Part 1

Produced by Louise Hope, Carlo Traverso, 1st-hand-history.org, and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net. This file was produced from images generously made available by the Bibliothèque nationale de France (BnF/Gallica) at http://gallica.bnf.fr.

SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION--BUREAU OF ETHNOLOGY.

PREHISTORIC TEXTILE FABRICS

OF THE

UNITED STATES,

DERIVED FROM IMPRESSIONS ON POTTERY.

by WILLIAM H. HOLMES.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * *

CONTENTS.

Page. Introductory 397 First Group 401 Second Group 404 Third Group 413 Fourth Group 416 Fifth Group 417 Sixth Group 418 Miscellaneous 420

ILLUSTRATIONS.

[Transcriber's Note: In the original text, the position of illustrations was determined by available page space. For this e-text, each figure caption has been placed directly _after_ the paragraph describing the figure. Figure 88, which shared a caption with Figure 89, has been shifted down to join Figure 90. The captions are identical except for number.]

Plate XXXIX.--Pottery, with impressions of textile fabrics 397

Fig. 60.--Cord-marked vessel, Great Britain 399 61.--Cord and fabric marked vessel, Pennsylvania 400 62.--Combination of threads in coffee sacking 401 63.--Section of same 401 64.--Fabric from the ancient pottery of New York 402 65.--Fabric from the ancient pottery of District of Columbia 402 66.--Fabric from the ancient pottery of Arizona 402 67.--Fabric from the caves of Kentucky 403 68.--Fabric from the Swiss Lake Dwellings 403 69.--Fabric from a mound in Ohio 403 70.--Fabric from a mound in Ohio 403 71.--Section of the same 403 72.--Fabric from the ancient pottery of Tennessee 405 73.--Section of same 405 74.--Diagram showing method of weaving 405 75.--Device for making the twist 406 76.--Fabric from the ancient pottery of Tennessee 406 77.--Fabric from the ancient pottery of Georgia 407 78.--Fabric from the ancient pottery of Tennessee 407 79.--Fabric from the ancient pottery of Tennessee 408 80.--Fabric from the ancient pottery of Tennessee 408 81.--Fabric from the ancient pottery of Arkansas 408 82.--Fabric from the ancient pottery of Illinois 409 83.--Fabric from the ancient pottery of Illinois 410 84.--Fabric from the ancient pottery of Missouri 410 85.--Fabric from the ancient pottery of Tennessee 410 86.--Fabric from a copper celt, Iowa 411 87.--Fabric from Vancouver's Island 412 88.--Fabric from the Lake Dwellings of Switzerland 412 89.--Fabric from the Lake Dwellings of Switzerland 412 90.--Fabric from the Lake Dwellings of Switzerland 413 91.--Section of third form of fabric 414 92.--Device for weaving same 414 93.--Fabric from the ancient pottery of Tennessee 414 94.--Fabric from the ancient pottery of Tennessee 414 95.--Fabric from the ancient pottery of Tennessee 414 96.--Fabric from the ancient pottery of Tennessee 415 97.--Fabric from the Northwest coast 415 98.--Fabric from the ancient pottery of Tennessee 416 99.--Fabric from the ancient pottery of Alabama 416 100.--Fabric from the ancient pottery of Iowa 417 101.--Plaiting of an ancient sandal 417 102.--Braiding done by the Lake Dwellers 418 103.--Fabric from the ancient pottery of District of Columbia 419 104.--Fabric from the ancient pottery of North Carolina 419 105.--Fabric from the ancient pottery of North Carolina 420 106.--Net from the Lake Dwellings 420 107.--Fabric from the ancient pottery of New Jersey 421 108.--Fabric from the ancient pottery of New Jersey 421 109.--Fabric from the ancient pottery of New Jersey 422 110.--Fabric from the ancient pottery of Pennsylvania 422 111.--Impression on the ancient pottery of Ohio 423 112.--Impression on the ancient pottery of New Jersey 423 113.--Impression on the ancient pottery of Alabama 423 114.--Impression on the ancient pottery of Maryland 424 115.--Impression on the ancient pottery of Alabama 425

PREHISTORIC TEXTILE FABRICS OF THE UNITED STATES,

DERIVED FROM IMPRESSIONS ON POTTERY.

By W. H. Holmes.

INTRODUCTORY.

