977.3861 W172r The River L'Abbe Mission John A. Walthall Ehzabeth D. Benchley '^V'^ vjt-' • > ■ ■■■■■ •^'^•^^!f5f^..- - . --'• • •• ••,- . ■'•■■ • ..•.;/:••••■■■■■ •• • ••••■ .r ..|l-: ,.|g -3^?^ Ui Studies in Illinois Archaeology No. 2 Uinois Historic Preservation Agency ^ The River L'Abbe Mission Studies in Illinois Archaeology Number 2 Thomas Emerson, Series Editor Evelyn R. Moore, Managing Editor The River L'Abbe Mission A French Colonial Church for the Cahokia Illini on Monks Mound John A. Walthall Elizabeth D. Benchley Illinois Historic Preservation Agency Springfield, Illinois Illinois Historic Preservation Agency, Springfield, IL 62701 Printed by the authority of the State of Illinois January 1987 W 172. r Contents Figures vii Tables ix Acknowledgements xi Introduction 1 Historical Background 6 Excavations 13 Features 21 Structure Area 1: The Chapel 21 Structure Area 2 29 Other Pit Features 32 Mortuary Features 35 Artifact Analysis 44 Glass Artifacts . .' 44 Beads 51 Ceramics 58 Metallic Artifacts 60 Stone 73 Marine Shell 75 Conclusions 79 Appendix A: The Cantine Trading Post, 1776 to 1784 John A. Walthall 81 Appendix B: A Chronology of Early Land Transactions in the Monks Mound Area Raymond H. Hammes 88 References Cited 92 Figures 1. Location of Monks Mound and French Cahokia 2 2. An mini Family in 1735 7 3. Location of Excavations on the First Terrace 14 4. Excavation Units in the Southwest Sector 15 5. Cross-section Profile of the Southwest Sector 17 6. Horizontal Plan of Features in Southwest Sector 22 7. Structure One Plan View 23 8. Artist's Reconstruction of Front of Chapel 28 9. Artist's Reconstruction of Chapel 28 10. Structure Two Plan View 30 11. Mortuary Feature 118 36 12. Mortuary Feature 119 37 13. Mortuary Feature 130 39 14. Mortuary Feature 131 41 15. Mortuary Feature 133 42 16. Burial One 43 17. Glass and Stone Pendants 45 18. Ceramic and Bottle Glass Sherds 47 19. Large Glass Beads 48 20. Large Seed Beads 49 21. Seed Beads 50 22. Tinkling Cones, Ceramic Disks, and Gunfiints 59 23. Lead Brooches, Lead Cross, Iron Cross 61 24. Wrought Iron Building Hardware 63 25. Clasp Knives and Other Metal Artifacts 65 26. Chest Hardware 67 27. Lock Plates from Chests 68 28. Liberty-type Clapper Bell 72 29. Triangular Shell Beads 76 30. Land Grants near Monks Mound 86 vn Figures 1. Location of Monks Mound and French Cahokia 2 2. An mini Family in 1735 7 3. Location of Excavations on the First Terrace 14 4. Excavation Units in the Southwest Sector 15 5. Cross-section Profile of the Southwest Sector 17 6. Horizontal Plan of Features in Southwest Sector 22 7. Structure One Plan View 23 8. Artist's Reconstruction of Front of Chapel 28 9. Artist's Reconstruction of Chapel 28 10. Structure Two Plan View 30 11. Mortuary Feature 118 36 12. Mortuary Feature 119 37 13. Mortuary Feature 130 39 14. Mortuary Feature 131 41 15. Mortuary Feature 133 42 16. Burial One 43 17. Glass and Stone Pendants 45 18. Ceramic and Bottle Glass Sherds 47 19. Large Glass Beads 48 20. Large Seed Beads 49 21. Seed Beads 50 22. Tinkling Cones, Ceramic Disks, and Gunfiints 59 23. Lead Brooches, Lead Cross, Iron Cross 61 24. Wrought Iron Building Hardware 63 25. Clasp Knives and Other Metal Artifacts 65 26. Chest Hardware 67 27. Lock Plates from Chests 68 28. Liberty-type Clapper Bell 72 29. Triangular Shell Beads 76 30. Land Grants near Monks Mound 86 Tables 1. Glass Bead Types from Sites in Illinois 55 2. Monks Mound Seed Bead Distribution 56 3. Dimensions of French Colonial Chests 70 4. Artifact Provenience, General Excavation Units 77 iz Acknowledgments Throughout the research effort that culminated in this publication many individuals contributed advice and assistance. Charles Bareis enthusiastically supported the project and made available records and cultural materials from his excavations in the central sector of the first terrace at Monks Mound. Raymond Hammes shared his exten- sive knowledge of colonial records and provided the documentary evi- dence vital to the interpretations presented in the following pages. We thank Paul Parmalee for identifying the faunal remains and Roseann Meer for describing and analyzing the human skeletal material. Alan Ham took the field sketches and photographs and produced the drawings of the human burials. Tim Kennedy drew the Illini fa- mily reproduced in Figure 2. Carla D. Zedialis, whose considerable artistic talent was called upon numerous times, produced all of the other drawings and maps. Kenneth Farnsworth shared his expertise in photography and contributed the artifact photographs. Cindy Par- ker, a magician with the word processor, produced the manuscript. Several colleagues read and commented on various drafts of this report. We particularly want to thank Jerry Jacobson, Terry Norris, John Kelly, Ken Farnsworth, Jeff Brain, and Ian Brown for their help. We wish to thank William Farrar and his staff at the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency, especially Chief Archaeologist Thomas Emerson and Editor Evelyn Moore, for their enthusiasm and efforts in publishing this report. XI Introduction The largest prehistoric earthen mound in North America, commonly known as Monks Mound, is situated in western Illinois on the Missis- sippi River flood plain a few miles east of St. Louis (see Figure 1). During its major period of construction, the mound was the focal point of the most extensive Early Mississippian (AD 1000-1250) civic/ ceremonial center in the Eastern woodlands. This huge earthwork is part of a much larger archaeological complex whose importance is emphasized by its status of World Heritage site. While Monks Mound has been widely known and written about for more than 150 years, serious archaeological study of the structure has been confined to the last quarter century. The final prehistoric occupation of the mound occurred in the fourteenth century during the Sand Prairie Phase (see Bareis and Porter 1984; Benchley 1974, 1975; Fowler and Hall 1975). The earliest historic description of Monks Mound was written by Henry Brackenridge (1814), who visited the area m 1811. When Brackenridge examined the mound, the surround- ing area was occupied by a group of Trappist Monks who lived there from 1809 to 1813 (Fowler 1969:7). The only legacy of the short-lived Trappist settlement near the great mound is the landmark's name, "Monks Mound." The four hundred-year interval between the prehistoric abandon- ment of Monks Mound and the establishment of the early nineteenth- century Trappist settlement, has left a void in the archaeological and historic record. Scholars assumed that the location of the mound, well back from the modern channel of the Mississippi River, prevented its discovery during the area's exploration and settlement in the last quarter of the seventeenth century: "That the French did not know- about Cahokia as it was outside their path of interaction is . . . indi- cated by the fact that none of the early French explorers, LaSalle, Tonti, Marquette, who passed that way made any mention of the mounds" (Fowler 1969:7). Archaeological and historic documentary evidence presented in this study indicates that Monks Mound was well known by the eight- eenth-century colonial inhabitants of the American Bottom, both European and Indian. In fact, Monks Mound was the site of a French Fig. 1. I BLUFF AREA |: ..| UPLAND AREA Hg RIVERS 4 LAKES || FLOOD PLAIN Map showing the location of Monks Mound and French Cahokia INTRODUCTION 3 colonial mission and Cahokia Illini settlement from 1735 to 1752. Later, from 1776 to 1784. a trading post - the Cantine - was estab- lished by local entrepreneurs near the mound that they called the "Great Nobb" (see Appendix A). In 1804. French farmers from Prairie du Pont settled just east of Monks Mound near the confluence of Cahokia and Canteen creeks (see History of Madison County 1882:77 and 501-502). Archaeological remains of those sites have yet to be located. During excavations on the first terrace of Monks Mound conducted between 1969 and 1972. evidence of the French chapel and an asso- ciated aboriginal cemetery were found. The major goal of these excava- tions, conducted by crews from the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee and the University of lUinois-Urbana. was to address research prob- lems concerning the prehistoric construction, dating, and function of the mound. The discovery of several aboriginal burials with French trade goods came as a surprise. Only a few brief statements scattered throughout the archaeolog- ical literature provided some hints about the last aboriginal occupa- tions of the Monks Mound area. To the west and south of Monks Mound, down old Cahokia Creek, historic aboriginal burials have intruded into prehistoric mounds. When the great Powell Mound was razed in the winter of 1930-31, a single historic burial was found near the summit. Accompanying this interment were "silver crosses, buck- les, spangles, and sheet silver bracelets, one of which bears the letters ' — trear " (Wray 1952:160). This material, some of which was manufac- tured at Montreal, dates to the late eighteenth century (Quimby 1966). This burial may have been contemporary with the Cantine trading post, which was located about a mile to the east. Farther down Cahokia Creek in East St. Louis, a large thirty-foot high conical mound was destroyed by railroad construction during the late nineteenth century. According to John Francis Snyder (Walton, ed., 1962:249), "about the mound's surface several Indians of later date had been buried in shallow graves, some of whom still wore ornaments of shell and bone, together with glass beads brought to Canada by early French traders". These burials may have been associated with the early eighteenth-century Cahokia Illini village sites situated downstream at the French mission near the confluence of Cahokia Creek and the Mississippi River. Neither the 1699-1735 Cahokia Indian village nor a second village established in 1735 have been located. The latter may have been only briefly occupied. If these sites have not been destroyed by the shifting Mississippi River or industrial- ization, they are surely buried because no surface remains have been identified during several archaeological surveys in the area. That 4 INTRODUCTION these village sites have not been found increases the significance of the first terrace component, for it represents the only documented archaeological site associated with the Cahokia Illini. Artifacts that we now associate with the Cahokia Illini settlement at Monks Mound were illustrated in the 1920s by Moorehead (1923: Plate XVIII, Figures 41 and 43). Pictured are a "Micmac" style stone pipe and a triangular catlinite pendant from the Ramey family collec- tion. The pendant is identical to some of those found with burials in the chapel cemetery on the first terrace. Good (1972: Color Plate 1) illustrates several pipes of similar form from the Kaskaskia Guebert site in Randolph County. Baum (1903:222) also mentions that Dr. P. R. Baker of St. Louis removed an iron axe from a small mound near Monks Mound. Fifteen miles east of Monks Mound, in the vicinity of the Emerald Mound group near Lebanon, surface collections have yielded early eighteenth-century trade items, including several glass beads (Wray 1952:160; Tim Pauketat and Joyce Williams: Personal Communica- tion). According to Titterington (1938:3), as late as 1818 a deeply worn trail could be traced from Monks Mound to the Emerald Mound area in the upland prairies. It is possible that the Cahokia Illini living at Monks Mound established hunting camps near Lebanon or camped there during trading expeditions to posts along the Wabash River. Until further investigations are conducted in the Emerald Mound locality such a connection, while plausible, will remain conjecture. Interpretation of the French colonial archaeological remains on Monks Mound's first terrace is greatly enhanced by historic docu- ments, particularly letters from the priests at the Cahokia Mission to the Seminary of Quebec (see the following chapter). What name the priests gave to their separate mission to the Cahokia Illini is unknown. We refer to it here as the River L'Abbe Mission for two reasons. First, calling it the "Cahokia" mission would further confuse the meaning of an already over-used term. "Cahokia" refers to a sub- tribe of the Illini, a French village, a modern town, the stream whose course passes Monks Mound, a flood-plain lake, and the archaeological site known as "Cahokia Mounds." Secondly, during the second half of the eighteenth century Cahokia Creek was locally called the River L'Abbe. Historians suggest that name was given to the stream because Nicolas Noiset, called "L'abbe" (the priest), operated a mill on the creek just upstream from the French village of Cahokia (Alvord 1907:627). There is another plausible inter- pretation, especially in light of the data presented in the following chapter. Noiset may have gotten his nickname from the creek that the local priest used to travel from the Cahokia mission to the chapel INTRODUCTION 5 on Monks Mound (therefore, River L'Abbe. literally "river of the priest" or "priest river"). According to the 1882 History of Madison County, Monks Mound was earlier known as "Abbe Hill" even to the early American settlers who arrived in the area during the 1780s and 90s. Eighteenth-century historic documents also reveal information concerning the relationship of the priests at the Cahokia village to their mission at Monks Mound. In the period 1735 to 1752 there were usually two. and no more than three, priests in residence at the Cahokia Mission - Fathers Mercier (1718 to his death in 1753), Gagnon (1743-1754), and Lorens (1739-1748) (McDermott,ed., 1949; Schlarman 1929). During that seventeen-year period the Cahokia Mission priests, over the objections of the rival Jesuits at Kaskaskia, also served the parish at St. Anne near Fort de Chartres (Palm 1931:58). Both Mercier and Gagnon spent lengthy periods of time at the distant St. Anne's church. Given that information, it appears unlikely that any of the three priests was in permanent residence at Monks Mound. An early eighteenth-century description of the Apalache Mission located east of the French settlement on Mobile Bay likely describes the situation at Monks Mound: "They (the Apalache Indians) have a church to which one of our French priests goes and says Mass every Sunday and every feast day. They have a baptismal font at which to baptize their infants and at the side of the church a graveyard in which there is a cross. Here they are buried" (McWilliams, ed., 1953:134-135). Historical Background When French explorers entered the Illinois Country during the late seventeenth century, the Illini were composed of two geogi-aphical divi- sions. Several tribes - most prominently the Peoria and Kaskaskia - had territories in the north along the upper Illinois River. Three others - the Cahokia, Tamaroa, and the Michigamea - formed the southern segment. The Cahokia, except for a short-lived settlement near the French at Starved Rock, occupied the northern American Bottom. Hunting territories for the Cahokia extended up the Missis- sippi and Illinois rivers (Temple 1959; Bauxar 1978). Little is known of these southern tribes, especially of the period prior to 1700. No Pierre de Liette (Quaife 1947) lived among them to produce a detailed ethnohistory of their lifeways as was recorded for the Peoria and Kaskaskia. The Cahokia were first mentioned by explorer Robert LaSalle in 1680 (Pease and Werner 1934:5; Callender 1978). Yet within a cen- tury, endemic warfare and disease had reduced them to a few families who were eventually absorbed by the Peoria, the most traditional and long-lived of all the Illini tribes. The first protracted contact with Europeans was initiated in 1699 when the French Seminary of Foreign Missions established the Mis- sion to the Tamaroa near the present village of Cahokia (Fortier 1908; Bauxar 1978). Soon after the mission's founding the Cahokia settled among the Tamaroa in a combined village of some ninety cabins. In 1701 the Tamaroa moved across the Mississippi to join the Kaskaskia, and the mission became associated with the Cahokia. In the following thirty years the Cahokia lived near the small mission and its dozen or so European inhabitants (see Figure 2). Between 1729 and 1735, however, a series of events created deep hostility between the Cahokia and their French neighbors. Father Mercier, Superior of the Cahokia Mission, began in 1731 a program to encourage settlement of the mission lands by French immigrants. Land was purchased from the Cahokia, and a number of linear farm tracts were established. As the French presence increased so did the resentment of the Cahokia. Distrust of the French, British influence, and pressure from Fig. 2. mini family ca. 1735. From a drawing by Alexander de Batz (see Callendar 1978:677). Redrawn by Tim Kennedy 8 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND other tribes fueled the so-called Cahokia Revolt in 1733. The Natchez rebellion (1729) and the massacre of French settlers in the lower Missis- sippi Valley created distrust between the French and their Indian allies. The French victory over the Fox a year later weakened the Cahokia's need for French protection, causing fears among the Illini that the fate of the Fox might be their own. The Cahokia also feared that the French would appropriate all uncultivated lands, depriving the Illini of hunting territories. That concern was rooted in the 1721 grant of four square leagues of land surrounding the Cahokia mission. Already the close proximity of the Cahokia to the French farms created conflict and bickering over crops, fences, and damages caused by wandering cattle. Additional tension was created when the arch-traditional Peoria Indians moved south, settling among the Cahokia during the Fox War. Population pressure on circumscribed Cahokia agricultural lands increased, and the Peoria's open animosity toward the French added to the dangerous atmosphere. Father Mercier, whose missionary activities among the Cahokia were carried out with zeal if not with much success, wrote in May 1732 that "several savages wish to become christians, which makes me forget almost entirely all the trouble we have had with them up to the present. . . ." (Schlarman 1929:29). The following August he noted that "If only the Peorias were away from here! - they will leave this fall - we could