clustering of ceramic spindle whorls at certain sites and within a limited number .... enough twist is produced to lock the fibers together and so form the desired ...
Made in United States of America Reprinted Copyright
ro
from SOUTHEASTERN ARCHAEOLOGY Vol. 18, No.2, Winter 1999 1999 by the Southeastern Archaeological Conference
Spindle Whorls and Fiber Production at Early Cahokian Settlements
Abstract. Ceramic spindle whorls have been identified in the archaeological record from the Emergent Mississippian period through historic times. Patterns of recovery for spindle whorls at the Halliday site, as well as sites in the American Bottom during the Lohmann phase, suggest that fiber production was more than a simple household occupation. The clustering of ceramic spindle whorls at certain sites and within a limited number of features at those sites suggest that the processing of fiber may have been localized during the rise of Cahokia. One of the many changes identified with the advent of political consolidation at Cahokia (at approximately A.D. 1050)1is the localized manufacture of certain material goods. By the Lohmann phase (A.D. 1050-1100) manufacturing debris and finished craft items seem to have a limited distribution. The nature of this localization, or what some would call specialization, is debated (see Muller 1997;Pauketat 1997a;Prentice 1985;Yerkes 1989), but the most recent data on the distribution of manufacturing debris and finished products indicate that these items were not produced by all people, in all residential areas or even at all sites (Milner 1990; Pauketat 1998a, 1998b; Yerkes 1989)2.For example, microliths (tools specifically associated with shell bead manufacture) do not occur with equal frequency across Cahokia, with areas such as the Kunnemann Tract producing large numbers of these drills, while others such as Tract 15A produced significantly fewer. Regional comparison of microlith distribution reveals a similar pattern, drills having been recovered at some, but not all, Lohmann phase sites (Yerkes 1983, 1989).Debitage from celt manufacture also occurs in specific concentrations at limited locations (Esarey and Pauketat 1992; Pauketat 1997). Given the distributional patterns for spindle whorls in and around the American Bottom, I propose that while fiber production occurred as a normal household activity, there was more intensive spinning of fiber in some locations and this may be linked to developing needs for ritual and social display at Cahokia. Within the newly centralized society of Cahokia, textile production may have increased as the need for distinctive markers of rank or position, as well as for more elaborate ritual, increased. According to Drooker (1992:11),
the "trend toward elaborate display in Mississippian textiles parallels the increased social complexity deduced from Mississippian settlement configurations, architecture, artifacts and burial practices." A relationship between the rank of an individual and the complexity of textiles also is noted by Jakes and Sibley (1994) based on materials recovered from Hopewell and Mississippian burials. Kuttruff (1993) found that labor intensive garments are associated with high status Caddoan burials. A similar relationship may be seen at Powell and Kunnemann Mounds at Cahokia, both of which contained perishable material associated with special contexts. The material from Powell contained layers of matting inlaid with beads which was associated with a burial, reminiscent of the elaborate Mound 72 primary burial of an individual on a beaded blanket shaped as a falcon (Fowler 1991). A special building beneath Kunnemann Mound contained evidence of woven material and cordage, including a piece of fabric woven from very thin fine spun threads (Pauketat 1993)3. Material symbols of rank are common to complex chiefdoms everywhere. According to Earle (1990:75), with "the initial evolution of social stratification and chiefdoms, new uses of symbolism and status categories develop." Earle includes the use of cloth as a way to signify status. Murra (1989)notes that cloth was a main ceremonial good for the Inca, who burned cloth as a sacrifice. Wiener (1989:63) states that "throughout Polynesia, cloth wealth provided the economic and cosmological foundation for rank and hierarchy." The use of clothing as a marker of status also was reported for the Southeast by early observers; the De Soto accounts mention the use of elaborate capes by chiefs (Clayton et al. 1993). Swanton (1979)gives details on the special clothing used by religious practitioners. Adair describes special dress for those participating in a ceremony to receive a new rank (Williams 1930:426). Thus persons with greater prestige or with a specialized role in society generally are marked in some way to demonstrate and reinforce this difference. If rank requires signification through special adornments and garments, then such goods, obviously, must be produced. While the identity of those who controlled production and distribution remains an open question, it is likely that the production of so called "prestige goods" in the American Bottom, including the celts and beads mentioned earlier, was restricted in some sense to certain individuals at certain locations (see Pauketat 1998a:Figure 6). Although the significance of regional 124
