-
Title
-
Plantation Archaeology at Riviere Aux Chiens, ca. 1725-1848 (Preferred Source)
-
Date
-
2000
-
Bibliographic Citation
-
Waselkov, Gregory A. and Bonnie L. Gums. 2000. Plantation Archaeology at Riviere Aux Chiens, ca. 1725-1848. Report submitted to the Alabama Department of Transportation. Center for Archaeological Studies, University of South Alabama, Mobile.
-
annotates
-
• Probably the best written summary of historical documentation of Native American tribes in the north Gulf coast region, to date.
• Mobilians; Pensacola; Pascagoulas/Capinans/Biloxi; Apalachee/Chatos/Towasas; Taensa; Chitimachas/Washas/Abenaki/Yamasee/and other “enslaved Native Americans;” Upper Creek.
• Tomés (Tohomés, Tomehs); Naniabas combines the discussion of these two tribes. The Tomé established a relationship with the French colonists around 1699 on the Mobile River and the French found Choctaw visitors at a Tomé village (Waselkov and Gums 2000:17). They recount Charles Levasseur’s visit to a Tomé village in 1700, which numbered them in the 300s whereas Iberville numbered them around 350 in 1702 (Waselkov and Gums 2000:17-18). The historical records indicate that yellow fever (introduced from European ships) decimated the Tomé population by the 1720s. Several lines of evidence point to the production of salt by the Tome for trade, even to the Choctaw who were a good distance away.
• Choctaw (pgs. 36-44) provides a detailed history of the Choctaw tribe in relation to Europeans and gives the best summary of the evidence for Choctaws living in and around Mobile well into the nineteenth century.
• The section on the archaeology with sites that represent historical period Native American tribes is shorter but does cover the shell tempering used (unattributed to a specific tribe in the report) and du Pratz having Natchez potters construct vessels based on his faience dishes (Waselkov and Gums 2000:45). Covers the scant evidence for local colonowares being manufactured by Native potters rather than African or African American people in the Mobile area (Waselkov and Gums 2000:46).
o Agrees with Fuller that the Port Dauphin complex and Mobilian potters is sound conclusion and that Fuller supposition that the Doctor Lake complex is associated with the Tomé and Naniaba is sound, but the relationship between the two is not understood.
o Post-1763, the amalgamation of Native potting traditions homogenizes (Fuller’s Gulf Historic Fineware Tradition) in terms of temper, form, and decorative motifs (Waselkov and Gums 2000:47).
o The presence of Native-made vessels in historical settings could represent any number of activities and behaviors that resulted in the incorporation of those artifacts in the archaeological record, including trade for products like bear or nut oils, sold to local residents, or indeed made by African descendants.
• Mentions 1SU7 (Fort Tombecbé), 1MB100 (Fort Stoddert) in relation to the Choctaw.
• The Native pottery recovered from the excavations includes types attributed to the Apalachee, Creek, Choctaw, and Chato, Tomé, Mobilians, Yamasee, Pascagoula (or possibly Choctaw).
• Nodena type hafted bifaces are reported and associated with the Chato (Waselkov and Gums 2000:135).
• Area 2 is believed to represent a Native structure and associated activities (trash and smudge pits) (Waselkov and Gums 2000:184-185) based primarily on the relatively high concentration of historical Native American vessels.