CL2, Chapt. 7 · ered as elements within the heavy-fraction flota-tion samples. The flotation samples were care-fully scanned, however, in an effort to identify diagnostic artifacts

$Page 1: CL2, Chapt. 7 · ered as elements within the heavy-fraction flota-tion samples. The flotation samples were care-fully scanned, however, in an effort to identify diagnostic artifacts$
Chapter 7: Aboriginal Ceramics

241

CHAPTER 7

ABORIGINAL CERAMICS

RICHARD A. WEINSTEIN

MICHELLE HUTCHINS

Analysis of the aboriginal ceramics recoveredat Guadalupe Bay during the 1992 data-recovery projectwas an extremely laborious and time-consumingendeavor. Included in the analysis were all sherdsrecovered as field specimens, all sherds captured inthe 1/4-in screens, and all sherds collected fromthe site’s surface. Unfortunately, time and mon-etary constraints did not allow for analysis ofceramics captured in the 1/8-in screens or recov-ered as elements within the heavy-fraction flota-tion samples. The flotation samples were care-fully scanned, however, in an effort to identifydiagnostic artifacts that might be present. Thisresulted in the discovery of only one additionalrim sherd worthy of inclusion. Regardless, 42,712individual sherds were examined, of which 41,946came from the various excavation units and 766came from the eroding bankline. This is, by far,the largest collection of aboriginal ceramics everanalyzed from a site on the central Texas coast. Infact, it may be the largest sample of ceramics ana-lyzed from a single site anywhere in Texas outsidethe Caddoan culture area.

At this point it should be noted briefly that thecurrent ceramic analysis attempted to build uponprevious research in the area, particularly that of Duayand Weinstein (1992) and Duay et al. (1994). Otherearlier studies, such as those by Campbell (1952,1958a, 1962), Suhm and Krieger (1954), Mounger(1959), Suhm and Jelks (1962), Calhoun (1962), Story(1968), Hester and Parker (1970), Hester and Hill(1971), Mallouf et al. (1973), Fritz (1975), Cox andSmith (1988), and Ricklis (1990b), also were usedto guide the current research. A summary of thecontributions of these studies, plus other archaeo-

logical investigations in the region, can be found inS. Black (1989b) and Weinstein (1992, 1994), andwill not be repeated here. Rather, details related toeach of these individual reports will be discussedas necessary below.

Generally, the present analysis was designed toinvestigate both chronological and functional ques-tions regarding the Guadalupe Bay ceramic collec-tion (see Chapter 4). The type-variety system ofceramic classification, as devised by Duay andWeinstein (1992) and Duay et al. (1994) for the centralTexas coast, was to be the primary method utilizedin examining site chronology. Analyses of decora-tive motifs, rim form, and vessel form also were tobe employed if possible. Functional questions wereto be addressed through the use of numerous attributeanalyses, including such factors as vessel shape, orificediameter, and vessel wall thickness. As will be seen,each sherd was examined and measured in a myriadof ways, and numerous attributes were recorded. Theseattributes will be discussed in detail in the follow-ing sections.

Analytical Techniques

Analytical techniques employed for this studygenerally followed those established by Duay andWeinstein (1992) and began with the identificationof the various paste characteristics of individual sherds.Identification of a sherd’s paste is the critical firststep required under the current analysis system, andis necessary before that sherd can be assigned to aware series, and, subsequently, to a specific type andthen to a variety within that series. The followingdiscussion, therefore, represents a modified version

The Guadalupe Bay Site (41 CL 2)

242

of the sorting criteria employed originally by Duayand Weinstein (1992).

Paste Identification

After a careful review of the previous researchconcerning central Texas coastal ceramics, particu-larly those studies by Campbell (1962), Fritz (1975),Hester and Hill (1971), Mallouf et al. (1973), Story(1968), and Suhm and Krieger (1954), it became clearthat the presence or absence of sand grains in thepaste of a sherd, plus the size of the sand grains,were key sorting criteria. These were recognizedas the basic matrix of the sherd, and were referredto as “primary inclusions” in the paste. Duay andWeinstein (1992) initially established three catego-ries of primary inclusions—silty paste, fine sandypaste, and medium to coarse sandy paste. Sherdswith silty or fine sandy pastes subsequently wereplaced in the Rockport ware series, while sherds withmedium to coarse sandy pastes were assigned to theGoose Creek ware series.