facture cord, to manufacture greater quantities of cord, or to create a finer, thinner thread. For the second line of evidence, there are two types of ceramic disks reported from the American Bottom region-smaller, non-perforated disks and larger, perforated disks. The first set of disks corresponds to what has been called game pieces, while I identify the perforated disks as spindle whorls. Centrally perforated ceramic disks begin to appear in the Emergent Mississippian period (ca. A.D. 800-1050)and increase in frequency through time (Table 1). This trend is exemplified by data from Tract 15A and the Range Site4, two sites with large Emergent Mississippian samples. As identified by Pauketat (1998b), at Tract 15A there are no spindle whorls in the single early Emergent Mississippian structure, two whorls in the 12 late Emergent Mississippian structures and 9 whorls in the 16 latest Emergent Mississippians structures. For the Range site, there is one disk from 105Dohack phase structures, but 89 from the later 132 Lindeman phase structures (Kelly et al. 1990, 1998)6.Ceramic disks without perforations, commonly identified as game pieces, also are reported during the Emergent Mississippian period (e.g., Emerson and Jackson 1984:81; Fortier et al. 1991:264; McElrath et al. 1987:129; Moshage et al. 1987:259).These objects generally are much smaller in size than perforated disks. For example, the Range site, late Emergent Mississippian Lindeman phase non-perforated disks had an average diameter of 3.1 em, while perforated disks averaged 7.0 cm in diameter. It was only with the end of the Emergent Mississippian period and the beginning of the Lohmann phase that centrally drilled (and larger) disks began to become common. By this time there is a change detected for cordmarked ceramics that constitutes a third line of evidence suggesting use of perforated disks as spindle whorls. The direction of twist on cordmarked pottery shifted from a preponderance of S twist in what is now called the Patrick Phase to a preponderance of Z twist in Emergent Mississippian assemblages (Munson 1971). A reversal in twist angle has been corroborated in subsequent studies. Kelly et al. (1990) identified this shift as correspondingly occurring between the Late Woodland and Emergent Mississippian periods (see also Szuter 1979), when the first perforated disks are reported. Hall (1980) suggested that a change in the direction of twist could imply technological change, although he did not recognize the presence of spindle whorls in the American Bottom. A cross-cultural study of spinners by Minar (1998)found that the practice of spinning was highly resistant to change and that a change in twist should correspond to technological change. Finally, incised or scratched design elements appear on some perforated ceramic disks in the American Bottom region. One of the most striking examples is a disk found at Cahokia with human heads etched around it
craft production has been contested (see Muller 1997), the inference that symbolically marked goods were produced, perhaps for high-ranking individuals, seems less controversial. In light of this, and focusing on the Cahokia region, I discuss new data on the distribution of Lohmann phase ceramic disks, which appear to be spindle whorls. These data support interpretations that material goods production, in this instance cloth, was intensified, and localized with the rise of Cahokia during the late Edelhardt and early Lohmann phases. The data presented are focused on information from the Halliday site, a recently excavated Lohmann phase village near Cahokia. The spindle whorl case should add to understanding the relationship between Cahokia and its surrounding communities.
Several lines of evidence suggest that perforated sherds were used as spindle whorls in the American Bottom region. The most obvious, while certainly not definitive, argument is that the perforated sherds look like and function like spindle whorls. Similar disks are described in ethnographic reports from the Southeast (e.g., Swanton 1979:450) and cross-culturally (Barber 1981; Raymond 1984). I can attest to the fact that the disks function as spindle whorls very well, as in a test of my own I was able to spin yarn from rabbit hair and linen fibers very easily using the Halliday spindle whorls. Raw fibers can be spun quite easily into cordage without the aid of spindle whorls or other tools, for example, by twisting the fibers with fingers or by rolling the fibers in one direction along the thigh until enough twist is produced to lock the fibers together and so form the desired length of cord (Barber 1991;Drooker 1992).Since fibers generally are rolled from the top of the thigh toward the knee, for a right handed spinner this method usually would produce an S twist yarn (Hurley 1979).Spindle whorls can be spun either clockwise or counter-clockwise, and so could produce a thread with either twist equally well. Neither twist direction has a technological advantage (Miner 1936). Thigh spinning can be very effective in producing a consistent product, but it does not produce cord as quickly as spinning with a weighted spindle. In her discussion of Wickliffe textiles, Drooker (1992)notes that it is very difficult and time consuming to produce a finer, smaller diameter thread by thigh spinning. Spindle whorls provide a spinner with a tool that facilitates the manufacture of a more standardized product. If the size of the disk is matched to the characteristics of the fiber being spun, less effort is required to control for finished yarn size and the amount of twist in the spun fibers. Spindle whorl use would be advantageous if producers need to more quickly manu125
SOUTHEASTERN
ARCHAEOLOGY
18(2) WINTER
1999
Table 1. Halliday Site Spindle Whorl Data. Item # 105-2 109-2 1-1 1-1 1-1 1-1 1-12, 1-6 1-13 1-16 1-5 1-5 1-5 1-6 1-6 1-7 1-8 1-8 1-8 21-2 28-4 30-4 39-3 4-15 4-21 43-1 43-2 44-7 46-2 50-17 50-2 50-6 52-1 52-1 52-1,52-5 58-2 6-14 79-2 79-2 86-2 86-3 86-3 88-21 88-22 88-23 88-23 88-3 88-5 88-6 88-9 88-9 89-3 89-5 89-5 89-5 89-9 900900-14 900-3 901-17 91-18 91-22 91-5 91-5 91-6 91-8 92-1 9-6 9-6 99-11 99-8 99-8 HE1 f3 HE1 st 1 HE1 st 2 HE1 st 2 HE1 st 2
Disk Diameter (cm) 4.65 6.40 7.51 4.11 4.10 12.50 7.68 5.40 5.63 6.88 8.04 6.32 6.62 6.06 5.10 4.20 6.30 5.15 5.74 5.16 8.10 5.52 6.60 7.60 7.00 5.60 9.80 7.20