have some hopes of doing something with several Kahos (Cahokia Indians)." The Illini have the idea, Mercier continued, that once the French are strong enough they will be sent off. The Illini are contemptuous and insolent towards the French, complained Mercier, and the French must always be alert. Mercier revealed his fears when he wrote, "Unless some help come[s] from Canada or from the sea ... we must dread the same fate as the post of the Natchez - quod Deus auertat - which may God prevent" (Schlarman 1929-290). In May 1733, following a mortal quarrel between an Illini and a Frenchman, open hostilities commenced. At one point, when warned of impending danger, the priests and some inhabitants of the French village fled at night. St. Ange, the commandant of Fort de Chartres, requested additional troops: Something may it please you to command me, Monsieur, you will permit me to tell you that this post needs a strong garrison and some very firm officers. The Illinois are the most restless nation that I have known. Each day they do everything in their power to cause new alarm. They are persuaded or want to HISTORICAL BACKGROUND 9 appear so that we want to destroy them in retaliation for the Frenchman who was killed last year at Cahokia. and for the wrong which they have done to the inhabitants [settlers) by killing their animals. ... I have no drummer here and I need very much one or two good sergeants. I have only one on whom I can count and he is commanding the detachment which I have placed at Cahokia. . . . (Price 1982:3). In the fall of 1733 St. Ange was replaced by Pierre Dartaguiette, who had arrived from New Orleans with two companies of soldiers. Dartaguiette soon turned his attention to suppressing the rebellious spirit of the Cahokia. Dartaguiette's activities were summarized in a report from the government at New Orleans to officials in France: . . . with the exception of the Cahokia he has made presents to all the villages, and ... he has forbidden this rebel nation to present itself to him as long as they have not repaired the wrongs which they have done. He has even decided in order to repress the insults of these savages and to bring them to reason, to build a fort in their post where he has put a garrison of twenty men commanded by Sieur de Montcherueaux, an ensign who went up with him. . . . (Price 1982:3). The rebellion of the Cahokia and the departure of the Peoria to their traditional territory on the Illinois River prompted a plan to remove all of the Illini twelve leagues from the French villages. Local priests requested that in such an event the abandoned Indian lands be ceded in seigniory to the priests to repay them for the expense of establishing new churches and parish houses at the relocated Illini villages (Palm 1931:70-71). This plan was only partially carried out. The Cahokia, in 1735, acquiesced to Dartaguiette's demands. At first they moved only a half a league or so north of the Cahokia mission but soon agreed to relocate 3.5 leagues (about 9 miles) away. To encourage that move Father Mercier agreed to give them trade goods, to build their own church (such churches had previously been established at the villages of the Kaskaskia and Michigamea by the Jesuits), and to plow new fields for them. On May 21, 1735, Father Mercier requested that the Seminary of Quebec furnish proper equipment for "our new church at the Indian village." Among the list of items requested were: fine cloth (belle Etoffe) to furnish a retable, a crucifix, six candlesticks, six bouquets of arti- ficial fiowers in pots, a cross to serve in processions and burials, a 10 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND little banner with a picture of the Holy Family painted on it, a statue of the Holy Virgin, and some packets of candles (Peterson 1949:20; see also Alvord 1922:200). All did not go as planned. On April 20, 1743, Mercier complained: Moreover, Sir, the said mission has been forced to lay out much expense in presents to induce the said Indians to withdraw peaceably a short distance so as to avoid quarrels that the close proximity of the French and Indian villages frequently occasion. More than half of the Indians have removed three leagues and a half from here (where we have ploughed for them as much land as they needed). The rest express the hope of doing the same but they have so often broken their word that one cannot rely on their promises either in this matter or any other (McDermott 1949:78-79). Little is known about the 1735 church, more likely a chapel, built for the Cahokia at their new village. Later documents (see Land Records in Appendix A) indicate that the chapel was built some nine miles from the French village near the confluence of Cahokia and Canteen creeks on the first terrace of Monks Mound (the lower side of the "Great Nobb"). Monks Mound, surrounded by expansive prairies, must have been a major landmark during the eighteenth century. According to Brackenridge (1814) one could see as far as six miles up and down the valley from its summit. No date for the mission chapel's abandonment is recorded. How- ever, a terminal date of 1752 is indicated by contemporary accounts. In that year the Cahokia left the northern American Bottom for the last time. Some were lured away by British traders and agents living among the Miami along the Wabash River. The remaining Cahokia fled south to the Michigamea village near Fort de Chartres to seek refuge from northern tribes whom they had angered. In a letter from Paris, France, dated March 28, 1752, the Abbe De L'Isle Dieu, Vicar general of the French colonies, noted that (Pease 1940:566-567): In addition to the four missionaries absolutely essential to M. le Loutre to assist the new settlements which he wishes to form from the French Acadians drawn from the peninsula, I think it will be necessary to send one to the Tamaroa [Cahokia] mission of Louisiana, which is the nearest one to Canada of the Illinois, and served by the secular priests for foreign missions of the seminaries of Paris and Quebec. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND 11 You will see, Monsieur, by that heading in my extracts that that mission has almost fallen, consisting of little more than a small French settlement, ... all the Indian tribes being departed to go to the English. However, that mission, if it had been supplied with missionaries, would not only have held its ground, but would have grown like the Jesuit mission to the Illinois and to the other tribes served by it. There are only three secular priests at Tamaroa; two of whom are very old, begging for relief for a long time. One missionary at least should be sent there this year, as it is more than sixteen years since one has been sent. Those in charge of that mission don't understand how important it is to establish it solidly. On all sides it is surrounded by Indian tribes, and every one that we lose is gained by the English. . . . Religion is among the strongest motives that tie the Indians to us. If by our fault it is wanting, greed and drunkenness will take them away from us. I think then. Monsieur, that there is no time to lose in reestablishing the mission little by little, sending this year at least one person; he could go to New Orleans and easily go up to Tamaroa as the Jesuits go to their Illinois mission. There are tw^o contemporary accounts of the major defeat of the Cahokia and their Michigamea allies in June 1752. The account by Macarty, the commandant at Fort de Chartres (Pease 1940:654-655), is brief and provides little detail. The second account by Bossu, who was under Macarty 's command at the time, is more complete (Schlar- mann 1929:295-296): In 1752, the Savages of the tribe of the Koakias [Cahokias], while on a hunt, met six Savages of the nation of the Foxes; they made them prisoners, although they were not at war, and decided among themselves to burn them. . . . One Fox was fortunate enough to escape. ... As he was pursued by his tormentors, he jumped into a lake. . . . He remained hid among the rushes, raising only his head from time to time to breathe. He had the endurance to remain in that position during the time they burned his comrades. Night have come on, he escaped from the close watch of the Illinois. . . . Having returned to his Nation, he related what had happened to him among 12 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND the Illinois. . . . The Sious, the Sauks and the Kicka- poo . . . marched under the banner of the Foxes . . . 1000 warriors. . . . The warriors being assembled . . . embarked in 180 bark canoes on the Wisconsin, which empties into the Mississippi. . . . They passed in good order the Fort of the Koakias, where Chevalier de Volsei commanded. . . . They disembarked a quarter of a league from the enemy's village. . . . The Foxes had advisedly [positivement] chosen the feast of Corpus Christi [Jour de la fete Dieu] for their attack upon the Illinois. They knew that the Savages went to Fort de Chartres to see the ceremony, which the French observe on that solemn day. The Fort is only a league away. . . . The young men pounced upon the village of the enemy and killed all they met, shouting the while the death cry . . . and then fled as swiftly as they had come. The Illinois rushed to arms & pursued them; but the body of the army of the Foxes which was lying on the ground in the high grasses, fired their guns and killed 28 Illinois; then they plunged headlong into the village and massacred men, women, and children; they set fire to the village etc. ... I was an eyewitness to this carnage, which happened June 6, 1752. ... I even had occasion to save the life of a young girl about 15 years old. . . . When the enemies pursued her, she threw herself into my arms, & the Barbarians did not dare to shoot at her for fear they might strike me. . . . Only the Savages who had gone to Fort de Chartres, to see the Procession, escaped the vengeance of the Foxes. These, satisfied with their victory, stepped into their little canoes ... & passing the French Fort of the Koakias, fired a volley of musketry. . . . The village of the Mitchigamias lost in that unfortunate affair about eighty persons, counting the dead and the slaves. This attack was the deathblow to the already weakened Illinois and they gradually went down to their final doom. Excavations Southwest Sector The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (UWM) began excavations on the first terrace of Monks Mound to search for evidence of a post or other monument marking a critical point along what was proposed as the major north-south axis of the Cahokia site (Fowler 1969). The location of this critical point was on top of a rise, referred to as "the conical," on the southwest corner of the first terrace. Three summers of fieldwork (1968, 1969, 1971) were conducted to elucidate the nature of the locus, its mound, and other associations (Figure 3). Excavations were conducted under the supervision of Elizabeth D. Benchley, and Melvin L. Fowler was the project director. The work was funded primarily by the National Science Foundation. The Illinois Depart- ment of Conservation provided funding assistance for one summer. A detailed description of the excavations can be found in Benchley 's dissertation (Benchley 1974), and a summary is presented in a field report (Benchley 1975). The excavations proceeded through a number of phases. The excavation grid was based on the Master Cahokia Grid, a metric gi-id system with its 0:0 point located just southwest of the base of Monks Mound. The vertical grid is recorded in meters above mean sea level. The "critical point" proposed by Fowler was situated at N70 El 00 at the summit of the "conical" on the first terrace. The first phase of excavation consisted of digging two 2 m-wide trenches that intersected at N70 ElOO. Excavations began at the north and east ends of the trenches outside the presumed limits of the "conical". The trenches were then excavated toward the intersection point by mattocking a vertical profile wall in 10 cm increments (Figure 4). After the inter- section was reached, the trenches were extended to the south and west. Once the "conical," now referred to as the primary mound, had been identified, its surface was exposed by excavating the late fill which capped it. This late fill is referred to as the overburden. The cross trenches also revealed a complex of structures that underlay and predate the Primary Mound. Portions of these features were exposed by excavating and removing the northeast quadrant of the primary f ON 200 ~ro=o D Highway 40 N 200 400 +^ OE 400 Excavated Areas 'Geodetic North Contour - Meters above sea level 200 1 =i Meters Fig. 3. Contour map of Monks Mound: A, southwest sector excavations; B, central sector excavations f^ f %i^ Fig. 4. Excavation units in the southwest sector of the first terrace. View from third terrace looking southwest 16 EXCAVATIONS mound. During the final year of work, remains of a burned prehistoric structure at the summit of the primary mound were partially exposed. Historic debris was recovered from the topsoil and near surface con- texts during all three years of excavation. In 1969 and 1971, several historic Indian burials believed to date to the mid-eighteenth century were also uncovered. The burials, historic debris, and late period features form the basis for the present volume. The following description summarizes the prehistoric and historic setting of the features on the first terrace of Monks Mound. Figure 5 presents a simplified cross section of the southwest corner of the first terrace. The earliest features and materials uncovered by the excavations consist of prepared surfaces, buildings, trenches, pits, and posts. The series of construction episodes was found from the deepest part of the excavations (137.5 m) to the base of the primary mound (139.1 m). With the exception of the numerous puddled-clay floors, the construc- tion fill was a light brown to white silt or sandy silt that may be derived from the loess bluffs bordering the east edge of the American Bottom. Very little artifactual debris is associated with the early features, but the small fragments of plates, bowls, and jars that were recovered indicate that the material dates to the Moorehead Phase (A.D. 1150-1250). Radiocarbon and archaeomagnetic dates from burned structures also fall within this time range. No "marker post" was located in the early zone, but a series of large pits was found at N70 ElOO. The lack of debris concentrations makes it difficult to draw any conclusions about the function of the locus and its buildings during this early period. Although portions of large burned buildings were exposed occasionally during excavations, there were no artifacts associated with the floors of the structures. The large size and clean condition of the buildings suggest that they had some type of non- residential, special purpose function. The intensity of construction evidenced by a series of prepared surfaces - including puddled-clay floors from which buildings, trenches, and posts originated - also indicates that the locus was of considerable importance during Moore- head Phase. The second construction episode (A.D. 1100-1250) on the southwest corner of the first terrace was marked by construction of a platform mound, which is referred to as the primary mound. The mound was built in ten stages and was apparently completed rapidly since radio- carbon and archaeomagnetic dates from burned buildings on the mound's summit overlap with dates from the pre-mound context. The primary mound was built of light brown to white colored silt, which 0) 0) 3 O CO 0) tn O 3 U3 o Ih a> cxo > c o o ci x t>0 -»J ed u 4^ o to c •n t»0 a c 3 "o o ciS s c s 3 ,o o ■<-> -2 en "q. j«: c dq' o S CO* O c bCO c ZZi ■^ 3 CO ^ o 00 ■^ to CO a> E 3 -o iri c M 3 O £ P3 18 EXCAVATIONS appears to be loess from the nearby bluffs. Although much of the south and west edges of the primary mound have eroded from the side of the first terrace, enough remains to conclude that the mound was square, flat topped, and had a ramp extending up its east face. The configuration of the east and north face of the mound suggest that it was oriented slightly south of east. Ceramics found in the fill of the primary mound included of plates, jars, and bowls dating to the Moorehead Phase. A series of post molds associated with several mound stages was identified at N70 ElOO. The remains of at least one large prehistoric building were un- covered at the mound's summit. The building had burned and its fired- clay floor broken up and scattered by subsequent activities. Intact sections of floor were located only 20 cm below the modern surface. Although quantities of debris, including ceramics and animal bone, were recovered in and around the building, this material cannot be directly associated with the structure. Deflation, erosion, and exten- sive rodent disturbance have compressed, moved, and mixed the near surface artifacts so much that associations could not be determined. The summit building is dated by a single radiocarbon sample from an interior post at A.D. 1210 + 55 (WIS 545). A burned clay floor just east of the building on the primary mound summit dates to A.D. 1230 + 17 (0-273), based on an archaeomagnetic sample. Ceramics from in and around the building on the summit includes plates, bowls, and jars that are associated with the Sand Prairie Phase (A.D. 1250-1500). The late construction period (A.D. 1250-1500) on the southwest corner of the first terrace was marked by a series of garbage dumping episodes and the construction of trenches, pits, and possibly structures. Remains from the late period stand in marked contrast to earlier periods due to the large amount of debris in the dark, organic loam fill. The debris contained substantial concentrations of faunal remains including deer, migratory waterfowl, fish, and small mammals (see Parmalee 1975). The fill also includes large and small fragments of Sand Prairie Phase ceramics, including plates, bowls, and jars as well as abundant lithic detritus. One pit feature of unknown date was located at N70 ElOO. Only one radiometric date, determined by a sample collected by Washington University, exists for the late period and it dates to A.D. 1190 + 95 (1-2947). The date was run on charcoal from a fill context and probably was not directly associated with the late period occupation. The origins of this late period debris and fill are poorly