Recent Research on the Archaeological and Historical Evidence of the Hasanai

This article was assembled using information collected for my dissertation proposal. The Allen Phase Caddo sites and other aboriginal Historic sites of interest are located in the upper Neches and Angelina River basins in East Texas, and were identified from various sources in the archaeological literature . In addition, regional archaeologists and a vocational archaeologists, including several participants of the East Texas Caddo Research Group 2006 meeting, provided information and helped in the process of vetting sites. My dissertation will examine the archival and archaeological records in hopes of identifying the archaeological correlates of Hasinai Caddo groups in East Texas. To accomplish this l will revisit primary documents and their translations, analyze known archaeological site collections, and locate, document, analyze and, if possible, contextualize unreported private collections. Utilizing multiple lines of evidence, including a broad survey of sites, collections, and a detailed examination of regional ceramic attributes, I propose to link archaeological sites to specific Hasinai regional entities. Native Caddo groups inhabited the area between the Neches and Angelina river valleys of East Texas for hundreds of years before the first European contact at ca. A.D. 1542. Written accounts from the time of sustained contact, more than 100 years later have informed and influenced our understanding of the social, political, and economic organization of the Caddo. Over the last half-century many public and privately owned archaeological sites have been excavated and reported, but to my knowledge there has not been a detailed region-wide ceramic study of archaeological sites and collections from the upper Neches and Angelina river drainages.


Introduction 82
This article was assembled using information collected for my dissertation proposal. The Allen Phase Caddo sites and other aboriginal Historic sites of interest are located in the upper Neches and Angelina River basins in East Texas, and were identified from various sources in the archaeological literature . In addition, regional archaeologists and avocational archaeologists, including several participants of the East Texas Caddo Research Group 2006 meeting, provided information and helped in the process of vetting sites.
My dissertation will examine the archival and archaeological records in hopes of identifying the archaeological correlates of Hasinai Caddo groups in East Texas. To accomplish this I will revisit primary documents and their translations, analyze known archaeological site collections, and locate, document, analyze and, if possible, contextualize unreported private collections. Utilizing multiple lines of evidence, including a broad survey of sites (Figure 1), collections, and a detailed examination of regional ceramic attributes, l propose to link archaeological sites to specific Hasinai regional entities.
Native Caddo groups inhabited the area between the Neches and Angelina river valleys of East Texas for hundreds of years before the first European contact at ca. A.D. 1542. Written accounts from the time of sustained contact, more than 100 years later have informed and intluenced our understanding of the social, political, and economic organization of the Caddo. Over the last half-century many public and privately owned archaeological sites have been excavated and reported, but to my knowledge there has not been a detailed region-wide ceramic study of archaeological sites and collections from the upper Neches and Angelina river drainages.

The Hasinai in the Archaeological and Historic Record
The Hasinai confederacy 1 , comprised of sedentary Caddo groups living in dispersed settlements along the upper Neches and Angelina rivers, was united through the religious leadership of a grand xines{ (Perttula 1993(Perttula , 2001. The hierarchical structure of the Hasinai is also evidenced by a set of hereditary and appointed officials, including caddices and canahas, who governed and mediated important matters. Ethnographic accounts from ca. 1690 (Casaiias 1927;Espinosa 1927;Foster 1998;Hidalgo 1927;Joutel 1906;Margy 1879), although not exact in tenns of location, provide evidence as to the position and geographical extent of some of the Caddo groups. The Frenchman Rene  Robert Cavelier, Sieur de La Salle visited the Cenis 1 Hasinai 1 in 1686, and Henri Joutel. with survivors from the failed Fort St. Louis, spent two months among the Nabedache and lower Nasoni the following year. Over the last two decades archaeologists have identified sites associated with these two groups of the Hasinai confederacy (llill Young, personal communication 2006;Corbin 1989:273;Kenmotsu and Perttula 1993: 151 ;Perttula and Nelson 2006). Pertlula and Nelson (2006) recently excavated two sites in Mission Tejas State Park, Houston County, which they detennined to be part of the Nabedache village known from historical sources. The sites are possibly associated with either Mission San Francisco de los Tcja.c; [1690.1 or with Mission Nuestro Padre San Francisco de Tejas 117161 or with both. In the late 17th and early 18t 11 centuries there were six named Spanish missions established in seven locations in East Texas ( Figure 2). Mission San Jose de los Nasonis 117161 is one of only two positively identified East Texas missions, thus making it an invaluable addition to the archaeological record. Mission Nasonis wac; located in Rusk County in 1988 by Bill Young, a Texas Historical Commission Steward. According to Espinosa, Mission Nasonis is associated with the Nasoni Caddo group (Tous 1930:23-24), as the name indicates, and although most East Texas Caddo archaeologists are aware of the site only limited investigations have taken place there, and none have been published.
