The Poverty Point site (16WC5) in northeast Louisiana is justly famous for its massive earthworks, a unique lapidary industry, and an exchange system that brought in copper, lead, soapstone, and numerous varieties of chert from all over the Eastern Woodlands (Figure 7.1). However, the artifact that is most truly diagnostic of both the Poverty Point site and Poverty Point culture, the plentiful and enigmatic Poverty Point object (also known simply as “PPO”), has received comparatively little research attention. Its importance to Poverty Point culture is highlighted by the fact that when Clarence Webb (1968, 1982) delineated the extent of the culture, he used sites containing PPOs or related baked-clay objects (“BCOs”) as his boundary markers.
PPOs are one of the most widely distributed artifact types in the Southeast. They are found primarily in the Lower Mississippi Valley (LMV), but they have also been found at sites extending from coastal Louisiana eastward along the Gulf Coast to northeast Florida (a distance of approximately 960 km), northward from the coast approximately 960 km to the Cairo, Illinois, area, and even up into the lower Ohio Valley to near Louisville, Kentucky. This huge area can be subdivided into about 10 distinct regions of PPO concentrations (Figure 7.2). These include eastern Florida (particularly at the Harris Creek site [8VO24] on Tick Island), the northwest coast of Florida, the Mississippi/Louisiana Gulf Coast, south Louisiana, south Texas, the Poverty Point area, the Yazoo Basin, eastern Arkansas, the Central Mississippi Valley, and the Falls of the Ohio.
Because PPOs can be sorted easily into a standard set of types, archaeologists have typically classified and quantified their numbers at sites, but rarely do they analyze the PPOs any further. Typically they have assumed that PPOs were used primarily as a type of “cooking stone” to hold and release heat when roasting food. In 2009 we began a multiyear research project on the function, distribution, and meaning of PPOs in order to explore their greater research potential and the complexity of their use. We have, for example, discovered that PPOs have sometimes been traded or transported between sites that are several hundred miles apart, such as from Poverty Point to Tick Island in eastern Florida or from the Mississippi Gulf Coast site of Claiborne (22HA501) at the mouth of the Pearl River to Poverty Point (Hays, Stoltman, Tykot, and Weinstein 2010). We have identified distinct regional patterns in the distribution of types (e.g., mulberried spheroids were almost exclusively made on the Gulf Coast but were transported to Poverty Point: Hays, Weinstein, and Stoltman 2010). And we are convinced that the function and meanings that Poverty Point peoples associated with some of the PPOs must have extended beyond their use as quotidian baking stones (Hays, Weinstein, and Stoltman 2010; Hays et al. 2011).
Figure 7.1. Map of sites from which Poverty Point Objects (PPOs) were thin-sectioned during 2010–2011
Figure 7.2. Ten general areas of PPO concentrations.
We are currently working toward publication of a comprehensive analysis and interpretation of the results of our multiyear research project. In this chapter we report on a portion of that work, primarily the results of our thin-section analyses of baked-clay objects conducted during 2010–2011. In addition, we discuss relevant thin-section analyses from previous years. The thin sections were analyzed by Stoltman using a point-counting procedure to record the bulk composition of each PPO (Stoltman 1989, 1991). Bulk composition is expressed quantitatively as the percentages of the following three natural ingredients: matrix (i.e., clay), silt, and sand. A sand-size index is also recorded for each thin section. The basic underlying assumption of this analysis is that local manufacture of fired-clay products is the more probable alternative to importation when their physical properties match those of local sediments and/or demonstrably local artifacts.
We thin-sectioned 27 PPOs from a wide range of locales including the Burkett (23MI20) and Weems (23MI25) sites in southeast Missouri, six sites in western Tennessee, the McCarty site (3PO467) in northeast Arkansas, the Teoc Creek site (22CR504) in the Yazoo Basin, and the Claiborne and Apple Street (22JA530) sites on the Mississippi Gulf Coast. We selected samples from these areas to answer questions raised by our previous work, and also to ensure that we had examined samples from most of the important regions with PPO concentrations.
