Caddoan Ceremonial Sites of the Caddoan Cultural Area of Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas: Draft Caddo National Landmark Nomination

Cite this Record Barnes, Mark R. and Perttula, Timothy K. (1999) "Caddoan Ceremonial Sites of the Caddoan Cultural Area of Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas: Draft Caddo National Landmark Nomination," Index of Texas Archaeology: Open Access Gray Literature from the Lone Star State: Vol. 1999, Article 22. https://doi.org/10.21112/.ita.1999.1.22 ISSN: 2475-9333 Available at: https://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/ita/vol1999/iss1/22


INTRODUCTION
we have been working on the development of a National Historic Landmark (NHL) cover nomination for Caddoan ceremonial sites -earthen mounds -in the Caddoan cultural area of southwestern Arkansas, northwestern Louisiana, eastern Oklahoma, and northeastern Texas. Such a nomination establishes the historic context within which all similar cultural properties can be evaluated for significance according to the NHL criteria, as it establishes the research and other criteria by which a cultural property may be identified as a significant archeological resource.
* For author information, see "The Authors", 5 The NHL nomination of Caddoan ceremonial sites is an important step in a long-range process to preserve these nationally significant properties. The nomination of Caddoan ceremonial sites to the NHL clearly points to the recognized significance and importance of the sites, and highlights the need to protect them while properly documenting their archeological character.
We are soliciting the help of the Caddo Tribe of Oklahoma, professional archeologists (government, academia, and private consultants), avocational archeologists,

4.
Caddoan ArcheologJ:_ and other interested members of the public in the completion of this NHL nomination project. We would appreciate receiving any substantive comments on the NHL cover nomination being published in this issue of Caddoan Archeology, and also solicit participation of individuals interested in developing individual site nominations to accompany the cover NHL nomination.

STATEMENT OF HISTORIC CONTEXTS
Archeological work has shown that the distribution of Caddoan ceremonial mound sites is limited to the Red, Ouachita, and Arkansas River Basins in southwest Arkansas, northcentral and northwest Louisiana, eastern Oklahoma, and northeastern Texas. Construction of ceremonial mound centers by Caddoan peoples found in the Caddoan Culture Area commenced ca. AD. 800. Over the next nine hundred years these mound centers became increasingly larger and more complex, under the apparent direction of a Caddoan chiefdom elite. During the sixteenth century, the effects of pandemic diseases caused a substantial loss of population and the gradual cessation of ceremonial mound construction. By ca. AD. 1700 all Caddoan ceremonial mound centers were abandoned.
Prior to the emergence of a distinctive Caddo culture ca. AD. 800, these areas were occupied by Woodland and Fourche Maline groups that were ancestral to the Caddoan peoples. According to Perttula (1 992: 13), in "Th e Caddo Nation ": The actual processes involved in the appearance and development of the prehistoric Caddoan cultural 6 tradition are still a matter of some debate, but generally speaking the most important factors appear to be: (a) the development of more complex social and political systems of authority, ritual, and ceremony; (b) the rise, elaboration, and maintenance of social ranking and status within the Caddoan communities and larger social and political spheres; and ( c) the intensification of maize agriculture and a reliance on tropical cultigens over time in local economic systems.
Most Caddoan mound sites only have one mound, although some of the larger Caddoan sites contain multiple mounds. A distinctive feature of the mounds is their use as the foundations for ceremonial and elite residential structures. Mound excavations show they were also constructed stages and served occasionally as the focus of tomb burials of Caddoan chiefs, often interred with elaborate burial goods and sometimes buried with human attendants.
Caddoan ceremonial mound centers were always the center of a large Caddo village or community, and on the larger rivers were integral parts of Caddo towns. Past archeological work on these sites have tended to focus on investigation of the mounds and their contents due to the elaborate burial goods interred with the chiefs, although current research is now studying other aspects of Caddo culture. Current research on Caddo ceremonial Volume 10 (1) centers include topics such as: chronology and typology, settlement systems, subsistence systems, social and political complexity, demographic change, mortuary practices, local and extra-local trade and exchange, technological change, and material culture.

