat where the vegetation in former mantle has been eroded to form a hilly topo­ times was dominantly tall grass prairie. Their graphy of loess plains and canyons. The Loup villages and horticultural activities were centered River and its tributaries drain the area and the in the wooded and fertile stream valleys, while Sandhills to the west. South of the Platte they utilized the surrounding plains uplands as between that river and the Republican fork of hunting territory.

-8- NEB.

COLO.

Figure 4. The Pawnee Archeological Region

-9- Having placed the Lower Loup Focus and general physiography and environment, it is next historic Pawnee archeological sites in their spatial necessary to place these manifestations in the dimensions in terms of area, subarea and region general archeological sequence of the Central and having described this region in terms of its Plains area.

THE CENTRAL PLAINS ARCHEOLOGICAL SEQUENCE

Several different classifications of the Lower The Signal Butte sequence was also included in Loup Focus and historic Pawnee complexes have the prehistoric period (Strong 1933: 274). been made within the framework of Central Strong's Introduction to Nebraska Plains archeology. A few of these will be briefly Archaeology appeared in 1935, presenting the reviewed below. data gathered since 1929 by the archeological Blackman's first efforts at classification di­ survey. The culture sequence chart was much the vided sites into two broad categories, recent and same as that presented in 1933, but with the ancient. Historic Pawnee sites of the 1850's and addition of Dismal River to the protohistoric later were in the first category, and some earlier period (Strong 1935: 271-72, Table 7). The historic Pawnee sites and sites now designated as sequence was subdivided into geographical Lower Loup Focus were placed in the ancient columns. category (Blackman 1904: 296-97). Blackman Also in 1935, Wedel presented a preliminary had a second classification of sites, based largely classification based upon Strong's suggestions on stone tool types. He recognized three overlap­ and similar to it. Wedel, however, included ping categories of stone implements: the most Kansas materials as well as those from Nebraska. primitive, the intermediate and those of fine The Great Bend-Smoky Hill Aspect of the workmanship. Materials of the Lower Loup and protohistoric period and the Upper Republican Platte River fell into the latter category (Black­ aspect of the prehistoric period represented the man 1904: 310). added material from Kansas (Wedel 1935: 253). Wedel has pointed out that soundly based In 1936 Wedel dated the historic period at interpretations of plains prehistory are largely a 1 77 5 to 1847, the protohistoric period at 1540 development of the last 30 years (Wedel 1961: to 1 77 5 and the prehistoric period as prior to 25), but also noted the significance of earlier 1541 (Wedel 1936: 24, fn. 33). work. For example, by the time the University of A further amplification of the Central Plains Nebraska Archeological Survey was established in sequence was developed by Wedel in 1940. His 1929, Hill had already recognized the distinctive­ sequence chart shows many refinements relative ness of several cultures in the area: historic to the earlier ones, but the major additions were Pawnee, protohistoric Pawnee, Upper Republi­ the inclusion of the Oneota aspect of the can, DiSinal River and Woodland (Wedel 1953: Missouri Bluffs zone in the protohistoric period 74). and the inclusion of Woodland occupations in At the first Plains Conference in 1931, three almost all sections of the Central Plains in the broad periods were devised as a framework for prehistoric period. The Upper Republican aspect plains culture sequences: the Historic, Protohis­ was now termed ..late prehistoric" and followed toric and the Prehistoric periods (Wedel 1961: the Woodland occupations in time. Provisional 26). Strong utilized these categories in 1933, dates were added with the protohistoric period assigning the sedentary Siouan, Pawnee, Dakota, beginning at A. D. 1600 and the historic period at Arapaho and Cheyenne tribes to the historic circa 1800 (Wedel1940: 343, Fig. 21). period in the central plains. The protohistoric Based on work in stratified sites, Champe period at that time was represented only by the presented in 1946 a tentative stratigraphic cor­ Pawnee (Lower Loup), while Nebraska culture, relation sequence of Central Plains sites, com­ Upper Republican culture and Sterns Creek posed largely of Nebraska material. Charnpe culture were assigned to the prehistoric period. proposed a new three-fold period classification

-10- based on complexes of traits (Champe 1946: an overlap with historic Pawnee beginning about 87). These periods were termed Historic, Ceramic 1725 on the chart (Wedel 1947: 152, 154). This and Lithic, but the latter two were not meant to assessment of the chronological position of the be exclusively ceramic or lithic. The Ceramic Lower Loup Focus remains current (Wedel 1959: period was subdivided into early, middle and 613, Fig. 106). late The periods were dated on the basis of tree Two other classifications of Central Plains ring dates from the stratified deposits in Ash archeological complexes have been made which Hollow Cave. Woodland materials were Early will further serve to illuminate the position of Ceramic, A.D. 1000-1300. Upper Republican the Pawnee and Lower Loup Focus. materials were Middle Ceramic, A. D. 1300-1500, In 19 54 Lehmer suggested that "During and D1smal River, Oneota and Lower Loup 'post-Woodland' times the village cultures of the materials fell in to the Late Ceramic period, A. D. Great Plains developed according to a pattern 1500-1700. The Lithic period was subdivided which distinguishes them from any others in into early and intermediate subperiods (Champe native America." (Lehmer 1954: 139). He de­ 1946: 85, 90). scribed ten generalized traits present in each of Wedel further refined Champe's dating of the the regional and temporal variants of the Plains Central Plains sequence in 194 7, correlating it Village Pattern: with Rio Grande Pueblo glaze periods (Wedel (1) Subsistence based about equally on hunt­ 1947). At the same time Krieger presented a ing and agriculture. similar correlation (Krieger 1947). Wedel ex­ (2) Semipermanent villages. tended provisional correlations of the Central (3) Villages located adjacent to the larger Plains sequence to other areas of the Missouri flood plains. basin (Wedel1949) in 1949 and still regarded the ( 4) Semi-subterranean earth lodges with entry­ three broad time periods recognized in 1940 as ways. useful (Wedel 1949: 3). ( 5) Undercut and straight-sided cache pits in The most recent revision of the Central Plains and between the houses. sequence is contained in Wedel's An Introduction (6) Grit-tempered pottery with paddle-mark­ to Kansas Archaeology which appeared in 1959. ed bodies and cord- or tool-impressed In this summary of the Kansas data the decoration. introduction of the Smoky Hill Aspect on the (7) Small, light projectile points. level of the Upper Republican materials is an (8) Chipped end-scrapers. important addition to the sequence. The (9) Scapula hoes. Nebraska sequence is also included in the (10) Bone hide-dressing tools. (Lehmer 1954: sequence chart (Wedel1959: 535). 139-40). It will be seen from the foregoing brief Lehmer distinguished three broad cultural sununary that the position of the Pawnee and traditions within the Plains Village Pattern: the Lower Loup Focus in the Central Plains sequence Middle Missouri Tradition, the Central Plains has not been significantly changed since 1935. Tradition and the Coalescent Tradition. Sites of The Pawnee sites fall into the final period in both the Upper Republican and Nebraska Aspects the Lithic-Ceramic-Historic and represented the Central Plains Tradition (Lehmer Pre his t oric-Protohis to ric-Historic sequence 1954: 143) while the Lower Loup Focus and classification schemes. The historic period is historic Pawnee sites were included in the later generally begun with the date 1775 or 1800. The Coalescent Tradition, which encompasses both Lower Loup Focus sites have long been regarded the Central Plains and Middle Missouri areas as belonging in the Late Ceramic and (Lehmer 19 54; 150). Thus, the Late Ceramic or Protohistoric periods of the two classifications. Protohistoric and the Historic periods of the The Late Ceramic period dates of 1500 to 1 700 Central Plains sequence are both included within have been noted above. Strong initially proposed the Coalescent Tradition, which represents a A. o. 1600 as an approximate median dating for blend (Lehmer 1954: 152) of earlier Central protchistoric Pawnee culture (Strong 1935: 62). Plains and Middle Missouri traditions. The term In reviewing the chronology in 194 7 Wedel saw "tradition" is coming to be used in much the no reason to doubt that the earliest Lower Loup same way as the term "Central Plains Phase" has sites were flourishing at circa 1600 (±50 years) been used (Wedel1959: 566-67, 627). and on his chronology chart gave the complex a Wedel utilized some similar terminology in his date range of circa 1500 to 1750, also indicating discussion of Plains settlement patterns north of

-11- the upper Arkansas Valley which appeared in and may last until almost A. D. 1000. It is the 1956. He suggested the following culture com­ post-Woodland occupation of the Central Plains plex horizons in his discussion: Historic Tribes, which is of direct importance in the present Coalescent Village Complexes, Small Village study of Lower Loup and Pawnee pottery. Complexes, Plains Woodland Complexes, Hunt­ The Central Plains Phase, including the Smoky ing-Gathering Complexes and Early Hunting Hill, Upper Republican and Nebraska aspects, Complexes. The Upper Republican and Nebraska begins sometime after A. D. 1000 and lasts until Culture materials (Lehmer's Central Plains Tra­ about A. D. 1500. In this period a dual economy dition) and the Middle Missouri Tradition are the based on huntir.g and horticulture provided a Small Village Complexes of A. D. 1200 to A. D. more stable subsistence base, as reflected in the 1500, and the Lower Loup Focus is included in abundance of stone and bone tools and pottery the Coalescent Village Complexes of A. D. 1500 recovered from the storage pits and middens of to 1750 in Wedel's chronological formulation. In these small scattered villages. The typical house is the post-1750 Historic Tribe horizon, Wedel the rectangular earth lodge. The Upper Republi­ contrasts the Equestrian Bison Hunters of the can people extended horticulture into the west­ Northwestern Plains with the Decadent Village ern part of the plains beyond the 100th meridian Complexes of the Central Plains and Middle and later abandoned that region, perhaps because Missouri subareas. The historic Pawnee would of the incursions of other people or because of thus be classified as representative of the Deca­ drought conditions. Carbon-14 dates for sites dent Village Complexes (Wedel1956: 83, Fig. 2). within this classification include the time span Since the publication of Strong's An Intro­ from A. D. 1138 to A. D. 1458. duction to Nebraska Archaeology (1935), Wedel Recorded history begins in the Central Plains in has been the most prolific producer of syntheses 1541 and the Protohistoric period is generally of Central Plains archeology in such papers as regarded as beginning at about 1500. The Lower "Culture Sequence in the Central Great Plains" Loup and Red Bird foci, the Great Bend, White (1940), "Culture Chronology in the Central Rock, Oneota and Dismal River aspects are the Great Plains" (1947), and "Changing Settlement major complexes of this period in the Central Patterns in the Great Plains" (1956). Wedel has Plains. It is sometimes termed a coalescent recently provided two syntheses of the sequence period, for the small hamlets of the Central in An Introduction to Kansas Archaeology (1959) Plains Phase are replaced by large population and in Prehistoric Man on the Great Plains concentrations in villages of up to 100 acres in (1961). size. Rectangular earth lodges may be present in The outline of the archeological sequence the Oneota Aspect, but the circular earth lodge is in the Central Plains based on these summaries, more typical of the semi-permanent villages. It presented in Table 3, indicates the position of has been suggested that the seasonal hunt away the Lower Loup and historic Pawnee materials in from the village, typical of such historic tribes as the record of human occupation of the area. the Pawnee, was a pattern established during this Six major periods provide a basic outline of time and that the concentration of population in the archeological sequence. The earliest of these larger villages probably brought considerable is the period of the Early Big Game Hunters, social and ceremonial changes as well. Village characterized by sites from which Clovis, Folsom sites are on terraces near the larger streams in and other paleo-Indian projectile points have locations that can be interpreted as defensive. been recovered. Plains Archaic sites are known in The Dismal River Aspect of the western portion both eastern and western Nebraska (Grange of the Central Plains has been identified as Plains 1962). Occupation of the western part of the Apache. The Lower Loup Focus is protohistoric Central Plains by Hunters and Gatherers repre­ Pawnee and the Oneota material may represent sented by such sites as Signal Butte and Barn the Siouan village tribes. Limited amounts of Butte follow the paleo-Indian occupation by a trade goods reflect increasing contacts with considerable period of time. The lack of good Europeans. evidence of human occupation in the period The beginning of the final, historic period in between sites of the Early Hunters and those of the sequence may be defined as beginning at the Hunters and Gatherers may represent the about 1750 or 1800. During this eighteenth and hot, dry altithermal period in the Plains (Wedel nineteenth century period, certain sites can be 1961: 254). The Plains Woodland occupation identified specifically from the historical record. begins a few centuries before the time of Christ The Pawnee are the best known tribe from an

-12- TABLE 3. CENTRAL PLAINS ARCIIEOLOCICAL SEQUENCE AND CLASSIFICATION

~ Approximate Date Classification Period I

A.D. 1876 Historic Pawnee Coalescent Tradition Historic Focus Decadent Village and other Complex historic tribes

A.D. 1750 Lower Loup Focus Coalescent Tradition Proto historic Red Bird Focus Coalescent Village Late Ceramic Great Bend Aspect Complexes White Rock Aspect Oneota Aspect Dismal River Aspect

A.D. 1500 Upper Republican Central Plains Tradition Late Prehistoric Aspect Small Village Complexes Middle Ceramic Nebraska Aspect A. D. 1000 Smoky Hill Aspect

A.D. 1 Plains Woodland Complexes Middle Prehistoric Early Ceramic

2000 B. C. Hunting-Gathering Complexes Lithic

4500 B.C. Early Hunting Complexes Early Prehistoric 10,000 B. C. Lithic

-13- archeological point of view in this period on the western portion of the area increased. Pawnee Central Plains and well represent what was towns dwindled in number to three or four and happening to many of the village tribes. Severe finally to one before they left the Central Plains pressures from the mounted bison hunters of the for a reservation in Oklahoma in 1876.

TAXONOMIC CLASSIFICATION OF LOWER

LOUP AND PAWNEE SITES

In contrast to the general uniformity in Protohistoric Sites, respectively. When Dunlevy placement of the Pawnee and Lower Loup Focus wrote the descriptive report of the Lower Loup in the cultural and chronological sequence of the sites, she concluded that these materials were Central Plains, a review of the taxonomic classifi~ more related to Oneota than to historic Pawnee cation of these two archeological complexes and should, therefore, be considered as the reveals some confusion. Lower Loup Focus of an unnamed aspect of the When the Midwestern Taxonomic System was Upper Mississippi Phase (Dunlevy 1936: 216). proposed in 1934, Strong's manuscript of An This constituted a reclassification from the Cen­ Introduction to Nebraska Archaeology was al­ tral Plains Phase. Dunlevy substituted Lower ready written. It was not practical to revise it to Loup, the aspect name assigned by Strong and include the new terminology, but Strong did Wedel, for the focus name Beaver Creek. No include in the foreword a classification em­ explanation for this change was offered. ploying the new terms "component," "focus," In answer to Dunlevy's new hypothesis, Wedel "aspect," "phase" and "basic culture" (Strong reexamined the relationship between historic 1935: 1-2). Wedel had already published a very Pawnee and the Lower Loup Focus materials in similar classification based on suggestions by 1938. Since the Lower Loup sites were not Strong (Wedel 1935: 251). Strong had employed subject to historical identification, Wedel agreed the term "culture" in his text to designate what that non-linguistic designation was best and that was implied in the term "aspect" (Strong 1935: the term applied by Dunlevy was as appropriate 1). as any (Wedel 1938: 20). Thus, Wedel accepted Strong classified the Burkett and Schuyler the change of name of the focus from Beaver sites as components of the Beaver Creek Focus. Creek to Lower Loup. which in turn was assigned to the Lower Loup The field and laboratory records of the (Protohistoric Pawnee ?) Aspect of the Central Nebraska State Historical Society relating to the Plains Phase of the Mississippi Basic Culture. historic sites utilize such terms as "historic Horse Creek, Fullerton, Linwood and other Pawnee", "Skidi (or other band name) Pawnee", historic Pawnee sites in the Loup-Platte River "Lower Platte (historic Pawnee)" and "presum- area were designated as components of the ably Pawnee" for some non-documented sites. Columbus Focus. The Hill site on the Republican The Lower Loup Focus sites are designated by River was assigned to the Republican Focus. such terms as "Lower Loup Focus," "Protohis­ Both the Columbus and Republican foci were, in toric Pawnee, Lower Loup" and "Lower Loup turn, assigned to the Lower Platte (Historic Phase, Protohistoric Pawnee." Aspect assignment Pawnee) Aspect of the Central Plains Phase of is seldom recorded in these records except as: the Mississippi Basic Culture (Strong 1935: 2). In "Lower Loup Focus, unnamed Aspect (Protohis­ view of his assertion that there were no im­ toric Pawnee, same aspect as Historic Pawnee).'' portant differences between any of the historic This variety of terminology is traceable to the Pawnee sites (Strong 1935: 57), it appears that various initial names of the taxonomic units the definition of two foci was based primarily on involved. geographical considerations. A further change in taxonomic terminology In his An Introduction to Pawnee Archaeolo­ was introduced by Wedel in 1940 with respect to gy Wedel classified the Pawnee and Lower Loup the historic Pawnee sites. The Hill site, Horse sites in the categories Historic Village Sites and Creek, Palmer and others were classified here as

-14- the Hill Focus, combining the Columbus and In a 1956 master's thesis at the University of Republican foci of preceding classifications un­ Nebraska, Wood added the Red Bird Focus to der the new name and omitting reference to the Pahuk Aspect and listed the sites assigned to aspect (Wedel 1940: 343, Figure 21). Since the the Lower Loup I and II foci. The Lower Loup II Columbus and Republican foci were apparently Focus consisted of a single component, the based solely on geographical location and not on Barcal site (25 BU 4) (Wood 1956a: 201). culnnal variation, the designation as Hill Focus The new Lower Loup and Pawnee terminol­ was s logical revision. ogy outlined by Stephenson has not been used a 1he designation of the historic Pawnee sites as great deal. In Wedel's latest publication the the Hill Focus did not gain acceptance. In 1947, original Lower Loup Focus designation is re­ for example, Wedel referred to the Lower Loup tained, and the terms "Historic Pawnee Focus" Focus (Pawnee) and the Historic Pawnee, drop­ and "Pahuk Aspect" are not applied to the ping r.he Midwestern Taxonomic System termi­ Kansas Monument site, which is classified in the nology with reference to the historic Pawnee category "Historic sites with tribal identifica­ material (Wedel1947: 152). The practice became tions" as "14 RP 1 (Kansas Monument site)­ one of reference to the historic sites in historical Pawnee, pre-1800" (Wedel1959: 534, Table 18). terms with reference to tribe and band subdivi­ Brown has recently suggested that the Lower sions: for example, the Kansas Monument site as Loup Focus should be termed the Lower Loup " ... a Republican Pawnee village" (Smith 1949: Phase (Brown 1966). 2). It would appear from the foregoing resume In 1950 Wolfe made a laboratory study of a that the most usual taxonomic reference to the portion of the Lower Loup Focus pottery whlch Lower Loup sites at the present time would be has had limited unpublished circulation. Wolfe its designation as the Lower Loup Focus of the confirmed the assignment of several sites to the Pahuk Aspect. There would seem to be little Lower Loup Focus, but concluded that there value in confusing the issue by proposing a return were enough trait differences in pottery from the to a designation such as the Beaver Creek Focus Barca! site (25 BU 4) to make assignment of that of the Lower Loup Aspect, for which taxonomic ~ite to the Lower Loup Focus questionable until priority could be established. Similarly, in view of the total material complex had been studied the current practice of reference to Pawnee sites (Wolfe 1950: 50). To date this has not been by historical designations and the most recent accomplished. Nevertheless, this tentative and classification of these sites as the Historic Pawnee undemonstrated hypothesis has found its way Focus of the Pahuk Aspect, there would seem to into literature as a fact of classification. be little value in a return to such a designation as In a 19 54 paper reporting the results of Hill Focus or Lower Platte Aspect. Although the several days of informal meetings termed the term "Hill Focus" had priority and probably Accidental Plains Conference, Stephenson pre­ should have been used, the term "Historic sented a series of modifications of the Midwest­ Pawnee Focus" is closer to the non-taxonomic ern Taxonomic System terminology with refer­ references to hlstoric Pawnee sites. Designation ence to the Lower Loup and Pawnee and other of the hlstoric sites as the Historic Pawnee Focus materials. The unnamed aspect to which the and their protohistoric counterparts as the Lower Lower Loup Focus had previously been assigned Loup Focus and the assignment of both foci to was given the name Pahuk Aspect. Four foci the Pahuk Aspect is the most accurate expression were assigned to the Pahuk Aspect: the Fort of the current taxonomic status of the sites Thompson Focus (several sites in South Dakota), under consideration in thls ceramic study. How­ the Lvwer Loup I Focus, the Lower Loup II ever, there would seem to be some value in Foc'1S and the Historic Pawnee Focus (Stephen­ utilizing band designations with reference to the son 1954: 19, Table 1). Thus, the Hill Focus components of the Historic Pawnee Focus in designation for the hlstoric Pawnee sites was those cases where a band identification can be dropped in favor of the term Historic Pawnee made from the historical record. Focus, and the Lower Loup Focus was divided intn two foci.

-15- CURRENT STATUS OF THE LOWER LOUP

AND PAWNEE SITES

The Lower Loup and historic Pawnee sites of these data have been drawn upon in various have been located within a portion of the Central archeological discussions, the above mentioned Plains subarea of the Great Plains. On the sources are the primary references generally protohistoric-historic time level, the section of available for comparative purposes. The publish­ the Central Plains in which these sites are found ed record affords an incomplete inventory of the can be designated as the Pawnee region. content of these two archeological units, a The Lower Loup sites have been classified as situation which necessarily affects the assessment the Lower Loup Focus of the Pahuk Aspect and of certain archeological comparisons in the area. assigned to the Late Ceramic and Protohistoric Wedel recently stated in a discussion of period of circa 1500 to 1750. The Lower Loup Oneota sites in the plains, "If these dates are Focus has also been designated as a Coalescent substantially correct, it seems remarkable that Village Complex and as part of the Coalescent there is so little evidence of Oneota in the Lower Tradition of the Plains Village Pattern. Loup pottery complex. I know of no unmis­ The historic Pawnee sites have been classified takably Oneota sherds from any of the Lower as the Historic Pawnee Focus of the Pahuk Loup sites; ... " (Wedel 1959: 614). Spaulding, in Aspect and assigned to the Historic time period utilizing Dunlevy's report on the Lower Loup of circa 1750 to 1876. The Historic Pawnee Focus in comparisons with his Arzberger site Focus has also been designated as a Decadent commented on ceramic differences. He states, Village Complex and as a part of the Coalescent "Outstanding among these are the complete Tradition of the Plains Village Pattern. absence in the Lower Loup of cord-wrapped paddle and checked-paddle stamping; ... " (Spauld­ Both complexes may be briefly characterized ing 1956: 85). In view of Spaulding's suggestion as semi-sedentary earthlodge dwelling people that the Arzberger site could represent an an­ with a dual hunting-horticulture subsistence base, cestral stage in the development of the Lower living in the prairie-plains environment during Loup pottery tradition (Spaulding 1956: 86), the the period of increasing contacts with white complete study of the Lower Loup pottery is men. important. The lack of published data has ham­ Current archeological knowledge of these pered the interpretations of Spaulding and complexes is based on a brief section in Strong's Wedel. They did not know that there are An Introduction to Nebraska Archaeology unmistakably Oneota sherds from a Lower Loup (1935), on Wedel's An Introduction to Pawnee site and that both cord-wrapped paddle and Archeology (1936), on Dunlevy's "A Com­ checked-paddle stamping do occur as parts of the parison of the Cultural Manifestations of the Lower Loup pottery tradition. Burkett (Nance County) and the Gray-Wolfe It is to this general problem that this ceramic (Colfax County) Sites" (1936), on Wedel's The study will contribute. This study of the pottery Direct-Historical Approach in Pawnee Archeolo­ is recognized as not fulfilling the need for a gy (I 938) and on Smith's reports on the Kansas complete analysis and publication of the Lower Monument site (Smith 1949; 1950a; 1950b). Loup and historic Pawnee materials. It is visualiz­ Many more sites of these two foci have been ed as a necessary first step within the scope of a excavated than have been reported. While many larger research project.

-16- Chapter II

DESCRIPTION AND IDENTIFICATION OF PAWNEE AND LOWER LOUP SITES

The Lower Loup and historic Pawnee sites to present a resume of the current status of the have been identified in connection with the historical identification of the Pawnee villages in definition of the Pawnee region. The following the same fashion that their status in the Central descriptions of the sites and excavations are Plains archeological framework has been summary in nature and are not intended as a reviewed. These data are summarized in Table 4. complete set of site description data, but rather The identification of the historic Pawnee sites to outline the nature of the sample of archeolo­ has been the result of the careful research of Hill, gical material used in this analysis. The size of Wedel, Strong, Kivett and others, and the site the total pottery sample from each site is identifications are cited with respect to these indicated since this is of primary interest in this individuals. Most of the sources employed in study. Much of the information is derived from their identifications have been examined in the the field and laboratory records of the Nebraska course of preparing an outline summary of State Historical Society; information from other Pawnee ethnohistory, but the firm basis of the sources has been cited accordingly. previous work has been acknowledged in the In connection with this more detailed identifi­ citations. A more detailed account of Pawnee cation of the archeological sites, it is convenient ethnohistory will be presented later, and possible

-17- TABLE 4. IDENTIFICATION OF HISTORIC PAWNEE SITES Site Reported Pottery Number Site Name I den tifica tion Dates Sample 25 NC 6 Genoa All four bands 1857-1876 None 25 SD 8 McClaine Skidi and 1851-1857 None Tappage 25 SD 2 J_,eshara Skidi or Grand 1851-1857 None and Republican 25 BU 1 Linwood (B) Grand 1851-1857 None 25 HM 1 Hordville Grand or ca. 1844 None Republican 25 HM 2 Burial Pawnee None Ridge 1 25 NC 7 Fullerton Skidi 1842-1846 2 25 NC 10 Cunningham Probably Skidi ca. 1831 6 25 NC 11 Vogel Pawnee 45 Component 25 NC 14 Plum Creek Grand, Tappage 1842-1843 None and Republican 25 PK 1 Clarks Grand 1820-1845 24 25 PK 2 Nelson Pawnee None 25 PK 3 Johnson Pawnee None 25 NC 5 Cottonwood Republican 1820- 9 Creek Tappage 1833- Republican 1836-1842 25 NC 2 Horse Grand and Creek Republican 1809- Grand 1820- Republican 1833-1842 1117 14 RP 1 Kansas 1821-1833 Monument Republican or 1775-1800 469 25 HW 1 Palmer Skidi 1804-1836 296 25 BU 1 Linwood(A) Grand 1777-1809 559 25 BU 2 Bellwood Pawnee Component Probably Grand 1795-1800 553 25 GA 1 Blue Springs Pawnee Possibly Tappage ca. 1825 500 25 WT 1 Hill Republican 1775-1815 1187 25WT7 Shipman Pawnee Component Probably Republican 18 25 HK 7 Carmody Pawnee Component ca. 1750? 23 25 SD 1 Yutan Oto 1820-1827 231 Pawnee influence --- Archer Pawnee 1

-18- reviSion of site identification or dating will be most of the identifications listed below, and this discussed at a more appropriate point after the summary of site data will serve a dual purpose as data from the ceramic study have been pre­ a resume of current site identification and as a sented. provisional chronological outline for the historic There is little reason to doubt the accuracy of sites.

HISTORIC PAWNEE FOCUS SITES

The Linwood Site, 25 BU 1 located by Blackman in 1907 after an intensive search (Blackman 1907: 114) and is apparently The Lin wood site is located approximately a the location identified as the village of the Grand mile south and slightly west of the town of Pawnee by Brown in 1892 (Brown 1892: Linwood in Butler County, Nebraska. The site is 275-305). Blackman reported that the landowner three miles south of the Platte River on an east J. B. Tichacek said that in the 1870's this area of bank terrace of Skull Creek. Bounded on the the site was enclosed by a sod wall three feet south, east and west by high bluffs, the site high and contained over I 000 lodge circles. The extends continuously along the stream bank for sod wall and house depressions had been leveled nearly one half mile. The southwestern portion in 1907, and Blackman reported that he was of the site, about 20 acres in area, has been unable to find any pottery on the site. Like designated as Component A. The northeastern Component A, Component B, is reported to have area, Component B, covers some 40 acres and is had a raised circle of earth, possibly an unroofed physically separated by its location on a some­ ceremonial structure, some 90 feet in diameter. what lower terrace. Burials associated with the Wedel has identified Component B of the village sites are found on the nearby hills, and Linwood site as the Grand Pawnee village visited Skull Creek derived its name from skeletal by Oehler and Smith in 1851 (Wedel 1936: 22, material found in the area. 31). The inhabitants moved from this site to the Component A of the Linwood site has twice Genoa site after 1857. No pottery is available been the scene of archeological excavations. The from the late component, while 559 potsherds University of Nebraska Archeological Survey di­ were recovered in excavating the early rected by W. D. Strong assisted by Waldo Wedel component. excavated two houses and one burial at the site in 1930. In 1939 the Nebraska State Historical Society excavations at the site were supervised by John Champe under the direction of A. T. Hill. At this time a large circular structure, five houses, several cache pits and numerous burials The Bellwood Site, 25 BU 2 were excavated. A pottery sample of 559 sherds was available for study. This component of the The Bellwood site is located approximately site has been identified as the village site of the five miles northeast of the town of Bellwood in Grand Pawnee occupied about 1800 (Strong Butler County, Nebraska. The site is on a terrace 1935: 56; Wedel 1936: 30, footnote 55). Hyde above the floodplain and about 300 yards south has suggested a date of 1777 for the site (Hyde of the Platte River. The village site is about 300 1951: 78), probably on the basis of the 1777 yards in width and extends almost three-quarters record of a Panis village on a small tributary of of a mile along the river bank, covering an area of the Platte (Houck 1909: 144). The site was about 100 acres. The eastern part of the site· occupied in 1804 as reported by Lewis and Clark represents a component attributable to the and in 1806 as reported by Pike (Wedel 1936: historic Pawnee of circa 1800 while the western 17). part of the site has been assigned to the Lower Component B of the Linwood site has never Loup Focus (Champe 1946: 119). Excavation by been excavated. This section of the site was the Nebraska State Historical Society under the

-19- direction of A. T. Hill assisted by Waldo Wedel date of 1750 for the Pawnee occupation (Kivett and George Lamb was carried out in 1936. Two 1952: 28-29). Massacre Canyon, the site of the houses and associated features and three cache 1873 battle between the Sioux and the Pawnee, pits are assigned to the historic Pawnee is nearby. The Pawnee component of the Car­ component at the site. A sample of 553 mody site represents a temporary occupation. It potsherds was recovered. is within Pawnee hunting territory, but far to the west of their permanent village sites. A total of 23 sherds were included in the Category A pottery sample. The Blue Springs Site, 25 GA 1

The Blue Springs site was originally named the Wonder site and is located about one mile north The Hordville Site, 25 HM 1 of the town of Blue Springs in Gage County, Nebraska. The village is on a terrace above the The Hordville site is located some two miles bottomlands on the west side of the Blue River. north of the town of Hordville in Hamilton Blackman described the site in 1904 and report­ County, Nebraska. The village site was on the ed that some 48 house depressions were visible south side of the Platte River on a terrace above within a 30-acre area enclosed by a sod wall and the floodplain of the Platte River bottomlands. defensive ditches {Blackman 1904: 16-17). The Rising ground and hills are present to the south Blue Springs site was excavated by the Nebraska and east of the village, which included some 15 State Historical Society in 193 5 by George Lamb acres. Graves were located on nearby bluffs. under the direction of A. T. Hill. By that time all The site has never been excavated, and no evidence of the sod wall and ditches had been materials from it are available for examination. A obliterated by agricultural operations. Two reasonably detailed description of collections houses, two cache pits and three middens were from the site was prepared by Bengtson, who excavated in 1935 and produced a sample of 500 attributed it to the Grand Pawnee. In 1868 house potsherds. Blackman was unable to identify the depressions were visible, but could no longer be occupants of the Blue Springs site, but Major seen in 1933. Iron hoes, mirrors, glass beads, Albert Green, Oto Indian agent, reported that axes, gun barrels and clay pipes were present. the Pawnee occupied the area until about 1825 Other trade materials included files, arrow heads, (Green 1918: 91). {Green 1916: 113). According butcher knives, sheet copper, sheet brass, china­ to Pawnee traditions, the Tappage people remain­ ware, a steel pipe-tomahawk and a "Spanish" ax. ed in the vicinity of Nemaha in southeastern Flint arrow heads and pottery were present, Nebraska after the separation of the Grand and indicating that production of native implements Republican bands (Dorsey 1906: 8), suggesting had not been completely abandoned. The pottery the tentative identification of the site as a is described as shell tempered, painted red on the Tappage village. This Blue River location is the interior and decorated with lines and dots on the Pawnee site closest to the Nemaha area. exterior surface (Bengtson 1933: 124-29). A. T. Hill has suggested that this site might be the Republican village mentioned by Major Wharton in 1844. The Carmody Site, 25 HK 7

The Carmody site is located about two miles west of the town of Trenton in Hitchcock County, Nebraska, on a high bluff on the north The Burial Ridge 1 Site, 25 HM 2 side of the Republican River southwest of Elm Creek. The site was excavated by Marvin F. The Burial Ridge 1 site is located south of the Kivett of the Nebraska State Historical Society in Platte River in Hamilton County, Nebraska. It is 1950. Three components have been identified. on a tongue-like ridge 40 feet high which runs Two of these represent Plains Woodland com­ north and south parallel to the face of the plexes, and the third, Category A pottery, has tableland and covers one half acre. Seven looted been identified as historic Pawnee. On the basis burial pits, only two of which contained burials, of sherd quality Kivett suggested an approximate were excavated by the Nebraska State Historical

-20- Society in 1940 by Robert Cumming under the excavated three cache pits exposed in a gully direction of A. T. Hill. No pottery was recovered. bank. Excavation by the Nebraska State Histori­ cal Society under the direction of A. T. Hill took place in 1940 when three houses, ten cache pits and three middens were excavated. The pottery The Palmer Site, 25 HW 1 sample from the site consists of I ,117 sherds. Blackman discovered the site in 1901 and attri­ The Palmer site is located four miles north buted it to the Skidi Pawnee of 1832 (Blackman and one mile west of the town of Palmer in 1902: 297). Hill states that "A trader of Lewis of Howard County, Nebraska. The site is on a St. Louis visited this village in 1811 and said it terrace some 30 feet above the Loup River, was started about two years ago by the Grand which skirts the southern edge of the village. and Republican Pawnee" (Hill 1932: field notes). Burials are located on hills to the north of the Wedel also identifies it as the village of the Grand site, and the village is some 20 to 40 acres in and Republican of about 1810 mentioned by extent. A large circle some 200 feet in diameter Sibley, occupied by the Grand as reported by is a prominent surface feature. The Palmer site Long in 1820, and described by Irving as was first identified by A. T. Hill in 1922(Wedel occupied by the Republican until its abandon­ 1936: 25). Some collections, apparently mostly ment in 1842 recorded by Dunbar (Wedel 1936: from burials, were excavated by Brookings and 36-37). are now in the House of Yesterday Museum in Hastings. Preparations to excavate the Palmer site were made by the Nebraska State Historical Society in 1936, but the landowner would not The Cottonwood Creek Site, 25 NC 5 permit either survey or excavation. Archeologists have been excluded from the property since that The Cottonwood Creek site is located four time until 1961 when permission was finally miles north and two miles east of the town of secured for a brief surface survey. Surface ma­ Palmer in Nance County, Nebraska. It is on a low terials collected at that time and prior to 1936 terrace east of Cottonwood Creek on the north include an available sample of 296 potsherds. bank of the Loup River. In 1884 when J. F. This may be the Skidi site reported by Lewis Forbes homesteaded the land, a low sod wall and Clark in 1804 (Wedel1936: 17). Hill and enclosed some 50 lodge circles within an area of Wedel have identified the site as that occupied by about 20 acres. By the 1930's the site had been the Skidi Pawnee and reported by Sibley in nearly obliterated by farming operations (Wedel 1811, Long and Morse in 1820, Irving in 1833 1936: 37-38). Robert Cumming under the direc­ and Dunbar in 1836 (Wedel 1936: 25-27). Since tion of A. T. Hill excavated one house, one cache this is the only documented Skidi site from pit and other features for the Nebraska State which an adequate archeological sample can be Historical Society in 1940. Pottery was scarce obtained, it is very important that it be exca­ both on survey and from excavations, and only vated. nine sherds were recovered. Wedel has identified the site as the Republican village reported in 1820 by Long and Morse and as the Tappage The Horse Creek Site, 25 NC 2 village reported by Irving in 1833. It was again occupied by the Republican band in 1836 and abandoned in 1842 as reported by Dunbar The Horse Creek site is located nine miles (Wedell936: 38). southwest of the town of Fullerton in Nance County, Nebraska. The 40-acre village is on a terrace above the north bank of the Loup River and just below the mouth of Horse Creek which marks the western limit of the site. Burials were The Genoa Site, 25 NC 6 found along the river edge. Traces of a system of fortifications protecting the north side of the The Genoa site has also been referred to as the village were visible. A. T. Hill and J. C. Samms Greek site. It is located about one mile south of excavated part of a house, five cache pits and a the town of Genoa in Nance County, Nebraska, horse corral in 1932. In 1937 Paul Cooper and occupies a broad, flat plain between Beaver

-21- Creek on the north and the Loup River on the illustrated the vessel found by Stearns which in south. The village encompasses an area of 100 1901 was the only complete vessel then found in acres or more. Burials were on hills to the north the state. However, the vessel cannot be positive­ and west and to the south across the Loup. ly associated with this particular site (Blackman Blackman identified the site in 1901 (Black­ 1902: 297; 326, Plate IV). man 1902: 296), but since that time the site The village was burned by the Sioux, and in has been nearly obliterated by intensive farm­ 184 7 Clayton described the recently destroyed ing, expansion of the town of Genoa and ruin. The village was enclosed by a five-foot wide by the Genoa Cemetery. Vandalism and re­ ditch with a four-foot high embankment inside cent highway ,construction have also damaged the ditch. Only a few houses were outside the burial areas, although s.ome burial material was wall and ditch. In 184 7 one of the 200 earth salvaged during· the r~ad work. A few burials lodges was still intact. Wedel identified the site attributed to the Genoa site were intrusive into on the basis of Dunbar and Clayton as the village the Wright site nearby. No large scale excavation built by the Skidi Pawnee in 184 2 and aban­ of the site has been undertaken, and Jew objects doned about 1846 (Wedel 1936: 27). Hyde of Indian manufacture have been found. No contends that part of the Pitahauirats (Tappage) pottery is definitely associated with the site. The joined the Skidi at this village (Hyde 1951: 153) village was protected by a sod wall fortification and that the inhabitants of the Grand and on the south and west sides. Republican village near the Presbyterian Mission The Genoa site is the last village of the on Plum Creek joined forces with the Skidi at Pawnee in Nebras~ in which the four Pawnee Willow (now Cedar) Creek following the 1843 bands concentrated during the period between Sioux attack in which the Plum Creek village was the t~eaty of 1857 and their removal to Oklaho­ destroyed (Hyde 1951: 156). Thus, the Fullerton ma in 1876. Reservation administrative buildings site may not have been exclusively Skidi. The were in Genoa (Wedel 19~6: 79), and Jackson's possibility that the Vogel site (25 NC 11) may be well-known photographs of the Pawnee were related to this complex situation may be sug­ taken at this site in 1871. Hyde presents a inap gested but not demonstrated. showing distribution of the four bands within the village area(Hyde-1951: 210).

The Cunningham Site, 25 NC 10 The Fullerton Site, 25 NC 7 The Cunningham site is located two miles west and one mile south of the town of Fullerton The Fullerton site is located two miles east in Nance County, Nebraska. It is located on a and one half mile north of the town of Fullerton terrace 200 yards north of the Loup River. The in Nance County, Nebraska. The site includes village is an Upper Republican Aspect site, but some 40 acres on the north bank of the Loup Feature 2, located on an adjacent hilltop, is River just below the mouth of Cedar Creek on a probably attributable to the Pawnee. The site level terrace above the bottomlands. Burial sites was located by Melvin R. Gilmore in 1914 and on nearby hills have been designated NC 7a, NC excavated by the Nebraska State Historical So­ 7b and NC 7c. Blackman located the site in 1901 ciety in 1940. The Pawnee component is repre­ (Blackman 1902: 297), and excavations by the sented by a patch of burned earth, two post Nebraska State Historical Society were carried molds and six bodysherds on top of the ridge. out by Cumming and directed by A. T. Hill in White Eagle identifieu the site in 1914 as the 1940. Five houses and test areas were dug in the location of the Skidi village in which he was born village, and burials were removed from the 83 years previously. White Eagle also said the last nearby hills. human sacrifice in the Morning Star Ceremony Pottery is scarce at the site. Portions of a was on the nearby hill (Gilmore 1914: 9-10). If single vessel which was recovered in 1940 and a the post molds do represent the sacrificial scaf­ complete pot collected from the area, possibly fold, the site may be attributed to the Skidi from the site, by Stearns represent the only Pawnee. The bodysherds are insufficient for a samples available for study. Blackman's report positive archeological identification.

-22- The Vogel Site, 25 NC 11 Society excavations in 1940 were carried out by Robert B. Cumming directed by A. T. Hill. Three The Vogel site is located six miles west and houses, six caches, other features and several one mile south of the town of Fullerton in Nance burials were excavated. The pottery sample County, Neoraska. The site is on a hill between amounts, to a total of 24 sherds. Wedel identifies Mare and Colt creeks and a knoll on the east the site as a Grand Pawnee village of the 1820 to bank of Colt Creek. Two components are repre­ 1845 period as reported by Irving and Wharton. sented, and the houses on the east bank of Colt The village was attacked and burned by the Creek were designated "probably Pawnee" in the Delaware in 1832, but was rebuilt (Wedel 1936: field records. A single house of this component 31). was excavated in 1940 by the Nebraska State Historical Society by Robert Cumming and directed by A. T. Hill. The pottery sample includes a total of 45 sherds. The only trade The Petrous Nelson Site, 25 PK 2 goods found in the excavations were two .44 caliber cartridge casings, rim fire and stamped The Nelson site, located two miles northeast with an H on the base. These cartridge casings of the town of Clarks in Polk County, Nebraska, post-date 1860 and are probably intrusive in the is on the edge of the tableland fronting the Platte site. River Valley and is about one half mile south of the river. The site was excavated by the Nebraska The Plum Creek Site, 25 NC 14 State Historical Society in 1940 by Robert Cumming under the direction of A. T. Hill. One Alternate names for the Plum Creek site small house, one lookout house and two looted include Burnt Village and Mission Village. The burials were excavated, but no potsherds were Burnt Village is located about eight miles south­ recovered.· The site was idel!,tified "presumably west of the town of Genoa in Nance County, Pawnet>" in the field records. Wedel describes Nebraska. The village occupied a flat terrace on lookouts at the Clarks site, and since the Nelson the north bank of Plum Creek, formerly Council site is only one mile away from the Clarks site, it Creek, some three-quarters of a mile north of the may be an occupation related to that village. Loup River. Wedel reported the general location of the site in 1936. The site was found in 1940 by A. T. Hill, and excavations by the Nebraska The Dick Johnson Site, 25 PK 3 State Historical Society were carried out at that time. One house was excavated, but no pottery The Dick Johnson site is located about three was recovered. Wedel has identified the site as miles northeast of Clarks in Polk County, Ne­ that occupied by the Grand, Republican and braska. The site is on a level ten-acre terrace, Tappage bands in 1842 in order to establish a surrounded on three sides by relatively deep village near the Presbyterian Mission (25 NC 15) canyons, on the south side of the Platte River which was a mile away. The 1843 attack on the Valley. It was excav<:~ted by the Nebraska State village has been described in detail (Wede11936: Historical Society in 1940 by Robert Cumming 32, Hyde 1951: 156). under the direction of A. T. Hill. One small, poorly defined house was excavated; no pottery was recovered. The site was presumed to be The Clarks Site, 25 PK 1 Pawnee at the time of excavation, and its location near the Clarks site suggests the possibi­ The Clarks site is located three miles southeast lity of some relationship to it. of the town of Clarks in Polk County, Nebraska. The village site is on a narrow terrace overlooking the south side of the Platte River Valley and The Yutan Site, 25 SD 1 encompasses an area of about 30 acres. Burials associated with the site are found on a nearby The Yutan site is located about two miles east hilltop. The site was located and identified by of the town of Yutan in Saunders County, Blackman in 1907 after an intensive search Nebraska, and was identified and reported by (Blackman 1907: 140-44). Wedel examined the Blackman in 1901. Excavations by the Nebraska site in 1936, and the Nebraska State Historical State Historical Society were undertaken in 193 5

-23- by George Lamb under the direction of A. T. ported that the area between the Leshara and Hill. One house, two middens and tests were ex­ McClaine sites was an almost continuous occupa­ cavated. A second investigation of the site by the tion. Historical Society under the direction of Marvin Blackman listed the site simply as recent F. Kivett and under the immediate supervision of Pawnee, but Wedel identified it as a Skidi Pawnee Thomas A. Witty was undertaken in 1958 when village and suggested that it was an overflow one house and several cache pits were excavated. from the McClaine site (Wedel 1936: 28). The The pottery sample resulting from both seasons Leshara site was attributed to the Grand Pawnee of work is small, amounting to a total of 231 by Hill at the time of excavation, and this sherds. Indications of a 100-foot diameter coun­ identification has been suggested by others on cil house were noted by Lamb. the basis of Indian agent reports for 1855. Oehler Blackman identified the site as a recent Oto and Smith in 1851 and Thayer in 1855 visited village with "Some earthworks plainly defined, the Pawnee at the McClaine site (Wedel 1936: very few relics to be found" (Blackman 1902: 28); the same period of Indian occupation 296). At the time of Hill's investigations the site applies to Leshara. During a visit to Nebraska was regarded as of Oto origin: many years later, the Skidi chief White Eagle A case in point is that of the Oto who, if the site at reported that the Grand and Republican bands Yutan is correctly identified as belonging to them, occupied the Leshara site (Gilmore 1914: 6). had taken over very largely the material culture of the Pawnee as a result of close contact with them (Hill and Cooper 1938: 277-78). It was the presence of Pawnee pottery and The McOaine Site, 25 SD 8 characteristics at the site that prompted the 1958 excavations. If the Yutan site is that of the The McClaine site is located three miles south well-documented Oto village at this location on of the town of Fremont 3nd is in Saunders the Platte, its occupation lasted from perhaps County, Nebraska. The site is on the south bank 177 5 or earlier until 183 5 (Kivett 1940: 6). of the Platte River, occupying a 40-acre area on China ware recovered from the site is of the Fort top of a commanding cliff above the valley. Atkinson period, 1820-27 (Kivett, personal com­ Blackman named and tested the site, which he munication). Kivett has noted that in the ac­ identified as a recent Pawnee village, in 1901 count of Long's 1819-20 expedition the Oto site (Blackman 1902: 296). Wedel tested an exposed was described as being on the left bank of the cache pit in 1930 and recovered " . . . a few Platte rather than on the right, where the Yutan sherds, a scissors blade, the tooth of a horse, and site is situated (Kivett 1940: 6). However, other a badly rusted triangular file" (Wedel 1936: 28), references place the Oto village on the right bank but no systematic excavation of the site has ever of this portion of the Platte (Nasatir 1952: 123). been undertaken. Blackman reported that the 40- The Yutan site poses several problems of identifi­ or 50-acre village was formerly enclosed by a sod cation. If it is an Oto site, it poses still further fortification wall. Wedel has identified the site as problems in reaching an explanation of the the Skidi Pawnee village visited by Oehler and presence of Pawnee materials. Smith in 1851 and by Thayer in 185 5. It was apparently not abandoned until after 1856 when the Pawnee began to concentrate in the single village at Genoa. During a visit to Nebraska many The Leshara Site, 25 SD 2 years later, White Eagle reported that the Skidi and Tappage bands had occupied the McClaine The Leshara site is located about eight miles site (Gilmore 1914: 6). Originally the site was south of the town of Fremont and is in Saunders named for the landowner, Robert McClean. County, Nebraska. The site is located on a bluff above the valley on the south side of the Platte River. Visiting the site in 1901, Blackman report­ The Hill Site, 25 WT 1 ed that it was nearly obliterated (Blackman 1902: 296). George Lamb excavated the site in The Hill site has also been termed the Hill 1935 for the Nebraska State Historical Society Farm site, the Superior 1 (Hill site) and the under the direction of A. T. Hill. Three houses Pike-Pawnee Village. It is located between the were excavated, but no pottery was among the towns of Red Cloud and Guide Rock and is specimen material recovered. Early settlers re- about five miles southwest of Guide Rock in

-24- Webster County, Nebraska. The 30-acre site is on suggested that it may not have been entirely the south side of the Republican River on a abandoned until as late as 1815 (Kivett 19 57). terrace some 25 or 30 feet high. South of the site Among archeologists there is little or no doubt of the ground slopes upward to a high hill on which the identification of the Hill site as the one burials are located. The village was located and visited both by the Spanish expedition led by identified in 1923 by A. T. Hill, who later Malgares and by the Americans under Pike in purchased the site and carried out personal 1806. However, some historians regard the excavations. These specimens were subsequently problem as unsettled (Barry 1961: 6 7). Along made a part of the Nebraska State Historical with the Linwood site, the Hill site is one of the Society collections after Hill became Museum type sites of the historic Pawnee archeological Director. In 1930 the University of Nebraska complex. Archeological Survey under the direction of W. D. Strong carried out excavations at the site. Cumming, Metcalf and Kivett, under the direction of A. T. Hill, carried out excavations The Shipman Site, 25 WT 7 for the Nebraska State Historical Society in 1941. Five houses, several cache pits and many The Shipman site is located between Red burials were excavated at this time. The total Cloud and Guide Rock in Webster County, pottery sample available from these various Nebraska. The site adjoins the Hill site on the investigations is 1,187 sherds. west and is on the south side of the Republican River on a terrace above Hull Creek. The site was The identification of the Hill site as the excavated in 1941 by the Nebraska State Histori­ Republican Pawnee village visited by Zebulon Pike in 1806 has been the subject of considerable cal Society under the direction of A. T. Hill. The controversy which has arisen from the identifica­ village is an earthlodge site of the Upper Republi­ tion of the Kansas Monument site as the scene of can Aspect, but one circular house located at the the Pike visit. In 189 5 Coues suggested that the west edge of the village is assigned to a second village visited by Pike must have been on the _ component representing the historic Pawnee. Hill Republican River in Nebraska opposite the town regarded this house as an overflow from the of Red Cloud (Coues 1896: Vol. 2, p. 404, note adjacent Hill site attributed to the Republican 65; p. 410-11, note 70). However, the State of Pawnee (Hill 1941: 6). The pottery sample Kansas marked the Kansas Monument site as the recovered from the house amounts to 18 sherds. Pike location in 1901. Blackman concluded that " ... after a careful study of Pike's very meager description of the village, which he visited in The Kansas Monument Site, 14 RP 1 1806, one can scarcely believe this is the identical spot" (Blackman 1907: 134). Hill's The Kansas Monument site has also been dissatisfaction with the Kansas location led to his termed the Republic Kansas site or Concordia search for the site he found in Webster County (Kansas) site, and was designated 14 KR 2 prior (Wedel 1953: 153). to a change in the county's symbol. The Kansas Pike described looking down at the Republi­ Monument site is located one and one half miles can Pawnee village from the top of a hill, a west and one mile south of the town of Republic topographical situation exactly duplicated at the in Republic County, Kansas. The village site Hill site and not present at the Kansas Monument occupies the top of a high promontory a few site which is on top of, rather than at the base of, hundred yards south of the Republican River and a promontory. The recovery of peace medals of includes some 12 acres. Burials are found at the type observed among the Pawnee at the site nearby ravines. The site was deeded to the State in 1806 from graves at the Hill site is among the of Kansas, and a monument commemorating archeological evidence supporting the Hill site Pike's supposed visit was erected in 1901. A. T. identification (Munday 1927: 187). Wedel has Hill made a surface collection of 42 sherds for reviewed the controversy, noting that the Repub­ the Nebraska State Historical Society in 1933, lican Pawnee were first mentioned in 1777 and and George lamb recovered some restorable pots that by 1811 the entire band was on the l.oup from the site, photographs of which are on file. River (Wedel 1936: 32-36). The occupation of Excavation by the University of Kansas Museum the Hill site falls within this period. Kivett has of Natural History under the direction of Carlyle examined the trade materials from the site and S. Smith took place in 1949. Smith excavated

-25- two houses and reports a pottery sample of 416 site. He later named the village the James site and sherds and one restorable vessel. He described 30 says, "This is not so large as the Wonder site, and houses and 50 cache pits. Except for one house has not been explored to any great extent, but and some pit~, all of these surface features are enough has been learned to classify it as the same within a rectangular area enclosed by a low kind as the Wonder site" (Blackman 1904: 16). fortification wall which extends around The Wonder or Blue Springs site has been three-quarters of the perimeter of the site. Smith described above and attributed to the Pawnee, concludes that there is little doubt that this is a possibly the Tappage band. The James site area Pawnee village, but that the true scene of Pike's was apparently examined during the period of visit was the Hill site in Nebraska. More recent excavation at Blue Springs, but satisfactory excavations in 1965 and 1966 were conducted evidence of the village was not obtained. There­ by Thomas A. Witty of the Kansas State Histori­ fore, no archeological collection from the site cal Society (Witty 196 7: 218). was available for study. In view of the identifica­ Other details of this problem of identification tion of the Blue Springs site and Blackman's have been discussed in connection with the Hill classification of the James site as "the same site. Smith states that indirect documentation kind," the James site is of some importance. places the occupation of the site prior to 1802 Blackman's map shows no fortification at the but probably not much earlier than 1777 (Smith James site, which may be an indication that it is 1950a). Wedel discussed the site in his mono­ earlier than Blue Springs. In any event, this site graph on Pawnee archeology (Wedel 1936: may eventually be of significance in the Pawnee 32-34) and reviewed the Kansas Monument site problem. evidence in 19 59. He concluded that it is attributable to the Republican Pawnee after circa 1775 (Wedel 1959: 60) and pre-1800 (Wedel 1959: 535), representing a period slightly earlier The Savannah Site than the Hill site. Brown reported that the "Kittikorak's" Revision of the identifications and dating of (Republican) band of Pawnee " ... lived for the Pawnee sites will be dealt with in detail in a many years on the present site of Savannah" subsequent chapter, but it should be noted in (Brown 1892: 282). This location would be this summary of site data that the ceramic study south of the Platte River in Butler County, suggested the Kansas Monument site might be Nebraska, and could be the Bellwood site, 25 BU later, rather than earlier, than the Hill site. 2. Subsequent to this analysis the paper by Barry and other sources were examined. There is historical evidence of a re-occupation of the The Archer Site Republican Valley by the Republican Pawnee in the period shortly after 1820 to after 1831 and A pottery vessel of Pawnee type was found on prior to 1833. J edediah Smith spent some time Prairie Creek, near the town of Archer in Merrick visiting the Republican Pawnee in their village on County, Nebraska. the Republican in 1829 (Barry 1961: 541-43). The evidence of Smith's visit and other data pertaining to this period of occupation in the Republican Valley suggested by Barry has not Possible Sites in Kansas been previously considered in connection with the problem of identifying the Hill and Kansas Pawnee sites in Kansas other than the Kansas Monument sites from the historical record. Monument site have not been located. Concern­ ing this problem Wedel has said:

There is unfortunately little or no information available on the Pawnee in Kansas, despite the fact The James Site that additional sites should be present on the Republican River, and probably also on the Blue. The James site is located just north of the Blackman reports a site in Kansas about three miles Blue Springs or Wonder site in Gage County, south of Hardy, Nebraska, which occupied an eminence about a mile from the Republican River, Nebraska. Blackman discovered the site, designa­ at 'Big Spring'; lodge circles were visible here in ting it "New Village" on his map of the Wonder 1860 (Wedel1936: 34).