In all of our thin-section analyses of PPOs, we attempted to answer three basic questions: (1) What is the primary sedimentary composition of PPOs within a region? (2) What types of PPOs are present in a region and are there any PPOs unique to that region? and (3) Is there any evidence that some of the PPOs in a region are nonindigenous and, in fact, may have been brought into that area from someplace else? Most of this chapter is devoted to addressing these questions for PPO samples from three areas: southeast Missouri, west Tennessee, and the Mississippi Gulf Coast.
Poverty Point objects or baked-clay objects have been recorded at sites in southeastern Missouri since as early as the late 1800s (Williams 1991:96). Excavations at the adjacent sites of Burkett and Weems and at the Hearns (23MI7) site have produced some of the largest samples of these objects in the region (Klippel 1969; Thomas et al. 2005; Williams 1968). While most of the PPOs in southeast Missouri date to the O’Bryan Ridge phase of the Late Archaic period, they continued to be used and produced in the region in declining but appreciable numbers into the Mississippi period (ca. 10 to 20 at sites in each post-Archaic time period: Williams 1991). The range of types is limited, but includes distinct biconical shapes, poorly defined spheroid and biscuit shapes, a few melon-shaped forms, and some tabular and potato-shaped forms (Thomas et al. 2005; Williams 1968).
To address our questions about PPOs in this region, we received a loan from the University of Missouri of approximately 200 PPOs from the Burkett and Weems sites. Based on a visual inspection of the objects, we noted the following trends. The majority are round/spheroidal or amorphous in shape (Figure 7.3). There is a sizable number of biconical objects, although many of them were barely distinguishable from the rounded objects since the ends were not very pointed (Figure 7.4). There are also a few ellipsoidal objects.
The vast majority of the Missouri PPOs have a sandy composition, which is to be expected since the soil samples curated with the PPOs were texturally very sandy, probably a sandy loam. It should be noted that Thomas et al. (2005:93–101) report that soil texture can vary considerably at the Burkett site from sandy to clayey to silty. Seven PPOs, two from Burkett and five from Weems, were selected for thin sectioning in order to sample a range of styles (biconicals, spheroids, and ellipsoids) and composition (very sandy, moderately sandy, clayey).
The thin-section analysis demonstrated that, in fact, there are two distinct compositional groups (Figure 7.5 and Table 7.1). Most of the PPOs are sandy (i.e., have > 20 percent sand) with very little silt (i.e., less than 10 percent silt). Interestingly one of the objects in this group (23-3) is composed of two very distinct clays (Figure 7.6). On the left part of the thin section is fine clay with almost no inclusions and on the right is extremely sandy clay, which is the predominant soil type in the object. In contrast to the five sandy PPOs, two (one each from Burkett and Weems) are composed almost entirely of clay (or matrix) with very little silt or sand.
Figure 7.3. PPOs thin sectioned from the Burkett/Weems sites. (a. spheroidal; b. biconical; c. biconical; d. biconical; e. biconical; f. biconical/spheroidal; g. potato-shaped). Photo courtesy Christopher T. Hays, James B. Stoltman, and Richard A. Weinstein.
Figure 7.4. Comparison of Weems (a) and West Tennessee biconicals (b). Photo courtesy Christopher T. Hays, James B. Stoltman, and Richard A. Weinstein.
Figure 7.5. Ternary graph of PPOs from Burkett/Weems, McCarty and 40SY56 (biconicals from West Tennessee).