Pre-Caddo Culture
Mound building in and near the Caddoan Culture Area dates back to the late Middle Archaic with the construction of Hedgepeth Mound, an Archaic Period structure, in Lincoln Parish, Louisiana, which has been dated to ca. 5000 -4500 B.C. (Saunders and Allen 1994). A second period of mound dates from ca. 300 B.C. to A.D. 600, as seen in burial mounds built in southwest Arkansas, northwest Louisiana, and east Texas (Schan1bach 1996(Schan1bach , 1997 (Schambach 1998). The Fourche Maline culture was apparently located on the extreme western edge of the Hopewellian Interaction Sphere, and toward the end ofits existence received cultural influences from the Coles Creek culture to the south, until replaced by the Caddoan culture that introduced temple mounds into the area by ca. A.D. 1200, if not earlier.
Presently, the basic cultural chronology for the Caddoan Culture Area is divided into five periods (Caddo I-V) for the time frame of ca. A.D. 800 -1850. Within each of the four state areas, the five periods have been differentiated into phases or smaller periods, based primarily on ceramic typology and radiocarbon dating. Most of the following chronology was developed by archeological research which has historically concentrated on the recovery of artifacts from high status burials, usually recovered from tomb burials located within mounds.

Caddo I Period
The development of the Caddo culture, beginning ca. A.D. 800, is currently not well understood. Today, the prevailing theory an1ong researchers of prehistoric Caddoan archeology is that Caddoan societies evolved in place through a fusion of Coles Creek and Fourche Maline cultures of the Red River and Arkansas River valleys; some researchers also suggest that there were special religious concepts and features that have been possibly derived from Middle America, although this idea is not currently much in favor. The culture of Caddo I Period represents a continuation of the earlier burial mound building cultures in terms of mound building around a plaza. What was new was the use of certain ceramic types, use of the bow and arrow, maize agriculture, and sedentism. However, between ca.  Smith et al. 1983:211).
Particularly characteristic of the Caddo I Period are large shaft graves for high status individuals, sometimes accompanied by retainers; new ceramic shapes, such as bottles and carinated bowls, with a glossy black or dark brown exterior finish; new ceramic decoration techniques, such as engraving; and the appearance of new religious iconography involving a long-nosed god and the feathered serpent engraved on sheet copper, stone, and conch shells. These latter features are very similar to the religious art found in Middle America (Smith et al. 1983 :212).

Arkansas
Lost Prairie and Miller's Crossing Phases, A. D. 900 -1200) These two phases are equivalent to the Caddo I Period for southwest Arkansas. During these phases, temple mounds, but without any constructions on their summits, along with shaft tombs in the mounds, first make their appearance in this part of the Caddoan Culture Area. Ceramics associated with these phases are Crockett Curvilinear Incised, Pennington Punctated-Incised, Holly Fine Engraved, Spiro Engraved, Wilkinson Punctated, Hollyknowe Ridge-Pinched, Williams Plain, and Leflore Plain. Significant sites of the Lost Prairie and Miller's Crossing phases, in Arkansas, are the Crenshaw and Bowman sites (Schambach and Early 1982:100-101).

Louisiana
Alto Focus (A.D. 800 -1150) The Alto Focus is equivalent to the Caddo I Period for northcentral and northwest Louisiana. This area of the Caddoan Culture Area is the first to construct flat-topped temple mounds arranged around central plazas, but mounds, besides serving as the bases for ceremonial structures, also contained shaft tombs where high status individuals were interred with elaborate ceremony and ceramic, stone, shell, and copper objects obtained through trading networks with the Mississippi valley to the east. Significant sites of the Alto Focus in Louisiana include the Gahagan site and Mounds Plantation (Smith et al. 1983:212-213 (Brown et al. 1978: 172-173).  (Schambach and Early 1982:107-109).

Louisiana
Bossier Focus (A .D. II 50 -1550) The Bossier Focus is equivalent to the Caddo II and III Periods of the Caddoan Culture Area. During this time period, mound construction and ritual ceremonialism appears to have declined significantly, indicating that ceremonialism played a much less prominent role in the lives of these people. This is reflected in the known ceremonial centers of this time period, such as Vanceville ( 16BO7), and Werner (16BO8) mounds, which were constructed on a smaller scale and contained much less elaborate material than the ceremonial centers of the preceding Alto Focus (Smith et al. 1983:2 13).
Not only is the ritual lifestyle less elaborate, but so are the artifacts recovered. Ceramics are no longer common-10 ly engraved, incised, or punctated; rather, surface decoration involves a much heavier emphasis on brushing of body walls and/or rim, which is a decorative technique apparently derived from the Plaquemine culture to the east, in the Lower Mississippi River valley. There is also a noticeable lack of imported materials, indicating the trade networks are abandoned (Smith et al. 1983:214 (Smith et al. 1983:214).