-26- Of the former Tappage Pawnee village sites said Central City, Nebraska, in the vicinity of the by Dunbar ( 1880: 260) to have been pointed out vessel find at Archer. Third was the white bank on the Smoky Hill in western Kansas, which may or may not be the same as the Tappage Pawnee sites Ah-ka-wit-akol on the Loup fork opposite the said by Connelly (1918: 442) to have been mouth of Cedar Creek. This location would be inhabited on the Smoky Hill possibly as late as opposite the Fullerton site. A fourth such place 1830, no evidence has yet come to light (Wedel was on the Solomon River in Kansas and called 1959: 58-59). Kitz-a-witz-uk or Pa'howa. This has been identi­ fied as the mineral spring now called Waconda "Sacred Places" of the Pawnee Springs near Cawker City, Kansas. The fifth location was Pa-hur, or "hill that points the way", first thought to be in central Kansas and Wedel has reviewed the locations of the five known to whites as Guide Rock. Wedel noted "sacred places" of the Pawnee recorded by that A. T. Hill contended the true location of Grinnell. One was at Pa-huk on the south side of this hill was on the south side of the Republican the Platte River opposite the town of Fremont, River opposite the town of Guide Rock in Nebraska, not far from the McClaine site. An­ Nebraska. The location favored by Hill, who is other animal home was La-la-wa-koh-ti-to, under believed to be correct, is in the vicinity of the an island in the Platte River near the town of Hill site. (Wedel1936: 6-7,7 note 22).

LOWER LOUP FOCUS SITES The Bellwood Site, 25 BU 2 The Barcal Site, 25 BU 4

The Bellwood site is located approximately The Barcal site has also been referred to by five miles northeast of the town of Bellwood in the alternate name Skull Creek site and is located Butler County, Nebraska. On a terrace above the aoout four miles south of the town of Linwood floodplain about 300 yards south of the Platte in Butler County, Nebraska. The site occupies a River, the village site is about 300 yards in width high terrace south of the Platte River on the west side of Skull Creek. The Barcal site represents a and extends almost three-quarters of a mile along village occupation. Both Pawnee and Lower the river bank. It covers an area of about 100 Loup affiliations are listed on one survey report. acres. The village site is attributable to the The site was noted by Blackman in 1906 historic Pawnee, but field observations and (Blackman 1907: 11 5), and was excavated by the laboratory analysis indicate that several features Nebraska State Historical Society in 1939 by can be identified as representing a Lower Loup John L. Champe under the direction of A. T. Focus component. Excavations were carried out Hill. Three houses, two middens, several cache in 1936 by the Nebraska State Historical Society pits and 34 burials were excavated. The houses under the direction of A. T. Hill assisted by were extensively rebuilt, and the three house Waldo Wedel and George Lamb. Three cache pits, sites were interpreted as the remains of six struc­ tures. The pottery sample recovered consists of a midden and a test area are assigned to the some 5,672 sherds. Champe ass!gns the sites to Lower Loup component, from which a pottery the Pawnee (Champe 1946: 78), but Wolfe con­ sample of 1,23 7 sherds is available for study. sidered the site in relation to others of the George Lamb and George Metcalf prepared a Lower Loup Focus and concluded that focus manuscript report and Alvin Wolfe examined assignment should await the study of the total pottery from the site. A brief published reference complex (Wolfe 1950: 40). The Barcal site has appears in the Ash Hollow Cave report (Champe also been designated as representing the Lower 1946: 119). Loup II Focus of the Pahuk Aspect (Stephenson 1954; Wood 1956).

-27- TABLE 5. LOWER LOUP SITES

Site Pottery Number Site Name Identification Sample

25BU2 Bellwood Lower Loup Focus Component 1237 25BU4 Bucal Pawnee Lower Loup Focus Lower Loup II 5672 25CC 1 Ashland Some relationship Occupation C to Lower Loup 185 25CX 1 Gray Lower Loup Focus 947 25CX2 Wolfe Lower Loup Focus 1223 25CX3 FuDer'sHm Lower Loup Focus 40 25NC 1 Burkett Lower Loup Focus 21359 25NC3 Wright Lower Loup Focus 11547 25NC4 PhD Cuba Lower Loup Focus 651 25 NC 16 Cofim Lower Loup Focus 109 25PT 1 Larson Lower Loup Focus 4587

25PT13 Monroe Lower Loup Fo~s 2269 25PT17 Foley LowerLoup? none 25 PT 18 Lightner LowerLoup? none 25 NC22 Templin LowerLoup? none 25 NC 21 Umbuger LowerLoup? none

relationship to the Lower Loup Focus. The site The Ashland Site, 2S cc 1 . was visited by Hill and Chlqllpe in 1936 while they were searching for evidence of the Oto site The Ashland site is located about two miles at the mouth of Salt Creek which had been east and one half mile north of the town of reported by Bourgmond in 1714. Ashland in Cass County, Nebraska. It is located Excavations by the Nebraska State Historical on the south side of the Platte River near the Society were begun in 1936 by George Lamb and mouth of Salt Creek on a terrace on the continued in 1937 by Paul Cooper under the southwest side of the creek which here flows direction of A. T. Hill. Four houses, numerous along the bottomlands of the Platte River Valley. cache pits and 16 burial pits were excavated. Five The occupied area extends over the terrace and features on the terrace (no houses) contain the nearby uplands, covering an area of more Lower Loup and other materials and trade goods. than 200 acres. It is a village site including The pottery sample from these pits is 185 sherds. ossuaries. Hill and Cooper tentatively assigned the Oneota Three components have been identified. Occu­ occupation to the Oto on admittedly inconclu­ pation A is a manifestation of the Nebraska sive evidence. They suggest that the Lower Loup Aspect; Occupation B has been assigned to the materials represent Pawnee influence among the Oneota Aspe~ and Occupation C has some Oto at the Ashland site similar to those

-28- influences at the Yutan (25 SD 1) Oto site (Hill and was excavated by the University of Nebraska and Cooper 1938: 250, 277-78). Trade materials Archeological Survey in 1931 under the supervi­ include a gun spring and an offset awl, probably sion of Waldo Wedel and the direction of W. D. indicating a relatively late period of trade Strong. A Nebraska State Historical Society contact. surface collection was made in 193 7. Ten or 12 mounds and several house rings were reported visible in 1931 when one house and one midden The Gray Site, 25 1 were excavated. Dunlevy reported the Wolfe site ex in detail in 1936, designating this house as house two of the Gray-Wolfe site (Dunlevy 1936). The Gray site has also been designated as the Wolfe examined the pottery in 1950, the sample Schuyler site and as the Gray group of the available for study being 1 ,223 sherds. This site is Gray-Wolfe site. It is located about five miles also one of the type sites of the Lower Loup north of the town of Schuyler in Colfax County, Focus. Nebraska, and is north of the Platte River on the south side of Shell Creek near its confluence The Fuller's Hill Site, 25 3 with the Platte. The site is on the eastern ex extremity of a flat-topped divide between the Platte and Shell Creek valleys and encompasses The Fuller's Hill site is located one and one an area of about 40 acres. The village was half miles north of the town of Schuyler in investigated by Blackman in 1904 and 1905 after Colfax County, Nebraska, in the vicinity of the it was reported to him by Mrs. Robert Gray Gray and Wolfe sites. It has never been exca­ (Blackman 1904: 23; Blackman 1905: 398-99). vated, but a sample of 40 sherds is in the Uni­ Excavations were carried out by the Univer­ versity of Nebraska Laboratory of Anthropology sity of Nebraska Archeological Survey under the coli ections. supervision of Waldo Wedel and the direction of W. D. Strong. A surface collection was made in 193 7 by the Nebraska State Historical Society. The Burkett Site, 25 Ne 1 One house and eight associated cache pits were excavated. The pottery sample consists of some 947 sherds. Strong (1935: 63) and Wedel (1936: The Burkett site is located about four miles 39) discuss the site as representative of protohis­ southwest of the town of Genoa in Nance toric Pawnee. It is one of the type sites of the County, Nebraska. The village is located on a Lower Loup Focus. Dunlevy reported the site in lofty tableland about a mile north of the Loup detail in 1936, considering it as an extension of a River, about 15 miles north of the Platte and a continuous Gray-Wolfe site (Dunlevy 1936: few miles south of Beaver Creek Valley. The 154). However, Wolfe clarified the situation by terrace rises almost 150 feet above the floor of field survey and reports the two sites as distinct, the Loup Valley. The occupational area is large, being separated by a mile of unoccupied ground encompassing an area of from 50 to 80 acres. (Wolfe 1950: 12). Blackman concluded that the Wedel has identified the Burkett site as site was Pawnee, that it was related to the probably the one reported by Hayden in 1867 Burkett site and that it was abandoned prior to (Wedel 1936: 40). Blackman visited the site in 1820 when Major Long crossed Shell Creek on 1901, reporting the presence of 200 "mound June 8, 1820 (Blackman 1904: S-6). houses" (Blackman 1902: 297), and in 1907 he excavated a mound and part of a cache pit. He regarded the mound as the remains of a house rather than as a midden (Blackman 1907: The Wolfe Site, 25 ex 2 124-28). Hill and Wedel trenched a midden at the site in 1930(Wedel1936: 41),andin 1931 the The Wolfe site, also termed the Wolfe group University of Nebraska Archeological Survey of the Gray-Wolfe site, is located about four carried out more extensive excavations. Sub­ miles northwest of the town of Schuyler in sequent to Dunlevy's report on that work (Dun­ Colfax County, Nebraska. The village site is levy, 1936} the Nebraska State Historical So­ located on the bluffs overlooking the valley of ciety excavated at the site in 1940. Fifty-seven Shell Creek some 400 yards to the north. The mounds were reported visible at the site, and site occupies an area of approximately 20 acres local informants reported that the mounds had

-29- formerly been much higher than at that time. ciety in 1936. While working on the Wright site it Five middens and two houses were excavated in was learned that construction of a levee by the 1931; 13 additional houses, several caches, mid­ Loup River Power Project was utilizing some dens and other features were excavated in 1940, 44,000 yards of topsoil from the area of the Wolfe examined a portion of the pottery in Cuba site. Earth removal destroyed all evidence 1950; and a total of 21,359 sherds was available of the houses at the site but exposed ten cache for the present ceramic analysis. The Burkett site pits and one burial, which were salvaged. The is the third of the Lower Loup type sites in pottery sample from the site amounts to 651 Dunlevy's report (Dunlevy 1936). Strong (1935) sherds. A brief account of the excavations was and Wedel (1936) have also described materials included in Lamb's Wright site report. recovered at the Burkett site.

The Coffin Site, 25 NC 16 The Wright Site, 25 NC 3 The Coffin site is located about one half mile east and three and one half miles north of the Part of the Wright site extends over land town of Genoa in Nance County, Nebraska. The owned by Mr. Umbarger and Mr. Krzycki, and site, probably 80 to 100 acres in extent, occupies field notes sometimes refer to the Umbarger and the sides and top of a high ridge overlooking the Krzycki portions of the site. However, the term valley of Looking Glass Creek to the east. "Wright site" refers to tne entire area. The site is Blackman reported the village in 1901 (Blackman located one and one half miles southwest of the 1902: 297), and Hill and Metcalf made a surface town of Genoa in Nance County, Nebraska, with collection for the Nebraska State Historical the village occupying a bluff above the Beaver Creek Valley which lies to the north of the site. Society in 1941. However, the site has never been excavated. The pottery sample available for The Loup River is over two miles away to the study amounts to 109 potsherds. south. Eighty acres or more are included within the Wright site area. Blackman visited the Wright site in 1901 (Blackman 1902: 297), and exten­ sive excavations were accomplished in 1936 by The Larson Site, 25 PT 1 the Nebraska State Historical Society under the supervision of George Lamb directed by A. T. The Larson site, or Looking Glass site, is Hill. Ten houses, a dozen cache pits and nu­ located four and one half miles west of the town merous tests were excavated. The pottery is of Monroe in Platte County, Nebraska. The comprised of 11 ,54 7 sherds. George Lamb pre­ Looking Glass site is an alternate name. It pared a manuscript account of the excavations, occupies the valley and adjacent bluffs on the and Alvin Wolfe studied a portion of the pottery west bank of Looking Glass Creek about two in 1950. A notable feature was the discovery of miles north of the Loup River. The village is over 50 human skeletons on the floors of one large, covering 75 to 80 acres of ground. Black­ burned house, interpreted as evidence of a man reports visiting the site in 1901 (Blackman massacre. The landowner reported former evi­ 1902: 297); and the site, damaged by a canal of dence of a possible fortification ditch, but the the Loup River Public Power Company, was presence of fortification has not been demon­ excavated by A. T. Hill assisted by George Lamb strated beyond doubt. for the Nebraska State Historical Society in 1936. Two houses and ten cache pits were excavated, yielding a pottery sample of 4,587 The Phil Cuba Site, 25 NC 4 sherds. Wolfe included material from the site in his 1950 examination of Lower Loup pottery. The Phil Cuba site is located about one mile south and one half mile west of the town of Genoa in Nance County, Nebraska. It is one mile The Monroe Site, 25 PT 13 north of the Loup River and, like the Wright site, was on the south bank of Beaver Creek. The The Monroe site, also called the Hill-Rupp village covered an area of ten to 20 acres and was site, is located one and one half miles north of excavated by the Nebraska State Historical So- the town of Monroe in Platte County, Nebraska,

-30- north of the Loup River. The site occupies the Lamb in his manuscript dealing with the Wright crest and slope of a ridge forming a divide site as yielding the same type of pottery and flint between the Loup Valley and Cherry Creek and artifacts as the Wright site, but no material from covers an area of 20 to 25 acres. Cherry Creek is the Templin site is available for study (Lamb about a quarter of a mile southwest of the village 1936: 1). location. Nebraska State Historical Society exca­ vations in 1941 were directed by A. T. Hill assisted by Marvin F. Kivett and George Metcalf. The Umbarger Site, 25 NC 21 Two houses, two midden areas and seven cache pits were excavated, producing a pottery sample of 2,269 sherds. Wolfe included pottery from the The Umbarger site is reported to be located site in his 1950 study, and Metcalf prepared a on land belonging to A. M. Umbarger and about manuscript report in which he suggests: one mile north of the Umbarger portion of the Wright site. The site, situated on a terrace on the When a laboratory study is made of material from the various Lower Loup sites now in the west bank of Beaver Creek, was observed from a laboratory of the Nebraska State Historical Society distance but was not otherwise investigated by I would suggest that the material and especially the the field party working at 25 NC 3. However, Mr. pottery from this site be very carefully compared Umbarger reported excavating pottery from a with that obtained at the Wright site; and that cache at this site which appeared to be the same material from PT 13 and the Wright site be checked against that from other sites in an effort as that found at the Wright site. No material to establish an early and late focus for the aspect from this location is available for study. Wedel (Metcalf 1941: 33). includes an Umbarger site among Lower Loup sites in a 1938 article (Wedel 1938: 13, Figure 1). The Foley Site, 25 PT 17 Summary The Foley site is reported t9 be two miles southwest of the town of Monroe in Platte County, Nebraska. Although it has never been A brief resume of the nature of the ar­ excavated and no pottery is available, a few trade cheological sample and historical documentation materials from the Foley site are on exhibit in has been presented for the sites of the Lower the House of Yesterday Museum in Hastings, Loup Focus and Historic Pawnee Focus. These Nebraska. This material was probably collected data have been summarized in Tables 4 and 5. by A. M. Brookings. The site is mentioned in the Sixteen Lower Loup Focus sites have been field records of 25 PT 1 and in Metcalfs 25 PT listed, four of which are reported rather than 13 manuscript. Wedel includes the Foley site investigated sites. This leaves a total of 12 sites among the Lower Loup sites (Wedel 1938: 13, from which archeological collections are avail­ Figure 1). able. Only nine of these remaining sites are represented by collections large enough to in­ clude more than 50 rimsherds. These are the The Lightner Site, 25 PT 18 Bellwood site (25 BU 2), Barcal site (25 BU 4), Gray site (25 CX 1), Wolfe site (25 CX 2), The Lightner site is reported to be three miles Burkett site (25 NC 1), Wright site (25 NC 3), northwest of the town of Monroe in Platte Cuba site (25 NC 4), Larson site (25 PT 1) and County, Nebraska, and is included as a Lower Monroe site (25 PT 13). A total of 49,826 sherds Loup Focus site by Wedel (1938: 13, Figure 1). is available for study of the Lqwer Loup pottery. No material from the site was available for Twenty-four historic Pawnee sites have been examination. listed, four of which are not represented by archeological collections. Five did not produce pottery and hence cannot be included in the The Templin Site, 25 NC 22 ceramic aspects of this investigation. Seven of the remaining fifteen Pawnee sites are represented by The Templin site is reported to be located small pottery samples, thus reducing the effective about two miles west of the town of Genoa in total for intensive study to eight sites. These are Nance County, Nebraska. The site is reported by the Horse Creek site (25 NC 2), Kansas

-31- Monument site (14 RP 1), Palmer site (25 HW 1), The historical record provides documentation Linwood site Component A (25 BU 1), Pawnee for Pawnee sites from 1775 until 1876 when component at the Bellwood site (25 BU 2), Blue these people left the Central Plains. The eight Springs site (25 GA 1), Hill site (25 WT 1) and sites from which reasonably large pottery sam­ Yutan site (25 SD 1). A total of 5,040 sherds or ples are available range in date from 1775 to vessels is available for the study of historic 1846, and indications are that pottery was Pawnee pottery. virtually absent from sites occupied after 1846. The total pottery sample available for study Further consideration of the terminal date for and definition of the Lower Loup-Pawnee cera­ pottery production by the Pawnee will be pre­ mic tradition is 54,866 sherds and restored sented in a later section of this study. vessels. Historical documentation of Pawnee sites has With respect to settlement pattern, the Paw­ been extended back to 1775. The Lower Loup nee and Lower Loup sites are located, with few Focus has been assigned to the protohistoric exceptions, in similar positions on terraces above period of circa 1500 to circa 1700. The problem the floodplains of the Platte, Loup, Blue and of closing this gap, and other problems of site Republican rivers. The estimated size range of identification and dating, will be considered both groups of villages is also similar, being from later. ten to 100 acres. The Lower Loup sites are somewhat larger. Based on minimum and maxi­ The historic Pawnee and Lower Loup Focus mum estimates, these sites average between 52 sites have previously been discussed with respect and 60 acres in extent, while the historic Pawnee to their geographical location within the Pawnee villages average some 38 acres. Other than one region and with respect to their position in the possible exception among the Lower Loup sites, Central Plains archeological sequence. In this fortification is present only at historic Pawnee chapter the nature of the archeological sample sites. Dating the earliest appearance of fortifica­ available and the historical identification of the tion will be considered later, but it is a relatively Pawnee sites have been reviewed, thus comple­ late development. The presence of large, circular, ting the preliminary task of summarizing the ring-like mounds, probably the remains of un­ current status of knowledge of these archeologi­ roofed structures, is likewise reported only from cal complexes as a basis for the ceramic analysis Pawnee sites ofpost-1800 date. to follow.

-32- Chapter Ill

THE PAWNEE- LOWER LOUP PROBLEM

Wedel has commented that "In the Plains, as simultaneously meeting the demanding responsi­ elsewhere, publication of results has lagged far bilities of an expanding museum operation. behind the fieldwork ... " (Wedel 1961: 30). The 28-year gap in current knowledge of the The post-war development of the Missouri Lower Loup and Pawnee materials has already Basin Project of the Inter-Agency Archeological been pointed out. The lag in detailed publication Salvage Program has resulted in the accumulation of this as well as other segments of the vast of vast amounts of new data which have in turn amount of fieldwork accomplished in Nebraska stimulated the development and refinement of during the years immediately preceding the archeological sequences in the plains area (Wedel Second World War has been due to a variety of 1961: 28). The Lower Loup and Pawnee ma­ factors. With that war came the curtailment of terials have an important bearing on problems in WP A projects related to archeological work, and plains archeology (Wedel 1959: 582) and in view in the years since the end of the conflict there of their significance it is important that the have been the various pressing problems involved hiatus in the general.knowledge available about in maintaining an active program of research and these archeological manifestations be filled as salvage archeology by a limited staff while soon as possible.

-33- This analysis of the Pawnee and Lower Loup pottery study; these hypotheses have been one pottery is a part of the efforts to prepare the means by which direction and meaning have been data from these sites for publication. The study integrated into the examination of the potsherds. of the 54,866 potsherds has been selected as a The hypotheses are as follows: ( 1) Sites of the necessary first step toward preparation of the Lower Loup Focus represent the protohistoric individual site analyses culminating in a general period of the historic Pawnee tribe; (2) Lower study of the total cultural complex represented Loup and Pawnee pottery changed during the by these collections. passage of time; (3) Historic Pawnee and Lower The limitations resulting from the confine­ Loup Focus sites can be arranged in relative ment of this study to pottery analysis are recog­ chronological order on the basis of pottery nized, but it is hoped that this examination oi seriation; ( 4) It may be possible to detect band the Pawnee and Lower Loup ceramic tradition differences in pottery from historic Pawnee sites will provide a firm basis for future study of the of known band affiliation; ( 5) Sites of the Lower rest of the material remains and field data per­ Loup Focus may be most closely related to only taining to the sites. Subsequent study of the re­ one of the four Pawnee bands; ( 6) The Lower mainder of the archeological specimens may then Loup Focus is related to one or more archeologi­ be used to test the validity of this seriation and cal manifestations as well as to the historic the hypotheses developed from it. Pawnee. Previous efforts to describe and classify the These are not the only hypotheses which Lower Loup and Pawnee archeological com­ could be stated and investigated, but they have plexes have produced several conclusions and served their purpose in the present analysis. The interpretations which were of aid in organizing following discussion of the development of each this investigation of the ceramic materials. Vari­ of these hypotheses will illustrate the nature of ous suggestions for future research could be the Pawnee-Lower Loup problem and the stated in the form of a series of interrelated method of analysis used in this study of the hypotheses for consideration on the basis of ceramic remains.

HYPOTHESIS ONE

The first hypothesis reilects the long term vations, reconsidered the relationship of the Bur­ interest in the problems of the relationship kett, Gray and Wolfe sites to Pawnee culture. She between the Lower Loup Focus and historic noted that: "There are apparent similarities in Pawnee culture. Only occasionally has the inti­ material culture, and the Pawnee in historic times mate relationship between these archeological inhabited the region in which the Burkett and complexes been questioned. Gray-Wolfe sites are located. Naturally, the Strong compared the historic Pawnee Hill and question arises, are these sites proto-historic Linwood sites with the Burkett and Gray (Schuy­ Pawnee?" (Dunlevy 1936: 204). Dunlevy then ler) sites, both later designated Lower Loup, and presented a trait list comparison of the three concluded that: "These proto-historic villages are Lower Loup sites, Pawnee material, the Upper not only located in the very heart of Pawnee Mississippi Phase and the Wisconsin Aspect of territory but also contain much internal evidence that Phase. She concluded with respect to the linking them with the historic Pawnee culture as Gray-Wolfe and Burkett sites: revealed by archeology" (Strong 1935: 62). Thus, the chart indicates a greater similarity Wedel also regarded the Burkett and Schuyler between the two sites and the Wisconsin Aspect (Gray) sites as protohistoric Pawnee (Wedel than between the Pawnee and the two. As for the 1936: 38). relationship of the culture with the Pawnee, the percentage of similarity is great enough to indicate Dunlevy, in the report which is still the only borrowing or some affinity, but the determinants comprehensive description of Lower Loup exca- of the Upper Mississippi Phase make more logical

-34- the inclusion in it of the culture in question all details since individual, village and probably (Dunlevy 1936: 216). band differences were undoubtedly active factors. The element of time, too, must be ever borne in In response io Dunlevy's suggestion of a closer mind, for over a period of two or three centuries relationship of the Lower Loup Focus to Oneota considerable changes are expectable (Wedel 19 38: culture than to Pawnee, Wedel reexamined the 19). problem in 1938. His analysis of the available data was a convincing demonstration of the An initial hypothesis for consideration during relationship of the Lower Loup Focus to historic the analysis of the Pawnee and Lower Loup Pawnee culture. Wedel concluded: pottery was therefore stated as: Sites of the There is, therefore, no reason whatsoever, for Lower Loup Focus represent the protohistoric abandoning the hypothesis outlined by Strong period of the historic Pawnee tribe. wherein the Lower Loup Focus is considered a Since there is reason to believe that pottery protohistoric phase of Pawnee culture (Wedel modes and types reflect a portion of the cultural 1938: 20). tradition of the artisans who made the pottery Wedel's application of the direct historical (Ford 1949: 38; Rouse 1939: 15; Gifford 1960: approach to the Pawnee-Lower Loup problem 343; Lehmer 1954: 41), the presence of similar has left little doubt that the Lower Loup sites are pottery modes and types in both Lower Loup attributable to the Pawnee of the protohistoric and Pawnee collections can be interpreted as period. However, it is logical to include the evidence of a common ceramic tradition and reconsideration of this question within the scope would thus support the hypothesis in question. of the analysis of Pawnee and Lower Loup Identities are not to be expected (Wedel 1938: pottery. Wedel suggested a similar course: 19). The leads for future research on this problem The first step in the analysis is, thus, the are very clear. It is imperative first of all that examination of the material and definition of thorough analysis be made of all available archeo­ pottery modes and types and the comparison of logical material from sites of the Lower Loup these data from Lower Loup and Pawnee sites in Focus. These should be carefully compared with similarly detailed studies of collections and data order to establish the presence of a common from documented sites of the nineteenth century. ceramic tradition. After this has been done the Needless to say, identities are not to be expected in second related hypothesis may be investigated.

HYPOTHESIS TWO

The second hypothesis is that Pawnee and Wolfe group are markedly cruder" (Dunlevy Lower Loup pottery changed through time. The 1936: 188). probability of such change is indicated not only Qualitative and quantitative decline are, of in the statement of Wedel's quoted above, but course, only two types of change that might be also by other comments by individuals who have associated with Pawnee ceramics. Other changes examined these ceramics. of a stylistic nature would also be expected. Strong characterized historic Pawnee pottery The decline of pottery among the Pawnee as "a dy-ing industry, formalized and decadent" people of most recent times probably reflects the (Strong 1935: 59). Wedel also commented upon general decline of their native material culture the decline of pottery among the Pawnee, noting under the impact of increasing contacts with ". . . the superiority of the art in early times, white men. Wedel has recently noted that "As quantitatively as well as qualitatively, and its revealed by archeology, the material culture of decline with recency ..." (Wedel 1936: 63). the Pawnee after 1800 shows many parallels to Dunlevy noted differences in the pottery the remains from the protohistoric Lower Loup found at the Gray and Wolfe sites of the Lower towns, but can be described as generally much Loup Focus: "The pottery of both groups is inferior in quality. The way of life, we may infer, essentially alike, but the specimens from the was essentially the same" (Wedel 1961: 122).

-35- The sites have been classified as the Historic result of the passage time (Willey and Phillips Pawnee Focus and the Lower Loup Focus on the 1958: 18). The percentage occurrences of pot- basis of field and laboratory examination of data tery modes and types in stratified excavation recovered from the excavations. The problem of units of specific sites will, therefore, be calcu­ ceramic change through time can be investigated lated. If variations are observed to be present, within each focus independently of their suggest­ such differences can be attributed to change ed historical relationship by means of variations through time and will thus support the in the frequency of occurrence of pottery modes hypothesis being investigated. and types observed among the sites. In order to A similar comparison of variations among safely attribute such variations to temporal ra­ pottery types and modes can also be made in the ther than to cultural factors it is necessary to case of historic Pawnee sites of known date, but base this part of the investigation on those an added factor must be considered here in order portions of the data for which temporal control to reveal the temporal nature of the change. is available and for which cultural factors can be Known cultural variations must first be held relatively constant. Fortunately, such con­ controlled. This requires that such comparisons trols are available in two forms, stratigraphic between dated Pawnee sites be confined to those contexts within some sites and historical dates sites which can be dated by historical means and for other sites. safely attributed to a single Pawnee band on the Within single sites it is an almost certain basis of historical evidence. assumption that cultural changes can only be the

HYPOTHESIS THREE

Once the temporal nature of ceramic variation To summarize, Pawnee pottery in historic times has been demonstrated by analysis of excavated was often crude and unfinished, suggesting ceramic decadence. The earlier sites, however, show a materials for which proper controls are available, progressive increase in complexity and variety of the third hypothesis can be investigated. Ceramic wares in inverse ratio to the amount of Caucasian changes occurring during the course of time influence to be noted in each. Thus the Schuyler suggest, in turn, the possibility of utilizing such site, where only traces of Caucasian contact have been found, surpasses the later historic sites in the changes in the development of a relative chrono­ grade of pottery encountered, while the still earlier logical arrangement of the sites under considera­ but also protohistoric Burkett site excells both in tion by the application of seriational methods of this regard (Wedel1936: 74). analysis (Heizer 1959: 375-76). Wedel later amplified this suggestion, substituting As shown above, Dunlevy's comparison of the need for a statistical demonstration in place Lower Loup and Pawnee materials led her to of the concept of progressive decadence as a conclude that the two complexes were not as means of placing the various sites in relative closely related as other investigators had suggest­ sequence: ed. The following statement, however, strongly suggests that if these complexes are related, a For the Pawnee, as already stated, historical records precise enough to permit site identifica­ ceramic seriation would be possible: tions carry us back to ca. 1775 or 1800. Older sites that for historical reasons can hardly be anything The plain, high, direct flaring rim sherds and the but Pawnee (Wedel, 1938) are plentiful, but these collar-like rim forms are both found in the Burkett have not yet been convincingly arranged in chrono­ and Gray-Wolfe sites and in Pawnee pottery, but in logical sequence. In the absence of a detailed reverse proportions (Dunlevy 1936: 213). statistical demonstration, I suggest that those Lower Loup Focus sites that show the highest Wedel has twice suggested possible methods development of native arts and industries, the least by which the Pawnee and Lower Loup sites amount of trade goods, and no evidence of the could be placed in relative chronological order. horse complex are the oldest (Wedel 1947: 152). The first of these suggestions was: Aside from Dunlevy's report on the Burkett

-36- and Gray-Wolfe sites, the only serious, formal inverse ratio between ceramic complexity and effort to analyze Lower Loup pottery was evidence of white influence further suggests that presented in an unpublished laboratory study by a ceramic seriation could be tested by compari­ Wolfe in 1950. He sounded a note of dissent with son with similar data on the distribution of trade respect to the possibilities of placing the Lower goods from the various sites as well as by Loup sites in a sequence based on the concept of reference to historical records. ceramic decadence and made no effort to place Not all of the sites include stratified excava­ the sites in a sequence based on other types of tion units or historical data for chronological change in the pottery: placement, but the data applicable to the investi­ No chronological sequence can be set up for the gation of the second hypothesis concerning the seven Lower Loup sites on the basis of ceramic presence of temporal ceramic variations provides decadence. This study would suggest that any a firm basis for the application of seriation conclusions on sequences based on stylistic change analysis. must be supported by other evidence than ceramics alone (Wolfe 1950: 40). The stratigraphic analysis and historical data In a recent publication Wedel has reaffirmed indicate the direction of changing frequencies of his belief that the Lower Loup and Pawnee pottery types in the various Pawnee and Lower materials are closely related and that the sites can Loup sites. The stratigraphic units will then be be placed in a developmental sequence. He says: arranged in relative order on the basis of It can probably also be safely predicted that seriation, and the data from non-stratified units seriation of the large collections of artifacts and can be fitted to this pattern (Ford 1949: 38-44). careful analysis of all other data on hand from The ordering can be tested by reference to the Lower Loup sites will ultimately show a clear and unbroken line of development leading to the historically dated sites and by means of the historic Pawnee culture ..." (Wedel 1961: 111). observed inverse ratio of certain ceramic traits These comments by previous investigators and the amount of material of European clearly indicate that there is a reasonable possibi­ manufacture present in the sites (Wedel 1936: lity of placing the Lower Loup and Pawnee sites 74). These data may also be of use in supplying in relative chronological order on the basis of approximate and absolute dates for the seriation ceramic seriation. Wedel's observation of an sequence.

HYPOTHESIS FOUR

Although many variations in the pottery and uniform nature of Pawnee pottery. Strong stated other material remains from Pawnee and Lower that: Loup sites may be attributed to temporal change, So far no distinction has been observed in archaeo­ " ... individual, village and probably band prefer­ logical remains pertaining to the different Pawnee ences were undoubtedly active factors" (Wedel tribes. Although more detailed investigation may 1938: 19). An alternative or coexisting hypo­ reveal new criteria in this regard, our own investiga­ thesis must, therefore, be considered so that tions indicate very close cultural uniformity for all all change or variation from site to site is not these groups in the historic period (Strong 1935: automatically attributed to temporal factors. 57). Since historic sites can, in several instances, be Wedel agreed with this assessment in 1936, associated with a specific band of Pawnee, the stating first that "there is a general uniformity in possibility of detecting band differences in the all Pawnee ware that makes it impossible to pottery becomes the basis of the fourth distinguish the product of one band from an­ hypothesis. other" (Wedel 1936: 63). He continued, saying From the outset there was considerable doubt that: that such fine distinctions in the pottery would Careful research may yet develop local differences be recognizable since the primary investigators, although the fact that Pawnee pottery making was Wedel and Strong, were in agreement as to the on the decline precludes the probability of any

-37- very radical variations within the tribe during the may be possible to detect band differences from historic period. (Wedell936: 71). historic Pawnee sites of known band affiliation. In any event the outcome of an attempt to Variations in the frequency of occurrence of detect band differences in the pottery might be the pottery types in Pawnee sites will have been of use in determining what level of cultural attributed to the temporal factor in previous organization, be it band, tribe or some other portions of the study. These same variations can unit, the archeologist can determine from ma­ be used for the investigation of culturally deter­ terial remains. Willey and Phillips agreed that: mined differences only under carefully con­ trolled circumstances. Such comparisons are only In sum it looks as though the present chances are against archaeological phases having much, if possiOle between pairs of chronologically equiva­ any, social reality, but this does not prevent us lent sites known to have been occupied by from maintaining that they can have and that in different bands. Such sites can be extracted from the meantime we may act as if they did have .... the seriation for comparison. This is the reverse Just as, with the refinement of archaeological tech­ of the procedure used in attributing variations to niques, it will become increasingly possible to de­ fine types in terms of social behavior, it will be­ the temporal factor by holding cultural differen­ come increasingly possible to define phases in ces under control during consideration of the terms of social structure (Willey and Phillips second hypothesis. Instead, the temporal factor 1958: 50). will be held relatively constant by means of the Since Pawnee sites which can be identified as historical record and the seriation sequence. having been occupied by specific bands during Comparisons of such temporally equivalent, but specific years have been excavated, these data culturally different, sites may be expected to seem to offer as good a test of this kind of reveal band (cultural) or, at a minimum, spatial ceramic distinction as can be available in the variations in the pottery types. Central Plains. As Strong noted in 1935: Previous investigators suggested that the rec­ Summing up the matter of historic Pawnee pottery ognition of band differences in Pawnee pottery of the late 18th and early 19th centuries, we can say that it seems to furnish a reliable clue was doubtful. They may well have been right, concerning the group affiliations and period of any but if any such differences can be detected the site at which it may be found (Strong 1935: 59). method outlined above seens to be a reasonable The fourth hypothesis thus suggests that it approach to the problem.

HYPOTHESIS FIVE

Consideration of possible band differences in Kivett has had occasion to compare the Lower historic Pawnee pottery also suggests the possibi­ Loup pottery collections with materials exca­ lity that some differences in Lower Loup pottery vated in South Dakota and has suggested that the might also be attributed to cultural rather than to Lower Loup sites may be ancestral to only one temporal variation. If it is possible to detect band of the Pawnee bands. "As you may recall," he differences in Pawnee pottery, the next step said, "I feel that probably all Lower Loup sites would be to determine to what extent, if at all, are attributable to the Skidi band or possibly to such differences could be traced back into the Arikara influenced groups in some cases" (Kivett earlier Lower Loup complex. 1959: personal communication). There is ethno­ Wolfe noted some possibly significant dif­ graphical data which would tend to support such ferences in the pottery from the Barcal site in a possibility in that "The Skidi, however, consi­ contrast to the other Lower Loup sites he dered themselves independent and actually felt studied: closer to the Arikara than to the other three The pottery from site (25 Bu 4) differs in Pawnee bands" (Dorsey and Murie 1940: 75). enough traits so that assignment of this component Whereas hypothesis four focused on the ques­ to the Lower Loup Focus is questionable and must await a study of the total material complex at the tion of band distinctions in the pottery from site (Wolfe 1950: 50). sites known to have been occupied by a specific

-38- band, hypotheses five considers the possibility of Consideration of this hypothesis also requires similar distinctions among sites too early to be comparison between Lower Loup and identified specifically identified on the basis of historical historic Pawnee sites in order to determine if any records. The hypothesis may be stated as fol­ of the former are most closely related to any of lows: Sites of the Lower Loup Focus may be the latter. Again the investigation requires con­ most closely related to only one of the four trol of the chronological aspects in order to Pawnee bands. reasonably attribute variations to cultural fac­ The problem then is one of detecting non­ tors. In order to achieve this control it is temporal divisions within the Lower Loup Focus necessary to include the historic Pawnee sites in on the basis of ceramic variations. Since histori­ the parallel seriations extracted from the basic cal band identifications are not available for the chronological series of sites. This may be done on protohistoric period sites, some other basis must the basis of their geographical locations. Since be used for the extraction of these sites from the the historic and protohistoric sites are all located temporal sequence for cultural comparisons. within the Pawnee region, this procedure will Geographical location provides an independent introduce the historical band identifications into means of dividing the seriation into chronologi­ the geographically based parallel sedations. Thus, cally parallel, spatially separated segments. The any apparent correlations in pottery type fre­ resulting sequences can then be compared. On quency may also be related to identified bands. the basis of the distribution of the historic This must be recognized as a procedure which Pawnee sites, it may be assumed that geographi­ at best can produce only tentative results. It does cal separation is related to band differences. seem to offer a reasonably sound method of Frequency variations in pottery from pairs of simultaneous control of temporal, spatial, histori­ geographically separated sites which have more cal and cultural factors which must be present if or less equivalent chronological positions may be efforts to push historical band identifications tentatively suggested as an indication of possible back into the period when no such records are cultural variations. availabl-: is to succeed in any measure.

HYPOTHESIS SIX

Kivett's suggestion of possible Arikara in­ classification of cultural complexes of the Upper fluences on the Lower Loup Focus has been Missouri Valley should be deferred until the noted above and further suggests the need to analysis has been completed on the many sites now being excavated in this state by the National Park explore the relationships of this focus to other Service and its cooperating agencies. Even more archeological units as well as those with the risky at present is the attempt to assign the La Pawnee. Comparisons made by other investiga­ Roche focus to the Skidi Pawnee as did Meleen tors have shown that the Lower Loup Focus is (Hurt 1952: 35). related to several other archeological complexes Still other relationships of the Lower Loup in the Plains area. A few of many such obser­ Focus were considered by Spaulding in his vations will serve to illustrate the point. analysis of the materials recovered from the In his discussion of pottery from the Talking Arzberger site in South Dakota: Crow site in South Dakota, C. S. Smith has said As a result of these diverse influences Arzberger that "Talking Crow Ware ... resembles the pot­ culture was in many respects intermediate between the Upper Republican and Lower Loup cultures of tery of the Lower Loup Focus" (Smith 1951:33). Nebraska .... The basic affmity with the central Hurt has also commented on the relationship of plains culture sequence further suggests that the Lower Loup to South Dakota cultures: Arzberger community was a representative of an If we compare the La Roche focus and the early stage in the separation of the Arikara tribe Lower Loup focus on the basis of the significant from the parent Pawnee and that this separation traits listed above there is a greater similarity than occurred prior to the Lower Loup phase of cultural with the Over focus. Possibly they should both be development in Nebraska (Spaulding 1956: 110). assigned to the same aspect but at present the The inclusion of a hypothesis that the Lower

-39- Loup Focus is related to one or more archeologi­ of this similarity. Rouse has stated a series of cal manifestations as well as to historic Pawnee postulates and concepts which have been found serves to systematically broaden the comparative useful in the consideration of pottery types in aspects of the ceramic analysis. In the past, this study. comparisons of the Lower Loup with archeologi­ Rouse has employed the term "mode" in cal sites in other parts of the Central Plains and reference to observed attributes, each mode in the Middle Missouri area have been based on representing a single design, technique or other only those limited portions of the ceramic specification. This analytical procedure divides complex which have been reported in publication the artifacts into their individual parts. Types of or have been known to the investigators. This artifacts may then be defined as patterns of study will provide a broader basis for such attributes obtained by classifying the artifacts. comparisons since the whole range of the pottery Each mode is a single attribute which seems to be complex will be available. worthy of historical study, while each type is The majority of the cases in which Lower defined as a list of attributes which appear to be Loup materials have been compared with other most characteristic of the artifacts classitled in archeological data has been on the level of the each group. Rouse has postulated that modes and focus classification. A few such comparisons have types are conceptual patterns set up by the been noted above. The seriation of the Lower archeologist to represent ideas possibly held by Loup sites should provide a basis for comparisons the artisans; they are abstractions from the in a refined chronology within the focus classifi­ artifacts. Modes represent community-wide cation unit. It will thus be possible to make standards which influence the artisans behavior comparisons on the basis of early or late Lower in making the objects, while types represent the Loup sites. Such a refmement of chronology is stylistic patterns to which the artisan tried to one of the important contributions of the seria­ make the completed artifact conform. Types and tion method (Brainerd 1951: 121). modes, being intellectual ideas, are not re­ stricted in temporal and spatial existence as are the actual artifacts, and can, therefore, be traced It may be seen, then, that the Pawnee-Lower historically through time and space (Rouse 1939: Loup problem is one that involves various aspects 11-26). of the relationship of these archeological com­ Pottery from sites in the Central Plains is plexes to each other and that the dimensions of usually found in fragmentary condition, and it is the problem can be expressed in a series of six characteristic to find the rims of the vessels interrelated hypotheses which have served as a separated from the bodies. For this reason, useful guide in the study of the ceramic remains although complete and restorable vessels are from these sites. considered when available, many of the pottery It is apparent from the foregoing discussion types described in the area might best be termed that the key procedures in the investigation of rim types. This is the case in the pottery the Pawnee-Lower Loup problem are the defini­ collections from the Lower Loup and Pawnee tion of pottery modes and types and the arrange­ sites, and rim sherds and bodysherds have been ment of the sites in relative chronological se­ handled independently except in cases where quence on the basis of stratigraphy, history and sherds are large enough to permit correlation of seriation. These procedures are so well estab­ rims and body treatments. lished that it is not necessary to present an The pottery utilized in this study had been exhaustive analysis of their theoretical founda­ catalogued and placed in storage in the research tion or operational methods, but it is necessary collections of the Nebraska State Historical to review the particular approach to the prob­ Society and the University of Nebraska Labora­ lems of classification adopted in this study and tory of Anthropology. Due to space limitations, to indicate which of the various seriation meth­ it was necessary to work on small amounts of ods have been utilized. material at any one time. The work was done The classification of pottery or any artifact over a period of several months during two begins with the inspection of individual objects winters. These time and space limitations made it and proceeds by the description of those attri­ necessary to take particular care in maintaining butes which distinguish that artifact from others. uniform standards of classification. After all of Artifacts observed to share combinations of attri­ the sherds had been classified each of the butes may then be grouped together on the basis groupings was reexamined as a unit in order to

-40- evaluate the uniformity of the classification and Several methods have been utilized, but they are to make corrections if necessary. based on similar premises (Meighan 1959: Both rim and body sherds were first sorted on 203-4). the basis of tempering materials used in the The underlying concept is that quantitative paste. Body sherds were further subdivided on changes in culture take the form of unimodal the basis of combinations of attributes or modes curves (Spaulding 1960: 82), and that within a relating to surface finish. Rim sherds were given tradition changes are gradual enough that analyzed first on the basis of profile or units close in time resemble each other more cross-section form. These groups were subdivided closely than units separated in time (Rowe 1961 : on the basis of the decoration of the exterior rim 326). Several demonstrations of the validity of temporal ordering on the basis of these postu­ and further divided into groups based on the lates have been made (Robinson 1951; Phillips, decorative treatment of the lip and interior of Ford and Griffin 1951: 219-23). The basic steps the rim. The ultimate result was groups of rim involved are the identification of the cultural sherds based on the combination of modes units such as pots or sites, the determination of present on individual sherds in each group. The the relative similarity between these units and data were recorded so that information regarding the arrangement of the units in a linear sequence the distribution of individual modes was also based on their relative similarity (Heizer 1959: available for study. In order to make use of the 375). A relative ordering based on these assump­ data in terms of stratigraphic relationships and tions must be given direction by reference to other excavation units within sites such as houses independent data (Heizer 1959: 375; Rowe or cache pits, it was necessary to record the 1961: 327). Stratigraphic evidence is often used catalogue information regarding the provenance in conjunction with seriation (Ford 1949: 44). of each rim and bodysherd. The result was a The three following methods of seriation were body of data available for analysis in a variety of considered in reaching a decision as to which one ways. would be used in the present analysis. Ford and The pottery types used in the study were de­ others have employed a method which involves· fined on the basis of combinations of modes the calculation of percentages of pottery types observed on individual sherds and groups of present in each unit to be studied and the similar sherds. The distribution of such types in plotting of these percentages as bar graphs with stratigraphic contexts was examined, and those each type being located on a particular axis of combinations which were useful in revealing the graph for each unit. Stratigraphic units are temporal changes were noted. Some of the pro­ examined for evidence of change, and the strati­ visional types were grouped together to better fied units are placed in relative order. The other reveal temporal variations. The types thus collections are then fitted into the pattern (Ford defined included groups of sherds which were of 1949: 44-48; Phillips, Ford and Griffin 1951: similar general appearance and which also 232-36; Smith 1944; Smith 1950c). exhibited chronological variation in stratigraphic Robinson and Brainerd (Robinson i 951; units. Brainerd 1951)have developed a statistical meth­ Several previous classifications of portions of od of seriation which is similar to that em­ the Lower Loup pottery and Pawnee pottery ployed in graphic form by Ford (Spaulding were ignored, in so far as possible, during the 1960: 82). After calculating the percentage classification of the pottery for purposes of the frequency of the types present in each unit to be present study. After the classification was placed in relative order, this technique involves complete it was compared with previous the further step of expressing the degree of descriptions of the pottery and proved to parallel similarity between each of the units as a mathe­ those groupings to a high degree. Type names matical coefficient of agreement. Robinson has assigned to various segments of the pottery demonstrated that correctly ordered units dis­ complex are derived from those used by Kivett in play a particular pattern of arrangement when his description of the pottery from the Oacoma such coefficients are placed in a matrix. The site (Kivett 1958). More specific discussion will units to be seriated are thus rearranged in such a be deferred to a later section. matrix until the desired pattern is achieved. The The theory and method of seriation of archeo­ original frequency percentages are then substi­ logical materials has been discussed at great tuted for the coefficients, resulting in a series of length and need not be fully reviewed here. graphs of ceramic changes similar to those

-41- achieved by direct manipulation of percentage particular case because the required lirni tation of graphs in the method used by Ford. data to only three types reduced the accuracy of Meighan has proposed a third method which the results. The Robinson-Brainerd method he suggests is less time-consuming than the proved to be more complicated than rearrange­ Robinson-Brainerd technique. In this method the ment of graphically plotted data. Therefore, the number of types to be considered is reduced to graphic method was selected for use in this three, and the frequency percentages for each study; it seemed to offer the best method of unit are calculated as if those three types rapid, simultaneous control of the variations in represented the total collection from each unit. several pottery types. The results are plotted on three-pole graph paper Meighan has discussed the advantages of utiliz­ with each unit represented as a single point. A ing seriation methods even when stratigraphic best-fit line is drawn amid the clustered points data are available because it provides a more which are then in proper relative position along detailed picture of temporal change (Meighan the line. Meighan notes that the values of his 1959: 207, 210). Brainerd has agreed, noting seriation method are its ease and rapidity relative that through seriation the time scale is bound to to the Ford and Brainerd-Robinson techniques, be refined and that clues to the tempo of cultural but that it has an additional limitation in the change will be disclosed (Brainerd 1951 : 121 ). required selection of data (Meighan 1959: 204-5). Smith had found it possible to establish time All of these methods of seriation have been perspective within the Coalescent complex in the provided with convincing demonstrations of their Missouri River area through a combination of validity, and the method used depends upon the stratigraphy and seriation using ceramic data nature of the data available and the preferences (Smith 1959). The Lower Loup and historic of the investigator. Each was considered as a Pawnee sites are Central Plains representatives of possible method and was tried with a portion of the Coalescent complex, and it is hoped that the Lower Loup data. The three-pole graph stratigraphy and seriation will prove equally method was found to be the least useful in this successful when applied to these materials.