Unfortunately, Duay and Weinstein (1992) basedtheir earlier analysis on the subjective observationof grain size. According to their methods, if it waspossible to see individual sand grains without theaid of magnification, then the grains were classifiedas medium or coarse in size (Duay, personal com-munication 1995). If sand grains could not be seen,then the sherd was considered to have either a siltyor fine sandy paste, and it was examined further under10x magnification to determine whether or not sandwas present. Clearly, such a subjective approachcan be biased by the sharpness of an individual’seye sight, plus that person’s conception of what con-stitutes medium-size sand grains. As to be expected,when actual sherds from the 1989 testing project werereexamined at the beginning of the present study, itwas impossible for the current analysts to replicatethe earlier findings.

To avoid a similar subjective analysis, each sherdfrom the 1992 collection was broken along one edgeand carefully observed under either a 1.75x magni-fying light, a 10x hand lens, or a 10-to-30x binocu-lar microscope. Sand grains then were measuredwith the aid of a Wentworth scale, and the sherd’spaste classified according to three size categories:(1) silty paste (grains <1/16 mm in diameter), (2) veryfine (1/16 to 1/8 mm) to fine (1/8 to 1/4 mm) sandypaste, and (3) medium sandy paste (1/4 to 1/2 mm)(Table 7-1). No coarse-size sand grains were ob-served.

It soon was discovered that almost all sherdsfell within the very fine to fine grain-size category,thereby placing most of the collection into what earlierhad been assigned to the Rockport series. Althougha few sherds with medium-size grains were noted,the majority of material that would have been clas-sified as Goose Creek ware in 1989 became Rockportware under the present classification scheme. It stillwas not known, however, whether the paste dichotomyrecognized under the present system using theWentworth scale actually reflected true Rockport andGoose Creek ware categories, or if it simply wasthe result of the classification criteria utilized. Inother words, if one establishes parameters for warecategories prior to analysis, and then places sherdsinto those categories, how is one to know if thosecategories represent meaningful groupings?

In order to alleviate this problem, ceramics fromother sites along the Texas coast were examined atboth CEI and TARL. Collections with unquestion-able Goose Creek material included those from FlatBank Creek (41 FB 99), Mitchell Ridge (41 GV 66),and sites 41 HR 7, 41 HR 61, 41 HR 85, 41 HR 161,and 41 HR 632, all in the upper Texas coastal area.Sites with Rockport ware included Live Oak Point(41 AS 2), Kent-Crane (41 AS 3), and MustangLake (41 CL 3). This review confirmed the no-tion that previously recognized Rockport sherdshad silty pastes and/or very fine or fine sandy pastes.Somewhat disheartening, however, was the real-ization that sherds previously classified as mem-bers of the Goose Creek series actually exhibitedthe full range of sand-size particles, from veryfine to coarse. Fortunately, this fact was madeless troubling by the recognition that there weresignificant differences between Goose Creek andRockport wares other than grain size. All Rockportsherds, for instance, exhibited a very compact, well-consolidated paste, that appeared harder than almostall Goose Creek examples. Goose Creek ware, onthe other hand, had a much higher ratio of sand inthe paste, making it softer and more friable thanRockport ware. Because of the high sand content,Goose Creek ceramics also had a much sandier sur-face texture, at times approaching that of fine sand-stone. Often, loose particles of sand became dis-lodged from a Goose Creek sherd if one rubbed itin one’s hand. When taken together, all of these factors(quantity and size of sand grains, compactness andhardness of the paste, and general surface finish)provided a relatively clear break between Rockportand Goose Creek wares, a break that was easy torecognize once analysis began in earnest.


