Caddo Ceramic Vessels from Sites in the Upper Neches River Basin of East Texas, Anderson and Cherokee Counties, Texas

Cite this Record Perttula, Timothy K.; Marceaux, P. Shawn; Nelson, Bo; and Walters, Mark (2014) "Caddo Ceramic Vessels from Sites in the Upper Neches River Basin of East Texas, Anderson and Cherokee Counties, Texas," Index of Texas Archaeology: Open Access Gray Literature from the Lone Star State: Vol. 2014, Article 73. https://doi.org/10.21112/ita.2014.1.73 ISSN: 2475-9333 Available at: https://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/ita/vol2014/iss1/73


Introduction
This report concerns the analysis and documentation of 129 ancestral Caddo ceramic vessels from seven burial/cemetery sites in the upper Neches River basin in East Texas: R . L . Jowell (41AN13,n=13 vessels), Mrs . Emma Owens (41AN21,n=1 vessel), Richard Patton (41AN26, n=29 vessels), Pierce Freeman (41AN34, n=19 vessels), E . W . Hackney (41CE6, n=8 vessels), Jim P . Allen (41CE12, n=55 vessels), and R . F . Wallace (41CE20, n=1 vessel) . These sites are part of a cluster of Late Caddo and Historic Caddo period sites in northeastern Anderson County and northwestern Cherokee County (Figures 1 and 2) . These vessels are in the collections at the Texas Archeological Research Laboratory at The University of Texas at Austin . They were analyzed and documented in 2008 as part of the study of the material culture of the Hasinai Caddo groups of East Texas for Marceaux's 2011 Ph .D . dissertation at The University of Texas . Although images of the vessels were provided in Marceaux (2011:531-609), and the overall findings of the analysis were discussed in broad terms, the primary data gathered in the vessel analysis is provided here for the first time. The concluding section of the report provides a summary of the characteristics of the fine ware and utility ware vessels from burial contexts at the seven sites-which are thought to pertain primarily to Historic Caddo Allen phase burial features at the different sites; several of the sites have associated European trade goods-along with a consideration of the overall nature of post 17 th century Caddo ceramic vessel technology and style among upper Neches Caddo communities .