-42- Chapter IV

PAWNEE AND LOWER LOUP POTTERY TYPES

PAWNEE AND LOWER LOUP POTTERY

In noting the absence of Pawnee pottery in information concerning Pawnee pottery. In the museum collections, Strong attributed this gap to absence of historical data or other evidence of a the rapid replacement of native implements of all classification of the pottery by the Pawnee them­ kinds by European trade items before ethnologi­ selves, these materials may best be described in cal collections could be made, and indicated the an archeological frame of reference in the same necessity of acquiring information concerning manner that the Lower Loup pottery will be these aspects of Pawnee culture by archeological described. methods {Strong 1935: 56). Wedel has reviewed Two ceramic subdivisions, collared and non­ the known historical data relative to the manu­ collared rims, have long been recognized m facture of pottery by the Pawnee and has pottery collections from sites in the central pointed out that none of the brief accounts Plains {Spaulding 1956: 130}. The pottery re­ provide a detailed description of the completed covered from historic Pawnee and protohistoric wares (Wedel 1936: 62-63). Thus, the archeo­ Lower Loup Focus sites includes material repre­ logical collections from the historic Pawnee sites sentative of both of these major descriptive are the only presently known source of adequate categories. These and other classificatory

-43- groupings have been carefully described in early logical significance. In so far as possible this cera­ site reports for the central Plains, but such mic analysis was carried out independently of the groupings were not given type designations previous classifications. It was found that with (Jennings 1949: 40). only a few exceptions the new classification Thus, the pottery found in the type sites of closely paralleled the earlier ones. These excep­ the Historic Pawnee Focus was described but not tions can be attributed to the fact that a larger provided with type names (Strong 1935: 58-59; pottery sample was utilized in the current study Wedel 1936: 62-74; Smith 1949). Dunlevy de­ than was available to Strong, Wedel and Dunlevy scribed the pottery of the Lower Loup Focus in or represented in the Oacoma site collections. terms of three major divisions, which were The type names assigned by Kivett have been denoted by the Roman numerals I, II and III. applied to the appropriate materials segregated in The characteristic variations of the three divi­ this analysis. Modifications and additional names sions were designated by capital letters and have been assigned as necessary. further variations by Arabic numerals (Dunlevy 1936: 171-92). In his study of a portion of the Lehmer has outlined a commonly used ap­ Lower Loup pottery, Wolfe utilized Dunlevy's proach in presenting ceramic data in which system of designation (Wolfe 1950). "wares" are defined as groups of types which Kivett noted close similarity between pottery share such fundamental characteristics as the from Lower Loup sites and that recovered from fabric of the pottery itself, the surface finish, the the Oacoma site in South Dakota. His description general vessel form and the basic rim form of the Oacoma site pottery took this similarity (Lehmer 1954: 40-42). Variations included with­ into account and was in part based on examina­ in such types " ... presumably deserve elevation tion of the Lower Loup material. He has assigned to types only when it is possible to demonstrate names to pottery types common to both the some spatial or temporal significance for them" Lower Loup Focus and the Oacoma site which (Lehmer 1954: 42). Smith has indicated his reflect the primary association of these pottery agreement with this approach (Smith 1951: 32), types with the Lower Loup sites (Kivett 1958: and Kivett's classification and definition of 106-21). certain Lower Loup pottery types has been on this general basis. The methods by which the pottery types used in this study were designated have been described The basic descriptions of Lower Loup and above. Various modes of form and decoration Pawnee pottery have been cited above. Although were recorded, and types were defined on the some of these are in unpublished form, these basis of frequently occurring combinations of references should be consulted for additional those modes which were also of apparent chrono- descriptive detail.

GENERAL DESCRIPTIVE DATA

Some of the characteristics of the pottery times present on exterior surfaces. The structure studied in this analysis are shared by most of the is laminated, and sherds sometimes split parallel types defined below and will provide a general to the interior and exterior walls. Crumbling at background for the following definitions. the edges of fresh breaks occurs, but the pottery Grit tempered paste. Most of the Pawnee and is generally relatively hard and brittle. Lower Loup pottery is made of a fine to medium The pottery has never been subjected to an textured flaky paste sparsely tempered with intensive technological analysis which has in­ crushed granite or sand. Other tempering ma­ cluded examination of thin sections, but such a terials observed include calcite, crushed lime­ procedure may eventually provide supplementary stone and mica. A very few sherds include information concerning some of the types de­ crushed shell as well as grit temper, but the fined on the basis of form and decoration. Some combination is extremely rare. The color of the observations indicate that there may be some pottery ranges widely from very dark grey to distinctions in the paste of pottery associated light tan or buff with the occasional occurrence with specific sites. For example, at least some of of reddish-orange. Black sooty deposits are some- the pottery from the Barcal site (25 BU 4) has

-44- relatively denser tempering and is less brittle than Sherds which exhibit a somewhat more com­ pottery from other Lower Loup sites (Wolfe plex pattern of surface treatment have been 1950: 16). The difference is not pronounced and designated as Check Stamped (Plate III). These may be attributed to local variations in clay are rare in the Pawnee and Lower Loup collec­ sources or other factors. Other minor differences tions but must be regarded as part of the in the paste have been observed which may be complex. Two patterns of check stamping were associated with different pottery types defined observed, rectangular-shaped impressions and dia­ on the basis of form and decoration. For mond-shaped impressions. The diamond-shaped example, hardness of Nance Flared Plain sherds impressions are sometimes polished on the ridges. ranges from 2 to 7 with a majority of the Sherds with a Smoothed (Plate IV) surface measured sample falling between hardness 3 to 5. finish were also frequently observed. Many of In contrast, sherds of Colfax Braced type range these have been rubbed until all traces of former from 3 to 6 in hardness with a majority falling surface treatment have been obliterated. Regular between hardness 4 to 5. There is also a tendency undulations on the surface of other examples toward slightly coarser tempering particles and suggest that these smoothed sherds were original­ more granular texture in collared as opposed to ly simple stamped and that subsequent smooth­ non-collared rims. The paste used in Webster ing while the clay was still wet obliterated the Bowl sherds is even more sparsely tempered than grooves and ridges. The necks and rims of most Nance Flared Plain sherds, and Webster Bowl vessels were smoothed prior to the application of material is thicker and has a carelessly made decoration. The smoothing in some cases has appearance which further contrasts with the brought the finer clay particles to the surface of other types. Further intensive analysis will be the sherd, giving some of the pottery a slip-like necessary in order to determine the degree of appearance, but no evidence of a true slip association of these minor variations in paste application has been observed in the collections. with particular pottery types. For the present, The smoothing has been carried out in some nont> of these differences in paste are as signifi­ cases w produce a Smooth Polished (Plate IV) cant in the definition of chronologically sensi­ surface finish. tive pottery types as are the characteristics of The interior surface of the sherds is usually form and decoration. smoothed and plain. Thickness is variable on All of the pottery was produced by the same individual sherds, bodysherds ranging in thick­ techniques of manufacture. Vessels were model­ ness from 2 to 14 mm. with a mean of 5.48 mm. ed from lumps of clay with no evidence of Irregularities of the interior surface and occa­ coiling observed. The paddle and anvil technique sional fingerprint impressions suggest that the was employed, and surface finishes produced by potter employed one hand as the anvil on the this method have been observed on the sherds. interior of the vessel while shaping the pot by Cord Roughening (Plate I) is present as a part means of the paddle and anvil technique. of the complex, but is rare. It is a common Handles were attached to the vessels by surface treatment in the area but is characteristic welding them to the wet surface. Frequently of the early and middle ceramic periods. The they have been broken off, leaving a handle scar paddle was covered with twisted ·cords, the on the rim surface. Other appendages such as lugs impressions of which remain visible in the surface and pendant tabs were modeled. of the pottery. The cord impressions are some­ Decoration was accomplished by incising or times smoothed over and virtually obliterated. trailing the still wet clay with a pointed or blunt Simple Stamping (Plate II) is the most com­ tool. No evidence of engraving was observed. mon surface finish on Pawnee and Lower Loup Incised iines are deeper than they are wide, while pottery. It consists of a series of parallel straight trailed lines are wider than they are deep. A few grooves and ridges, the grooves ranging in width sherds exhibited broad trailing in which a very from 2.5 to 5.0 mm. Bone tools scored with wide, s..l-Jallow impression was made by means of parallel lines have been identified as the probable a fingertip or broad blunt tool. Tool impressing paddles employed (Wedel and Hill 1942: or indenting and punctating were also common 91-100). In some cases, the simple stamped vessel decorative techniques. Impressing or indenting body was subsequently rubbed until an imper­ with the end of the finger was also employed and fectly reflective polish was achieved. The polish can be distinguished by the presence of finger­ is restricted to the ridges of the simple stamped print or fingernail impressions in the sherds. pattern (Plate II). Pinching the wet clay was also employed. Some

-45- examples of bossed pinches, in which clay was the rim joins the body of the vessel. Flaring and pressed outward from the interior of the vessel, stra•ght flared rims grade imperceptibly into one were also noted. In these cases an indentation on anuther; in most cases the distinction is clear. but the interior vessel wall is present behind the in many examples classification is difficult. Even bossed pinch on the exterior. on an individual vessel, portions of the rim may Most of the incised and trailed decorations be flaring while other portions of the same rim represent combinations of parallel and opposed may approach the straight flared appearance. It is straight lines, often arranged in triangular plats notable that handles are more frequently ass

-46- slightly thicker at its base than at its lip, and the occurrence of multiple handles arranged in con­ interior of the rim is characterized by a deep tinuous series to form a cloistered rim effect is channel. The collar may be a smoothly curving S more common, but a few multiple handles profile or a more abrupt, angular recurve. approaching this effect are present on direct rim Vessel bodies are generally globular in shape. vessels (Plates XI, XXIV). The upper portion of the body ranges from Strap handles on direct rim vessels exhibit a flattened shoulders on a body with a maximum variety of outlines. Some are broad with parallel diameter considerably larger than the diameter of sides; others are wider at the top and taper to a the rim to a slightly rounded shoulder on a body narrower bottom. The handles of the latter are of with a maximum diameter only slightly larger various widths. Others are characterized by con­ than the rim. A few examples of angular should­ cave sides in which the center areas are narrow ers are present, but most are rounded. The base and the top and bottom widths are equal. A few of the vessels range from rounded to sulrconical are convex and are wider at the center than at rounded bottoms. the top and bottom. The strap handles occur Most of the handles present on all types of with one or two oval or round perforations. A pottery in the collections are strap handles with series of strap handles connected to a single flattened rectangular or oval cross sections. A broad top have a cloistered appearance; these small portion of the handles are round in cross include examples with two, three and four section and may be classified as loop handles. pendant straps (Plate Xl). The handles hang straight downward from the On braced rim vessels the strap handles have flared, braced or collared rims, sometimes curv­ similar outlines modified by the cloistered ing outward slightly. A few of the strap handles arrangement. On collar braced rims single strap are shouldered and extend outward more or Jess handles are the rule; when these alternate with horizontally from the rim and then bend sharply downward toward the vessel body. pendant tabs the result is a partially cloistered On non-collared or direct rim vessels, the effect. Occasionally strap handles associated handles are usually two to four in number and with this rim form expand and are wider at the are located either on opposite sides of the vessel bottom than at the top of the handles (Plates or at quadrant points. On braced rim vessels the XXIV-XXV).

POTTERY TYPES

Nance Flared Plain

Nance Flared Plain is the most common type present in the Lower Loup collection. It is characterized by flaring and straight flared rims which arc not decorated. Lip decorations usually consist of punctates, parallel lines or herringbone patterns, but great variety is present. Handles appear with most frequency on rims of flaring profile. Zig-zag or horizontal parallel lines are the more frequent handle decoration. Associated decoration on shoulders is most frequently parallel diagonal lines or opposed parallel diagonals arranged in triangular plats. Name: Nance Flared Plain (Plates VI-XI). Sample: 14 restored vessels; 4 ,8 12 rim sherds. Paste: Grit tempered as described above. Vessel Form: Rim: Flaring 60.5 percent Straight flared 39.5 percent Lip: Usually rounded or squared and flattened. Beveled, pointed and thinned variations occur. Application of decoration modifies lip shape.

Body: The vessels are about equally divided in three variations. One is a large globular body with

-47- maximum diameter larger than the diameter at the lip of the rim, with the broad shoulder rounded or flattened with a rounded bottom. The second is an elongated globular body with maximum diameter only slightly larger than maximum rim diameter, with slightly rounded shoulders and a rounded sub-conical base. The third variation is similar to the second but has a rounded bottom. Two vessels have globular bodies but are eliptical in outline and have oval orifices; these are the only two such examples from the collection, and it is probably a rarer variation than is indicated by their presence in two out of 14 vessels. Rim Decoration: Plain (smoothed or simple stamped) 100 percent. Lip Decoration: Percent: Description 20.8 Plain 21.6 Parallel lines (diagonal or transverse) 22.8 Punctate 8.8 Finger indented 13.7 Herringbone 5.1 Notched 4.7 Plain lip; parallel lines on interior rim .31 Parallel lines~ parallel lines on interior rim .02 Parallel lines encircling orifice .37 Crosshatched X .02 Parallel lines; parallel lines on exterior edge .02 Punctate; punctate exterior edge .02 Punctate; punctate interior edge .02 Herringbone; herringbone interior rim .02 Notches and punctates alternate .1 !_>lain lip~ herringbone interior rim .64 Plain lip; parallel lines exterior edge .02 faralJellip.es; parallel lines ending in single punctates on mtenor nm .04 Herringbone; parallel lines on interior rim .02 Zig-zag line encircling orifice .02 Single line encircling orifice .02 Plain lip; punctates exterior edge; parallel lines on interior rim .04 Plain; pendant triangles on exterior edge .04 Opposed parallel diagonal lines .52 Plain; interior rim impressed

Associated Shoulder Decoration: (Sample: 313; 6.5%) Percent Description 8.6 Simple stamped 6.3 Simple stamped, polished 16.0 Smoothed 4. 7 Smoothed, polished .32 Check stamped, polished 24.6 Parallel diagonal lines 23.3 Opposed parallel diagonal lines 2.5 Zig-zag 1.9 Vertical trailed parallel lines 2.2 Herringbone .64 Parallel diagonal lines and horizontal parallel lines .32 Zig-zag lines and vertical parallel lines .32 Outlined triangular plats; alternate triangles plain and filled with horizontal parallel lines .64 Punctates .95 Horizontal parallel lines .32 Opposed triangles, alternating triangles filled with parallel diagonal lines and horizontal parallel lines .32 Opposed parallel diagonal lines with single finger indentations at apex of triangular plats .95 Chevrons .32 Curved parallel lines .32 Parallel diagonal lines branching from opposite sides of a single vertical line

-48- .32 Opposed parallel diagonal lines; row of parallel in­ dentations at vessel shoulder below the uesign .32 Parallel diagonal lines and horizontal parallel lines; row of finger pinches below design at shoulder .95 Vertical parallel lines and horizontal parallel lines in alternating plats .32 Opposed diagonal lines meeting at apex .64 Concentric diamond formed by parallel lines; fmger indentation at lower point .32 Single broad trailed line .32 Opposed parallel diagonal lines above a series of horizontal parallel lines .95 Parallel diagonal lines, broad trailed

Appendages: Two to four handles were located at opposite sides or at quadrants of the vessel orifice. Multiple handles occur, but are rare. Extant handles or handle scars appear on 7.9 percent of the total rim sample. 10.2 percent of the flaring rim forms have handles in contrast to 4.5 percent of the straight flared rims which have handles. Expressed differently, 77 percent of the handle sample appears on flaring rims while only 23 percent is on straight flared rims. 50 percent are attached at the lip and 50 percent below the lip. Percent Description 91.5 Strap handles 1.0 Cloistered strap handles 1.0 Perforated strap handles 2.4 Shouldered strap handles 3.3 Loop handles .7 Perforated lug extensions of lip

Handle Decoration: Percent Description 19.5 Plain 21.2 Zig-zag 14.7 Horizontal parallel lines 8.1 Vertical parallel lines 6.5 Vertical parallel lines, trailed 6.1 Punctates 7.3 Parallel diagonal lines 2.8 Herringbone 1.2 Herringbone above horizontal parallels 2.3 Parallel diagonal lines above plain 1.2 Inward pointed herringbone at opposite sides; single fmger indentation at center 1.2 Horizontal notches (on loop handles) .81 Chevrons .81 Crosshatched .45 Herringbone tor and bottom; center plain .81 Vertical paralle lines separated by single horizontal line at center .45 Parallel diagonal lines above horizontal parallel lines .81 Horizontal notched ridge (on strap handle) .81 Herringbone above plain .45 Zig-zag above punctates .45 Vertical parallel lines above punctates .45 Plain above punctates .45 Downslanting parallel diagonals separated by single vertical central line .45 Punctate above plain .45 Punctate above horizontal parallel .45 Single horizontal line top and bottom with single line Z in center

-49- Nance Flared Dec ora ted

Nance Flared Decorated differs from Nance Flared Plain only in the presence of decoration on the rim panel and other decorative variations. Rim decorations most frequently consist of parallel diagonal lines or of opposed parallel diagonal lines which are arranged in triangular plats. Parallel lines and punctates are the most common lip decoration. A higher frequency of parallel diagonal lines on the interior of the rim is associated with this type than with Nance Flared Plain. Handles appear in about the same frequency as on Nance Flared Plain but are usually decorated with vertically oriented parallel lines. Only a few examples with associated shoulder decoration are available; parallel diagonal lines are most conunon. Name: Nance Flared Decorated (Plates XII-XIV). Sample: 4 restored vessels; 407 rim sherds. Paste: Grit tempered as described above. Vessel Fonn: Rim: Flaring 39.5 percent Straight flared 60.5 percent Lip: Same as Nance Flared Plain. Body: Same as Nance Flared Plain. Rim Decoration: Percent Description 38.6 Parallel diagonal lines 17.8 Horizontal parallel lines 16.3 Opposed parallel diagonal lines 11.2 Zig-zag 4.6 Herringbone 18.0 Parallel diagonal lines and horizontal parallel lines .7 Punctate .5 Vertical parallel trailed lines .24 Curved parallel lines .7 Chevrons .5 Horizontal parallel lines and punctates .24 Parallel diagonal lines and punctates .24 Series of outlined triangles; upper triangles filled with horizontal parallel lines; lower triangles not filled; horizontal parallel lines below the triangles .24 Opposed parallel diagonal lines and horizontal lines 1.2 Parallel diagonal lines and herringbone .24 Crosshatched X .24 Pinched Lip Decoration: Percent Description 4.0 Plain 31.7 Parallel lines 31.0 Punctate 1.5 Finger indented 1.0 Notched 13.1 Plain; parallel diagonal lines on interior rim 5.5 Plain; impressed interior rim 7.7 Herringbone .5 Punctate; parallel diagonal lines on interior rim .25 Pinched interior and exterior edges .25 Crosshatched X .25 Parallel lines; parallel lines on interior rim .75 Parallel lines; herringbone on interior rim .75 Plain; parallel lines on exterior edge .5 Plain; parallel lines on interior and exterior edges .25 Finger indented; parallel lines on interior rim .25 Panillellines; impressed interior rim .25 Punctate; impressed interior rim .25 Herringbone; parallel lines on interior rim

-50- Associated Shoulder Decoration: (Sample: 4) Percent Description 50.0 Parallel diagonal lines 25.0 Zig-zag 25.0 Parallel diagonal lines and horizontal parallel lines; row of pinches below design Appendages: Extant handles or handle scars appear on 8.2 percent of Nance Flared Decorated rims. 15.5 percent of the flaring rim forms have handles, while only 3.5 percent of the straight flared rim forms have handles. 50 percent of the handles are attached at the lip and SO percent to the rim below the lip. Percent Description 92.5 Strap handles 7.5 Shouldered strap handles Handle Decoration: Percent Description 3.7 Plain 3.7 Single diagonal incised I ine 33.3 Parallel vertical lines 18.5 Parallel vertical lines in two rows 3.7 Down-slanting parallel diagonal lines separated by single vertical line 18.5 Horizontal parallel lines 3.7 Parallel vertical lines, trailed 7.4 Parallel diagonal lines 7.4 Zig-zag

Nance Straight Rim Plain

Nance Straight Rim Plain is distinguished by the vertical orientation of its undecorated rim. Lips are most often decorated with parallel lines, punctates or herringbone designs. Handles are only rarely present, and the few associated shoulders suggest that opposed parallel diagonals in triangular plats may have been less frequent than an undecorated simple stamped or srnoothed surface finish. Name: Nance Straight Rim Plain (Plate XV). Sample: 2 restored vessels; 140 rim sherds. Paste: Grit tempered as described above. Vessel Form: Rim: Straight (vertical) 100 percent. Lip: Same as Nance Flared Plain. Body: Globular body with maximum diameter larger than maximum diameter of rim and orifice; rounded shoulders and rounded bottom. Rin1 Decoration: Plain (smoothed and simple stamped) I 00 percent. Lip Decoration: Percent Description 12.7 Plain 28.4 Parallel lines 23.9 Punctate 23.9 Herringbone 2.9 Finger indented 3.7 Notched 3.7 Plain; parallel lines on interior rim .75 Plain; punctate exterior edge

-51- Associated Shoulder Decoration: (Sample: 5) Percent Description 20.0 Simple stamped 40.0 Smoothed 40.0 Opposed parallel diagonal lines Appendages: Plain strap handles appear on one vessel.

Nance Straight Rim Decorated Nance Straight Rim Decorated pottery is present in largest amounts in the Burkett site (25 NC 1) and is distinguished from Nance Straight Rim Plain by the presence of decoration on the rim panel. Horizontal parallel lines and opposed parallel lines are most common. Handles are only rarely associated with the type. Opposed parallel diagonal decoration occurs in the small sample of associated shoulder sherds. Name: Nance Straight Rim Decorated (Plate XV). Sample: 1 vessel; 7 5 rim sherds. Paste: Grit tempered as described above. Vessel Form: Rim: Straight (vertical) 100 percent. Lip: Same as Nance Flared Plain. Body: Same as Nance Straight Rim Plain. Rim Decoration: Percent Description 30.2 Opposed parallel diagonal lines 9.2 Parallel diagonal lines 7.9 Herringbone 39.5 Horizontal parallel lines 2.6 Opposed parallel diagonal lines and horizontal parallel lines 7.9 Pinched 1.3 Punctate row 1.3 Parallel diagonal lines crossed by single horizontal line

Lip Decoration: Percent Description 56.7 Plain 18.9 Parallel lines 17.6 Punctates 5.4 Herringbone 1.3 Plain; impressed on interior rim

Associated Shoulder Decoration: (Sample: 2) Percent Description 50.0 Haphazard incised lines on smoothed surface 50.0 Opposed parallel diagonal lines Appendages: Vertically incised strap handles appear on one example.

-52- Nance Flanged Lip

Nance Flanged Lip is similar to the other direct rim wares but is distinguished by the addition of clay to the edges of the lip to form an inverted L- or T-shaped profile. The rim panel is usually plain. Herringbone designs are the most common lip decoration, but parallel lines occur with some frequency. Handles are rarely associated with this type, but hollow tubular handles are present. Opposed parallel diagonal lines make up the only associated shoulder decoration. Name: Nance Flanged Lip (Plate XVI). Sample: 134 rim sherds. Paste: Grit tempered as described above. Vessel Form: Rim: Flaring 34.6 percent Straight Flared 55.6 percent Straight 9.8 percent Lip: A flange extension on the interior and exterior or only on the exterior gives the lip an in- verted L-or T- shaped profile. Body: Unknown. Probably similar to Nance Flared Plain. Rim Decoration: Percent Description 97.6 Plain .74 Herringbone .74 Parallel diagonal lines .74 Horizontal parallel lines Lip Decoration: Percent Description 6.7 Plain 12.7 Parallel 17.9 Punctate 5.9 Finger indented 55.2 Herringbone .74 Zig-zag .74 Notched

Associated Shoulder Decoration: Opposed parallel diagonal lines {Sample: 1). Appendages: (Sample: 3) Percent Description 66.6 Strap handles 33.3 Hollow tubular handle Handle Decoration: One of the three associated handles is decorated with horizontal parallel lines. The others are indeterminate.

Nance Thickened Lip

Nance Thickened Lip is a direct rim form modified by the addition of clay to form a rounded or squared thickening of the lip. The rim is usually undecorated. Herringbone designs are the most common lip ornamentation. Handles are infrequent, but those present are most commonly decorated with a pattern of parallel zig-zag lines. Associated decorated shoulders are rare; parallel and opposed parallel line patterns are most common. Name: Nance Thickened Lip (Plate XVII). SampJe: 114 rim sherds.

-53- Paste: Grit tempered as described above. Vessel Form: Rim: Flaring. Lip: Thickened and rounded or squared. Body: Unknown. Probably similar to Nance Flared Plain. Rim Decoration: Percent Description 92.0 Plain 2.6 Parallel diagonal lines 2.6 Herringbone 2.6 Horizontal parallel lines Lip Decoration: Percent Description 14.9 Plain 9.6 Parallellines 16.7 Punctate 48.3 Herringbone 1. 7 Finger indented 1. 7 Punctate; parallel lines on interior rim 1. 7 Plain; parallel lines on interior rim .9 Parallel lines encircle orifice .9 Crosshatched X .9 Parallel lines; parallel lines on interior rim .9 Zig-zag .9 Notched .9 Punctate; impressed interior rim Associated Decorated Shoulder: (Sample: 9) Percent Description 11.1 Smoothed, polished 22.2 Opposed parallel diagonal lines 55.5 Parallel diagonal lines 11.1 Zig-zag Appendages: Evidence of handles is associated with 10.5 percent of the total sample. Percent Description 91.6 Strap handles 8.4 Cloistered strap handles Handle Decoration: Percent Description 16.7 Parallel lines 41.6 Zig-zag 16.7 Horizontal parallel lines 8.3 Herringbone above horizontal parallel lines 16.7 Parallel vertical lines

Burkett S-Collared

Burkett S-Collared is a rarely occurring type characterized by a smoothly recurved or S-shaped rim. Opposed parallel lines, herringbone designs or a plain surface finish are most common on the rim. The lip is usually plain or decorated with parallel lines. Handles are not present in this small sample. The only associated shoulder has an undecorated simple stamped surface fmish. Name: Burkett S-Collared (Plate XVIII). Sample: 65 rim sherds.

-54- Paste: Grit tempered as described above. Vessel Fonn: Rim: S-collar, plain base 80.0 percent S-~ollar, pinched base 13.8 percent S-~ollar, pendant tabs on base 6.1 percent Lip: Usually rounded. Body: Unknown. Probably similar to Wright Collared. Rim Decoration: Percent Description 21.5 Plain 33.8 Qpposed parallel diagonal lines 24.6 Herringbone 6.1 Parallel diagonal lines 1.5 Punctate 1.5 Horizontal parallel lines 1.5 Paralled diagonal lines and horizontal parallel lines 3.0 Zig-zag 3.0 Haphazard incised lines 1.5 Chevrons alternating with horizontal parallel lines 1.5 Opposed parallel diagonal lines and horizontal parallel lines Lip Decoration: Percent Description 30.0 Plain 51.6 Parallel lines 10.0 Punctates 5.0 Plain; parallel lines on interior rim 1.6 Herringbone 1.6 Finger indented Associated Shoulder Decoration: The one example present exhibits simple stamped surface treatment. Appendages: None are present in this sample except the pendant tabs noted above in the section on rim form.

Wright Collared Ware

Wright Collared Ware is characterized by an angular, recurved, collared rim. Collars with finger pinching on the base have been named Nance Pinched Collar and are the most frequently occurring type. Other variations of collar base treatment include plain, punctate and notched. The rim is most often decorated with opposed parallel diagonal lines arranged in triangular plats. However, herringbone designs and undecorated rims are not uncommon. The lip is usually decorated with parallel lines or punctates. Handles are rare, and simple stamped or smoothed shoulders are most common. Shoulder designs include parallel lines, opposed parallel lines, herringbone and zig-zag patterns. Name: Wright Collared Ware (Plates XIX-XXI). Sample: 5 restored or restorable vessels_; 305 rim sherds. Paste: Grit tempered as described above. Vessel Fonn: Rim: The collared rim overhangs the constricted neck of the vessel. The base of the collar is only slightly thicker than the lip, and the collar is characterized by a deep channeled interior. Wright Collared as defined for this study includes the types Nance Pinched Collar and Wright Channel Braced as defined by Kivett.

-55- Collar, plain base 26.2 percent Collar, notched base 5.1 percent Collar, punctate base 1.4 percent Collar, pinched base 62.6 percent Collar, bossed pinched base 3.0 percent Collar, pendant tabs on base 1.4 percent

Lip: Rounded.

Body: Globular body with rounded shoulder and rounded bottom. Maximum diameter is larger than maximum rim diameter. Rim Decoration: Percent Description 17.7 Plain 23.5 Opposed parallel diagonal lines 19.6 Herringbone 16.9 Parallel diagonal lines 13.8 Zig-zag 3.1 Opposed parallel diagonal lines and horizontal parallel lines .77 Punctates .4 Chevrons and horizontal parallel lines .4 Chevrons .4 Fingernail indentations in parallel rows .4 Panillel lines and zig-zag Lip Decoration: Percent Description 10.0 Plain 52.6 Parallel lines 23.4 Punctates 8.8 Herringbone 2.6 Finger indented 1.3 Plain; parallel lines on interior rim .4 Herringbone; parallel lines on interior rim .4 Notched Associated Shoulder Decoration: (Sample: 32) Percent Description 18.8 Simple stamped 9.3 Simple stamped, polished ridges 28.2 Smoothed 3.1 Smoothed Polished 9.3 Zig-zag 3.1 Chevron 6.2 Opposed parallel diagonal lines 18.8 Parallel diagonal lines 3.1 Herringbone Appendages: The presence of pendant tabs on some collars has been noted above in the section on rim form. Handles attached to the base of the collar are rare; only four sherds showed evidence of the presence of strap handles. Only one had an identifiable design, that of horizontal parallel lines.

Burkett Ridged Rim

Burkett Ridged Rim is a rare type characterized by a straight or slightly flaring rim to which a central ridge of clay has been added to produce a collared appearance. The rim is usually undecorated. Lip decoration is most often in the form of parallel lines or punctates. Handles are not present, and associated shoulder decoration is rare.

-56- Name: Burkett Ridged Rim (Plate XVII). Sample: 1 restored vessel; 17 rim sherds. Paste: Grit tempered as described above. Vessel Form: Rim: The rim is a straight, direct rim with a ridge or fulet of clay added; the ridge encircles the rim midway between the lip and the body of the vessel. Some of the rims are slightly flaring. The resulting appearance is a collared effect. Lip: Rounded. Body: The only complete vessel is very small, almost a miniature form. It has a flat upper body surface, a sharp shoulder and a globular rounded base.

Rim Decoration: Percent Description 72.1 Plain 5.5 Parallel vertical lines 16.7 Parallel diagonal lines 5.5 Herringbone Lip Decoration: Percent Description 27.8 Plain 44.5 Punctate 5.5 Notched 22.2 Parallel lines Associated Shoulder Decoration: (Sample: 1) Parallel diagonal incised lines appear on the only example available. Appendages: None.

Wright Folded Lip Wright Folded Lip is distinguished by a braced rim-top produced by folding the top of the rim down over the exterior wall. The rim is usually undecorated with parallel lines and herringbone designs the most common lip decoration. Handles and associated shoulders are not represented. Name: Wright Folded Lip (Plate XXII). Sample: 65" rim sherds. Paste: Grit tempered as described above. Vessel Form: Rim: Straight to flaring rim with exterior top edge thickened or braced by folding down the top of the rim. The fold line is preserved in the rim interior section. Lip: Rounded or slightly flattened. Body: Unknown. Probably like Nance Flared Plain. Rim Decoration: Percent Description 92.2 Plain 3.1 Parallel diagonal lines 4.6 Punctates Lip Decoration: Percent Description 18.5 Plain 35.4 Parallel lines 12.3 Punctates

-57- 24.6 Herringbone 4.6 Finger indented 3.1 Plain; parallel lines interior rim 1.5 Herringbone; impressed interior rim Appendages: None.

Colfax Braced

Colfax Braced is the second most frequently occurring type in the Lower Loup collections and includes vessels with a continous series of handles forming the cloistered rim which has been regarded as the most distinctive feature of Lower Loup pottery. The rim is most often decorated with parallel diagonal lines or herringbone designs, but considerable variety of decoration is present. Lip decorations are usually parallel lines or punctates. Handles are frequent, as noted above, and are most often decorated with horizontal parallel lines. Much variety of shoulder decoration is present with parallel diagonal and opposed diagonal lines being most common. Name: Colfax Braced (Plates XXII-XXV). Sample: 3 vessels; 867 rim sherds. Paste: Grit tempered as described above.

Vessel F ann: Rim: The rim is thickened on the exterior by the addition of a wedge-shaped fillet which produces a low braced or collared appearance, thicker at the base of the brace than at the lip. Braced, plain base 98.2 percent Braced, pinched base 1.4 percent Braced, pendant tabs on base .3 percent Lip: Usually rounded, sometimes slightly flattened; very rarely with a concave surface.

Body: Globular body with rounded shoulders and a rounded bottom. Maximum body diameter is greater than maximum rim diameter. Rim Decoration: Percent Description 9.9 Plain 18.0 Horizontal parallel lines 30.8 Parallel diagonal lines 25.4 Herringbone 5.3 Punctate 3.8 Opposed parallel diagonal lines 3.8 Zig-zag 1.8 Parallel diagonal and horizontal parallel lines .1 Single horizontal line with V above it .2 Chevrons .I Herringbone alternating with horizontal parallel lines below a row of parallel diagonal lines .I Parallel diagonal lines and punctates .2 Herringbone and horizontal parallel lines .1 Chevrons and horizontal parallel lines .1 Curved parallel lines .1 Herringbone and punctates Lip Decoration: Percent Description 7.4 Plain 37.4 Parallel lines 21.7 Punctate

-58- 13.9 Herringbone 12.7 Plain; parallel lines on interior rim 2.9 Finger indented 1.1 Parallel lines; parallel lines on interior rim .7 Notched .11 Punctate; punctates on interior rim .8 Punctate; parallel lines on interior rim .11 Plain; punctates on interior rim .11 Crosshatched X .11 Parallel lines; chevrons on interior rim .11 Plain; parallel lines on interior rim and exterior edges .11 Plain areas and parallel line groups altern ate .11 Parallel lines and punctates .11 Plain, chevrons on interior rim .11 Herringbone; parallel diagonals and horizontal parallels on interior nm .11 Herringbone; punctate on interior rim Associated Shoulder Decoration: (Sample: 98) Percent Description 4.1 Simple stamped 2.04 Simple stamped, polished ridges 10.2 Smoothed 1.02 Smoothed, polished 25.5 Parallel diagonal lines 26.5 Opposed parallel diagonal lines 4.1 Horizontal parallel lines above parallel diagonal lines 4.1 Parallel diagonal lines and horizontal parallel lines 3.1 Herringbone 3.1 Zig-zag 3.1 Parallel vertical trailed lines 1.02 Outlined V; alternate figures filled with hori­ zontal parallels and parallel diagonals 1.02 Vertical parallel pairs with down-slanted parallel diagonal lines on each side 1.02 Horizontal parallel lines 1.02 Vertical parallel broad trailed lines 1.02 Concentric diamonds with single finger indentations 1.02 Punctate 2.04 Parallel zig-zag and parallel diagonal lines 1.02 Horizontal parallel lines above herringbone 1.02 Series of outlined triangles filled with horizontal parallel lines. Two horizontal parallel lines en- circle shoulder; series of outlined triangles below the shoulder are filled with opposed parallel diagonal lines. 1.02 Haphazard incised lines 1.02 Chevron on neck below brace 1.02 Inverted chevrons separated by horizontal parallel lines

Appendages: Handles are frequently attached to the base of the braced portion of the rim and extend downward to the body of the vessel. 98.2 percent of the handles present are strap handles. The remainder are nearly round in cross section and may be termed loop handles. Many of the sherds are too small to determine how many handles were present. Some vessels with this type of rim had no handles, others had four or more handles and others had multiple handles arranged in a continuous series producing a cloistered effect. 8.4 percent of the sherds on which handles are present have multiple handles; 26.4 percent have continuous multiple or cloistered handles; the remainder have only one handle present on the sherd and are therefore indeterminate with respect to the number of handles present

-59- on the vessel. Although a small number of rims lacking handles are present, the typical Colfax Braced vessel probably had multiple or cloistered handles.

Handle Decoration: Percent Description . 11.8 Plain 49.4 Horizontal parallel lines 13.5 Zig-zag 6.3 Parallel diagonal lines 3.8 Parallel vertical lines 3.4 Herringbone 2.5 Parallel diagonal lines above plain 2.1 Chevrons 1.6 Punctate .8 Different design on alternate handles: horizontal parallel lines, zig-zag .4 Curved parallel lines extending from rim decoration .8 Parallel diagonal lines and horizontal parallel lines .8 Opposed parallel diagonal lines .4 Parallel diagonal lines branching off single vertical line .4 Opposed parallel lines over parallel vertical lines over plain bottom .8 Punctates above plain .8 Parallel diagonals above plain

Butler Braced

Butler Braced closely resembles Colfax Braced but usually has a somewhat higher, slightly concave braced rim. Parallel diagonal lines are the most common rim decoration. Lips are decorated with parallel lines and punctates but in reverse proportion as compared to Colfax Braced. Handles and handle decoration resembles that on Colfax Braced. The type is most frequent in the collection from the Barcal site (25 BU 4) and may represent a transition between Colfax Braced and the typical Pawnee pottery of the historic period. Name: Butler Braced (Plate XXVI-XXVII). Sample: 1 vessel; 41 rim sherds. Paste: Grit tempered as described above. Vessel Form: Rim: Wedge-shaped rim with a slightly concave exterior surface. Rim height is intermediate between Colfax Braced and Webster Collar Braced. Classification is difficult since these sherds could be placed in Colfax Braced or Webster Collar Braced. Provisionally, they are segregated as a possible transitional type between those two groupings.

Lip: Usually rounded.

Body: Flattened, down-sloping upper body and rounded but fairly abrupt shoulder tapering to a rounded, sub-conical base. Rim Decoration: Percent Description 12.2 Plain 36.3 Parallel diagonal lines 9.7 Horizontal parallel lines 12.2 Herringbone 2.4 Opposed parallel diagonal lines 19.5 Parallel diagonal and horizontal parallel lines 2.4 Curved parallel lines

-60- 2.4 Chevrons 2.4 Zig-zag Lip Decoration: Percent Description 15.8 Plain 26.4 Parallel lines 31.6 Punctate 5.2 Finger indented 7.9 Plain; parallel lines on interior rim 2.6 Punctate; parallel lines on interior rim 7.9 Plain; impressed on interior rim 2.6 Notched Associated Shoulder Decoration: (Sample: 3) Percent Description 66.6 Opposed parallel diagonal lines 33.3 Parallel diagonal lines Appendages: Strap handles attached to the base of the collar are present on 26.2 percent of the type sample. Five examples are large enough for a determination of the number of handles per vessel. Three have a handle at each quadrant point; two have continuous or cloistered handles. Handle Decoration: Percent Description 50.0 Horizontal parallel lines 25.0 Plain 12.5 Parallel diagonal lines above plai;I 12.5 Opposed parallel diagonal lines

Webster Collar Braced

Webster Collar Braced is the most common pottery in historic Pawnee sites. It is characterized by a relatively high collared rim which is solid rather than channeled on the interior. The lower edge of the rim is sometimes plain but is often modified by the addition of pendant tabs and alternate handles. Rim decoration usually consists of opposed parallel diagonal lines in triangular plats or parallel diagonal lines. Punctates are the most common lip decoration. The rim decoration usually extends downward onto the upper portion of the handles and pendant tabs. The shoulder is frequently undecorated except for the simple stamped surface finish; parallel diagonal lines and opposed parallel diagonal lines are equally common. Name: Webster Collar Braced (Plates XXVIII-XXIX). Sample: 13 restored vessels; 58) rim sherds. Paste: Grit tempered as described above. Vessel Form: Rim: Wedge-shaped brace on the exterior side of the rim overhangs the constricted neck of the vessel. The collar is thicker at the bottom than at the lip. The interior side of the collar is flat to slightly concave but is filled with clay. In profile it is similar to the braced rims of Colfax and Butler Braced types, but it is elongated to form a considerably higher collar.

Collar braced, plain base 42.2 percent Collar braced, pendant tabs on base 57.7 percent

-61- Lip: Usually rounded.

Body: All vessels have the collar braced rim and constricted neck. Globular bodies with rounded shoulders and bases are present, but a slightly flattened, sloping, rounded shoulder and a tapering body with a rounded sub-conical base is more frequent.

Rim Decoration: Percent Description 9.6 Plain 10.0 Herringbone 35.3 Opposed parallel diagonal lines 29.6 Parailel diagonal lines 7.3 Chevrons 2.0 Horizontal parallel lines 2.4 Inverted chevrons and horizontal parallel lines 2.0 Parallel diagonal lines and horizontal parallel lines .4 Zig-zag .2 Parallel diagonal lines cut by single horizontal line .2 V cut by horizontal parallel lines .2 Parallel diagonal lines separated by single vertical lines from panel of horizontal parallel lines .2 Rectangular grid of horizontal and vertical parallel lines .2 Punctates .2 Crosshatched X Lip Decoration: Percent Description 11.8 Plain 58.6 Punctate 18.7 Parallel lines 1.6 Finger indented 7.2 Plain; parallel lines on interior rim 1.3 Notched .3 Parallel; parallel lines on interior rim .3 Herringbone Associated Shoulder Decoration: (Sample: 43) Percent Description 27.9 Simple stamped 16.3 Smoothed 23.3 Opposed parallel diagonal lines 23.3 Parailel diagonal lines 2.3 Parallel diagonal lines and single punctates 2.3 Single horizontal line at base of neck 2.3 Vertical pairs of parallel lines separated by undecorated panels 2.3. Inverted chevrons and horizontal parallel lines below a row of parallel diagonal lmes Appendages: Strap handles pendant from the base of the collar are present on 6.5 percent of the total sample. In 73 percent of the cases where handles are present the handles alternate with pendant tabs. Four handles and four tabs are the most frequent combination. Vessels with pendant tabs only have eight or more tabs. The rim decoration pattern usually is extended down onto the tabs or handles. Handle Decoration: Percent Description 20.0 Plain 20.0 Horizontal parallel lines 15.5 Parallel diagonal lines 13.3 Parallel diagonal lines above plain 15.5 Chevrons above plain

-62- 6.6 Diagonal lines 2.2 Panillellines at top and bottom; center of handle plain 2.2 Punctates 2.2 Vertical lines

Burkett Cord Roughened Burkett Cord Roughened is a rare type with a flaring or straight flared rim and a cord roughened surface finish. The rim is usually undecorated except for cord roughening; X-shaped crosshatching occurs. Plain lips and parallel lines on the lips are common. It is most significant that there is a high proportion of parallel diagonal line decoration on the interior of the rim below the lip, an attribute which distinguishes this pottery from similar Upper Republican material. Handles are not present. Body decoration is uncertain but probably was absent except for the cord roughened surface finish. The type is associated with a few excavation units and is an early part of the Lower Loup ceramic complex. Name: Burkett Cord Roughened (Plate XXX). Sample: 30 rim sherds. Paste: Grit tempered. Vessel Form: Rim: Flaring to straight flared direct or non-collared rims. Lip: Rounded and slightly flattened. Body: Unknown. Probably a rounded globular body. Rim Decoration: Percent Description 93.4 Cord roughened 6.6 Crosshatched; incised with X over cord roughened surface Lip Decoration: Percent Description 25.0 Plain 17.8 Parallel lines 35.7 Plain; parallel lines on interior rim 7.1 Punctate 7.1 Herringbone 3.5 Plain; parallel lines on exterior edge 3.5 Cord impressed Associated Shoulder Decoration: None. Probably cord roughened surface finish on entire body.

Appendages: None.

Remarks: This material is consistently associated with other materials typical of the Lower Loup Focus pottery in certain features at the Burkett site (25 NC 1) and the Wright site (25 NC 3) and must be regarded as part of the ceramic complex. The presence of a high proportion of rims decorated on the interior with parallel lines is significant since this decoration is not present on Upper Republican Aspect pottery which otherwise resembles Burkett Cord Roughened.

-63- Burkett Collared

Burkett Collared is distinguished by a slightly channeled collar. Pendant tabs, pinching and punctates are present as well as plain collar bases. The associated surface fmish on rims and bodies is cord roughened. Rim designs include horizontal parallel incised lines, horizontal cord impressed lines and crosshatched X-incised lines. Parallel lines and punctates are the most common lip decorations. Handles are not represented, and cord roughened and smoothed surface fmishes are the only associated body decoration. This type is also restricted to a few early excavation units but must be regarded as part of the complex. Name: Burkett Collared (Plate XXX-XXXI). Sample: 1 restored vessel; 74 rim sherds. Paste: Grit tempered. Vessel F onn: Rim: The rim overhangs a constricted neck and is slightly thicker at the base of the collar than at the lip. It has a concave interior surface or channel of medium depth. Collar, pinched base 8.0 percent Collar, punctate base 53.4 percent Collar, pendant tabs on base 33.3 percent Collar, plain base 4.5 percent

Lip: Rounded.

Body: The one restored vessel has a pinched collar rim base. The body is globular with rounded shoulder and a rounded bottom. Rim Decoration: Percent Description 18.2 Cord roughened and smoothed over cord roughened 12.0 Opposed parallel diagonal lines 32.0 Horizontal parallel lines 8.0 Parallel diagonal lines 22.6 Crosshatched X 1.3 Herringbone 5.3 Horizontal cord impressed Lip Decoration: Percent Description 23.0 Plain 58.0 Parallel lines 16.2 Punctate 2.7 Parallel lines and punctates

Associated Shoulder Decoration: Cord roughened and smoothed over cord roughening.