understood. There is evidence of a series of dumping episodes and occasional periods of erosion. A few hard-packed and/or burned surfaces were recognized during excavation, but none appear to be associated with EXCAVATIONS 19 structures or pits. The debris may originate from a Sand Prairie Phase residence possibly located on the summit of the primary mound. Else- where at the Cahokia Site, late Missis.sippjan occupant.s appear to have produced .substantial debris concentration.s along mound slopes (Benchley 1981). The late debris on Monks Mound, however, extends to the north well beyond the edges of the primary mound, forming a substantial ridge that continues to the base of the third terrace. Several factors contribute to our poor understanding of the late period activities. First, the late fill is organically rich and very dark in color. The relatively uniform dark color made it difficult to di.scern construction episodes and features during excavation. Second, soil development processes have produced well-defined A and B horizons on the first terrace. Color distinctions could not be seen in the homoge- neous B horizon. Except in unusual circumstances, it was impossible to define features and feature origins within 70 cm of the modern surface. An example of an unusual circumstances was being able to recognize a trench or pit because it cut through a burned clay floor located just under the surface. The presence of a well-developed B horizon also made it difficult to recognize features which cut into the upper levels of the primary mound. Finally, recent disturbances and displacements caused by erosion, defiation, and very active rodents made the identification of specific contexts for late-period materials difficult. Several features - gi'aves, pits, trenches, and post molds - appear to originate at or near the modern surface of the first terrace. In some circumstances, the near surface origins could be determined because the pit or trench cut through a burned fioor located just under the surface. In other circumstances, a near surface origin was assumed for a feature or grave because it contained historic artifacts. However, in many cases it was not possible to clearly identify the origins or date of late period features. The presence of historic artifacts in the topsoil or upper overburden was occasionally used as support for dating features to the hi.storic period. Central Sector Excavations were conducted in the central .sector of the first terrace by the University of Illinois-Urbana under the direction of Charles J. Bareis in 1964 and again in 1971 and 1972. These excavations have been de.scribed in detail in two published field reports (Bareis 1975a; 1975b). The purpo.se ofthe.se investigations in the area of the interface of the first and third terraces was "to determine if archaeological features were pre.sent on the first terrace directly north of the main or south ramp of Monks Mound and to investigate the physical 20 EXCAVATIONS structure of the final surface or face of the south side of the third terrace" (Bareis 1975a:9). Bareis's work was originally undertaken in an area between N85-101.5 and E163-165 in the Cahokia Site grid system and was subsequently expanded eastward (Figure 3). A number of prehistoric features, mounded areas, and artificial plateaus were encountered. Eighteenth-century historic debris was recovered from nearly half the excavation units. Such materials were found scattered in the top 10 cm of these exploration trenches. During the 1971 field season, two burials were discovered by Bareis more than 1 m below the present mound surface. One of these interments (Burial One) was completely excavated and it is described in the following chapter. The second burial was discovered in a nearby profile wall. Only a portion of the cranium was exposed and since the excavation of this burial would have entailed considerable effort, it was left in place. It is not known if this second burial, like Burial One, dated to the historic period. However, its vertical and horizontal proximity to Burial One suggests contemporaniety. This raises the possibility that additional historic burials are present in the interface zone between the first and third terraces in the unexcavated 50 m-wide area between Benchley's and Bareis' excavation units. Features Four kinds of features are associated with the French colonial occupa- tion of the first terrace: wall trenches, post molds, pits, and burials. Two areas containing the remains of quite different types of timber structures were found on the first terrace. Each of these structures will be discussed in detail below. Around, and in one case inside, these structures were a dozen pit features with origins near the modern surface (see Figure 6). Some pits had historic materials in their fill, some were in 2 m x 2 m excavation units that had historic artifacts recovered in the A horizon or near-surface fill, and some had no direct historic associations. Many pit and post mold features could be identi- fied as having late origins because their fill contained fired-clay rubble and charcoal that resulted from the feature being cut through burned prehistoric structure fioors at the summit of the primary mound. Structure Area 1: The French Chapel In the northern excavation block of the southwest sector, extending from N67 to N76 and from ElOO to Elll, a number of features were discovered that represent the remains of the French chapel (Figure 7). On the west side of the structure are four post molds that were placed into a shallow north-south trench. Nine meters east is a parallel line of three post molds that appear to represent the other end of the build- ing. From corner post to corner post on each end the distance is 5.5 m, forming a rectangular structure 18 x 30 feet. At a distance of approx- imately 1.4 m (4.6 feet) from the projected south wall of the structure is a line of four post molds that may have been roof supports. Near the northern excavation profile, which extended slightly less than 1.4 m from the northern side of the structure, a line of three post molds was encountered. Since this northern line of post molds is not as distant from the structure as the southern line, it is possible that the roof support posts may be outside the excavated area or this gallery may not have been as wide. A projected fourth post mold was not recognized. Two post holes between the structure wall and the western- most post of this northern line of possible roof supports may have constituted a dividing wall or partition under the gallery formed by the roof eaves. o f^ lO\ "-'- ^ v~^ W 6 o o Q. ^ o I © o ^ a. a a; c O CD 24 FEATURES Within the structure were two large pits (Features 109 and 110), a central post mold that contained a small faience sherd, and a scatter of four posts in the southwest corner of the structure whose functions cannot be determined. An adult female was buried (Feature 118) under the southern roof gallery near its eastern corner. North-South Wall Trench (Figure 7) The north-south wall trench extends north from N69.9 ElOl to N74.7 ElOl. This shallow trench was not recognized until it cut through a burned clay floor just under the modern surface between N69.6 and N71. The continuation of the trench northward has been projected based on the presence of clay features that mark the location of wall posts. It appears likely in light of French colonial vernacular archi- tectural construction techniques that such shallow slot trenches ex- tended along each side of the building to hold large horizontal sill beams. Since the upper A horizon has been subjected to post-colonial disturbance and erosion, such shallow trenches would have been obliterated. The presence of such trenches would have been totally obscured had not the one section penetrated into the prehistoric near- surface burned floor area. The four posts within this trench were assigned the following feature numbers in the field: Feature 100 - northern post in N-S wall trench Location: N74.7 ElOl Blue-gray clay fill defines the post mold. Some general refuse was contained in the clay, including charcoal, bone, prehistoric pottery, limestone, and sandstone. First recognized at 50 cm Below Surface (BS) (140.65 m above mean sea level). Bottom at 140.56 m. The oval feature measures 70 cm N-S by 53 cm E-W. It has a rounded bottom. Feature 101 Location: 72.6 ElOl Gray clay fill defines the post mold. Refuse in the clay included one prehistoric sherd, one flake, and two bone fragments. The feature was initially recognized where it cut into the primary mound. It was difficult to define, and it was excavated by texture differences. First noticed at 60 cm BS (140.55 m). Bottom at 140.30 mm. The circular feature measures 40 cm in diameter and has a rounded bottom. FEATURES 25 Feature 107 Location: N71 ElOl Light brown loess defines the post mold. The feature cuts into the surface of the primary mound and was difficult to define. The feature contained scattered burned clay, charcoal, sandstone, and one piece of prehistoric pottery. First noticed at 60 cm BS (140.55m). Bottom at 140.40 m. This squarish feature measures 70 cm E-W by 60 cm N-S. It has a flat bottom. Feature 108 - south end of N-S wall trench Location: N69.9 ElOl Light brown loess fill defines the trench and post mold at the south end of the trench. The fill contained scattered burned clay and charcoal as well as some bone and prehistoric pottery. The trench was first recognized in profile where it cut through the construction stages of the primary mound. The trench and ter- minal post were recognized in plan view because they cut through a fired-clay floor located at the summit of the primary mound and just under the sod. Although no historic artifacts were directly associated with Feature 108, several were recovered from the topsoil of the N70-72 ElOO-102 unit. These include a wrought-iron shutter hook eye, a piece of brass, and wrought-iron nails (see Figure 7). The excavation field notes indicate that the three nails were recovered just above the burned clay floor within the structure. First noticed in profile at 60 cm BS (140.45 m). Bottom at 140.12 m. The trench is 50 cm wide and was followed for 120 cm. The bottom is slightly rounded. Interior Pits Feature 109 - deep, rounded circular pit. Location: N74.4 E107.4 The dark gray clay fill of this pit contained a large amount of refuse. Materials in the fill included animal bone, prehistoric pottery, charcoal, and one small sherd of green-glazed coarse earthenware. One piece of prehistoric pottery had been nicked by a shovel or similar metal tool prior to excavation by the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. It appears that much of the debris in the pit came from the surrounding overburden since 26 FEATURES the appearance of the pottery and bone was identical to that in the overburden. The contents, therefore, do not reveal much data about the pit's function. The feature was first recognized where it cut through a hard- packed and burned surface within the overburden. The homoge- nous dark color of the overburden and B horizon made it impos- sible to identify the feature's origins. First noticed at 92 cm BS (139.88). Bottom at 139.5 m. The circular feature measures 95 cm E-W and 90 cm N-S. It has a rounded bottom. Feature 109 appears to be associated with Feature 110, another deep, circular pit, located 60 cm to the south. Feature 110 - deep, flat bottom, circular pit Location: N72.7 E107.7 Dark gray clay fill lies in the upper portion of the pit, and lighter brown, loose fill occurs in the bottom. The fill contained small fragments of prehistoric potteiy and was distui'bed by rodent bur- rows. This feature was first noticed where it cut into the primary mound. Inspection of the profile wall revealed that the feature's origins were near the surface. Historic artifacts were recovered from the topsoil and over- burden excavation levels from this unit before the feature was recognized and were undoubtedly associated with the pit feature. These artifacts include two French clasp-knife blades, a wi'ought- iron hoe collar, and a brass tinkling cone. First visible at 70 cm BS (140.1m). Bottom at 139.3 m. The circular pit is 120 cm in diameter and has a flat bottom. Discussion: French colonial timber structures were subject to fairly rapid weathering in the Illinois climate. Because of this, these struc- tures had to be frequently repaired. Unless they were burned, few recognizable remains were left. Additional data concerning the archi- tecture of the River L'Abbe chapel can be gleaned from eighteenth- century historical sources. An inventory taken at Fort de Chartres in 1732 described a chapel that stood just outside the stockade (Price 1980:3). This chapel was a small, thatched roof structure of poteaux en terre (post-in-gi'ound) construction measuring 20 by 30 feet. The contents included an altar, a tabernacle, an altar step, a small armoire for vestments, and a bell. A 1733 plan of the Natchitoches Fort (Wilson 1965: Figure 19) in lower Louisiana illustrates a rectangular chapel 15 by 24 feet in FEATURES 27 dimensions. The chapel doorway in the center of one end wall stands opposite a central altar that abuts the back wall. A single window punctuated each of the side walls. According to the plan, the church was poteaux en terre, with mud fill (bouzille) between the joints, and a roof of bark. Poteaux en terre structures, which required no nails or hardware except to construct and hang doors and shutters, were built by placing vertical posts into wall trenches. The gaps between the uprights were filled with bouzillage, a type of mortar generally made of common clay and straw (Peterson 1949:340; Price 1980:3). According to one account, eighteenth-century French structures in the Illinois Country were frequently roofed with thatch made of long prairie grass that "looked well and lasted longer than shingles" (Peter- son 1949:340). A second type of construction used by French colonial builders was poteaux sur sole (post on sill). In this type of construction, vertical timbers were placed on cut and squared horizontal log sills (see Peter- son 1965). The barracks and forge of the second Fort de Chartres, built in 1725, were constructed in this manner (Price 1980:3). A letter written by Father Mercier from Cahokia in May 1732 states that walnut timbers were hewn for a house to be built that summer. For his house Mercier designed two porches to run down its long sides "not for beauty of the building, but for the preservation of the sills, which will last half as long again" (Peterson 1949:14). The following August, Mercier wrote that his brother Joseph, who had arrived in Cahokia, would make the iron hardware for the house (Peterson 1949:14). When Father Mercier had the River L'Abbe chapel built three years later it seems likely that used the same plan and construction techniques employed in his new house. The excavation plans and the artist's reconstruction shown in Figures 8 and 9 indicate that this was the case. The chapel appears to have been constructed with a combina- tion oi poteaux en terre and poteaux sur sole techniques. Perhaps for structural stability, posts were sunk into the ground on the corners and along the ends of the buildings. Unlike the late-eighteenth- century courthouse and Holy Family Church in present-day Cahokia, the horizontal sill beams appear to have been set directly into slot trenches rather than on limestone foundations. Like Father Mercier's house, the chapel appears to have had porches or wide eaves along the long sides to protect the sills. Short lengths of such sill beams may have been placed between the widely-spaced posts on the ends of the structure. ^ ■ ). bi r.i> . . < Ut«W Fig. 8. Artist's reconstruction of front of chapel. Drawing by Carla Zedialis Fig. 9. Artist's reconstruction of chapel, two-point perspective. Drawing by Carla Zedialis FEATURES 29 Structure Area 2: Six meters to the southwest of the chapel, in an area between E88 and E98 and N62-N68, the remains of an oval timber structure and several associated features were found. The structure, only partially excavated, was constructed of single posts of varying sizes. If symmetrical, the structure would have measured 7 m X 4.5 m (23 X 15 feet) with 32m^ (345 square feet) of interior floor space. A single interior central post appears to have been slightly relocated on one occasion. A series of interior posts may have served as supports for a bench or sleeping platform along the interior of the structure walls. Inside this dwelling archaeologists found 2 French clasp-knife blades, small iron hinges (perhaps for a book), a glass bead, a broken wrought-iron pintle strap, and a glass bottle sherd utilized as a scraper (Figure 10). Less than a meter to the west of the structure was a cluster of features, including two circular pits, a narrow north-south trench (1.5 meters long) and four scattered post molds. In the excavation unit containing the trench archaeologists found a French clasp-knife blade, a bead, a green glazed coarse earthenware sherd, and a wrought-iron nail. The two pit features in this cluster were: Feature 153 - circular, flat bottom pit Location: N67.7 E91.4 Mottled light brown loess filled the upper portion of this pit, and a black layer at its base was a refuse concentration. The pit contained animal bone, shell, limestone, pottery fragments, six seed beads, a large lead musket ball, and a large wrought-iron nail. The faunal remains found in this pit include deer, raccoon, duck, gar, terrapin, turtle (large pieces of Pseudemys and Chrysemeys carapaces), mussel, and black bear. Along with a large bear canine recovered by Bareis in the central area excava- tion unit, these represent the only bear remains found at the Cahokia site (Paul Parmalee, personal communication). A bear femur and one deer tibia exhibited butchering marks. The feature was first noticed where it cut through the burned clay fioor of the large prehistoric building on the summit of the primary mound. Only one-half of the pit was exposed and exca- vated. It was first recognized at 35 cm BS ( 140.2 m) and its bottom was reached at 139.9 m. The pit measures 85 cm E-W and its N-S dimension is unknown. It had a fiat bottom. w o o o ElElElSliJSEIli] FEATURES 31 Feature 154 - irregular, circular pit Location: N66.4 E91.0 The pit has dark gray loam fill containing bits of burned rubble. This pit was not excavated. Historic artifacts, including a