It is not my intention in this paper to make an exhaustive study of the art of weaving as practiced by the ancient peoples of this country. To do this would necessitate a very extended study of the materials used and of the methods of preparing them, as well as of the arts of spinning and weaving practiced by primitive peoples generally. This would be a very wide field, and one which I have no need of entering. I may state here, however, that the materials used by savages in weaving their simple fabrics consist generally of the fibre of bark, flax, hemp, nettles, and grasses, which is spun into thread of various sizes; or of splints of wood, twigs, roots, vines, porcupine quills, feathers, and a variety of animal tissues, either plaited or used in an untwisted state. The articles produced are mats, baskets, nets, bags, plain cloths, and entire garments, such as capes, hats, belts, and sandals.

It has been noticed by a few authors that twisted or plaited cords, as well as a considerable variety of woven fabrics, have been used by primitive tribes in the manufacture and ornamentation of pottery. Impressions of these made in the soft clay are frequently preserved on very ancient ware, the original fabrics having long since crumbled to dust. It is to these that I propose calling attention, their restoration having been successfully accomplished in many hundreds of cases by taking impressions in clay from the ancient pottery.

The perfect manner in which the fabric in all its details of plaiting, netting, and weaving can be brought out is a matter of astonishment; the cloth itself could hardly make all the particulars of its construction more manifest.

The examples presented in the accompanying plate will be very instructive, as the fragment of pottery is given on the left, with its rather obscure intaglio impressions, and the clay cast on the right with the cords of the fabric in high relief. The great body of illustrations have been made in pen directly from the clay impressions, and, although details are more distinctly shown than in the specimens themselves, I believe that nothing is presented that cannot with ease be seen in the originals. Alongside of these restorations I have placed illustrations of fabrics from other primitive sources.

There appears to be a pretty general impression that baskets of the ordinary rigid character have been extensively used by our ancient peoples in the manufacture of pottery to build the vessel in or upon; but my investigations tend to show that such is not the case, and that nets or sacks of pliable materials have been almost exclusively employed. These have been applied to the surface of the vessel, sometimes covering the exterior entirely, and at others only the body or a part of the body. The interior surface is sometimes partially decorated in the same manner.

The nets or other fabrics used have generally been removed before the vessel was burned or even dried. Professor Wyman, in speaking casually of the cord-marked pottery of Tennessee, says:

"It seems incredible that even an Indian would be so prodigal of time and labor as to make the necessary quantity of well-twisted cord or thread, and weave it into shape for the mere purpose of serving as a mold which must be destroyed in making a single copy."

This remark is, however, based upon a false assumption. The fact that the net or fabric has generally been removed while the clay was still soft being susceptible of easy proof. I have observed in many cases that handles and ornaments have been added, and that impressed and incised designs have been made in the soft clay _after_ the removal of the woven fabric; besides this there would be no need of the support of a net after the vessel had been fully finished and slightly hardened. Furthermore, I have no doubt that these _textilia_ were employed as much for the purpose of enhancing the appearance of the vessel as for supporting it during the process of construction. I have observed, in relation to this point, that in a number of cases, notably the great salt vessels of Saline River, Illinois, the fabric has been applied after the vessel was finished. I arrive at this conclusion from having noticed that the loose threads of the net-like cover sag or festoon toward the rim as if applied to the inverted vessel, Fig. 82. If the net had been used to suspend the vessel while building, the threads would necessarily have hung in the opposite direction.

In support of the idea that ornament was a leading consideration in the employment of these coarse fabrics, we have the well-known fact that simple cord-markings, arranged to form patterns, have been employed by many peoples for embellishment alone. This was a common practice of the ancient inhabitants of Great Britain, as shown by Jewett. The accompanying cut (Fig. 60) is copied from his work.[1]

[Footnote 1: Jewett, Llewellynn: Grave mounds and their contents, p. 92.]

It is a remarkable fact that very few entire cord-marked vessels have been obtained in this country, although fragments of such are very plentiful.

In Fig. 61 we have an ancient vase from Pennsylvania. It presents a combination of net or basket markings and of separate cord-markings. The regularity of the impressions upon the globular body indicates almost unbroken contact with the interior surface of the woven vessel. The neck and rim have apparently received finishing touches by separately impressing cords or narrow bands of some woven fabric.

Many examples show very irregular markings such as might have been made by rolling the plastic vessel irregularly upon a woven surface, or by molding it in an improvised sack made by tying up the margins of a piece of cloth.