Spiro Phase (A.D. 125 -1400)
The preceding Harlan phase in the Arkansas Basin of Oklahoma overlaps into the tradition Caddo II Period, due to the lag time in the transmission of cultural aspects. Therefore, the Spiro phase is dated to begin in the latter part of the Caddo II Period and to continue to the end of the Caddo III Period. The key ceramic types of the Spiro phase are Woodward Applique, carinated bowls of Sanders Engraved, and Poteau Engraved wares, with the domestic cooking ware being entirely shell-tempered. Significant sites of this phase are Norman, Cat Smith, Horton, Sheffield, Littlefield I, and Spiro.
In particular, the investigations of the Great Mortuary at Spiro produced a quantity of specialized ritual and mortuary ceramic, shell, and copper artifacts associated with the Southern Cult or Southern Ceremonial Complex (Brown et. al. 1978: 173 ). The significant amount of elaborate ceremonial artifacts found in the Harlan Phase culture area would seem to indicate the mainstream of ceremonialism had passed northward from northwestern Louisiana into the northern part of the Caddoan Culture Area in the Caddo II Period.

Texas Early Caddoan (A.D. I 000 -1200)
There is a fluorescence of ceremonial behavior among the Caddo peoples between ca. A.D. 1000 -1200. Both burial mounds and flat-topped platforms were constructed on Caddo ceremonial sites in Northeast Texas during this time period; the platforms sometimes served as bases for important public buildings and the houses of the elite, while in other times, important structures were ritually burned and covered over with an earth mound platform. Elite burials in mounds were commonly centrally placed in large and deep pits with multiple interments, and accompanied by exotic prestige goods. Ceramics associated with these ceremonial sites include Crockett Curvilinear Incised and Pennington Punctated-Incised, Williams Plain, various engraved fine 11 Volume I 0(1) wares (such as Hickory Engraved and Holly Fine Engraved). Important ceremonial sites of the Early Caddoan age include the George C. Davis, Hudnall-Pirtle, and Hale sites.

Caddo III Period
This period, dating from ca. A.D. 1400 -1500, is viewed as one where fundamental changes occurred in the socioreligious system of at least some Caddoan cultural groups. These changes are reflected in shifts in mortuary behavior, the structure of ceremonial centers, and in material culture assemblages in at least some of the regions of the Caddoan Culture Area (Schambach and Early 1982:112). However, this period remains for the most part a poorly defined period for the Caddoan Culture area.
For the states of Louisiana and Oklahoma, the Caddo III Period is simply viewed as an extension of the Bossier Focus and Harlan phase, respectively. In Arkansas, the dating of Caddo III Period sites is so uncertain that it does not have a focus or phase name. Ceramic types associated with the Caddo II Period (see above) appear to continue into the Caddo III Period. Only one site in Arkansas (3SA11) may reasonably be dated to the Caddo III Period.

Texas ltvfiddle Caddoan (A .D. 1200 -1400)
There is an intense Caddo settlement across Northeast Texas at this time, probably indicative of the success of a horticultural lifeway among the Caddo peoples in this region (Perttula 1996:3 16

Caddo IV Period
The Caddo IV Period, generally dating from ca. A.D. 1500 -1700 for the Caddoan Culture Area. This represents the period from sporadic contact between the Caddo and Euro-Americans, such as the de Soto expedition entrada into the Caddo area (1541 -1542), to the establishment of permanent Spanish and French colonial settlements, such as the Arkansas Post, in Arkansas; Natchitoches, in Louisiana; and missions in Texas. According to the authors of the Arkansas State Plan,

12
The cultural effects of these early European contacts probably were not great, in the sense that few European goods found their way into Indian hands or significantly altered the Indian lifeways. The biological effects may have been more profound, however. It is probable that the Indians were afflicted with European diseases following contact with De Soto's army, and it is probable that as European contacts increased, and became prolonged towards the end of this period, these diseases began to take hold and spread, and Indian populations began their precipitous decline (Schambach and Early 1982: 115).
Little research work has been accomplished for the Caddo IV Period. Although the late prehistoric Caddo culture appears to be in decline in much of Arkansas, there is a revitalization of Caddoan ceremonialism in Texas, Louisiana and Oklahoma, reflecting either differences in cultural development throughout the Caddoan Culture Area or a general lack of research for this period.  (Schambach and Early 1982:119).