clasp- knife blade and an earthenware sherd, were found in the topsoil above this pit and in surrounding excavation units indicating that intensive historic activities took place in the area. First noticed at 35 cm BS (140.2 m). Bottom not defined. Gen- erally circular pit feature measures 100 cm N-S by 90 cm E-W. At a distance of 1.7 m to the northeast of the structure a pit was located (Feature 138) and 3.5 m to the east, on the far side of a two meter- wide unexcavated strip, was another pit (Feature 112). In the excava- tion units south of Feature 138 and just east of the structure, eight glass beads and a piece of cut brass were found. Feature 138 - oval pit Location: N68.6 E97.2 The brown sandy loess fill of the pit contained burned clay rubble and charcoal. The pit was recognized in plan view just under the topsoil where its fill contrasted with the primar>' mound summit. This feature was not excavated. Historic artifacts from the top 10 cm of the excavation unit (N68-70 E96-98) suggest that Feature 138 was historic. Materi- als recovered include a piece of cut brass and wrought-iron nail fragments. First noticed at 20 cm BS (140.7). Bottom not defined. Pit measures 100 cm N-S by 90 cm E-W. Feature 112 - oval, fiat bottom pit Location: 66.0 E100.2 The dark brown fill of this pit contained a piece of cut brass as well as a few small prehistoric sherds, lithics, and deer bone. Burned clay rubble in the fill indicate that the feature was intrusive through the burned fioors on the primary mound summit. Two post molds were found at the edges of this pit. First noticed at about 40 cm BS (140.4 m), but only really clear at 140.2 m. Bottom at 139.7 m. The oval pit measures 95 cm N-S by 90 cm E-W. It has a fiat bottom. Discussion: Structure Area 2 appears to represent an aboriginally constructed oval hut. The wall posts may have been joined at the 32 FEATURES central post forming a wigwam-type structure. The frame was likely covered with woven mats, a type of construction recorded historically for the mini (Quaife, ed., 1947). That the Illini continued to build traditional dwellings after the middle of the eighteenth century was demonstrated by Margaret Brown's excavations at the post-1752 Waterman site in Randolph County (Brown, n.d.b). Brown discovered a variety of structures at this Michigamea village, ranging from long oval houses to circular huts. Most of the oval structures were of a similar width to the one discussed here. This structure was located only a few meters from the edge of the first terrace. The short wall trench on its western side may have contained a short screen of posts that served to block the prevailing winds from outdoor activity areas. From artifacts recovered within and around the structure and the evidence of food preparation and consumption found in Feature 153, we postulate that this structure was a domestic dwelling of the Cahokia Illini, who occupied the area in 1735. Its proximity to the chapel and the recovery of small book hinges (perhaps from a breviary) inside the structure further suggest that the hut may have been occupied by converts who perhaps served as caretakers for the chapel. The dwelling may have housed the priest during his visits to the chapel. Other Pit Features Six other pit features were identified to the west and south of the chapel (Figure 6). These features are separately described below. Feature 106 - oval, rounded bottom pit Location: N70 ElOO This pit was recognizable primarily because of a heavy concen- tration of charcoal in its gray clay fill. Although excavation notes indicate animal bone concentrations in the pit, no bone was recovered from Feature 106. Identified bone from the topsoil of units around Feature 106 include deer, raccoon, goose, duck, merganser, and bullhead. There is no human bone from the area and Feature 106 does not appear to be a grave. No pottery or lithics were recovered from the feature. First noticed at 30 cm BS (140.8 m). Bottom at 140.6 m. The oval feature measures 140 cm E-W x 60 cm N-S. It has a rounded bottom. FEATURES 33 Feature 121 - pit of unknown shape Location: N66 E 109.6 The mixed brown and yellow loam fill of this pit contained the usual lithic. ceramic, and faunal debris associated with features that cut through the overburden. The pit could not be defined in plan view, and it was only recognized because it cut into the primary mound. The feature was neither completely exposed nor excavated. Although Feature 121 was first recognized and mapped in profile at N66 E108-110 (Figure 6), the field notes indicate an undefined disturbance in the southwest corner of the unit at N66-68 EllO-112. The notation of a disturbance suggests that Feature 121 may have extended into N66-68 EllO-112. The recovery of historic materials including wrought-iron nails, cut brass or copper, and a small metal hinge from the topsoil and upper levels of the overburden in N66-68 EllO-112 suggest that Feature 121 is historic. First visible at 30 cm BS (140.0 m). Bottom lower than 139.6 m. The pit measures 80 cm E-W and has an unknown N-S dimen- sion. The pit was not excavated to its bottom. The pit appears to be associated with Feature 122, which is located 1.5 m to the east. Feature 122 - pit of unknown shape Location: N66 E111.5 The mottled gray and brown loam fill of the feature contained ceramics, lithics. and faunal remains common to features that cut through the overburden. The pit could not be defined in plan view since the surrounding soils were the same color as the feature. The pit was only recognized in profile at N66 EllO-112 where it cut into the overburden. Its origins could not be defined but appear to be near the modern surface. The unit in which Feature 122 was located was never completely excavated. The recovery of historic artifacts from the topsoil of the unit in which the feature was located (N66-68 EllO-112) suggests that the feature was historic. Artifacts recovered included a seed bead, a catlinite pendant, and cut brass or copper. The bead and pendant further suggest that the pit feature was a grave. No hu- man bones were recovered from the area, but the feature was not totally excavated. 34 FEATURES First visible at 50 cm (139.5 m). Bottom below 139.2 m. The pit feature measures 55 cm E-W and has an unknown N-S dimension. Feature 126 - oval (?), irregular bottom pit Location: N65.9 E104.8 The fill of this pit was hard packed, very light brown and yellow loess. Small fragments of pottery, bone, and lithics were un- covered. It was first recognized where it cut into the primary mound stages but could not be defined in plan view at the summit of the primary mound. Feature 126 was never completely exca- vated. Its origins appear to be near the modern surface. First noticed at 30 cm BS (140.3 m). Bottom at 139.85 m. The pit measures 120 cm E-W and has an undefined N-S dimen- sion. Its bottom is flattened and slopes to the east. Feature 126 is part of a cluster of three features including Feature 127, a pit feature, and Feature 131, a historic grave. Features 126 and 127 do not overlap. Feature 131 is intrusive into both pit features. Feature 127 - circular (?), round-bottom pit Location: N65.2 E105.4 The loose, dark brown sandy loess fill of this pit contained burned clay rubble and pottery fragments. The burned rubble in the fill suggests this feature was intrusive through the burned buildings at the summit of the primary mound. The pit was first recognized in profile where it cut into the Primary Mound and was partially defined in plan view at the primary mound summit. Feature 127 was not completely excavated. First noticed at 30 cm BS (140.3 m). Bottom at 139.85 m. Feature measures 110 cm N-S and has an unknown E-W dimen- sion. The pit bottom is rounded. Feature 127 lies next to Feature 126 and is intersected by Feature 131, a historic gi-ave. Feature 129 - circular (?), flat bottom pit Location: N65.6 E102.4 The upper feature fill was medium brown sandy loess, and the very bottom of the pit had dark brown sandy fill. No cultural debris was recovered from the pit. The feature was first noticed where it cut through several primary mound stages. A dark, FEATURES 35 disturbed area was present just above the feature, suggesting that the feature origins may be near the surface. Feature 129 was never completely exposed or excavated. First visible at about 70 cm BS (140.1 m). Bottom at 139.1 m. The circular (?) pit measures 80 cm in diameter. It has a flat bottom. Mortuary Features Southwest Sector Feature 118 (Figure 11) Location: N 68-70 E 108-110 Number of Individuals: 1 Age and Sex: Adult female, 35 years Disposition of Skeletal Material: Extended. Skull turned slightly to the right. Disposition of Artifacts: A stain, possibly from a woven fiber mat, was recognized in the upper third of the feature. Glass beads were found in the neck and chest area. List of Artifacts: 4 white Variety IV A 1 seed beads Feature 119 (Figure 12) Location: N 70-72 E 94-96 Number of Individuals: 1 Age and Sex: 6- to 7-year-old juvenile, probable male. Disposition of Skeletal Material: Extended, burial disturbed. Skull facing right. Disposition of Artifacts: Remains of fabric or buckskin garment near right shoulder. Tinkling cones near edges of garment stain. Iron rings on each hand. Iron key, ramrod guide, and medium-to-large glass beads near waist. Numerous glass seed beads on right arm near garment stain. Lead brooches and glass pendant on upper thorax. List of Artifacts: 1 glass triangular pendant 4 Variety II A 5 necklace beads 2 Variety II A 6 necklace beads 1 Variety WI A 1 necklace bead 2 Type WII C necklace beads 2,810 white Variety IV A 1 seed beads 1,081 translucent blue Variety II A 6 seed beads 1,526 turquoise blue Variety II A 15 seed beads Glass Scale 50 cm FEATURE 118 Fig. 11. Mortuary Feature 118 plan view dS^l Tinkling Cones ' L , ^ ^^ V/ Tinkling Cones % Iron Ring M a f to ik M- ^ •^i' <^: C"^ Key Large Beads ti 50 cm FEATURE 119 Lead Brooches Seed Beads Iron Ring -Ramrod Guide Fig. 12. Mortuary Feature 119 plan \ rw 38 FEATURES 378 green Variety II A 15 seed beads 2 iron finger rings 1 iron key 1 iron ramrod guide 8 molded lead brooches 8 brass tinkling cones 1 catlinite triangular pendant 4 tubular wampum shell beads 28 triangular shell beads Feature 130 (Figure 13) Location: N 64-66 E 102-104 Number of Individuals: 1 Age and Sex: Adult female, 35"^ years Disposition of Skeletal Material: Bundle burial placed into a wooden French-manufactured chest. A number of the long bones remained articulated when they were placed into the chest. None of the bones have evidence of scraping on their surfaces. Disposition of Artifacts: Artifacts scattered at feature base. List of Artifacts: 2 pieces of brass wire 73 white Variety IV A 1 seed beads Feature 131 (Figure 14) Location: N 64-66 E 104-106 Number of Individuals: 3 Age and Sex: 1 adult female, 35 -f years old 1 fetus, and 1 juvenile 3 to 5 years old Disposition of Skeletal Material: Adult extended, skull facing left. Disturbed remains of juvenile near adult's pelvis. Disposition of Artifacts: Catlinite pendants and glass beads on upper thorax of juvenile. Clasp knife fragments near adult's waist. Hawk bell above knees. List of Artifacts: 2 iron clasp-knife blades 1 molded lead cross 1 hawk bell 83 white Variety IV A 1 seed beads 7 translucent blue Variety II A 6 seed beads 3 green Variety II A 15 seed beads 18 black Variety II A 15 seed beads 4 catlinite triangular pendants Chest Handle Lock Plate Hinge Glass Bead Key FEATURE 130 /// -Nails Scale 25 cm Fig. 13. Mortuary Feature I'M plan view 40 FEATURES Feature 133 (Figure 15) Location: N 70-72 E 94-96 Number of Individuals: 2 Age and Sex: 1 adult female, 35"^ years old 1 juvenile, 2 to 5 years old Disposition of Skeletal Material: Extended with arms and legs parallel to axis of body. Juvenile remains extended on top of adult. Disposition of Artifacts: Large clapper bell rested on the right hand and forearm of adult. White seed beads were found from the neck area around to the right side of the cranium. List of Artifacts: 1 large brass "Liberty" type bell 10 white Variety IV A 1 seed beads Central Sector (Figure 16) Burial 1 Location: N 89.9-90.7 E 166.4-166.6 Number of Individuals: 1 Age and Sex: 5- to 7-year-old juvenile, probable male Disposition of Skeletal Material: Extended with upper arms and legs parallel to axis of body. Skull turned to the right. Disposition of Artifact: Seed beads and a glass triangular pendant near frontal region of cranium. White seed beads were found near the thorax. List of Artifacts: 1 glass triangular pendant 391 white Variety IV A 1 seed beads 133 translucent blue Variety II A 6 seed beads 24 burgundy Variety II A 7 seed beads Clasp Knives Child's Teeth Hawk Bell FEATURE 131 Child's Vertebrae Catlinite Pendants, Beads Scale 50 cm Fig. 14. Mortuary Feature 131 plan view Scale 50 cm FEATURE 133 Fig. 15. Mortuary Feature 133 plan view Glass Pendant Seed Beads BURIAL 1 Scale 40 cnn Fig. 16. Burial One plan view Artifact Analysis Glass Artifacts Triangular Pendants (Figure 17): Two triangular glass pendants were recovered, one each in association with mortuary Feature 119 in the southwest sector and Burial 1 in the central sector. Both of these burials were five-to-seven-year-old juveniles. The Feature 119 pendant, broken at the apex across the drilled perforation, measures 21 mm wide at the base, 18 mm in length, and 4 mm in thickness. Prior to breaking, the pendant was 21 mm in length. The pendant associated with Burial 1 is 22 mm in length and width. Both pendants have a flat reverse surface and a slightly convex obverse face. They are heavily ground along the edges and both faces have been polished. Each has a striped pattern formed by dark translucent blue bands separated by white opaque bands. According to Margaret Brown (1972), these pendants were aboriginally manufactured from crushed glass beads. These particular specimens appear to have been made from Variety II A 6 and Variety IV A 1 beads (see following section on glass beads). Discussion: Margaret Brown (1972) has previously illustrated the Feature 119 specimen in her comparative study of these pendants. Such pendants have been reported from four sites in Illinois, two in Michigan, one in Indiana, one in North Dakota, and three in South Dakota. The latter four sites are associated with the Ankara and date between ca. 1750 and 1832. The earliest occurrence of these pendants is in the Starved Rock area (LaSalle County, Illinois) where they date to the last decade of the seventeenth century (Schnell 1974; M. Brown 1975). They appear to have been made in the Illinois Country over a sixty -year period (1690-1750). Brown (1972) reports only twenty- four of these pendants east of the Mississippi, nine within Illinois. This data suggests that such pendants were never common and may prove to be significant temporal markers. Bottle Glass (Figure 18): Six sherds of bottle glass were recovered from general excavation levels. Five are olive-gi^een wine-bottle body sherds while the sixth is a light blue-green body sherd, perhaps from Fig. 17. Pendants. Top row: Catlinite pendants with side-to-side drilled holes; middle row: glass pendants; bottom row: Catlinite pendants with face-to-face drilled holes 46 ARTIFACT ANALYSIS a case bottle (see M. Brown 1971). Four of these sherds have been used as tools. Each sherd is discussed individually below: Cat. No. 68-465 - Large olive-green body sherd with a broad distal end and a tapered proximal stem. This specimen is 62 mm long, 23 mm maximum width and 5 mm thick. It has the general shape of a thumb-nail end scraper. The rounded distal end is steeply flaked and exhibits use-wear. Cat. No. 69-1244 - A small (12 mm x 9 mm) olive green body sherd with a burin-like sharp tip formed by the removal of single flakes from opposing faces. The exterior flake scar and the tip exhibit use-wear. Cat. No. 71-701 and 71-700 - These two olive green body sherds have a fresh, articulating break. When fitted, the sherd has a thumb-nail end scraper shape and measures 26 mm x 8 mm. The rounded distal end has numerous small flake scars and exhibits polish resulting from use. Cat. No. 71-701 - This light blue-green body sherd is roughly rectangular in shape. It is 37 mm long, 23 mm maximum width and 2 mm thick. The specimen has two concave edges (20 mm and 25 mm long) and one convex edge (33 mm long). All three of these edges exhibit heavy wear and polish. Discussion: It is of particular interest that all of the bottleglass sherds from the southwest sector show evidence of aboriginal re-use as tools, particularly scraping implements. While large collections of similar glass fragments have been recovered at other Illini habitation sites, analyses of these specimens have been restricted to their identification in terms of container form. Only a few examples of aboriginal re-use of glass fragments have been noted. At the Guebert site, Good (1972) illustrates a small triangular pendant made from a glass sherd (pg. 82: Figure 20-g) and two bottle lip fragments with their broken surfaces ground to form ring-like objects (pp. 181-185). Deuel (1958:57; Figure 37-B) illustrates a triangular arrow point manufactured from a bottle glass sherd also found at the Guebert site. Such data indicates that glass sherds should be studied in the future in terms of their potential as a readily available source of raw materials for aboriginal use as tools and ornaments. Fig. 18. Ceramic and glass sherds. A, green-glazed coarse earthenware; B and D, faience; C, red-ware; E-K, bottle glass sherds Fig. 19. Large glass beads Fig. 20. Large seed beads (restrung for curation purposes) Fig. 21. Seed beads (restrung for curation purposes) ARTIFACT ANALYSIS 51 Glass Beads (Figures 19-21 ): Some 6,573 glass beads were recovered during the combined excavations on the first terrace of Monks Mound. Eleven of these are large necklace beads while the remaining 6,562 are small seed beads. This sample of beads has been classified accord- ing to the system devised by Jeffrey Brain ( 1979) for the Trudeau site collection from the lower Mississippi Valley. For comparative pur- poses, type designations employed by M. E. Good (1972) for the eighteenth-century Guebert site in Randolph County, Illinois, are correlated with the Brain classification. The publications by both Brain and Good contain color illustrations of the bead types discussed below. Drawn Beads Class II: Beads with rounded ends of simple construction. Type