Appendages: The occurrence of pendant tabs has been indicated in the section on rim form. No handles were present in the available sample.

Remarks: Sherds of this type are consistently associated with other materials typical of the Lower Loup pottery in certain features at the Burkett site {25 NC 1). The restored vessel came from Cache pit 1, associated with House 3. This pottery must be regarded as being part of the complex at the Burkett site.

-64- Unnamed Shell Tempered Ware

Unnamed Shell Tempered Ware representative of Oneota sites is present in limited quantities. Straight flared and undecorated rims are most common. Lips are usually plain with a high proportion of parallel incised and impressed rim interiors. Strap handles with parallel, vertical, trailed decorations are most common. Body decorations consist of parallel and opposed parallel trailed designs. Name: Unnamed. Shell tempered ware. (Plates XXXII-XXXIII). Sample: 52 rim sherds. Paste: Fine, flaky paste sparsely tempered with crushed shell. The shell particles have eroded away on the surface of many sherds leaving holes or cells. Relative to the grit tempered wares at the various sites, the shell tempered material is thinner and not as dense or heavy as the more common pottery. Some of the material may have been made locally; other shell tempered sherds may have come from the Leary site or other Oneota sites. Vessel Fonn: Rim: Rims are flaring to straight flared in profile. Lip: Thinned and rounded. Body: Unknown. Probably broad flattened shoulders. Rim Decoration: Percent Description 96.0 Plain, smoothed 2.0 Horizontal parallel lines 2.0 Parallel diagonal and horizontal parallel lines Lip Decoration: Percent Description 25.0 Plain 13.4 Parallel lines 5.7 Punctate 27.0 Plain; impressed interior rim 15.4 Plain; parallel trailed interior rim 9.6 Notched 1.9 Herringbone 1.9 Plain; parallel lines on exterior edge Associated Shoulder Decoration: (Sample: 16) Percent Description 6.2 Simple stamped, smoothed over 25.0 Parallel trailed lines 37.5 Parallel broad trailed lines 31.2 Opposed parallel diagonals Appendages: Eight examples or 15.4 percent have strap handles. Half of the cases have the handle attached to the lip while the other 50 percent have the handle attached to the rim wall below the lip. Handles are two to four in number and located at opposite sides of the orifice or at the four quadrant points. Handle Decoration: Percent Description 25.0 Plain 75.0 Vertical trailed lines

Remarks: Sherds of this type are of significance in indicating probable contacts of the Lower Loup focus with the Oneota sites. Previous finds of Lower Loup sherds in Oneota sites have been reported, but Oneota material in Lower Loup sites has not been demonstrated previously.

~65- Walnut Decorated Lip

Walnut Decorated Lip is a pottery type associated with the White Rock Aspect in Nebraska and Kansas. It is present in limited quantity at the Burkett site (25 NC I) where it exhibits somewhat more variation in lip decoration than is present in the type collections. The rim is always plain. Parallel diagonal lines on the rim interior are most common, and strap handles with vertical trailed deco­ rations are present. Opposed parallel diagonal lines and curved parallel line decorations are present.

Name: Walnut Decorated Lip (Plate XXXIII). Sample: 45 rim sherds. Paste: Grit tempered. Vessel Form: Rim: Flaring and straight flared. Lip: Rounded. Body: Unknown. Rim Decoration: Plain 100 percent. Lip Decoration: Percent Description 4.5 Plain 11.1 Parallel lines 17.8 Herringbone 2.2 Notched 60.0 Plain; parallel lines on interior rim 2.2 Parallel lines; parallel lines on interior rim 2.2 Punctate; impressed on interior rim Associated Shoulder Decoration: Percent Description 30.6 Parallel diagonal lines 53.2 Opposed parallel diagonal lines 6.4 Herringbone 3.2 Opposed parallel diagonal lines separated by panel of downward curved parallel lines, broad trailed 1.6 Punctates 1.6 Zig-zag 1.6 Vertical parallel lines and herringbone 1.6 Parallel diagonal and horizontal parallel lines

Appendages: Strap handles appear on 22.2 percent of the total rim sherd sample. All are strap handles, although one is nearly round in cross section and approaches the loop handle form. 75 percent of the handles are attached at the lip of the vessel; 25 percent attach to the rim wall below the lip. Handle Decorations: Percent Description 57.0 Vertical trailed lines 14.3 Plain 14.3 Opposed parallel diagonal lines 14.3 Parillel dtagonallines below finger indentation

Remarks: Walnut Decorated Lip is the typical pottery at the sites of the White Rock Aspect (Rusco 1960: 63-65). Its presence in certain sites of the Lower Loup Focus is of significance in clarifying the relationships between these archeological complexes. It should be noted that there are apparently more variations in lip decoration in the Walnut Decorated Lip pottery from the Lower Loup site than from those of the White Rock Aspect.

-66- Webster Bowl Ware

Webster Bowl Ware is distinguished in part by variations in paste. The usual form is a simple hemispherical bowl. The bottom is usually rounded, but flat bottoms and irregular shapes do occur. The bowls are undecorated, usually have plain lips and occasionally have lugs or vertically oriented loop handles. The interior is almost always stained with a red mineral deposit. The presence of the red pigment is most frequently associated with bowls but is not restricted to this vessel form. Name: Webster Bowl Ware (Plate XXXIV). Sample: Historic Pawnee: 9 vessels, 159 rim sherds; Lower Loup: 3 vessels, 39 rim sherds.

Paste: Grit tempered as discussed above. Intensive analysis is necessary to confirm the present observations indicating a paste difference in bowl forms among the historic Pawnee sites where the temper seems to be very sparse and the clay may contain more iron. The paste of most of the bowls from Lower Loup sites does not seem to be different from that of the other pottery. Vessel Form: The bowls are simple hemispherical vessels with rounded bottoms. Some examples have flattened bottoms and irregular shapes. One example with a low insloping rim has been included in this category as well as an example with a slightly outflaring rim. These may be miniature examples of other types but are close enough to the bowl category to be tentatively included as minor variations of form. Lips are rounded or slightly flattened. Associated Body Decoration: Most examples are smoothed over the entire body surface, but a few examples with a simple stamped surface finish are present in the material from Pawnee sites. The interior surface of bowls is usually covered with a thin deposit of a red pigment which can be washed off; this is apparently the residue of material kept in the vessels. Appendages: Usually none. Two Pawnee and one Lower Loup specimen have vertically oriented loop handles attached at the lip of the bowl. Two Pawnee specimens have downslanted lugs on opposite sides of the bowl midway between the lip and the bottom. Two Lower Loup specimens have horizontally oriented, perforated lugs attached to the exterior of the lip.

Webster Bowl Lids Webster Bowl Lids are plain discs with plain loop handles and are related to the above described bowls. The lids are present only in historic Pawnee sites. Name: Webster Bowl Lids (Plate XXXIV). Sample: 5 restored lids; 34 rim sherds. Paste: Same as Pawnee examples of Webster Bowl Ware.

Form.~ Flat disc with rounded lip. Vertically oriented plain loop handle attached at center of the round lid. Surface finish: Smoothed and simple stamped. Decoration: None. Remarks: Bowl lids occur only in historic Pawnee sites and may represent influences derived from contact with white men.

-67- Miniature Vessels

Miniature Vessels ranging from very crude examples to elaborate small scale reproductions of larger pottery vessels are present. Miniature forms also include an elaborate high necked jar.

Name: Miniature Vessels (Plate XXXV). Sample: 13 complete vessels; 164 sherds. Paste: Grit tempered.

Vessel Fonn: Miniature vessels range from crude small pots to faithful scale copies of other pottery types. Small jar forms may be included in this category. One particularly elaborate, tall, straight necked jar is from the Burkett site.

Miscellaneous Vessels Name: Spouted Vessel "A fragmentary, globular, multiples pouted vessel from Mound No. 4, Burkett site. Several other broken spouts indicate that this form may have been rare, but not singular" (Dunlevy 1936: 220).

Name: Lower Walnut Focus Shell Tempered Ware "Several thickly shell-tempered sherds, including parts of a flat disk vessel base, were recovered in 1930 from house 1, Gray site (see Dunlevy, 1936, fig. 6), 2 miles north of Schuyler, Nebraska, by a University of Nebraska Archaeological Survey party under my field supervision. These were recognized at the time as unusual in the local (Lower Loup) complex. I now believe these pieces originated somewhere in the Great Bend region of Kansas, perhaps as far south as the Lower Walnut Focus sites" (Wedel 1959: 586, note 48).

Name: Cowley Plain (Plate XXXIII). Sample: I rim sherd Paste: Laminated structure, heavily tempered with crushed shell.

Fonn: Straight flaring rim. Decoration: Smoothed and plain. Remarks: Present in the Burkett site, mound 2, cache 11. This sherd offers additional evidence of contact between the Lower Loup Focus and the Great Bend Aspect. Fragments of a flat-bottomed, shell-tempered Great Bend vessel were found in the Gray site (Wedel 1959: 586n) listed above as Lower Walnut Focus Shell Tempered Ware.

-68- Name: Stanley Cord Impressed (Plate XXXV). Sample: 4 rim sherds. Paste: Grit temper. Form: Braced rim. Decoration: Horizontal cord impressed, single row of punctates. Remarks: Present in the Cuba site (25 NC 4). This sample is important for comparative purposes. Stanley Cord Impressed is present in the Stanley Focus, 1700-1750 and the Snake Butte Focus, 1750-1800 in South Dakota (Lehmer 1954: 44).

Name: Unclassified. Sample: 1 rim sherd. Paste: Grit tempered. Fonn: A direct rim with an inverted lip.

Name: Unclassified Woodland pottery is present in small amounts at some sites. Their identification has been confirmed by Kivett, and the material has not been further considered in this analysis (Plate I).

Name: Unclassified Upper Republican pottery is present in small amounts in certain sites. Here also identification has been confirmed by Kivett, and the material has not been further considered. The Upper Republican sherds from the Hill site (25 WT 1) may be attributed to the Upper Republican component at the nearby Shipman site (25 WT 7). (Plate I).

-69- Page Left Blank Chapter V

THE PAWNEE AND LOWER LOUP CERAMIC TRADITION AND SITE SERIATION

THE PAWNEE- LOWER LOUP CERAMIC TRADITION

Examination and classification of the Lower from sites of each focus, but the basic similarities Loup and historic Pawnee pottery indicated the indicate a common ceramic tradition. presence of a high degree of basic similarity Pottery is far more common in the sites of the despite the fact that there are pronounced Lower Loup Focus than in historic Pawnee sites. differences between Nance Flared Plain and Eighty-eight percent of the rim sherds and 91 Webster Collar Braced, the two most common percent of the body sherds in the total collection pottery types associated with the Lower Loup are associated with Lower Loup sites. Only a few and Historic Pawnee Foci respectively. Most of sherds were recovered from some historic Pawnee the types defined are present in both foci and all sites, and others lack pottery entirely. The of the more common modes of surface finish, following tables also illustrate the greater variety rim decoration, lip decoration, handle form, of decoration on Lower Loup pottery. However, handle decoration and vessel body decoration are it should be noted that these variations are shared by representative sites of both foci. There mainly the result of different combinations of are variations in the relative frequency with more common modes and are frequently repr~ which these various modes appear on pottery sented by only a few examples. Much of the

-71- greater variety in the Lower Loup sample is Burkett (25 NC 1), Wright {25 NC 3), Coffin (25 quantitatively a small portion of the total collec­ NC 16), Larson {25 PT I) and Monroe (25 PT tion. 13). Sherds which are indeterminate for a par­ The following tables present a summary and ticular attribute have been omitted in each case. comparison of the occurrence of the various Discussion of Table 6. The only bodysherd modes of pottery form and decoration associated surface finish which is not present in both Lower with the Lower Loup and historic Pawnee foci. Loup and historic Pawnee samples is cord rough­ For the purposes of this comparison the Lower ening. This surface finish is typical of earlier Loup and historic Pawnee pottery collections Central Plains materials such as the pottery of were separated. The Pawnee sites are: Fullerton the Upper Republican Aspect. It is, however, a {25 NC 7), Cunningham {25 NC 10), Vogel (25 part of the Lower Loup ceramic complex, as NC 11), Clarks (25 PK 1), Cottonwood Creek indicated by its association with typical Lower {25 NC 5), Horse Creek (25 NC 2), Kansas Loup materials in several excavation units at the Monument {14 RP 1), Palmer (25 HW 1), Burkett and Wright sites. As far as can be Linwood Component A {25 BU 1), Bellwood determined from the excavation records, this Pawnee Component {25 BU 2), Blue Springs (25 association is not the result of mixture following GA 1), Hill {25 WT 1), Shipman Pawnee Com­ earlier occupations, but represents an important ponent (25 WT 7) and the Yutan site (25 SD 1). addition to knowledge of the content of the Pottery from the following sites makes up the Lower Loup ceramic complex. Cord roughened Lower Loup sample in the following tables: surface finish was reported for Pawnee pottery Bellwood Lower Loup Component {25 BU 2), by Strong (1935: 58), but the only sherds with Barcal (25 BU 4), Ashland Lower Loup related this surface finish present in the historic sites features (25 CC 1), Gray (25 CX 1), Wolfe (25 could be identified either as intrusive mate­ CX 2), Fuller's Hill (25 CX 3), Cuba (25 NC 4), rials from nearby Upper Republican sites or as

TABLE 6. MODES OF BODY SHERD SURF ACE TREATMENT

Surface Treatment Lower Loup Sample Pawnee Sample

No. % No. % Cord Roughened 400 .9 0 0 Simple Stamped 15096 36.8 1512 39.5 Simple Stamped Polished 4741 11.5 50 1.3

Smoothed 13879 33.8 1517 39.6 Smoothed Polished 1440 3.5 15 .4 --

Check Stamped 23 .05 5 .1 Smoothed Shell Tempered 291 .7 7 .2

Decorated Body 5146 12.5 707 18.5 Total 41016 3813 Percent of entire Collection 91.5 8.5

Interior Decoration Sub-total

Simple Stamped Red Exterior 1092 2.6 54 1.4

Smoothed Red Exterior 683 1.6 436 11.4

-72- TABLE 7. MODES OF RIM FORM

Rim Forms Lower Loup Sample Pawnee Sample

No. % No. % Flaring I 3063 42.1 36 4.6 Straight i I Flared 2187 29.9 78 10.0 Stmight 214 2.9 10 1.2 Flanged Lip 133 1.8 1 .1 Thickened Lip 104 1.4 10 1.2 S-Collar, Plain Base 49 .7 3 .4 S-Collar, Pinched Base 9 .12 0 0 S-Collar, Tabs on Base 4 .05 0 0 Collared Plain Base 79 1.1 2 .25 Collared, Notched Base 14 .2 1 .1 Collared, Punctate Base 45 .6 0 0 Collared, Pinched Base 190 2.6 1 .1 Collared, Tabs on Base 1 .01 3 .4 Collared, Bossed Pinched Base 9 .12 0 0 Folded Braced 60 .82 5 .6 Braced 863 11.9 34 4.3 Braced, Pinched Base 12 .16 0 0 Braced Tabs on Base 1 .01 2 .25 Collar Braced, Plain Base 25 .34 140 17.9 Collar Braced, Tabs on Base 2 .02 228 29.2 Ridged l 17 .23 1 .1 Miniatures i 144 i 1.9 19 2.4 Bowls I 42 ! .6 i 168 21.5 Bowl Lids 0 0 39 5.0

Woodland pottery of far greater age than the Polishing is less common and smoothing and Pawnee sites. simple stamping without polishing are somewhat Table 6 reveals some variations in relative more frequent in the Pawnee sample. Decorated frequency of different surface finishes when the body sherds appear in relatively greater percent­ Lower Loup and Pawnee samples are compared. age in the Pawnee sample. The greater relative

-73- TABLE 8. MODES OF RIM DECORATION

Rim Decoration Lower Loup Sample Pawnee Sample No. % No. % Plain 5425 74.2 308 34.7

Parallel Diagonal I 455 6.2 197 22.2 Opposed Parallel Diagonal 181 2.5 210 23.6 Horizontal Parallel 275 3.7 9 1.0 Herringbone 306 4.2 68 7.6 Parallel Diagonal & Horizontal Parallel 68 .9 14 1.6 Chevron 6 .08 54 6.1 Zig-zag 119 1.6 3 .3 Punctate 53 .7 2 .2

Miscellaneous 414 5.6 22 2.5

percentage of fugitive red pigment on the interior fully listed in the pottery type descriptions. Ali surface of sherds in the Pawnee sample reflects of the modes of decoration which are not present the more frequent occurrence of the bowl form in both the Lower Loup and Pawnee pottery in the historic sites. The fugitive red pigment is samples have been combined in the miscellaneous most commonly, but not exclusively, associated category of this table; most of these variations with_ the bowl vessel form. are present only in the Lower Loup sample. This Discussion of Table 7. Inspection of Table 7 category, which represents all of the modes of will reveal that of the 24 different modes of rim rim decoration not present in both samples, form identified in the analysis 18 are present in represents only 2.5 percent of the Pawnee both the Lower Loup and Pawnee pottery pottery and 5.6 percent of the Lower Loup samples. The five modes of form which are sample. As was the case with modes of rim form, present in Lower Loup and not in historic the more striking differences between the Lower Pawnee are all variations of basic forms which are Loup and Pawnee samples are seen in the relative in both samples. The one form present in the proportion in which the various modes of rim Pawnee sample which is absent from the Lower decoration appear in each complex. Loup sample is the bowl lid. However, only five Discussion of Table 9. Table 9 further illus­ percent of the Pawnee sample is in this category. trates the basic similarity between the Lower Only slightly more than one percent of the Loup and historic Pawnee pottery with respect Lower Loup sample is represented by the modes to the modes of decoration on vessel lips. All of of form absent in the Pawnee sample. The most the most common modes of lip decoration are striking differences in form, therefore, are in the represented in both the Lower Loup and historic relative proportions in which these modes are Pawnee pottery samples. All minor variations represented in the two samples. have been included in the table in a single Discussion of Table 8. In Table 8 more miscellaneous category. These variations have common modes of rim decoration are listed been fully listed in the pottery type descriptions, separately. Rarely occurring variations have been and nearly all represent different combinations

-74- TABLE 9. MODES OF LIP DECORATION

Lip Decoration Lower Loup Sample Pawnee Sample No. % No. % Parallel Lines ~ 1586 24.0 49 9.0 Herringbone 895 13.5 2 .4 Punctate 1618 24.4 187 ' 34.6 Plain 1096 16.5 241 =t-~--=--4~~- Finger Indented 529 8.0 8 Parallel Diagonal t 1.5 Rim Interior 461 6.9 38 7.0 Indented or Design on Rim Interior 67 1.0 7 1.3 Parallel Notched 255 3.8 5 .9 Miscellaneous 112 1.7 4 .7 I

TABLE 10. MODES OF VESSEL SHOULDER DECORATION

Shoulder Decoration Lower Loup Sample Pawnee Sample No. % No. % Parallel Diagonal 2430 47.1 454 64.1 I I Opposed Parallel Diagonal 1644 32.0 187 26.4 Parallel Diagonal and Horizontal Parallel 119 2.3 2 .3 Haphazard 24 .4 9 I 1.2 Opposed Parallel Diagonal and Finger Indented 125 2.4 3 .4 I Herringbone 156 3.0 4 .6 .2 12 1.7 Chevrons 13 -- Punctate 26 .5 2 .3 Zig-zag 164 3.2 2 .3 Miscellaneous 448 8.7 32 4.5

of the more common modes of lip decoration. decorations are more common in the Pawnee All of the variations represented in only one of sample. the two pottery samples are included in this Discussion of Table 10. As is illustrated by the category. Less than one percent of the Pawnee various modes of body or shoulder decoration sample and less than two percent of the Lower listed in Table 10, the more common modes of Loup sample are included in the miscellaneous shoulder decoration are represented in both category. Among the variations of proportion it Lower Loup and Pawnee samples. The miscella­ will be noted that plain lips and punctate neous category includes all of the less frequently

-75- TABLE 11. POTTERY TYPES AND WARES

Pottery Types Lower Loup Sample Pawnee Sample No. % No. % Nance Flared Plain 4769 65.0 57 5.8 Nance Flared Decorated 352 4.8 59 6.0 Nance Straight Plain 133 1.8 9 .9

Nance Straight I I Decorated 75 1.0 1 .1 Nance Flanged Lip 133 1.8 1 .1 Nance Thickenet:1 Lip 104 1.3 10 1.0 Burkett S-Collared 62 .8 3 .3 Wright Collared Ware 302 4.1 8 .8 Wright Folded Lip 60 .8 5 .5 Colfax Braced 841 11.5 29 2.9 Butler Braced 35 .5 7 .7 Webster Collar Braced 27 .4 571 58.0 Burkett Ridged Rim 17 .2 1 .1 Burkett Cord Roughened 30 .4 0 0 Burkett Collared Ware 75 1.0 0 0 Webster Bowl Ware 42 .6 168 17.1 Webster Bowl Lids 0 0 39 3.9 Unnamed Shell Tempered Ware 51 .7 1 I .1 Walnut Decorated Lip 45 .6 0 0 Miniatures 144 1.9 20 2.0 Miscellaneous I 4 .05 0 0

occurring modes of shoulder decoration as well rim panel and punctate decorated lip; (4) Braced as those which are present in only one of the ·im form, herringbone rim panel and punctate two samples. This category includes almost nine dtcorated lip; (5) Braced rim form, horizontal percent of the decorated shoulder sherds in the parallel rim panel and punctate decorated lip. Lower Loup sample and 4.5 percent of those in The firs~ three examples represent mode combi­ the Pawnee sample. Thus, when the two samples nations included in Nance Flared Plain pottery are compared there is greater variation in vessel while the last two represent mode combinations body decoration than in rim or lip decoration. included in Colfax Braced. A total of 5 50 such Most of the examples of each sample are in the combinations of rim form, rim decoration and lip categories of parallel diagonal lines and opposed decoration were observed in the collection. These parallel diagonal lines. Despite the greater varia­ combinations were further studied, then com­ tion in modes of shoulder decoration between bined into groups and defined as pottery types the two samples, the similarities are notable. for the purpose of this analysis. Discussion of Table 11. The pottery types A total of 377 of the 550 combinations were summarized in Table 11 represent groups of rim present only in the Lower Loup pottery sample, sherds which share certain combinations of rim 106 were present only in the Pawnee sample and form, rim decoration and lip decoration. Ex­ 67 of the combinations were present in both the amples of such combinations include: (I) Flaring Lower Loup and Pawnee samples. A greater rim form, plain rim panel and plain lip; (2) variety of combinations of rim form, rim decora­ Flaring rim form, plain rim panel and punctate tion and lip decoration is thus associated with decorated lip; (3) Straight flared rim form, plain the Lower l..oup pottery complex than with the

-76- Pawnee sample. typical of the historic Pawnee is present in the It should be noted, however, that 455 of the Barcal site collection, but most of the material is 550 combinations of modes occur rarely. A total of types most common in Lower Loup sites. For of 212 combinations are found only on single this reason the Barcal site was included in the sherds, another 243 are each represented by two Lower Loup sample in the comparison of to nine sherds and 49 combinations are present distribution of modes under discussion. Had this on 10 to 24 sherds each. site been included within the Pawnee sample the Only 46 of the 550 combinations of modes result would have been an increase in the degree are represented on more than 25 sherds each. to which the modes, combinations of modes, and These commonly occurring combinations of rim pottery types were represented in the Pawnee form, rim decoration and lip decoration are the sample. In other words, the comparison of modes ones present on the bulk of the pottery sample, and types represented in the Pawnee and Lower and half of these combinations are present in Loup pottery samples discussed above is based both the Pawnee and Lower Loup pottery on a conservative classification which emphasizes samples. the differences between the two samples. The The various combinations of rim form, rim nature of the Barcal site will be discussed in decoration and lip decoration have been classi­ other sections. fied in to 20 pottery categories. The distribution There is one other factor which should be of these categories with respect to the Pawnee discussed in connection with assessing the and Lower Loup pottery samples is summarized differences noted above in the comparison of the in Table 11. Most of the pottery from the Pawnee and Lower Loup pottery samples. Wedel Pawnee and Lower Loup sites can be classified noted that some rim sherds from the Schuyler into types which are present in the pottery (Gray) site (25 CX 1) foreshadowed later samples representative of each focus. Pawnee-type pottery (Wedel 1936: 73). As stated above, Webster Bowl Lids are Comparison of several pottery types defined present in the Pawnee sample but absent from in thi;-, analysis led to the formulation of a the Lower Loup sample. Three types, Burkett hypothesis that the typical Pawnee pottery type, Cord Roughened, Burkett Collared and Walnut Webster Collar Braced, may have developed out Decorated Lip, are present in the Lower Loup of the Lower Loup pottery type, Colfax Braced, sample but not in the Pawnee pottery sample. and that the pottery type provisionally Several of the type categories are relatively rare designated as Butler Braced may represent a both in the total collection and in each of the transitional variation of these two types. The two pottery samples. Ninety-seven percent of the changes necessary for this development are not total pottery collection represents type great. An increase in the height of the braced categories present in both the Lower Loup and portion of the rim to attain a collared appearance Pawnee samples. and the reduction of alternate cloistered handles The Barcal site (25 BU 4) has been included in to pendant tabs would be the primary the Lower Loup pottery sample in the above modifications required. Some changes in the comparative tables. However, the classification of shape of the vessel body from a globular form to this site has been discussed in an earlier section, one with a more pronounced shoulder and a and it should be noted again at this point that rounded sub-conical base are also indicated, but the Barcal site has been classified both as a both vessel forms are present in the Lower Loup member of the Lower Loup Focus and as an complex. The presence of Wright Collared ware historic Pawnee site. The latter classification is in the Lower Loup complex has also been not supported by direct historical indicated, and some of this ware has a superficial documentation, but reflects the presence in the exterior resemblance to Webster Collar Braced site of non-ceramic features which are not rims. High collars of this form were thus part of typically Lower Loup. This evidence is the Lower Loup pottery which could have served principally the type of six and eight center-post as a prototype for the historic Webster Collar house which is characteristic of the historic Braced pottery. It should also be noted that Pawnee and typical of the Barcal site. Only one pendant tabs are present, although rarely, on other .Lower Loup site, the Wright site (25 NC rims which otherwise fit the Colfax Braced 3 ), has houses with more than four center posts, classification. It is suggested that most, if not all, and there only two of the ten excavated houses of the features typical of Webster Collar Braced have a six center-post foundation. Some pottery pottery are •present in the Lower Loup pottery

-77- sample. Therefore, the suggestion that a simple largely in the variety with which these modes are recombination of modes of form and decoration combined and the frequency in which the modes, could result in the historic Pawnee pottery type combinations of modes and pottery types are is not unreasonable. See Plate XXVII. represented in each sample. Modes and types can This ceramic development is suggested as a be interpreted as reflecting community standards hypothesis for further investigation. The and stylistic patterns, which in turn reflect the discussion will serve to indicate that there would culture which conditioned the behavior of the be some justification for including Colfax artisan (Rouse 1939: 15). The degree to which Braced, Butler Braced and Webster Collar Braced the various modes of form, lip decoration, types in a single category as representatives of a surface treatment and body decoration are repre­ single braced rim ware. If this were followed the sented in both Lower Loup and Pawnee pottery transition from Lower Loup to Pawnee pottery samples can, therefore, be interpreted as indicat­ would be a smoother one and some of the ing that the pottery from the protohistoric differences noted in the discussion of modes of Lower Loup and historic Pawnee sites is the form and decoration would be lessened or product of a common ceramic tradition. The disappear. The types have been kept separate in variations noted in the comparison can be attri­ this comparison to avoid the possibility of buted in part to changes occurring over a forcing similarities between the two pottery probable time span of 300 or more years and will samples. provide a means of arranging the sites involved in The comparison of the modes of pottery relative order by means of seriation. form, rim decoration and lip decoration has These data support the first hypothesis of the shown that all of the more common modes are Pawnee-Lower Loup problem, which states that present in both Pawnee and Lower Loup pottery. the sites of the Lower Loup Focus represent the The differences between the two samples are protohistoric period of the historic tribe.

SERIATION OF THE PAWNEE AND LOWER LOUP SITES

Attention may now be directed toward the and in order to have as many units as possible problem of identifying temporal changes within available for seriation, all excavation units includ­ the pottery types which comprise the Pawnee ing more than 50 rim sherds were used in the and Lower Loup ceramic tradition. The methods analysis. Many of the stratified excavation units by which this portion of the analysis was produced fewer than 50 sherds and, thus, do not accomplished have been discussed in an earlier provide reliable results. These units have been section. Stratigraphic units provide a basis for the utilized for what little they will suggest regarding seriation of the various sites. trends for seriation, but only the units with The problem of what constitutes and ade­ larger samples have been relied upon in the quate sample for seriation has been given consi­ ordering. Without additional excavation it is deration. Of course, the larger the sample the impossible to improve the sample available, so it more accurate the results~ the problem, there­ has been necessary to make the best of the fore, is what minimal size of sample will produce existing collection. useable results. Meighan has suggested that I 00 In some cases no feature within a site includes items or even less may be useable (Meighan a sufficiently large pottery sample of 50 or more 1959: 211). Ford regards a sample of over 100 sherds. In these cases the site has been taken as sherds as fairly dependable and anything over 50 the excavation unit and is represented in the sherds as useable for rough dating (Ford 1949: seriation as a site total only. It will be noted that 36). Since tabulation of the Pawnee and Lower some of the Pawnee sites produced so little Loup collections by excavation unit revealed that pottery that even the site total is below the de­ many units included less than 100 rim sherds, sired sample size. Fortunately, historic evidence

-78- TABLE 12. DISTRIBUTION OF POTTERY CATEGORIES IN SITE AND EXCAVATION UNITS

Excavation Units

25 BU 1 25 PK 1 25WT 1 14 RP 1 Pottery Types I Site Total Site Total Site Total Site Total No. % No. % No. % No. % Nance Flared Plain I 13 13.0 4.3 I 1 11.1 16 Nance Flared Decorated 16 16.0 18 4.8 Nance Straight Plain 8 8.5 Nance Straight Decorated I Nance Flanged Lip 1 .3 Nance Thick- ened Lip 1 1.0 Burkett S -Collared Wright Collared Ware 1 1.0 6 1.6 Wright Folded Lip ~ 3 .8 Colfax Braced 7 7.0 4 1.1 1 1.1 Butler Braced 1 1.0 1 .3 Webster Collar Braced I 61 61.0 2 22.2 176 47.1 84 90.3 Burkett Ridged I Rim Burkett Cord Roughened Burkett Collared Webster Bowl Ware 4 44.4 120 32.1 Webster Bowl Lids 1 11.1 28 7.5 .Shell Tempered Ware I Walnut Decorated I Lip j Miniatures and I Misc. i 1 11.1 r

-79- TABLE 12. (Continued)

Excavation Units

25 NC2 25 NC2 25 NC2 25 NC 2 Pottery Types Site Total House 2 Cl Houo;e 2 House l , C2 No. % No. % No. % No. % Nance Flared Plain 10 4.4 Nance Flared Decorated 2 .9 Nance Straight Plain Nance Straight Decorated Nance Flanged Lip Nance Thiele- ened Lip 2 .9 Bu rkett S~ollared Wright Collared Ware 1 .4 Wright Folded Lip Colfax Braced 1 .4 Butler Braced 2 .9 Webster Collar Braced 166 72.4 14 100.0 5 50.0 I 100.0 Burkett Ridged Rim Burkett Cord Roughened Burkett Collared Webster Bowl Ware 21 9.2 4 40.0 Webster Bowl Lids 10 4.4 l 10.0 Shell Temper· ed Ware Walnut Decor- ated Lip Miniatures and Misc. 13 5.7

- 80- TABLE 12. (Continued)

Excavation Units

25 NC 2 25 BU 1 25 BU 1 25 BU 1 Pottery Types House 1 House 3 House 3, C4 UN-Housc 2 No. % No. % No. % No. % Nance Flared Plain Nance Flared Decorated 2 66.6 1 16.7 Nance Straight Plain Nance Straight Decorated Nance Flanged Lip Nance Thick- ened Lip Burkett $-Collared Wright Collared Ware Wright Folded Lip Colfax Braced Butler Braced I Webster Collar Braced 3 42.9 1 33.3 1 100.0 5 83.2 Burkett Ridged Rim Burkett Cord I Roughened Burkett Collared Webster Bowl Ware 4 57.1 Webster Bowl Lids Shell Tempered Ware Walnut Decor- ated Lip Miniatures and Misc.

-81- TABLE 12. (Continued)

Excavation Units

25 BU 1 25 SD 1 25 SD 1 25 SD 1 Pottery Types UN-House 1 Site Total Fea. 7 Pit below F. 7 No. % No. % No. % No. % Nance Flared Plain 3 10.0 Nance Flared Decorated 2 6.7 Nance Straight Plain Nance Straight Decorated Nance Flanged Lip Nance Thick- ened Lip 2 6.7 Burkett 5-Collared Wright Collared I Ware Wright Folded Lip Colfax ~ Braced 1 50.0 7 23.4

Butler I Braced I Webster Collar Braced 1 50.0 14 45.7 2 100.0 1 lwo.o Burkett Ridged Rim

Burkett Cord I Roughened Burkett Collared Webster Bowl Ware 2 6.7 I Webster Bowl + Lids Shell Tempered I Ware Walnut Decorated Lip Miniatures and Misc.

-82- TABLE 12. (Continued)

Excavation Units

25 GA 1 25 BU 4 25 BU 4 25 BU 4 Pottery Types Site Total Site Total M. 2 0-12" M. 2 12-24" No. % No. % No. % No. % Nance Flared ! Plain 7 13.2 236 38.5 16 44.5 21 142.0 Nance Flared Decorated 7 13.2 176 28.7 7 19.5 16 32.0 Nance Straight Plain 9 1.5 Nance Straight Decorated 6 .9 Nance Flanged Lip Nance Thick- ened Lip- 7 1.1 Burkett S-Collared 3 5.6 5 .8 1 2.7 Wright Collar- ed Ware 1 .2 I Wright Folded I Lip Colfax Braced 88 14.4 6 16.7 8 16.0 Butler Braced 1 1.9 38 6.2 1 2.7 5 10.0 Webster Collar Braced 18 33.9 23 3.7 1 2.7 Burkett Ridged Rim 2 .3 1 2.7 Burkett Cord Roughened Burkett Collared Webster Bowl Ware 9 17.0 3 .4 2 5.6 Webster Bowl Lids 2 3.8 Shell Tempered Ware 1 .2 Walnut Decorated Lip I I Miniatures and I Misc. 10 11.3 18 2.9 1 2.7 I

-83- TABLE 12. (Continued}

Excavation Units

25 BU 4 25 BU 4 I 25 BU 4 25 BU 4 Pottery Types M. 1 0-15" M. 1 15-30" c. 5 1-18" C. 5B No. % No. % No. % No. % Nance Flared Plain 35 42.1 13 42.0 1 6.6 14 68.9 Nance Flared Decorated 24 28.9 7 22.6 7 46.6 5 21.7 Nance Straight Plain 3 I 13.1 Nance Straight Decorated 2 13.3 Nance Flanged Lip Nance Thick- ened Lip Burkett s-Collared 1 4.3 Wright Collared Ware Wright Folded Lip Colfax Braced 9 10.8 4 12.9 1 6.6 Butler Braced 12 14.5 3 9.7 2 13.3 Webster Collar Braced 2 6.4 1 6.6 Burkett Ridged Rim 1 1.2 Burkett Cord I Roughened Burkett Collared Wehster Bowl Ware Webster Bowl Lids l Shell Tempered Ware I l 3.2 I Walnut Decorated Lip Miniatures and Misc. 2 2.4 1 3.2 1 6.6 I

-84- TABLE 12. (Continued)

Excavation Units

I 25 NC 3 25 NC 3 25 NC 3 25 NC 3 Pottery Types Site Total House 6 House 7 House 5 No. % No. % No. % No. % Nance Flared Plain 913 60.1 12 63.2 110 72.0 73 62.0 Nance Flared Decorated 63 4.1 7 5.8 Nance Straight Plain 6 .4 Nance Straight Decorated 1 .06 Nance Flanged Lip 7 .5 Nance Thick- ened Lip 9 .6 1 .6 Burkett 5-Collared 10 .7 Wright Collared Ware 127 8.4 2 10.5 11 7.2 12 10.2 Wright Folded Lip 3 .2 Colfax Braced 337 22.2 1 5.2 29 19.0 24 20.4 Butler Braced 2 .1 Webster Collar Braced 1 .06 1 .6 Burkett Ridged Rim Burkett Cord Roughened 5 .3 Burkett Collared Webster Bowl Ware 9 .6 3 15.8 Webster Bowl Lids Shell Tempered Ware 4 .2 Wainu t Decorated Lip Miniatures and Misc. 23 1.5 l 5.2 1 .6 2 1.6

-85- TABLE 12. (Continued)

L Excavation Units

25 NC 3 25 NC 3 25NC3 25 NC 3 Pottery Types House 5 C1 T. 6 C1 House 8 T. 3 No. % No. % No. % No. % Nance Flared Plain 100 77.5 63 65.6 32 56.1 82 57.3 Nance Flared Decorated 3 2.2 1 1.0 1 1.7 10 7.0 Nance Straight Plain 1 .7 Nance Straight Decorated 1 .7 Nance Flanged Lip Nance Thick- ened Lip 2 1.5 1 1.7 Burkett S.Collared Wright Collared Ware 8 6.2 3 3.1 9 15.8 20 14.0 Wright Folded Lip Colfax Braced 15 11.6 26 27.1 13 22.8 30 21.0 Butler Braced Webster Collar Braced Burkett Ridged Rim Burkett Cord Roughened Burkett Collared Webster Bowl Ware Webster Bowl Lids Shell Tempered Ware Walnut Decorated Lip Miniatures and Misc. 3 3.1 1 1.7

-86- TABLE 12. (Continued)

Excavation Units

25 NC 3 25 NC 3 25 NC 3 25 NC 3 Pottery Types Trench 1 H. 6.C1 T. 6.C. 2 Krzvcki Area No. % No. % No. % No. % Nance Flared Plain 95 59.1 33 76.7 65 43.6 47 79.0 Nance Flared Decorated 10 6.0 1 2.3 4 2.6 Nance Straight Plain Nance Straight Decorated I Nance Flanged Lip Nance Thick- ened Lip 2 1.3 Burkett S.{::ollared Wright Collared Ware 12 7.5 2 4.6 11 7.4 3 5.0 Wright Folded Lip Colfax Braced 37 23.4 2 4.6 65 43.6 Butler Braced 1 .6 Webster Collar Braced Burkett Ridged Rim Burkett Cord Roughened Burkett Collared Webster Bowl Ware 5 3.0 Webster Bowl Lids Shell Tempered Ware 3 5.0 Walnut Decorated Lip Miniatures and Misc. 1 .6 5 11.6 1 .6 6 11.0

-87- TABLE 12. (Continued)

Excavation Units

25 NC3 25 PT 1 25 PT 1 25 PT 1 Pottery Types House 2 & 4 Site Total Cache 10 Cache 9 No. % No. % No. % No. % Nance Flared Plain 26 49.0 527 66.0 50 67.7 8 32.0 Nance Flared Decorated 29 3.6 4 5.2 4 16.0 Nance Straight Plain 2 3.8 7 .9 1 1.3 Nance Straight Decorated Nance Flanged Lip 1 1.9 17 2.1 1 1.3 Nance Thick- ened Lip 19 2.4 1 1.3 3 12.0 Burkett S-Collared 8 1.0 Wright Collared Ware 10 18.9 51 7.3 6 8.1 7 28.0 Wright Folded Lip 19 2.4 Colfax Braced 14 26.4 66 8.3 10 13.5 2 8.0 Butler Braced Webster Collar Braced Burkett Ridged Rim 1 .1 Burkett Cord Roughened Burkett Collared Webster Bowl Ware 5 .6 Webster Bowl Lids Shell Tempered waie Walnut Decorated Lip Miniatures and Misc. 42 5.3 1 1.3 1 4.0

-88- TABLE 12. (Continued) - Excavation Units

25 PT 1 25 PT 1 25 PT 1 25 PT 1 Pottery Types Cache 2 Cache 8 Cache 1 Cache 4 No. % No. % No. % No. % ---- l\ance Flared I Plain 36 64.2 53 80.2 38 76.0 49 80.3 :\ ance Flared Decorated 1 1.8 1 1.5 :>lance Straight Plain 2 3.0 1 2.0 1\ance Straight Decorated :.; ance Flanged Lip 3 5.3 Nance Thick- ened Lip 2 3.5 2 3.0 1 2.0 I Burkett I S -<::ollared Wright Collared Ware 5 8.9 2 3.0 6 12.0 3 4.9 Wright Folded Lip Colfax Braced 4 7.1 6 9.1 1 2.0 8 13.1 Butler Braced Webster Collar I Braced I Burkett Ridged Rim I Burkett Cord Roughened I Burkett I Collared I _jI __ . __ . Webster Bowl I Ware 1 1.8 1 2.0 Webster Bowl

Lids I Shell Tempered Ware I Walnut Decorated Lip Miniatures and Misc. 4 7.1 2 4.0 J±

-89- TABLE 12. (Continued)

Excavation Units

25 PT 1 25 NC 1 25 NCl 25 NC I Pottery Types House 1 Site Total M. 1. C 11 M.l. C 7 No % No. % No. % No. % Nance F lared Plain 65 65.7 2250 70. 1 125 85.6 47 85.5 Nance Flared Decorated 3 3.0 58 1.7 2 1.9 Nance Straight Plain 86 2.7 1 .7 1 1.8 Nance Straight Decorated 61 1.9 1 .7 Nance Flanged Lip 5 5.1 89 2.8 1 .7 1 1.8 Nance Thick- ened Lip 2 2.0 56 1.6 11 7.5 Burkett S.Collared 1 1.0 35 1.1 Wright Collared Ware 3 3.0 72 2.2 Wright Folded Lip 35 l.l Colfax Braced 14 14.1 214 6.6 6 10.9 Butler Braced 1 .03 Webster Collar Braced Burkett Ridged Rim 12 .4 Burkett Cord Roughened 24 .7 Burkett Collared 80 2.3 1 .7 Webster Bowl Ware 2 2.0 12 .4 Webster Bowl Lids Shell Tempered Ware 25 .8 Walnut Decorated Lip 42 1.3 Miniatures and Misc. 4 4.0 53 1.6 4 2.7

- 90- TABLE 12. (Continued)

Excavation Units

25 NC 1 25 NC 1 25 NC 1 25 NC 1 Pottery Types M.1 0-8" M. 1 8-16" M. 2 0-8" M. 2 8-16" No. % No. % No. % No. % Nance Flared Plain 186 78.2 138 83.0 88 69.2 109 64.1 Nance Flared Decorated 3 1.4 5 3.0 2 1.6 3 1.7 Nance Straight Plain 3 1.4 2 1.2 5 3.9 6 3.5 Nance Straight Decorated 8 3.4 7 4.2 1 .8 2 1.1 Nance Flanged Lip 4 1.7 1 .8 1 .6 Nance Thick- ened Lip 4 1.7 1 .6 Burkett S-Collared 2 .8 1 .6 1 .8 2 1.1 Wright Collared Ware 3 1.2 3 2.4 Wright Folded Lip Colfax Braced 21 8.8 10 6.2 4 3.1 7 4.1 Butler Braced Webster Collar Braced Burkett Ridged Rim Burkett Cord Roughened 1 .6 Burkett Collared 1 .6 10 7.9 20 11.8 Webster Bowl Ware Webster Bowl Lids Shell Tempered Ware 3 1.2 3 2.4 14 8.2 Walnut Decor- ated Lip 1 .4 1 .6 4 3.1 2 1.1 Miniatures and Misc. 1 .6 5 3.9 2 1.1

-91- TABLE 12. (Continued)

Excavation Units

25 NC 1 25 NC 1 25 NC 1 25 NC 1 Pottery Types NSTT 0-8" NSTT 8-16" GT3 0-8" GT3 8-16" No. % No. % No. % No. % Nance Flared Plain 16 66.5 17 48.6 9 81.8 10 50.0 Nance Flared Decorated Nance Straight Plain 1 4.2 2 5.7 2 18.1 2 10.0 Nance Straight Decorated Nance Flanged Lip Nance Thick- ened Lip Burkett S-Collared Wright Collared Ware 2 10.0 Wright Folded Lip Colfax Braced 1 4.2 Butler Braced Webster Collar I Braced Burkett Ridged Rim Burkett Cord Roughened 3 12.5 7 20.0 2 10.0 Burkett Collared 2 8.3 4 11.4 3 15.0 Webster Bowl Ware Webster Bowl Lids Shell Tempered Ware 1 2.8 1 5.0 Walnut Decor- ated Lip 1 4.2 4 11.4 Miniatures and Misc.