7.55 10.44 7.26 7.46 6.44 7.40 5.69 8.70 10.68 5.60 9.40 10.34 7.70 7.86 8.00 6.42 9.28 5.40' 2.95 12.74 10.50 7.60 5.52 10.20 4.48' 9.20 8.02 10.70 4.58 7.72
Number of Perforations
Temper
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0
shell shell shell shell shell shell shell shell shell shell shell shell shell shell shell ~it s ell shell shell shell graft she I shell shell shell shell shell shell shell shell shell shell grog limestone shell shell shell shell shell
1 multiple 1 1 1 1 1 1 multiple 1 3 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 6 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 0
gr°ft she I shell shell shell shell shell shell shell shell shell shell shell shell shell shell shell shell shell shell limestone shell shell shell limestone shell shell shell shell limestone shell shell shell shell shell shell shell
1 1 1 multiple 1 1 1 /26
Surface Treatment
Disk Thickness (cm)
brslip plain red slip plain plain plain plain cordmark? plain plain plain plain plain plain plain cordmark-s plain plain red slip plain plain plain plain plain plain plain plain plain plain plain plain plain plain red slip plain plain red slip red slip plain cordmark? plain plain cordmark-z plain plain plain plain plain cordmarkss smoothed cord plain plain plain plain plain red slip plain plain plain red slip plain br-red slip red slip red slip plain cm red slip plain red slip plain plain plain plain red slip red slip red slip
0.44 0.55 0.88 0.83 0.79 0.76 0.83 0.50 0.63 0.65 0.81 0.73 0.59 0.70 0.47 0.62 0.41 0.66 0.86 0.75 0.82 0.38 0.80 0.94 0.90 0.64 0.72 0.75 0.85 0.72 0.39 0.81 0.35 0.90 0.67 0.55 0.52 0.91 0.84 1.20 0.95 0.57 0.45 0.91 0.72 0.74 0.69 0.76 0.59 0.50 0.64 0.9 0.53 0.80 0.90 0.70 0.56 0.76 0.75 0.68 0.53 0.48 0.89 0.70 0.60 0.73 0.50 0.72
(Iseminger 1983).Some disks from Cahokia, Lohmann, and Halliday have circles etched around the perforation (Esarey and Pauketat 1992; Pauketat 1998b). The circles are crossed with lines radiating from the center to the outside; the design may be a representation of a spider's web, linking fiber preparation to weaving. Decorated disks generally represent a small proportion of all disk assemblages. Tract 15A is unusual, with 28 percent of all recovered Lohmann phase disks decorated (Pauketat 1998b).At the Halliday site, with the largest assemblage of spindle whorls in the region, only four percent of the recovered disks are decorated. In her studies of Aztec spinners, Brumfiel (1996) links decorated whorls to production of material for household use, while plain, undecorated whorls were used for the production of tribute cloth. It should also be considered that the ultimate use of certain prepared materials may have required a specially treated tool. Murra (1989) has noted that Inca domestic and fine cloth must be woven on different looms. Thus, decoration on the Mississippian disks may be indicative of specific use patterns.
whorls were being recovered. Moreover, most of the spindle whorls were recovered from very few features. The data that I review here suggest that this restricted pattern of spindle whorl distribution may be related to Cahokian consumption of fiber products. Excavations at the Halliday site have produced more spindle whorls than any other Lohmann phase site, although the nearby Grossman and Knoebel sites also have a high density of whorls. Since analysis is not complete for the last year of excavation at Halliday, I use data from the 163 features excavated in the first two years of work. These features contained a total of 692 jars and 76 disks, 66 of which were centrally drilled (Table2; Figure 2). The spindle whorls apparently were crafted from broken pieces of pottery. Sherds seem to have been selected to produce a spindle whorl that would have a slightly concave exterior surface; this would aid in keeping the finished cord on the spindle. The selected sherds were chipped into rough circles. Of all spindle whorls with outer edges intact, 67 percent had well ground edges. Other whorls had only larger irregularities ground off, with some disks apparently chipped simply into a circular form, showing no evidence of edge smoothing. Surface treatment did not influence selection of sherds for spindle whorls. Slipped or cordmarked sherds were not preferentially selected for or against in spindle whorl use. The surface treatments of the spindle whorls at Halliday proportionally match the surface treatment of sherds found in the general ceramic assemblage. Two whorls clearly were decorated intentionally with incised lines on the interior7 such that they would face the spinner during use. Both decorated spindle whorls have circles incised around the central hole, with the diameters of the incised circles about one third the diameter of the disks. On the interior of one disk is a more elaborate circle and line design producing the appearance of spokes between the central hole and the incised circle. Six spindle whorls have extra, smaller holes drilled around the larger central hole (Figure 3). These whorls are no larger or heavier than most other disks, probably indicating that these holes do not represent an attempt to control spindle whorl weight. Based on a multiple-holed disk found in a funnel neck, Kelly (1980) has suggested that disks with multiple holes may have been used as funnel strainers. The context of the Halliday specimens does not support this suggestion. All Halliday whorls have a central hole with additional holes symmetrically arranged around the center, and all but one specimen were found with other disks. I have found no ethnographic accounts that suggest that extraneous holes are anything other than a decorative treatment. Ten non-perforated disks also were found at Halliday, but context and their resemblance to perforated whorls suggest that they are spindle whorl preforms. In all but one case, the non-perforated disks were found along with perforated disks.