A: Monochrome beads of simple construction. Variety U A5^ (Brain 1979:102) (Good 1972:127) Definition: Small to large opaque, dark bur- gundy (black in appearance) beads Sample: 4 oval necklace beads. Length: 9-11 mm, Diameter: 8-10 mm 2 round necklace beads. Diameter: 6-7 mm, Width: 8-9 mm 18 donut-shaped seed beads (All seed beads in this collection range in diameter from 1.5 to 4 mm) Variety II A 6 (Brain 1979:102) (Good 1972:113) Definition: Small to large translucent, dark blue beads. Sample: 1 tubular. Length: 8 mm. Diameter: 5 mm 1 square. Length: 7 mm. Diameter: 7.5 mm 1,221 donut-shaped seed beads Variety II A 7 (Brain 1979:102-103) (Good 1972:117) Definition: Very small to very large opaque, turquoise blue beads. Sample: 1,527 donut-shaped seed beads 52 ARTIFACT ANALYSIS Variety II A 15 (Brain 1972:103) (Good 1972:110) Definition: Very small to large translucent, dark green beads Sample: 381 very small (2 mm) donut-shaped seed beads Class IV: Beads with rounded ends of either compound or composite structure Type A: Compound monochrome beads Variety IV A 1 (Brain 1972:105-106) (Good 1972:119) Definition: Small to very large beads with an opaque, white core covered by an outer layer of either opaque white or translucent clear glass. Sample: 40 oval medium-size beads (4 mm in average diameter) 3,351 small donut-shaped-to-oval seed beads Wire-Wound (Mandrel) Beads Class I: Monochrome beads Type A: Large and round beads, length and diameter nearly equal Variety W I A 1 (Brain 1979:107) (Good 1972:112) Definition: Large to very large translucent, pale blue beads. The larger specimens have an almost opaque appearance. Sample: 1 Length: 12 mm, Diameter: 11 mm Class II: Beads with a more elaborate shape resulting from pressing, molding, or some other manipulations. These beads are monochrome and of simple construction. Variety W II A 7 (Brain 1979:111) (Good 1972:117) Definition: Small to medium translucent, dark burgundy. These beads have three to five, at times rounded, facets. Sample: 24 seed beads, most with four facets ARTIFACT ANALYSIS 53 Variety W II C Definition: Variety W II C 2 Definition: Sample: Variety W II C 3 Definition: Sample: (Brain 1979:112) (Good 1972:105) Large bead with five longitudinal facets creating a pentagonal cylinder form. Brain (1979:112) lists only one variety of this bead (based on color), a translucent pale blue. At least four other varieties have been described in the litera- ture, dark blue, aqua blue, clear, and amber. Good (1972:105) illus- trates specimens of the dark blue, clear, and amber colors. (new variety) Form as described for type. Clear translucent beads 1 Length: 16 mm. Diameter 10 mm (new variety) Form as described for type. Translu- cent aqua blue beads 1 Length: 16 mm. Diameter: 9 mm Discussion: The types of beads recovered from Monks Mound are consistent with those defined as typical for the Middle Historic Period (1670-1760) by Quimby (1966). It is of interest to note that no com- pound or complex polychrome beads were present in the Monks Mound sample. The significance of this observation, if any, is tempered by the small number of the larger necklace beads found. The large beads are more commonly polychrome. For comparative purposes, reports from all Middle Historic Period sites in Illinois that have yielded beads were reviewed. Beads have been recovered from twelve such sites. Of these, five have sizeable samples that have been described in a manner to permit comparisons. All of these sites (Table 1) are aboriginal habitation sites associated with the Illini Confederacy. A possible exception is the Newell site, which may represent the remains of a French trading post (M. Brown n.d.a). It is probable, however, that European traders or priests were present at all of these sites during some portion of their occupations. The seven other Middle Historic Period sites in Illinois from which beads have been recovered are: 54 ARTIFACT ANALYSIS Hotel Plaza (ca 1670-1697), LaSalle County, Schnell 1974: 11 beads Zimmerman (ca 1670-1697), LaSalle County, J. Brown 1961, M. Brown 1973, 1975: about 150 beads Plum Island (ca 1660-1680), LaSalle County, Fenner 1963: 1 bead Naples-Abbot (ca 1700-1760), Scott County Griffin and Morgan 1941: 2 beads Adler (18th century), St. Clair County, Williams and Lacampagne 1982: 7 beads Laurens-Fort de Chartres I (1720-1732), Randolph County, Jelks and Ekberg 1984: 9 beads Fort de Chartres III (1755-1772), Randolph County, M. Brown 1976, Orser 1977: about 100 beads These seven sites are not included in the present discussion since so few beads were recovered from them or because the published descrip- tions of the beads are inadequate. The specimens from these sites, however, should be studied in the future since they may provide critical temporal and distributional data about specific bead types. It is noteworthy that no chevron beads, one of the major definitive types enumerated by Quimby (1966:83-85) for the Early Historic Period (1610-1670), have been reported from sites in Illinois. Table 1 provides summary data concerning the kinds of beads found at eighteenth-century Illini sites. Three of these bead samples (those from Newell, Kolmer and Guebert) are derived from surface collection only. This distinction is critical in terms of the quantity of seed beads in the collections. Each of the excavated sites (Starved Rock, Waterman, and Monks Mound) produced significantly larger quantities of seed beads. The vast majority of seed beads from these excavated sites were recovered in burial context. Eleven of the 69 burials found at the Waterman site yielded 76% (18,893 of 24,854) of the beads recovered. Similarly, the three burials at Starved Rock contained 69% of the beads found (1,991 of 2,886) and a single burial at Monks Mound yielded 88% (5,804 of 6,025) of the beads recovered (Table 2). In each of these cases hundreds (or thousands) of seed beads had been sewn onto deerskin or wool garments. The data presented in Table 1 indicate that the most common seed bead type found in the Illinois Country is the white compound bead (Brain's Type IV A 1). This type constituted 76% of the total seed bead sample and 67% of all beads found. This appears true for the French trade in general. Brain (1979) reports that 61% of the 186,200 beads S 5 O O OS O lO o — O (M O — ■ o s u W ^ d « QQ p u CQ O -< _, CO — CO -^ ^ E^ ^ ^ ^ e^ Oi r~ in (» «D CO 05 a> Tl> C~- -H o lO 05 o Ol CO ao CO <35 Oi 00 ^ o ^ CO c^o coo too UOO oo c^o (MX3 t^O ^O OO TJ-O too CO CO CO Ol U5 00 lO --' CO o CO O (M —I t~ •* ^ to O oo to 00 —I IM Ol in 2 cs 1 o 1 CO 1 in 00 (71 CM in CO to to t^ t^ t— t^ 3 ^ o CO -H ti* «^ g* (^ 8e e eo Ol J£ S — eo o ffl o o o e- o- H TABLE 2 Monks Mound Seed Bead Distribution translucent turquoise Prosenience white blue blue green black burgundy Totals IV A 1 11 A 6 II A 7 II A 15 II A 5 W II A 7 Burials: Feature 119 2,810 1,081 1,526 378 5,795 Feature 118 4 4 Feature 130 73 73 Feature 131 83 7 3 18 111 Feature 133 10 10 Burial 1 391 133 24 548 Squares: N64-66 E 110-112 1 1 NVC-NHC 1 1 N66-68 E 90-92 5 5 N62-64 E 96-98 2 2 N68-70 E 108-110 4 4 N66-68 E 96-98 8 8 Totals 3,391 1,221 1,527 381 18 24 6,562 ARTIFACT ANALYSIS 57 from Trudeau were of this type. Almost 7,000 of the 11,000 beads recovered from Fort Ouiatenon in Indiana by TordofT(1983) were of this type and more than 44,000 were found at the Fletcher site, a Middle Historic Period aboriginal mortuary site near Bay City, Michigan (Mainfort 1979:384). Seed beads of this type were traded in units of one livre or pound. Extrapolating from the weight of the white compound beads found at Monks Mound it can be estimated that a one-pound packet contained some 10,000 seed beads. Thus, 61% of the huge number of beads found at Trudeau constituted only 10 to 12 trade units (pounds). All of the beads recovered from the 13 Middle Historic Period sites in Illinois represent less than seven pounds of beads. Bauxar (1973:46-47) reports that the inventory of goods of a single independent French trader in the Illinois Country in 1688, listed five livres of glass beads. While the number of beads per pound of course varies according to size, these data nonetheless indicate that we are dealing only with some unknown minute fraction of the beads actually traded during the eighteenth century. Necklace beads do not appear to be as common a trade item as generally indicated in the literature. Only 12% of the beads enum- erated in Table 1 are large-size necklace types. Of these, 96% were simple or compound monochrome beads. Complex, polychrome beads, while frequently illustrated (e.g., Quimby 1966:87) are relatively rare. Mandrel or wire-wound beads also appear uncommon. Less than 5,000 wound beads were found at Trudeau (3%). Similarly, the 1,098 from the six Illinois sites comprise only 3% of the total sample. Polychrome mandrel beads are especially rare in the Illinois Country. The most common polychrome mandrel bead at Trudeau was Type Win A 4 (Brain 1979:112), a black (dark burgundy) bead with white, wavy lines around the circumference. There were 360 speci- mens of this type in the Trudeau sample. Only three beads of this type have been reported from Illinois, one each from Guebert, Newell, and Starved Rock. Similarly, 366 drawn beads of the Corneline d'Alleppo type were found at Trudeau. Only five of the Illinois sites have produced such beads (Zimmerman-2, Waterman-28, Kolmer-1, Guebert-91, Starved Rock-1; Total: 121). Based on these data, it would appear that large numbers of polychrome beads were not consistent trade items in the Mississippi Valley region. While monochrome drawn beads (especially seed beads) were a staple of the French Middle Historic Period trade, the importation of complex or compound poly- chrome beads appears sporadic and perhaps confined to small lots of specific types or mixed lots of diverse types. 58 ARTIFACT ANALYSIS Ceramics Aboriginal Pottery: More than a thousand sherds from aboriginally manufactured pottery vessels were found during excavations. Many of those small water-worn fragments were mixed in village refuse used prehistorically for mound fill. Samples from both excavation areas were studied. Only a single specimen was found that can be associated with the post-contact occupation. This artifact, a burnished, bone- tempered-body sherd, was found in unit N70-72 E106-108 in the interior of the French chapel. This specimen can be assigned to the type Addis Plain, variety unspecified, a ceramic type associated with the historic Natchez in the lower Mississippi Valley. Tin-glazed Earthenw^are (Figure 18): Three rim sherds of faience were recovered from general excavation units, two in the southwest sector and one in the central sector. Two specimens are small and plain. The other rim sherd has a band drawn parallel to the vessel lip. This simple decorative border, set 3 mm below the rim lip, is composed of two parallel bands interspaced with perpendicular slashes. Such simple blue decorated faience ware has been found on numerous eighteenth-century French-related sites in eastern North America (Miller and Stone 1970; Long 1973; Brain 1979; Parker 1982). This particular specimen was likely manufactured in the vicinity of Rouen (Noel Hume 1969). Lead-glazed Earthenware (Figure 18): Five lead-glazed body sherds were recovered. One sherd, glazed on one side, has a red paste and a transparent glaze that appears brown against the red background. It is similar to Type B coarse earthenware from Trudeau (Steponaitis 1979:50). The remaining four sherds, which correspond to Steponaitis' Type C coarse earthenware, have a light salmon paste with a white underslip and green lead glaze (1979:57). One rolled rim, from a bowl, was recovered from the central sector. Ceramic Plumstones (Figure 22): Two disks aboriginally manu- factured from coarse earthenware sherds were recovered in the central sector. One, a Type C earthenware, is 13 mm in diameter. The edges have been ground to form the disk shape. One face retains the bright green glaze while the glaze has been ground off the reverse face. The second specimen, which is broken, is 21 mm in diameter. This disk has a salmon colored paste. One face retains a white slip while the other has remnants of a light green glaze. Both faces have been ground. Fig. 22. Top row: brass tinkling cones; middle row: ceramic plumstones; bottom row: gunflints 60 ARTIFACT ANALYSIS Discussion: Good (1972:177-78) describes eight similar disks from the Guebert site and suggests they were used as dice in the plumstone game. This game of chance, played by women, was widespread among central Algonkian groups. Six or more dice were used in the game, which had a variety of complex scoring combinations. Culin (1907:168-170) collected plumstone dice made of European ceramic sherds from the Shoshone Wind River, Wyoming, reservation in 1900. The only eighteenth-century sites from which such ceramic plumstone dice have been reported are Guebert (Good 1972), Water- man (Brown 1973; n.d.b), Kolmer (Orser n.d.), and Monks Mound. This distribution indicates that such dice were made and used by Illini women associated with several tribal units. Metallic Artifacts Lead Lead Cross (Figure 23): A broken, molded lead cross was recovered in association with mortuary Feature 131. The arms of the cross measure 39 mm and 38 mm. This specimen is a native-made ornament cast in small stone molds like those found at Guebert ((jood 1972: Color Plate 2). This feature yielded the only black seed beads found on the first terrace. Such beads may have been strung with the cross to form a rosary (Stone 1971:75). Lead Brooches (Figure 23): Seven round-to-oval lead brooches and one triangular brooch were associated with mortuary Feature 119. Each of the round brooches has a solid cross bar. They average 16 mm in diameter. The triangular specimen measures 16 mm in height by 17 mm in width. These brooches are relatively crude. They lack exact symmetry and their surfaces have not been ground and smoothed. Like the lead cross, these ornaments were likely native- made in small stone molds. One such mold from the Little Osage site in Missouri (ca 1727-1777) has a circle with cross-bar design (Chap- man 1959; Walthall 1981:24, Figure 8, lower left). Stone (1974:135, Figure 63-1) illustrates a similar cast circle with solid cross bar brooch, which he identifies as being made from pewter. The brooches found at Fort Michilimackinac were of two basic forms, those with a movable tongue or cross-bar and those with a stationary cross-bar. Stone's (1974:135) interpretation of both of these brooch styles as British- related from the period 1760-1780 is questionable. The context of the stationary tongue brooches reported here suggests that this style is earlier. Their recovery in association with French trade goods further suggests that this earlier style brooch may have been introduced into Fig. 23. Lead brooches and (bottom row, far left) iron cross 62 ARTIFACT ANALYSIS the Mississippi Valley through the French trade or may have been copied from brooches obtained from British traders along the Wabash. Musket ball: One large spherical musket ball was recovered in Feature 153. Although slightly flattened, this specimen has an aver- age diameter of 1.45 cm. The size and weight (268 grams) of this musket ball indicates it is a standard .56 caliber found at numerous eighteenth-century French-related sites (Neitzel 1983:115-116). Iron Architectural Hardware Latch-Bar Catch (Figure 24): One door-latch-bar catch was recovered. This specimen, which has a broken shank, is 74 mm long by 24 mm wide. Similar catches were found at Fort Michilimackinac (Stone 1974:235; Figure 147-J) where they were interpreted as being asso- ciated with French structures. Pintle Hinges (Figure 24): Two door pintle elements were found. One, the proximal end of a rectangular strap hinge, has two holes and measures 75 mm x 16 mm. It is similar to Stone's Type 2 (1974:219; Figure 134). The shank of a pintle element, broken where the shank meets the hinge pin, is rectangular in cross section. This type of pintle has been classified by Stone (1974:221; Figure 135) as Series B, Type 2. Similar pintle elements were reported from the Guebert Site (Good 1972:165-166; Figure 40-K). Receiving Ring (Figure 24): A receiving ring for a shutter hook measures 68 mm in length. It is made from an iron bar, rectangular in cross section, with the proximal end tapered to a point. The distal end has been bent to form the eye or ring. Shutter Hook (Figure 24): One shutter hook was recovered. It is broken at the proximal end; the remaining section is 50 mm long. The distal end has been bent to form a hook. This hook fits neatly into the receiving ring described above. Latch-Bar Knob (Figure 24): A disc-shaped object, 18 mm in diameter and 8 mm thick, is interpreted as the knob to a latch bar. The flat, reverse face has a central attachment scar where it had been forged to a pin, which was in turn attached to the latch bar (see Stone 1974:210; Figure 126). Fig. 24. Wroughl-iron building hardware. A. B, E. nails; C, strap hinge; D, latch- bar knob; F, shutter hook; G, receiving ring; H, latch-bar catch; I, pintle hinge 64 ARTIFACT ANALYSIS Nails and Spikes (Figure 24): Three complete and 14 fragmentary hand-wrought nails were found in the Southwest sector. There are five rose head types (Stone 1974:225-230) and one L-head nail in the sample. Two complete specimens have lengths of 69 mm and 96 mm. Tools Scissors (Figure 25): Scissors were common items in the French trade and are frequently found on aboriginal sites. Portions of two pairs of scissors were recovered, one a hand-forged blade with a broken eye, and the second, an oval-shaped finger ring (eye) probably made from steel. Hoe Eye: One hoe eye or hafting ring was found above Feature 110. This oval eye, made from a bent bar of iron, was broken in the area where the blade attached. Skillet Pan: A broken, but almost complete skillet pan was found in the area of Square N82-84 E 177-179. It is similar to a complete specimen found at Trudeau (Brain 1979:140). Such skillets, when complete, had long (about 75 cm), narrow handles. The pan found at Monks Mound measured 32 cm in diameter and 7 cm deep, with an out-slanting rim. Strike-A-Light: One D-shaped strike-a-light is in the first terrace collection. It is broken and badly bent but appears to have been 7 cm long. A gunflint, which was used with the strike-a-light to produce sparks, was found in the same