Louisiana
Belcher Focus (A.D. 1500 -1700) This focus appears to represent a revitalization of ceremonialism from the preceding Bossier Focus of northwestern Louisiana. During this time period, there is return to the construction, in stages, of mounds which served as the foundations for religious structures and contained shaft burial pits. There is also a renewal of elaborate ritual offering for the high status dead. Among these artifacts are drinking cups, made of conch shells engraved with the serpent-eagle motif --a common Southern Cult or Southern Ceremonial Complex representation; elaborate ceramic vessels of bird and animal effigies, return of engraved, incised, and punctated ceramic vessels, and surface decoration involving painting, brushing, and appliques; and ground stone objects. Many of the shell, ceramic, and stone artifacts were obtained through trade networks (Smith et. al. 1983 :2 14-215 (A.D. 1400 -1700) This phase begins ca. A.D. 1400 and continues into the end of the Caddo V Period (ca. A.D. 1700). Key ceramic types of this phase are A very Engraved, Braden Punctated, and Nash Banded. Significant sites of this phase are Harvey, Moore East, Tyler, Robinson-Solesbee, and Tyler-Rose (Brown et al. 1978: 173).

Texas
Late Caddoan (A.D. 1400-1680) Over much of Northeast Texas after about A.D. 1400 -1500, with the exception mainly of the Red River valley, Caddo ceremonial mound centers were no longer being built and used by the Caddo in any numbers. Rather, large community cemeteries ( some containing several hundred individuals) began to be used for the burial of the Caddo social elite ( adult males) and individuals from surrounding and related Caddoan settlements (Perttula 1996:309). These elites were accompanied by many material goods, principally ceramic vessels, quivers of arrows, ceramic pipes, and groundstone celts, though rarely were grave goods made of exotic raw materials.

Caddo V Period (Historic Contact Period)
The Caddo V Period marked the end of the nine hundred year Caddoan Tradition of mound building, under the direction of a chiefdom elite. This break with the past is undoubtedly due to the substantial population loss suffered by the Caddo through contact with Euro-American diseases. The loss of population transformed the Caddo from a primarily settled, horticultural society, to one which formed a strategic trading relationship with the Spanish and French colonists, in Texas and Louisiana, respectively. Sustained contacts and trade allowed the Caddo to acquire guns and horses, which they used in the procurement of buffalo hides, a primary item of trade with the colonists. Archeological investigations of Caddoan villages sites of this period are notable for the European trade items recovered in association with items of Caddoan material culture.

Arkansas
Chakanina Phase (A.D. 1700 -1800) Under pressure from Euro-American diseases and settlement, and from other Indian tribes, Caddo V occupation appears to be limited to the Great Bend area of the Red River in extreme southwest Arkansas. Diagnostic artifacts of the Caddo V Period in Arkansas are Keno Trailed and Natchitoches Engraved ceramics, as well as European trade goods. Caddo V Period occupation is probably associated with the 14 Kadohadacho tribe of the Caddo. Significant sites associated with this period are Cedar Grove (3LA97) and the Friday site (Schambach and Early 1982:122-129).

Louisiana
Historic Contact (A .D. 1700Contact (A .D. -1835 Sustained contact between the Caddo people and Euro-Americans begins ca. A.D. 1700 with the establishment of French and Spanish settlements in northwest Louisiana. The historic Caddo tribes of this area included the Kadohadacho (from which the term "Caddo" is derived), Ouachita, Natchitoches, Doustioni, Adaes, and Yatasi. By 1835, the majority of the Caddo population was removed to "Indian Ten-itory" in presentday Oklahoma. Sites associated with the Caddo V Period are Fish Hatchery, Allen Plantation, and Drake's Saltworks (Smith et al. 1983:223-233).

Oklahoma
(See Fort Coffee phase in Caddo IV Period above.)