-92- TABLE 12. (Continued)

Excavation Units

25 NC 1 25 NC 1 25 NC 1 25 NC 1 Pottery Types MT1 0-8" MT1 8-16" EWTT OC9 UN-M. 1 No. % No. % No. % No. % Nance Flared Plain 9 100.0 11 84.5 45 63.3 89 59.5 Nance Flared Decorated 2 2.8 5 3.2 Nance Straight Plain I Nance Straight Decorated 1 7.7 Nance Flanged Lip 1 7.7 10 6.6 Nance Thick- ened Lip 1 1.4 5 3.3 Burkett S-Collared 6 8.4 1 .6 Wright Collar- ed Ware 1 1.4 10 6.6 Wright Folded Lip 1 .6 Colfax Braced 11 15.5 21 14.0 Bulter Braced 1 1.4 Webster Collar Braced Burkett Ridged Rim 1 .6 Burkett Cord Roughened 1 1.4 Burkett Collared 1 1.4 Webster Bowl Ware Webster Bowl Lids Shell Tempered Ware Walnut Decor- I ated Lip Miniatures and Misc. I 2 2.8 7 4.6

-93- TABLE 12. (Continued)

Excavation Units 25 NC 1 25 NC 1 25 NC 1 25 NC 1 Pottery Types House 6 UN-M. 2 UN-M.4 House 10 No. % No. % No. % No. % Nance Flared Plain 39 69.7 57 71.3 207 70.5 31 72.0 Nance Flared Decorated 1 1.7 5 6.2 5 1.7 1 2.3 Nance Straight Plain 3 5.3 I 3 6.9 Nance Straight Decorated 3 5.3 2 4.5 Nance Flanged Lip 1 1.7 2 2.5 12 4.8 2 4.5 Nance Thick- ened Lip 3 3.7 11 3.7 Burkett $-Collared 2 .6 Wright Collar- ed Ware 7 12.5 1 1.2 5 1.7 2 4.5 Wright Folded Lip 3 1.0 Colfax Braced 10 12.5 32 10.9 Butler Braced Webster Collar Braced Burkett Ridged Rim 5 1.7 Burkett Cord Roughened Burkett Collared Webster Bowl Ware Webster Bowl Lids Shell Tempered Ware Walnut Decorated Lip 1 1.7 1 2.3 Miniatures and Misc. 1 1.7 2 2.5 11 3.7 1 2.3

-94- TABLE 12. (Continued) - Excavation Units

25 NC 1 25 NC 1 25 PT 13 25 PT 13 Pottery Types M. 2C9 House 3 Site Total House 2 No. % No. % No. % No. % Nance Flared Plain 46 69.6 45 59.2 222 69.2 43 63.1 Nance Flared Decorated 1 1.5 1 1.3 18 5.6 6 8.8 Nance Straight Plain 2 3.0 2 2.7 18 5.6 Nance Straight Decorated 1 1.5 4 5.2 Nance Flanged Lip 1 1.5 14 4.3 Nance Thick- ened Lip 2 3.0 1 .3 5 7.3 -- Burkett $-Collared 1 1.5 1 1.3 Wright Collar- ed Ware 3 3.9 34 10.5 9 13.2 -- Wright Folded Lip Colfax Braced 6 9.1 2 2.6 4 1.2 1 1.4 Butler Braced Webster Collar Braced Burkett Ridged Rim Burkett Cord Roughened 3 4.5 3 3.9 1 .3 Burkett Collared 8 10.5 Webster Bowl Ware 7 2.2 4 I 5.8 Webster Bowl Lids Shell Tempered Ware I 3 3.9 Walnut Decor- ated Lip 2 3.0 4 5.2 I Miniatures and Misc. 1 1.5 2 .6

-95- TABLE 12. (Continued)

Excavation Units

25 PT 13 25 NC 16 25 BU 2 25 BU 2 Pottery Types Cache 3 Site Total P. Comp. Lower Loup Site Total Site Total No. % No. % No. % No. % Nance Flared Plain 55 72.4 10 43.5 2 3.7 70 46.4 Nance Flared Decorated 5 6.5 9 16.7 18 11.9 Nance Straight Plain l 1.3 2 8.7 2 1.5 Nance Straight Decorated 1 4.5 Nance Flanged I Lip 2 8.7 Nance Thick- ened Lip 2 2.6 2 8.7 1 1.8 5 3.3 Burkett S.Collared 2 1.3 Wright Collar- ed Ware 10 13.3 I Wright Folded Lip 1 4.3 1 .6 Colfax Braced 5 21.8 3 5.5 42 27.8 Butler Braced Webster Collar 37 68.5 5 3.3 Braced - Burkett Ridged Rim Burkett Cord Roughened 1 1.3 Burkett Collared Webster Bowl Ware 2 2.6 2 3.7 1 .6 Webster Bowl Lids Shell Tempered Ware Walnut Decor- ated Lip Miniatures and Misc. 5 3.3

-96- TABLE 12. (Continued)

Excavation Units

25NC4 25CC 1 25CX2 25CX2 Pottery Types Site Total Site Total Site Total UN-Mound 1 Lower Loup No. % No. % No. % No. % Nance Flared Plain 32 50.7 15 51.1 227 11.5 86 76.7 Nance Flared Decorated 1 1.6 1 3.8 7 2.4 Nance Straight Plain 1 1.6 Nance Straight Decorated Nance Flanged Lip 1 1.6 2 7.7 Nance Thick- ened Lip 5 1.7 1 .9 Burkett S.Collared Wright Collar- ed Ware 10 15.9 1 .3 Wright Folded Lip Colfax Braced 11 17.5 46 15.7 24 21.4 Butler Braced Webster Collar Braced Burkett Ridged Rim 2 .7 Burkett Cord Roughened Burkett Collared Webster Bowl Ware 3 1.0 1 .9 Webster Bowl Lids Shell Tempered Ware 3 4.7 8 30.8 Walnut Decor- ated Lip Miniatures and Misc. 4 6.3 2 .7

-97- TABLE 12. (Continued)

Excavation Units

25 ex 2 25 ex 3 25 ex 1 25 ex 1 Pottery Types UN-House 1 Site Total Site Total UN-House 1 No. % No. % No. % No. % Nance Flared Plain 132 87.7 9 81.9 270 79.8 70 72.2 Nance Flared Decorated 5 3.0 1 9.0 8 2.3 4 4.1 Nance Straight Plain 6 1.7 Nance Straight Decorated Nance Flanged Lip 1 .3 1 1.0 Nance Thick- ened Lip Burkett S-Collared 1 .3 1 1.0 Wright Collar- ed Ware 1 .6 5 1.4 4 4.1 Wright Folded Lip 2 .6 Colfax Braced 10 6.6 1 9.0 30 8.9 12 12~3 Butler Braced Webster Collar Braced Burkett Ridged Rim Burkett Cord Roughened Burkett Collared Webster Bowl Ware 2 1.3 3 .9 1 1.0 Webster Bowl Lids Shell Temper- ed Ware 11 3.2 4 4.1 Walnut Decor- ated Lip Miniatures and Misc. 1 .6 1 .3

-98- TABLE 12. (Cole,_,)

Ela:afttiaa Ualts 25CX1 25NC7 25NCll Pottmy'l'ypel UD-IIoule 1. C2 SlteToal Site ToW No. No. No. NIDCe Flaled " " " Pilla 78 87.7 1 33.3 N.aceF'Ialed Decalated 1 1.1 Mace Strlfabt Plain 1 1.1 N.aceStnfaht Deoala1ed N.aceF'Iaql4 Lip NIDC8 'l'bict· eaeclUp Balbtt S.cau-cl WrJahtw.. Coll8l8d WJJabt Folded iJp Colfax BIIICOd 5 5.6 Butler Bracecl Webllllr eaa... Bracecl 2 BUibtt IUdpd "-' Rim Burbtt Cold ~ BUIDU Callaaell WebltBI Bowl w.. 1 1.1 1 100.0 W..,.._Bowl Lida Sbe1l Tempeald w.. 3 3A Waut Decor- ldldLip Min'•ta.. IDCI Mile. ·-

-99- TABLE 12. (Conti11ued)

Excavation Units

2SNCS 2SWT7 25HW1 Pottery Types Site Total Pawnee Comp. Site Total No. 911 No. % No. Nance Flared I" Plain -- . . 4 ---7.2 Nance Flaled Deconted 6 10.8 Nance St:ndght Plain Nance Stlaight Deconted Nance Flanged Lip Nance Thick- ened Lip 4 7.2 Burltett S.Collaed --"--"- Wright Collared Ware --- I 1.8 Wrilbt Folded ------Lip 2 3.6 Colfax BJaced s 9.1 Butler Blaced 1 1.8 Webster CoUar Braced 2 66.6 3 100.0 18 32.6 Burltett Ridged Rim - Burltett Ccml Roughened -----· Blllkett Collared Webster Bowl Ware - - 12 21.8 Webster Bowl Lids 1 33.3 Shell Tempemd Ware 1 1.8 Walnut Decor- atedLip Miniatlllel and Misc. 1 1.8

-100- is available for dating most of these sites. The Clarks site (25 PK 1), 1820-45, and the In the Wright site (25 NC 3) of the Lower early component of the Linwood site (25 BU I), Loup Focus, certain features which consistently circa 1804, have both been identified as village include distinctive combinations of pottery types sites occupied by the Grand Pawnee band. The have been combined in a single unit in order to pottery sample from the Clarks site is also so amass a sample in excess of 50 sherds for small that a comparison involving this site cannot incliis_ion. in the seriation. This was necessary in be regarded as conclusive. However, there is a the case of several cache pits in the Krzycki area slight decrease in the Nance Flared Plain and a of the site in which shell tempered ware was more pronounced decrease in the Webster Collar associated with Lower Loup materials. The pot­ Braced in the Clarks site relative to the earlier tery from House 2 and House 4 at the Wright site Linwood site. Nance Thickened Lip, Wright was also combined for seriation purposes. These Collared Ware, Colfax Braced and Butler Braced two houses were the only ones at the site with a are all present in limited amounts in the Linwood six center-post structural pattern. Thus, they site and absent in the Clarks site. These variations were possible representatives of a late period at in pottery proportions may be due to the passage the site since this is a trait characteristic of of time between these two occupations. The historic sites. Neither house alone contained a marked decrease in the amount of pottery large sample of pottery; combined they produce present in the Clarks site is perhaps more a useable total of 53 sherd~. The two features significant than any of the above variations as an were similar in both structure and ceramic indication of the rapid decline of the potter's art content. in the early nineteenth century. These and other excavation units have been The Hill site (25 WT 1), 1775-1806 to 1815, identified by reference to the excavation and and the Kansas Monument site (14 RP 1), laboratory records since a complete archeological 1775-1800 or 1821-31, have bothbeenattrib­ description of each feature is beyond the scope uted to the Republican band of Pawnee. There of this paper. The following table (Table 12) is little doubt that the Hill site was occupied and summarizes the data utilized in the stratigraphic visited in 1806 by Pike. The Kansas Monument analysis and seriation. site has usually been regarded as being earlier The second hypothesis stated for investigation than the Hill site, but new evidence reviewed as part of the Pawnee-Lower Loup problem was earlier supports a suggested later date. Almost concerned with the identification of temporal equal amounts of direct rim pottery types are variations in the ceramic materials. One of the present in the Hill and Kansas Monument sites, methods of determining the presence and direc­ but they represent different type categories. The tion of such changes is in the analysis of most striking difference is in the relative frequen­ stratigraphic excavation units. Another source of cy of Webster Collar Braced which includes 90 such data is in the comparison of sites of percent of the pottery at Kansas Monument and different age which can be attributed to a single only 47 percent of the Hill site collection. Pawnee band. The historical evidence of time and Webster Bowl Ware and Webster Bowl Lids are identification of village occupations was reviewed very common at the Hill site and virtually absent in an earlier section. Only three pairs of historic at Kansas Monument where only a few sherds sites meet the conditions necessary for such a suggestive of this ware were found (Smith 1950: comparison. Even these must be considered with 8). Four other types, Nance Flanged Lip, Wright some reservations because most of the evidence Collared Ware, Wright Folded Lip and Butler indicates a considerable amount of both se­ Braced, are present in the Hill site and absent at quential and simultaneous occupation of the Kansas Monument. Colfax Braced appears in the various villages by more than one band. It could same relative proportion in each site. The dif­ hardly be contended that the sites used in the ferences noted in the comparison can probably following comparison were unaffected by at least be attributed to temporal factors regardless of some degree of influence from other bands. which site is the older. The historical record The Fullerton site (25 NC 7) and the Palmer suggests that the sites are not far apart in time, site (25 HW I) have been identified as Skidi again without regard to which is the earlier site. villages. So little pottery was present at the The relative age depends upon the direction of Fullerton site that a comparison of Fullerton and the trend of Webster Collar Braced and Webster Palmer reveals only that pottery had become Bowl Ware. Webster Collar Braced decreased extremely rare among the Skidi by 1846. through time in the comparison between the

-101- Linwood and Clarks sites, but this may be due to Three stratigraphic excavation units are avail­ the general decline in pottery making at the able at the Barcal site (25 BU 4). The upper Clarks site. The same pair indicates an increase in portion of Cache 5 is segregated from the lower Webster Bowl Ware which is present only in the portions and an intrusive Cache Sb. Two refuse later of the two sites. Stratigraphic evidence from mounds were excavated in arbitrary three-inch other historic sites indicates an increasing popu­ levels. Analysis of these levels did not reveal larity of Webster Collar Braced, which would striking changes and involved only small samples. make the Kansas Monument site later than the Adjacent levels have been combined to increase Hill site. However, small samples render these the sample size. Two levels are thus available for trend indications unreliable. The relative age of comparison in each mound. The usual factors of the Hill and Kansas Monument sites will be mound disturbance must be kept in mind in considered again in another context. evaluating these data. Cache 5 data shows a Other clues to the trends or temporal changes decrease in Nance Flared Plain and an increase in in pottery type frequencies may be observed in Nance Flared Decorated, but the same trends are the stratified excavation units available in the not repeated in the mounds in a consistent Horse Creek, Linwood and Yutan sites of the fashion, nor are the variations in relative percent­ historic period. Unfortunately, none of these age of Colfax :.raced and Butler Braced similar in stratified excavation units contains more than 14 each stratigraphic pair. With two exceptions the sherds, and the apparent trends are not conclu­ samples from the various units are below 50 sive. sherds. Taken alone the stratigraphic data from In the Horse Creek site (25 NC 2) House 2 is the Barca) site are not helpful. However, in stratigraphically below House 2, Cache I. At the relation to the Wright and Burkett site data, they same site House 1, Cache 2 is stratigraphically take on added significance. above House 1, which in turn is above House I, Two pairs of physically stratified excavation Cache 1. The latter feature contained no pottery units are present in the Wright site (25 NC 3); at all, and only a few sherds are present in the House 6 is superimposed above a portion of other stratified units. Both situations suggest an House 7, and House 5 is stratigraphically above increasing popularity of Webster Collar Braced House 5, Cache 1. House 6 contains only 19 rim pottery. sherds, but the other three units have pottery At the Yutan site (25 SD 1) Feature 7 is samples in excess of 100 sherds each. Decreasing stratigraphically above a pit. Only a few sherds relative percentages of Nance Flared Plain are are present, all of the Webster Collar Braced represented in both pairs of excavation units. variety, and as a result, they reveal no trends. Wright Collared ware increases in both cases. The site has been identified as Pawnee on the At the Larson site (25 PT 1) Cache 10 is basis of the archeological materials in the face of intrusive into the earlier cache pit 9 which has a historical data which has led to the identification small sherd sample. Nance Flared Plain increases of the site as Oto. while Nance Flared Decorated decreases. Wright None of the stratified excavation units at the Collared Ware also decreases while Colfax Braced Linwood site (25 BU 1) includes enough sherds type increases in percentage. Nance Thickened for significant results. House 3 is stratigraphically Lip decreases. above House 3, Cache 4. The house contains Arbitrary excavation levels were maintained in Nance Flared Decorated, which is not present in the excavation of two refuse mounds and several the earlier feature, as well as a relatively smaller test trenches during the excavation of the Bur­ amount of Webster Collar Braced than does the kett site (25 NC 1), and two cache pits were earlier pit. Houses 1 and 2 as excavated by the recorded as being intrusive into one of these University of Nebraska are superimposed midden deposits. All of the excavation units in features, House 2 being the later structure. House Mounds 1 and 2 and the intrusive cache pits 7 2 contains Nance Flared Decorated and a higher and 11 in Mound 1 included pottery samples in proportion of Webster Collar Braced than does excess of 50 sherds; most samples totaled more the earlier structure. than 100 sherds. The test trench excavation units Stratified excavation units in Lower Loup include smaller samples but are important be­ Focus sites offer more reliable indications of cause of the presence of Burkett Cord Rough­ temporal changes in the relative popularity of ened and Burkett Collared types in their lower pottery. Samples in excess of 50 or 100 sherds levels. These two types show decreasing percent­ are available in several cases. ages in Mound 2 and the North-south Test

-102- 1 I Sl TE E'XCAVATION UNIT SERIATION OF STRATIGRAPHIC UN ITS I Sd I { .. , c I H2Cl HlC2 N< 2 H2 { HI ~ u "2 So I U HI lliiiii c: 1111111111111111111111 { H3 111111111111111111111111111m HJCA c:: C5 0 .. 18 nnm M2 0 -12 I II ., 4 Ml 0 -15 M2 12-24 { Ml' 15 ·30 ; RJ cs • m t H 5 r-ic 3 H 6 ' IIDID { H 7 I Ptl (10 'm I Nc 3 SCI p, I c 9 Cll MTl 0-8 1 ( Ml c 7 I MTI 8"'16 • Ml 0•8 • I Ml 8-16 t ' N • 0! ;'! . ;; Zi.i:L z.,c z., . J., }:;u u• •u u • j " J:.l z ~o ·~ ~~ z ...... •: ~

Figure 5. Seriation of Stratigraphic Excavation Units.

-103- Trench and appear only in the lower level of associated with the early portion of the series Grave Test 3. Nance Flared Plain increases in the and decline before Nance Flared Plain reaches its upper levels of all pair~ of excavation levels peak. except in Mound 1 where it decreases slightly. The next step in developing a seriation of the Colfax Braced shows a slight increase in Mound 1 Lower Loup and historic Pawnee sites was the and the intrusive Cache 7. addition of the remaining excavation units to the The data from the various stratified seriation graph. Figure 6 is a bar graph illustrat­ excavation units in the site discussed above reveal ing the resulting seriation of stratified excavation some evidence of variations in pottery percent­ units including pottery samples in excess of 50 ages which can be attributed to changes occur­ rim sherds and site units in cases where individual ring with the passage of time. Most of the excavation units within the sites were of insuf­ stratified excavation units provide pottery sam­ ficient size for reliable analysis. ples of only marginal size and are therefore only Discussion of Figure 6. Examination of Figure suggestive of trends. Other units providing more 6 shows that the addition of the non-stratified reliable information have been useful in indicat­ excavation units to the basic seriation has ing the direction of change in the seriation of len~thened the series but has no;. greatly modi­ excavation units on the basis of variations in fied th~ trends r.b~srvcd and discussed in relation their ceramic content. to the ordering of the stratigraphic data. The The first step in developing a seriation of the major change is in the pattern of declining units was the seriation of the stratified materials. popularity of the type Nance Flared Plain. In the A comparison of the relative amounts of the stratigraphic seriation, Figure 5, this type had several pottery types indicated some striking appeared to decline at about the same rate as it variations from site to site, and the sites were had increased in popularity, but most of the placed in order on that basis. The results were non-stratified units fit into the seriation graph in more encouraging than individual stratigraphic Figure 6 at or after the point of maximum excavation units had indicated and at the same popularity of Nance Flared Plain. The pattern in time were supported by the stratigraphic evi­ the new seriation shows a more gradual decline in dence. The seriation of the stratified excavation popularity of this type. This may indicate a units is shown in bar graph form in Figure 5. period of greater stability, but it more likely Discussion of Figure 5. The seriation of the reflects the larger number of sites occupied stratified excavation units shown in Figure 5 was during this part of the time span included in the primarily based on the trends apparent in the Lower Loup Focus. Another possibility is that most common pottery type Nance Flared Plain the early period when cord roughened wares and and secondarily on trends in the other types. shell tempered pottery were a part of the Nance Flared Plain shows an increase in complex is not adequately represented in the relative popularity, reaches a peak and then collections. Only a few features, a house, ·several declines in a pattern of development which is of cache pits and some refuse deposits, contained basic importance in the seriation of archeological these materials. More extensive excavations at materials. When the stratified excavation units the Burkett and Wright sites could be expected are arranged in an order which produces this to reveal additional evidence of this early portion pattern of increase and decline in the type Nance of the sequence. Flared Plain, similar patterns emerge in relative The Lower Loup component at the Ashland proportions for several other types, an indication site is here regarded as evidence of Lower Loup that a reasonably correct ordering has been influences in the Oneota component at the achieved. Nance Flared Decorated becomes in­ Ashland site rather than as an actual Lower Loup creasingly more popular. Colfax Braced increases village at that location. gradually and begins to decline as Webster Collar The seriation as shown on the graph indicates Braced increases. Butler Braced appears at the a rather abrupt transition between the Lower time of maximum popularity of Colfax Braced. Loup and historic Pawnee sites in which the type Nance Flanged Lip, Nance Thickened Lip and Webster Collar Braced predominate. The hypoth­ Wright Collared Ware are most common relative­ esis concerning the development of Webster ly in the middle range of the sequence and after Collar Braced out of Colfax Braced through the Nance Flared Plain has begun to decline. Burkett recombination of modes of form and decoration Cord Roughened, Burkett Collared, Shell Tem­ already present in the Lower Loup pottery pered Ware and Walnut Decorated Lip are sample has been discussed previously. These

-104- EXCAVATION UNIT SERIATION EXCAVATION UNITS

NC 1 SITt PIC I Silt NC II SITt NC & SIT£ • • ~ .. :: \II NC 2 HI•CI NC 2 HI•CI ri • NC 2 SITt I - NC 2 H2 NC 2 HI BU 2 SITE ' I IIU I H 2 I I BU I HI c BU I SITE ... BU I H3 c • • ..-, ~¥ : "ilf: I SD I F7 I SD I SITE • SD I PIT [ I I GA I SITE • - HW I SITE au • ce 1-ta" - BU 4 SITE - •I =~:BU 4 112=~ lac4"8::= NC 3 U C2 t NC 3 Ill aH4 I tU 4 Nl 18-'¥/' I IIU ~ LL SITt :E .. II I I CC I IITt •c 3 Ht ' ' NC I T I NC 3 SITE NC I T I I'T 13 H 2 - I NC 1 rwnct IIC I U· M I •c 3 "e ~: '! \~ ! ~~NC I ='N I • PT I C 2 PT I H I ~l I ~, PT I IITI[ PT 13 •Tr i ~= f :: : I I'T I C S •c u- 112 NC U· 114 ~~ :II CJI IITl I I'T C t PT C: I I'T C 4 NC .. Cl I =~ =~Ill I •c 111'1 o-ff NC Ill C'P ' •c 111'1 .... • CX IITI ' ex " 1 CX HI C2 NC Nl o-a• I I t I NC I MZ 8-oS:, ' f !NC i~l-ljI NSTT 0-8 ''[ I' NC I H 3 • ~ :r:nt~.~- ;I a • >­ w % a: Q. .. ~z a: u.~ C> ~ a: "' r ••••••oo-.. -~ORE THAN 60 RIM SHERDS - LESS THAN !10 RIM SHEilDS

Figure 6. Seriation of Excavation Units.

-105- types have been kept separate in the analysis, but unfortunately, some of the Lower Loup sites are if they were plotted on the same column axis as represented by only a few excavation units with representatives of a single ware, the transition adequate pottery samples or by site total data from Lower Loup to historic Pawnee would be a only. Obviously the record for these sites is not much smoother development in the seriation as accurate a~ the seriation data for such sites as graph without requiring any changes in the Wright and Burkett which have many excavation arrangement of excavation units. units for seriation. The only means by which this It is interesting to note· that both the Burkett situation can be improved is the utilization in the (25 NC I) and Wright (25 NC 3) sites are shown graph of excavation units with smaller samples or in the seriation to have been occupied for long by extensive additional excavation to acquire periods of time. Excavation units from these two additional data. The use of excavation units with sites appear in the earliest portion of the seria­ pottery samples of less than 50 sherds introduces tion and other units from these sites are located material of questionable reliability into the in relatively late positions. The two houses at the seriation and has been avoided in the graphs Wright site which differ in that they have a late shown here although the attempt was made, with type six center-post structural pattern fall in to some success, in the course of the analysis. the same portion of the seriation as does the It should also be noted that similar problems Barcal site (25 BU 4) which is also a Lower Loup limit the accuracy of the historic Pawnee portion site with late traits in house type. Some of the seriation graph. Due to the sample sizes, consideration was given to the possibility of most of the historic Pawnee material is arbitrarily combining excavation units at the represented in the graph only in the form of site Burkett and Wright sites so as to divide the total percentage figures. It is doubtful, therefore, Burkett site in to three temporal components that the historic Pawnee portion of the seriation and the Wright site in to two such components. is as accurate as the better represented portions Seriation experiments indicate that such a divi­ of the sequence in the Lower Loup period. Many sion would not be unreasonable on a ceramic of the historic Pawnee sites are known to have basis, and since certain excavation units including been occupied at the same time, yet they can both caches and houses represent these early and only be shown in serial order in this graph late occupations, there is at least some degree of because the pottery samples from individual physical separation of these possible temporal excavation units are inadequate for reliable components at the two sites. However, it was results. This problem will be further discussed in finally decided to defer the--division of these sites a following section in which the seriation on until such time as the analysis of the remaining ceramic evidence is tested and modified on the non-ceramic materials in the collections is com­ basis of historical and other data. One method of pleted and is available as additional evidence. The correcting this problem is the division of the identification of these possibly early and late seriation into parallel seriations in which excavation units at the sites has resulted from the contemporary sites can be separated and placed seriation study and is an important addition to at equivalent temporal positions. This too will be the archeological record at these sites. the subject of a later portion of this study. The seriation of these sites by means of In assessing this seriation it is apparent that it excavation units rather than only as site units is is in part based on stratigraphic data which is useful in another fashion. It makes possible an necessary in order to give direction to the trends assessment of the degree to which some sites upon which the seriation is based. Perhaps the were simultaneously occupied, whereas a greatest weakness of the seriation lies in the seriation by site units alone obscures such necessary use of some relatively small sherd factors. Figure 7 is a graphic representation of samples. If Ford is correct in his opinion that the contemporaneity of the various Lower Loup samples of 50 sherds are useable for rough sites. The time span for each site has been dating, the results obtained in this seriation may determined by the position of excavation units be regarded as valid but not as precise as would of each site in the seriation graph. This can only presumably result if larger samples were available be regarded as suggestive of the length of for some of the excavation units. One method of occupation for each site and as an indication of getting around this problem is the substitution of which sites were occupied at the same time. The larger site unit total samples for the many more excavation units available for seriation, the excavation units. Such a simplified seriation more detailed such comparisons can be, and, based only on site totals is presented in the next

-106- section and includes modification indicated in seriation is based on the trends shown in this the course of testing this graph. The site unit seriation of stratified and other excavation units.

Site Unit Order Excavation Unit Time Spans L a t e

---"""·------lu 4 ...... ~ -~------~-- Bu 4 ~

Bu 2 4

Nc 16 ~

Nc 3 ~ Nc 3 ~

:::s::::

Pt I ~ Pt 13 ~ Pt 13 ~

(X 2 Cx 2 j Cx 1 <4 Cx 1 "'

Cx 3 ~

Nc ~ Nc 1 ~

""'-----·-·------______....,. Ear I y

Figure 7. Time Spans of Lower Loup Sites.

-107- Page Left Blank Chapter VI

TESTING AND REVISING

THE SITE UNIT SERIATION

The overlapping occupational spans of the among the Pawnee sites. These date ranges Lower Loup sites have been estimated by the represent only the recorded occupations at the relative seriation positions of the excavation villages in question, and the true occupation of units pertaining to each site (Figure 7). However, the sites may exceed these temporal points in a few sites were represented in the excavation either direction. Simultaneous occupation of unit seriation only as site units, and the relative more than one village by the Pawnee during the length of occupation at these sites could not be historic period can in most cases be attributed to determined. different bands. Small pottery samples from individual excava­ The evidence of contemporary occupation of tion units made it impossible to include the villages during both the protohistoric and historic historic Pawnee sites in the seriation in terms of periods points up one defect in ceramic seriations excavation units, and the seriation graph does based on site units: The resultant graph obscures not reveal relative lengths of occupation at these the evidence of simultaneous occupation at sites sites. Historical dates for these sites indicate included in the seriation. This problem has been considerable overlapping in occupational spans partially controlled by using·excavation units as

-109- the units of seriation. which site units occupied at the same time can be The excavation unit seriation is a sensitive, placed in equivalent or parallel chronological but complex, means of expressing the tem­ positions. poral relationships of Lower Loup sites. It is impossible to show in a single serial However, a less complex seriation in terms of site ordering the proper temporal relationships of the units provides a useful summary of the excava­ historic Pawnee sites which were occupied at the tion unit seriation which may be readily used for same time. An approximation has been made by comparative purposes. The order of sites in an placing these sites in serial order on the basis of a initial site unit seriation was determined by median date calculated from the date range of including the site unit totals in the excavation each site. Even this crude approximation of a unit seriation graph. Several of the sites could historical ordering of the sites indicates that only be represented in terms of site unit totals some of the Pawnee sites were probably placed in because of the size of the pottery samples earlier positions in the ceramic seriation than available, but the site unit totals for sites their dating will support. Such misplacement represented by several excavation units were also may be due to non-temporal factors which will included. It was noted that the site unit total fit be considered later (Table 13). the seriation best in a position within the range Another source of data for checking the of the excavation units of that site. This may be ceramic seriation of sites was suggested by interpreted as evidence that the site unit values Wedel's observation of " ... a progressive in­ represent an approximate mean ceramic value for crease in complexity and variety of wares in those sites also represented in the seriation by inverse ratio to the amount of Caucasian in­ individual excavation units, and in turn that this fluence to be noted in each" (Wedel 1936: 74). Lehmer has utilized a similar approach in deter­ conclusion may be applied to those sites repre­ mining chronological relationships and has placed sented only by a site total which can also be the Snake Butte Focus subsequent to the Stanley regarded as an approximation of a mean ceramic Focus " ... because of an increase in the number value for the site. The site units were extracted of items indicating white contact" (Lehmer from the excavation unit seriation in order of 1952: 329). appearance to arrive at a site unit seriation based A summary of the relative proportions of on the stratigraphic analysis and seriation (Figure pottery and trade items for each site is presented 7). in Table 14. As a means of obtaining relatively Three sites have been omitted from the Lower uniform data only village site areas have been Loup portion of the site unit seriation. The used in this comparison. Material from burial pits Ashland site (25 CC 1) is here regarded as was not used since a relatively small amount of representing Lower Loup influences at the Ash­ pottery was found in burials while heavy concen­ land site rather than as a Lower Loup village at trations of trade materials were placed in graves. that location. The site is also represented by a Also, since burials were not excavated for every small pottery sample. The Coffin site (25 NC 16) site, their elimination from this consideration and the Fuller's Hill site (25 CX 3) have been left serves to reduce the data to that from similar out of the site unit seriation because they are sources. A similar table was prepared in which represented by only small surface collections the relative percentages of pottery and trade and, therefore, their placement in the excavation materials were calculated on the basis of the total unit seriation cannot be regarded as reliable. quantity of artifacts from the sites. Variations in It must be kept in mind that site unit seriation the amounts of different kinds of material, such obscures details of site contemporaneity revealed as animal bone, from each of the sites may have in the excavation unit seriation of the Lower been the result of differing factors of collecting. Loup sites and by the historical data for the Therefore, the comparison was limited to pottery Pawnee sites. Some adjustment of the seriation and trade materials in an effort to provide a more positions of the Pawnee sites on the basis of the uniform basis for comparison. The results based historical data is particularly desirable. Examina­ on total catalogued items were similar in relative tion of data independent of the ceramic seriation proportion to the figures presented here. The was utilized to determine what modifications table also indicates the nature of the distribution were necessary in the site unit seriation and to of trade materials in each site. In all historic serve as a partial test of the validity of the Pawnee sites trade goods were present in every ceramic seriation. In a later discussion the site excavation unit. Such continuous distributions unit seriation is divided into parallel seriations in are denoted by the letter C. In five Lower Loup

-110- TABLE 13. APPROXIMATE HISTORICAL SEQUENCE OF PAWN EE SITES

Site Date Range Median Date

Fullerton (25 NC 7) 1842-1846 1844 Clarks (.2 5 PK 1) 1820-1845 1832 Cottonwood Creek (25 NC 5) 1820-1842 1831 Kansas Monument ( 14 RP I) 1821-1831 (Late) 1826 Horse Creek (25 NC 2) 1809-1842 1825 Blue Springs (15 GA. I) ? -1825 1825 Yutan (25 SO I) 1820-1827 1823 Pal.me.r (25 HW I) 1804-1836 1820 Hill (25 WT I) 1806-1815 (late) 1810 BeUwood (25 BU 2) 1795-1800 1797 HiU (25 WT 1) 1775-1815 (Early) 1795 Lin wood (25 BU l) 1777-1809 1793 Kansas Monument (14 RP l) J 77 5-UlOO (Early) 1787

TABLE 14. SITES ARRANGED IN ORDER OF INCREASING i'ROPORTION OF TRADE MATERIALS

Site Dis1ribution Trade Materials Pottery Focus No, % No. % ·- 25 NC 7 c 79 98.7 1 1.2 25l'K 1 c 161 8?.0 24 13.0 25 NC 5 c 34 79.1 9 20.9 14 RP 1 c 963 67.2 469 32.8 25 SD 1 c 351 60.2 231 39.8 Historic 25 HW I c 124 I 31.5 269 65.8 Pawnee 25 BU 1 c 235 29.6 559 70.4 25 .B U 2 c 131 19.2 553 80.8 25 NC 2 c 253 18.5 111 7 81.5 25 WT 1 c I 76 12.9 11 87 87.1 25 GA 1 c 66 11.7 500 88.3 25WT 7 c l 5.2 18 94.7 25 NC 4 M 20 2.98 651 97.0 25 BU 4 M 165 2.8 5672 97.2 25 NC 3 M 232 1.97 11547 98.0 25 BU 2 M 11 .88 123? 99.1 Lower M 4587 99.3 25 PT 1 32 .69 Loup 25 ex 1 s 2 .21 947 99.7 25 ex 2 s 2 .15 1223 99.8 25 PT 13 s 3 . 13 2269 99.8 25 NC l s 15 .07 21359 99.9 - Key: C= Continuous: M= Nearly Continuous: S= Sporadic

- 111 - sites trade materials were present in most, but at the Barcal site (25 BU 4) more iron is present not all, of the excavation units; this distribution and only about 25 percent of the trade materials has been denoted by the letter M. In four Lower are copper. This contrast tends to support the Loup sites trade materials were present in only a later ceramic seriation placement of the Barcal few excavation units, and this sporadic dis­ site relative to the Wright site. tribution has been denoted by the letterS. The In Table 15 the relative orders of the sites two Lower Loup sites eliminated from the site based on ceramic seriation, proportion of trade seriation because of the small surface collection materials and median historic date are compared. samples were ones from which no trade materials The final column represents the revised site unit have been recovered, but this absence may be seriation. due to the lack of excavation. One historic When the known degree of overlapping of site Pawnee site (25 NC 11) which cannot be occupations for both the Lower Loup and identified positively in the historical record historic Pawnee sites is taken into consideration, contained trade materials in the form of cartridge the correspondence between the site unit seria­ casings of such late date that they must be tions compared in Table 15 is close enough to considered intrusive, and, therefore, this site has indicate that the ceramic seriation is a reasonably not been included in the tabulation. valid site ordeiing. The Fullerton site (25 NC 7), The last nine sites in the above ordering are the Clarks site (25 PK 1) and the Cottonwood the Lower Loup focus sites. The limited amount Creek site (25 NC 5) appear in the same relative of trade materials present in these sites contrasts order in all sedations. The Vogel site (25 NC 11) sharply with the increasingly large amounts lacks comparable evidence and has been retained present in the historic Pawnee sites. Pawnee sites in its ceramic seriation position in the revised site known to be later in date than those from which unit order. The Pawnee component at the Ship­ pottery was recovered are almost devoid of man site (25 WT 7) is one in which a great native implements of any kind, and the specimen variation of position is noted. However, so little catalogues for such sites as Leshara read like material is present in this site unit that any hardware store shelf lists. In contrast, relatively placement is open to question. The site may be early Pawnee sites such as the Hill site (25 WT 1) an extension of the Hill site or a later reoccupa­ still include some artifacts of native manufacture. tion of the area. The latter interpretation has Most of the trade materials which have a been favored. specific bearing on the dating and identification The probable date ranges for the Linwood (25 of such historic sites as the Hill site (25 WT 1) BU 1) and Hill sites (25 WT I) indicate contem­ have been considered in determining dates for poraneity for these villages which cannot be these villages, and in most cases the Pawnee sites illustrated in a serial ordering. However, the are well dated by the historical record. It is order of ceramic seriation for these sites has been beyond the scope of this analysis to include a retained because it is paralleled by the ordering detailed study of all of the trade materials for the two sites based on relative proportions of available in these collections, and several years of trade materials. intensive research will be required to fully The Kansas Monument site ( 14 RP 1) and Hill identify and evaluate all of the articles of site (25 WT 1) have been included in the median European manufacture. Such future studies will date seriation in both early and late positions. provide an additional means of testing the The data which resulted from ordering the hypotheses developed on the basis of this ceram­ proportion of trade materials tend to support the ic seriation. ceramic seriation's late placement of the Kansas The historic Pawnee sites include large quanti­ Monument site and its early placement of the ties of glass beads, iron hoes, axes, gun parts and Hill site. There is also some historical evidence many other materials, usually in the form of which corresponds with the late dating of the identifiable artifacts or scraps of iron. The most Kansas site (Barry 1961 : 541-43). The hypothe­ common trade materials in the Lower Loup sites sis that this site may be later than the Hill are scraps of sheet copper, copper cones and site is a tentatively proposed modification of the occasional glass beads. It is noteworthy that the previously suggested temporal relationship proportion of iron increases along with an between these sites. This hypothesis may or may increase in variety of trade materials in later not be supported by future research, but it seems times. At the Wright site (25 NC 3) over 60 to be a reasonable suggestion at the present. The percent of the trade materials are copper, while hypothesis was proposed to Smith, who

-112- TABLE 15. COMPARISON OF SITE UNIT SERIATIONS

Ceramic Proportion of Median Revised Site Unit Seriation Trade Material Date Seriation

25 NC 7 25 NC 7 25 NC 7 25 NC 7 25 PK 1 25 PK 1 25 PK 1 25 PK 1 25 NC 11 25 NC 11 25 NC 5 25 NC 5 25 NC 5 25 NC 5 25WT 7 25WT 7 14 RP 1 14 RP 1 14 RP 1 (L) 14 RP 1 25 NC 2 25 NC 2 25 NC 2 25 GA 1 25 GA 1 25 SD 1 25 SD 1 25 SD 1 25 HW 1 25 HW 1 25 HW 1 25 WT 1 (L) 25 BU 2 25 BU 2 25 BU 2 25 BU 1 25 BU 1 25 BU 1 25 BU 2 25 NC 2 25WT 1 25 WT 1 25 WT 1 (E) 25WT 1 25 BU 1 14 RP 1 (E) 25 SD 1 25 GA 1 25 GA 1 25 HW 1 25WT 7 25 NC4 25 BU 4 25 BU 4 25 BU 4 25 BU 2 25 BU 2 25 NC4 25 NC4 25 NC 3 25 NC 3 25 NC 3 25 BU 2 25 PT 1 25 PT 1 25 PT 1 25 PT 13 25 PT 13 25 ex 1 25 ex 2 25 ex 2 25 ex 2 25 ex 1 25 ex 1 25 PT 13 25 NC 1 25 NC 1 25 NC 1 (L) = Latest Date (E) = Earliest Date

excavated the Kansas Monument site, and he earlier position based on trade materials. It is replied, in part: significant that in all three orderings the site is in ... I am now struck by the tremendous amount of a later position than the · Hill site which it trade goods from the site in contrast with sites post-dates historically. known to date from the last quarter of the 18th The major departures of the site unit seriation century.... Your dating makes more sense, and with the documentary evidence, however indirect, from the ceramic ordering are in the Palmer site I think you are probably correct in assigning the (25 HW I), the Yutan site {25 SD I) and the site to the second quarter of the 19th century Blue Springs site (25 GA I). On the basis of rather than to the last quarter of the 18th century. historical evidence, all three sites should be later (Smith 1962: personal communication). in the sequence than they were placed on the The median date position of the Horse Creek basis of ceramic seriation. Their position in the site (25 NC 2) tends to support this site's ceramic study was determined largely by we position in the ceramic seriation despite its relatively small amounts of the typical historic

-113- Pawnee pottery, Webster Collar Braced, present The revised site unit seriation is illustrated in in these sites relative to other historic sites. It is graphic form in Figure 8. The graph includes an notable, however, that there are cultural prob­ indication of periods or segments into which the lems regarding each of these sites that may ceramic developments may be divided. Dates are indicate the ceramic differences are due to also assigned to various points in the seriation; non-temporal factors. The Palmer site is the only these will be discussed in detail in a following known Skidi village from which substantial chapter. amounts of pottery can be obtained, but the The earliest ceramic period is primarily repre­ collection available for seriation is limited. The sented in certain features at the Burkett site (25 Yutan site has been identified as Oto on histori­ NC 1), but traces of an early occupation were cal grounds but seems to be Pawnee when also present at the Wright site (25 NC 3). In the archeological evidence is considered. This prob­ ceramic seriation the predominant pottery in this lem has never been solved. The Blue Springs site period is Nance Flared Plain, which is increasing would appear to be late on the basis of its in relative frequency. Wright collared ware and possible fortification, which is most frequently Colfax Braced are present in small amounts, as associated with the later Pawnee sites. Although are other pottery types. The most important the band has never been identified on sound associations are unnamed shell tempered ware of historical grounds, this may be a Tappage site. Oneota type, Walnut Decorated Lip, Burkett When these sites are rearranged in the seriation Cord Roughened and Burkett Collared ware, on the basis of historical evidence, the change along with the previously noted typically Lower creates a break in the smooth curve of develop­ Loup pottery. This early period is most clearly ment of Webster Collar Braced pottery. It is shown in the excavation unit seriation in which it possible that the cultural factors of band affilia­ is apparent that Burkett Cord Roughened, tion cited above may account for this ceramic Burkett Collared and Walnut Decorated Lip variation. decline in frequency as Nance Flared Plain Positive historical identifications are not pos­ increases. 'J.'he sub-period IS represented by the sible in the case of the Lower Loup sites, Monroe sit'e (25 PT 13), the Larson site (25 PT although some will be suggested later. For the 1), the Wright site (25 NC 3) and the Cuba site purposes of this comparison, only the relative (25 NC 4). However, the excavation unit seria­ proportion of the seriation of trade materials is tion indicates that the terminal oortion ot the available to compare to the ceramic seriation Burkett site (25 NC 1) occupation is included .1 order. There are some minor differences; but the this period, and that the Gray (25 CX 1) and Barcal site (25 BU 4), the Wright site (25 NC 3), Wolfe (25 CX 2) sites probably extend into it. the Larson site (25 PT 1) and the Burkett site The Coffin site (25 NC 16) probably fits this (25 NC I) are in the same relative order in each period best, as well as the Lower Loup influences seriation. The Gray site (25 CX 1) and the Wolfe at the Ashland site (25 CC 1). site (25 ex 2) appear to be contemporary Sub-period 2C is characterized by a further occupations on the basis of the excavation unit decline of Nance Flared Plain and a marked seriation, and their reversal of order on the basis increase in Nance Flared Decorated. Wright of their relative proportions of trade materials Collared Ware is virtually absent while Colfax does not seem particularly s(}fious; the ceramic Braced reaches a peak and begins to decline. seriation ordering has been retained. The dis­ Butler Braced is at its peak, and the historic placement of the Cuba site (25 NC 4) and the Pawnee pottery type, Webster .Collar Braced, Lower Loup component of the Bellwood site (25 makes its appearance in this period. On the site BU 2) on the basis of their relative amounts of unit seriation the period IS represented by the trade materials is notable since the ceramic Barcal site (25 BU 4) and the Lower Loup seriation ordering did at least place all of the sites component at the Bellwood site (25 BU 2). The showing a nearly continuous distribution of trade excavation unit seriation indicates that the termi­ materials in relatively late positions. This is nal portion of the Wright site occupation (25 NC perhaps more significant than the minor variation 3) is contemporary with the Barcal site. It is of individual site positions within this group of significant to note that at the Barcal site and in sites. A general confirmation of the ceramic the houses of the same period at the Wright site seriation order is indicated bv the trade material the six center-post house type, which is typical ordering, and no modification of the site unit of the multi-center-post Pawnee houses of the seriation was made. historic period, makes its appearance at this time.

-114- CERAMIC l!NIT SE,ATION SITE PERIOD OA TE SIT I 1876

1850 Nc 7 Pk I "'::;) v Nc II • • !2 Nc s Wt 7 .. Rp --- z Nc ~ Go I - :. JA I Sd v ik Hw I lu ~ lu 1 ' r ' llSO Wt I I lu I 2C "'::;) lu ,. v ~ * N< ~ !2 Nc 3 t L ' ::;) Pt I g 16 so Pt 13 l l '"' Cx 2 t ~ c. I I 2 1500 I I I I I Nc I ~ ' "D ., ., ., "D ..., l ..:; . .. .c .c- _., _., . J:- •.. ., :: ~ - 0 . ~ I 00 PERCENT • OJ~-· .. ~! 0 .. 0. ::-: . SCALE: • "D c ."lJ ~ "l1u .. . .. c 0 ... '".!! ~ ... ,: ...... = i. ~ ~ ~e ~·o.~ c c =" .. "". ·- o•o D.!! D 0 ~ o!! ~:! ~ ~!¥ 1 ! ~~ ~J:! ~ z;;L z~o z ... i:E v• .iJ ' j~~ z i~ .. ~~ll i~ ' "'"' ii ...

figure 8. Revised Site Unit Seriation

-115- The seriation pattern of Nance Flared Plain ment, including here some details from the and Colfax Braced serves to indicate the relative excavation unit seriation, would be as follows: temporal order of these sites. It is notable, 25 CX 1, 25 CX3, 25 CX 2, 25 BU 2 and 25 BU however, that Wright Collared Ware is present in 4 would form one series; 25 PT 13, 25 PT 1, the relatively large quantities in the Beaver Creek and terminal portions of 25 NC 1 and 25 NC 3, 25 Looking Glass Creek area of the Lower Loup NC 16 and 25 NC 4 would form the other series. River and appears in low frequency in the Butler Such a parallel arrangement of contemporary County sites south of the Platte River. The latter sites suggests possibilities which will be the sites, Barcal and Bellwood, are those in which the subject of a later discussion. site unit seriation obscures this detail since it The third ceramic period is that into which includes later materials from the Burkett site most of the historic Pawnee sites fall. Sub-period and, therefore, cannot show the decline of the 3A is characterized by small amounts of Nance early types described above. Flared Plain and about equal amounts of Nance In the second period Nance Flared Plain Flared Decorated. Nance Thickened Lip and gradually declines in popularity while Colfax Burkett S.-Collared are rare but appear in greatest Braced steadily increases to reach a peak late in relative amounts in sites of this period. Colfax the period. Wright Collared appears to reach a Braced is generally on the decline except at the peak in the middle of the period; Nance Flared Yutan site which did yield a small sample of Decorated, late in the period. This second period pottery. Traces of Butler Braced are present, and has been divided into three sub-units on the basis Webster Collar Braced appears in increasing of frequency variations in the site unit seriation. relative frequency. The pattern is broken by These variations are in part attributed to tem­ three sites which have lesser amounts of Webster poral factors. Sub-period 2A is characterized by Collar Braced, but some possible non-temporal the greatest frequency of Nance Flared Plain, by factors have been discussed in this regard. Web­ relatively smaller amounts of other non-collared ster Bowl ware is present and appears to decrease pottery and a slight increase in Nance Flared although the same non-temporal factors may be Decorated. Most notable is the increasing fre­ noted. The type appears in its largest numerical quency of Colfax Braced while Wright Collared frequency at the Hill site. Bowl lids make their Ware is only weakly represented. In the site unit appearance in this period. seriatton this period appears to be restricted to Sub-period 3B includes four historic Pawnee the Gray and Wolfe sites (25 CX 1 and 25 CX 2), sites trom which very little pottery was but the excavation unit seriation shows that the recovered. Webster Collar Braced declines in Fullers Hill site (25 CX 3) and some features of relative frequency, and the cruder Bowl Ware and the Burkett site (25 NC I) also represent this Bowl Lids increase. These trends may not be period. Sub-period 2B is characterized by a reliable since they are based on extremely small steady decline in the relative frequency of Nance pottery samples. The symbol "x" appears on the Flared Plain and by a slight increase in Nance graph for the Fullerton site, and "NC 7" on the Flared Decorated, Nance Straight Rim Plain, axis for Wright Collared Ware. A complete vessel Nance Flanged Lip and Wright Folded Lip. of this pottery type was found in the Fullerton Colfax Braced increases notably except in one vicinity and described by Blackman in 1902 site (25 PT 13) in which it is rare. The most (Blackman 1902, Plate IV). The association of distinguishing feature of this ceramic subdivision this vessel with the historic Skidi site at Fuller­ is the peak of popularity of Wright Collared ton is not certain, but other suggestions will be Ware. The site unit seriation shows that transi­ made which tentatively associate this type with tion to historic Pawnee pottery occurs. Wright the Skidi band. Therefore, the Fullerton vessel Collared Ware is also relatively infrequent in the may be of significance. It is possible that the Gray and Wolfe sites, which are located on Shell demarcation of the historic Pawnee portion of Creek and are geographically closest to the Butler the seriation into two periods on the basis of County Lower Loup sites. The correlation of pottery places too much reliance on the small these patterns suggests that some of these varia­ pottery samples of the later sites. tions may be due to non-temporal factors. This The fourth period may be defined as one in may be interpreted as an indication that this which pottery has disappeared from the inven­ portion of the Lower Loup sequence should be tory of Pawnee artifacts. Into this period all of divided into two parallel seriations on the basis the late Pawnee sites may be placed in temporal of geographical distribution. Such an arrange- order on the basis of historical data.

-116- Chapter VII

DATING THE CERAMIC SEQUENCE

The date range of the Pawnee and Lower sites has been divided into periods based on Loup site sequence shown in Figure 8 can be variations in the pattern of pottery frequency. estimated by reference to a variety of data. The The assignment of calendar dates to the sequence historical record, trade materials and tree ring was indicated on the site seriation graph. dates all provide some dating evidence. Archeolo­ Two approaches to the problem of dating the gical cross-finds of pottery and general ceramic sequence were used. The first was based on dates similarities between the Lower Loup Focus and derived from the historical record; the second, on other archeological units for which estimated dates derived from the archeological record. dates, tree ring dates and carbon-14 dates are Dates of specific Pawnee sites of the period available provide another line of evidence. On the 1775 to 1876 have already been discussed. In basis of these data it is probable that the Lower this section the historical evidence of primary Loup Focus falls within the period A.D. 1500 to concern is that which relates to the period 1541 1750 and that the Historic Pawnee Focus falls to 1775. References to the Pawnee during this within the period A.D. 1750 to 1876. period cannot be associated with specific archeo­ The seriation of the Lower Loup and Pawnee logical sites, but can be related to the Lower

-117- Loup Focus in a more general fashion. ods. Since these sites can be related directly or Suggestions concerning specific sites can be put indirectly to some of the Lower Loup sites, such forward as hypotheses for future consideration. dates can be utilized in dating the Lower Loup Dates for the ceramic sequence derived from sequence. the archeological record are of particular impor­ The dates derived from historical and archeo­ tance in relation to the Lower Loup portion of logical sources indicate a similar period of occu­ the sequence. Central Plains and South Dakota pation for the Lower Loup Focus and have been archeological materials have been dated by combined in determining estimated dates for the estimate, carbon-14 and tree ring dating meth- Lower Loup-Pawnee sequence.