square. A similar D-shaped strike-a- light was recovered at Trudeau (Brain 1979:157). Clasp Knives (Figure 25): Blades from eight clasp (folding) knives were found. Two of these were associated with mortuary Feature 131 and two more were found above Feature 110, a circular pit. Case knife (Figure 25): A single case-knife blade was found in the central sector. The blade is bent and the tip broken off. The remaining portion measures 13 cm. Ornaments Rings: Two plain, narrow iron rings were associated with mortuary Feature 119. A single ring had been worn on each hand of this burial. These specimens, both badly deteriorated, were 4 mm wide and approximately 17 mm in diameter. Ramrod Guide (Figure 25): A ramrod guide, made from a rolled and crimped iron sheet, was found with mortuary Feature 119. It is 26 mm long and 9 mm in diameter. This specimen represents the only |L ' -■ igw m ^^K^^ ^^^m " ^^1 ^^^^^^B B ^' 1 ^■^ -'^^1 1 . rw^^« ^^^^B H ~ '4 ^^m <. ■< ^^^^1 1 Jm ^H ^ ^^ "■ IV I ■' '^ ^^B^' 1^/1 BiH ^^B V ^^^' ^K^'H K^ \^l ^^^^^^B ^ ^^1 ■ o 1 ^1 < ^^HB 2 3 4 5 CM ^ Fig. 25. Iron artifacts. A, key; B, scissors eye; C, ramrod guide; D, buckle section; E, scissors blade; F and G, clasp-knife blades; H. case-knife blade 66 ARTIFACT ANALYSIS gun part in the first terrace collections. It was apparently worn as an ornament since it was found with the key described below and some beads near the waist of this child burial. Key (Figure 25): An iron key, associated with mortuary Feature 119, apparently was strung and worn as an ornament. This key corresponds to Stone's (1974:225) Series A (hollow shank) Type 1 variety b (one notch in the proximal blade edge). This key is 61 mm long. Cross (Figure 23): One small bent and broken iron cross was found in the general excavation units in the central sector. Buckle (Figure 25): One rectangular iron buckle frame fragment was found. It appears to have been similar to a buckle illustrated by Stone (1974:42; Figure 24:JJ). Small Hinges: Three fragments of very small iron hinges were recovered in the Southwest sector. The most complete specimen measures 8 mm in length and 4 mm in width. These appear to be hinges for the metal spine of a book, perhaps a breviary. Chest Hardw^are (Figure 26 and 27): Mortuary Feature 130 consisted of a bundle burial that had been placed into a wooden chest fitted with iron hardware. Based upon distances between nail stains, this chest measured 60 cm x 35 cm. The chest had iron hinges, a single long handle probably centered on the lid, and an elaborate lock plate and lock complete with a key. Both nails and staples were used in con- structing the chest. Each hardware element is described below: Lock and Lock Plate - A highly ornate, flat, main plate and fully enclosed lock mechanism with a split bolt spring were attached to the chest. An almost identical plate and lock combination was recovered from Fort Michilimackinac (Stone 1974:197; Figure 114 C-D. See also Figure 27 this report). This lock and plate form is referred to by Stone as Type 1 (flat main plate) Variety b (split bolt spring). Hinge - One iron hinge was fairly well preserved. It is 21 mm wide and 40 mm long. It consists of two perforated plates joined by a pin. The elements were attached, perhaps by staples, to the chest back and lid. Handle - A single long (14 cm) iron handle was attached to the chest (perhaps to the lid). It is roughly shaped like an open rectangle with projecting ends, and it was attached to the chest with cotter-key-like pins. Fig. 26. Chest hardware. Top: handle and key; bottom: lockplate and hinge ARTIFACT ANALYSIS 69 This handle is similar to those illustrated by Stone (1974:204; Plate 120-A) and Nern and Cleland (1974:4; Figure 1) from Fort Michilimackinac and Gros Cap. Key - A key, 59 mm long, was associated with the chest. It corresponds to Stone's Series B, Type 1, Variety b key (no notches in key blade) (1974:227; Figure 138 A). Similar keys have been reported from the Gros Cap (Nern and Cleland 1974: Figure 1-6) and Bell sites (Wittry 1963). Nails and Staples - A minimum of 21 nails and one staple (11 mm x 5 mm) were found with the remains of the chest. At least two sizes of nails were present, a small nail (11 mm long) and a large form more than twice the length. Discussion: We have described the chest hardware associated with Feature 130 in some detail since the recovery of chests in French colonial archaeological context is fairly rare. In some cases (see for example Stone 1974 and Brain 1979) hardware has been found in mixed or unrecorded context and cannot be definitely attributed as belonging to chests. Chests have been recovered either as grave offerings or as containers for grave offerings at the Bell (Wittry 1963), Fletcher (Mainfort 1979), Fatherland (Neitzel 1965) and Trudeau sites (Brain 1979). Chests containing bundle burials have been reported from only three other sites, Gros Cap in Michigan, and Angola and Fatherland in the lower Mississippi Valley (see Table 3). These sites have dates ranging from 1675 to 1731 and have mean occupation dates ranging from 1690 to 1716. Based upon measurements, generally between nail stains, there appear to be three sizes of chests in this sample (the Bell chest measurements are estimated based on Quimby's (1966:125) state- ment that the Gros Cap and Bell chests were almost identical). The smallest chest type appears to be approximately 61 cm in length and 38 cm in width; the medium form 109 cm by 37 to 48 cm; and one large wide chest measured 107 by 73 cm. Measurements of height were availablefor only two chests. 25 mm (small chest) and 48 cm (medium chest). These two chests would have had approximate volumes of .058 cubic m (2 cubic feet) and .25 cubic m (9 cubic feet). TABLE 3 Dimensions and Context of French Colonial Chests Recovered at Aboriginal Sites Site Source Dates Mean Length Width Height Gros Cap Xern and Cleland 1974 Monks Mound This paper Angola Ford 1936 Fatherland (1) Neitzel 1965 (2) (3) (4) Bell Wittry 1963 1675-1705 1735-1752 1700-1731 1690 1744 1716 1699-1730 1715 61 cm 60 cm 109 cm 76 cm 61 cm 104 cm 107 cm 38 cm 38 cm 48 cm 38 cm 46 cm 37 cm 73 cm 25 cm 48 cm 1680-1730 1705 61 cm (?) 38 cm (?) ARTIFACT ANALYSIS 71 Copper Brass Kettle Fragments: Eight pieces of kettle brass and one kettle bail ear, or attachment, were recovered from general excavation units. The kettle ear is made of sheet brass that was folded and placed astraddle the rim. Iron bails were attached to the projecting ear in this type of kettle. This bail ear app>ears to correspond to Brain's (1979:166) Type A Variety 1 kettle, the most common form found at the Trudeau site. Wire: Two small pieces of brass or copper wire were associated with mortuary Feature 130. One 8 mm-long strand is twisted to form a hook. Such wire appears to have been a common item in the French trade. Tinkling Cones (Figure 22): Nine sheet-brass tinkling cones were present in the collections, 8 found in association with mortuary Feature 119 and one from a general unit. The cones associated with Feature 119, a child burial, were relatively small. The cone from non- feature context measured 28 mm in length; those from the burial ranged in length from 9 mm to 19 mm. Stone (1974:133) notes that the average length of tinkling cones at Fort Michilimackinac was 25.5 mm with a range of 11.6 mm to 42.8 mm. Several of the cones from Feature 119 have preserved deer hair within them, suggesting that they had been attached to a deerskin shirt or jacket. Hawk Bell: One hawk bell was associated with mortuary Feature 131. It is made of sheet brass and corresponds to Ian Brown's (1979:201) T>'pe Flush-edge Variety Flushloop. This particular specimen, broken and crushed at the equatorial seam, measures 17 mm in diameter. Liberty-type Bell (Figure 28): A large cast brass clapper bell, shaped similarly to the Liberty Bell, was found near the right hand of an adult female in mortuary Feature 131. This bell measures 11 cm in height and 9 cm in maximum diameter and weighs 368 grams (13 ounces). Four raised fleur-de-lys design elements spaced 90° apart, are cast into the outside of the bell. Two of these designs are clearly defined while the others are indistinctly cast. A lead sphere attached by iron wire served as a clapper. Discussion: Large cast bells such as this are rare in eighteenth- century context. Much smaller clapper bells were reported at the Fletcher site in eastern Michigan (Mainfort 1979) and two fragments of such small bells are on display at the Fort de Chartres museum. The only bell of this size and type found in similar context was reported by Brain (1977:1 1 » from the Angola Farm site ( 1706-1731 1 in the lower Mississippi Valley. Except for the absence of the fieur-de-lys designs, that bell is almost identical to the one from Monks Mound. Fig. 28. Large clapper bell ARTIFACT ANALYSIS 73 This is of special interest since there is a direct historical connec- tion between the Cahokia mission and the An^'ola Farm site. In 1698 three priests of the Seminary of F\jreign Missions, Montigny, St. Cosme, and Davion, guided by Henry de Tonti. traveled from Quebec to the Mississippi Valley to establish missions among the Indians (Shea 1861; Fortier 1908). Two missions were founded in the following year, the Tamaroa (Cahokia) mission by St. Cosme and the Tunica mission by Davion. Davion followed the Tunica from their settlement on the Yazoo River, in 1706, downstream to a new location at the Angola Farm site (Brain 1977). Davion's connection with the Cahokia mission is revealed in a series of lists of goods received at Cahokia between 1718 and 1724 (McDermott 1949:64-68). From these documents it appears that books and supplies for the missions often came by sea-going ships to the mouth of the Mississippi River. Such goods were shipped upstream to Davion, who then forwarded a portion of them by boat to his colleagues in the Illinois Country. Among the supplies received by the Cahokia mission in 1718 were "one copper handbell, one other small bell" (McDermott 1949:65). It is possible that the bell found at Monks Mound and the one recovered by Brain at Angola Farm were part of the same shipment of supplies received and dispersed by Davion at his mission among the Tunica. The recovery of what was probably the mission's chapel bell in the grave of an adult Cahokia Illini woman is puzzling. It is possible that the bell was simply appropriated by the woman or her relatives. There is, however, an alternative explanation. The priests in the Illinois Country delegated certain responsibilities to their aboriginal converts. Each church or chapel had a bell, "which, rung by a native, now summoned the Indians to services morning and evening at the same hour" (Garraghan 1928:121). The prayers said during Mass were commonly left "to an Indian woman to recite" (Garraghan 1928:121). It appears possible that this woman may have performed such tasks at the chapel built on Monks Mound and was recognized for her efforts by being buried with the chapel bell. Stone Gunflints (Figure 22): Four gun flints were found during excavation in the central .sector. Two of these are honey -colored PVench gun spalls (Hamilton 1979) both of which exhibit use with strike-a-lites; one is partially burned. The remaining two are bifacially flaked and were made from dark-gray chert. The.se latter specimens are small and were perhaps aboriginally manufactured. 74 ARTIFACT ANALYSIS Catlinite Pendants (Figure 17): Six triangular-to-trapezoidal catlinite pendants were recovered in the following contexts: one with mortuary Feature 119, four with mortuary Feature 131, and one in the area of Feature 122, an unexcavated pit that may have contained a burial. The dimensions of each specimen are given below: Specimen Length Width Thickness Feature 119 20 mm 16 mm 3 mm Feature 122 25 8 4 Feature 131-1 21 14 3 131-2 18 13 4 131-3 20 15 3 131-4 20 15 4 Mean: 21 mm 14 mm 4 mm Each of these pendants has a drilled perforation near the apex. Three are drilled from face to face. Three others (Feature 131-2-4) have very delicately drilled holes from side to side through their 3 mm to 4 mm width. Similar catlinite pendants have not been reported from regions west of the Mississippi River nor south of the Kaskaskia River. Catlinite pendants have been recovered at several sites in Illinois, in Wisconsin at the Bell site (Wittry 1963:33), in Michigan at Gros Cap (Quimby 1963), Lasanen (How 1971), and at Fletcher (Mainfort 1979). They have also appeared as far east as New York (Peter Pratt: Personal Communication). Catlinite beads and pendants appear in some frequency on sites dating to the half century between 1690 and 1740 and are rare afterwards. For example, 152 catlinite ornaments were recovered in mortuary context at Lasanen (How 1971). Charles Cleland (1971:144) suggests that this site represents a historically documented event dating to between 1690 and 1697. Only four catlinite artifacts were found at the Fletcher site and two were re- covered at Waterman (M. Brown n.d.b), both post-dating 1740. Silver ornaments were present on both of these latter sites. Silver became increasingly abundant in the fur trade during the second half of the eighteenth century and appears to have replaced catlinite as a raw material for the manufacturing of aboriginal jewelry. In Illinois, only five Illini sites besides the Monks Mound com- ponent have yielded triangular catlinite pendants. The Michigamea villages at the Kolmer and Waterman sites in Randolph County produced two pendants each. The Kaskaskia Guebert site has yielded ARTIFACT ANALYSIS 75 a dozen pendants (Good 1972:83). In the Illinois River Valley, two pendants have been recovered at Naples in Scott County (Kenneth Farnsworth: Personal Communication), three at the Newell site near Starved Rock (M. Brown n.d.a) and two were recovered from a burial atop Starved Rock (Westover 1984). This distribution pattern likely reflects the historically documented fur trade between the Illinois Country and various French posts in the Great Lakes region. This trade network, with the Illinois River as a major artery, was particu- larly active during the first half of the eighteenth century when catlinite jewelry was most popular. Marine Shell Wampum Beads: Four tubular shell beads, 4 mm to 6 mm in length, were associated with mortuaiy Feature 119. More than 14,000 of these beads were recovered from the Lasanen mortuary site in Michigan (Buckmaster and Canouts 1971:39). They are likely of European manufacture. Triangular Beads (Figure 29): Twenty-eight triangular shell beads, most with concave sides, were recovered from Feature 119. These beads, perhaps made to resemble small shark teeth, range from 6 mm to 10 mm in length and from 5 mm to 8 mm in width. Each bead has a small longitudinal perforation drilled from the apex to the center of the base. They are likely of European manufacture. Such beads have been reported from Lasanen and Fort Michilimackinac (Buckmaster and Canouts 1971:38). The specimens at Michilimackinac were found in association with rosary beads and were strung "in such a manner as to form the four arms of a cross" (Buckmaster and Canouts 1971:38). K k k k A A A. A A A A A Fig. 29. Marine shell triangular beads TABLE 4 Artifact Provenience General Excavation Units Southwest Sector Square N62-64 E 94-96 N62-64 E 96-98 N62-64 E 100-102 N64-66 E 90-92 N64-66 E 92-94 N64-66 E 110-112 N66-68 E 88-90 N66-68 E 90-92 N66-68 E 96-98 N66-68 E 110-112 N66-68 E 112-114 N68-70 E 96-98 N68-70 E 102-104 N68-70 E 108-110 N70-72 E 88-90 N70-72 E 92-94 N70-72 E 94-96 N70-72 E 116-118 N72-74 E 102-104 N72-74 E 106-108 N74-76 E 100-102 N74-76 E 102-104 Artifacts 1 clasp-knife blade 2 seed beads (IV A 1> 1 scissors fragment 3 small iron hinges 1 clasp-knife blade 1 necklace bead (II A 5) 1 bottle glass sherd 1 pintle strap 1 white seed bead (IV A 1) 1 scrap brass fragment 1 catlinite pendant 1 coarse earthenware sherd 1 necklace bead (II A 5) 5 white seed beads (IV A 1) 1 lead musket ball 1 scrap brass fragment 1 pintle shank 1 large nail 1 earthenware sherd 8 white seed beads (IV A 1) 1 scrap brass fragment 1 nail 1 bottle glass sherd 1 scrap brass fragment 1 iron latch-bar catch 4 white seed beads (IV A 1) 1 scrap brass fragment 1 nail 1 scrap brass fragment 1 blue seed bead (II A 7) 1 bottle glass sherd 1 nail 1 faience rim 1 kettle lug 1 scissors handle 1 iron hoe eye 2 clasp knives 1 brass tinkling cone 1 scrap brass fragment 1 bottle glass sherd TABLE 4 - Continued Central Sector Square N82-84 E 171-173 N82-84 E 177-179 N83-85 E 159-161 N83-85 E 161-163 N83-85 E 171-173 N83-85 E 173-175 N84-86 E 157-151 N96-98 E 161-163 Artifacts 1 scrap brass fragment 1 tinkling cone 1 clasp knife 1 iron skillet pan 1 scrap brass fragment 1 tinkling cone 1 iron cross fragment 1 gunflint 1 clasp-knife blade 1 earthenware sherd 1 plumstone ceramic die 2 gunflints 1 iron buckle fragment 2 scrap brass fragments 1 bear canine 1 plumstone ceramic die 1 earthenware sherd 1 bottle glass sherd 1 gunflint 1 strike-a-light 1 case knife blade 5 scrap brass fragments 1 scrap brass fragment 1 bottle glass sherd 1 faience sherd 1 iron buckle fragment Conclusions The archaeological and historical data presented in this study indicate that Monks Mound was the site of a French colonial mission and Cahokia Illini settlement was established in 1735. The proposed terminal date of 1752 for this occupation is based on a recorded event, the attack by northern tribes on the Cahokia, who had fled southward to the Michigamea village near Fort de Chartres. There is no evidence that the Cahokia returned to Monks Mound after this disastrous raid. No ornaments of silver, an increasingly important commodity in the fur trade after the mid-eighteenth century, were recovered from the first terrace. Silver ornaments were, however, reported by Margaret Brown (n.d.b) from the later Michigamea village at Waterman, which dates between 1753 and 1765. Although the population sample is small, it is of interest that all of the burials excavated on the first terrace were women and children. Two factors may account for this. First, from documentary sources it is evident that the priests had little success in converting adult males. Schlarman (1929:154), quoting a letter from a Jesuit priest among the Illini, states that "the hard work fell to the lot of women. . . . The women thus occupied and humbled by work are thereby more disposed to accept the truths of the Gospel." Secondly, adult men were