One clear conclusion concerning the Missouri objects is that none of them appear to be imports from either Poverty Point or the Yazoo Basin, since they do not fit the compositional characteristics of either area. Particularly, the Missouri objects have low silt content, which is distinctively different from the high silt content of LMV PPOs. Therefore we find no evidence of the movement of baked-clay objects between Poverty Point and southeast Missouri. This is not surprising since the main components containing PPOs at the Burkett and Weems sites appear to predate Poverty Point and Jaketown by several hundred years. Radiocarbon dates from Burkett indicate baked-clay objects were in use there as early as 2300 B.C., which is quite a few hundred years before PPOs appear at the Poverty Point site (Thomas et al. 2004:120).
There is, however, an intriguing similarity in composition between three of the biconicals from Tennessee (two from 40SY56 and one from 40DY42) and the five sandy PPOs from Missouri (Figures 7.5 and 7.9). Since the soils at 40SY56 are primarily silt loams (loessal soils cover much of western Tennessee adjacent to the Mississippi River), this suggests the possibility that these two biconicals were made somewhere in the Burkett/Weems vicinity. However, in form and style the Burkett/Weems biconicals are quite different from those found in southwest Tennessee. Specifically, as noted earlier, the Missouri biconicals are poorly formed, whereas the biconicals found at 40SY56 are well made.
Figure 7.6. Thin section of PPO from Weems site composed of two distinct clays (fine clay on the left and extremely sandy clay on the right). Photo courtesy Christopher T. Hays, James B. Stoltman, and Richard A. Weinstein.
There are some notable compositional similarities that can be observed between Missouri PPOs and those of the neighboring states of Arkansas and Tennessee. In contrast to the LMV sites in Mississippi and Louisiana, which have generally high-silt/low-sand compositions, the preponderance of those from Missouri and Arkansas plus four from Tennessee have generally lowsilt/high-sand compositions (i.e., no more than 11 percent silt and no less than 20 percent sand). It seems most parsimonious to view this as a regional pattern that can be associated with the central Mississippi Valley region.
In several papers Smith (e.g., 1996, 1998) has documented the presence and extent of PPOs at sites throughout western Tennessee, and he has set up a series of associated Poverty Point phases in the region. The dates and cultural affiliations of these objects are not entirely clear, however, since the collections are associated with mostly small-scale investigations and few definitive radiocarbon dates. Most of the PPOs probably date to the terminal Archaic or Poverty Point periods, but it seems likely that they were used in limited numbers in the Woodland period, since some have been found in association with Early to Middle Woodland pottery (Mainfort 1997; Smith 1998).
To address our questions about the Tennessee samples, we obtained a loan from the Chucalissa Museum in Memphis of all the PPOs from western Tennessee that were large enough to be identifiable to type (Figure 7.7). In total, this included approximately 30 objects. We selected 13 of them for thin sectioning from six sites, three from southwest Tennessee (40SY56, 40FY36, and 40TP37) and three from northwest Tennessee (40DY42, 40GB42, and 40OB54). These samples were selected based on the following criteria: first, we wanted a wide representation from sites throughout west Tennessee; second, we selected samples made of a highly unusual and intriguing white clay that we wanted to know more about; and third, we included some samples that we believed might be imports into the region (Figure 7.8).
Thin-section analysis revealed that the PPOs from west Tennessee are diverse in composition: seven have sand counts of 2 percent or less; four, by contrast, have high sand percentages, ranging from 20 to 26 percent; and two have relatively high amounts of silt (i.e., 15–21 percent) with relatively low sand percentages of 1–7 percent (Figure 7.9 and Table 7.2). This diversity in composition is apparent even within sites. For example, both site 40GB42 in northwestern Tennessee and site 40SY56 in southwest Tennessee have PPOs of three distinct compositions: some are very clayey, some are siltier, and others are somewhat sandy. Thus, on the whole there does not appear to be a particular mineralogical composition characteristic of the region. The styles of PPOs found in west Tennessee are a bit more diverse than those in southeast Missouri. They include well-formed biconicals, biscuits, cylinders, round/ spheroids, and ellipsoids; yet they are not nearly as diverse nor as consistent in their stylistic forms as those found at Poverty Point or within the Yazoo Basin’s Poverty Point-era sites.