HISTORICAL DATING

Weltfish (1965) has recently published a site. In addition, he has recently summarized this detailed description of Pawnee culture and sever­ documentary evidence in An Introduction to al individuals have considered Pawnee ethnohis­ Kan~as Archeology (Wedel 1959: 19-82). Other tory. Although these sources have been utilized, information has been added from such sources as they cannot be reviewed here in detail. Nasatir (1952), Wheat (1957; 1958), Barry Blackman wrote a history of each of the (1961) and Champe and Fenenga (1954). The Nebraska linguistic families, including the Paw­ Pawnee data assembled under the direction of nee, in which he attempted to apply dates to A. T. Hill which are on file at the Nebraska State Pawnee traditions. He suggested that the Skidi Historical Society have also been an important drifted into the Platte Valley about 1400 and source of information. that other bands reached the area of the Nemaha A relatively complete tabular summary of River in southeastern Nebraska by 1500. He historical references to the Pawnee was prepared also suggested that the province of Harahey, from these various sources and used as a basis for reported by Coronado in 1541, was the first historical dating of the ceramic sequence. Only historical reference to the Pawnee (Blackman the more important references are cited here. 1902: 320-21). Information from Pawnee traditions was sum­ Hyde has reconstructed Pawnee history on marized by Dorsey, and much of his statement is several occasions, attempting to correlate lin­ repeated below: guistic and traditional data with historical and ... although the four bands have long been archeological evidence (Hyde 1934; 1951; 1959). recognized as distinct, the Pawnee themselves are firm in the belief that the Chaui, Pitahauirat, and It is not always possible to agree with Hyde's Kitkehahki originally formed a single band or interpretation of the archeological record; for division known as the Kawarahkis .... According example, he includes Nebraska Aspect sites as to this tradition the Kawarahkis at this time made Pawnee (Hyde 1951: 28). However, his discus­ their home near the present site of Nemaha, in the sions are informative and his speculations southeastern corner of Nebraska, near the Missouri River. From this point the Chaui and Kitkehahki, interesting. after their separation, went north, the Kitkehahki The direct historical approach to archeological locating on the Republican River where they were problems was one of the early objectives of found by Pike, and the Chaui going to the Strong's archeological survey in 1929. At this northwest, where they settled south of the Platte River. After the departure of these two bands, the time Hill had already made progress in the Kawarahkis remained in the neighborhood of identification of Pawnee sites through a critical Nemaha for a long period and the remnant finally study of maps and documents (Wedel 1938: 1). became known as the Pitahauirat. Early in this Wedel's review of site documentation presented century they also migrated to the northwest and in his Introduction to PawneeArcheology (Wedel occupied the area between the Chaui and the Kitkehahki. According to this tradition, therefore, 1936: 7-38) and the Direct-Historical Approach the Chaui, Pitahauirat, and the Kitkehahki form in Pawnee Archeology (Wedel 1938) has been to-day remnants of what was once a single tribe, considered in relation to the description of each just as we have reason to believe that the Arikara

-118- and Skidi once formed a single tribe. groups identified until 1767 when Don Francisco Riu mentioned the Panis, Panimaha and the It should be noted, however, that the religion of the Chaui, Kitkehahki, and Pitahauirat collec­ Pani-Topage in a list of trader's licenses (Nasatir tively is not nearly so rich in ceremonies and ac­ 1952: 66). Specific references to the Tappage or companying rituals based upon the sacred bundles Pitahauirat band are infrequent. or altars as is that of the Skidi. Indeed, as The Republican band or Kitkehahki is first stated before, there is some reason for believing that these three bands represent offshoots of the mentioned by Piernas in 1775 (Barry 1961, Pt. original Skidi through the single band of the 2: 203) and again in 1777 by Cruzat in a list of Kawarahkis (Dorsey 1906: 8-9). tribes receiving presents at St. Louis (Nasatir Coronado's expedition into the Plains in 1541 1952: 70). The Republican band was then provides possibly the first historical reference to residing on the "Cances'' River (Houck 1909: the Pawnee. Upon reaching Quivira, probably 143), a reference interpreted ?.s meaning the located in the vicinity of Lindsborg in Rice and Republican River fork of the Kansas (Wedel McPherson counties, Kansas (Wedel 1941; Wedel 1936: 15). The Pcmis at the same time are 1959: 21, 61), the Spanish learned that the next reported on a small stream branching off from province beyond Quivira was Harahey (Wedel the "Plata" River (Houck 1909: 144), a location 1936: 9-10). "Arahey, or Harahey, has often which has been interpreted as the Linwood site been interpreted as an allusion to the Pawnee, or on Skull Creek on the south bank of the Platte possibly to the Arikara," according to Wedel (Wedel 1936: 15), a Grand village. (1959: 61; cf. Lesser and Weltfish 1932: 12-13). These data suggest that the formation of the However, Wedel does not agree with Lehmer's Republican and Tappage bands may not have suggestion that Harahey may have been Upper taken place until sometime in the last half of the Republican (Wedel 1959: 570). eighteenth century. The Spanish attributed the introduction of The Tappage are mentioned in 1794 and again trade materials among the Pawnee to the French in 1797 (Nasatir 1952: 209-211, 530-531), but (Wedel 1959: 23), and Wedel has inferred that village ~ocations have never been identified. The regular trade was established in the Central Plains MacKay and Evans map of 1797 shows one Loup sometime between 1650 and 1700 (Wedel 1938: (Skidi) village on the Loup River and two Panis 16). (Grand) villages on the south side of the Platte, The Pawnee are shown on Marquette's map, probably the Linwood and Bellwood sites (Wheat prepared in 1673, in a location which corres­ 1957: 243, 1797 The Missouri). ponds generally with their later historic habitat The pattern of village location, with the Skidi (Wedel 1936: 11). In the late seventeenth cen­ on the Loup River, the Grand on the south bank tury the Spanish in the Southwest were informed of the Platte, the Republican band on the that " ... from El Cuartelejo it was possible to Republican River and Tappage at an unspecified travel by way of Quivira to the Pawnees, with location, seems to have prevailed until the early whom the French were said to be trading" part of the nineteenth century. The Republican (Wedel 1959: 23). and the Grand then joined in establishing the In 1685 Nicholas La Salle mentions the Panis Horse Creek site on the Loup River north of the Pawnee specifically in relation to the Missouri Platte about 1810 (Wedel 1936: 36), although River (Wedel 1936: 11), and Hennepin, writing some of the Republican band may have lingered in 1687, mentioned both the Skidi and the at the Hill site as late as 1815. Wedel has Pawnee proper (Wedel 1936: 11). Iberville listed discussed in detail the changes in village location the Indian nations living on the Missouri in 1702 subsequent to this withdrawal north of the Platte and included both the Panis and Panimahas River (Wedel 1936: 23-38). (Nasatir 1952: 8), who are the Pawnee proper, About 1820 the Pawnee returned to the south and the Skidi (Wedel 1936: 11). The 1702 side of the Platte FJver when the Grand are DeLisle map shows the Panimahas on the north reported at the Clarks site (Wedel 1936: 31). side of the Platte River and the Panis on the Barry has recently summarized information not south side (Wheat 1957: 82; 1702 De Lisle). previously considered in connection with historic Reports and maps dating from the period Pawnee archeology and suggests that the Re­ 1687 until the cession of Louisiana by France to publican band left the Loup River area sometime Spain in 1763 locate the Panimaha (Skidi) on the between 1820 and 1823 (Barry 1961 Pt. 4: Loup fork and the Panis to the south of the 541-543) to re,occupy the Republican River Platte River. These are the only two Pawnee area. Two of the sources Barry cites describe the

-119- site as a "dirt village" (Barry 1961: Pt. 4: 541), a This brief review of some of the historical reference which indicates an earthlodge village evidence indicates that from perhaps as early as rather than a tent encampment. Jedediah Smith 1541 and certainly since 1673 there are historical also visited the village (Morgan and Wheat 1954: references which serve to establish the Pawnee 56-57). On his map (Wheat 1958: 398, 1851 occupation of the Loup and Platte River area, Smith, Fremont, Gibbs), the village is shown in a and later, their occupation of the Republican and location below the 40th parallel which now Blue rivers to the south. From 1687 to 1767 the marks the Kansas-Nebraska boundary, further Panimaha and Panis are the only two bands suggesting that the village Smith visited was the recorded and were located north and south of Kansas Monument site. Sometime between 1831 the Platte River, respectively. The Tap page are and 1833 the Republican band returned to the first mentioned in 1767 and the Republican band Loup river area (Barry 1961 Pt. 4: 542). These in 1775. data support the late position given this site in Among the historical sites the Republican the ceramic seriation. The Blue Springs site on village identified as the Hill site (25 WT 1) is the the Blue River may also represent a return of the earliest site for which a positive identification Pawnee to their territory south of the Platte. An can be made. This would indicate a historical unfortified site, the James site reported by date for the bfginPing of the Pawnee portion of Blackman near the Blue Springs village, may the site seriation at 1775. In view of the mention represent an earlier Pawnee occupation of this of the Tappage in 1767, despite the lack of a area but is unknown archeologically. In the village location, it seems likely that a beginning absence of other sites attributed to the Tappage date of 17 50 for this portion of the seriation and in view of the evidence of Pawnee tradition, graph would allow ample time for the establish­ the Blue Springs site may well represent a ment of sites prior to the date at which they Tappage band village location, but there is little were first recorded. to support this hypothesis. Another site which The end of the Republican Valley reoccupa­ may belong to this late reoccupation of the tion sometime before 1833 marks the end of the Republican River area is the Pawnee component major portion of the seriation of Pawnee sites. at the Shipman site (25 WT 7). This is here The final period designated in the site seriation is interpreted as evidence that the Hill site area may one in which pottery is a rapidly declining native have been reoccupied at the same time as the product. The sites shown in this portion of the Kansas Monument site was established. seriation have date ranges between 1820 and After the treaty of 1833 in which the Pawnee 1846. The separation between the two Pawnee ceded their land south of the Platte River to the ceramic periods does not coincide with these United States, the Grand Pawnee band continued dates, and it is perhaps impractical to attempt to to occupy the Clarks site south of the river. The distinguish this final gasp of pottery making other bands were at various locations on the among the Pawnee as a separate period. In any Loup, and some of the Republican band may event, all of the sites in the seriation in which have been on the south bank of the Platte at the Webster Collar Braced, Webster Bowl Ware and Hordville site about 1844 (Hill 1933: 176). This Bo\Xl Lids appear in substantial quantities post­ site is not represented by an archeological collec­ date 1775. tion. This situation leaves numerous historical ref­ Hyde has recounted the attacks on the Paw­ erences to the Pawnee prior to 1775 without an nee by other Indians during this period, and after archeological identification unless the references 1850 they apparently all retreated from the apply to the Lower Loup Focus sites. The year Loup River area (Hyde 1951: 145-178). The 1775 or 1750 may be taken as marking the point Leshara, McClaine and the late component at the in the seriation graph between 25 WT 1, one of Linwood site were the villages occupied during the earliest Pawnee sites, and 25 BU 4, one of the this period. In 1857 a treaty established a latest Lower Loup sites. The early portion of the Pawnee reservation in Nance County on the Lower Loup sequence must be at least as old as Loup River, and the Pawnee were reduced to 1673, and if the Harahey identification is correct living in four separate sections of a single village this initial historical date may be extended back at Genoa. Sioux attacks continued, and in the to 1541. face of these pressures the Pawnee left Nebraska It was noted in the review of the historical and the Central Plains in 1876 for a new evidence that after 1687 the Panimaha were reservation in Indian Territory. located north of the Platte and the Panis were

-120- located south of the Platte. The 1777 and 1797 the early sites and that these materials were references to the Panis may be attributed to the present in most of the excavation units at the Linwood and Bellwood sites on the south bank sites. This pattern of nearly continuous distribu­ of the river. Only two Lower Loup Focus sites tion of trade materials suggests that trade goods are located south of the Platte River. These are were reaching these later Lower Loup sites with the Barcal site (25 BU 4) and the Lower Loup some regularity, and it may be inferred that these component of the Bellwood site (25 BU 2), both sites probably post-date 1650. The trade ma­ of which are in the vicinity of the historic terials present in the earlier Lower Loup sites Linwood and Bellwood sites. It is therefore appear not only in relatively small amounts but suggested that the references to the Panis in a sporadic distribution. At sites in which between 1687 and 1777 apply to the two Lower evidence of the earliest ceramic period in the Loup sites south of the Platte River, Bellwood Lower Loup Focus was detected (25 NC 3 and (25 BU 2) and Barcal (25 BU 4). It is notable 25 NC 1) it was noted that there were no trade that these are the two Lower Loup sites in which materials in the features representing this early the historic Pawnee pottery type Webster Collar period. This suggests, but does not demonstrate, Braced first appears. They also differ from sites that the early portion of the sequence may on the Loup in their lack of much Wright pre-date trading contacts. It is suggested that the Collared Ware and their relatively large amounts Larson site (25 PT 1) and those above it in the of Nance Flared Decorated pottery. seriation graph are probably not earlier than Assuming the suggested identification of the 1650. Barcal site and the Lower Loup component of The historical dating of the Lower Loup the Bellwood site as the location of the Panis Focus and the Pawnee seriation sequence gives from 1687 to 1775, the earlier Lower Loup sites the following time span: Pawnee sites without in the ceramic sequence must pre-date 1687. pottery fall between 1850 and 1876. The termi­ Even allowing for factors of simultaneous occu­ nal date of the Pawnee portion of the ceramic pation in several Lower Loup sites, the majority sequence is 1846, and the beginning of this of these sites must be earlier than the two Butler portion of the sequence is at least 177 5, possibly County sites. Therefore, it is not unreasonable to as early as 1750. The latest sites in the Lower suggest that there is ample length represented in Loup portion of the seriation fall between 1777 the seriation to cover at least the nearly 150 and 1687. About half of the sites are later in years between 1687 and 1541, or perhaps even time than the establishment of regular trade in longer. the area and probably post-date 1650. The Another point in time within the span of the earliest reference to the Pawnee may well be the Lower Loup sequence may be introduced on the identification of these Lower Loup sites as the basis of Wedel's hypothesis that regular trade was Harahey of 1541, and a date this early is not probably established in the Central Plains some­ unreasonable in view of the length of the time between 1650 and 1700, although stray sequence and the other dates listed above. This items may have reached the area much earlier set of dates can be compared with other dates (Wedel 1938: 16). It was noted that the later derived primarily, but not exclusively, from the Lower Loup sites in the seriation sequence archeological record. contained relatively more trade materials than

ARCHEOLOGICAL COMPARISONS A NO DATING

A few sherds from collections at several sites sherds picked up elsewhere and dropped on the were classified as Woodland pottery. These ma­ later sites. terials relating to the Early Ceramic Period must Some Upper Republican pottery present at be regarded as evidence of earlier occupations of the Hill site was found to be identical with the sites in which they were found or as intrusive pottery from the early component at the adjacent

-121- Shipman site and cannot be regarded as a Fanning site in Kansas which Wedel dates in the part of the ceramic complex of the historic last half of the seventeenth century, identifying Pawnee site. it as probably a Kansa occupation (Wedel1959: An Upper Republican-type rim sherd was also 617). The shell tempered pottery from late present in a surface collection from the Burkett Lower Loup sites such as the Cuba site (25 NC 4) site. However, the surface find of an Upper suggests that contacts with the producers of shell Republican sherd at the site cannot be regarded tempered pottery continued throughout the time as evidence of contact betwee11 Lower Loup and span of the Lower Loup Focus. The seriation Upper Republican in Nebraska. No similar evidence can thus be interpreted in such a way pottery was found in any of the collections from that there is no conflict in ~ suggesting Lower the excavation units at the site, and the sherd is Loup contacts with both early and late Oneota probably an intrusive item. It differs in paste, sites. form and decoration from the cord roughened The Oneota component at the Ashland site is pottery at the site which is a part of the Lower distinct from the component at that site in which Loup complex. Lower Loup sherds, shell tempered pottery and No pottery which could be classified as trade materials were associated. The Oneota representative of the Dismal River Aspect was component at that site has never been identified found in the Lower Loup and historic Pawnee as to tribe (Wedel 1959: 120). Since the site was pottery collections. Lower Loup sherds have located while searching for an Oto village re­ never been identified in Dismal River sites (Wedel ported at that location, features at the site which 1959: 594). Thus, there is no ceramic evidence contain shell tempered pottery, trade materials of any contact between the people responsible and Lower Loup sherds may represent the Oto. for these archeological manifestations, despite However, a positive identification is not possible the apparent contemporaniety of these archeolo­ at the present time. The complex situation at the gical units. Ashland site also remains a problem for further A few rim and body sherds of shell tempered investigation. Spaulding has discussed in detail ware are present in the Lower Loup collections the Oneota relationship with the Arzberger site, in the Burkett, Gray, Wright, Cuba and Bellwood with which the Lower Loup Focus is also related. sites and the Palmer and Yutan sites of the He likewise suggests Oneota influences at a time historic Pawnee period. The greatest concentra­ level corresponding with an early phase of Lower tion of these Oneota-like materials occurs in the Loup (Spaulding 1956: 96). This conclusion is earliest features of the Burkett site. The shell greatly strengthened by the identification of tempered m3terial from the Burkett site closely Oneota materials early in the Lower Loup resembles the pottery of the Leary site in sequence. On the basis of the Oneota evidence, southeastern Nebraska. Wedel has said: the Lower Loup sequence would seem to fall . . it seems remarkable that there is so little between the end of the fifteenth and late evidence of Oneota in the Lower Loup pottery seventeenth senturies. complex. I know of no unmistakably Oneota Lower Loup influences have been found in sherds from any Lower Loup sites; and there are no Lower Loup sherds from Leary, though several Kansas in sites of the Great Bend Aspect, and were noted at Fanning (Wedel1959: 614). Great Bend material has been found in Lower The identification of several Oneota rim Loup sites. The most recent discussion of these sherds in the Lower Loup collections resulted relationships is that by Wedel, who states that from an inspection of all of the available pottery the Great Bend Aspect is probably approxi­ and, thus, serves to confirm relationships which mately contemporaneous with the Lower Loup had been previously anticipated. Wedel has in­ focus. Both general similarities and a sherd in terpreted the traces of Oneota at Lynch and St. unmistakable Lower Loup style lead to this Helena in Nebraska as evidence of Oneota in­ interpretation (Wedel 1959: 617; Udden 1900: fluences west of the Missouri possibly before 30). Fragments of a shell tempered, flat based 1500 and that the Leary site represents an vessel of the Lower Walnut Focus type were Oneota community in the region before 1600 identified in the Gray site (25 CX 1) of the (Wedel 1959: 614). The position of the shell Lower Loup Focus (Wedel 1959: 617). The tempered materials early in the Lower Loup recent examination of the Lower Loup pottery sequence suggests that Oneota intluences began revealed a sherd from the Burkett site (25 NC I) during the initial Lower Loup occupation of the which probably originated in a Great Bend area. Lower Loup sherds were found in the Aspect site in Kansas. The seriation positions of

-122- the Gray and Burkett sites suggest that the Nance Flared Plain, Nance Straight Rim Plain and contacts with the Great Bend Aspect took place some of the decorated non-collared rims from early in the Lower Loup sequence. Chain mail the Lower Loup collections. Mackay Ware also armor fragments have been recovered from Great shares some general similarites with part of the Bend sites (Udden 1900: 66-67; Terry 1961). Wright Collared Ware taken from Lower Loup Wedel has discussed these finds in connection sites. The classification of Redbird and Lower with identifying the Great Bend sites as the Loup materials in two distinct foci is· supported Quivira villages visited by Coronado in 1541 and by pottery comparisons. It should be noted that Onate in 1601 (Wedel 1959: 19-22). Similar the greatest similarities are between the Redbird dates for the Great Bend Aspect are indicated by Focus Mackay Ware pottery and the pottery type the Rio Grande glazed pottery found there from frequencies of the later Lower Loup sites in circa 1525 to 1650 (Wedel 1959: 617). Wedel which Wright Collared Ware most frequently suggests that the late fifteenth to early appears. Site 25 KX 9 of the Redbird Focus eighteenth centuries probably bracket the Great contains trade materials, and Wood has suggested Bend Aspect occupation. (Wedel1959: 617). an approximate date of 1700 for this site, with a The earliest period of the Lower Loup se~ range for the focus of circa 1600 to 1700 (Wood quence as represented in the Burkett site in­ 1956: 199). cluded a small amount of pottery which has been The Redbird Focus sites are located on the classified as Walnut Decorated Lip, a pottery Niobrara and Elkhorn rivers, and it has been type associated with the White Rock Aspect of suggested that they have some relationship to the central Nebraska and northern Kansas. This historic Pawnee (Wood 1956b: 7-8). There are direct evidence of contact between the Lower hints in Pawnee legends of a time when the Loup Focus and the White Rock Aspect was Pawnee were said to have villages on the Elkhorn. unknown prior to the intensive examination of Although this may refer to the more re~ote the Burkett site pottery. Rusco has described the Upper Republican period (Wedel 1961: 125), White Rock Aspect and assigned it to the Late such a tradition could be related to the Redbird Ceramic Period with a suggested date between Focus. In 1723 Renaudiere reported Pawnee 1500 and 1600 (Rusco 1960: 75). A tree ring villages on the Elkhorn, a reference which might specimen from the 25 HN 39 site of the White be of importance in identifying the Redbird Rock Aspect has recently been dated 1614 Focus, but Hyde suggests that Renaudiere trans­ (Weakly 1961: 23). The association of Walnut ferred the name Elkhorn to the Loup Fork Decorated Lip with the early portion of the (Hyde 1934: Vol. 2, 13-14). Lower Loup sequence suggests that these early These general relationships and the evidence features must be at least as early as 1614. of specific contacts between the Lower Loup Another Nebraska archeological complex re­ Focus and other archeological units suggest a lated to the Lower Loup and Pawnee materials is date range of between 1500 and 1700. They also the Redbird Focus, which has been assigned to suggest that the contacts of the early portion of the Pahuk Aspect along with Lower Loup (Wood the Lower Loup sequence probably took place 1956: 201, Table 8) and historic Pawnee between 1500 and 1600 with later contacts and (Stephenson 1954). Wood discussed the similari­ similarities falling between 1600 and 1700. ties and differences between Redbird and Lower Relationships between the Lower Loup Focus Loup pottery along with other traits (Wood and certain archeological units in the South 1956: 182-187) in reaching his conclusion that Dakota area have long been recognized. The the two complexes must be assigned to different added information of previously unknown rna~ foci but are similar enough to be classified in the terials within the Lower Loup pottery complex same aspect. He suggests that these Redbird and the perspective of the seriation sequences are Focus sites are in some undetermined manner useful in determining the temporal relationships related to historic Pawnee (Wood 1956b: 8). of these contacts. Wood has subsequently assigned the Redbird Smith has discussed time perspective in the Focus to the Chouteau Aspect and suggests that Coalescent Complex in South Dakota in a it may identified as an archeological sequence based on stratigraphy and seriation manifestation related to the historical Ponca (Smith 1959b), and Lehmer's assignment of both tribe (Wood 1965). The pottery classified as Lower Loup and historic Pawnee to the Coales­ Evans Ware in the Redbird Focus is generally cent Tradition has previously been discussed similar to, but in some details different from, (Lehmer 1954: 150). Smith's sequence is based

-123- on the stratigraphy of the Talking Crow site, their primary association with the Lower Loup which includes components of the Coalescent Focus. The relationship is closer between the complex. He found "The sequence from Central Oacoma and the Wright sites, but not exclusive. Plains through Coalescent in the Fort Randall Some shouldered handle forms at Oacoma are Reservoir is Campbell focus, Shannon and La like some Barca} site handles. Smith has also Roche foci and Fort Thompson focus" (Smith discussed the similarity, stating, "I find that 1959: 3). In terms of sites and components the Talking Crow Ware includes the pottery which sequence developed by Smith is: Cooper classified as Category C and the Division Coalescent: Talking Crow B (Fort Thompson Focus) I rims of the Lower Loup pottery described by Two Teeth site (Shannon Focus) Dunlevy from the Burkett and Gray-Wolfe sites Wheeler component (La Roche Focus) Spain site (Shannon Focus) in Nebraska (Dunlevy 1936)" (Smith 1951: 33). Kivett drew a distinction between some of the Central Plains: Talking Crow C (Campbell Creek Focus) variations of the Oacoma site pottery and classi­ Talking CrowD (Campbell Creek Focus) fied only a small portion of the material as European trade materials are present in the Talking Crow Straight Rim, while the majority Coalescent complex Talking Crow B component was classified as Nance Plain Rim on the basis of and Two Teeth sites, but absent in the Wheeler Lower Loup similarities (Kivett 1958: 109-10). component and Spain sites as well as from sites One of the Nance Flanged Lip rims from the and components with central Plains affinities. Wright site (25 NC 3) includes the remnant of a Smith suggests that coalescent sites with trade hollow tubular handle. Kivett illustrates this rim materials date between 1700 and 1750, while and a near duplicate from the Oacoma site in those lacking trade materials must date from South Dakota (Kivett 1958: Plate XXXVI A) about 1600 to 1700. which further indicates the close relationship Other sites in the Fort Randall Reservoir area between the Wright site of the Lower Loup are included in the Fort Thompson and Campbell Focus and the Oacoma site of the Fort Thomp­ Creek foci. Among these are the Oacoma site and son Focus. Component A of the Oldham site, which have The basic similarities between the Fort been assigned to the Fort Thompson Focus of Thompson Focus and certain Lower Loup Focus the Pahuk Aspect (Kivett 1958: 137). The Farm sites can thus be recognized although many School site (Neuman 1961) and the Black Parti­ problems remain to be solved concerning these zan site (Caldwell1960; 1966) are multi-compon­ relationships. It is important to point out, how­ ent sites included within or related to the Fort ever, that these similarities are closer, at least Thompson focus and the Campbell Creek focus. with respect to the Oacoma site, in those Lower The Wolfe Creek component of the Crow Creek Loup sites which contain relatively more of the site can be assigned to the Campbell Creek focus. Nance Pinched Collar type of Wright Collared This component has been dated by the carbon-14 Ware. A relationship between the Fort Thomp­ method at 1401 (560 ± 150) (Missouri Basin son Focus and the Lower Loup Focus, therefore, Chronology Program 1962: 2) and by a tree ring is suggested for the later portion of the sequence date of 1441 (Weakly 1961: 36). A tree ring date of Lower Loup sites, and particularly with those for the Oacoma site of 1743 (Weakly 1961: 56) sites along the Loup rather than on Shell Creek falls within the date range suggested by Smith, or in Butler County. although it is later than the 1675 to 1725 period Meleen compared material from the La Roche which was originally suggested for the site by site in South Dakota with published data on the Kivett (1958: 137). Neuman suggests that the Lower Loup Focus and suggested that the Campbell Creek focus probably dates between manifestations at La Roche developed as a result 1100 and 1400 (Neuman 1961: 199). of the migration of a branch of Skidi Pawnee. He A cloistered rim of Colfax Braced Lower also suggested that this was not a demonstration Loup pottery was found at the Talking Crow site of direct diffusion from the Lower Loup Focus, (Smith 1952), but the greatest similarity between but rather a development from an earlier and a Fort Thompson Focus site and a Lower Loup more basic cultural stream. He concluded that site is that noted by Kivett between the Oacoma the La Roche site might represent part of the site in South Dakota and the Wright site in ancestral stock from which the Arikara developed Nebraska (Kivett 1958: 136). These similarities (Meleen 1948: 31). Hurt has noted that although led to the description of Oacoma pottery in the La Roche and Lower Loup foci ceramics terms of some type designations which reflect share traits of design elements and rim profiles,

-124- they are often distinct in other aspects. He felt Lower Loup sequence shows some relationships that Meleen's attempt to assign the La Roche site to the Campbell Creek Focus, but it is probably to the Skidi was based on slim evidence (Hurt later in time than the 1440 to 14 70 date range 1952: 34-35). suggested for Campbell Creek by Weakly (1961: There are additional similarities between Low­ 60, Figure 5). er Loup pottery and material from sites of the The Arzberger site in South Dakota also Chouteau Aspect in South Dakota. The Lower shows relationships to the Campbell Creek Focus Loup pottery classified as Nance Flanged Lip (Smith 1959) and has been assigned to the same resembles in its inverted L- and T -shaped profile Aksarben Aspect as Talking Crow D (Stephenson some of the pottery classified as Iona Ware at the 1954). The similarities of the Lynch site have Spain site (Smith and Grange 1958) and Wheeler been recognized by a similar classification Ware of the Wheeler component of the Scalp (Stephenson 1954 ). Arzberger influences have Creek Site (Hurt 1952). Another similarity been noted in the early components of the Farm between Lower Loup pottery and Iona Ware at School site (Neuman 1961: 199) and the Black the Spain site (Shannon Focus, Chouteau As­ Partizan site (Caldwell 1960: 56; 1966). Tree pect) is in the relative popularity of herringbone ring dates of 1419 to 1468 plus less than five lip decoration. Such decoration is more popular years have been assigned to this component of in those Lower Loup sites along the Loup River the Black Partizan site (Weakly 1961: 37). The (25 NC 3, 25 NC 4, 25 PT 1, 25 PT 13); the previously unrecognized pottery from the early design occurs in other sites, but is relatively more occupation of the Burkett site and the Lower common in these. This tends to equate the late Loup Focus, classified as Burkett Collared in this Lower Loup sites on Beaver and Looking Glass study, closely resembles Arzberger Group rims creeks with the Shannon and La Roche foci of from the Arzberger site, particularly Arzberger the Chouteau Aspect. These foci have been Crosshatched and Arzberger Plain. Pottery of the placed by Smith in the middle of his sequence of Hughes group at the Arzberger site is also very Fort Randall Reservoir coalescent sites. The similar to some of the non-collared pottery at the Spain site has an estimated date of 15 50 to 1650 Burkett site. (Smith and Grange 1958: 125). Spaulding compared the Arzberger material The La Roche, Wheeler component of Scalp with the published information on the Lower Creek and the Spain sites are among those Loup Focus in great detail and concluded that: assigned to the Chouteau Aspect for which tree .. Arzberger culture was in many respects ring dates suggest a time range of 15 50 to 1650 intermediate between the Upper Republican and (Weakly 1961: 41-42, 45). Carbon-14 datesfrom Lower Loup cultures of Nebraska and may in fact have served as an intermediary in the transmission the La Roche site range from 1520 to 1680 of grooved-paddle stamping of pottery to the (Neuman 1967: 483). Lower Loup culture. The basic affinity with the The Campbell Creek Focus is characterized by Central Plains cultural sequence further suggests cord marked surface treatment, although simple that the Arzberger community was a representative stamping is also present. There are similarities of an early stage in the separation of the Arikara tribe from the parent Pawnee, and that this between Campbell Creek Ware, Burkett Cord separation occurred prior to the Lower Loup phase Roughened and a vessel included in the Burkett of cultural development in Nebraska. (Spaulding Collared category. Grey Cloud Horizontal Incised 1956: llO). is more common in the Campbell Creek Focus Strong previously had noted similarities be­ than in the Fort Thompson Focus. It is also tween Arzberger site pottery and Upper Republi­ I present in the Shannon Focus in the Spain site. can materials. in the Central Plains. He also noted Horizontally incised rims are present in Nance the Oneota influences and the traits such as Flared Decorated and Nance Straight Decorated collars, handles and shoulder incising which and are numerically most frequent in the Burkett indicated connections between Arzberger and the site of the Lower Loup Focus in which Burkett Lower Loup Focus. He suggested that the Arz­ Cord Roughened and Burkett Collared are pres­ berger site represented a late prehistoric horizon ent in the earliest features. The Lower Loup site " ... in process of development into the more lacks the rectangular houses which are sometimes specialized and later protohistoric Pawnee (to the associated with sites of the Campbell Creek Fo­ south) and Arikara (to the north)" (Strong 1940: cus. Its pottery has relatively more simple stamp­ 382-83). ing and less cord roughened surface treatment. It Spaulding utilized Wedel's Lower Loup date is suggested, therefore, that the beginning of the estimates in assigning a date of 1500 to the

-125- PLATE XXXII: SHELL TEMPERED BODYSHERDS

1, 17-18, Cuba (25 NC 4); 2-4, 9-11, Burkett (25 NC 1); 5-8, 13--15, Wright (25 NC 3); 12, Ashland (25 CC I); 16, Larson (25 PT 1); 19, Barca} (25 BU 4);20, Linwood(25 BU 1).1-7, trailed;B-20, plain.

-226- Monument site unless the Hill site was also Wedel has illustrated some Arikara pottery from reoccupied between 1821 and 1831. However, Fort Berthold in North Dakota which dates from later burials at an abandoned site would not be about 1866, a time period when pottery had impossible. Another problem is that the records apparently disappeared from the Pawnee cultural of the Historical Society indicate that only wood inventory. This pottery is distinct from Webster from houses at the Hill site was submitted for Collar Braced, although pendant tabs on a braced dating; there is no mention of wood sent from rim present a superficial similarity (Wedel 1957: burials (Kivett: personal communication). This 107-9, 114, Plate 44). He also illustrates some material was submitted many years ago by Hill, twentieth century Arikara pots (Wedel 1957: but the discrepancy in identification of the 109, Plate 45). These crude vessels show some specimen has not been resolved and the date resemblance in form to Pawnee Webster Bowl should be used with caution, if at all. Ware, although the Arikara pieces are a century Historic Pawnee pottery is less like historic later than the Pawnee bowls. Despite some Arikara than proto historic (Lower Loup) pottery similarities the brushed surface treatment of is like equally early Arikara pottery as represent­ vessel necks and cord impressed decoration dis­ ed in the Fort Thompson Focus. Arikara pottery tinguish Arikara pottery form Pawnee ware of from the Leavenworth site (Strong 1940, Plate the period. 7), Stanley Ware (Cooper 1949: 303; Lehmer The greater ceramic similarity between the 1951: 14), is distinct from the Webster Collar protohistoric Pawnee (Lower Loup Focus) and Braced pottery of the approximately contem­ Arikara (Fort Thompson Focus) relative to the porary Hill and Linwood Pawnee sites. However, difference between historic Pawnee and Arikara red interior paint is present in Arikara pottery pottery suggests that increasing ceramic diver­ (Strong 1940: 369) as it is among the Pawnee. gence occurred with the passage of time.

DATING THE LOWER LOUP AND PAWNEE SEQUENCE

The historical dating of the Lower Loup archeological sources. It must be recognized, of Focus indicated a possible date bracket of 1541 course, that the archeological dating is not to 1750, and by 1775 the historical record is completely divorced from reference to historical sufficiently clear for the identification of individ­ information. ual sites. A hypothesis concerning the identifi­ A comparison of dates from these various cation and dating of two Lower Loup sites south sources is shown in Table 16. When considering of the Platte River in the period 1687 to 1777 the date ranges shown it must be kept in mind was suggested, and it is possible that sites that the site unit seriation listing obscures the containing relatively more trade materials post­ details of the simultaneous occupation of sites date 1650. Historical dating of the Pawnee during the historic period as well as similar portion of the seriation indicates that all sites evidence of contemporaneity of certain of the from which pottery has been recovered were Lower Loup sites. Clarification of this problem is occupied between 1775 and 1846. The decline of discussed in the following chapter in which the pottery making must have begun as early as 1820 site unit seriation is divided into parallel seria­ and was greatly accelerated after 1830. Pottery tions based on geographical location and band making probably disappeared by 1850. identifications. For example, the periods into The archeological dating of the Lower Loup which the ceramic sequence has been divided Focus sites suggests that the beginning of the may in part represent non-temporal variations. Lower Loup sequence may be placed in time This has been mentioned in relation to the lower between 1500 and 1550 and that the later sites frequency of Wright Collared Ware which may in the sequence show South Dakota relationships correlate with the geographical location of sites as late as 1750. There is thus a striking agreement 25 BU 4 and 25 BU 2 south of the Platte River between dates derived from the historical and and the Colfax County sites nearby on the north

-127- ) -·-J

.-L

0

Figure 9. Locations of Archeological Sites Used in Comparisons

-128- bank, in contrast to the sites located along the fluences of other factors. This has already been Loup River. The comparison of historical dates revealed in the excavation unit seriation. for the two sites south of the Platte with the The dates shown in the final column of Table archeological dating of the sites on the Loup 16 and on Figure 8 should be regarded as River shows that the two groups of sites are marking the approximate temporal boundaries probably contemporary and that the ceramic within which periods the included sites were "periods" 2C and 2B are probably not temporal occupied, and not as specific dates for particular periods but representations of the partial in- sites.

CARBON- 14

After the seriation of the ceramic materials Both of these dates are within the predicted was completed, two charcoal samples were sub­ time ranges and serve as chronological indicators mited to the University of Michigan for radio­ for the early and late temporal subdivisions of carbon dating. The carbon samples were carefully the Lower Loup sequence. They confirm the selected from excavation units so that they relative positions of dated excavation units in the would constitute a test of the ceramic seriation ceramic seriation. Since the carbon-14 results and other estimates of site dating. were not available until two years after the Sample M-1368 was from the Burkett site and seriation analysis was completed, these dates came from a storage pit intrusive into a refuse constitute a test which supports the validity of deposit, an excavation unit used in establishing the seriation. the ceramic trends in the Lower Loup pottery The A.D. 1680 date on the middle of the complex. The estimated date range of .A.D. 1500 Wright site time span leaves little to be desired to 1650 reported when the sample was submitted since it closely parallels other dating estimates. A was determined by the position of this excava­ somewhat earlier date than A.D. 1630 would be tion unit in the seriation graphs. The carbon-14 preferable for the Burkett site since this date, date derived from the specimen is 320±100 b.p., although within the predicted range, is somewhat or A.D. 1630. later than anticipated when the site is considered Sample M-1369 was from the Wright site and as a site unit in seriation sequence. However, the consisted of charcoal from House 5 on the floor dated material comes from a feature which falls with 50 scattered human skeletons, interpreted in the last half of the estimated span of occupa­ as evidence of an attack on the village. The tion at Burkett and from this point of view is not position of the excavation unit in the graph disturbing. More c-14 dates are needed, especially indicated that it should date in the middle of the on material from the suggested early component occupation of the site, and a date range of A.D. at the Burkett site for which one would antici­ 1650 to 1750 was predicted. The reported pate a considerably earlier date than the one carbon-14 date is 270 ± 100 b.p. or A.D. 1680. available and reported here.

-129- TABLE 16. DATING THE LOWER LOUP AND PAWNEE SEQUENCE - Ceramic Division Site Historical Dates Archeological Dates C-14 Dates Estimated Dates

25 NC6 1857-1876 1876 4 25 SD 8 1851-1857 25SD 2 1851-1857 25 BU 1 1851-1857 25NC7 1842-1845 Historic 3b 25 PK 1 1820-1845 1830-1833 Pawnee 25NC5 1820-1842 Focus 25WT7 14 RP 1 1821-1831 25 NC 2 1809-1842 25 GA 1 - 1825 3a 25 SD 1 1820-1827 25 HW 1 1804-1836 25BU2 1795 25 BU 1 1777-1809 25WT 1 1775-1809 1770-1830 1750 25BU4 2c 1685-1777 Lower 25 BU 2 Loup 25 NC4 1750-1800 Snake Butte Focus Focus or 1700-1750 Stanley Focus 1650-1700 Fanning Site 2b 25 NC3 1743 Oacoma Site 1680 (25 NC 3) 25 PT 1 1700-1750 Ft. Thompson Focus 1650-1700? 1600-1700 Redbird Focus 25 PT 13 1550-1650 Chouteau Aspect 1650? 25CX2 2a 25 ex 1 1525-1650 Gt. Bend Aspect ---- 1 25 NC 1 1541 Pre-1600 Leary Site 1630 (25 NC 1) 1500-1614 White Rock Aspect 1500 1461, 1531 Arzberger Site 1141, 1421, 1473 Lynch Site 1401, 1441, 1468 Campbell Creek Focus

-130- Chapter VIII

GEOGRAPHICAL

AND CULTURAL VARIATIONS

The historical record indicates that several of the protohistoric period may be correlated Pawnee sites were occupied at the same time in with some of the historic bands. Variations in the different localities and that this occurrence can relative proportions of certain ceramic types and be attributed to the division of the Pawnee tribe wares seem to correlate with the local sequences into the four bands of the historic period. of the protohistoric period, and these spatially Evidence in the excavation unit seriation indi­ separated groups of Lower Loup sites may, cated that several of the Lower Loup sites were therefore, be. interpreted as possible cultural occupied at the same time, and data supporting subdivisions rather than as temporal variants of this evidence of site contemporaneity was found the Lower Loup Focus. Basically, this interpreta­ in the comparison of historical and archeological tion means an extension of historic band differ­ dating of these sites. Geographical distribution of ences back into the protohistoric period. There is the Lower Loup sites suggests that the site unit a general, but not specific, correlation between seriation can be divided into two parallel local archeological and historical reconstruction and sequences. The interpretation of the historical the interpretation of Pawnee history based on record further suggests that these local sequences the study of native traditions.

-131- The evidence of site contemporaneity as village at Cottonwood Creek. The Blue Springs shown in archeological and historical records has site (25 GA 1) has been tentatively identified as a been discussed in detail in preceding chapters, Tappage village of circa 1825. The nearby James and the geographical distribution of the sites has site, which is not represented by an archeological been illustrated by maps presented in describing collection, may eventually prove to be an earlier the various sites. During the period following Pawnee village, possibly Tappage, in the Blue 1850, village locations shifted to the areas south River valley. of the Platte River and to the northeastern The geographical locations of the Lower Loup portion of the Pawnee region, then moved back sites suggest two spatially separated groups of to the Loup River to the reservation village at sites. The Barcal site (25 BU 4) and the Lower Genoa. These locations need not be considered Loup component at the Bellwood site (25 BU 2) here because pottery is very rare or absent from are located in the Platte River Valley on the the cultural inventory at this time, and no south side of the river. The Gray (25 CX 1), pottery was recovered from the Pawnee sites of Wolfe (25 CX 2) and Fuller's Hill (25 CX 3) sites this period. in Colfax County are all north of the Platte River Prior to 1850 the Skidi band was located in on Shell Creek. This location is below the mouth villages in the Loup River area north of the Platte of the Loup River, and these three sites are just River. Two villages are known archeologically, north of the Bellwood and Barcal sites. There­ the Palmer site (25 HW 1) and the Fullerton site fore, the Colfax County sites are geographically (25 NC 7), but the record is probably incomplete closer to the Lower Loup sites south of the and may not include all Skidi locations. Also the Platte than they are to the other Lower Loup Palmer site is poorly represented in the archeo­ Focus sites along the Loup River. See Figure 3. logical record through surface collections only. The remaining Lower Loup sites are located See Figure 2. on the Loup River near Beaver·creek and Look­ The Grand Pawnee villages were generally ing Glass Creek. The sites represented by archeo­ located along the south bank of the Platte River logical collections are Burkett (25 NC 1), Wright Valley except for a brief period between 1810 (25 NC 3), Cuba (25 NC 4), Coffin (25 NC 16), and 1833. At this time the band occupied the Larson (25 PT 1) and Monroe (25 PT 13). Four Horse Creek site (25 NC 2), first in company other reported sites are in the same locality. with the Republican band and later alone. The Both historical and archeological dates and Platte River sites attributed to the Grand are the the excavation unit seriation data suggest that Linwood site (25 BU 1), the Bellwood site (25 the sites in these two localities, the Loup River BU 2) and the Clarks site (25 PK 1). area and the Shell Creek-south of the Platte area, The Republican band is known to have lived were occupied at the same time. The interpreta­ in villages located on the Republican River tion of the historical data suggests the hypothesis except for a brief withdrawal to the Loup River th&t the sites south of the Platte River are the area and a final relocation on the Loup River Panis of the period 1687 to 1777, while those in north of the Platte. The band occupied the Hill the Loup River Valley area may be identified as site (25 Wf 1) on the Republican until perhaps the Panimaha or Skidi. as late as 1815, briefly resided at the Horse Creek Champe classified the Barcal site (25 BU 4) as site (25 NC 2) with the Grands and reoccupied Pawnee of an earlier type than the Linwood site the Republican River area at the Kansas Monu­ (25 BU 1) (Champe 1946: 78) and suggested that ment site (14 RP 1) between 1821 and 1831. the evidence from Bellwood and BU 4 " ... may During this period they probably also reoccupied demonstrate cultural succession ... " between the Hill site area and the adjacent Shipman site the Lower Loup and Pawnee (Champe 1946: (25 Wf 7). The band later moved back to the 90). On the basis of the historical interpretation, Loup River area to the Cottonwood Creek site the two local sequences of Lower Loup Focus (25 NC 5), a village also occupied by the Tappage sites may be related to the band sequences of the band. The Hordville site may be a Republican historic Pawnee. The Loup River area Lower village south of the Platte occupied about 1844, Loup sites may be connected with the Skidi but it is not represented by an archeological sequence of the same locality, and the Shell collection. Creek-south of the Platte sequence of Lower The Tappage band is infrequently mentioned Loup Focus sites may be connected via the in the historical record, and no sites have been Butler County sites south of the river with the historically identified as Tappage except the late Grand sequence of the same locality. By

-132- extension, the Colfax County sites in this local sequences of historic sites of the Skidi and Grand sequence are thus related to the development of bands. No protohistoric sites attributable to the the Grand Pawnee band of historic times. Republican and Tappage bands have yet been There are some difficulties in making these identified. local sequence band _connections. A Skidi site The historical evidence and the excavation intermediate in time and ceramic content unit seriation illustrate how the site unit seriation between the Wright or Cuba sites and the Palmer of the Lower Loup and Pawnee sites obscures the site of the historic period is lacking; thus, a evidence of site contemporaneity, but, for con­ smooth transition cannot be made. This gap may venience, site unit data will be used in ceramic be attributed at least in part to lack of data. The comparisons of the local sequences described Palmer site has never been excavated and may above. The Lower Loup and Pawnee sites may be well contain evidence of occupation during the grouped into six periods which represent the protohistoric period. Two reported but unexca­ major occupations of these sites (Table 17), vated Lower Loup sites in the locality may although it must be kept in mind that some of eventually help to fill the gap. The evidence of the sites were occupied during more than one the Cuba site is incomplete; all evidence of period. The periods are based on historical and houses was destroyed prior to salvage excava­ archeological evidence. Some of the sites listed in tions. Two houses at the Wright site show Table 17 will be considered in subsequent com­ ceramic evidence of a late position in the parisons. Site unit seriations of the local se­ sequence and also have a structural pattern quences based on geographical distribution and similar to that of historic Pawnee sites. Blackman historical identifications are illustrated in Figure observed surface evidence of two occupations at 10. In this graph the Horse Creek site (25 NC 2) the Wright site (Blackman 1902: 313), and it is is shown in both the Grand and Rl'publican band quite possible that a relatively late occupation of sequences, and the Cottonwood Creek site (25 the site is imperfectly represented in the archeo­ NC 5) is shown in both the Republican and logical evidence available at the present time. Tappage band sequences. This procedure is ne­ The link between the Lower Loup and Grand cessary because both sites were occupied by Pawnee sites in the Butler County locality south more than one band. Sites of uncertain affiliation of the Platte is more substantial, but the ceramic and Lower Loup sites represented by small seriation does not present a smooth transition. samples have not been included in the graph. The excavation of the protohistoric and historic Ceramic variations which might be attributed' sites in this locality, however, is far from to non-temporal factors such as band differences complete and can best be described as extensive may be revealed in comparisons among contem­ testing rather than as adequate excavation. The porary sites for which band identification is Lower Loup component at the Bellwood site is possible. A comparison of this sort serves to hold poorly represented by a few features. However, the temporal factors relatively constant so that some of the ceramic nonconformity could be variations noted may reflect cultural or spatial eliminated by classifying Colfax Braced, Butler distribution factors. Several such comparable Braced and Webster Collar Braced pottery as pairs of sites are available for analysis. representatives of a single ware. The hypothesis Historic Pawnee sites occupied in the period concerning this ceramic development was dis­ 1830 to 1850 include the Skidi site at Fullerton cussed in some detail earlier. It is postulated that (25 NC 7), the Grand Clarks site (25 PK 1), the the Webster Collar Braced pottery type, typical Cottonwood Creek site (25 NC 5) (which cannot of the historic Pawnee, developed in the area be effectively used because both Republican and south of the Platte River. It is present in larger Tappage bands occupied the village) and the amounts in sites of the Grand and Republican Vogel site (25 NC 11) which is of uncertain bands in this locality. The presence of this affiliation. The Plum Creek site (24 NC 14) pottery in the Skidi site at Palmer quite possibly produced no pottery. These sites contain so little reflects the increased influences of the southern pottery that comparison of the available data bands on the Skidi when these bands withdrew from them cannot be considered reliable. There to the Loup River area. is an observed tendency toward reduction in the Thus, the historical and geographical evidence relative frequency of Webster Collar Braced and suggests the division of the Lower Loup sites into an increase of Webster Bowls and Lids in this two parallel, contemporary, local sequences period, but these data probably reflect the which can in turn be related to the local decline of the potter's art more than they do any

-133- TABLE 17. LOWER LOUP AND PAWNEE SITES LISTED BY BAND AND LOCAL SEQUENCE BY PERIOD OF MAJOR OCCUPATION

Skidi Band Grand Band Republican Band Tappage Band Unknown Focus Period Loup River Shell of Platte Republican Blue Creek South River Sequence Sequence Sequence River Sequence

- Affiliation Historic 25 NC6 25 NC6 25 NC 6 25 NC 6 Pawnee 1850-1876 25 SD 8 25 BU 1 25 SD 2 25 SD 8

25 HM 1? Historic 25 NC 7 25 PK 1 25 NC 5 25 NC 5 25 NC 11 Pawnee 1830-1850 25 PK 2 25PK 3 25 NC 14 25 NC 14 25 NC 14

Historic 25 HW 1 25WT7 25 GA 1 25 SD 1 Pawnee 1810-1830 25 NC 10? 25 NC2 14 RP 1 25 NC 2

Historic In Loup 25 BU 2 Historical Pawnee 1750-1810 River 25 BU 1 25 WT 1 Record Area, ·?Site ? Site

Lower 25 NC4 25 BU 4 25 cc 1 Loup 1650-1750 25 NC 3 25 BU 2 25 NC 16 25 NC 22 25 PT 1 25 NC 21 25 PT 13 25 PT 17 25 PT 18

Lower 25 NC 1 25CX 2 Loup 1500-1650 25 ex 1 25 ex 3

-134- SITE LOCAL SEQUENCE AND &AND SERIATION lAND AND PERl 00 SEQUENCE

1810 -1830 Sd 1 • I I I oro PAWNEE N< S Go 1 • • I .... • llipl N' 5 w. 7 Rp 1 N< 2 W•l I • .. -I PII N< 2 •• 2 •• 1 T "" . ~' ""2 I c, 2 ' c, I f I ~· I

N< 7 Hw 1 N< • N< 3 .. 1 .. 13 - N< 1

~ 1 ~ ~ . • .z ·'! .l ::! ;.:; .] Jo'i a ·1 !•'" :1 . _l .. tJc :;! SCALE: 100 PERCENT nE jjj·-=! ;.,·l H jj .!; ,~5 . !~ .:, .. ~L z~ J.a. fH Hi Jil u l~ iJ i.: ... li l .lv 1: l ~! ~~~ ~•

Figure 10. Seriation of Band and Local Sequences.