Texas Historic Caddo (A. D. 1680 -185 9)
There is no archeological evidence that Caddo groups in Northeast Texas built mounds after about the mid-17th century (Perttula 1992). However, from ethnohistoric accounts left by Spanish and French explorers and traders who visited Nasoni Caddo groups along the Red River what is now Bowie County, Texas, the Caddo continued to use mounds as platforms for buildings used by important personages such as the caddi (see Wedel 1978). The mound at the Hatchel-Mitchell site ( 41 B W3) appears to be the ceremonial structure or templo mayor noted by the Spanish in 1691-1692, and the community includes the Eli Moores (41BW2), Hargrove Moores (41BW39), and Cabe ( 41 B W 14) sites. Other important Historic Caddo archeological sites in Northeast Texas include Deshazo, Clements, Allen, and Roseborough Lake, as well as Timber

Volume I O(Jl
Hill (41MR211, also known as Sha'chadinnih). In addition to European trade goods, key Historic Caddo material culture includes ceramics of the types Keno Trailed, Natchitoches Engraved, Foster Trailed-Incised, Simms Engraved, Patton Engraved, Emory Punctated-Incised, and A very Engraved.

Important Categories of Information Known to Exist at Caddoan Ceremonial Sites (such as features and artifacts)
Caddoan ceremonial sites contain diverse sources of information from artifacts and features from three basic contexts: (a) the flat-topped platform mounds and the structures buried within and below them; (b) the burial mounds and associated burial tombs; and ( c) the structures, features, and archeological deposits from any associated village areas.
The flat-topped platform mounds contain ( either in and/or under the mound fill zones) preserved structures and interior features (postholes, pits, fires, etc.) documenting the character and planning of important public structures within the ceremonial sites, as well as the character and complexity of the structures used by the Caddo social elite. These are also informative in a comparative sense of the varying functions and hierarchies that may have existed between contemporaneous Caddoan ceremonial sites. Furthermore, the construction, use, destruction, and capping of these important structures with 15 mound fill, and the associated different colored soils and fills, represent a cycle of ritual activity and ceremony that is a basic part of Caddoan ceremonial behavior for many centuries.
The burial mounds and associated burial tombs represent unique categories of information concerning the nature of Caddoan mortuary practices at different times and places among the Caddoan people. From the construction of the mounds themselves, to the types of burials placed in the mounds, as well as the kinds and diversity of associated grave goods, and their associations with Caddo individuals of known age and sex, important information can be gained on change and continuity in mortuary behavior and ritual. The exotic grave goods are evidence for the existence of Caddoan long-distance trade and exchange networks, and the bioarcheological data from the burials is uniquely informative about changes in the health and diet of Caddoan ArcheoloIQ_ different Caddoan groups.
Domestic village contexts on Caddoan ceremonial sites are marked by clusters of structures inhabited year-round, interior and extramural cooking and heating features, midden deposits, family cemeteries, and a diverse utilitarian assemblage of lithic and bone tools and ceramic vessels. Information on changes in architectural detail, building size, spacing between buildings, and associated features ( and their contents) provide insights into Caddoan social and economic trends at both the domestic and the ceremonial levels (see Rogers 1995).

Cultural and Environmental Influences on the Location and Distribution of Caddoan Mound Sites
The archeological evidence gathered since the early 1900s indicates that the largest Caddoan communities and the most significant civic-ceremonial centers (i.e., those with multiple platform mounds and burial mounds distributed around large plazas) were distributed rather regularly along the major streams, namely the Red (sites such as Battle, Crenshaw, Bowman, and Roitsch), Arkansas (includ-ing the Spiro and Harlan centers), Little (the Clement site is one of the better known Caddoan mound centers in this river valley), Sabine (such as the Hudnall-Pirtle Site with eight mounds and a 60 acre village), and Ouachita rivers. These expansive riverine areas also had abundant natural resource and easily-worked arable soils, and appear to have had the highest population densities of Caddoan groups. * The origin and evolution of complex chiefdom societies, e.g., the Caddoan chiefdoms.