The Halliday site is a large Lohmann phase village located in the Illinois uplands, about ten miles east of Cahokia (Figure 1). This site was excavated during the summers of 1995,1996,1998 and 1999under the direction of Timothy Pauketat. During these excavations, it became obvious that a large number of ceramic spindle
o
30 kilometers
127
Total Number of Disks ICTII Tract 15A Combined Lohmann sites Halliday Combined upland Lohmann sites
6 18 13 76 17
Number of Drilled Disks 4 18 11 66 17
Number of Average Decorated Diameter Disks (em) 0 5 1 4 2
3.9 8.0 7.2 6.9 7.9
Range in Diameter (em)
3.5-4.8 2.7-11.0 4.7-11.0 2.95-12.74 4.9-11
Number of Features with Disks 4 12 10 25 11
Total No. of Features 107 189 163 163 28
Total No. of Jar Rims
Ratio of Disks/Jars 0.004 0.077 0.028 0.095 0.108
Lohmann sites included in study: Carbon Dioxide site (Finney 1985);Lohmann site (Esarey and Pauketat 1992); Turner site (Milner 1983);Olzsewski Gackson and Hananberger (1990);Holdener (Wittry et al. 1994);George Reeves site (McElrath and Finney 1987);BBBMotor (Emerson and Jackson 1984) Upland Lohmann Sites include the Grossman site Gackson personal communication) and the Knoebel site (Alt, analysis in progress)
Figure 2.
Sample of spindle whorls from the Halliday site.
128
manipulation of the fiber is matched to the speed at which the twists are occurring. It seems reasonable to assume that spinners will identify those characteristics that facilitate the work they are doing and, in the absence of other motivators, will select for them accordingly. In the American Bottom region, very little perishable material has been recovered, and even less analysis done on such material. Direct evidence for the raw materials used in textile production by people around the American Bottom and at Halliday is, for the most part, lacking. Among the commonly recovered archaeobotanical materials that could have been used for textiles are dogbane, wild hemp, nettle, milkweed, mulberry, slippery elm and basswood (Holmes 1896; Jakes et al. 1994; King 1984; Kuttruff 1993; Whitford 1941).Textile fragments with fibers of bark and rabbit hair are reported from Mitchell Mound (Howland 1877). Studies of textiles recovered from Spiro Mounds, Oklahoma, record the use of rabbit, squirrel and muskrat hair and a variety of vegetal fibers such as cane and pawpaw (Brown 1996; Fundaburk and Foreman 1957; Kuttruff 1993;Whitford 1941;Willoughby 1952).Early Historic period accounts, while generally sparse as to the particulars regarding the industries of women, note that women produced textiles and mention some of the fibers used. Swanton (1979)describes reports of the use of "silk grass," which he believed was hemp, mulberry, slippery elm, and bass, as well as nettles. In the mid1500s, Fidalgo de Elvas described "blankets made of
At Halliday, spindle whorls exhibit a greater variation in diameter than disks at other sites, ranging in size from 2.95 cm to 12.74cm, with a mean diameter of 6.9 cm (Table 1).In all features with multiple disks there is a variety of sizes represented. For example, Feature 1 contains disks with diameters ranging from 2.94to 12.5 cm and Feature 91 has a range of 2.95 to 12.74. Given that the diameter of a spindle whorl will affect the characteristics of the spun fiber, this range in size seems to indicate that different materials were processed at the same location or by the same individuals.
The diameter of a spindle whorl determines how many twists will occur in a specific length of cord during each twirl of the spindle. Given the same effort and spinning motions by a spinner, a smaller diameter whorl will create more twist more quickly (Barber 1991).Raw materials will be spun more effectively if the amount of twist is adjusted to the natural characteristics of the fiber. A thicker, more coarse fiber requires a long slow twist or it will become too stiff; a fiber such as rabbit hair is impossible to spin without a short quick spin or the fibers will not adhere to each other and form a usable yarn. Aztec spinners commonly used small diameter whorls to spin cotton and larger whorls for maguey fibers (BrumfieI1991, 1996).A faster spinning whorl can be used to improve the speed of production if a quicker 129
the inner bark of trees and from a plant like daffodils which when pounded remains like flax" (Clayton et al. 1993:75), and Rodrigo Rangel states "...are some blankets of both coarse and fine linen. They make the thread of them from the bark of the mulberry trees" (Clayton et al. 1993:271).Adair, in 1775,wrote "they have a wild hemp that grows to 6 feet high ...when it is fit for use they pull, peel, and beat it" (Williams 1930:453). Plants that may have been available to Halliday spinners, such as milkweed, dogbane, Indian hemp, nettle, red mulberry, slippery elm and bass, would produce different types of fibers. Dogbane, milkweed, nettle and mulberry can produce fine threads, while fibers from the bass tree and slippery elm would produce coarse cords. Animal hair such as rabbit certainly would have produced a fine thread (Jakes et al. 1994). The size range exhibited by Halliday spindle whorls may indicate an effort to more effectively manage the range of available materials, which would have given Halliday spinners the ability to spin more fibers more quickly. Small diameter disks would have more effectively spun animal hair, while a large whorl would be better suited to bass or elm fibers. It is interesting to note that mean range for disk diameters for all Lohman phase sites is between 3.9 cm and 8.0 cm (Table3). This seems to indicate that a variety of materials were being spun at Lohmann phase settlements, and that disk sizes were not geared to extremely fine or extremely coarse fibers. Compared with findings in a study by Raymond (1984:52), this size range corresponds to his large spindle-whorl size category, with none falling into his categories of small, medium or extra large. Given the range of material identified as used in earlier Hopewell fabrics (Church 1984;Song et al. 1996),and in later Spiro fabrics (Fundaburk and Foreman 1957; Kuttruff 1993;
Whitford 1941; Willoughby 1952), variability in fibers at early Cahokian settlements should not be surprising.