243

Primary Inclusions Black Painted Design Elementssilt (<1/16 mm) vertical straight linesvery fine (1/16-1/8mm) to fine (1/8-1/4 mm) sand vertical wavy linesmedium ( 1/4-1/2 mm) sand horizontal straight lines

horizontal wavy linesSecondary Inclusions diagonal straight lines

none pendant loopscaliche curved linesbone perpendicular linesshell unknown line orientationcaliche and bone dotscaliche and shell open circlecaliche, bone, and shell triangleshell and bone random dabbingunidentified white inclusions swastika

Decoration and Surface Alteration Body Portionnone bodyincised rimblack painted with gray or white slipblack painted without slip Lip Decorationpunctated painted black lip bandbrushed notchedred filmed incisedpolychrome paintedasphaltum black coating Vessel Formscoring beaker

jarIncised Design Elements beaker/jar

vertical straight lines bottlehorizontal straight lines simple bowldiagonal straight lines shallow bowlcurved lines globular bowlperpendicular straight linesparallel straight lines Rim Diameterhorizontal zigzag lines rounded off to the nearest cmdiagonal overincised linesvertical overincised lines Sherd Thicknesscrosshatched overincised lines rounded off to the nearest mmchevron patternopen trianglesline-filled trianglescrosshatched linescrossed linesunknown line orientation

Table 7-1. Attributes Recorded During the Analysis of the Aboriginal Ceramics fromGuadalupe Bay.


244

Once the primary paste characteristics of a sherdwere identified, and that sherd was assigned to ei-ther the Rockport or Goose Creek series, then it be-came necessary to identify the so-called “second-ary inclusions” within that sherd’s paste (see Table 7-1).Secondary inclusions were recognized by Duay andWeinstein (1992) as potentially significant temper-ing agents that could provide important chronologicaland cultural information. Since it was assumed thatthe silt and sand within the paste of a sherd repre-sented elements occurring naturally in the clays ofthe area (see Aten 1983b), then any additional ma-terial might represent culturally introduced temper.Duay and Weinstein (1992) searched for, and iden-tified, secondary inclusions by chipping off a smallportion of the sherd being analyzed, and examiningthe exposed interior for the presence of additionalmaterial, such as bone, caliche, and shell. This ex-amination occurred with the aid of a 10x binocularmicroscope and the addition of a small amount ofdiluted (10 percent) hydrochloric acid to the exposedsherd interior to check for the presence of calicheor organic particles that could not be seen with themicroscope. While this technique appeared to begenerally reliable, it was decided that more defini-tive means of identifying secondary inclusions werenecessary, particularly since these inclusions wouldhave been subjected to intense heat during the fir-ing of the vessel and they may not have retained thesame identifying characteristics that they had priorto firing.

As a test, both archaeological and contempo-rary samples of each inclusion were examined byapplying a drop of a 10-percent solution of hydro-chloric acid and observing the reaction. Bone, Rangiashell, oyster shell, and what was termed “hard” and“soft” caliche were tested. “Hard” caliche nodulesincluded extremely compact, pebble-like particlesthat did not dissolve or break apart when scrapedwith a sharp implement like a dental pick. Whenthese nodules were split in half, however, they nor-mally exhibited concentric growth rings. “Soft” calichewas composed of nodules that approached the con-sistency of chalk. A thin section of one of thesenodules showed no evidence of growth rings or definitestructure. It might, in fact, be more proper to referto soft caliche as microcrystalline limestone, or micrite,rather than caliche (Juan Lorenzo, personal commu-nication 1995). However, since this material oftenoccurred as a coating around the outer edge of a hardcaliche nodule, it was decided simply to refer to thetwo as “hard” and “soft” caliche. It should be notedfurther that soft caliche can easily be mistaken for

grog when included in the paste of a sherd. Appli-cation of the acid solution will, however, reveal itstrue identity.

