INFORMATION TO USERS This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacen, frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced. 5. PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as received. University Microfilms International 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 USA St. John's Road, Tyler's Green High Wycombe, Bucks, England HP10 8HR 77- 24,599 BOLES, Joann Ferguson, 1940- THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE NAVAHO RUG, 1890-1920, AS INFLUENCED BY TRADER J. L. HUBBELL. (VOLUMES I AND I I ) The Ohio State U niversity, Ph.D., 1977 History, United States Xerox University Microfilms,Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 @ 1977 JOANN FERGUSON BOLES ALL RIGHTS RESERVED THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE NAVAHO RUG, 1890-1920, AS INFLUENCED BY TRADER J. L. HUBBELL Volume I . DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University by Joann Ferguson Boles, B.S., M.A. ***** The Ohio State University 1977 Reading Committee; D r . Lois Dickey Dr. Mathew Herban Dr. Mary Lapitsky Adviser Department of Textiles and Clothing r ACKNOWLEDGMENTS An effort the size of the present study, which spanned two years and thousands of miles of travel throughout the United States, would not have been possible without the physical and emotional help and support of many. The researcher wishes to thank those who made this study possible: • Museums and archives mentioned throughout this study with special thanks to the staff of the Hubbell Trading Post National Historic Site and the University of Arizona Library, Special Collections, Clint Colby, Archivist. • Colleagues and administrators at Virginia Polytechnic Insti­ tute and State University, College of Home Economics with special thanks to former Assistant Dean, Dr. Mary Quam. • Committee members at The Ohio State University with special thanks to major advisor, Dr. Lois E. Dickey, Professor of Home Economics and Head of the Department of Textiles and Clothing; committee member, Dr. Mary Lapitsky, Professor of Home Economics; and minor advisor, Dr. Mathew Herban, Associate Professor of Art History. • Friends, with special thanks to Janet Noble and Marjorie Newman. • Family, with special thanks to her mother, Ruth Ferguson, whose constant and consistent help truly sustained the re- siearch, and her late father, Donald Ferguson, who did not live to see the finished product but whose belief in it lived on. ii VITA 1962 ................... B.S.H.Ec., Ohio University, Athens, Ohio 1963-1964 ............ High School Teacher, Wasatch Academy, Mt. Pleasant, Utah 1964-1965 ............ Rehabilitation Home Economist, Goodwill Industries, Akron, Ohio 1966-1968 ............ Teaching Assistant, Home Management House, Kent State University, Kent, Ohio - 1968 ................... M.A., Kent State University, Kent, Ohio 1968-1969 ............ High School Teacher, Munroeville High School, Munroeville, Ohio 1969-1973 ............ High School Teacher, Brookside High School, Sheffield Lake, Ohio 1974-1975 ............ Teaching Associate, Department of Textiles and Clothing, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1975-1977 ............ Instructor, Department of Clothing, Textiles and Related Arts, Virginia Polytechnic Insti­ tute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia 1977 ................... Ph.D., The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: Textiles and Clothing Studies in Social Psychological Aspects cf Clothing. Professor Lois Dickey Studies in Historic Costume and Textiles. Professor Mary Millican iii Minor Field: Art History Studies in 19th Century Art and Color. Professor Mathew Herban Studies in African Textiles. Professor Okechukwu Odita iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................. ii VITA.......................................................... iii LIST OF F I G U R E S ............................................. vii LIST OF P L A T E S ............................................... viii Chapter I. INTRODUCTION ........................................ 1 The Problem..................................... 3 Limitations..................................... 5 Definitions of Terms Used....................... 5 Organization of Presentation ................... 6 II. PROCEDURE........................... 7 Preliminary Research Trip to Washington, D.C............................... 7 Transitional Research Trip to A r i z o n a ................................... 9 Final Trip to Arizona........................... 12 III. RUG STUDIES AT THE HUBBELL TRADING POST.............. 15 Painters of Rug Studies......................... 16 Models for the Rug Studies..................... 18 Dates on Rug Studies........................... 19 Number of Rug Studies........................... 22 Color Analysis of Rug Studies................... 22 v Chapter Page Design Analysis of RugStudies .................. 37 Findings Related to Rug Studies, Objective One................................. 66 IV. NAVAHO RUGS WHICH REFLECT THE INFLUENCE OF RUG STUDIES .................... 69 Color Combinations............................. 70 Design Motifs................................... 72 Borders. ..................................... 79 Format . .............. 81 The Exceptional Copied Rug Study ................ 86 Findings Related to Navaho Rugs which Correspond to the Rug Studies, Objective Two................................. 88 V. HUBBELL'S CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING RUGS............. 91 Rug C o l o r s ..................................... 92 Rug Designs................. ................... 104 Fibers Used in Rugs............................. 114 Construction of R u g s ........................... 119 Uses of R u g s ................................... 123 The Rug B u siness........... ... ................ 125 Findings Related to the Analysis of Correspondence, Objective One ............ 132 VI. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS........................... 134 APPENDIX A. FIGURES............................................. 140 vi LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. RUG FORMATS ........................................ 82 2. RUG COLORS MENTIONED IN CORRESPONDENCE BY HUBBELL AND BY CUSTOMERS..................... 101 3. NUMBER OF VARIATIONS OF COLOR COMBINA­ TIONS FOR RUGS AS RECORDED IN CORRES­ PONDENCE BY HUBBELL AND CUSTOMERS.............. 103 4. NUMBER OF CUSTOMER REQUESTS FOR COLOR COMBINATIONS IN RUGS............................. 105 5. RUG SKETCHES SENT TO HUBBELL BY BUYERS............. 112 6. DESIGN ANALYSIS CHART FOR ON SITE EXAMINATION OF RUG STUDIES. ................... 141 7. NAVAHO RUG SKETCH I ............................... 142 8. NAVAHO RUG SKETCH I I ............................. 143 9; NAVAHO RUG SKETCH III ............................. 144 10. NAVAHO RUG SKETCH I V ............................. 145 11. NAVAHO RUG SKETCH V ............................. 146 12. NAVAHO RUG SKETCH V I ............................. 147 13. NAVAHO RUG SKETCH VII ............................. 148 14. NAVAHO RUG SKETCH VI I I ........................... 149 15. NAVAHO RUG SKETCH I X .............. 150 16. NAVAHO RUG SKETCH X ............................... 151 r i 17. NAVAHO RUG SKETCH X I ............................. 152 18. NAVAHO RUG SKETCH XII ............................. 153 vii Chapter I INTRODUCTION The first native United States tapestries were created by the Navaho Indians. The Navahos learned to weave after arriving in what is now the southwestern United States. Their rugs, originally called blankets, are a unique American art form in a land so often considered as an extension of Western "old world" culture. Three centuries of weaving experience have enabled the Navaho weaver to progress from producing tapestries or rugs at the rudimentary utilitarian level to a level as a highly developed technical craft and to