Joutel 's diary 11685-J 6871 provides detailed descriptions of French interaction with the Cenis [Hasinai] groups. but it would be several years before the Spanish established pennanenl settlements in the area. ln 1691, we learn of the affiliation of the nine nations occupying the Hasinai province. The Franciscan Frdy Francisco Casaiias de Jesus Maria ( J 691) listed the Aseney I Hasinai I as consisting of the Nabadacho lNabedachcj, Nccha, Nechavi, Nacono, Nacachau, Nazadachotzi, Cachae, Nabiti, and Nasayaha. Casaiias further noted that the nine affiliated groups were "agreeable and obedient to the demands of the grand xines{, who is like a small king" (my translation of Casaiias 1691). The Nazonis JNasonij, along with many other groups, are listed as tribes friendly to the province of the Hasinai but not n~cessarily subject to the grand xines{.
It is not until after 1716 that several groups, including the Nasoni, Nadaco, and Nacaos, are included in lists of the Hasinai confederacy. Ba'ied on historical sources, archaeologists have noted that the leadership around this time was "a governing elite consisting of a religious head (xinesr) and village or confederacy assemblies" (Wyckoff and Baugh 1980:238). Perttula notes ( 1992: 177) that when comparing ethnographically recorded locations of the affiliated Hasinai groups to the archaeological data available from the Neches and Angelina drainages two points arc apparent: First, that fairly specific Caddoan ethnic affiliations may be feasible for the Allen phase components in proximity to El Caminos Reales (Corbin 1991) and, second, that A1len phase components in the upper Neches River basin cannot be presently affiliated with any known Caddoan group, "band," or tribe. There are several important surveys of Historic Caddo Allen phase sites in the study area (Kenmotsu and Perttula 1993;Perttula 1992:115-1 17; Story 1982Story , 1990, but none examine the distribution of detailed regional ceramic attributes across these sites. This, along with new translations and the re-examination of primary sources, may provide new insight into the socio-political organization of the Hasinai Caddo groups. Other Previous Research Krieger's (1946:205-21 1) discussion of the Fulton Aspect notes that "the Frankston Focus wac;, in the main, a prehistoric culture" recognized as the Hasinai groups. He also identified the association between Patton Engraved ceramics and sites with European goods. In the later Inrroduczory Handbook ofTexas Archeology, Suhm et al. (1954:219-221) first characterize the Allen Focus 2 (dating from ca. A.D. 1600-1800) as dominated by Patton Engraved ceramics, Cuney and Turney projectile points, and European trade goods. The distribution of Patton Engraved and other ceramic types associated with Allen phase sites (Figure 3) Kleinschmidt 1982;Shafer n.d.;Story and Creel 1982;Suhm and Jelks 1962), will provide an analytical tool that can be used to approximate the geographical extent of some Hasinai groups.
The most comprehensive archaeological research in the study area comes from the work at the Deshazo site in Nacogdoches County (Story 1982(Story , 1995. Using this Allen phase site and their knowledge of the regional archaeology, Story and Creel (1982:32-34) suggest that the Late Prehistoric and Historic Caddo groups at times were organized socio-politically into con..\1ituent groups that comprised an affiliated group headed by the grand xinesi. This suggestion provides a testable model bac;ed on constituent groups, ethnographically analogous to the above mentioned nine principal historical tribes, whereby each constituent group would share a greater number and variety of clements of material culture than the affiliated group.