Methods of Vessel Analysis
As with other ancestral Caddo ceramic vessel documentation studies recently completed of East Texas ceramic assemblages (cf . Perttula et al . 2011:219-223;Perttula et al . 2013), the following consistent set of attributes were employed in this ceramic vessel study: Non-plastics: Deliberate and indeterminate materials in the paste (Rice 1987:411), including a variety of tempers (grog or crushed sherds, bone, hematite/ferruginous sandstone, shell, quartz sands, etc .) and "particulate matter of some size ." The grog, bone, and hematite/ferruginous sandstone non-plastics appear to have been deliberately added to the paste as tempers . The bone used for temper had been burned and calcined, then crushed, before it was added to the paste .
Vessel Form: Vessel form categories include open containers (bowls of several sizes, including effigy bowls, carinated bowls, and compound bowls) and restricted containers, including jars and bottles, as well as plates . As restricted containers, jars allow access by hand, but bottles do not (Brown 1996:335) . Other form attributes that were recorded include the rim profile (outflaring or everted, vertical or standing, and inverted), lip profile (rolled to the exterior, rounded, flat, or thinned), and base shape (flat or rounded).
Core Colors: Observations on ceramic cross-section colors permit consideration of oxidation patterns (Teltser 1993:Figure 2A-H), and thus the conditions under which the vessel was fired and then cooled after firing. Comments are included for these attributes on the presence and location of fire-clouding, sooting or smudging from cooking use (Skibo 1992), and the preservation of any charred organic remains .
Wall Thickness: Thickness was recorded in millimeters, using a vernier caliper, at the lip, along the rim, at several points along the body, and at the base when possible (only for the vessels that were not complete) .
Interior and Exterior Surface Treatment: The primary methods of finishing the surface of the vessels includes either smoothing, burnishing, and polishing (Rice 1987:138) . Brushing, while a popular method of roughening the surface (particularly the body) of large and small Middle (ca . A .D . 1200-1450) and Late Caddo (ca . A .D . 1450-1680) period cooking jars in several parts of the Caddo area, is here considered a decorative treatment rather than solely a functional surface treatment (cf . Rice 1987:138), although not all Caddo ceramic analysts treat brushing as a decorative treatment (cf . Gadus et al . 2006:31) . Smoothing creates "a finer and more regular surface… [and] has a matte rather than a lustrous finish" (Rice 1987:138). Burnishing, on the other hand, creates an irregular lustrous finish marked by parallel facets left by the burnishing tool (perhaps a pebble or bone) . A polished surface treatment is marked by a uniform and highly lustrous surface finish, done when the vessel is dry, but without "the pronounced parallel facets produced by burnishing leather-hard clay" (Rice 1987:138) .
The application of a hematite-rich clay slip (Ferring and Perttula 1987), either red or black after firing in an oxidizing or reducing (i .e ., low-oxygen) environment, is another form of surface treatment noted in many East Texas assemblage . On these vessels, the clay slip is more frequently applied on the vessel exterior, or on both surfaces, than on the interior surface, and then was either burnished or polished after it was leatherhard or dry . None of these Upper Neches River basin vessels have a slipped decoration, however .
Height and Orifice Diameter: These attributes, measured in centimeters, were recorded with a ruler .
Diameter at Bottom of Rim and Base Diameter: Also recorded in millimeters using a ruler, these attributes permit characterization of the overall contour and shape of the vessel .
Volume: With measurements of height and orifice diameter obtained from the vessels, as well as other measurements of size (i .e ., base diameter and maximum body width), volumes were estimated by comparison with known vessel volumes of specific forms (i. e., carinated bowl, jar, bottle, compound bowl, and bowl) in other recently documented Caddo vessel assemblages .
Base Diameter and Shape: these attributes were either measured in centimeters or by shape attributes: circular or square, and flat or round.
Decoration: Decorative techniques present in these Upper Neches River basin vessel collection from sites in East Texas include engraving, incising, trailing, punctating, pinching, brushing, and appliquéing, and on certain vessels, combinations of decorative techniques (i .e ., brushed-punctated) created the decorative elements and motifs . Engraving was done with a sharp tool when the vessel was either leather-hard, or after it was fired, as were the tick marks often seen on vessels in this collection, while the other decorative techniques were executed with tools (trailing, incising, and punctation), by adding strips of clay to the wet body (appliqué), using frayed sticks or grass stems (brushing) dragged across the body surface, or fingernails (certain forms of punctations and pinching), when the vessel was wet or still plastic . Excising is considered a form of engraved decoration, where the clay is deliberately and closely marked/scraped and carved away with a sharp tool, usually to create triangular elements, tick marks, or excised punctations .
Use of Pigments: Another form of vessel decoration is the use of red (hematite or ochre) or white (kaolin clay) clay pigments that have been smeared or rubbed into the engraved lines of certain vessels .
Type: The kinds of ceramic types and defined varieties in the collections from East Texas sites follow Suhm and Jelks (1962), Kleinschmidt (1982), Perttula (2008), and Perttula et al . (2011) . Of particular concern are recently defined varieties of Poynor Engraved (Figures 3-4

R. L. Jowell Farm Site (41AN13) Vessels
The R. L. Jowell Farm site is located on Kickapoo Creek, an eastward-flowing tributary of the Neches River, a few km south of Frankston, Texas . The vessels in the collection were dug up by the landowner, and the University of Texas purchased the vessels and other artifacts in 1933 (Cole 1975:110;Marceaux 2011:415) . European trade goods, including 10 glass beads and a metal knife, were among the funerary objects in the burials, along with Jowell knives and several arrow points . The metal knife was found inside Vessel 41AN13-1, and the glass beads may have been inside Vessel 41AN13-9 (Cole 1975:111) .

Mrs. Emma Owens Site (41AN21) Vessel
The Mrs . Emma Owens site is on an unnamed tributary of Caddo Creek . UT archeologists excavated here in 1931, exposing one burial, midden deposits, and a pit feature (Cole 1975:120) . The one vessel from the site had been placed by the left shoulder of a Caddo adult man, along with a clay pipe and a metal knife blade (Cole 1975:125

Richard Patton Site (41AN26) Vessels
The Richard Patton site has ancestral Caddo habitation deposits as well as a small cemetery . The landowner, Mr . Patton, located and excavated 12 burials there, in two north-south rows (Perttula et al . 2011:Figure 11-6), and recovered 29 ceramic vessels (Cole 1975:129) . These vessels were purchased in 1933 by The University of Texas (UT) (Marceaux 2011:418) . Two blue glass beads were found in one burial re-investigated by UT in 1933 (Cole 1975:

Pierce Freeman Site (41AN34) Vessels
The Pierce Freeman site is a small Caddo cemetery excavated by UT in 1931; the landowner had first found the site in 1914 (Cole 1975:89) . Twenty ceramic vessels were among the funerary objects from the four excavated burials; there were no European trade goods recovered from the site (Marceaux 2011:424 (Figure 63a-b) . The horizontal engraved lines dip under the opposed attachments. The effigy head appears to be a bird facing outwards, while the tail rider is looking inward towards the effigy head (Figure 63b). The tail rider is a quadruped, possibly a bear or a dog, with a long tail, and a head with two eyes, mouth, and erect ears .