-135- possible band differences in ceramics. types, and the two Grand sites are distinguished More fruitful comparisons may be made be­ by higher percentages of Nance Flared Plain and tween the sites occupied during the period 1810 Nance Flared Decorated pottery than are present to 1830, but some problems must first be noted. in the Hill site. It should be noted that the two The Yutan site (25 SD 1) is of unknown Pawnee Grand sites are more like one another in their affiliation. It has been identified as an Oto village ceramic content than either is like the Hill site. It on the basis of historical records, but it has may be that the Webster Collar Braced represents produced strong evidence of either Pawnee occu­ a more popular type among the Grands of this pation or Pawnee influences in the archeological period than among the Republicans, and Webster record. The Blue Springs site (25 GA 1) can only Bowls may well be interpreted as a ceramic tentatively be identified as a Tappage site, and development by the Republican band. the Shipman site (25 WT 7) is probably Republi­ Band comparisons among historic Pawnee can but presents an inadequate pottery sample. sites of all three periods reveal that differences in The Kansas Monument site (14 RP 1) is useable the pottery content of these sites are differences for the purpose outlined. The Clarks site (25 PK of proportion more than differences of content. 1) was occupied after 1820 by the Grands but, as There is no question that all of these sites, regardless of S'lb-Eroup affiliation, would be noted above, presents an inadequate pottery classified in a singie archeological unit, the focus, sample for comparison. The Horse Creek site (25 on the basis of the pottery present. There is NC 2) represents the only major collection of serious question that these differences or pottery from a Grand village of this period, but proportional variations would be interpreted in the site was also occupied by the Republican non-temporal terms in the absence of historical band. This "combination" must be kept in mind data concerning the time of occupation and the if the site is to be used as representative of the band affiliation. As illustrated in the excavation Grand Pawnee pottery of the period. No rim unit seriation, these variations can be interpreted sherds were present in the Cunningham site (25 as temporal variations, the site could be placed in NC 10) collection. The Palmer site (25 HW 1) is a temporal sequence, and the geographical the main Skidi village of the historic period but is distribution could be interpreted as evidence of a poorly represented by a small surface collection single population moving from site to site within of pottery. the region during the period represented. The most notable difference in the ceramic Application of the direct historical approach collections is that much smaller relative amounts permits the identification of ceramic variations of Webster Collar Braced pottery are present in which can be attributed to non-temporal or band the Palmer, Blue Springs and Yutan sites than are differences, but in the absence of historical data present in the Horse Creek and Kansas Monu­ these distinctions could not be made with any ment sites. This difference may be interpreted as degree of certainty. an indication that this pottery type is typical of Comparison of the Loup River sequence and the Grand and Republican and may represent the Shell Creek-south of the Platte sequence of influences of these bands on the Skidi, Tappage the Lower Loup Focus sites reveals similar (?) and Oto-Pawnee (?) of the period. The proportional variations in pottery types. Burkett $-Collared pottery in the Blue Springs During the period 1650 to 1750, the Loup collection distinguishes it. If the pottery of the River sequence is distinguished particularly by Horse Creek site represents more of the Grand the higher proportions of Wright Collared Ware occupation there than of the Republican, then it and Nance Flanged Lip pottery and a lower may be that the greater amount of Webster proportion of Nance Flared Decorated pottery Collar Braced pottery in the Kansas Monument than is present in the sites south of the Platte site reflects the greater popularity of this type River. The latter sites also show the beginnings of among the Republican band of this period. the development of Webster Collar Braced and For the period 1750 to 1810 two Grand the transitional type, Butler Braced. Traces of Pawnee sites (25 BU 1 and 25 BU 2) at Linwood these latter types are present in the Wright site of and Bellwood may be contrasted with the Re­ the Loup River sequence and are interpreted here publican village in Webster County, the Hill site as evidence of contacts between the two local (25 WT 1). The most common pottery type in all Lower Loup groups rather than as the beginning three sites is Webster Collar Braced. The Hill site of these types since they are very rare in the is marked by a higher percentage of Web­ Wright site collection. On the basis of a low ster Bowls and more variety in numbers of proportion of Wright Collared Ware in the Colfax

~136~ County sites, the inclusion of these in the same non-temporal variations, at least not in the sequence as the sites south of the Platte is ordering of the sites determined in this study. suggested. A comparison of the modes or rim decoration Comparison of the temporal and spatial dis­ on Colfax Braced pottery (Table 20) reveals a tribution of some modes of surface finish and similarly higher proportion of herringbone and decoration reveal proportional variations which zig-zag designs associated with the Loup River offer some additional supporting evidence of area sequence of Lower Loup sites and a higher minor differences which distinguish the site proportion of designs composed of opposed sequences. This information is summarized in parallel lines in the sites on Shell Creek and south Tables 18 to 21. The sites are grouped according of the Platte. Colfax Braced rims in the historic to local sequence and in chronological order Pawnee Grand sites south of the Platte are similar within the sequences. Sites in which these modes to the Lower Loup sites of this area with respect are absent have been omitted from the tables. to this mode of decoration. Horizontal parallel Body sherd surface finish comparisons (Table lines on rims of this type are also more common 18) indicate that the simple stamped surface in the Shell Creek-south of the Platte sequence. finish is slightly more common in the Lower The presence of pendant tabs on braced rims Loup sites of the Loup River sequence than in serves to link the Palmer Skidi site to the Cuba the Shell Creek-south of the Platte sequence. The site of the Loup River sequence. relative proportion of decorated body sherds is Modes of rim decoration on Nance Flared and much higher in the Shell Creek-south of the Nance Straight Decorated rims also serve to Platte sequence than in the Loup River sequence distinguish the two Lower Loup Focus se­ of Lower Loup sites. This proportion is also low quences (Table 21). Designs of vertically and at the Skidi Palmer site of the historic period as diagonally oriented parallel lines are somewhat it was in the Loup River Lower Loup sites more common south of the Platte and in one of attributed to the Skidi. In contrast, the Grand the Shell Creek sites than at Loup River area Pawnee sites of the historic period have propor­ Lower Loup sites. Designs composed of opposed tions of decorated body sherd frequency which parallel lines show a similar distribution. In are similar to those of the Shell Creek-south of contrast, herringbone and zig-zag designs and the Platte sequence of Lower Loup sites. These horizontal parallel lines are more common in the data support the division of the Lower Loup sites sites of the Loup River sequence. The Palmer into local sequences and the linkage of those Skidi site of the historic period is more like the sequences with historic bands. other Pawnee sites in this regard than it is like Among the modes of lip decoration (Table the Loup River Lower Loup sites attributed to 19), herringbone patterns are relatively more the Skidi. common in pottery from the Lower Loup sites It should be noted that, just as was the case grouped in the Loup River sequence than at sites with the historic Pawnee sites of different band in the Shell Creek-south of the Platte locality. affiliation, the ceramic differences between the There is a slightly higher proportion of interior two Lower Loup site sequences which have been rim decoration in the late Lower Loup sites interpreted as possible band variations are mainly south of the Platte River than is present in changes of relative frequency. None of the comparable sites along the Loup. Parallel line lip common pottery types or modes of decoration decorations are slightly more common in two of or surface finish exhibit an exclusive association the sites of the Loup River area in contrast to with a particular sequence. The differences in sites south of the Platte. The most pronounced proportion in some cases tend to support the variation is the distribution of the herringbone division of the Lower Loup Focus sites into two pattern mentioned above. Punctate lip chronological, parallel, local sequences. Geo­ decorations increase both in Lower Loup graphical distribution and the application of the sequences and historic Pawnee sites. Plain lips direct historical approach have been used to link decrease in popularity and then increase greatly the local sequences with historic Pawnee bands. in historic times; this is the case in both Lower All of these variations could be interpreted as Loup sequences and historic sites, apparently temporal in nature, and, in the absence of regardless of band affiliations. Aside from the historical evidence, such an interpretation would association of herringbone lip decoration with probably be more likely. the Loup River area of the Lower Loup It has been shown earlier that seriation of the sequence, modes of lip decoration do not reflect Pawnee sites on the basis of site units obscured

-137- TABLE 18. MODES OF BODY SHERD SURFACE TREATMENT; BY SITE

Simple Check Cord Smoothed lndeter- Decorated Site Stamped Smoothed Stamped Roughened Shell Temp. Misc. ruinate Shoulder No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % 25 SD 1 102 50.8 52 25.9 5 2.5 3 1.5 39 19.4 25 GA 1 220 49.0 198 I 44.1 30 6.7 25 NC 5 5 83.2 1 16.7 25 WT 7 13 86.6 1 6.6 1 6.6 14 RP 1 124 38.7 84 26.2 4 1.2 50 15.6 58 18.1 25 WT 1 262 35.0 429 57.3 1 .13 56 7.5 25 PK 1 1 7.1 12 85.7 1 7.1 25 NC 2 333 36.9 307 34.0 262 29.0 25 BU 2 Pawnee 267 54.0 135 27.3 92 18.6 ~- 25 BU 1 160 34.4 159 34.2 2 .4 144 31.0 25 BU 4 2293 45.5 1819 36.0 1 .02 8 .15 2 .04 920 18.3 ---·- 25 BU 2 L.Loup 405 36.6 403 36.4 300 27.C 25 ex 2 271 31.4 359 41.5 4 .46 230 26.6 25 ex 1 143 22.7 325 51.6 1 .2 4 .6 45 7.1 111 17.7 25 NC 7 1 100.0 25 HW 1 88 36.7 132 55.0 20 8.3 25 Ne 4 397 67.7 125 21.4 17 2.9 46 7.8 25 Ne 3 6203 61.2 2955 29.0 11 .01 55 .54 109 1.1 815 8.0 25 PT 1 1920 49.0 1620 41.2 386 9.8 25 PT 13 1035 52.6 798 40.6 1 .05 130 6.6 25 Ne 1 7329 43.2 6986 41.1 11 .06 337 1.9 107 .63 2179 12.8

-138- TABLE 19. MODES OF LIP DECORATION; BY SITE

Parallel Finger Interior Site Lines Herringbone Punctate Plain Indented Rim Miscellaneous No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % 25 SD 1 3 10.7 9 32.2 4 14.3 3 10.7 3 10.7 6 21.4 25 GA 1 2 4.6 7 16.3 22 51.1 12 27.8 25 NC 5 1 33.3 2 66.6 25 WT 7 3 100.0 25 WT 1 22 9.9 1 .45 50 22.3 132 59.5 3 1.3 12 5.4 2 .9 25 PK 1 2 18.2 9 81.8 -··---·-- - 1---~---- 25 NC 2 10 7.1 76 54.3 52 37.2 1 .7 1 .7 25 BU 2 Pawnee 14 40.0 17 48.5 2 5.7 1 2.8 1 2.8 25 BU 1 6 9.7 1 1.6 31 50.0 8 12.9 1 1.6 15 24.1 25 BU 4 124 21.8 5 .8 235 41.3 57 10.0 12 2.1 130 22.8 6 1.0 25 BU 2 L. Loup 22 17.1 3 2.3 41 31.8 18 14.0 33 25.5 25 ex 2 46 13.7 25 7.4 130 38.7 61 18.2 44 13.1 2 .6 28 8.3 25 ex 1 43 13.0 12 3.6 51 15.4 137 41.5 27 8.2 17 5.1 43 13.0 25 NC 7 1 100.0 I 25 HW 1 5 19.2 I 8 30.8 11 42.2 2 7.6 -- - 25 NC 4 I 11 ' 18.3 2 3.3 22 36.6 7 11.7 9 15.0 8 13.3 1 1.6 25 NC 3 t 489 36.9 177 13.3 343 24.8 77 5.8 141 10.6 100 7.5 2 .1 25 PT 1 I 247 35.1 128 18.2 129 18.3 113 16.1 66 9.3 3 .4 18 2.5 1------1--· ' 25 PT l~-f-4l- 14.0 66 : 22.6 49 16.8 54 18.5 52 17.8 1 .3 29 9.9

25 NC 1 539 19.3 471 1 16.9 594 21.3 562 20.2 156 5.7 227 8.1 235 8.4

-139- TABLE 20. MODES OF RIM DECORATION ON COLFAX BRACED RIMS

Horizontal Herringbone Opposed Pinched Pendant Site Plain Punctate Lines & Zig-zag Lines Chevron Base Tabs No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % 25 SD 1 1 14.3 2 28.5 4 57.1 14 RP 1 1 100.0 25WT 1 2 50.0 1 25.0 l 25.0 25 NC 2 1 100.0 25 BU 2 Pawnee 3 100.0 25 BU 1 3 42.9 4 57.1 25 BU 4 14 13.6 2 1.9 23 22.3 5 4.8 59 57.2 25 BU 2 L.Loup 8 34.9 6 26.1 9 39.2 25CX 2 1 2.5 3 6.1 29 59.0 4 8.1 12 24.5 25 ex 1 2 7.1 12 42.8 6 21.4 8 28.6 25 HW 1 1 20.0 2 40.0 2 40.0 25 NC 4 2 18.2 1 9.1 5 45.5 2 18.2 1 9.1 25 NC 3 33 9.7 22 6.5 43 12.7 117 34.6 121 35.8 2 .6 25 PT 1 6 9.1 20 30.3 12 18.2 28 42.4 25 PT 13 1 25.0 3 75.0 25 NC 1 16 7.3 11 5.0 18 8.2 89 40.8 79 36.3 5 2.3

-140- TABLE 21. MODES OF RIM DESIGN ON NANCE FLARED DECORATED AND NANCE STRAJGHT DECORATED RIMS

Parallel Opposed Herringbone Horizontal Misc. Site Lines Lines & Zig-zag Lines Punctate No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %

25 so 1 1 33.3 1 33.3 1 33.3 25 GA 1 5 71.4 2 28.6 25WT l 8 44.5 7 38.9 3 16.7 25 NC2 2 100.0 25 BU 2 Pawnee 2 25.0 6 62.5 1 12.5 25 BU 1 7 44.7 7 44.7 2 12.4 25 BU4 113 66.5 29 23.0 15 8.8 1 .5 2 1.2 25 BU 2 L.Loup 3 37.5 4 50.0 l 12.5 25CX 2 2 28.5 2 28.5 2 28.5 1 14.3 25 ex 1 2 33.3 1 16.7 l 16.7 2 33.3 25 HW 1 2 28.5 4 57.0 1 14.3 25 NC4 1 100.0 25 NC3 6 9.5 45 71.4 11 17.5 1 1.6 25 PT 1 12 40.0 5 16.7 10 33.3 2 6.6 1 3.3 25 PT 13 5 27.8 7 38.9 3 16.7 1 5.5 25 NC 1 6 4.8 28 22.8 10 8.1 64 52.0

- 141- the evidence of site contemporaneity which was sites to the north, Arzberger in South Dakota revealed by the historical record. Seriation of the and Lynch in northern Nebraska, are present Lower Loup sites on the basis of site unit during the same period; this evidence may point percentages likewise obscures the evidence of site to an origin of the Lower Loup complex outside contemporaneity which can be revealed by seria­ of the Central Plains area. Such a possibility has tion on the basis of excavation units. In this been suggested (Lehmer 1954: 158; Wedel 1941: study, the seriation of the Lower Loup sites by 26 note 12). Traces of an almost equally early excavation units provided evidence of contem­ occupation at the nearby Wright site (25 NC 3) poraneous occupations among the unrecorded on Beaver Creek have also been noted. sites (Figure 7) which parallels the information Sometime prior to 1650, and perhaps not too provided for Pawnee sites by historical data. If long after about 1525, there was an expansion of only a site unit seriation were available for the territory occupied by the Lower Loup Focus comparison, it is probable that all ceramic people to include the vicinity of the mouth of variations would be interpreted as temporal Shell Creek. The Gray (25 CX 1), Wolfe (25 CX differences. With the added information of con­ 2) and Fuller's Hill (25 CX 3) sites were probably temporaneous occupations derived from histori­ all occupied during this period. The settlement of cal and other dating sources and from excavation the Shell Creek vicinity may mark the beginning unit seriation, the factor of geographical distribu­ of the formation of the Pawnee bands of the tion has been interpreted in terms of non­ historic period, since the sites in the Beaver temporal variations and attributed to band differ­ Creek vicinity may be tentatively identified as ences in pottery on both historic and protohis­ the Skidi while those on Shell Creek begin a toric time levels. The application of the direct sequence which leads to the Grand Pawnee band. historical approach has been the method by Further expansion also occurred prior to about which the regional seriation sequence was divided 1650, but probably after the occupation of the into local sequences which could, in turn, be Shell Creek vicinity, with the establishment of attributed to band differences among the Paw­ the Larson (25 PT 1) and Monroe (25 PT 13) nee. The band differences in pottery are not sites in the vicinity of Looking Glass Creek on great, and it is doubtful that such an interpreta­ the Loup River below Beaver Creek. These sites tion would result if the historical evidence was are geographically and ceramically closer to those not at hand. This attempt to extend historic in the Beaver Creek vicinity, are included in the band differences back in time to the protohis­ same sequence, and may be tentatively identified toric period has resulted in a tentative interpreta­ as Skidi along with the Burkett and Wright sites. tion; in the absence of historical evidence the It was during this period that sporadic contacts interpretation would be even more speculative with white men began, and limited amounts of than it is. It is possible that a study of the trade materials began to reach the Lower Loup artifacts from the Lower Loup and Pawnee sites Focus people. might reveal similarities and differences which During the period 1650 to 17 50 the occupa­ could be used to test this hypothesis concerning tion of the Beaver and Looking Glass creeks the extension of band differences from historic locality of the Loup Valley continued, but to protohistoric times. downstream the village locations shifted from the Assuming for the moment that there is some Shell Creek vicinity to the south bank of the validity in the above hypothesis, it is possible to Platte River at the Bellwood (25 BU 2) and reconstruct some aspects of Pawnee history. Barcal (25 BU 4) sites. The distinction between The initial occupation of the Pawnee within the two bands is reflected in the historical the area defined as the Pawnee region probably references to the Panimahas of the Loup River took place in about A.D. 1500 with the establish­ and the Panis south of the Platte. Ceramic ment of a village on the Loup River in the distinctions are apparent in the greater popular­ vicinity of Beaver Creek. This early occupation at ity of Wright Collared Ware among the Skidi of the Burkett site (25 NC I) shows not only the Loup River area and the greater frequency of typically Lower Loup ceramic materials, but Nance Flared Decorated pottery south of the pottery which indicates that these people were in Platte. The development of the characteristic contact with and probably influenced by the Pawnee pottery, Webster Collar Braced, appar­ Oneota Aspect peoples and White Rock Aspect ently took place south of the Platte. Contacts people of the Central Plains. Influences and with white men were increasing, and although possible contacts with Central Plains Tradition trade goods are more common in sites of this

-142- period, they are still present in limited amounts. and perhaps at nearby sites (25 PK 2 and 3). The The transition between the sites of the Lower Republican and Tappage bands occupied the Loup Focus and those of the Historic Pawnee is Cottonwood Creek site (25 NC 5). Other sites of not completely clear, as is indicated by a ceramic this period lack pottery and have not been inconformity. A partial gap in the record considered in detail here. The terminal period of apparently exists but may be attributed to lack the Pawnee occupation of this region of the of sufficient data regarding the transitional Central Plains has been discussed earlier and need components. All four historic bands may be not be repeated. identified in the historical record, but The sequence of events in ths reconstruction archeological indentifications are lacking for two begins with a single Lower Loup occupation, of the groups. The Skidi continued to occupy the passes through a period of division into two Loup River area at an unidentified site, and the spatially separated groups tentatively identifiable Grands continued to occupy the south bank of as bands, and finally leads to the distribution of the Platte Valley at the Bellwood (25 BU 2) and the four identified bands of the historic period. Linwood (25 BU 1) sites. The Republican band is This parallels Dorsey's reconstruction on the mentioned historically in 1775, and their village basis of Pawnee traditions in which he suggests was on the Republican River at the Hill site (25 that there is some reason to believe that the WT 1) where they were visited in 1806 by a Chaui (Grand), Kitkehahki (Republican) and Spanish expedition and by the American Pitahauirat (Tappage) bands ". . . represent expedition led by Pike. Trade was increasingly offshoots of the original Skidi through the single important, and the Tappage band is mentioned band of the Kawarahkis" (Dorsey 1906: 9). The in a 1767 list of traders' licenses. No archeo­ proposed archeological reconstruction differs in logical site has been identified as a Tappage vil­ detail, particularly in the locality in which the lage of this period, but a possibility is the report­ differentiation took place, the traditional ed James site on the Blue River. location being the Nemaha area of southeastern A brief shift of village locations took place Nebraska. The general similarity in the sequence during the next period, between 1810 and 1830. of events is apparent despite the conflict The Skidi band was apparently established at the regarding the location, and it can be tentatively village at Palmer (25 HW 1). The Republican and suggested that the Shell Creek area Lower Loup the Grand bands withdrew from the area south sites may represent the Kawarahkis band. Other of the Platte River and jointly established the information links the Pitahauirat and Kawarahkis Horse Creek site (25 NC 2). About 1821 the groups in a single village, and the latter name is Republican band returned to the Republican referred to the ownership of one of the most River area, establishing the fortified Kansas ancient Pawnee bundles (Lesser and Weltfish Monument site (14 RP 1) and probably 1932: 7). There is also evidence that while in reoccupying the Hill site vicinity at the Shipman Nebraska the Skidi referred to the other three site (25 WT 7). The Blue Springs site (25 GA 1), bands together by a term which meant another fortified village, has been tentatively "village-east" (Lesser and Weltfish 1932: 6), a identified as Tappage and either represents the reference which would agree with the continuous occupation of this band in the Blue reconstruction presented here if it actually refers River Valley or a reoccupation of the locality. to such a distant time rather than to more recent The Pawnee archeological character of the Yutan Nebraska village locations. site (25 SD 1) has not been satisfactorily The Grand can be traced tentatively to the explained. It may represent heavy Pawnee Butler County Lower Loup sites south of the influence at this historic Oto site, or the Platte. These in tum can be placed in a sequence identification as Oto may be in error. The latter with the earlier Shell Creek area sites, but the cannot be accepted until another site in the stages of development leading from a specific immediate vicinity has been identified as Oto. Lower Loup source to the Tappage and Re­ Between 1830 and 1850 pottery virtually publican bands are missing. Dorsey has also disappears from the archeological materials suggested that: recovered from Pawnee villages, and trade A classification based upon the testimony of materials almost completely replace all native the Skidi would place the Skidi and the Arikara in one group, and the Chaui, Kitkehahki and implements. The Skidi inhabited the Fullerton Pitahauirat in another group. The three tribes last site (25 NC 7), and the Grands continued to live named speak a common dialect, which more nearly south of the Platte at the Clarks site (25 PK 1) approximates that of the Skidi than does the

-143- tongue of the Arikara; but both Skidi and members in 1785 that of the other three bands have no difficulty in It must be observed in passing that, since all these understanding the speech of the Arikara. The Skidi nations, or at least the majority of them, live by claim that the Arikara are Skidi, while, in turn, the hunting, they are apt to divide themselves from Arikara look upon the Skidi as part of themselves time to time when they do not find enough (Dorsey 1904: xiii). animals on their hunts for the maintenance of their It has been noted that the greatest similarity nation, and from the time of the division they are enemies (Nasatir 1952: 126). between the Lower Loup Focus and sites of the Fort Thompson Focus in South Dakota are seen In 1802 Du Lac visited the Grand Pawnee in between the Wright site in Nebraska and the their villages on the south bank of the Platte and Oacoma site in South Dakota (Kivett 1958: 136) reported that "They were at war with the nation and that the Fort Thompson Focus has been called Republicans and had only a small number attributed by Smith to the Arikara (Neuman of firearms, without any powder" (Nasatir 1952: 1961: 198). Ceramic similarities were noted in 709). These two references to conflict between the earliest occupation of the Burkett site, bands refer to the period when the Republican indicating a relationship to the Arzberger site in band occupied the Hill site and the Grands were South Dakota which Spaulding suggests may at Linwood; later the two bands are reported as represent an early stage in the separation of the jointly establishing the Horse Creek site. Conflict Arikara from the Pawnee (Spaulding 1956: 11 0). with the Kansa may have caused this removal from the Republican Valley to the Loup as The Burkett and Wright sites have been placed in Sibley's report suggests (Wedel 1959: 51) and as the Loup River local sequence of the Lower Lewis and Clark reported in 1804 (Wedel1959: Loup Focus and tentatively identified as Skidi 60). villages. The comparative archeological data tend to support this interpretation because this se­ It is possible to make some observations quence shows relationships to South Dakota sites concerning culture change with reference to the which have been tentatively identified as Arikara seriation of Lower Loup and historic Pawnee and because these suggested relationships parallel pottery. As indicated in this analysis, pottery the traditional evidence of Skidi and Arikara virtually disappeared from the inventory of connections. Pawnee artifacts by about 1850. Wedel has The hypothesis concerning relationships of previously described this change and has noted the Lower Loup Focus to archeological manifes­ that the nineteenth century Pawnee sites tations in South Dakota is not new. The division ... generally yield far fewer potsherds than do the older ones, reflecting the deterioration of the of the Lower Loup Focus into two sequences, native potter's art in the face of a growing flood of one identified as Skidi and related to the South metal pots and kettles brought in by the white Dakota sites, the other a contrasting sequence traders (Wedel 1961: 124). related more directly to sites of the Grand Pottery is particularly scarce in archeological Pawnee band in Nebraska, represents a refine­ collections from sites occupied after about 1820 ment of the suggested relationships. This re­ or 1830, and these dates approximate the construction of Lower Loup and Pawnee history beginning of a particularly rapid decline in the is proposed as a hypothesis for further investiga­ amount of pottery produced by the Pawnee. tion and will probably be modified by future When the seriation graph data concerning the research. decreasing frequency of Nance Flared Plain Each of the four bands seems to have been pottery is compared with similar data illustrating autonomous and to have acted essentially as an the increasing popularity of Webster Collar independent tribe (Weltfish 193 7: V; Lesser and Braced pottery, it may be observed that the Weltfish 1932: 4). The factors which caused the relative frequencies of these two ceramic catego­ division of the Pawnee into separate bands are ries underwent about the same amount of percen­ probably complex and are not clearly revealed in tile change although in opposite directions. It is the archeological record, or at least have not interesting to note, however, that this relative been recognized in the study of the ceramic amount of change took place over a span of 250 remains. The separations were not permanent, as years in the protohistoric Lower Loup sites and indicated by the joint occupation of the Horse over a period of about 100 years in the historic Creek site by the Grand and Republican bands sites. This suggests that, along with the decline in after a period of separation, but at times the pottery production, ceramic changes were occur­ divisions were apparently marked by conflict. ring at a more rapid pace during the historic Miro states in a reference to the Republican band period. This more rapid rate of change in the

-144- histcric pexiod may well reflect the increasing sequences are also geographically separated from impact of cultural contacts with white men. 11 their presumed points of origin. Spatiai has also been suggested by Hill that the develop­ separation and more rapid rates of ceramic ment of bowl lids may have been a result of change (either decrease or increase of f!:! lative Pawnee observation of chinaware vessel forms popularity of a partic>ular type) thus seem to be (Hill: NSHS files). associated with the formation of cultural Other differential rates of ceramic change may sub-groups or bands and may be tentatively be tentatively associated with the spatial distribu­ regarded as archeological manifestations of the tions of the parallel local sequences and with processes of band formation. A similar suggestion band identifications. concerning seriation rate change and direction of When the l.oup River sequence of Lower diffusion has been proposed by Deetz (1966: loup Focus sites is compared with the Shell 509). Creek-south of the Platte sequence of Lower It is probable that any trends toward band Loup sites (Figure 9), it appears that the pottery distinctions were at least partly reversed after category Nance Flared Plain declines in popular­ 1857 when the bands aU moved to the single ity in both sequences. The rate of decline is village at Genoa. This is within the post-ceramic somewhat more rapid in the area south of the period and., thus, beyond the scope of this study. Platte than it is among the sites of the loup It is suggested that future research based on River local sequence. the study of the non-ceran1jc archeological When the sequence of Republican Pawnee remains from these sites may be used to test the sites is compared with the sequence of Grand seriation and sequence division here proposed on Pawnee sites in the historic period, it is apparent the basis of pottery study. that the pottery category Webster Collar Braced Further study of the non-ceramic artifacts exhibits a pattern of increasing popularity in within the chronological framework suggested by both groups. The rate of change is apparently this analysis of the pottery may be expected to slightly more rapid in the site attributed to the reveal much information about culture change. Republican band than it is among the Grand Fo[ example, such analysis might illustrate the Pawnee site collections. rate of replacement of bison shoulder blade hoes On historical grounds the Republican band by metal trade hoes. Similar differential changes can be regarded as an offshoot of the Grand in many artifact categories could be studied by Pawnee, although the shift cannot be traced th.is method when it becomes possible to archeologically. On archeological and historical examine the non-ceramic artifacts in detail. evidence it has been suggested here that the Shell Deetz has suggested that changes in the Arikara Creek-south of the Platte sequence of Lower social organization can be detected by ceramic Loup sites represents an offshoot from the Loup analysis (Deetz 1960; 1965). A similar study of River area. lt is interesting to note that a mere the Pawnee material might be useful as a means rapid rate of ceramic change is associated with of testing Deetz's l1ypothesis, but it is beyond both of the offshoot sequences. The offshoot the scope of this study.

- 145- Page Left Blank Chapter IX

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

This investigation has been concerned with to 1750. The broader relationships of these sites the pottery recovered from protohistoric Lower have been expressed in their assignment to the Loup Focus and Historic Pawnee Focus Pahuk Aspect. The Lower Loup Focus has also archeological sites in the east central portion of been characterized as a Coalescent Village the Central Plains archeological sub-area (Figure Complex and has been included in the Coalescent 1). These sites are located along the Loup, Platte, Tradition of the Plains Village Pattern. Blue and Republican River valleys, and the area Relationships between the Lower Loup Focus encompassed by this site distribution has been and the earlier Central Plains Tradition have also defined as the Pawnee archeological region been established. (Figures 2, 3 and 4 ). The Genoa, McClaine, Leshara, Linwood, The Burkett, Wright, Cuba, Coffin, Larson, Hordville, Fullerton, Cunningham, Vogel, Plum Monroe, Gray, Wolfe, Fuller's Hill, Bellwood and Creek, Clarks, Nelson, Johnson, Cottonwood Barcal sites have been classified together as the Creek, Horse Creek, Kansas Monument, Palmer, Lower Loup Focus (Table 5) and assigned to the Bellwood, Blue Springs, Hill, Shipman and Yutan Late Ceramic, Protohistoric period of A. D. 1500 sites have been classified as the Historic Pawnee

-147- Focus. Most of these sites have been identified focus was determined and compared with the with respect to time of occupation and other focus (Tables 6 to 11 ). Well over 90 associated with specific Pawnee bands (Table 4). percent of the pottery was classified in type These sites have been assigned to the Historic categories which were represented in both foci. period of 1750 to 1876 and the wider All of the commonly occurring modes of surface relationships of the focus have been expressed in finish and decoration were found to be present in its assignment to the Pahuk Aspect. The Pawnee both samples, and a large proportion of the sites have also been characterized as commonly occurring combinations of modes of representative of a Decadent Village Complex form and decoration were likewise represented in and have been included in the Coalescent pottery from both foci. Pronounced differences Tradition of the Plains Village Pattern. in numerical and percentile representation of the The Lower Loup and Historic Pawnee foci pottery attributes were noted as a major may be characterized as archeological difference between the Lower Loup and Pawnee manifestations of semi-sedentary earthlodge ceramic samples, as well as were variations in the dwelling people with a dual hunting-horticulture combinations of the modes of form and subsistence base, living in the prairie-plains decoration. The development of the typical environment during the period of increasing historic Pawnee pottery from similar Lower contacts with white men. The Lower Loup Focus Loup material by means of the recombination of is the protohistoric counterpart of the Historic ceramic attributes was suggested. The Pawnee Focus. comparison of the two ceramic samples led to A description of each site and a brief review the conclusion that the pottery recovered from of the archeological fieldwork at each location the Lower Loup and historic Pawnee sites has been presented, and data concerning the represents the product of a common, but historical identification of Pawnee sites has been changing, ceramic tradition. This conclusion summarized. The pottery collections, amounting supports the hypothesis proposed by previous to over 54,800 items, were examined. Ceramic investigators that the Lower Loup Focus attributes and modes were identified, and the represents the protohistoric period of the historic combinations of modes of form and decoration Pawnee tribe. have been used as a basis of classification in the The second hypothesis of the Pawnee-Lower description of pottery types and wares. These Loup problem was that Lower Loup and Pawnee data have been used in the subsequent pottery changed through time. The comparison arrangement of the sites in chronological order of the two pottery samples illustrated that by means of stratigraphic studies, seriation ceramic categories common to both foci were methods of relative temporal ordering, present in varying proportions, and since the two comparative analysis and the application of the archeological units represent different time direct historical approach. periods, the proportional variation gave general Some aspects of the relationship between the support to the hypothesis. Lower Loup and Pawnee archeological units have More specific evidence of temporal ceramic thus been investigated by ceramic analysis. These change was illustrated by comparison of the relationships have been studied within the material recovered from historic sites known to context of six inter-related hypothesis which have been occupied by a single band of the together serve to define the Pawnee-Lower Loup Pawnee at different time periods. Other evidence problem for the purposes of this investigation. of temporal change was revealed by analysis of The results of the analysis may be conveniently stratigraphic excavation units in both historic summarized in terms of the six hypotheses. and protohistoric sites. The stratigraphic studies The first hypothesis was that sites of the established trends of increasing and decreasing Lower Loup Focus represent the protohistoric proportions of various pottery types which could period of the historic Pawnee tribe. Previous be interpreted as reflecting the passage of time investigations had firn1ly established this and served to support the hypothesis in question. relationship, but the hypothesis was reexamined The third of the series of interrelated in the light of more detailed ceramic data. hypothesis was that Pawnee and Lower Loup The pottery collection was divided into two sites can be arranged in relative chronological samples representing the focus classification of order on the basis of pottery seriation. The the sites, and the association of various modes of stratigraphic evidence of changing trends of form, surface finish and decoration with each pottery popularity provided a basis for the

-148- chronological ordering of the sites by seriation revealed by the historical record because it was and gave direction to the trends by which the site impossible to show sites in chronologically sequence could be oriented in time. equivalent positions in a single graph in which The first step was the arrangement of the sites were arranged in sequential order. The stratigraphic units in a relative chronological excavation unit seriation also produced evidence sequence (Figure 5). When the stratified units of the contemporaneous occupation of several were arranged in such a fashion as to produce a Lower Loup sites (Figure 7) which was obscured developmental pattern in the pottery category in the site unit seriation graph. These problems Nance Flared Plain, similar evidence of ceramic were resolved in the investigation of another of trends appeared in several other pottery type the hypotheses delimiting the Pawnee-Lower categories. The seriation was then expanded by Loup problem. the introduction of additional data (Figure 6). Ceramic trends and periods indicated in the The expanded seriation was based on the seriation graphs have been outlined and the plotting of individual archeological excavation sequence dated by reference to historical units from which 50 or more rim sherds had been evidence and by means of archeological recovered. Such a large sample was not present in comparisons (Figure 8). These data also support all cases, and some sites were necessarily treated the relative order of the sites. as single excavation units. Sites otherwise The fourth hypothesis investigated was that it represented by several excavation units were also may be possible to detect band differences in included in the graph as site total units. A site pottery from historic Pawnee sites of known unit seriation was then obtained by extracting band affiliation. In the investigation of this the site unit elements from the excavation unit hypothesis, sites occupied by different bands seriation graph in their relative sequence. during the same time period were compared The sequence of sites was then tested by (Table 16). comparing the order based on ceramic seriation Some limitations in the possible comparisons with an order based on the relative proportion of were t!1e result of very small pottery samples trade materials. The ceramic order of the historic from late sites and historical evidence of the sites was also compared with an approximation occupation of some sites by more than a single r)f the serial order of these sites based on the band. historical record of the period of occupation at The historic Pawnee sites were separated into each location. These comparative data supported sequences based on band affiliation (Figure 10). the general ceramic sequence of sites, although The comparison of chronologically equivalent the sequences were not identical. Modification of sites such as the Linwood site of the Grand the sequence of historic sites was necessary. Pawnee and the Hill site of the Republican band Three sites, Palmer, Blue Springs and Yutan, revealed that there were detectable ceramic had been placed in early positions in the ceramic differences but that these were mainly sequence of historic Pawnee sites on the basis of proportional variations rather than significant relatively low proportions of the Webster Collar differences of content. The ceramic evidence Braced pottery typical of the historic period. The supports the classification of the historic Pawnee historical evidence indicated that these sites sites in a single focus regardless of band should have been placed in later positions in the affiliation. sequence. The Palmer site is a Skidi Pawnee With respect to this hypothesis, it was village but it is not well known archeologically. concluded that band differences in pottery could The Blue Springs site can only be tentatively be detected by means of the direct historical identified as a Tappage Pawnee site, and the approach to site identification but that in the Yutan site has been identified as an Oto village absence of historical data or other evidence of with archeological evidence of either Pawnee site contemporaneity these same differences occupation or Pawnee influences. These cultural might well be interpreted as temporal variations. factors distinguish the three sites from the Grand The fifth hypothesis investigated was that and Republican Pawnee sites, and it was sites of the Lower Loup focus may be most suggested that the ceramic percentile variations closely related to only one of the four Pawnee reflected these cu1tural factors rather than an bands. The hypothesis was stated in this form earlier temporal position. because of previous suggestions that the focus It was shown that the site unit seriation might represent only the Skidi band or Arikara obscured the evidence of site contemporaneity influenced groups. The general intent of this

-149- portion of the investigation was to explore the while the Panis are presumably the Grand possibility of identifying bands ceramically in a Pawnee. time period when specific site identifications had The ceramic transition between these local not been made on the basis of the historical Lower Loup sequences and band sequences of record. the historic period is not as smooth a shift as is The investigation of the possibility of desirable. The transition between the Lower distinguishing Pawnee bands prior to 1775 was Loup sites south of the Platte and historic not limited to archeological information. Pawnee sites in the same locality is supported by Examination of historical references to the ceramic evidence. There is a gap in the Pawnee during the period 1687 to 1775 archeological record between the Loup River indicated that two groups were mentioned and Lower Loup sites and the historic Skidi which shown on maps. The Panimaha were associated can be attributed to the lack of adequate data. with the Loup River area, and the Panis were Archeological sequences representing the located south of the Platte River. The Republican Pawnee and possibly the Tappage geographical distribution of the Lower Loup sites have been devised (Figure 10). The Republican extends to the area south of the Platte where the sequence incorporates a proposed revision of focus is represented by the Lower Loup previous site dating by placing the Kansas component at the Bellwood site and by the Monument site later than the Hill site. This Barcal site. These sites were placed in late revision is supported by the ceramic seriation and positions in the sequence of Lower Loup sites by historical references not previously considered and include in their ceramic inventory evidence with respect to the Kansas Monument site. of transition to the pottery typical of the historic Possible reoccupation of the Hill site area during Pawnee in this locality. These Lower Loup sites the 18 21 to 1831 occupation of the Kansas south of the Platte River are further Monument site is also suggested. distinguished from chronologically equivalent The Republican and Tappage bands may not Lower Loup sites on the Loup River by varying have become distinct until after the middle of proportions of pottery categories. The sites south the eighteenth century; the Tappage are first of the Platte have a higher proportion of Nance mentioned in 1767 and the Republicans in 1775. Flared Decorated pottery and a lower proportion The Republican band is an offshoot of the of Wright Collared Ware than do the Lower Loup Grand, and the hypothesis that the Grand, sites on the Loup River. The Lower Loup sites Republican and Tappage bands all represent located below the mouth of the Loup River on offshoots from the original Skidi through the Shell Creek also show a relatively low proportion single band of the Kawarahkis was proposed of Wright Collared Ware and proportions of other many years ago. ceramic attributes which link them with the sites It is suggested that the archeological evidence south of the Platte River. The Colfax County of the origin of these bands must be sought in sites at Shell Creek are geographically closer to the protohistoric and historic Panis (Grand) sites the Lower Loup sites south of the Platte than located on the south side of the Platte River, they are to the sites along the Loup River near although the Pawnee traditions suggest that these Beaver and Looking Glass creeks (Figure 3). divisions developed in the vicinity of Nemaha in Thus, both geographical distribution and pottery southeastern Nebraska. The Blue Springs site, proportions support the division of the Lower tentatively identified as Tappage, is located in Loup Focus into two groups of sites. the Blue River Valley and is closer to the The evidence of site contemporaneity in the Nemaha locality than the Platte River sites. The excavation unit seriation, the historical data and archeologically unknown James site near Blue the archeological comparisons have been Springs may eventually help to clarify the interpreted as indicating that these two groups of problem. It is at this time level, 1750 to 1775, Lower Loup sites represent chronologically that a partial gap in the archeological record is equivalent local sequences (Figure 10) which can indicated by a disconformity in the seriation be divided into two periods (Table 16), 1500 to curve of the historic Pawnee pottery type 1650 and 1650 to 1750. In the latter period the Webster Collar Braced. Additional excavation at Loup River sequence can be identified as the several sites might be expected to provide data Panimaha, and the site south of the Platte can be bearing on this problem. identified as the Panis. The historical evidence The Lower Loup sites south of the Platte have indicated that the Panimaha are the Skidi band been identified here as the Panis or Grand

-150- Pawnee of the period 1687 to 1750. If this Lower Loup and Pawnee pottery resulted in the identification is correct, it may be further identification of some materials which had not suggested that the earlier sites in this local previously been demonstrated as belonging to the sequence, the Gray and Wolfe sites on Shell Lower Loup ceramic complex. This new Creek, may be identified as the Kawarahkis band information supports some previously proposed of Pawnee tradition. The parallel between the assessments of Lower Loup relationships which archeological reconstruction and the traditional were based on published descriptions of only sequence of events is striking but in disagreement three Lower Loup sites. The added data and the as to locality, Shell Creek being some distance refinement of the cultural and chronological away from the traditional southeastern location relationships within the Lower Loup Focus have near Nemaha. It is possible that equally early added perspective to the comparisons. sites in that area or along the Blue River may be Cross-finds of pottery and general ·ceramic found, but none classifiable as Lower Loup are similarities are indicators of the broader known at the present time. relationships of the Lower Loup Focus beyond Efforts to distinguish non-temporal variations its more direct connection with historic Pawnee. in the Lower Loup Focus pottery which could be The ceramic analysis and stratigraphic studies attributed to band differences have been of the pottery recovered from the Burkett site reasonably successful, but the hypothesis as provided evidence of the earliest Lower Loup stated for investigation must be revised. The occupation in Nebraska. Traces of an early Lower Loup Focus sites are related to not one component were also found in the Wright site. but two of the historic Pawnee bands and have The materials from these early features at the been divided into two local sequences which Burkett site include typical Lower Loup pottery reflect these relationships with the Skidi and along with sherds which indicate early contacts Grand Pawnee. with the Oneota and White Rock aspects of Neb­ As was noted with respect to the ceramic raska and Kansas and also some relationships to distinctions between historic Pawnee bands, the the Arzberger site and Campbell Creek Focus in differences between the local sequences of the South Dakota. The general similarities between protohistoric period are mostly ones of varying sites of the Central Plains Tradition in South proportions of pottery rather than major Dakota and the Lower Loup Focus had been differences of content. The ceramic data support noted long before this investigation, but the the classification of the Lower Loup sites in a identification of Burkett Cord Roughened and single focus unit despite the chronological and Burkett Collared pottery as part of the Lower ceramic differences which can be distinguished Loup complex greatly strengthens the previously within the classificatory unit. The division into proposed connections because of the similarity chronologically equivalent local sequences was of these types to some South Dakota material based on evidence of site contemporaneity as such as Arzberger Crosshatched and Campbell well as geographical distribution. The differences Creek Ware. It is suggested that the beginning of in the pottery might well have been given a the Lower Loup Focus sequence in Nebraska strictly temporal interpretation in the absence of either slightly post-dates or is correlated with the historical and archeological evidence of terminal period of the Central Plains Tradition in contemporaneous occupations. Excavation unit South Dakota and should be dated at about seriation, as opposed to site unit seriation, A. D. 1500. These new Lower Loup data provided some of the information necessary to represent another step toward linking the resolve this problem. Pawnee-Lower Loup sequence of the historic and The sixth hypothesis investigated was that the protohistoric periods with the late prehistoric Lower Loup Focus is related to one or more archeological complexes of the Plains area. archeological manifestations as well as to the The relationship between the Lower Loup historic Pawnee. Previous archeological work had Focus and the Fort Thompson Focus of South already indicated the basic relationships of the Dakota had long been recognized and was Lower Loup Focus and other complexes in the expressed in the assignment of both foci to the area. These archeological relationships were same Pahuk Aspect. The closest temporal and summarized in connection with establishing ceramic relationships between these two foci archeological dates for the Lower Loup Focus seem to be between the Oacoma site in South which could be compared with suggested Dakota and the Wright site of Nebraska. It is historical dates for the focus. The study of the significant that the Fort Thompson Focus had

-151- been attributed to the Arikara and that the Pawnee-Lower Loup problem for the purposes of Wright site is in the Loup River sequence of this investigation. A new series of hypotheses Lower Loup sites here identified as the Skidi concerning the chronological and cultural Pawnee. These archeological interpretations relationships of the Lower Loup and Pawnee parallel the linguistic, traditional and historically sites was expressed in a reconstruction of some close relationships between the Skidi and the aspects of Pawnee archeology and history and in Arikara. the discussion of the initial hypothesis. The Redbird Focus of Nebraska has also been Very briefly summarized, it is suggested that included in the Pahuk Aspect, and the ceramic new evidence confirms the suggested comparisons of this investigation indicate a closer relationships between the Lower Loup Focus and ceramic relationship between the Redbird Focus the sites of the Central Plains Tradition in South and the Skidi sequence of Lower Loup sites. The Dakota which may eventually prove to be the Redbird Focus cannot be included in the same point of origin of the Lower Loup Focus. The classification as the Lower Loup sites on the Pawnee occupation of the region they inhabited basis of the ceramic comparisons. The Redbird in historic times began about 1500 with the Focus has recently been identified as Ponca, but establishment of the Burkett site in the Loup the previous suggestion that it is in some manner River Valley uear Beaver Creek. Contacts with related to the historic Pawnee cannot be other Central Plains archeological manifestations abandoned. The possible Pawnee relationship can include the Oneota, White Rock and Great Bend be refined and restated as probably a closer Aspects. Probably not long after the occupation relationship to the Skidi band. of the Beaver Creek locality a division occurred, This investigation has been limited to the and another Lower Loup occupation was pottery recovered from the Lower Loup and established at Shell Creek below the mouth of Pawnee sites, and the limitations of this approach the Loup. At the same time or slightly later, the have been recognized. The non-ceramic data can occupation of the Loup River was extended be utilized to test the hypotheses developed between Beaver and Looking Glass creeks. This through the study of the pottery. Further expansion and division marked the beginning of comparisons of the Lower Loup Focus with local archeological sequences which ultimately other archeological units should be deferred until developed into the Skidi and Grand Pawnee the analysis of the non-ceramic artifacts and bands. The sites along the Loup may represent other archeological data makes possible a the original Skidi, while those in the Shell Creek complete study of material relevant to the locality may represent the Kawarahkis of Pawnez problem. tradition. Perhaps about 1650 some village Comparisons between the local and band locations shifted to the south side of the Platte sequences of the Lower Loup and Pawnee sites River while the occupation of the Loup River indicated a possible correlation between spatial locality continued, and after 1687 the two local separation and somewhat more rapid rates of Lower Loup Focus sequences may be identified ceramic change which could be interpreted as an as the Panimaha (Skidi) on the Loup and Panis archeological manifestation of the process of (Grand) south of the Platte. Relationships band formation. The Lower Loup sites also show between the Skidi Pawnee along the Loup and ceramic similarities with the Fort Thompson the Fort Thompson Focus of South Dakota, Focus and other sites attributed to the Arikara, presumably Arikara, are notable. Sometime after while at a later time period the historic Pawnee 1750 the Tappage and Republican bands became and Arikara pottery is quite distinct, suggesting distinct, and they are mentioned respectively in increasing ceramic diversity with the passage of records of 1767 and 1775. The village location of time. Unfortunately, the tenuous identification the Tappage of this period is unidentified of the Blue Springs site as Tappage and the lack archeologically, but the Republican band was on of adequate information regarding the historic the Republican River. From this location it was Skidi pottery from the Palmer site greatly forced to retreat about 1810 by conflict with the reduces the reliability of these observations, and Kansa. A reoccupation of the Republican Valley additional investigation of this problem must by the Republican during the decade after 1820 await new archeological data. has been suggested in a revised interpretation of The pottery study resulted in the the fortified Kansas Monument site. The fortified confirmation or modification of the hypotheses site on the Blue River at Blue Springs has been which were devised to define and limit the tentatively identified as a Tappage village of this

-152- period. Fortification may have begun with the sequences have been established which establishment of the Horse Creek site by the correspond to Pawnee bands, but the ceramic Grands and Republicans in 1810. After 1820 variations between these sequences are not alone most Pawnee villages were provided with sufficient to establish taxonomic distinctions. defensive earthworks. The sites on the Thus, as archeological classifications currently Republican and Blue Rivers were abandoned by stand, no single archeological unit corresponds 1833 as the territory controlled by Pawnee precisely with Pawnee social or cultural units village locations began a final contraction. The except at the level of individual historical sites. It impact of increasing trade with white men is is possible that some archeological reflected in Pawnee pottery of this period. reclassification will be useful, but it is beyond Pottery is rare in most Pawnee sites occupied the scope of this ceramic study since all after 1820 and is not represented in archeological non-ceramic and other archeological data must collections from sites occupied after 1846. For a necessarily be considered with respect to this brief period after 1850 the Pawnee were forced problem. to abandon the Loup River for villages to the It is doubtful that any archeological south and east of the Platte River. From about classificatory unit will automatically correspond 1857 until they left Nebraska in 1876, the to a specific social group. The unsolved problem Pawnee bands shared a single village at Genoa on of the Yutan site illustrated some of the a reservation. difficulties. The present archeological evidence The protohistoric period, as Wedel has indicates that this site is closely related to the indicated (Wedel 1956: 89-91), represents a Pawnee tribe, but these data conflict with the climax of Pawnee development. The large size of historical identification of Yutan as an Oto the villages suggests an efficient adaptation to the village. The evidence may indicate strong Pawnee subsistence problems of the Plains sufficient to influences on the Oto at this location, but the allow large concentrations of population and identification of the site as Oto may be in error. more elaborate social development. Thus, the The latter alternative cannot be accepted until Pawnee represent an achievement in adaptation another site in the immediate locality can be for life in what white men for years considered identified as the historic Oto village. Two periods to be the "Great American Desert". Their success of fieldwork at the site have failed to reveal was short lived; with increasing trade in the archeological evidence of a multiple occupation, historic period many aspects of Pawnee life but such a possibility may still exist. changed, and they suffered greatly at the hands This investigation suggests that the best of the more nomadic tribes of the historic period method for establishing the identity of who attacked and burned their permanent archeological units is the direct historical villages. The Pawnee Scouts (Danker 1961) approach, and that reconstructions pertaining to returned the favor by assisting the U. S. Army in a specific historic tribe need not depend on the its military campaigns against the Sioux and archeological units of classification. played an important role in white settlement of In summary, this investigation has been the area through their service in protecting the concerned with the pottery recovered from a Union Pacific Railroad construction crews. series of archeological sites in the Central Plains, Service to the white men did not, however, bring sites which have been identified as the historic in return adequate protection for the Pawnee, villages of the Pawnee and their forerunners of and in the end they lost their homeland. the protohistoric period. The degree to which archeological units of The ceramic study produced new information classification correspond to the social unit of the which supports several previously proposed Pawnee tribe can be given some consideration. hypotheses concerning the dating, cultural The Pahuk Aspect includes the Historic Pawnee affiliation and broader relationships of the Lower Focus and the Lower Loup Focus, but other Loup Focus. Chronological and cultural related foci have also been included in this aspect relationships within the focus have been so that this unit of classification does not determined, and band divisions of the historic correspond to the Pawnee tribe. The Lower Loup Pawnee have been traced back into the and Historic Pawnee foci represent major protohistoric period. Evidence of the earliest temporal periods and to this extent correspond period of the Lower Loup occupation has been to phases of the Pawnee tribe. Within the focus isolated and represents another step in linking units of classification, local and historical the historic Pawnee through the protohistoric

-153- period to prehistoric complexes in the Plains. At the other end of the sequence, it would be of The archeological data support the historical great significance if additional excavation at the evidence of continuity between the Lower Loup Burkett and Wright sites provided more and historic Pawnee, but the transition is not a information about the earliest period of the smooth one. The gap between the protohistoric Lower Loup occupation identified there. and historic Skidi may eventually be closed by The new hypotheses concerning the Lower excavation of the historic Palmer site. Additional Loup and historic Pawnee materials represent excavation at the Wright site may strengthen the refinements of the interpretation of these evidence of a late occupation there, and archeological manifestations and have been unexcavated Lower Loup sites might also be of achieved by stratigraphic analysis, ceramic importance. Additional data from the Barca}, seriation and the direct historical approach. The Bellwood and Linwood sites might be expected study has been limited to pottery, and the to produce more evidence to smooth the complete analysis of the non-ceramic artifacts transition between these protohistoric and and other archeological data remaining for future historic sites south of the Platte. More work at research will provide one means of assessing the Blue Springs and excavation of the James site in hypotheses proposed on the basis of ceramic the Blue Valley might also clarify some problems. analysis.