In his 1929 volume, Moorehead suggested that perforated ceramic disks were quite common at Cahokia (see plate XXVII),but recent data indicate that they are not common at all American Bottom sites and certainly are more common at upland sites. Comparing quantities of Lohmann phase spindle whorls from the Halliday site, the Grossman and Knoebel8 sites in the uplands, the Lohmann site, Cahokia Tract 15Aand ICT II, as well as other excavated sites, with Lohmann phase components in the American Bottom, it is clear that spindle whorls are more common at some sites than at others (Table 3). They also appear to be much more common at upland sites than floodplain sites. This appears to be trite whether spindle whorl ubiquity is measured by comparing the percentage of features containing spindle whorls, or by comparing the number of jars to the number of spindle whorls. The number of jars does not correlate with the number of spindle whorls found in a settlement, and neither does the number of features. Considering only centrally drilled disks, Halliday has one disk per 10 jars, Grossman and Knoebel one whorl per 11jars, while the combined total for other Lohmann components outside of Cahokia is one whorl per 68jars. Cahokia's ICT II produced only one spindle whorl per 228jars. This is in stark contrast to Cahokia's Tract 15A, which produced four times as many drilled spindle whorls in less than twice the number of features and less than one third the pottery as ICT II (Table 2). Of all
Table 3. Spindle Whorl Distribution at Edelhardt and Lohmann Phase Sites. No. of Disks
Average Diameter
Holdener Area 4 George Reeves BBB Motor South Tract 15A Knoebel
0 1 2 11 1
0 2.5 5.9 5.6 7.2
Carbon Dioxide Lohmann Turner areas I, 2, 6 Olzsewski Holdener Area 4 George Reeves BBBMotor South ICT II Tract 15A Halliday Grossman Knoebel
1 10 2 0 0 1 1 6 18 76 13 4
8.2 6.75 6.6
Site
a
0 6.5 8.0 3.9 8.0 6.9 7.2 8.6
Decorated Whorls
No. of Features
% of Features
w/Whorls
Ratio of Whorls to Jars
PHASE SPINDLE WHORLS 0 0 5 1 77 0 277 0 2 141 8 8 1 1 59
9 38 149 131 7
0 0.03 0.01 0.06 0.14
0 0.01 0.01 0.08 0.02
PHASE SPINDLE WHORLS 10 1 1 273 5 8 ? 1 10 0 8 0 0 0 1 ? 1 17 1 0 69 913 4 4 18 12 234 25 692 66 134 13 9 24 4 2
13 19 63 2 9 16 41 107 189 163 20 8
0.08 0.26 0.02
0.10 0.04 0.20 0 0 0.05 0.02
No. Drilled
EDELHARDT 0 0 0 0 0 LOHMANN 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 4 1 1
In How Many Features
1
130
No. of Jars
a
0 0.06 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.06 0.45 0.25
a 0.08 0.10 0.10 0.17
sized whorls may suggest more than one spinner at a location, or a spinner with several whorls for optimal preparation of different types of cordage as quickly as possible. If speed of production was not a concern, any of the medium sized disks could have been manipulated to spin any type of fiber. Matching disk size to fiber characteristics, however, would have allowed faster and more standardized production. The occurrence of disks in a variety of sizes would therefore seem to indicate a concern to optimize the production of cordage. Why would the people of certain settlements, and some people within settlements, be processing more fiber than others during the Lohmann phase? James Adair (1775)noted of spinners: "...the old women spin it off the distaffs with wooden machines having some clay on them to hasten the motion" (Holmes 1903:33).Aside from describing the use of spindle whorls, Adair seems to be saying that only old women were engaged in spinning during this period. Looking only at the pattern at one site, it would be tempting to explain the clustered occurrences of spindle whorls by suggesting that fiber production was restricted by age and/ or gender. While this may be true of individual settlements, it does not explain the concentration of whorls at certain Lohmann phase sites. It is insufficient simply to state that ceramic spindle whorls became more common during the late Emergent Mississippian and Lohmann phase. Attributing whorl distribution to age or gender restrictions does not explain the larger clusters of disks in some features, and rarity at some sites. The data do not indicate that spindles were a sudden innovation embraced by only a few people. It does appear, however, that during the Lohmann phase spinning with spindle whorls was carried out more intensively by a few people and was also practiced by more people overall. Tobetter explain the regional pattern, it may be useful to look at the nature of social change in the American Bottom during the late Edelhardt and Lohmann phases. The Mound 72 burials at Cahokia provide evidence of social rank being marked at death by a differential distribution of grave goods and exotic materials, suggesting that some people were more closely associated with particular material goods than others (Emerson 1997;Fowler 1991,1973;Pauketat 1994).The bimodal house size distribution at Lohmann and Stirling phase communities (see Pauketat 1994),and the special sub-mound building from Kunnemann (Pauketat 1993) present architectural and spatial evidence of social distinctions, as does the regional centrifugal pattern of exotic material falling off with distance from Cahokia (Pauketat 1998a). It is perhaps telling that the patterns of spindle whorl distribution discussed here developed during the phase of Cahokia's political consolidation. It seems likely that political consolidation at Cahokia was accompanied by a corresponding requirement for markers of status and