Figure 7.7. Location of sites with samples from West Tennessee.
Figure 7.8. PPOs thin sectioned from West Tennessee sites (a. biconical; b. biconical; c. biconical; d. ellipsoid; e. cylinder; f. cylinder; g. spheroidal; h. spheroid with cane impression; i. spheroid; j. ellipsoid). Photo courtesy Christopher T. Hays, James B. Stoltman, and Richard A. Weinstein.
Figure 7.9. Ternary graph of PPOs from West Tennessee sites.
Figure 7.10. Biscuit-shaped object with cane impressions from West Tennessee (left) and unusual and decorated PPOs on display at Poverty Point (right). Photo of Poverty Point artifacts by Hieronymous Rowe at en.wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org).
The west Tennessee objects include several types with distinctive regional characteristics. First, a small number of them are ellipsoidal or spheroidal objects with cord or fabric impressions. As far as we know, only one other site has objects with fabric impressions: Poverty Point (with approximately 17 specimens). The Tennessee fabric- and cord-marked objects may be associated with Early and Middle Woodland occupations, since these decorations commonly show up on early pottery in the region. Another distinctive PPO type in west Tennessee is the biscuit-shaped object with cane impressions (Figure 7.10). The only other site with PPOs with similar cane impressions is Poverty Point, which has some cube-shaped and biscuit-shaped objects exhibiting such decoration.
Finally, one very distinctive quality of some of the west Tennessee PPOs is that they are made of dense, kaolinitic white clay (e.g. 40-123 in Figure 7.8). We thin-sectioned four of these PPOs (40-119, 40-123, 40-126, and 40-127) from three different sites (40SY56, 40FY36, and 40GB42). All four had highly birefringent bodies with very little silt or sand and, importantly, were white (10YR8/1) in color. Webb et al. (1969:61) refer to very similar PPOs in private collections in northwest Tennessee that are made of “firm white clay.” We believe that the most likely source of this clay is the borderline region of northwest Tennessee and southwest Kentucky, which contains deposits of Eocene-age kaolinitic clays known as “ball clay” (Olive and Finch 1969 and Figure 7.10). These deposits are being actively mined today for a variety of purposes, including the production of dinnerware and electrical porcelain. The only other site with PPOs with this combination of color and texture is Poverty Point (Figure 7.10; see PPOs in the center of the unusual and decorated collection). These PPOs, which are in the “unusual” collection at Poverty Point, are distinctive also because they have cane impressions, which, as noted above, are distinctly characteristic of west Tennessee PPOs. Taken together, these data strongly suggest that the white cane-impressed PPOs at Poverty Point were imported from west Tennessee.
Figure 7.11. Location of ball clay deposits in northwest Tennessee area.
The evidence for imported PPOs in west Tennessee is mixed. One of the PPOs (40-120) has a high percentage of silt (i.e., 15 percent) and only 1 percent sand. Although this is typical of objects originating at Poverty Point, because much of western Tennessee has silty loams, the origin of this PPO must be regarded as uncertain. PPO 40-115, however, has a high silt content (21 percent) and moderate sand content (7 percent) that is characteristic of Yazoo Basin PPOs, and is unlike the composition of the major soil type at the site (40SY56) where it was found (Fayala silt loam [Sease et al. 1970]). Therefore, it seems plausible that 40-115 was imported. Finally, as noted before, two of the biconicals found at 40SY56 have relatively sandy compositions and may have been imports from the southeast Missouri area.