Chronology and Typology
A well-developed chronological framework at both the local and regional scale witl1in the Caddoan Culture Area would facilitate: (a) the consideration of diachronic and synchronic changes in the development of agriculture, the dating of 17 Volume 10(1) tropical and native cultigens adopted by Caddoan groups, and the establishment of temporal parameters for investigating the intensification of agricultural economies; (b) broad comparisons of Caddoan cultural history between the various subtraditions recognized in the Caddoan area; and ( c) the formulation of local sequences, as well as typological constructs, that can be interpreted to have social meaning. Without an radiocarbon based absolute chronology it is difficult to assess the tempo of cultural changes, the adoption of domesti- * Identification of key diagnostic artifacts to particular phases or foci of the Caddoan chronology.

Social and Political Organization
Observed changes in the social circumstances and complexity in the Caddoan Culture Area are important to consider in attempting to understand and explain changes in prehistoric Caddoan culture. Ceremonial and ritual activities at earthen mounds played a vital and expansive role in social and community integration as well as group decision-making. There appears to be a increase in the number of large-scale ceremonial sites concurrent with an elaboration of associated ceremonialism. This is believed to be part of an overall development of more complex and powerful systems of authority that could command Caddoan populations to construct and maintain these facilities. * The local and regional adaptive efficiency of Caddoan populations after A.D. 1200 as measured by bioarcheological indices, e.g. , nutritional status, frequency of infectious diseases, and the mean age of death); * Diet in the Caddoan Culture Area, through the study of carbon isotope studies of human bone.

Demographic Change
Changes in population density and absolute sizes of communities and groups are important events in promoting structure and organizational changes in cultural systems. It is necessary to understand why prehistoric populations increased at certain times, the demographic structure and composition of communities and population groups, and how changes in population size and composition affected the sort and long-term nutrition and health of a population during periods of agricultural intensi-

Local and Extra-local Trade and Exchange
Within the Caddoan Culture Area the development of local and extra-local exchange and trade system are believed to serve to maintain social political relationships, provide means to obtain basic economic goods during years of lean crops, and provide a mechanism leading to the elaboration of ritual and religious ideology. Trade and exchange involving goods of economic and/or social significance may have contributed to community integration and fostered the development of sociopolitical entities that controlled and redistributed such goods. Research should concentrate on establishing the existence, size, and intensity of economic networks within the Caddoan Culture Area and other culture areas, and attempt to relate regional and/or temporal differences in such networks to the development of agricultural populations and social complexity in the region. Research areas include: 20 * The regional, temporal , and spatial distribution, frequency, and context of long-distance trade goods such as copper, marine shell, and other items; * The interaction of hunter-gatherers and Caddoan agriculturalists after ca. A.D. 900, and the types of material traded between these groups; * Source areas for raw materials, e.g. pottery clays, and finished ceramics, through petrographic, geochemical, and mineralogical analysis, to establish the existence, size, intensity, and relative amount of goods traded in Early to Late Caddoan Period economic networks; * Examination of stylistic parameters in ceramic, lithic, and groundstone artifacts, artifact attributes, and elements of design from sites within the Late Caddoan Period. In particular, research should concentrate on technological changes, such as construction of structural architecture , the adoption of the bow and arrow, the occurrence of specialized storage features, and development of bipolar lithic industries.

Material Culture
Material culture addresses specific artifacts recovered from the archeological record, such as ceramics, ornaments, projectile points, and stone tools, and seeks to determine how and why particular temporal, functional, regional, systemic changes in the Caddoan lifeways are expressed in the material culture assemblages of the Caddoan people. Research questions that could be explored include: Caddoan Ceremonial Sites and Their Relation to Important Archeological Research and its Association with the National Historic Landmark Thematic Framework