frequently absent from the villages, especially during seasonal hunts and in times of war. The priests were often sought out to provide refuge from enemies. Father Bergier, writing from the Cahokia Mission in 1700, notes that, "We have frequent alarms here and we have several times been oblidged to receive within our walls nearly all the women and children of the village" (Garraghan 1928:136). The presence of an aboriginal dwelling in the southwest sector, and the recovery of village refuse by Bareis in the area of the central sector, suggests that portions of the first terrace were occupied by the Cahokia Illini. While additional cabins may have been constructed in the fioodplain to the north between the mound and Cahokia Creek, the areal extent of the first terrace (2 acres) was large enough for an entire village. The palisade at the Michigamea village at Waterman enclosed an area of 1.75 acres (M. Brown n.d.b). Only about half of the 200 warriors and their families who lived at the Cahokia Mission 80 CONCLUSIONS had moved to their new village by 1743. It is not known how many, if any, of the remaining inhabitants of the old village settled there prior to the abandonment of the Monks Mound locality. Although the placement of a settlement on the first terrace would have created some difficulties in carrying water from Cahokia Creek, the defensive advantage of such a location may have outweighed such logistical problems. During the entire time of occupation of the first terrace, the Cahokia and the other Illini tribes were involved in almost incessant raiding and warfare with groups both to the north and south (Temple 1958:43-47). The location of Monks Mound, well back from the Mississippi River, would have provided some protection for the Cahokia. Living on Monks Mound would also have given the Cahokia a tactical advan- tage. Raiding parties that ascended the mound's steep slopes could have been fired down upon by defending warriors. The summit of Monks Mound would also have provided sentinels an unimpeded view of several miles of surrounding flood plain prairie. While the Illini may have gone to considerable efforts to protect themselves, their defense was, in the final analysis, unsuccessful. Over the course of the eighteenth century, the Illini fell from a position of regional prominence and strength to a few bands of harried sur- vivors. Their traditional culture did not survive into the nineteenth century. Less than ten archaeological sites with eighteenth century Illini components are known. Each of these sites is important. Only by studying the archaeological remains from these former villages will we ever learn more about the Illini other than what was casually recorded in scattered documents of the Colonial Period. The world of the Illini and their French neighbors is long past. The archaeological investigations at Monks Mound have shed light on the history of both of these groups. This study has also added a small, but significant, chapter to the heritage of the state of Illinois. Appendix A The Cantine Trading Post 1776-1784 John A. Walthall In an undetermined location near Monks Mound is the site of an eighteenth-century trading post. This establishment, known as La Cantine (soldiers dramshop), was founded in 1776 by a group of mer- chants from the village of Cahokia. Present-day Canteen Creek was named for this trading post, which was situated near its confluence with Cahokia Creek (called the River L'Abbe in the late eighteenth century). Primary sources of information concerning the Cantine are found in the Kaskaskia Land Books (see Appendix B) and Alvord's Cahokia Records (1907). Charles Peterson (1949:323-324) has pre- viously summarized much of this data. Since the unpublished Land Record documents are of key importance in determining the location and dating of the trading post, they are quoted at length below: Kaskaskia Land Book A, p. 319 June 4, 1799 . . . Between Louis Pierre Levy of Vincennes and Margaret Allary, called Margau of the Village of Cahokia . . . who are Legal Representatives and heirs at Law of Isaac Levy Deceased, intestate of the one part, And Isaac Darnielle of the said Village of Cahokia ... of the other part witnesseth, that the said Louis Pierre Levy and Margaret Allary as part heirs at Law of their Father Isaac Levy their part, for and in consideration of the Sum of Sixty-six Dollars . . . sell . . . unto the said Isaac Darneille ... all that Tract or Parcel of Land lying and being in the said county of St. Clair about twelve miles above the said Village of Cahokia upon the River Labbe near where the old french church formerly .stood called and known by the name of the Cantine adjoining the land of Thomas 82 APPENDIX A Brady, and where the said Isaac Levy Deceased in his life time made an Improvement and lived together with Thomas Brady from the year of Our Lord one thousand seven hundred and seventy-six until the year of Our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty-four inclusive . . . containing four hundred acres of land or more . . . Acknowledged before John Dumoulin, Justice of the Court of Common Pleas, June 10, 1799 Witnessed by Henry Mase and Thomas Brady Kaskaskia Land Book A, p. 320 Recorded 25th December 1804 St. Clair County Personally appeared before me John Dumoulin Esquire, one of the Justices of the Court of Common Pleas for the said county, Thomas Brady, who being first sworn on the Holy Evangelist of Almighty God, Deposeth and said, that in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and seventy-eight, Isaac Levy together with Jean Baptiste LaCroix and the Deponent made an Establishment on the River Labbe at the lower side of the Great Nobb, near where the french Church stood, and continued to live there until the Indians grew too troublesome and were obliged to leave the same and come and live in the Village, and further this Deponent Saith that, and hath signed the same with his name . . . T. Brady Cahokia July the 19th 1799 Sworn and Subscribed before me, John Dumoulin Kaskaskia Land Book C, pp. 37-38 June 15 1799 . . . Between Thomas Brady of Cahokia in the County of St. Clair ... of the one part and John Singleton of the same Place of the other Part, witnesseth that the said Thomas Brady on his part, for and in consideration of the sum of sixty-six Dollars . . . sold . . . unto the said John Singleton . . . that Tract or Parcel of land lying and being in the said County of St. Clair about twelve miles above the said Village of Cahokia upon the River Labbe near where the old APPENDIX A 83 french Church formerly stood called and known by the name of the Cantine which was Improved and Cultivated by Jean Baptiste dit LaCroix and whereon the said Jean Baptiste LaCroix lived together with Thomas Brady and Isaac Levy from the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and seventy-six until the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty-four . . . said Tract of land and Improvement the said Thomas Brady purchased of the said Jean Baptiste Hubert alias LaCroix, unto the said John Singleton . . . Signed . . . T. Brady Witnessed by William Arundel Darneille Cahokia May 15, 1799 In 1810 Levy's heirs, along with Nicolas Jarrot, sold the Cantine property to the Trappist monks who settled the area near Monks Mound between 1809 and 1813 (Hammes 1981:156). Little is known about the activities of Lexy and his partners at the Cantine. This post, established soon after British troops began to leave the American Bottom, was organized to compete with Spanish St. Louis for the Indian trade (Peterson 1949:323). However, even after the removal of their troops, the British made several attempts to arouse the Indians and drive the Americans from the area (McDermott 1949:229). The final abandonment of the Cantine in 1784 was caused by such intrigue. Levy and his partners were granted a short-term monopoly of the Indian trade in 1779 for the region between Cahokia and the Illinois River (Alvord 1907:463-465; Peterson 1949:324). Special permission was given, in 1782, to Levy's former partner, LaCroix, to trade with the Indians. This agreement fixed prices on certain trade goods as follows (Alvord 1907:127; Peterson 1949:324): Oil at 3 livres 10 sols Tallow at one livre 10 sols Spare ribs at 7 livres 10 sols Venison at 10 livres Smoked hides at 5 livres Most of what is recorded about the Cantine is in the form of reports of trouble, either real or imagined, during 1779. There were com- plaints of "disorder at the Cantine in November, 1779, and John Henson, a trader, was accused of bad conduct in his trading with the Indians. His wife was also declared guilty of evil speech and she was to be withdrawn from the Cantine" (McDermott 1949:229). Charles Gratiot, at Cahokia, mentioned the Cantine in two letters written in December, 1779 (McDermott 1949:229-230): 84 APPENDIX A Cahokia Dec 16, 1779 Col Montgomery, Kas I write you in haste by Mr. Girardin to apprise you of the sad chances with which we are threatened at every moment - This night about midnight I was awakened and informed that the cantine (soldiers dramshop) at ... of Mr. Labbe was toaken [sic] by Indians - I got up at once and went to Mr. LaCroix's to learn the correctness of the report - Reaching there I found a Payoria Indian, a hand of the said Cantine, who told me, that "yesterday he started with Charley [Charloc] the interpreter, and the son of the 'Wolf chief of the Kickapoos,' to go to the mamelles on the hills, about a league distant from the said Cantine, that when they reached there, they found a large Indian Lodge with a number of Indians in it, who immediately seized Charley and tied him, as for himself an Indian woman warned him that if he did not escape at once he would be killed with the others," he also said that the "Wolfs" son was implicated with the other Indians of the party - According to what I see they are Wabash Indians, and may number about 50 or 60 men having eight Lodges all united as one - Whereupon to be prepared against so pressing a danger, I immediately assembled all the people at my house, to deliberate on what we should do - where we determined to at once despatch twenty of the bravest and most resolute of our young men, well mounted and armed, with a written order to Mr. Saucier as their commandant, to demand from these Indians the reasons they made a prisoner of Charley; if they have any intention to make war, that they declare it formally without fear - I also told him to seize the person of Charley and bring him to the village, and if the Indians opposed it, to charge on them as brave soldiers - and if they wanted to enter into a discussion, to have no argument with them further than to tell them to send with you two or three of their principal men to confer with the old inhabitants of the village - I have just this moment despatched the said horsemen, well armed, with a white flag to offer them peace or war - APPENDIX A 85 I am much mortified to see that Mr. Gibeau will not wait to see the result of the expedition, and inform you of it, as he is preparing to depart at day break; but you may calculate that if anything new or prejudicial to the public welfare occurs, I will send a messenger to you immediately - I have nothing further at present to inform you of and beg you to believe me Cahokia Deer 1779 Col Montgomery, Kaskaskia I am much changrined that M. Gibeau left without having taken my letter as he had promised me, so I send you appended the details of the fright we had which fortunately was not well founded - I confronted the Peoria Indian in presence of many, who said that the Indians had done nothing to harm him, the Wolf came and stated that he still worked at the Cantine, and that all that had been told us was untrue - I am at a loss what to believe, either the Wolfs son is a great hypocrite who does not give us the truth or that in reality he knows nothing of the other Indians - But a great defect I perceive in Charley is that he gets drunk with the Indians, to which he is too much addicted - All has been quiet since then, and we hear no rumors of the approach of enemies. . . . The two 400-acre tracts of land claimed by Levy and Brady (Figure 30), which are outlined on modern USGS maps (See Fowler 1969: Figure 2), were sold and re-sold several times (see Hammes: Appendix B). In one of these deeds, dated May 1799, between Gonville and Jarrot, Cantine is spelled "Quantine" and is said to have been "the site of a former fort." The term "fort" in this context may be interpreted as meaning that the La Cantine trading post was surrounded by a stockade enclosure. This is especially plausible in light of the several references to threats of British-inspired Indian raids from the east. In later years, a military road between St. Louis and Vincennes was established that passed by Monks Mound. This road may have been built along a former overland path linking the Mississippi and Wabash valleys, which would have provided an easily accessible route for raid- ing parties as well as groups coming to trade. Also, according to Peterson (1965:24-26), it was a common practice in the French colonial period for house lots to be enclosed with palisades, commonly referred to as pieux en terre (stakes in earth) or pieux dubout (stakes upright). APPENDIX A 87 In several instances, including the Illinois settlements, property owners were required by law to stockade their lots. In St. Louis, it was required by the 1767 government instructions that "Outside the houses must run an encircling pointed fence, which will be constructed by each owner at his own expense, in order to prevent the savages from making any sudden rush at night and surprising them" (quoted in Peterson 1965:25). As mentioned earlier, the exact location of the trading post is yet to be established. Peterson ( 1949) believed it to be situated on the west side of Monks Mound. The configuration of the adjoining tracts of land claimed by Levy and Brady add some support to this hypothesis. Archaeological field research has been conducted in two large parcels of land in this area. Some 300 meters west of Monks Mound is the Merrell Tract, which was investigated by the Beloit College Archaeo- logical Field School under the direction of Robert Salzer and John Kelly (Salzer 1975). An extensive surface collection, under 100^/r visi- bility, was made in this area. The historic materials recovered from this work were loaned to the author for study. All such materials in this collection post-dated the Civil War. Adjoining the eastern boundary of the Merrell Tract along Sand Prairie Lane is Tract 15B, excavated by Warren Wittry in 1960 and 1961 (Vogel 1975). Unfortunately, no systematic surface collection was made during this investigation. Plowzone was removed mechanically and selected features were hand excavated. No historic materials are present in the collection from Tract 15B now stored by the Illinois State Museum. If quantities of eighteenth-century material had been found in feature context during this investigation such an occurrence would surely have been noted by Wittry. who had recently excavated the early historic Fox village at the Bell Site in Wisconsin in 1959 (Wittry 1963). The elimination of these tracts as possible locations for the trading post leaves the 200 m wide parcel of land immediately adjacent to Monks Mound. Much of this area was included in the original purchase of property by the State of Illinois, which established Cahokia State Park. Other than testing of the Sawmill Mound by Moorehead (1923) no modern archaeological work has been conducted in this area. Any future park improvements in this area, which includes the present museum and parking lot, should consider that the relatively shallow feature remains of La Cantine trading post may be present and would be subject to disturbance. Appendix B A Chronology of Early Land Transactions in the Monks Mound Area Raymond H. Hammes Prior to the sale of public domain by the Kaskaskia land office (1814), settlers in Illinois were given free land provided certain conditions were met. To qualify for a 400-acre "improvement" grant, the claimant had to prove that the land on which he was living as a squatter had been improved and/or cultivated by him. The building of a house and the clearing of a few acres for farming usually satisfied the require- ment. Reports by official land commissioners at Kaskaskia submitted to and confirmed by Congress list the names of all settlers awarded improvement grants, each identified by a claim number and a survey number (see American State Papers, Public Lands, Vol. II, No. 180). Survey books, describing the grant by metes and bounds, and plat books, locating private surveys by section, township, and range, are available at the Illinois State Archives, as are most deed books record- ing subsequent sales and title transfers of the granted property. Information regarding Monks Mound, the old French church, the remains of an Indian camp, and the site of a former fort discussed in this paper is recorded in two improvement grants of 400 acres each - one awarded to Jean Baptiste Gonville (Claim 133, Survey 628), the other to Isaac Levy (Claim 902, Survey 629). Chronology of claim 133, Survey 628 On March 8, 1799, the heirs of Jean B. Gonville, also called Rupulay, sold his 400-acre improvement tract at a place "commonly called Cantine" to Nicolas Jarrot for $60. According to the deed, Gonville had settled there on or before 1783 and had built a house. A fort had formerly been located there. No mention, however, is made of the large mound (Monks Mound) located in the southwest section of the tract. Cahokia Record A, p. 350 APPENDIX B 89 On May 31, 1810, surveyors, running the line between Section 35 and 36, Township 3 north, Range 9 west of the Third Principal Meridian, recorded crossing a fence "of an improvement occupied by the monks," four chains south of Canteen Creek. Field Notes, Vol. 57, Part 1, p. 104 On March 11, 1811, Nicolas Jarrot sold Gonville's 400 acres "on River I'Abbe" (where the monks were squatting) to the Rev. Urbain Guillet, Superior of the Order of Trappists, for $25. The sale included the provision that the site be used for religious purposes only. Cahokia Record B, p. 584 On March 16, 1812, the grant is surveyed at the request of Jarrot and assigned the survey number 628. Book of Private Surveys, No. 514 On February 2, 1813, the Rev. Guillet, before leaving Illinois, sold the 400 acres back to Jarrot. Included in the