E. W. Hackney Site (41CE6) Vessels
The E . W . Hackney site is an ancestral Caddo habitation site and small cemetery on a tributary of Killough Creek in the upper Neches River basin . UT archeologists excavated two burials at the site in 1935 (Cole 1975:101-110;Marceaux 2011:424;Woolsey 1935a) and also identified a nearby midden area. In addition to the recovery of eight ceramic vessels, described below, a possible gunflint and a brass hawk bell were among the funerary objects in the burials .

Jim P. Allen Site (41CE12) Vessels
The Jim P . Allen site is also situated about 0 .8 km from Killough Creek . UT archeologists excavated 18 burials at the site in 1935 (Woolsey 1935b), after the landowner had found and excavated one burial : Figure 11-7), and there were three nearby midden areas (Cole 1975:35 and Figure 2) . One of the 19 burials had glass trade beads and a brass tinkler (Marceaux 2011:425-426) .

R. F. Wallace Site (41CE20) Vessel
The one vessel from the R . F . Wallace site was found by the landowner from a disturbed Caddo burial that was washed out of the site during flooding (Jackson 1932). In June 1932, UT archeologists excavated a 26 x 36 ft . area in search of other burials from the site, and located a second disturbed burial and a nearby midden area . This burial did not have any associated ceramic vessels as funerary offerings, but two glass beads were recovered in the burial fill. The recovered sherds from the R. F. Wallace site suggest that it is primarily a small Historic Caddo Allen phase occupation with Patton Engraved sherds (n=9), Poynor Engraved sherds (n=3), as well as sherds from utility wares such as La Rue Neck Banded (n=2) and Maydelle Incised (n=2), along with many brushed (n=147), brushed-punctated (n=10), and brushedpunctated-appliqued (n=3) sherds .

Summary and Conclusions
This report has described the 129 ceramic vessels that were recovered from seven ancestral Caddo sites in the upper Neches River basin in Anderson and Cherokee counties, in East Texas . These vessels, in the collections of the Texas Archeological Research Laboratory at The University of Texas at Austin, come from burials in Caddo sites that appear to date either to the latter part of the Frankston phase (subphase 3, dating ca . A .D . 1560-1650) or to some part of the Allen phase (ca . A .D . 1650-1800) . Several of the Allen phase burials also have a few European trade goods, suggesting they were interred sometime between ca . A .D . 1680 and ca . A .D . 1720, after which European trade goods become more common in Hasinai Caddo sites in the region (see Marceaux and Perttula 2010;Marceaux and Wade 2014) .

Upper Neches River Caddo Ceramic Tradition
There is a temporally distinctive and spatially coherent Caddo ceramic tradition in the upper Neches River basin in East Texas (Figure 136) . The temporal framework of this ancestral Caddo ceramic tradition comes from the seriation of engraved fine ware vessels from mortuary contexts throughout the region, a more detailed seriation of specific Poynor Engraved rim motifs (see : Table  6-37) from a large sample of burial vessels, and extensive radiocarbon and TL dating from the Lang Pasture site (41AN38) and selected other Caddo sites in the upper Neches River basin . This framework includes a ca . A .D . 1320-1400 component at the Lang Pasture site, sub-phase 1 (ca . A .D . 1400-1480), sub-phase 2 (ca . A .D . 1480-1560), and sub-phase 3 (ca . A .D . 1560-1650) of the Frankston phase, and the post-A . D . 1650 Allen phase . The ceramic tradition probably lasted through the 18th century, but its ending point in the upper Neches River basin has not been established with any certainty. Important fine wares in this tradition include several varieties of Hood Engraved, Hume Engraved, Patton Engraved, and Poynor Engraved, while important utility wares are represented by Bullard Brushed, Killough Pinched, and Maydelle Incised jars and other vessel forms : Table 6-35) .
The spatial context for this Late Caddo ceramic tradition is a ca . 6600 km 2 area of the upper Neches River basin (see Figure 136), of which the best-studied part is a 1700 km 2 area centered on the Lang Pasture site (41AN38; see , a number of small to medium-sized cemeteries, and domestic ceramic sherd assemblages primarily from the Lake Palestine area (cf . Anderson et al . 1974;Kleinschmidt 1982;Perttula and Middlebrook 2008) . This broader upper Neches area is west of a second and broadly contemporaneous Late Caddo ceramic tradition in the downstream portions of the Neches, Angelina, and Attoyac river basins to the east and southeast in East Texas that is dominated by bone-tempered brushed pottery and a different suite of engraved fine wares (see Jelks 1965;Story 1982;Middlebrook 1994;Fields 1995) .