the assemblages considered here, Tract 15Acomes closest to the Halliday and upland site disk to jar ratios with one disk per eight jars. These figures seem to imply that fewer people were using more spindle whorls at Halliday than at Tract 15A, and many more than at the ICT II or other floodplain Lohmann phase sites. Perhaps this pattern reflects preservation of ceramic disks, while spindle whorls of other, more perishable materials have not survived to be counted. For instance, some early spindle whorls may have been no more than simple lumps of clay applied to the ends of sticks (Barber 1991; Kelly 1990). This possibility does not seem very compelling, however, when the patterning of spindle whorl distribution within sites is added to the picture. Spindle whorls tend to cluster by feature, as well as by site. This reinforces the picture of some people being more involved in fiber production than others, even within a specific community. Although there are more features with disks at Lohmann phase sites than Emergent Mississippian period sites (Table 3), there is also a clear tendency for most disks at any given site to be located in few features. At the Halliday site, 66 drilled disks (76 disks total) were found in only 25 of the total 163 features. Over half of these disks (n=36) were found in only four features. Three of these four features were located in the same courtyard group. Eighty percent of all disks found were in a feature with at least one other disk, and 63 percent of all disks were found with at least two other disks. The tendency for spindle whorls to cluster in a few features also is seen at other Lohmann phase sites. At Tract 15A,18drilled spindle whorls were found, but in only 12 out of 189 identified features (Pauketat 1998b). Nine of these whorls were found in only two features; half of the disks occur with at least one other disk. The Lohmann site produced six perforated disks, three of which were located in the same feature (Esarey and Pauketat 1992).Even at ICTII,with only four drilled disks, the disks occur in only two features (Holley 1989). This pattern seems to suggest that regardless of how many people used spindle whorls, within any settlement, certain locations were more intensively used for this purpose, and certain people were more intensively engaged in this activity.
For normal household use, one spinner would not be expected to need the quantity of disks that occur in some Halliday features. Given a leisurely pace of work, an accomplished spinner should be able to handle a wide range of fibers with one spindle whorl, as usually only one disk can be used at a time (see Barber 1991).Two disks can be placed on one spindle to increase weight, but this practice is not common and does not explain a range in disk diameters. A selection of several different 131
position. If we understand the rise of Cahokia to have heralded dramatic social change and overt status distinctions, then it is to be expected that these changes would have generated a need for display objectsto mark such distinctions. Patterns of axehead making and shell bead production seem to indicate that certain locations and certain individuals were engaged in very specific activities. The distribution patterns of spindle whorls, while revealing how part of this need for display objects was met, may be another indicator of the localization of material goods production. Spindle whorls would have enabled textile producers to increase both the quantity and the quality of produced yarns. The patterning of spindle whorl diameter sizes indicates that an effort was made to utilize tools that would be suited to most quickly and easily manage a variety of fiber types. The clustering of spindle whorls between and within Lohmann phase sites, and the fact that those clusters contained a range of disk sizes, seems to indicate that fiber production was carried out by a few people with an intent to increase production. Since spindle whorls occurred with greater frequency during the late Edelhardt and Lohmann phases, a time when greater distinctions were being made in social rank, it seems reasonable to posit a direct relationship between Cahokia's political consolidation, the use of spindle whorls, and fiber production.
Acknowledgements. The original version of this paper was presented in the symposium "New Evidence of Early Cahokian Provision and Rituals" organized by Tim Pauketat for the 54'h annual meeting of the Southeastern Conference in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. This paper would not have been possible without Tim's assistance and encouragement, not to mention his patient comments on various drafts of this paper. Suggestions and information supplied by Andy Fortier have proved invaluable in my attempts to improve this study. I am also indebted to Doug Jackson for providing unpublished data from the Grossman site. I would like to thank John Kelly for sharing his expertise, as well as data from his work in progress. Andy, John and an anonymous reviewer are also thanked for their thoughtful comments on this paper. I would also like to thank Tom Emerson, Olga Soffer as well as Penny Drooker for their thought provoking comments on earlier drafts. See Hall's calibrated chronology, 199I. While the patterns described for spindle whorl use are specific, they can also fit into more than one economic program. It is beyond the scope of this paper to argue for or against craft specialization, cottage industries, attached specialists, or any other proposed category of production. It will require a synthesis of more categories of production to begin to address this question. 3Comments on this material are based on personal inspection of unanalyzed collections at the University of Illinois, courtesy of Dr. Joyce Wike. 4 Although Emergent Mississippian data from the Range site are discussed, data from the later periods at Range are not available in a form that lend themselves to comparison with the other site data and so are not used. 5 EMI corresponds roughly to the Loyd Phase, EM2 to late Merrell early Edelhardt, and EM3 to the Edelhardt Phase. 1
2