Two additional sets of contemporary inclusions,bone and shell, then were placed in a pit containingan open fire. One set of inclusions was placed aroundthe margins of the pit, while the other was throwndirectly into the hot coals of the fire. The fire wasallowed to burn itself out, and then the inclusionswere removed and tested with the 10-percent solu-tion of acid. The various reactions of the acid tothe contemporary and archaeological samples (bothheated and nonheated) are presented in Table 7-2.

Before discussing the results of the test, it isnecessary to define the various acid reactions. Sixcategories were established and are defined as fol-lows: (1) no reaction (no bubbles emitted), (2) slightreaction (bubbles emerge slowly and singularly, dis-continuing within a few seconds), (3) mild reaction(bubbles emerge in a slow, steady stream for only abrief moment, usually less than 20 seconds, thendissipate), (4) moderate reaction (bubbles emergein rapid, multiple streams, forming a small clusterdirectly above the inclusion, (5) high reaction (anexplosion of tiny bubble clusters that pop up, dis-placing acid droplets, often emitting a hissing sound,(6) totally dissolved reaction (after a high reaction,the inclusion simply disappears).

Bone samples had the widest range of reactions,from none to mild (see Table 7-2). Interestingly,when there was no reaction, the bone often becamedarker in color while wet from the acid solution,returning to a lighter color when it dried. The heatedbone samples (those placed around the margins ofthe fire pit) produced a slight reaction, while the charredbone samples (those placed in the coals of the fire)and the archaeological samples produced mild re-actions. In the latter instance, the acid solution alsochanged colors, becoming brown after excess acidwas wiped off with a paper towel. The samples ofshell and soft caliche all had high reactions to theacid, while the hard caliche exhibited the dissolv-ing reaction.

Following results of the reaction test, sherds fromthe Guadalupe Bay site initially were examined byplacing a drop of the 10-percent solution of hydro-chloric acid on a fresh break along the sherd’s outeredge and then observing the reaction to determinethe nature of the secondary inclusions. Eventually,this method was abandoned in favor of submersing


245

the entire sherd in the acid solution (still after a piecehad been broken off), as the time needed to placean acid drop on each fresh break and then searchthe remainder of the sherd for additional inclusionsproved to be too extensive. Total immersion ofthe sherd offered a quick and efficient way of iden-tifying visible inclusions, plus finding and iden-tifying minute inclusions that were not visible atfirst.1

The 1989 analysis identified 11 paste catego-ries, or subcategories, based on the presence or ab-sence of secondary inclusions: (1) no visible inclu-sions, (2) caliche, (3) bone, (4) shell, (5) caliche andbone, (6) caliche and shell, (7) caliche, bone, andshell, (8) shell and bone, (9) organics other than boneand shell, (10) unidentified white inclusions (inclu-sions that did not react to acid), and (11) other (Duayand Weinstein 1992). In contrast, the current analy-sis noted only nine paste categories, as previouscategories 9 and 11 were not recognized (see Table7-1).

Generally, bone inclusions ranged from a singlespeck to a profuse amount. The bone was usuallywhite to gray in color, although occasional shadesof brown were noted. It was seldom black. Mostoften, the white bone inclusions had been pulver-ized, causing angular particles that were easily vis-ible on the sherd surface and along the break edges.Other sherds contained sparse amounts of bone ofvarying colors. A few sherds had been fired at ahigh enough temperature to reduce the bone to anashy state that was light gray in color. More will besaid of this “ashy” bone later in this chapter.

Sherds containing shell were the easiest to vi-sually identify, as the size of the shell particles gen-erally were the largest of all inclusions observed.The amount of shell in the paste exhibited the samebroad range as that noted for the bone; that is,from a single speck to a relatively large quantity.Shell particles usually were white in color, butshades of gray also were common. Occasionally,a sherd produced a high reaction to the acid, al-though no shell inclusions were visible. In theseinstances, the sherd again was broken, and thiseventually exposed the hidden shell particles. Ap-parently, shell has such a high reaction to acid thateven when the particles are buried deep within the

