Caddo Archaeological Sites on San Pedro Creek in Houston County, Texas: San Pedro de los Nabedaches

INTRODUCTION The Nabedache Caddo that lived on San Pedro Creek in Houston County in the East Texas Pineywoods (Figure 1) were a prominent nation during the early years of European contact, from ca. A.D. 1687-1730. Their villages, hamlets, and farmsteads sat astride an aboriginal trail that came to be known as El Camino Real de los Tejas, and thus their community was a principal gateway to Europeans and other Native American Spanish mission in East Texas was established amidst the Nabedache Caddo community (Weddle 2012:2).


INTRODUCTION
The Nabedache Caddo that lived on San Pedro Creek in Houston County in the East Texas Pineywoods ( Figure 1) were a prominent nation during the early years of European contact, from ca. A.D. 1687-1730. Their villages, hamlets, and farmsteads sat astride an aboriginal trail that came to be known as El Camino Real de los Tejas, and thus their community was a principal gateway to Europeans and other Native American Spanish mission in East Texas was established amidst the Nabedache Caddo community (Weddle 2012:2). The archaeology of the Nabedache Caddo, or that of their pre-A.D. 1542 ancestors, is not well understood, primarily because of the dearth of intensive investigations at a range of Nabedache Caddo sites. Work that has been completed, primarily on sites at Mission Tejas State Park, have included surveys and limited test excavations at a few sites (see summary in Perttula and Nelson 2006:27-29) that have Caddo material culture remains (sherds from ceramic vessels, chipped stone tools, etc.) and European trade goods, iron knife fragments, wrought iron nails, brass tinklers, and Spanish majolica sherds (Perttula and Nelson 2006:181-185). In this article, I discuss the archaeological material culture remains from several Nabedache Caddo sites along San Pedro Creek that are in the collections of the Texas Archeological Research Laboratory at The University of Texas at Austin.

HISTORICAL CONTEXT
remnants of the De Soto entrada (Bruseth and Kenmotsu 1993) described to chroniclers that the Caddo in East Texas lived in scattered but dispersed settlements with abundant food reserves of corn. The entrada moved along pre-existing east-west and north-south Caddo trails through East Texas, and from Hasinai Caddo groups in the Neches-Angelina River basins to Cadohadacho groups on the Red River ( Figure  2). The east-west aboriginal trail in most particulars became subsumed within the later East Texas por-2012:1-28; Williams 2007: Figure 8).
communities were widely dispersed throughout all of the major and minor river valleys of the region. The most intensive settlement of the region may have been after ca. A.D. 1400, especially in the Neches-Angelina River basin (Story 1995). By the mid-1600s, the Hasinai Caddo peoples of East Texas were referred to by the Spanish as the "Great Kingdom of the Tejas" because they were considered to be a populous and wellgoverned people.
When Europeans began to venture into East Texas in the 1680s and 1690s, the territory of the various Hasinai Caddo tribes became well understood (see Berlandier 1969;Jackson 1999; R. H. Jackson 2004). The area known to have been occupied by the Caddo in the late 17th century was also called "Tejas" by the Spanish, while the French called the Caddo in this area the "Cenis" (Figure 3). The Nabedache Caddo villages on San Pedro Creek were the principal entranceway to the lands of the Hasinai Caddo tribes that lived in the Neches and Angelina River basins, and one of the routes of the Camino Real-El Camino Real de los Tejas-came to and through this place from the late 17th to the early 19th century (Corbin 1991;Cunningham 2006). According to Weddle (2012:2): was among the Nabedaches that La Salle's remnant had appeared, just a few years previously, as it Nabedache village, situated between the Trinity and Neches Rivers. Beginning in 1716, missionary endeavors would be directed at other tribes of the Caddoan [sic] confederacies as well.
In historic times, the archaeology of the Hasinai Caddo groups is associated with the Allen phase (ca. A.D. 1650-early 1800s). "The Allen phase is believed to have developed out of the Frankston phase [ca. A.D. 1400-1650], and more importantly, to have shared the same form of organization, kinds of inter-group interaction, and settlement patterns" (Story and Creel 1982:34). The groups who during the Allen phase occupied the Neches (the Rio aux Cenis) and Angelina river basins were direct ancestors of the Hasinai tribes (see Figure 3) who were living in or near the Spanish missions that had been periodically established  and maintained in the region between ca. 1690-1731, and they continued to live there until the 1830s (see Jackson 1999:Plate 98). Story and Creel (1982:32) have suggested that the Allen phase populations were organized in a "weakly hierarchical structure" analogous to the Hasinai confederacy (see Swanton 1942). Allen phase components are found in the Neches and Angelina River basins in Cherokee, Anderson, Houston, Rusk, and Nacogdoches counties (Erickson and Corbin 1996;Middlebrook 2007;Perttula and Nelson 2006;Story 1982Story , 1995. These Historic Caddo sites contain small amounts of European trade goods found in village contexts, along with a variety of decorated and plain Caddo ceramic wares, triangular and unstemmed arrow points, elbow pipes, ground stone tools, and bone tools. Most Allen phase sites were apparently occupied for only short periods of time, perhaps an average of 20 to 40 years (Good 1982:67-69).
Allen phase Caddo communities were apparently composed of many farmsteads spread out over a considerable distance. In 1687, in the community of Nabedache Caddo on San Pedro Creek in Houston County (see Figure 3), Henri Joutel noted that:

Vs.
Vs.    Delisle's map of 1702 (see Figure 3) shows that the westernmost Caddo groups (the Cenis) were living on and near the Neches River, west of the Neches on San Pedro Creek. In the 1720s-1750s, the Hainai Caddo lived to the east on the Angelina River (see Figure 4), while the Nadaco and Nasoni were in communities to the north and west-apparently above the Camino Real-and a series of Cenis or Hasinai communities were along the western boundaries of their territory. The San Pedro or Nabedache Caddo were living east of the Trinity River and west of the Neches River (see Figure 4). At these times, Spanish missionaries were living in the midst of certain Caddo peoples at Mission Nuestra Senora de los Nacogdoches and Mission Nuestra Senora de Ais (see Figure 5). A 1771 map by Jose de Urrutia shows Caddo groups living north and west of these two missions (see Figure 6). The missions at Nacogdoches and Ais were abandoned in 1772 and 1773, respectively.

Nechas
Because of the regular outbreaks of epidemics among the East Texas Caddo, especially outbreaks at the Spanish settlement of Nacogdoches in the late 1770s and early 1780s, Caddo populations declined precipitously through the colonial era (Table 1). Caddo groups moved their villages, or coalesced into one village for protection. The Hasinai Caddo groups-the Nacogdoche, Hainai, the Hasinai, the Nadaco, Ais, and the Nabedache-remained in their East Texas homelands, living in the early 1800s outside of the Spanish settlements of Nacogdoches, west to the Neches River, and apparently north of the El Camino Real (Figure 7). Between about 1836 and 1839, the Hasinai tribes had all been forcibly pushed out of East Texas, and they either moved to Indian Territory, or farther west in Texas (in the upper Trinity and Brazos River basins, see Neighbours 1973Neighbours , 1975 Berlandier -300 *one warrior is assumed to equate to four members of a family, but it is likely that this underestimates population sizes; Swanton (1942:22-23). **Nacogdoche and Ais groups As previously mentioned, Mission San Francisco de los Tejas (1690-1693) was also situated on San Pedro Creek (Figure 8), apparently astride the Camino de los Tejas (labeled "Ancienne route de Bexar a Nacogdoches"). This mission was established "in the middle" of the Nabedache Caddo village along San Pedro Creek (Bolton 1987:41), perhaps about 2 leagues (ca. 5.2 miles) from the Neches River; Weddle (2012:45) suggests it was actually 4 leagues from the mission site to the Neches River along El Camino de los Tejas.

KNOWN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES
Archaeological evidence of Nabedache Caddo settlements that were occupied contemporaneously with   The collections discussed here were gathered by Alex D. Krieger in April 1944 during the course of a geological and archaeological reconnaissance of the lower valley of San Pedro Creek (Figure 9). Krieger Neches, we located a large site with many glass beads and iron fragments. A small cannon, now at the San Jacinto Memorial near Houston, Texas, was plowed up here about 1933. This place is... in a logical place for settlement and probably agreeable with Bolton's location of Nabedache" (Newell and Krieger 1949:13-14; see also Bolton 1908). In total, seven archaeological sites were located during the Krieger reconnaissance of

41HO64
of a small draw (a spring-fed tributary to San Pedro Creek) (see Figure 9); Woldert (1935) reported that the that this object is actually "the breech block of a small-bore artillery piece, such as a swivel gun." Whether this breech block, at the San Jacinto Museum of History is the same piece of artillery mentioned by Moore to Woldert or Krieger is an open debate and probably not easily resolved. The catalogue information for the breech block at the San Jacinto Museum of History indicates that it was found by George A. Moore in 1923 (Weddle 2012:46); Newell and Krieger (1949:14) have the discovery about 1933.
Moore had plowed up 7-8 Caddo Indian burials that had many glass beads found in association. Perttula the documentation of the Jackie Lively (and George A. Moore) collection from these sites. An assemblage of 7646 beads has been documented from 41HO64 (see Perttula 2004:93 and Table 1), and these are consistent with ca. A.D. 1690-1730 beads found in other East Texas Caddo sites. system) and the other is a large (8.0 mm in diameter) opaque round blue bead (IIa39). Both bead varieties were the two most common in the 41HO64 collection documented by Perttula (2004:

41HO66
This Nabedache Caddo site was situated along the edge of the second or higher alluvial terrace on the west side of San Pedro Creek (see Figure 9). Site 41HO67 is not far to the southwest.
Krieger collected six pieces of burned animal bone and 51 Caddo ceramic vessel sherds ( Table 2). The ceramic sherds are from both grog-tempered (59 percent) and bone-tempered (41 percent). The plain to decorated sherd ratio (P/DR) is a low 0.24, which is consistent with this being an Historic Caddo (Nabedache Caddo) ceramic assemblage on San Pedro Creek. In other known Historic Caddo sites on San Pedro Creek, P/DR ratios range from 0.32-0.60 (Perttula and Nelson 2006, 2007a, 2007bPerttula et al. 2011).  Sherds with brushed decorations represent 88 percent of the decorated sherds from the site (see Table 2). In other Nabedache Caddo ceramic assemblages on San Pedro Creek, brushed sherds comprise 69.2-76 percent of all the decorated sherds in the Nabedache Caddo ceramic assemblages (Table 3). If the proportion of brushing increases through time, such that sites with the highest percentage of brushed sherds are the youngest in a group of assemblages, and the P/DR value decreases from older to youngest, then the George A. Moore #2 site is the youngest of the documented Nabedache Caddo ceramic assemblages (41HO91, 41HO211, 41HO214, and 41HO263, see below and Perttula and Nelson 2006, 2007a, 2007b on San Pedro Creek.  The only substantial difference between these San Pedro Creek Caddo sites is the absence of Pat-Historic Nabedache Caddo sites. I take the absence of Patton Engraved at the George A. Moore site to be simply a product of decorated sherd sample size, taking into account the other measurements of very similar decorative methods (see Table 3). For example, 71 percent of all the sherds in the Krieger sample from the George A. Moore site are brushed, and 88 percent of all the decorated sherds are brushed (see Table 3); these proportions are higher than other Nabedache Caddo sites on San Pedro Creek. The very high proportion of Perttula et al. (2011:38), although the ceramic sherd assemblage from this work only comprised 15 sherds.
In addition to the many brushed sherds, likely from Bullard Brushed jars, in the assemblage, one body sherd has opposed brushing marks surrounding a single appliqued node (Figure 10a). Two sherds with parallel pinched ridges are from Killough Pinched vessels, and one body sherd with horizontal neck bands tempered bottle body sherd. It has at least two sets of three closely-spaced vertical engraved lines that end just above the vessel base (Figure 10b). This sherd may be from either a cylindrical Hume Engraved or Poynor Engraved bottle (see Suhm and Jelks 1962:Plates 42 and 63).

41HO67
The George A. Moore 3 site (41HO67) is on the same alluvial terrace as 41HO66 (see Figure 9). Krieger collected a total of six Caddo sherds from the site: one grog-tempered base sherd, a grog-tempered Killough Pinched body sherd, and four grog-tempered brushed rim and body sherds. The one rim, from a Bullard Brushed jar, has horizontal brushing marks, while the body sherds have vertical brushing marks. In the absence of Patton Engraved sherds or European trade goods, this site is most likely an ancestral Nabedache Caddo site that was occupied prior to ca. A.D. 1650.

41HO69
Only a small sample of Caddo ceramic sherds were collected from 41HO69, downstream a short distance from the other sites (see Figure 9), during the 1944 reconnaissance. This includes a grog-tempered parallel brushed body sherd, a plain bone-tempered body sherd, and a bone-tempered Poynor Engraved carinated bowl body sherd (see Figure 10c). This sherd may be from a Poynor Engraved, var. Cook vessel (see Perttula 2011: Figure 6-64c-d). This variety of Poynor Engraved was apparently made from ca. A.D. 1400-1650, but was most common on Caddo sites in the Neches River basin dating between ca. A.D. 1400-1560 (Perttula 2011: Table 6-37). This suggests that 41HO69 is an ancestral Nabedache Caddo site, occupied well before sustained European contact.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Archaeological work over the years, beginning with Alex Krieger's reconnaissance in 1944, has identiare also ancestral Caddo sites along the creek that date prior to European contact, indicating that the lower course of the creek was home to Caddo peoples by ca. A.D. 1400, if not earlier. Archival sources and historic maps of the San Pedro Creek area and East Texas indicate that these Caddo sites are the material remains of Nabedache Caddo habitation sites and cemeteries. In addition to a variety of ceramic vessel sherds and chipped stone artifacts, these sites also contain a wide range of European trade goods that were obtained from Spanish and French traders, colonists, and missionaries.
living on San Pedro Creek, Mission San Francisco de los Tejas, but the archaeological remains of the mission Figure 10. Decorative elements on selected ceramic sherds: a, brushedappliqued body sherd from 41HO66; b, engraved bottle body sherd from 41HO66; c, cf. Poynor Engraved body sherd from 41HO69.
compound have yet to be found. Historical and archival information indicates that the mission was about 10 well upstream from the Nabedache Caddo sites discussed in this article. These sites are nevertheless part of the community the Spanish referred to as San Pedro de los Nabedaches.
I hope that a concerted archaeological and historical/archival research effort can be mounted in the years to come that focuses on the community of San Pedro de los Nabedaches. The purposes of that effort would be to not only locate the 1690-1693 Mission San Francisco de los Tejas on San Pedro Creek, but to also obtain more detailed information on the archaeological character of the associated Nabedache sites and community on the creek.