During the year 2010–2011, we thin-sectioned a sample of PPOs from both the Yazoo Basin and the Mississippi Gulf Coast. For the Yazoo Basin, we selected three biconicals from the Teoc Creek site (Connaway et al. 1977; Figure 7.12 and Figure 7.13). The three are similar in composition, consisting of variable but relatively high amounts of silt (i.e., 11–24 percent), and small amounts of fine sand (i.e., 6 percent or less). This compositional mixture is similar to the PPOs that we had previously thin-sectioned from the other major Poverty Point-era Yazoo Basin sites of Jaketown (22HU505) and Norman (22QU518) (Hays, Stoltman, Tykot, and Weinstein 2010). Indeed, one of the most striking patterns among the PPOs we have observed across the Southeast is the remarkably consistent composition of PPOs from the Yazoo Basin, with their relatively high silt content (ranging from 10 to 24 percent) and moderate values of fine sand (i.e., 1–8 percent). This pattern stands in stark contrast to the PPOs from other regions, such as Poverty Point or Claiborne, where there is a great diversity of both styles and composition, and the Missouri and west Tennessee sites that, as mentioned above, have diverse compositions.
Figure 7.12. Biconical PPO fragments thin sectioned from Teoc Creek. Photo courtesy Christopher T. Hays, James B. Stoltman, and Richard A. Weinstein.
Figure 7.13. Ternary graph with all Yazoo Basin PPOs.
Figure 7.14. PPOs/BCOs thin sectioned from coastal Mississippi sites (a. perforated mulberry; b. dimpled PPO; c. dimpled PPO; d. melon, longitudinal grooved; e. melon, lateral grooved; f. mulberry fragment). Photo courtesy Christopher T. Hays, James B. Stoltman, and Richard A. Weinstein.
To address our research questions about the relationship between Mississippi Gulf Coast sites and Poverty Point, we obtained loans of PPOs from Claiborne from both public and private sources and the loan of a single PPO from the Apple Street site (Figure 7.14). From the Claiborne site we selected five PPOs, including one (22-44) with a distinctive roughened surface treatment that Webb (1982:39) referred to as mulberried (hereafter such PPOs are referred to as mulberries). Two of the other PPOs that we selected from Claiborne are what Webb et al. (1969:16) referred to as spheroidal dimpled, having a faceted or dimpled surface treatment to produce a golfball-like appearance (22-45 and 22-46). The other two PPOs selected included one with unusual lateral grooves (22-43) and a melon-shaped PPO with a silty composition (22-42). The Apple Street PPO is a mulberry (see Figure 7.14). Previously, we had analyzed thin sections of five PPOs from Claiborne (Hays, Stoltman, Tykot, and Weinstein 2010), and in our discussion below we compare them to the results of our 2010–2011 samples from Claiborne.
Figure 7.15. Ternary graph of relevant PPOs thin sectioned from Caliborne and Apple Street sites.
Accepting the five sandy PPOs as local Claiborne products, it is noteworthy that none of the six new PPO samples from Claiborne and Apple Street fall within the compositional range of variation of the local Claiborne PPOs (Table 7.3). At least one of the new samples (22-42), a melon-shaped PPO, has a compositional profile that places it fully within the range of variation of PPOs and sediments from the Poverty Point site. We regard it as an actual import from Poverty Point. The two dimpled PPOs (22-45 and 22-46) stand out as outliers, with compositions that are intermediate between the sandy local PPOs of Claiborne and the silty PPOs of Poverty Point (Figure 7.15). Their derivation must currently be regarded as unknown, but it is noteworthy that Poverty Point has 51 dimpled PPOs and they are not present at any of the Yazoo Basin sites (Webb et al. 1969).
As for the mulberried PPOs (one each from Claiborne and Apple Street and three from Poverty Point), there appears to be a notably uniform compositional pattern that is consistent with the view of a common origin. Generally, these five mulberries have moderate sand percentages (i.e., between 10 and 20 percent) and low silt values (i.e., 11 percent or less) (Figure 7.15). Since this compositional pattern is matched at no site or region in our current sample, we are unable to make a positive identification of their source. A view we currently favor is that they were made locally on the Gulf Coast, using a distinctive recipe that is a correlate of their cultural or functional uniqueness.