sale for which Guillet received $900 was Claim 902, Survey 629. St. Clair County Deed Book F, p. 97 Subsequent deeds reflect mortgage sales by Julie Jarrot to Amos Hill on April 5, 1831 (St. Clair County Deed Book F, p. 439), and by Hill to William L. Williams on October 5, 1840 (St. Clair County Deed Book P, pp. 667 and 668). The deed on page 667 mentions that it is land "embracing what are called Monks Mounds." Plat books locate Survey 628, Claim 133 in Sections 35 and 36, Town- ship 3 north, Range 9 west, Madison County, and in Section 1 and 2, Township 2 north. Range 9 west, St. Clair County. Plat Book 18, pp. 25 and 26 Plat Book 45, pp. 2 and 3 Patent issued to Nicolas Jarrot, Claim 133, Survey 628 on August 7, 1816. Rec. Vol. 1, p. 46 National Archives Chronology of Claim 902, Survey 629 On June 4, 1799, the heirs of Isaac Levy - Louis Pierre (his son) and Margaret Allary (his daughter), a widow called Margau - sold their father's 400-acre improvement tract to Isaac Darneille for $66. The land they sold is located "twelve miles above the village of Cahokia 90 APPENDIX B upon the River L'abbe near where the old french church formerly stood called and know by the name of Cantine". Isaac Levy had lived there with Thomas Brady "from the year 1776 until 1784 inclusive under the Government of the State of Virginia." Cahokia Record C, p. 358, Kaskaskia Deed Book A, p. 319 On July 29, 1799, Thomas Brady swears before Jean Dumoulin, Judge of the Court of Common Pleas, that Isaac Levy, Jean Baptiste Lacroix, and himself "made an establishment on the River L'abbe at the lower side of the Great Nobb [Monks Mound] near where the french church stood and continued to live there until the Indians grew troublesome and were obliged to leave the same and come and live in the village." Kaskaskia Deed Book A, p. 320 On December 27, 1803, Darneille sold Isaac Levy's 400-acre improve- ment grant to James Haggin for $1. The sale had been arranged on April 7, 1802, but not finalized. According to the deed, the land is located "on the river L'abbe near a place commonly called the Cantine . . . about ten miles above Cahokia." The survey mentions a stone near "a mound", and the "remains of an Indian camp on the bank of the River L'abbe." Cahokia Record C, p. 307 On January 11, 1808, surveyors, running the southern line of section 34 and 35, record sighting numerous mounds, twenty-four or more, "one whose base is nearly 6 acres by estimation and nearly 100 feet in height. Others of various sizes, from 6 to forty feet in height, and of various forms, some round some oblong or rectangled parallelo- grams, and other irregular. All covered with simtoms [sic] of ancient ruins." Field Notes, Vol. XII, p. 76 On September 13, 1809, James Haggin, acting through the Rev. Urbain Guillet, then in Kentucky, sold Levy's 400-acre improvement to Nicolas Jarrot for $214. Haggin's title is suspect. Cahokia Record B, p. 583 The following four deeds reflect a conflict of ownership regarding Isaac Levy's 400-acre improvement tract. On November 10, 1810, the grandchildren of Levy, Francois Demette, and wife Emily, sold their share of Levy's estate to the Rev. Marie Joseph Dunand, a Trappist monk, for $40. APPENDIX B 91 On November 19. 1810. other grandchildren of Levy. Joseph Poirier and wife Helen, sold their share of Levy's estate to the Rev. Dunand for $12. On March 27, 1811, the Rev. Dunand sold the land purchased from the grandchildren of Levy to the Rev. Urbain Guillet. Superior of the Trappists, for $52. Cahokia Record B, pp. 582 and 583 On July 15, 1811, the court orders the estate of Margaret AUary, daughter of Isaac Levy, to be sold at public auction. The Rev. Guillet purchases her share of Levy's improvement for $23 (see deed of June 14. 1799, above). Cahokia Record B, p. 617 On March 15, 1812, Levy's 400-acre improvement tract was surveyed for Isaac Darneille. Survey 629, Claim 902. Book of Private Surveys, No. 514 On February 2, 1813, the Rev. Guillet, before leaving Illinois, sold Levy's 400-acre improvement, Claim 902, survey 629, and Gonville's improvement tract, Claim 133, Survey 628, to Nicolas Jarrot for $900. St. Clair County Deed Book F, p. 97 Plat books locate Survey 629, Claim 902, in Sections 33 and 34, Town- ship 3 north. Range 9 west, Madison County, and in Sections 2 and 3, Township 2 north, Range 9 west, St. Clair County. Plat Book 18, pp. 25 and 26 Plat Book 45, pp. 2 and 3 Patent issued to Darneille, Claim 902, Survey 629, on December 19, 1818. Rec. Vol. 2, p. 227 National Archives References Cited Alvord, Clarence W. 1907 Cahokia Records, 1778-1790. Collections of the Illinois State Historical Library, vol. 2. Springfield. 1922 The Illinois Country, 1673-1818. A. C. McClurg, Chicago. Bareis, Charles J. 1975a Report of 1971 University of Illinois-Urbana Excavations at the Cahokia Site. Papers in Anthropology, no. 3, pp. 9-11. Illinois State Museum, Springfield. 1975b Report of 1972 University of Illinois-Urbana Excavations at the Cahokia Site. Papers in Anthropology, no. 3, pp. 12-15. Illinois State Museum, Springfield. Bareis, Charles J. and James W. Porter 1984 American Bottom Archaeology. University of Illinois Press, Urbana. Baum, Henry M. 1903 Antiquities of the United States: The Cahokia Mounds. Records of the Past 2:214-222. Washington, D.C. Bauxar, J. Joseph 1973 The Historic Period. Illinois Archaeological Survey Bulletin, no. 1. Urbana. 1978 History of the Illinois Area. Handbook of North Ameri- can Indians, vol. 15, pp. 594-601. Benchley, Elizabeth D. 1974 Mississippian Secondary Mound Loci: A Comparative Fuctional Analysis in a Time-Space Perspective. Ph.D. dissertation. University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. 1975 Summary Field Report of Excavations on the Southwest Corner of the First Terrace of Monks Mound- 1968, 1969, 1971. Papers in Anthropology, no. 3, pp. 16-20. Illinois State Museum, Springfield. REFERENCES CITED 93 1981 Summon' RefHirt on Controlled Surface Collections of the Ramey Field, Cahokia Mounds Historic Site, Madison County, Illinois. Report of Investigations, no. 51. Univer- sity of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Archaeological Research Laboratory. Brackenridge, Henry M. 1814 Views of Louisiana Together with a Journal of a Voyage up the Missouri River, in 1811. Pittsburgh. Brain, Jeffrey P. 1977 On the Tunica Trail. Louisiana Archaeological Survey and Antiquities Commission. Department of Culture, Recreation and Tourism, Baton Rouge. 1979 Tunica Treasure. Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, vol. 71. Harvard Univer- sity, Cambridge. Brown, Ian 1979 Bells. In Tunica Treasure by J. P. Brain. Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, vol. 71, pp. 44-73. Harvard University, Cambridge. Brown, James A. (EdJ 1961 The Zimmerman Site: A Report on Excavations at the Grand Village of Kaskaskia, La Salle County, Illinois. Reports of Investigations, no. 9. Illinois State Museum, Springfield. Brown, Margaret K. 1971 Glass from Fort Michilimackinac: A Classification for Eighteenth Century Glass. Michigan Archaeologist 17(3-4). 1972 Native Made Glass Pendants from East of the Missis- sippi. American Antiquity 37(3):432-438. 1973 Cultural Transformation Among the Illinois: The Appli- cation of a Systems Model to Archeological and Ethno- historic Data, Ph.D. thesis, Michigan State University, East Lansing. 1975 The Zimmerman Site. . . Further Excavations at the Grand Village of Kaskaskia. Reports of Investigations, no. 32. Illinois State Museum, Springfield. 1976 The 1974 Fort de Chartres Excavation Project. Archaeo- logical Service Report 14. University Museum, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. 94 REFERENCES CITES n.d.a The Newell Site, La Salle County, Illinois. Manuscript on file, Illinois Archaeological Survey, Urbana. n.d.b The Waterman Site: Archaeology and Systemic Change. Manuscript on file, Illinois State Museum, Springfield. Buckmaster, Maria and Valetta Canouts 1971 Shell Artifacts. In The Lasanen Site, edited by C. E. Cleland. Michigan State University Anthropological Series l(l):35-40. East Lansing. Callender, Charles 1978 Illinois. Handbook of North American Indians, vol. 15, pp. 673-680. Chapman, Carl H. 1959 The Little Osage and Missouri Indian Village Sites. Missouri Archaeologist, vol. 21, no. 1. Cleland, Charles E. (Ed.) 1971 The Lasanen Site. Michigan State University Anthro- pological Series vol. 1, no. 1. East Lansing. Culin, Stewart 1907 Games of the North American Indians. Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology, 1902-1903. Deuel, Thorne 1958 American Indian Ways of Life. Story of Illinois, no. 9. Illinois State Museum, Springfield. Fenner, Gloria J. 1963 The Plum Island Site, La Salle County, Illinois. Illinois Archaeological Survey Bulletin, pp. 1-106. Urbana. Ford, James A. 1936 Analysis of Indian Village Site Collections from Loui- siana and Mississippi. Anthropological Bulletin, no. 2. Louisiana Geological Survey, Department of Conserva- tion. Fortier, Edward J. 1908 The Establishment of the Tamarois Mission. Transac- tions of the Illinois State Historical Society 13:233-239. Springfield. Fowler, Melvin L. 1969 The Cahokia Site. Illinois Archaeological Survey Bulle- tin 7, pp. 1-20. Urbana. REFERENCES CITED 95 Fowler. Melvin and Robert L. Hall 1975 Archcn'olofiical Phases at Cahokia, Illinois Archaeo- logical Survey Bulletin, 10 pp. 1-14. Urbana. Garraghan, Gilbert J. 1928 New Light on Old Cahokia. Illinois Catholic Historical Review 11:99-146. Good, Mary E. 1972 Guebert Site: An 18th Century Kaskaskia Indian Village in Randolph County. Illinois. Central States Archae- ological Society Memoir, no. 2. Griffin, James B., and Richard G. Morgan, eds. 1941 Contributions to the Archaeology of the Illinois River Valley. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, vol. 32, part 1. Hamilton, T. M. 1979 Guns, Gunflints, Balls and Shot. In Tunica Treasure by J. P. Brain. Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archae- ology and Ethnology, vol. 71, pp. 206-216. Harvard University. Hammes, Raymond H. 1981 The Cantine Mounds of Southern Illinois. Journal of the Illinois State Historical Society 74(2):145-156. How, Paul 1971 Catlinite on the Lasanen Site. In The Lasanen Site, edited by Charles E. Cleland. Michigan State University Museum Anthropological Series, vol. 1, no. 1. East Lansing. Jelks, Edward B., and Carl J. Ekberg 1984 Archeological Explorations at the Laurens Site (11-R125), Randolph County, Illinois. Illinois State University, Midwestern Archeological Research Center, Normal. Long, George 1973 Progress Report on Faience Research. National Historic Sites Services Research Bulletin, no. 12. Ottawa. Mainfort, Robert C. 1979 Indian Social Dynamics in the Period of European Contact. Michigan State University Museum Anthro- pological Series, vol. 1, no. 4. East Lansing. 96 REFERENCES CITES McDermott, John F. (Ed.) 1949 Old Cahokia. The St. Louis Historical Documents Foun- dation, St. Louis. McWilliams, Richebourg G. 1953 Fleur de Lys and Calumet: Being the Penicaut Narrative of French Adventure in Louisiana. Louisiana State University Press. Miller, J. Jefferson, and Lyle M. Stone 1970 Eighteenth Century Ceramics from Fort Michilimack- inac. Smithsonian Studies in History and Technology, no. 4. Moorehead, Warren K. 1923 The Cahokia Mounds. University of Illinois Bulletin 21, no. 6. Urbana. Neitzel, Robert S. 1965 Archaeology of the Fatherland Site: The Grand Village of the Natchez. Anthropological Papers, vol. 51. Ameri- can Museum of Natural History. 1983 The Grand Village of the Natchez Revisted. Archaeolog- ical Report, no. 12. Mississippi Department of Archives and History. Nern, Craig F., and Charles E. Cleland 1974 The Gros Cap Cemetery Site, St. Ignace, Michigan: A Reconsideration of the Greenless Collection. Michigan Archaeologist 20(1). Noel Hume, Ivor 1969 Rouen Faience in 18th Century America. Antiques 89(6):559-561. Orser, Charles E. 1977 The 1975 Season of Archaeological Investigations at Fort de Chartres, Randolph County, Illinois. Research Records 16. Southern Illinois Studies. n.d. The Kolmer Site: An Eighteenth Century Michigamea Village. Manuscript on file, Illinois Archaeological Survey, Urbana. Palm, Sister Mary B. 1931 The Jesuit Missions of the Illinois Country, 1673-1763. Cleveland. REFERENCES CITED 97 Parker, James W. 1982 Archaeological Test Investigations at 1 Su 7: the Fort Tombecbe Site. Journal nf Alabama Archaeology 28(1). Pease. Theodore C. (Ed.) 1940 Illinois on the Eve of the Seven Year's War, 1747-1 755. Collections of the Illinois State Historical Library, vol. 29. Springfield. Pease, Theodore C, and Raymond Werner (Eds.) 1934 The French Foundations 1680-1693. Collections of the Illinois State Historical Society, vol. 23. Springfield. Peterson, Charles E. 1949 Notes on Old Cahokia. Journal of the Illinois State Historical Society 42(1-3). 1965 The Houses of French St. Louis. In The French in the Mississippi Valley, edited by J. F. McDermott. Univer- sity of Illinois Press. Price, Anna 1980 French Outpost on the Mississippi. Historic Illinois 3(1): 1-4, Illinois Department of Conservation, Spring- field. 1982 The French Regime in Illinois, 1718-1740. Historic Illinois 5(3):l-6. Illinois Department of Conservation, Springfield. Quaife, Milo M. (Ed.) 1947 The French in the Great Lakes Region. Lakeside Classics, Chicago. Quimby, George T. 1963 The Gros Cap Cemetery Site in Mackinac County, Mich- igan. Michigan Archaeologist 9(4). 1966 Indian Culture and European Trade Goods. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison. Salzer, Robert J. 1975 Excavations at the Merrell Tract of the Cahokia Site: Summary Feild Report, 1973. Papers in Anthropology, no. 3 pp. 1-8. Illinois State Museum, Springfield. Schlarman, J. H. 1929 From Quebec to New Orleans. Buechler Publishing Com- pany, Belleville. 98 REFERENCES CITES Schnell, Gail S. 1974 Hotel Plaza: an Early Historic Site with a Long Pre- history. Reports of Investigations, no. 29. Illinois State Museum, Springfield. Steponaitis, Vincas P. 1979 Lead-Glazed Earthenware. In Tunica Treasure, by J. P. Brain. Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, vol. 71, pp. 44-73. Harvard University. Stone, Lyle M. 1971 Rosary and Glass Beads. In The Lasanen Site, edited by C. E. Cleland. Michigan State University Anthro- pological Series, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 74-85. East Lansing. 1974 Fort Michilimackinac, 1715-1781. Michigan State University Anthropological Series, vol. 2. East Lansing. Temple, Wayne C. 1958 Indian Villages of the Illinois Country: Historic Tribes. Illinois State Museum Scientific Papers, no. 2. Titterington, P. F. 1938 The Cahokia Mound Group and Its Village Site Materi- als. St. Louis. Tordoff, Judith D. 1983 An Archaeological Perspective on the Organization of the Fur Trade in Eighteenth Century New France. Ph.D. dis- sertation. Department of Anthropology, Michigan State University. Vogel, Joseph D. 1975 Trends in Cahokia Ceramics: Preliminary Study of the Collections from Tracts 15A and 15B. Illinois Archaeo- logical Survey Bulletin 10:32-125. Walthall, John A. 1981 Galena and Aboriginal Trade in Eastern North America. Illinois State Museum Scientific Papers, no. 17. Spring- field. Walton, Clyde C. 1962 John Francis Snyder: Selected Writings. Illinois State Historical Society, Springfield. REFERENCES CITED 99 Westover, Allan R. 1984 A History of the Archcological Investigations at Starved Rock, Illinois. Masters thesis, Department of Histo- ry. Illinois State University. Williams, Joyce, and Richard B. Lacampagne 1982 Final Report on Archaeological Investigations of the Adler Site (11-5-64). FAI-270 Archaeological Mitiga- tion Project Report 43. Department of Anthropology, University of Illinois. Wilson, Samuel 1965 Colonial Fortification and Military Architecture in the Mississippi Valley. In The French in the Mississippi Valley, edited by John F. McDermott, University of Illinois Press, Urbana. Wittry, Warren L. 1963 The Bell Site, Wn 9, an Early Historic Fox Village. Wisconsin Archaeologist 44(1): 1-257. Wray, Donald E. 1952 Archeology of the Illinois Valley: 1950. In Archeology of Eastern United States, edited by James B. Griffin. University of Chicago Press. 7200-S15 PB-Oif C BT contents and^Ss".o'for^..^^;irv':,'^! the views or policies of th^ i c n !!^ "^^^'^^^ /fm\.m^® J UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS URBANA ThIK PaW MISSION^SPRINGFIELO, I The River L' Abbe Mission is the second i the Studies in Illinois Archaeology series „,„„„„,„„ published by the Preservation Services D 3 011 2 0253991 60 the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency, we are especially proud of this study because it takes the history of the Cahokia site, and Monks Mounds in particular, into the period following European contact. Much of what we know of Cahokia and its in- habitants comes to us from archaeological re- search. Excavations have produced a wealth of artifacts and information about Monks Mound, its people, and its origins. So significant is the site that, in addition to its status as a National Histor- ic Landmark, it is a designated World Heritage Site. Recent investigations, however, have all but ig- nored the significant post-European-contact his- tory of the Cahokia site. The great mound there took its name from the Trappist monks who estab- lished a nearby monastery there in the early nine- teenth century. One-hundred-fifty years earlier French settlers constructed a trading post and mission on the mound's first terrace, the subject of this volume. By combining artifacts and notes from excava- tions with information from French records in lo- cal repositories, the authors have written a fasci- nating account of the French presence at Cahokia Mounds. We may, for the first time, observe that French activity there was not confined to explor- ers passing through on their way to Fort de Char- tres or the village of Cahokia. Priests from the vil- lage of Cahokia served both the Monks Mound chapel and the parish of St. Anne at Fort de Chartres. We hope that this history of the River L'Abbe Mission will prove as interesting and fascinating to its reader as it has to those of us in the Agency that administers the site and that it will inspire others to explore this period of man's association with the Cahokia Mounds site.— WiUiam G. Farrar, Chief, Division of Preservation Services, Illinois Historic Preservation Agency mm -/4.^ A .4*'-