-154- BIBLIOGRAPHY

Barry, Louise the Nebraska State Historical Society, 1961 Kansas Before 1854: A Revised Annals. Vol. 15, pp. 323-59. Lincoln. Kansas Historical Quarterly, Vol. 27, Brainerd, George W. No. 1, pp. 67-93. Topeka. 1951 a The Use of Mathematical Formula­ 1961 Kansas Before 1854: A Revised Annals, tions in Archaeological Analysis. In Part Two, 1763-1803. Kansas Historical "Essays on Archaeological Methods," Quarterly, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp. 201-20. edited by Janes B. Griffin, pp. 117-27. Topeka. Anthropological Papers, Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, 1961 Kansas Before 1854: A Revised Annals, No. 8. Ann Arbor. Part Three, 1804-1818. Kansas Histori­ cal Quarterly, Vol. 27, No. 3. pp. 1951 b The Place of Chronological Ordering 353-82. Topeka. in Archeological Analysis. American An­ tiquity, Vol. 16, No.4, pp. 301-13. Salt 1961 Kansas Before 1854: A Revised Annals, Lake City. Part Four, 1819-1825. Kansas Historical Quarterly, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp. 497-543. Brown, George L. Topeka. 1892 The History of Butler County, 1876. Transactions and Reports of the Ne­ Bengston, B. E. braska State Historical Society, Vol. 4, 1933 An Ancient Village of the Grand Paw­ pp. 275-305. Lincoln. nee. Nebraska History Magazine, Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 124-29. Lincoln. Brown, Lionel A. Blackman, E. E. 1966 Temporal and Spatial Order in the Cen­ 1902 Report of Department of Archeology tral Plains. Plains Anthropologist, Vol. (of the Nebraska State Historical Socie­ 11, No. 34, pp. 294-301. Lincoln. ty). Annual Report of the Nebraska State Board of Agriculture for 1902, Caldwell, Warren W. pp. 294-326. Lincoln. 1960 The Black Partizan Site (39LM218), Big Bend Reservoir: South Dakota: A 1904 Report of Department of Archeology, Preliminary Report. Plains Anthropolo­ Nebraska State Historical Society, for gist, Vol. 5, No. 10, pp. 53-57. Norman. 1903 and 1904. Annual Report for the Nebraska State Board of Agriculture for 1966 The Black Partizan Site. Smithsoni£m 1904, pp. 207-29. Lincoln. Institution River Basin Surveys, Publica­ tions in Salvage Archaeology, No. 2. 1905 Archeological Report for 1905 (of the Lincoln. Nebraska State Historical Society). An­ nual Report of the Nebraska State Champe, John L. Board of Agriculture for 1905, pp. 390- 1946 Ash Hollow Cave: A Study of Strati­ 400. Lincoln. graphic Sequence in the Central Great 1907 Report of the Archeologist (for 1906- Plains. University of Nebraska Studies, 1907). Proceedings and Collections of New Series, No. 1. Lincoln.

-155- 1949 A Report for the Laboratory of Anthro­ 1906 The Pawnee Mythology (l>:n1 I). Car­ pology, Unjvcrsity of Nebraska, 1940- negie Institution of Washington Publica­ 1947. In "Proceedings of the Fifth tions. No. 59. Washington. D.C. Plams Conference for Archeology," pp. 14-17. Note Book No. 1, Laboratory of Dorsey , George A. and James R. Murie Anthropology, University of Nebraska, 1940 Notes on Skidi Pawnee Society_ Pre­ Lincoln. pared for publication by Alexander Spoehr. Anthropological Series, Field Museum of Natural History, VoL 27, Champe, John L. and FrankHn Fenenga No. 2, pp. 65-120. Chicago. 1954 Notes on the Pawnee. MS in the Labora­ tory of Anthropology, University of Dunbar, John B. Nebraska, Lincoln. 1880 The Pawnee Indians: Their History and Ethnology. Magazine of American His­ Cooper, Paul tory, VoL4, No.4, pp. 24 1-81. 1949 Recent Investigations in Fort Randall and Oahe Reservoirs, South Dakota. Dunlevy , Marion Lucile American Antiquity. Vol. 14, No.4, Pt. 1936 A Comparison of the Cultural Manifes­ 1, pp. 300-3 10. Menasha. tations of the Burkett (Nance County) and the Gray-Wolfe (Colfax County) Coues, Elliott Sites. In Chapters in Nebraska Archae­ 1895 The Expeditions of Zebulon Montgom· ology, edited by Earl H. Bell , Vol. t, ery Pike, to Headwaters of the Missis· No. 2, pp. 147-247. Lincoln . sippi River, through Louisiana Terri­ tory, and in New Spaill, During tlte Ford, James A. Years 1805-6·7. 3 vols. Harper, New 1949 Cultural Dating of Prehistoric Sites i.n York. Viru Valley, Peru. ln "Surface Survey of the Viru Valley, Peru,'' by Ford, James A. and Gordon R. Willey . An­ Danker, Donald F. thropological Papers of the American 196 1 (editor) Man of the Plains: Recollec­ Museum of Natural History, Vol. 43, tions of Luther North, 1856-1882. Uni­ Pt. 1, pp. 29-87. New York. versity of Nebraska Press, Lincoln. Freed, Mary Louise Deetz, James F. 1954 111e Lynch Site, 25 Bd 1. MS, mas­ 1960 An Archaeological Approach to Kinshjp ter's thesis, Uruversi ty of Nebraska, Change in Eighteenth Century Arikara Lincoln. Culture. In Abstracts of New World Gifford, James C. Archaeology, Vol. 2, No. 368, pp. 1960 The Type-Variety Method of Ceran1ic 55-56. Salt Lake City. Classification as an Indicator of Cul­ 1965 llle Dynamics of Stylistic Change in tural Phenomena. American Antiquity. Arikara Ceramics. 0/inois Studies in Vol. 25, No. 3, pp. 34147. Salt Lake Anthropology, No.4. Urban;~. City.

1966 Death's Heads, Cherubs, and Willow Gilmore, Melvin Trees: Experimental Archaeology in Co­ 1914 Trip ~vith White Eagle Determining Paw­ lonial Cemeteries. American Antiquity, nee Sites, August 27-29, 1914. MS in Vol. 31, No. 4, pp. 502-10. Salt Lake the Nebraska Stare Historical Society, City. Lincoln. Grange, Roger T., Jr. Dorsey, George A. 1962 Preliminary Report, Excavations in the 1904 Traditions of the Skidi Pawnee. Pub­ Red Willow Reservoir, Nebraska, 1961. lished for the American Polk:lore So­ MS in the Nebraska State Historical So­ ciety, Boston and New York, ciety , Lincoln.

- 1i6- Green, Major Albert L. 1680. The Old West Series, No.4. Den­ 1916 Reminiscences of Gage County. In Col­ ver. lection of Nebraska Pioneer Remini­ 1934 The Pawnee Indians, Part Two, 1680- scences, issued by the Nebraska Society 1770. The Old West Series, No. 5. Den­ o{ the Daughters of the American Re­ ver. volution, pp. 112-22. Cedar Rapids. 1951 Pawnee Indians. The University of Den­ 1918 Narrative of Major Albert Lamborn ver Press, Denver. Green. In History of Gage County, Nebraska by Hugh J. Dobbs, Ch. 12, 1959 Indians of the High Plains from the Pre­ pp. 89-110. Lincoln. historic Period to the Coming of Euro­ peans. Civilization of the American In­ Heizer, Robert F. dian Series 54, University of Oklahoma 1959 (editor) The Archaeologist at Work: A Press, Norman. Source Book in Archaeological Method and Interpretation. Harper & Brothers, Jennings, Jesse D. New York. 1949 Symposium on Ceramics and Pottery Typing: Introductory Remarks. In "Pro­ Hill, A. T. ceedings of the Fifth Plains Conference 1932 25 NC 2, Horse Creek Site, Field Notes, for Archeology," pp. 39-42. Note Book MS in the Nebraska State Historical So­ No. 1, Laboratory of Anthropology, ciety, Lincoln. University of Nebraska, Lincoln. 1933 Archeology Explorations in Nebraska in 1933. Nebraska History Magazine, Vol. Kivett, Marvin F. 14, No.3, pp. 174-77, Lincoln. 1940 Oto Indian Village Sites. MS in the Ne­ braska State Historical Society, Lincoln. 1941 Archeological Field Season of 1941. In Archeological Division of Nebraska 1952 Woodland Sites in Nebraska. Nebraska State Historical Society, pp. 5-8. Lin­ State Historical Society Publications in coln. Anthropology, No. 1. Lincoln. Hill, A. T. and Paul Cooper 1953 In the Field. Nebraska History, Vol. 34, 1938 The Ashland Site. In "Archeological No.2, pp. 86-89. Lincoln. Campaign of 1937," Nebraska History 1957 Infonnation Relating to Site 25 Wt 1 Magazine, Vol. 18, No.4. pp. 243-359 Known As: Hill Site or Pike-Pawnee Lincoln. Village. MS in the Nebraska State His­ Hill, A. T. and W. R. Wedel torical Society Museum, Lincoln. 1936 Excavations at the Leary Indian Village 1958 The Oacoma Site, Lyman County, South and Burial Site, Richardson County, Ne­ Dakota. MS in the Nebraska State His­ braska. Nebraska History Magazine, Vol. torical Society, Lincoln. 17, No. 1, pp. 2-73. Lincoln. Krieger, Alex D. Houck, Louis 194 7 The Eastward Extension of Puebloan 1909 The Spanish Regime in Missouri, Vol. 1, Datings Toward Cultures of the Missis­ R. R. Donnelley & Sons, Chicago. sippi Valley. American Antiquity, Vol. Hurt, Wesley R., Jr. 12, No.3, pp. 141-48. Menasha. 1952 Report of the Investigation of the Scalp Creek Site 39GR1 and the Ellis Creek Kroeber, A. L. Site 39GR2, Gregory County, South 1947 Cultural and Natural Areas of Native Dakota, 1941, 1951. For the South North America. University of California Dakota Archaeological Commission, Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles. Pierre. Lamb, George Hyde, George E. 1935 25 Ga 1 Field Notes. MS in the Nebraska 1934 The Pawnee Indians, Part One, 1500- State Historical Society, Lincoln.

-157- 1936 Wright Site, NC 3. MS in the Nebraska Morgan, Dale L. and Carl I. Wheat State Historical Society, Lincoln. 1954 Jedediah Smith and His Maps of the American West. California Historical So­ 1939 Bellwood Site, Bu 2. MS in the Ne­ ciety, San Francisco. braska State Historical Society, Lincoln. Munday, Frank J. Lehmer, Donald J. 1927 Pike-Pawnee Village Site, Review and 1951 Pottery Types from the Dodd Site, Summary of the Evidence in the Case. Oahe Reservoir, South Dakota. Plains Nebraska History Magazine, Vol. 10, Archaeological Conference News Letter, No.3, pp. 168-92. Lincoln. VoL 4, No.2, pp. 2-15. Lincoln. 1952 The Fort Pierre Branch, Central South Nasatir, A. P. Dakota. American Antiquity, Vol. 17, 19 52 (editor) Before Lewis and Clark: Docu­ No.4, pp. 329-36. Salt Lake City. ments Illustrating the History of the Missouri, 1785-1804. 2 vols. St. Louis 19 54 Archeological Investigations in the Oahe Historical Document Foundation, St. Dam Area, South Dakota, 1950-51. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin Louis. 158. River Basin Surveys Paper No. 7, Washington, D. C. Neuman, Robert W. 1961 Salvage Archaeology at a Site near Fort Thompson, South Dakota. Plains An­ Lehmer, Donald J. and Warren W. Caldwell thropologist Journal of the Plains Con­ 1966 Horizon and Tradition in the Northern ference, Vol. 6, No. 13, pp. 189-200. Plains. American Antiquity, Vol. 31, Norman. No. 4, pp. 511-16. Salt Lake City. 1967 Radiocarbon-Dated Archaeological Re­ Lesser, Alexander and Gene Weltfish mains on the Northern and Central 1932 Composition of the Caddoan Linguistic Great Plains. American Antiquity, Vol. Stock. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Col­ 32, No.4, pp. 471-86. Salt Lake City. lections, Vol. 87, No. 6. Publication Phillips, Philip, James A. Ford and James B. 3141. Griffin Meighan, Clement W. 1951 Archaeological Survey in the Lower Mis­ 1959 A New Method for the Seriation of sissippi Alluvial Valley, 1940-4 7. Papers Archeological Materials, AmericanAn­ of the Peabody Museum of American tiquity, Vol. 25, No.2, pp. 203-11. Salt Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard Lake City. University, Vol. 25. Cambridge. Robinson, W. S. Meleen, E. E. 1951 A Method for·Chronologically Ordering 1948 A Report on an Investigation of the Archaeological Deposits. American An­ LaRoche Site, Stanley County, South tiquity, Vol. 16, No. 4, pp. 293-301. Dakota. Archaeological Studies, Circu­ Salt Lake City. lar V. University of South Dakota Mu­ seum, Vermillion. Rouse, Irving 1939 Prehistory in Haiti: A Study in Method. Metcalf, George Yale University Publications in Anthro­ 1939 Pottery Summary, Bellwood Site. MS pology, No. 21. New Haven. in the Nebraska State Historical So­ Rowe, John Howland ciety, Lincoln. 1961 Stratigraphy and Seriation. American 1941 Pt 13, the Hill-Rupp or Monroe Site. MS Antiquity, Vol. 26, No. 3, Pt. 1, pp. in the Nebraska State Historical Society 324-30. Salt Lake City. Lincoln. Rusco, Mary Kiehl Missouri Basin Chronology Program 1960 The White Rock Aspect. Note Book No. 1962 Statement Number 3. Missouri Basin 4, Laboratory of Anthropology, Uni­ Project, Lincoln. versity of Nebraska, Lincoln.

-158- Sheldon, A. E. Spaulding, AI bert C. 1927 (editor) The War Between Kansas and 1956 The Arzberger Site, Hughes County, Nebraska. Nebraska History Magazine South Dakota. Occasional Contributions Vol. 10, No. 3. Lincoln. from the Museum of Anthropology of the University ofMichigan, No. 16, Ann Smith, Carlyle S. Arbor. 1944 Clues to the Chronology of Coastal New 1960 Statistical Description and Comparison York. American Antiquity, Vol. 10, No. of Artifact Assemblages. In "The Appli­ 1' pp. 87-98. cation of Quantitative Methods in Ar­ 1949 Fieldwork in Kansas, 1949. Plains Ar­ chaeology," edited by Robert F. Heizer cheological Conference News Letter, and Sherburne F. Cook, pp. 60-83. Vi­ Vol. 2, No.4, pp. 5-6. Lincoln. king Fund Publications in Anthropo­ logy, No. 28. New York. 1950a European Trade Material from the Kansas Monument Site. Plains Archeolo­ Stephenson, Robert L. gical Conference News Letter, Vol. 3, 19 54 Taxonomy and Chronology in the Cen­ pp. 2-9. Lincoln. tral Plains--Middle Missouri River Area. 1950b The Pottery from the Kansas Monu­ Plains Anthropologist, No. 1, pp. 15-21. ment Site. Plains Archeological Con­ Lincoln. ference News Letter, Vol. 3, No.4, pp. 7-9. Lincoln. Strong, William D. 1933 The Plains Culture in the Light of 1950c The Archeology of Coastal New York. Archeology. American Anthropologist, Anthropological Papers of the American New Series Vol. 35, No. 2, pp. 271-88. Museum ofNatural History, Vol. 43, Pt. Menasha. 2, New York. 1935 An Introduction to Nebraska Archeolo­ 1951 Pottery Types from the Talking Crow gy. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collec­ Site, Fort Randall Reservoir, South tions, Vol. 93, No. 10. Washington, D.C. Dakota. Plains Archeological Conference News Letter, Vol. 4, No.3. Lincoln. 1940 From History to Prehistory in the Nor­ thern Great Plains. In "Essays in His­ 1952 Talking Crow 1952: A Report to the torical Anthropology of North Ameri­ National Park Service on the Third Sea­ ca." Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collec­ son at Site 39BF3. MS in the Smith­ tions, Vol. 100, pp. 353-94. Washington, sonian Institution, Missouri River Basin D.C. Surveys, Lincoln. Terry, Kenneth and Ina Terry 1959a Time Perspective Within the Coale­ 1961 Chain Mail and Other Exotic Materials scent Complex. Museum of Natural His­ from South Central Kansas. Plains An­ tory, University of Kansas, Lawrence. thropologist Journal of the Plains Con­ ference, Vol. 6, No. 12, Pt. 2, pp. I 959b The Temporal Relationships of Co­ 126-29. Norman. alescent Village Sites in Fort Randall Udden, Johan August Reservoir South Dakota. In Aetas Del 1900 An Old Indian Village. Lutheran Augus­ XXXIII Congreso de Americanistas. San tana Book Concern, Rock Island. Jose, 1958. Torno II, pp. 111-23. Leh­ mann, San Jose. Weakly, Ward Fredrick 1961 Tree-rings and Archeology in the Cen­ Smith, Carlyle S. and Roger T. Grange, Jr. tral Plains. MS, master's thesis, Univer­ 1958 The Spain Site (39LM301), a Winter sity of Nebraska, Lincoln. Village in Fort Randall Reservoir, South Wedel, Waldo R. Dakota. Bureau of American Ethnol­ 1935 Appendix: Preliminary Classification for ogy Bulletin 169, River Basin Surveys Nebraska and Kansas Cultures. Nebraska Papers, No. ll,pp. 79-128. Washington, History Magazine, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. D.C. 251-5 5. Lincoln.

-159- 1936 An Introduction to Pawnee Archeology. 1957 Observations on Some Nineteenth Cen­ Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin tury Pottery Vessels from the Upper 112. Washington, D.C. Missouri. Anthropological Papers No. 51, Bureau of American Ethnology Bul­ 1938 The Direct-Historical Approach in Paw­ letin 164, Anthropological Papers 49-56, nee Archeology. Smithsonian Miscella­ neous Collections, Vol. 97, No.7. Wash­ pp. 87-114. Washington, D.C. ington, D.C. 1959 An Introduction to Kansas Archaeology. 1940 Culture Sequence in the Central Great Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin Plains. In "Essays in Historical Anthro­ 174. Washington, D.C. pology of North America." Smithsonian 1961 a PI a ins Archaeology, 193 5-1960. Institution Miscellaneous Collections, American Antiquity, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. Vol. 100, pp. 291-352. Washington, 24-32. Salt Lake City. D.C. 1961 b Prehistoric ft1an on the Great Plains. 1941 Environment and Native Subsistence University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. Economies in the Central Great Plains. Smithsonian Institution Miscellaneous Weltfish, Gene Collections, Vol. 101, No. 3. Washing­ 1937 Caddoan Texts: Pawnee, South Band ton, D.C. Dialect. Publications of the American 1947a Culture Chronology in the Central Ethnological Society, Vol. 17, New Great Plains. American Antiquity, Vol. York. 12, No. 3, Pt. 1, pp. 148-56. Menasha. 1965 The Lost Universe. Basic Books, Inc., 194 7b Prehistory and Environment in the New York. Central Great Plains. Transactions of the Kansas Academy of Science, Vol. 50, Wheat, Carl I. No. 1, pp. 1-18. 1957 Mapping the Transmississippi West: Vol. I, The Spanish Entrada to the Louisiana 1949a Some Provisional Correlations in Purchase, 1540-1804. The Institute of Missouri Basin Archaeology. American Historical Cartography, San Francisco. Antiquity, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 328-39. Menasha. 1958 Mapping the Transmississippi West: Vol. 2, Lewis and Clark to Fremont, 1804- 1949b A Summary of Recent Field Work in 1845. The Institute of Historical Car­ Central Plains Archeology. In "Pro­ tography, San Francisco. ceedings of the Fifth Plains Conference for Archeology," pp. 3-5. Note Book Willey, Gordon R. and Philip Phillips No. 1, Laboratory of Anthropology, 1958 Method and Theory in American Ar­ University of Nebraska. Lincoln. chaeology. University of Chicago Press, 1953a Pioneer Nebraska Archeologist. Chicago. Nebraska History,Vol. 32, No. 2, pp. 71-79. Lincoln. Witty, Thomas A. 1967 1966 Excavations at the Kansas Monu­ 1953b 1 A. T. Hill. American Antiquity, Vol. ment Site, 14RPI, Plains Anthropologist, 19, No.2, p. 153. Salt Lake City. Vol. 12, No. 36, p. 218. Lincoln. 1953c Some Aspects of Human Ecology in the Central Plains. American Anthropol­ Wolfe, Alvin W. ogist, Vol. 55, No. 4, pp. 499-514. 1950 A Study of Lower LoupPottery. MS in Menasha. the Nebraska State Historical Society, Lincoln. 1956 Changing Settlement Patterns in the Great Plains. In "Prehistoric Settlement Wood, W. Raymond Patterns in the New World," edited by 1955 Historical and Archeological Evidence G. R. Willey. Viking Fund Publications for Arikara Visits to the Central Plains. in Anthropology, No. 23, pp. 81-92. Plains Anthropologist, No.4, pp. 27-39. New York. Lincoln.

-160- 1956 a The Redbird Focus. MS, master's 1965 The Redbird Focus and the Problem thesis, University of Nebraska, Lincoln. of Ponca Prehistory. Plains Anthropo­ 1956 b Settlement Patterns of the Redbird logist, Vol. 10, No. 28. Lincoln. Focus. Plains Anthropologist, No.7, pp. 3-9. Lincoln.

-161- Page Left Blank PLATES PLATE I. CORD ROUGHENED BODYSHERDS

1 -2, Hill (25 WT 1), Upper Republican intrusive; 3, Linwood (25 BU 1), Upper Republican intrusive; 4, Linwood (25 BU I), Woodland intrusive; 5~6, Barca! (25 BU 4), Upper Republican intrusive; 7, Barca! (25 BU 4), Woodland intrusive; 8 12, Wright (25 NC 3); 13~17, Burkett (25 NC 1). Nos. 8~17 belong in the Lower Loup pottery complex.

-164- ... " ... .11~ ... 'I" . :~

1 3 2

5 6 4

7

, t·' .. \ ~ ..·., .... ~ ,· ...... ~ 8 9 11 10 J2

13 14 15 16 17

PLATE 1: CORD ROUGHENED BODYSHERDS

- 165 - PLATE II. SIMPLE STAMPED BODYSHERDS

1-14, Simple Stamped; 15-24, Simple Stamped polished. 1-3, 15-16, Burkett (25 NC 1); 4, 19, Monroe (25 PT 13); 5, 17, Wright (25 NC 3); 6, 20, Larson (25 PT 1); 7, 18, Cuba (25 NC 4); 8-9, 21-22, Barcal (25 BU 4); 10, 24, Linwood (25 BU 1); 11, Hill (25 WT 1); 12, Shipman (25 WT 7); 13, 23, Kansas Monument (14 RP 1); 14, Horse Creek (25 NC 2).

-166- 1 J 2 5 4

6 7 8 9

t1 12 13 10 14

16 18 19

23 22 20 21 24

PLATE II: SIMPLE STAMPED BODYSHERDS

- 167- PLATE III. CHECK STAMPED BODYSHERDS

1--13, 16, Burkett (25 NC 1); 14-15, 17-24, Wright (25 NC 3); 25, Bellwood (25 BU 2); 26, Barca! (25 BU 4); 27, Hill (25 WT 1).

-168- - I 2 3 6 1 5

I

7 8 9 10

13 14

15 16 ' I 18 17

21 22 ( '> 23 24 25 26 27

PLATE Ill: CHECK STAMPED BODYSHERDS

- 169- PLATE IV: SMOOTHED BODYSHERDS

1-13, Smoothed; 14-21, Smoothed Polished. 1-2, 14-15, Burkett (25 NC 1); 3, 16, Wright (25 NC 3); 4, 17, Cuba (25 NC 4); 5, 19-20, Monroe (25 PT 13); 6, 18, Larson (25 PT 1); 7, Bellwood (25 BU 2); 8, 21, Barcal (25 BU 4); 9, Linwood (25 BU 1); 10, Shipman (25 WT 7); 11, Hill (25 WT 1); 12, Kansas Monument (14 RP 1); 13, Horse Creek (25 NC 2).

-170- 1 2 3 4

8 5 7 6

9 10 12 11 13

14 15 16 17

21 . 18 20 ----! r.rr>~

PLATE IV: SMOOTHED BODYSHER DS

- 17 1- PLATE V: DECORATED SHOULDER BODYSHERDS

1, zig-zag with indented shoulder and opposed parallel diagonals below shoulder, Monroe (25 PT 13); 2, opposed parallel diagonals with punctates at shoulder, Burkett (25 NC 1); 3, opposed parallel diagonal lines, Horse Creek (25 NC 2); 4, opposed parallel diagonals and finger indentations, Hill (25 WT 1); 5, opposed parallel lines and finger indentations, Barcal (25 BU 4); 6, parallel broad trailed lines, Burkett (25 NC 1); 7, concentric diamond formed by parallel lines, Burkett ( 25 NC 1); 8, parallel diagonal lines branching from single vertical stem, Monroe (25 PT 13); 9, parallel diagonals separated by vertical lines, Burkett (25 NC 1); 10, opposed parallel lines and pendant triangles, Burkett (25 NC 1); 11, punctates Burkett (25 NC 1); 12, opposed single lines and pendant "ticks", Burkett (25 NC 1); 13, opposed parallel diagonal lines, Monroe (25 PT 13); 14, crosshatched X, Burkett (25 NC 1); 15, opposed and parallel curved lines, Burkett (25 NC 1); 16, opposed lines, Wright (25 NC 3); 17, opposed parallel lines separated by single lines, Burkett (25 NC 1); 18, opposed parallel lines and zig-zag lines, Burkett (25 NC 1); 19, zig-zag lines, Wright (25 NC 3); 20, parallel diagonals and zig-zag lines, Wright (25 NC 3); 21-22, opposed lines, Barcal (25 BU 4); 23, zig-zag lines, Barcal (25 BU 4); 24, opposed parallel diagonal lines, Linwood (25 BU 1).

-172- 2

3

4 6 s 7

' ~ .

8 10 11

12 13 15 16 14

17 18

19 20

21 23 24

PLATEV:DECORATEDSHOULDERBODYSHERDS

- 173- PLATE VI: NANCE FLARED PLAIN, RESTORED VESSELS

Upper left, Burkett (25 NC 1), Simple Stamped. Upper right, Burkett (25 NC 1), opposed parallel diagonal shoulder decoration. Lower left. Wright (25 NC 3). Check Stamped. Lower right, Burkett (25 NC 1), Simple Stamped.

~174~ PLATE VI : NANCE FLARED PLAIN, RESTORED VESSELS

- 175- PLATE VII: NANCE FLARED PLAIN

Flaring rim variety: 1, Yutan (25 SD 1); 2-3, Blue Springs (25 GA 1); 4, Horse Creek (25 NC 2); 5, Clarks (25 PK I); 6, 20, Palmer (25 HW 1); 7-9, 21 ~~23, Hill (25 WT 1); 10, 18, Linwood (25 BU I); 11-12, 16-17, Barca! (25 BU 4); 13 15, 19, Bellwood (25 BU 2).

-176- \ ~~~ 2 \. .:.' 4 1 5 '= , . , ~, ... ,..... r.. ~! (. .'~ :. 9 1 ~ I •

r 4. .;.. .· -.... _,....,.

•' ~ 11 - 15 "

lt 11

10 • 11 II 13

PLATE VII : NANCE FLARED PLAIN

- 177- PLATE VIII: NANCE FLARED PLAIN

Flaring rim variety: 1, Wolfe (25 CX 2); 2, Gray (25 CX 1); 3, Monroe (25 PT 13); 4, Larson (25 PT 1); 5-7, 13, Wright (25 NC 3); 8, Cuba (24 NC 4); 9-12, 14-22, Burkett (25 NC 1).

-178- 2 4

6 5 7 8

11 9 10 13

12

.... - ~.- . .. ~-, J4 15 17 16

20 21 J8 19 ---~~

PLATE VIII: NANCE FLARED PLAIN

179- PLATE IX: NANCE FLARED PLAIN

Straight rim flared variety: 1--7, Burkett (25 NC 1); 8, Larson (25 PT !); 9-10, Wright (25 NC 3); 11, Cuba (25 NC 4); 12, Gray (25 CX 1); 13-14, Monroe (25 PT 13); 15, Wolfe (25 CX 2); No. 9, impressed interior decoration.

-180- . '· :'{ ...... ··.··'I "" • f • ~ ) ,:. • -. ~- ,.,..~

1 2. 3 .. ~ ( . 'II!' ' . l 6 7 ..1£1 8 5

12 10. 11

J4

PLATE IX: NANCE FLARED PLAIN

- 18 1- PLATE X: NANCE FLARED PLAIN, ASSOClA TED BODY TREATMENT

1, Larson (25 PI 1); 2, 4, Wright (25 NC 3); 3, 5--6, 8, B11rkett (25 NC 1); 7, 9, Barcal (25 BU 4). 1-8, Simple Stamped;2, parallel diagonals branchi11g from single line; 3, opposed diagonals meeting at apex; 4, zig-zag; 5, 7, 9, opposed parallel diagonals; 6, concentric diamond.

--I R2- 3

5

7

g

~

PLATE X : NANCE FLARED PLAIN, ASSOCIATED BODY TREATMENT

- 183- PLATE XI: NANCE FLARED PLAIN, HANDLES

1-2, 7-14, 16-19, 21-24, strap handles; 3, notched ridge strap handle; 4-5, loop handles; 6, cloistered strap handle; 15, 20, shouldered strap handle. 1, 3, 13, 22, Monroe (25 PT 13);2, 5-6, 8-9, 11, 14, 16, 18-19, 24, Burkett (25 NC 1); 4, Linwood (25 BU 1); 7, 10, 15, 17, 20-21, 23, Barcal (25 BU 4); 12, Larson (25 PT 1). 1, 24, zig-zag; 2, parallel horizontal and indented; 3-5, notched; 6, herringbone; 7-8, punctate; 9-12, plain; 13-14, horizontal parallel; 15, 20, 22-23, vertical parallels; 16-17, crosshatched X; 18-19, opposed lines; 21, broad trailed.

-184- I ) ~ ~ ·. ~1 2 3 4 5' ...... - ~ "\ ., . , ~ "J!fl#..." · #A t: :,. "»"" .. -~~ 6 8 7

9 10

-

\. - ~~ -13 14

12 15

~v\ 18 20 16 17

24 21 22

PLATE XI : NANCE FLARED PLAIN, HANDLES

- 185 - PLATE XII: NANCE FLARED DECORATED, RESTORED VESSELS

Top, opposed parallel diagonals on rim, parallel and horizontal parallel lines with pinched shoulder, Burkett (25 NC l). Bottom, parallel diagonal lines on rim and shoulder, Barcal (25 BU 4).

-186- PLATE XII: NANCE FLARED DECORATED, RESTORED VESSELS

-187- PLATE XIII: NANCE FLARED DECORATED

Flaring rim variety: 1, Linwood (25 BU 1); 2, Blue Springs (25 GA I); 3-4, Palmer (25 HW 1); 5, 9, Bellwood (25 BU 2); 6-8, 10-15, Barcal (25 BU 4); 16-17, Burkett (25 NC 1); 18, Monroe (25 PT 13); 19-22, Wright (25 NC 3); 23, Larson (25 PT 1). 1, 6, 9-11, opposed parallel diagonals; 2, 4-5, 12, parallel diagonals; 7-8, 13, parallel and horizontals; 14-15, 18-19, horizontal parallels; 16-17, herringbone; 20, punctate "perforated"; 21-23, zig-zag.

-188- r.. , , • , io.,.. :~~-" ~~~ ,, ( , ..,;-' t ..,:,;.r I l -. ..• 1 ..,....' ....., ' ~ If ' ~ I 2 3 4

\ - -. --.o:.--' ' ;..--. ' - - 6 ..,_,~- \, ~ 8 5 7

9 12 11 10

... ~ .... ':" J >--· • ...... t . b.

.- ­ ~- 14- 15 13

16

18 19

2 1 20 -----22 PLATE XIII : NANCE FLAR ED DECO RATED

- 189- PLATE XIV: NANCE FLARED DECORATED

Straight rim flared variety: 1, 5-6, Burkett (25 NC 1);2, 12-13, Larson (25 PT 1); 3, 7-10, Wright (25 NC 3); 11, Monroe (25 PT 13); 14-16, Bellwood (25 BU 2); 17-20, Barcal (25 BU 4); 21, Palmer (25 HW 1); 22--23, Linwood (25 BU 1); 24, Hill (25 WT 1). 1--3, horizontal parallels; 4, punctates; 5, pinched; 6, parallel and horizontals above pinching; 7, 9, zig-zag; 8, 16, herring­ bone; 10, curved parallels; 11, 13-14, 20, 23, opposed parallel diagonals; 12, 19, 22, 24, parallel diagonals; 15, 17, parallel and horizontals; 21, chevrons.

-190- 5 6 2 4

., / /

·' ' : ~ '- ~ • -~ . •. " ~ 11 7 9 10 8 '~~~

~I~ -/ ~~ 12 · ' ~ 15 16 13

14

20 17 18 19

'''f23 ~ -21 -----

PLATE X IV: NANCE FLARED DECORATED

- 191- PLATE XV: NANCE STRAIGHT RIM PLAIN AND NANCE STRAIGHT RIM DECORATED

I 1 I. plain; 12 24, decorated. 1, Larson (25 PT I); 2, Wright (25 NC 3); 3, 12 14, Barca] (25 BU 4); 4, Monroe (25 PT 13); 5, Cuba (25 NC 4); 6, Horse Creek (25 NC 2); 7-11, 15-24, Burkett (25 NC I). I 2, parallel and punctates; 13- I 5, parallel diagonals; 16, pinched; 17-18, opposed parallel diagonals; 19, herringbone: 20, vertical and horizontal grid; 21- 24, horizontal parallels.

-192- 2 3

5 6 4

8 7 9 11

• ... •15 12 ~ I 13 14 ··.~ ...,. 16 -::•

...":;' 20 18 19 17

\ 21 24 23

PLATE XV: NANCE STRAIGHT RIM PLAIN AND NANCE STRAIGHT RIM DECORATED

- 193- PLATE XVI: NANCE FLANGED LIP

1-8, Burkett (25 NC 1); 9-10, Monroe (25 PT 13); 11-12, Larson (25 PT 1); 13-15, Wright (25 NC 3); 16, Hill (25 WT 1). No.15 has a hollow, tubular handle.

-194- 2 4 3

, _,.. r I I 8 7 5 --- -~~Y'"· 12 10 11

9

13 14 15 16

---~~

PLATE XVI : NA NCE FLANGED LIP

- 195- PLATE XVII: NANCE THICKENED LIP AND BURKETT RIDGED RIM

1-13, Nance Thickened Lip; 14, unclassified inverted lip; 15-19, Burkett Ridged Rim. 1-6, 14, 17-19, Burkett (25 NC 1); 7-8, Wright (25 NC 3); 9, 16, Larson (25 PT 1); 10, Bellwood (25 BU 2); 11, Barcal (25 BU 4); 12, Yutan (25 SD I); 13, Horse Creek (25 NC 2); 15, Wolfe (25 CX 2).

-196- 5 3 4 6

7 8 9

10 12

13

16

----18-- ...

PLATE XVII: NANCE THICKENED LIP AND BURKETT RIDGED RIM

-197- PLATE XVIJI: BURKETT S-COLLARED

1--7, pinched collar base; 8---16, plain collar base. 1-4, 9, 12-14, Burkett (25 NC 1); 5, Monroe (25 PT 13); 6, I 0, Wright (25 NC 3); 7, 11, Larson (25 PT 1); 8, Blue Springs (25 GA 1); 15, Bellwood (25 BU 2); 16, Barca! (25 BU 4). 1-2, 10, zig-zag;J, 5, 9, opposed diagona\;4, horizontal parallels; 6, 13, parallel diagonals; 7, 11, 14, plain; 8, 16, herringbone; 12, chevrons; 15, chevron and horizontal parallels.

-198-- 2 3 4

... . I

6 7

5

9 10

11

15 13 16

PLATE XVIII : BURKETT S-COLLARED

- 199- PLATE XIX: WRIGHT COLLARED WARE, RESTORED VESSELS

Upper left, opposed parallel diagonals on rim, Monroe (25 PT 13). Upper right, zig-zag lines on rim and body, Wright (25 NC 3). Lower center, plain and simple stamped, Fullerton locality.

-200------

PLATE XIX: WRIGHT COLLARED WARE, RESTORED VESSELS

- 201 - PLATE XX: WRIGHT COLLARED WARE

1-13, pinched collar base; 14-15, punctate collar base; 16-17, notched collar base; 18--24, plain collar base. 1-5, 20, 23-24, Wright (25 NC 3); 6, 19, Monroe (25 PT 13); 7, 13, 15-16, 18, Larson (25 PT 1); 8, Cuba (25 NC 4); 9-12, 14, 17,21-22, Burkett (25 NC 1).1, 14, 16-18, plain;2, 6, 8-9, 13, 15, 19-21, opposed parallel diagonals; 3, 22-23, zig-zag; 4, 10, 24, horizontal parallels; 5, opposed and horizontal; 11, parallel diagonal; 12, crosshatched X.

-202- t

' ~., 4 2 3

8 5 7

6

.... 13 10 11

9 12

14 15 16

18 19 20

23 21 22

PLATE XX: WR IGHT COLLARED WARE

-'LUJ- PLATE XXI: WRIGHT COLLARED WARE

Pendant tabs and bosses: 1-3, Hill (25 WT 1);4Yutan (25 SD 1);5, Barcal (25 BU 4); 6-8, 10-11, Wright (25 NC 3); 9, Cuba (25 NC 4); 12-14, Burkett (25 NC 1); 15, Larson (25 PT 1). 1, 6, 8-9, 11-12, herringbone; 2-4, 13, opposed parallel diagonals; 7, 10, 14-15, zig-zag.

-204- d!"-. 0., / , ft;l v \• 4

2 3

5 6

10. 11 8 9

14 12 13 15 ---~ ,. ~,.... i

PLATE XXI: WRIGHT COLLARED WARE

- 205 - PLATE XXII: WRIGHT FOLDED LIP AND COLFAX BRACED

1-6, Wright Folded Lip; 7-19, Colfax Braced. 1, 7, 11, 16, Burkett (25 NC 1); 2, 8, Larson (25 PT 1); 3-4, 9, 13-15, 17-19, Wright (25 NC 3);5, Cuba, (25 NC 4); 6, Hill (25 WT 1); 10, Linwood (25 BU 1); 12, Gray (25 CX 1).1-6, 11-14, plain; 7, 19, parallel diagonals; 8, herringbone; 9, horizontal parallels; 15, zig-zag; 16-18, punctate.

-206- 2

6 5 4 3

7

9 8

12

10 13

11

f~ ... ,....., ..., 1 ot..~ , " ..,' s"./ '7t·- ' " '

16 17 15 "· 19 ----~

PLATE XXII : WRIGHT FOLDED LIP AND COLFAX BRACED

-207- PLATE XXIII: COLFAX BRACED, RESTORED VESSEL

Horizontal parallels on rim, opposed parallel diagonals on shoulder. Bellwood (25 BU 2), Lower Loup component.

-208- PLATE XXIII: COLFAX BRACED, RESTORED VESSEL

- 209- PLATE XXIV: COLFAX BRACED

1-7, Burkett (25 NC 1); 8-10, Larson (25 PT 1); 11, Wolfe (25 CX 2); 12, Gray (25 CX 1); 13, Monroe (25 PT 13); 14-20, Wright (25 NC 3); 21-22, Cuba (25 NC 4). 1-2, 5-7, 19, 21, herringbone; 4, 22, parallel diagonals; 3, 8-9, 11, 15, horizontal parallels; 10, 17, opposed parallel diagonals; 12, 14, parallel and horizontal; 13, 20, zig-zag; 18, chevrons.

-210- 2 3

..."" ~-"",;, _,., _ - ·' . , .-, ... ' .. ~ :::::-w-

6 7 4 5

12 8 II 10

g

' • "../ It;_ ...... _ 13 14 15 17 16

19 20 ----- 21

PLATE XXIV: COLFAX BRACED

-211 - PLATE XXV: COLFAX BRACED

1-6, 9, 18-19, Barcal (25 BU 4); 7-8, 17, Bellwood (25 BU 2); 10, 16, Linwood (25 BU 1); 11, Blue Springs (25 GA I); 12, Palmer (25 HW I); 13, Kansas Monument (14 RP I); 14, Hill (25 WT I); 15, Horse Creek (25 NC 2); 20, Yutan (25 SD I). 1-2, 15, horizontal parallels; 3, 7, parallel and horizontal lines; 4, 8, opposed parallel diagonals; 5, 12, 16, herringbone; 6, 13-14, parallel diagonals; 9, curved parallels; 17, punctate; 18-20, plain.

-2I2- ~'!>. --;;:.:;' "I - ··/j ") ,.J 2 3 4 :::=:=-

.... ·- s 6 8 7

9 11 tO 12

13 14 15

16

20 18 19

PLATE XXV: COLFAX BRACED

- 213- PLATE XXVI: BUTLER BRACED, RESTORED VESSEL

Opposed parallel diagonals on rim and shoulder, Linwood (25 BU 1).

-214-- PLATE XXVI: BUTLER BRACED, RESTORED VESSEL

- 215- PLATE XXVII: TRANSITIONAL SERIES

1-4, Colfax Braced; 5-13, 19, Butler Braced; 14-18, Webster Collar Braced. 1, 14, Hill (25 WT 1);2, 7, 12, 16, Barcal (25 BU 4);3, 8, 13, 18, Wright (25 NC 3); 4, 9, Burkett (25 NC 1); 5, 10, Linwood (25 BU 1); 6, 11, 15, Bellwood (25 BU 2); 17, Yutan (25 SD 1); 19, Blue Springs (25 GA 1). 1, plain; 2, 6, parallel and horizontal lines; 3-4, 7-9, 11, 14-15, 18, herringbone; 5, 12, parallel diagonals; 10, 13, 16--17, 19, opposed parallel diagonals.

-216- -·

./-}" ... -'-'"''"·"· 2 3

7 9

5

' - .,:. . 11 13 10

~ ~ ' /4~ .: . .~ .. 18

17 ~ 15 16 . ----- 19

PLATE XXVII: TRANSITIONAL SERIES

- 217- PLATE XXVIII: WEBSTER COLLAR BRACED, RESTORED VESSELS

Upper left, opposed parallel diagonal decorations, Bellwood (25 BU 2), Pawnee component. Upper right, opposed parallel diagonal decorations, Horse Creek (25 NC 2). Lower center, herringbone rim, opposed parallel diagonals on shoulder, Archer locality.

-218------

PLATE XXVIII: WEBSTER COLLAR BRACED, RESTORED VESSELS

- 2 19- PLATE XXIX: WEBSTER COLLAR BRACED

1, 15, 18, Linwood (25 BU 1); 2, 7, Bellwood (25 BU 2); 4, 19, Palmer (25 HW 1); 5, Shipman (25 WT 7); 6, Cottonwood Creek (25 NC 5); 8, 11, 14, 16, 21, Horse Creek (25 NC 2); 9, Barcal (25 BU 4); 10, Blue Springs (25 GA 1); 12, 17, 20, Hill (25 WT 1); 13, Yutan (25 SD 1). 1-6, opposed parallel diagonals; 7-8, parallel diagonals cut by single line; 9-10, parallel diagonals; 11, zig-zag lines; 12-15, herringbone; 16-18, chevrons; 19, parallel diagonals and horizontal parallels in separate panels; 20, vertical parallel; 21, plain.

-220- ,./ 1 •. 7/ I' ' '

3 4

5 10 8 9 6

.. 'I •, • . .t"/, f' " \ ··~ ~· - 11 13 14

15 16 17

19 20

----- 21

PLATE XXIX: WEBSTER COLLAR BRACED

- 221 - PLATE XXX: BURKETT CORD ROUGHENED AND BURKETT COLLARED

1--8, Burkett Cord Roughened; 9--28, Burkett Collared. No.5 is a handle. 1-5, 9-28, Burkett (25 NC I); 6, Monroe (25 PT 13); 7-8, Wright (25 NC 3); 9-13, 26, plain; 14, parallel diagonals; 15-17, 19 -22, crosshatched; 18, 23-25, horizontal parallels; 27, opposed parallel diagonals; 28, horizontal cord impressed.

-222- 4 2

' 6 7 5

8

10. 9 11 12

~ ~::.

- ~ 14 IS 16 ·~-:--. _:--:-::- 17 ·- _; 18

21 23 19 20 22

-

c. , , ,..,~ ... • ~J, ...... _., .... ~... -· -¥'-~: 25 28 • 27 26 24 ~

PLATE XXX: BURKETT CORD ROUGHENED AND BURKETT COLLARED

- 223 - PLATE XXXI: BURKETT COLLARED, RESTORED VESSEL

Pinched collar base, Burkett (:25 NC I).

224 PLATE XXXI: BURKETT COLLARED, RESTORED VESSEL

- 225- PLATE XXXII: SHELL TEMPERED BODYSHERDS

1, 17-18, Cuba (25 NC 4); 2-4, 9-11, Burkett (25 NC I); 5-8, 13-15, Wright (25 NC 3); 12, Ashland (25 CC 1); 16, Larson (25 PT 1); 19, Barcal (25 BU 4); 20, Linwood (25 BU 1).1-7, trailed; 8-20, plain.

-226- 2 3 4

6 1 8

:. .\

'- 9 10 11 ' _/ 12

13 14 15

20 17

19

PLATE XXXII : SHELL TEMPERED BODYSHERDS

- 227- PLATE XXXIII: SHELL TEMPERED WARE AND WALNUT DECORATED LIP

1, Cowley Plain; 2-15, unnamed shell tempered ware; 16-23, Walnut Decorated Lip. 1-8, 16-23, Burkett (25 NC 1); 7, 22-23, interior rim views; 9'-11, Wright (25 NC 3); 11, interior rim view; 12-14, Cuba (24 NC 4); 15, Barcal (25 BU 4).

-228- . '• . •.

:,~ . -- ··~ ..~~-:~· ' .. 4 \ 4 \ 2

6

5 ~ 10 8 9 11

14 13 • "15

18

22 23 20 19

PLATE XXX III : SHELL TEMPERED WARE AND WALNUT DECORATED LIP

- 229- PLATE XXXIV: WEBSTER BOWL WARE AND BOWL LIDS

1-16, Webster Bowl Ware; 17-20, Webster Bowl Lids. 1-2, Burkett (25 NC 1); 3-4, Monroe (25 PT 13); 5, Larson (25 PT l); 6--8, Wright (25 NC 3); 9, Barcal (25 BU 4); 10, 18, Bellwood (25 BU 2); 11-12, 19, Hill (25 WT 1); 13--14, 20, Horse Creek (25 NC 2); 15, Clarks (25 PK 1); 16, Blue Springs (25 GA 1); 17, Palmer (25 HW 1).

-230- 3

4

5 6 7 8

9 10

12

15 16 14

18 -----19 20

PLATE XXXIV: WEBSTER BOWL WARE AND BOWL LIDS

- 23 1- PLATE XXXV: MISCELLANEOUS

1, Nance Flared Plain, interior view showing row of punctates at juncture of rim and body, Burkett (25 NC 1); 2-5, Stanley Cord Impressed, Cuba (25 NC 4); 6-27, miniature vessels; 6, 10,13-14, 16,18, Burkett (25 NC 1); 7, 24-25, Barcal (25 BU 4); 8, 12, 15, 19, 23, Larson (25 PT 1); 9, Monroe (25 PT 13); 11, 17, 20, 22, Wright (25 NC 3); 21, Wolfe (25 CX 2); 26, Bellwood (25 BU 2); 27, Horse Creek (25 NC 2).

-232- 2 3 5

7 8 9 & 10.

14 12 13 11

1~\~"'\j \' 18 16 15 17

23 19 -20 21 22 ,..___ i;JI'; # .. . . , /~4 •• ?'>' ~,..." 24 25 26 27 ~

PLATE XXXV: MISCELLANEOUS

- 233- PLATE XXXVI: RIM PROFILES

1-4, Nance Flared Plain and Decorated; 1-2, Straight Flared variety; 3-4, Flaring variety; 5-6, Nance Straight Rim Plain and Decorated; 7, Nance Thick­ ened; 8-10, Nance Flanged Lip; 11, Wright Folded; 12-13, Wright Collared Ware; 14-15, Burkett S-Collared; 16-17, Burkett Ridged; 18, Webster Bowl Ware; 19-21, Colfax Braced; 22-23, Butler Braced; 24-26, Webster Collar Braced; 27-29, Burkett Collared; 30-31, Burkett Cord Roughened; 32-33, Shell Tempered Ware (Oneota); 34-35, Walnut Decorated Lip.

-234- ) 'J)

1 2 3 4 6 7 I 9 10 s , sf J l

f1 t2 13 14 '' 16 17 ••

" 20 ,.

22 ,

2• 2S 2•

27 21 29 30 31 )1 J) ,. ,

f X lf'IOf

PLATE XXXVI: RI M PROFILES

- 235- END