It is necessary to distinguish carefully the cord and fabric markings from the stamped designs so common in southern pottery, as well as from the incised designs, some of which imitate fabric markings very closely.

I shall present at once a selection from the numerous examples of the fabrics restored. For convenience of study I have arranged them in six groups, some miscellaneous examples being added in a seventh group. For comparison, a number of illustrations of both ancient and modern textiles are presented.

In regard to methods of manufacture but little need be said. The appliances used have been extremely simple, the work in a vast majority of cases having been done by hand. It is probable that in many instances a simple frame has been used, the threads of the web or warp being fixed at one end and those of the woof being carried through them by the fingers or by a simple needle or shuttle. A loom with a device for carrying the alternate threads of the warp back and forth may have been used, but that form of fabric in which the threads are twisted in pairs at each crossing of the woof could only have been made by hand.

The probable methods will be dwelt upon more in detail as the groups are presented. In verifying the various methods of fabrication I have been greatly assisted by Miss Kate C. Osgood, who has successfully reproduced, in cotton cord, all the varieties discovered, all the mechanism necessary being a number of pins set in a drawing board or frame, in the form of three sides of a rectangle, the warp being fixed at one end only and the woof passing back and forth between the lateral rows of pins, as shown in Fig. 74.

FIRST GROUP.

Fig. 62 illustrates a small fragment of an ordinary coffee sack which I take as a type of the first group. It is a loosely woven fabric of the simplest construction; the two sets of threads being interwoven at right angles to each other, alternate threads of one series passing over and under each of the opposing series as shown in the section, Fig. 63.

It is a remarkable fact that loosely woven examples of this kind of cloth are rarely, if ever, found among the impressions upon clay or in the fabrics themselves where preserved by the salts of copper or by charring. The reason of this probably is that the combination is such that when loosely woven the threads would not remain in place under tension, and the twisted and knotted varieties were consequently preferred.

It is possible that many of the very irregular impressions observed, in which it is so difficult to trace the combinations of the threads, are of distorted fabrics of this class.

This stuff may be woven by hand in a simple frame, or by any of the primitive forms of the loom.

In most cases, so far as the impressions upon pottery show, when this particular combination is employed, the warp is generally very heavy and the woof comparatively light. This gives a cloth differing greatly from the type in appearance; and when, as is usually the case, the woof threads are beaten down tightly, obscuring those of the web, the resemblance to the type is quite lost.

Examples of this kind of weaving may be obtained from the fictile remains of nearly all the Atlantic States.

The specimen presented in Fig. 64 was obtained from a small fragment of ancient pottery from the State of New York.

It is generally quite difficult to determine which set of threads is the warp and which the woof. In most cases I have preferred to call the more closely placed threads the woof, as they are readily beaten down by a baton, whereas it would be difficult to manipulate the warp threads if so closely placed. In the specimen illustrated, only the tightly woven threads of the woof appear. The impression is not sufficiently distinct to show the exact character of the thread, but there are indications that it has been twisted. The regularity and prominence of the ridges indicate a strong, tightly drawn warp.

Fig. 65 represents a form of this type of fabric very common in impressions upon the pottery of the Middle Atlantic States. This specimen was obtained from a small potsherd picked up near Washington, D.C. The woof or cross-threads are small and uniform in thickness, and pass alternately over and under the somewhat rigid fillets of the web. The apparent rigidity of these fillets may result from the tightening of the series when the fabric was applied to the plastic surface of the vessel.

I present in Fig. 66 the only example of the impression of a woven fabric found by the writer in two summers' work among the remains of the ancient Cliff-Dwellers. It was obtained from the banks of the San Juan River, in southeastern Utah. It is probably the imprint of the interior surface of a more or less rigid basket, such as are to be seen among many of the modern tribes of the Southwest. The character of the warp cannot be determined, as the woof, which has been of moderately heavy rushes or other untwisted, vegetable fillets, entirely hides it.

The caves of Kentucky have furnished specimens of ancient weaving of much interest. One of these, a small fragment of a mat apparently made from the fiber of bark, or a fibrous rush, is illustrated in Fig. 67.

This simple combination of the web and woof has been employed by all ancient weavers who have left us examples of their work. The specimen given in Fig. 68 is the work of the ancient Lake-Dwellers of Switzerland. It is a mat plaited or woven of strips of bast, and was found at Robenhausen, having been preserved in a charred state.[2] Keller gives another example of a similar fabric of much finer texture in Fig. 8, Pl. CXXXVI.