Character of Mortuary Ceramics
The mortuary ceramics from upper Neches River basin Caddo sites illustrate broad continuities in ceramic practice, particularly in terms of vessel decoration and vessel form, but they also demonstrate patterns in stylistic and technical choices that are very different than what has been documented in domestic Caddo ceramic assemblages of the same age and likely made by the same social group of potters . Domestic sherd assemblages in this part of East Texas that date after ca . A .D . 1400 are dominated by sherds from utility ware vessels, particularly sherds from vessels that feature brushed, incised, punctated, and other wet-paste decorative elements. Sherds from fine ware vessels are not common in domestic archeological deposits (see : Table 6-38), typically accounting for less than 10 percent of decorated sherd assemblages . Ancestral Caddo mortuary ceramics in the upper Neches River basin, however, are dominated by fine wares: 73.3 percent of the ceramic vessel database from the basin are fine wares : Table 6-35) . Not surprisingly, then, the vessel assemblages discussed here are dominated by locally-manufactured fine wares (n=103, 80 percent of the assemblage as a whole), along with locally manufactured utility wares (n=15, 11 .6 percent), locally-made plain wares (n=4, 3 .1 percent), and non-locally-manufactured fine wares (n=7, 5.4 percent).

Vessel Size
Mortuary vessels in upper Neches River Caddo sites were made in a wide variety of sizes . Surely these vessels held liquids and foodstuffs for the deceased to use on the journey to the House of Death . In most cases, the vessels included with the deceased by his or her living relatives easily would have held multiple servings of food and liquids (perhaps enough to last for the 6 day journey) . In the vessel assemblages discussed in this report, vessel size ranges from as little as 0 .1 liters to greater than 4 .5 liters ( Table 2) . With one exception, bowls are small in size . Carinated bowls tend to be either small (0 .1-1 .0 liter) or very large (3 .5->4 .5 liters), while globular bowls are primarily small to medium-sized (0 .1-1 .5 liters) in size (see Table 2) . The very large size of some of the carinated bowls (food serving vessels) in post-A . D . 1480 Caddo cemeteries in the upper Neches River basin would have been well-suited for communal food serving, which suggests that the vessels may have been intended by the Caddo to serve multiple purposes in mortuary rituals . These could have included use of the vessels in grave-side rituals and daily food offerings by the relatives of the deceased, after which they were placed in the graves as final accompaniment once the "Sixth Day Feast" had been concluded (see Gonzalez et al . 2005:57-58) . These grave-side practices and changes in mortuary rituals seem to have begun around ca . A .D . 1480A .D . . Pre-A .D . 1480 cemeteries in the upper Neches typically have only a range of small to medium-sized vessels, probably destined for individual use .
Jars are small in size in these assemblages . In other upper Neches River basin mortuary vessel assemblages, there are also miniature jars, large jars, and very large jars . Large amounts of food stuffs, enough for at least 10 servings, could have been held in these vessels . Bottles in these Caddo sites tend to have minimal differences in volume, ranging from 0 .1-1 .5 liters . With the appearance of elongated and cylindrical body/short-necked Hume Engraved vessels in post- A .D . 1480 contexts, the volume of bottles to hold liquids increased substantially . This trend for increased vessel size and volume after ca . A .D . 1480 is in step with volume size trends seen in the carinated bowls and jars .