Drawing from a larger sample of sites and archaeological data, but utilizing local and regional ceramic studies (Campbell 1936;Cole 1975;Fields 1981;Gilmore 1973;Kleinschmidt 1982;Shafer n.d.;Story 1982Story , 1995, I propose to identify and refine the chronology of specific affiliated and constituent groups. Historic archives, ceramic styles and their variations, and inclusive material culture assemblages will be the basis for identifying differences from one area and group to another. 2 'The Allen Focus designation was changed to Allen phase (Story 1982) when the use of Aspect and Focus designations fell out of favor for the more general term phase. Herein, I will use Perttula and Nelson's (2006) dates for the Allen phase (A.D. 1650-1800).  As mentioned above, there has not been a detailed region-wide ceramic study of archaeological sites and collections from the Neches and Angelina river drainages. In fact~ according to Perttula ( 1992:78), "there bas never been a comprehensive survey effort carried out within any part of the Caddo Area to acquire the regional archaeological data to characterize the density and distribution of Caddo sites that postdate 1520." To correct this problem and as the basis for my dissertation work I have created and developed a database containing site and locational data from over 800 Caddo sites, ranging in age from Early Caddo to the Historic period. Using the power of database queries and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) mapping. I have identified approximately 60 Caddo sites in the Neches and Angelina River drainages that date to the latter part of the Late Prehistoric and Historic periods. Over half of the sites contain both Caddo ceramics and European trade goods, confirming their historic context.
My research relies primarily on four sets of data: (1) unreported private collections of ceramic sherds, including those from Mission San Jose de los Nasonis and the Henry M site in Nacogdoches County, (2) existing ceramic collections consisting of vessels and sherds (including the most recently excavated sites) stored at regional facilities such as the Texas Archeological Research Laboratory in Austin and at Stephen F. Austin University in Nacogdoches, (3) regional site. artifact, and locationaJ data gathered from previous reports and compiled in a database, and (4) early French and Spanish historical documents associated with this area.
The principal objective of the research is to determine how specific pottery attributes of morphology, technology, and style from the study area correlate with sites found in the presumed locations of the principal tribes of the Hasinai as indicated by the archaeological and historical records. In other words, how do ceramic assemblages from the region reflect the position and geographical extent of Hasinai groups? It is my belief that a survey of historic Caddo sites will provide a means of identifying these affiliated and constituent groups.
In all, 28 sites identified as having Historic period or potentially historic components ( Table 1) of Caddo age, and 35 Allen phase sites (see Figure 3 and Table 2), are included in the analysis. Pottery attributes such as techniques of surface treatment, temper, decorative motif or element and, when possible. manufacturing technique, vessel part. and form will be recorded. Plain, brushed, and some ceramics decorated while the paste was wet, are thought to represent utilitarian wares and will be quantified using counts and weights. It has also been demonstrated that the plain to decorated sherd ratio decreases through time from Late Prehistoric to the Historic Caddo period (Perttula and Nelson 2006), providing a provisional chronological measure.  Story 1990 41SA94 Wylie Price K&P, Story 1990, Jelks 1965 4\SA95 Hines K&P, Story 1990, Stephenson 1950 Possibly include 41AN19 A.C. Saunders Kleinschmidt 1982 Cole 1975, Stoty 1990 Mrs. Emma Owens Site TARL Dbase, Story 1990, Cole 1975 Patton Site TARL Dbase, Story 1990, Cole 1975 41AN32 Fred McKee Site TARL Dbase, Story 1990, Cole 1975 L. Cecil Farm I and II TARLDbase 41CE12 Jim Allen K&P, Story 1990, Cole 1975, Kleinschmidt 1982

Conclusions
I will employ a multifaceted approach that utilizes unpublished archaeological investigations, infonnation on material culture from previous, current, and ongoing regional studies, and archivaJ records documenting the arrival and subsequent occupation of East Texas by European colonists. The current research proposes using ceramic attributes to refine decorative elements within types, potentially leading to the identification of Hasinai groups. Ceramic assemblages dominate most Caddo collections and provide the best opportunity to identify groups of the Hasi nai Caddo in the archaeological record. Database functionality and spatial analysis of GIS software will facilitate mapping ceramics sherd and vessel attributes, the distribution of European trade goods, and other temporally sensitive artifacts (e.g., projectile point types and knives).
The identification of archaeological sites associated with historically known members of the Ha~inai confederacy will greatly contribute to further archaeological research in this area. This study will serve as an example of how archaeologists util izing curated and unpublished collections, previous research, ethnographic accounts, and technological innovations such as GIS can arrive at new understandings of Native American groups. Tables 3 and 4 include examples of sorted queries from a database r created in order to manage site and artifact information for this study. Some fields contain reported counts, (i.e., VESSEL COU, T_SHERDS), and some fields are noted ac; present (I) or absent (0), (i.e., VESSELs, TRADE_BEAD, PP _K). Figure 4 is a map of sites across East Texas where European trade goods have been reported.