[Footnote 2: Keller: Lake-Dwellers. Fig. 2, Pl. CXXXIV.]

An illustration of this form of fabric is given by Foster,[3] and reproduced in Fig. 69.

[Footnote 3: Foster: Prehistoric Times.]

In the same place this author presents another form of cloth shown in my Fig. 70. In Fig. 71 we have a section of this fabric. These cloths, with a number of other specimens, were taken from a mound on the west side of the Great Miama River, Butler County, Ohio. The fabric in both samples appears to be composed of some material allied to hemp. As his remarks on these specimens, as well as on the general subject, are quite interesting, I quote them somewhat at length.

"The separation between the fibre and the wood appears to have been as thorough and effectual as at this day by the process of rotting and hackling. The thread, though coarse, is uniform in size, and regularly spun. Two modes of weaving are recognized: In one, by the alternate intersection of the warp and woof, and in the other, the weft is wound once around the warp, a process which could not be accomplished except by hand. In the illustration the interstices have been enlarged to show the method of weaving, but in the original the texture was about the same as that in coarse sail-cloth. In some of the Butler County specimens there is evidently a fringed border."

In regard to the second specimen described, I would remark that it is a very unusual form, no such combination of the parts having come to my notice either in the ancient fabrics themselves or in the impressions on pottery. In a very closely woven cloth it might be possible to employ such a combination, each thread of the web being turned once around each thread of the woof as shown in Fig. 71; but certainly it would work in a very unsatisfactory manner in open fabrics. I would suggest that this example may possibly belong to my second group, which, upon the surface, would have a similar appearance. The combination of this form is shown in the section, Fig. 73.

SECOND GROUP.

It is not impossible, as previously stated, that open fabrics of the plain type were avoided for the reason that the threads would not remain in place if subjected to tension. A very ingenious method of fixing the threads of open work, without resorting to the device of knotting has been extensively employed in the manufacture of ancient textiles. The simplest form of cloth in which this combination is used is shown in Fig. 72. This example, which was obtained from a small fragment of pottery found in Polk County, Tennessee, may be taken as a type.

Two series of threads are interwoven at right angles, the warp series being arranged in pairs and the woof singly. At each intersection the pairs of warp threads are twisted half around upon themselves, inclosing the woof threads and holding them quite firmly, so that the open mesh is well preserved even when much strained. Fabrics of this character have been employed by the ancient potters of a very extended region, including nearly all the Atlantic States. There are also many varieties of this form, of fabric resulting from differences in the size and spacing of the threads. These differences are well brought out in the series of illustrations that follow.

In regard to the manufacture of this particular fabric, I am unable to arrive at any very definite conclusion. As demonstrated by Miss Osgood, it may be knitted by hand, the threads of the warp being fixed at one end and the woof at both by wrapping about pegs set in a drawing board or frame, as shown in the diagram, Fig. 74.

The combination is extremely difficult to produce by mechanical means, and must have been beyond the reach of any primitive loom. I have prepared a diagram, Fig. 75, which, shows very clearly the arrangement of threads, and illustrates a possible method of supporting the warp while the woof is carried across. As each thread of the woof is laid in place, the threads of the warp can be thrown to the opposite support, a turn or half twist being made at each exchange. The work could be done equally well by beginning at the top and working downward. For the sake of clearness I have drawn but one pair of the warp threads.

Fig. 76 illustrates a characteristic example of this class obtained from a fragment of pottery from the great mound at Sevierville, Tenn.

The impression is quite perfect. The cords are somewhat uneven, and seem to have been only moderately well twisted. They were probably made of some vegetable fiber. It will be observed that the threads of the woof are placed at regular intervals, while those of the web are irregularly placed. It is interesting to notice that in one case the warp has not been doubled, the single thread having, as a consequence, exactly the same relation to the opposing series as corresponding threads in the first form of fabric presented. The impression, of which this is only a part, indicates that the cloth was considerably distorted when applied to the soft clay. The slipping of one of the woof threads is well shown in the upper part of the figure.

The fabric shown in Fig. 77 has been impressed upon an earthen vessel from Macon, Ga. It has been very well and neatly formed, and all the details of fiber, twist, and combination can be made out.

The example given in Fig. 78 differs from the preceding in the spacing and pairing of the warp cords. It was obtained from a fragment of ancient pottery recently collected at Reel Foot Lake, Tennessee.