John Kelly (personal communication) has noted that spindle whorls are virtually absent in the intervening George Reeves phase at the Range site. 7 These lines do not appear to be residual marks from drilling procedures. Partially drilled disks indicate that spindle whorls are drilled from both sides of the disk with the holes meeting in the center, but incised circles have not been found on the exterior of the whorls. Some of the incised disks also have more than one incised circle. S Data for the Grossman site were generously provided by Doug Jackson of the Illinois Transportation Archaeological Program from his preliminary analysis of the site material. Data for the Knoebel site are also preliminary, from my own analysis of that site. 6
Adair, James 1775 History of the American Indians. London. Barber, E. J. W. 1991 Prehistoric Textiles: The Development of Cloth in the Neolithic and Bronze Ages. Princeton University Press, Princeton. Brown, James A. 1996 The Spiro Ceremonial Center: The Archaeology of the Arkansas Valley Caddoan Culture in Eastern Oklahoma. Memoirs No. 29. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Brumfiel, Elizabeth M. 1991 Weaving and Cooking: Women's Production in Aztec Mexico. In Engendering Archaeology, edited by J. M. Gero and M. W. Conkey, pp. 224-254. Blackwell, Oxford. 1996 The Quality of Tribute Cloth: The Place of Evidence in Archaeological Argument. American Antiquity 61:453-462. Church, Flora 1984 Textiles as Markers of Ohio Hopewell Social Identities. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 9:1-26. Clayton, L. A., V. J. Knight Jr., and E. C. Moore 1993 The DeSoto Chronicles: The Expedition of Hernando de Soto to North America in 1539-1543. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa. Drooker, Penelope B. 1992 Mississippian Village Textiles at Wickliffe. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa. Earle, Timothy 1990 Style and Iconography as Legitimization in Complex Chiefdoms. In The Uses of Style in Archaeology, edited by M. Conkey and C. Hastorf, pp. 73-81. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Emerson, Thomas E. 1997 Reflections from the Countryside on Cahokian Hegemony. In Cahokia: Domination and Ideology in the Mississippian World, edited by T. R. Pauketat and T. E. Emerson, pp. 167-189. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln. Emerson, T. E., and D. K. Jackson 1984 The BBB Motor Site. American Bottom Archaeology FAI 270 Site Reports 6. University of Illinois Press, Urbana. Esarey, D., and T. R. Pauketat 1992 The Lohmann Site: An Early Mississippian Center in the American Bottom (11-5-29). American Bottom Archaeology FAI 270 Site Reports 25, University of Illinois Press, Urbana. Finney, F. A. 1985 The Carbon Dioxide Site. In The Carbon Dioxide Site and The Robert Schneider Site, by F. A. Finney and A. C. Fortier, pp. 3-168. American Bottom Archaeology FAI 270 Site Reports II. University of Illinois Press, Urbana. 1987 Ceramics. In The George Reeves Site. American Bottom Archaeology FAI 270 Site Reports 15. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.
Fortier, A. c., T. O. Mahler, and J. A. Williams 1991 The Sponemann Site: The Formative Emergent Mississippian Sponemann Phase Occupations. American Bottom Archaeology FA! 270 Site Report 23. University of Illinois Press, Urbana. Fowler, M. 1. 1973 The Cahokia Site. In Explorations into Cahokia Archaeology, edited by M. Fowler, pp. 1-30. Illinois Archaeological Survey Bulletin No.7 University of Illinois, Urbana. 1991 Mound 72 and Early Mississippian at Cahokia. In New Perspectives on Cahokia: Views from the Periphery, edited by J. B. Stoltman, pp. 1-28. Monographs in World Archaeology No.2, Prehistory Press, Madison, Wisconsin. Fundaburk, E. 1., and M. D. Fundaburk Foreman 1957 Sun Circles and Human Hands. Emma Lila Fundaburk, Luverne, Alabama. Hall, R. 1. 1980 Ceramics. In Investigations at the Labras Lake Site, edited by J. 1. Phillips, R. 1. Hall, and R. W. Yerkes, pp. 366-406. Department of Anthropology, University of Illinois at Chicago Circle. 1991 Cahokia Identity and Interaction Models of Cahokia Mississippian. In Cahokia and the Hinterlands: Middle Mississippian Cultures of the Midwest, edited by T. E. Emerson and R. B. Lewis, pp. 3-34. University of Illinois Press, Urbana. Holley, George R. 1989 The Archaeology of the Cahokia Mounds ICT II: Ceramics. Illinois Cultural Study No. 11, Illinois Historic Preservation Agency, Springfield. Holmes, W. H 1896 Prehistoric Textile Art of Eastern United States. Bureau of American Ethnology Annual Report 13:3-46. 1903 Aboriginal Pottery of the Eastern United States. Bureau of AmericaEthnography Annual Report 20:1-237. Howland, H. 1877 Recent Archaeological Discoveries in the American Bottom. Buffalo Society of Natural Sciences Bulletin 3(5):204-211. Hurley, W. M. 1979 Prehistoric Cordage: Identification of Impressions on Pottery. Taraxacum, Washington. Iseminger, W. 1983 A Cahokia Spindle Whorl. Illinois Antiquity 15(3):40-42. Jackson, D. K, and N. H. Hananberger 1990 Selected Early Mississippian Household Sites in the American Bottom. American Bottom Archaeology FAI 270 Site Reports 22, lJniversity of Illinois Press, Urbana. Jakes, K A., 1. R. Sibley, and R. Yerkes 1993 A Comparative Collection for the Study of Fibers Used in Prehistoric Textiles from Eastern North America. Journal of Archaeological Science 21:641-650. Kelly, J. E. 1980 Formative Developments at Cahokia and the Adjacent American Bottom: The Merrell Tract Perspective. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison. Kelly, J. E., S. J. Ozuk, and J. A. Williams 1990 The Range Site 2: The Emergent Mississippian Dohack and Range Phase Occupations. American Bottom Archaeology FAI 270 Site Reports 20, University of Illinois Press, Urbana. 1998 The Range Site 3 (11-5-47): Emergent Mississippian, George Reeves and Lindeman Phases. American Bottom Archaeology FA! 270 Site Reports, University of Illinois Press, Urbana. (in press) King, F. B. 1984 Plants, People and Paleoecology: Biotic Communities and Aboriginal Plant Use in Illinois. Illinois State Museum Scientific Papers Vol. 20, Springfield. Kuttruff, J. T. 1993 Mississippian Period Status Differentiation Through Textile Analysis: A Caddoan Example. American Antiquity 58:125145.