Ceramic Types represented in the Assemblage
The local fine ware types and varieties in this vessel collection all have engraved motifs and design elements ( Table 3). The include two varieties of Hood Engraved effigy bowls in three sites, two varieties of Hume Engraved bottles, primarily from the Jim P . Allen site, four varieties of Patton Engraved (as well as an incised variety dubbed Patton Incised)-best represented at the Jim P. Allen, Richard Patton, and R. L. Jowell sites-and five varieties of Poynor Engraved, particularly well represented at the Pierce Freeman and Jim P . Allen sites . Fine ware ceramic types in the assemblage that are considered to be of non-local origin and manufacture include Hodges Engraved, Keno Trailed, Simms Engraved, Simms Engraved, var. Darco, and a deep bowl with decorative elements that compare favorably to Avery Engraved (see Table 3) . Although no chemical sourcing of these vessels have been completed, the decorative styles and tempers noted in these vessels in upper Neches cluster sites suggest they may have originated among Nadaco and Nasoni Caddo groups that were living along the middle Sabine (i .e ., the Kinsloe phase, Fields and Gadus 2012;Jones 1968;Perttula 2007;Perttula and Nelson 2014), the Big Cypress (i .e ., Nasoni at the Clements [41CS25] and Hunt [41CS23] sites, Perttula et al. 2010), and the Red River (i.e., Nasoni sites such as Hatchel [41BW3] and Eli Moores [41BW2] north of Texarkana, Perttula 2014) basins in East Texas (Figure 137) .
The only typologically identified utility wares in this vessel assemblage are Bullard Brushed and one variety of Killough Pinched (see Table 3) . The Killough Pinched, var. Allen vessels are cylindricallyshaped bottles, almost identical in form to Hume Engraved fine ware bottles, but they are decorated on their bodies with vertical rows of pinched ridges .

Pigments
Red or white clay pigments were commonly applied to the fine wares in the present vessel assemblage sample (Table 4). Pigments were used on carinated bowls, globular bowls, effigy bowls, and bottles, with the highest frequency of pigment use documented among the Hood Engraved effigy bowls (66.7 percent) and Patton Engraved bowls (60.8 percent). Almost 48 percent of the local fine wares have a clay pigment rubbed in the engraved decorative elements, compared to 57 percent of the non-local fine wares. White pigments were more commonly applied to local fine wares (37 percent), while red pigments were the only pigment applied on the non-local wares (Table 4); one unique Patton Engraved vessel had a red pigment on the engraved lines on the rim and a white pigment rubbed in the engraved elements on the body of a globular bowl .

Temper and Paste
As with upper Neches River basin Caddo vessel ceramics in general : Table 6-32), the mortuary vessels from these assemblages were predominantly tempered with grog, regardless of their age (Table 5) . Grog is commonly the sole tempering inclusion, but more often than not, grog was the principal temper in conjunction with smaller amounts of crushed and burned bone and crushed and angular hematite/ferruginous sandstone pieces . Less than 5 percent of the vessels from any of the sites are tempered solely with aplastics other than grog . In the larger regional vessel dataset , the lowest frequency of grog temper (73 .4 percent) in upper Neches River basin mortuary vessel assemblages is the group of vessels from the 14th to early 15th century Lang Pasture site (41AN38) . In the other sites, which all postdate A .D . 1400, grog is found in 93.7-100 percent of the vessels, affirming the predominant practice of employing grog or crushed sherds/fired clay as the temper of clear choice in the manufacture of pottery vessels. In the present sample of vessels, 95 .4 percent are tempered with grog (see Table 5) .
The use of bone temper is very common at a few sites, especially at the J . W . Blackburn (41CE4) and R . J . Fair (41CE25) sites . Both of these sites date to post-A .D . 1480-1560 contexts, and thus bone temper was a popular temper inclusion used during parts of the Frankston phase for vessels placed in burials . Overall, the frequency of bone-tempered pottery in the upper Neches River basin mortuary vessels ranges from 11 .7-52 .2 percent; our present sample of vessels has only 6 .2 percent with bone temper (see Table 5) .
The use of hematite temper in the mortuary vessels is also common in the upper Neches River basin, including our present vessel assemblage (see Table 5) . No less than 33 percent of the vessels (from the Mrs. J. M. Cook site, 41AN1) from any one cemetery-and as much as 86.9 percent of the vessels (from the Fred McKee site, 41AN32)-had hematite inclusions in the paste (see : Table 6-32). The sites with the highest proportion of ceramics with hematite tempering are post-A . D . 1480 Caddo cemeteries . The lowest frequencies are in vessels from pre-A .D . 1480 sub-phase 1 Frankston phase cemeteries . These figures for hematite-tempered pottery represent very substantial use of hematite in upper Neches River Caddo mortuary ceramic contexts, and this use is well reflected in the present vessel assemblage.
No more than 22 percent of the vessels from any of the upper Neches River ceramic mortuary assemblages were made using a sandy clay paste (see : Table 6-32) . In the present vessel assemblage, 18 .6 percent have a sandy paste (see Table 5) . Non-sandy clays were apparently preferred for mortuary vessel manufacture, highlighting the possibility that mortuary vessels were made in a distinctly different technological manner (or by a different potter than the ones that made vessels for domestic consumption) than vessels that were designed to be used by Caddo families for domestic activities, since they commonly were from vessels with a sandy paste .
The highest proportions of vessels in the present assemblage with grog temper, hematite temper, and a sandy paste are locally made wares (see Table 5). Non-local wares (all fine wares) are distinctive because they are characterized by the highest proportions of bone-tempered vessels .