NO REACTION

SLIGHT REACTION

MILD REACTION

MODERATE REACTION

HIGH REACTION

TOTALLY DISSOLVED

Bone XHeated Bone X X

Charred Bone XArchaeological Bone X

Shell XHeated Shell X

Charred Shell XArchaeological Shell X

Hard Caliche X XHeated Hard Caliche X X

Charred Hard Caliche X XArchaeological Hard Caliche X X

Soft Caliche XHeated Soft Caliche X

Charred Soft Caliche XArchaeological Soft Caliche X

Table 7-2. Reactions of Contemporary and Archaeological Samples of Bone, Shell, and Caliche to the Diluted(10-Percent) Hydrochloric Acid Solution.

1 It should be noted that this method requires a well-venti-lated work space to avoid inhaling acid fumes. Gloves shouldalso be worn when handling the acid-soaked sherds.


246

paste, they still emit a significant amount of bub-bling effervescence.

The amount of hard caliche present in the sherdsfrom Guadalupe Bay was somewhat higher than theother secondary inclusions. There never were in-stances where only one or two pieces of caliche werepresent. Rather, hard caliche ranged from severalparticles to profuse amounts, and was always whitein color. Since hard caliche totally dissolves in theacid solution, careful observation of the sherd priorto submersion was necessary. It was found, how-ever, that if a sherd is dipped in the acid solutionand then removed immediately, the dissolving hardcaliche can be observed while it disappears.

Soft caliche inclusions were relatively rare atGuadalupe Bay, but, as noted earlier, when presentthey usually appeared as round nodules that initiallymight be mistaken for pieces of grog temper. Oncesubjected to the acid, however, then a very high re-action occurred. Soft caliche ranged in color fromwhite to pale gray, but it often became a bit darkerwhen placed in the acid solution.

A few additional inclusions were noted duringthe current analysis, usually hematite nodules or bitsof asphaltum, but these were not used to form newcategories of paste as they were extremely rare.Furthermore, hematite is believed to occur naturallyin some of the clays of the area, and, therefore, per-haps should not be considered an intentional tem-pering agent. Regardless, the presence of these in-clusions still was noted on the analysis forms.

Decoration and Surface Alteration

Following identification of the ware of a spe-cific sherd, plus the recognition of any secondaryinclusions that might be present, that sherd was searchedfor any evidence of intentional decoration and/or surfacealteration. Basically, seven main decorative groupswere recognized over the course of the analysis:(1) incised, (2) black painted on gray or white slip,(3) black painted without a slip, (4) punctated, (5)brushed, (6) red filmed, and (7) polychrome painted(see Table 7-1). These are thought to represent in-tentional decorative techniques that would have pro-duced recognizable design patterns on the surfaceof a vessel.

Two surface alterations that are not thought torepresent true decoration also were identified. Theseinclude black coating and scoring (see Table 7-1).

Black asphaltum coating occurs on different ceramictypes and varieties, and was not applied as an in-tentional decoration. Ricklis (1990b) and Duay andWeinstein (1992) considered it to be a mode that cross-cut types and varieties. Usually this coating appearsas a thick, sometimes shiny, layer of asphaltum. Itprimarily occurs as an overall coating on the inte-rior of jars and bottles, and is believed to have actedas a waterproofing agent. It also can be found alongthe edges of old vessel fragments (now identifiedas individual sherds) where it probably was appliedto help mend or seal cracks in the vessel wall. Be-cause of these probable functional, rather than deco-rative, uses, black asphaltum coating is not consid-ered a decoration. Black painting, on the other hand,which utilized asphaltum applied in decorative de-signs, is considered a form of decoration and willbe discussed in detail below.