Our visual and thin-section analyses of PPOs conducted during 2010–2011 revealed distinct patterns in each region that we studied. Our thin-section analysis of the Missouri objects revealed that they break distinctly into two groups: those with sandy composition (the vast majority) and those with clayey composition. None of the over 200 PPOs that were visually inspected had a predominantly silty paste, which strongly suggests none came from the Poverty Point or Yazoo Basin areas. Other striking aspects of the Missouri objects include their limited range in types, mostly biconical and spheroidal, and their overall crude appearance, particularly when compared to the comparatively well-formed and diverse types in the LMV. As noted above, since the main occupations of the O’Bryan Ridge phase in southeast Missouri predate Poverty Point culture sites by at least several hundred years, it is not surprising that there is no clear evidence of any interrelationship. However, the fact that both cultures have numerous biconical objects and their sites are located on or very near the Mississippi River suggests that they may have some connection. This is an issue we will be considering in our continuing research.
Our analysis of the west Tennessee artifacts indicates that there is considerable diversity in the composition of the objects, ranging from very silty to very clayey to somewhat sandy, even within one site. Stylistically the PPOs in west Tennessee are, for the most part, better made than the Missouri ones, and they have a range of types that include biconicals, ellipsoids, biscuit shapes, and rounds. The west Tennessee objects, however, are not as diverse as those from Poverty Point or the Yazoo Basin sites, lacking many of the classic Poverty Point types such as cylindrical and cross grooved, biconical grooved, and melons. We noted some distinctive surface treatments on a few of the west Tennessee PPOs that are not common in classic Poverty Point sites. These include cordmarked and fabric marked and objects with round cane impressions. Moreover, we note that PPOs at three different sites are made of distinctive white, kaolinitic clay, the most likely source for which is clay deposits in northwest Tennessee. The only other site with PPOs of this type is Poverty Point, and we think it likely that the ones found at that locale came from west Tennessee.
The results of our analysis of the Teoc Creek biconicals demonstrated, once again, that the Yazoo Basin PPOs are homogeneous in composition. The three Yazoo Basin sites from which we have samples are separated by over 160 km, but their PPOs are made of basically the same proportions of sand, silt, and clay. Finally, our analysis of the Claiborne and Apple Street PPOs revealed, as we had suspected, that PPOs were moving back and forth between the Gulf Coast and Poverty Point. We got further support for our argument that the sandy mulberries found at Poverty Point were coming from the Gulf Coast, and this year we demonstrated that Poverty Point objects were being moved to Claiborne. We suspect that our sample only represents a small portion of the PPOs that were moving between the sites, and indeed Webb et al. (1969:3, 28) hint at this when they mention that 2.8 percent (n = 357) of the PPOs at Claiborne were silty or clayey, while at Poverty Point they estimated .66 percent were coarse sandy (i.e., they found 39 coarse sandy PPOs out of the 5,908 checked for this attribute). A more detailed discourse on the implications of these results will be forthcoming, along with a full discussion and analysis of all of the results of our ongoing study into the distribution and movement of PPOs within the Poverty Point exchange system.
The authors would like to thank and acknowledge several institutions and their representatives who generously loaned us artifact samples for the thin-section study. These include the Museum of Anthropology, University of Missouri; the C. H. Nash Museum at Chucalissa; the Hancock County Historical Society; the University of Southern Mississippi; the Louisiana Division of Archaeology and the Louisiana Division of State Parks; and the Mississippi Department of Archives and History. Catherine and Phillip Burgess loaned us samples from Claiborne from their private collection. Research grants from the University of Wisconsin-Washington County Foundation and the Department of Anthropology and Sociology, University of Wisconsin, provided money for various laboratory analyses and trips to professional meetings and conferences. Lastly, colleagues at the authors’ institutions provided invaluable advice and support. We would particularly like to thank Donald Hunter of CEI for his work on the map figures and artifact photos.