McElrath, D. 1., and F. A. Finney 1987 The George Reeves Site. American Bottom Archaeology FA! 270 Site Reports 15, University of Illinois Press, Urbana. McElrath, D. L, J. A. Williams, T. O. Mahler, and M. C. Meinkoth 1987 The Radic Site. American Bottom Archaeology FAI 270 Site Report 17. University of Illinois Press, Urbana. Milner, G. R. 1983 The Turner and Demange Sites. American Bottom Archaeology FA! 270 Site Reports 4, University of Illinois Press, Urbana. 1990 The Late Prehistoric Cahokia Cultural System of the Mississippi River Valley: Foundations, Florescence, and Fragmentation. Journal of World Prehistory 4:1-43. Minar, C. J. 1998 Motor Skills and the Learning Process: The Conservation of Cordage Twist Direction in Communities of Practice. Paper presented at the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Seattle, Washington. Miner, H. 1936 The Importance of Textiles in the Archaeology of the Eastern United States. American Antiquity 3: 181-192. Moorehead, W. K 1929 The Cahokia Mounds. University of Illinois Bulletin No.4, University of Illinois Press, Urbana. Muller, J. 1997 Mississippian Political Economy. Plenum Press, New York. Munson, P. J., and A. J. Ham 1971 An Archaeological Survey of the American Bottoms and Wood River Terrace. Reports of Investigations No. 21. Illinois State Museum, Springfield. Murra,J. V. 1989 Cloth and Its Function in the Inca State. In Cloth and Human Experience, edited by A. B. Weiner and J. Schneider, pp. 275-303. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C. Pauketat, T. R. 1993 Temples for Cahokia Lords:Preston Holder's 1955-1956 Excavation of Kunnemann Mound. Memoirs No. 26. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 1994 The Ascent of Chiefs: Cahokia and Mississippian Politics in Native North America. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa. 1997a Cahokian Political Economy. In Cahokia: Domination and Ideology in The Mississippian World, edited by T. R. Pauketat and T. E. Emerson, pp. 30-51. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln. 1997b Specialization, Political Symbols, and the Crafty Elite of Cahokia. Southeastern Archaeology 16:1-15. 1998a Refiguring the Archaeology of Greater Cahokia. Journal of Archaeological Research 6:45-89. 1998b The Archaeology of Downtown Cahokia: Tract 15A and Dunham Tract Excavations. Studies in Archaeology, University of Illinois Press, Urbana. Prentice, G. 1985 Economic Differentiation Among Mississippian Farmsteads. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 10:77-122. Raymond, Louis C. 1984 Spindle Whorls in Archaeology. Occasional Publications in Mesoamerican Anthropology, Department of Anthropology University of Northern Colorado, Greely. Song, C. A., K A. Jakes, and R. W. Yerkes 1996 Seip Hopewell Textile Analysis and Cultural Implications. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology. 21:247-265. Swanton, J. R. 1979 The Indians of the Southeastern United States. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington and London. Szuter, C. R. 1979 The Schlemmer Site: A Late Woodland-Mississippian Site in The American Bottom. Unpublished M.A. thesis, Loyola University, Chicago. Weiner, A. B. 1989 Why Cloth, Wealth, Gender and Power in Oceania. In Cloth and Human Experience, edited by A. B. Weiner and J. Schneider, pp 37-74. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.
Whitford, A. C.
1941 Textile Fibers
Used in Aboriginal North America. AnthropologicalPapers of the American Museum of Natural History 38(1):1-22. Williams, Samuel Cole 1930 Adair's History of the American Indians. Watauga Press, Jackson City, Tennessee. Willoughby, C. C. 1952 Textile Fabrics from The Spiro Mound. Missouri Archaeologist 14:107-125. Wittry, W. L., J. C. Arnold, C. O. Wittry, and T. Pauketat 1994 The Holdener Site: Late Woodland, Emergent Mississippian, and Mississippian Occupations in the American Bottom. American Bottom Archaeology FAI 270 Site Reports 26, University of Illinois Press, Urbana. Yerkes, R. W. 1983 Microwear, Microdrills and Mississippian Craft Specialization. American Antiquity 48:499-518. 1989 Mississippian Craft Specialization on the American Bottom. Southeastern Archaeology 8:93-106.