Mound Ceremonialism in Caddo Culture and Caddoan Mythology and its Relations to Mound Sites
Caddoan civic-ceremonial centers were marked by the construction of earthen mounds that were used as temples, burial mounds, and ceremonial fire mounds for civic and/or religious functions (Jeter et al. 1989;Story 1990). Schambach (1996) suggest that the Caddoan mound-building tradition began as a bmial mound tradition in the Woodland Fourche Maline period along the Red River (perhaps between A.D. 600 -900), and that the first construction of flat-topped temple mounds dates several hundred years later (perhaps as late as A.D. 1250 in southwestern Arkansas). Elsewhere in the Caddo an area, however, the flat-topped platform mounds began to be constructed perhaps as early as A.D. 1000 or so. At Spiro in the north Caddoan area, the Brown and Copple platform mounds were constructed during the Harlan phase (ca. A.D. 1000 -1250), which is contemporaneous with the Mound A and B platfonns at the George 22 C. Davis Site, far to the south in deep East Texas.
The mound centers used by Caddoan groups up to A.D. 1700 (at least along the Red River at the Hatchel Site) probably represent the "social and economic focal point of local polities" (Rogers 1996:5). These mound centers were places where sacred rites could be performed, where ritual paraphernalia was stored, and where the important and elite members of Caddoan society congregated to discuss religious, political, and tribal matters. The civic-ceremonial centers also played special mortuary roles in prehistoric and protohistoric Caddoan polities. The social and political elite were frequently buried in shaft tombs placed in the earthen mounds, and they were accompanied by many elaborately made grave goods. These grave goods had limited intrasocietal distributions, were made frequently on non-local materials obtained from great distances (such as copper and conch shell) and usually were obtained though long-distance trade networks.
While elite Caddo burials in mounds were commonly centrally placed in large and deep grave pits with multiple interments ( some being retainer burials ),or were placed in (or under) the central area of the mound, the social commoners were buried in family and village cemeteries near the houses they lived in ( or in the case of children, buried under the floor of the house). They were probably accompanied by the same rituals and ceremonies as the elites, "but without so much pomp" (Carter 1995:88).
The prehistoric archeological record documents substantial changes in Caddoan sociopolitical and ceremonial activities over the period from ca. A.D. 800 to European contact. In general, the change is principally from the development of ranked societies between AD. 700-900 and ca. A.D. 1400-1500, to a more egalitarian sociopolitical system where mound centers were no longer constructed and used, long-distance trade efforts diminished, and elaborate mortuary ceremonialism associated with mounds ceased to flourish.
Although Caddoan peoples no longer constrncted mounds after about A.D. 1700, this does not mean that their ceremonial beliefs associated with them were lost and traditions discontinued concerning the cultural importance of the mounds . Caddoan folklore indicates that the custom of weeping on greeting each other may be related to those past times when Caddoan peoples came together at the civicceremonial mound centers.

Volume 1 O(Jj_
Crying, is associated with the Caddoan origin myths (Mooney 1896;Newkurnet and Meredith 1988: 112), to the earth itself, as well as to the sacred hills along the Red River, and thus the word appears to be a general Caddoan term symbolizing all ceremonial mound centers (Schambach 1989:30, note 9). It is surely significant that the Battle Mound, at 205 m in length and 98 min width, and 10.4 min height -the largest known Caddoan mound and one of the larger platform mounds in the Southeastern United States --stands on modern Chichaninny Prarie, a name clearly derived from the Caddo word "Cha-cahnee-nah".

Registration Requirements
In order for a Caddoan Ceremonial Mound Site to be considered for inclusion in this multiple resource nomination, the property must demonstrate the following three components: 1.
The property must contain a mound or complex of mounds. Associated habitation sites should be included in the boundaries.
The property must be shown from archeological investigations to date to the appropriate Caddo I to Caddo IV time period and contain appropriate artifacts of that period, i.e. , radiocarbon dates and/or datable ceramic or other artifacts.
The archeological property must have a high degree of integrity. T hat is, archeological investigations should be able to demonstrate the site has potential for providing information on research topics identified in this multiple resource nomination.

Geographical Data
As noted above, archeological investigations have demonstrated that the distribution of Caddoan ceremonial mound sites is limited to the Red, Ouachita, and Arkansas River Basins in southwest Arkansas, northcentral and northwest Louisiana, eastern Oklahoma, and northeastern Texas. Construction of these ceremonial mound centers found in the Caddoan Culture Area commenced ca. A.D. 800 and ended ca. A.D. 1700.

24
Throughout the nine hundred years these mound centers were constructed they became increasingly larger and more complex, under the apparent direction of a Caddoan chiefdom elite. Within the Caddoan Culture Area there was not a lineal progression of the construction of ceremonial mound centers. There were periods of time throughout the Caddo I to IV period when mound building activities intensified or ceased, possibly due to disruptions of the horticultural or sociopolitical base of the Caddoan chiefs within the various river basins. Other factors which affect the known distribution and preservation of Caddoan ceremonial centers are vandalism and modern development, both of which have destroyed a substantial number of mound centers.