Firing Conditions
These Upper Neches River Basin vessels were fired in a variety of different ways, presumably reflecting personal preferences in firing, the desired vessel color, the kind of clays that were used, and the functional and technological requirements of the kinds of vessel forms that were being manufactured for use at the sites. Vessels were likely fired in an open fire, with the vessels either set atop the fire or nestled in the coals and ash .
Locally made wares in the present vessel assemblage tend to have been fired in an oxidizing or high oxygen environment, especially the fine wares and plain wares (Table 6). Vessels fired in a reducing or low oxygen environment are found almost exclusively among the non-local fine wares. Substantial proportions of the locally-made fine wares and utility wares, as well as the non-local fine wares, were fired in a reducing environment but cooled in the open air .  A.D. 1400, mortuary ceramics in the upper Neches River basin were very commonly fired in a high oxygen environment, or were incompletely oxidized instead . By site in the large regional vessel dataset, these two methods of firing comprise between 46.7-84.6 percent of all the vessels in the post-A .D . 1400 detailed analysis sample (see : Table 6-33) .
As a consequence of differences in firing, many of the vessels found in Caddo mortuary contexts in the upper Neches River basin have a reddish to reddish-brown color because of high oxygen firing, rather than the darker gray, grayish-brown, or black colors that would have resulted from firing in a reducing environment. However, firing vessels in a reducing environment, but cooling them in the open air (which includes 27 .1 percent of the vessels in the present assemblage, see Table 6), would have had a similar effect, at least in terms of the color of the fired pots, since the open air cooling would leave a thin oxidized interior and/or exterior surface . Technologically, if the goal was to produce a vessel of a certain color and durability, it made more sense to fire the pot red-hot in an oxidizing fire, as the Frankston and Allen phase Caddo potters did, and thus they would have been able to see when a pottery vessel was done and could be removed from that fire, then it would be to gauge the right time to remove a pot from a firing when it was smothered in a bed of coals and ashes. This technological change or firing preference appears to have become part of the upper Neches River ceramic tradition-at least with respect to the manufacture of mortuary vessels-after ca. A.D. 1480 to A.D. 1560, during sub-phases 2 and 3 of the Frankston phase.

Pinkware
Approximately 9 .3 percent of the vessels in these assemblages are "pinkware" vessels; this includes 25 percent of the vessels from the R . L . Jowell site (41AN13), 10 .5 percent of the vessels at the Pierce Freeman site (41AN34), and 9 .1 percent of the vessels at the Jim P . Allen site (41CE12) ( Table 7) . These pinkware vessels are vessels with a distinctive red to pink-colored paste after firing. These vessels were made with a clay with a moderate to high iron content (cf . Cordell 2001:17) . Although the source of this clay is not known, we suspect it derives locally from iron-rich Weches Formation outcrops in the southwestern part of Smith County, the northwestern part of Cherokee County, and in northeastern Anderson County (see Bureau of Economic Geology 1965) . Pinkware vessels and vessel sherds have been documented in a number of post-A . D . 1400 Caddo ceramic assemblages in the upper Neches River basin : Figure 6-19), as well as a few sites downstream in the middle Neches River basin . In certain upper Neches River basin sites, pinkware phase . Increased frequencies of var. Patton at the R . L . Jowell cemetery suggests not only that this may be a slightly later variety of Patton Engraved, but that the R . L . Jowell site cemetery was in use after that of the Patton site; this may also be the case for the E . W . Hackney site, but there are not enough vessels in this cemetery assemblage to be temporally definitive. Finally, based on lower proportions of var. Freeman and var. Patton at the Jim P . Allen site (41CE12), but higher proportions of var. Allen and several still unspecified varieties (see Table 3), it is suspected that var. Allen is a later, and perhaps the latest, Patton Engraved variety, and that the Jim P . Allen site dates later in the 18 th century than the other Allen phase cemeteries in our present site sample .