Scoring is another form of surface alteration thatprobably has functional origins. Calhoun (1962) firstdiscussed this surface alteration and suggested that itwas created by scraping the ribbed shell of a marinebivalve (probably a bay scallop or similar creature) acrossthe vessel’s surface, thereby producing even, parallelrows of alternating ridges and furrows. Most of therows appear to have been aligned horizontally aroundthe vessel, although grid and diagonal patterns also occur.Scoring can be found on the exterior surface of sherds,and is assumed in those cases to have been the resultof thinning and shaping of the vessel wall. It may alsohave helped roughen the outer surface of the vessel tomake it less slippery and easier to grasp and handle.More often, scoring can be seen on the interior of sherds.In most of these cases, it probably also represents ef-forts of the potter to thin and shape the vessel wall,although heavy interior scoring on shallow bowls orplates could have been used as a grinding surface uponwhich plants, seeds, or other items may have been rubbed.Its prevalence on the interior of sherds probably re-flects the fact that exterior surfaces were carefullysmoothed over following thinning and shaping, therebyremoving most scoring marks, whereas the interiorsof jars and beakers either could not be smoothed dueto the small orifice diameter of the vessel (making itdifficult or impossible for the potter to get a hand in-side the vessel), or the interior surface did not need tobe smoothed for esthetic purposes. In many cases, scoringmarks on the interior had subsequently been coveredwith asphaltum, thus offering evidence of both func-tional techniques on the same vessel. Interestingly,only one sherd in the entire collection from Guada-lupe Bay exhibited scoring on both its interior and ex-terior surfaces.


247

Three of the decorative groups (incising, blackpainting on a gray or white slip, and black paintingon an unslipped surface) made up the vast majorityof all decorated ceramics recovered at GuadalupeBay. Following initial sorting into these groups, analpha-numeric code was developed and each deco-rated sherd was assigned a letter (or letters) and number(or numbers) representing the type of decoration, itsorientation on the vessel, and its width (Table 7-3).For example, a sherd with straight, vertical linesreceived the letter “A,” while a sherd with slightlywavy, vertical lines received the letter “B.” If theselines were painted then the qualifier “Asph.” wasadded. If they were incised, then the qualifier “Inc.”was added. These letters (plus the qualifier) thenwere coupled with a number indicating the width ofthe line. Thus, a sherd classed as “B2, Asph.” wouldexhibit slightly wavy, vertical painted lines that areof medium (between 2 and 4 mm) width. An “A1,Inc.” sherd would exhibit straight, vertical incisedlines of narrow width (<2 mm).

Rim/Lip Modification

In addition to sorting by paste and surface al-teration, sherds were separated into rim and bodycategories. A base category also would have beenused if any base sherds had been positively identi-fied. None was, however, so that category was dropped.Rim sherds were further examined for their shapeand any decorative treatments specific to that partof the vessel.

Several types of rims were recognized at Guada-lupe Bay. These included (1) rounded, (2) flat,(3)�pointed, and (4) beveled.

Three decorative treatments were recognized forvessel lips at Guadalupe Bay: (1) lip banding, (2) lipincising, and (3) lip notching (see Tables 7-1 and7-3). Lip banding was the most common treatmentin the collection and consisted of a painted asphal-tum band around the lip of the vessel. This bandusually fell into the wide category (>4 mm) and oc-curred simultaneously on the interior, exterior, andtop of the lip. Sometimes the band was a bit morenarrow, and/or only occurred on one or two portionsof the lip (i.e., the top and exterior, or the top only).

Lip incising was represented by short, multiplelines placed either on the top of flat lips or on theupper few millimeters of pointed lips. Lines on topof flat lips either were oriented perpendicular to thelong axis of the rim or were slanted across the top

of the lip. Lines on pointed lips were oriented ver-tically and generally extended up and over the lip,occurring on both the exterior and interior surfacesof the rim.

Lip notching occurred either as shallow V-shapedor square depressions impressed into the top of therim. Notching varied according to the space betweenthe individual notches, and the width of the notchesthemselves. These probably are equivalent to whatSuhm and Krieger (1954), Suhm and Jelks (1962)and Ricklis (1990b) have identified as “crenelated.”No scalloped rims were present in the collection.

Vessel Form and Size

When possible, rim sherds of sufficient size wereused to assess vessel form. Knowing the type ofvessel utilized presumably can provide informationon its function, thereby allowing for inferences tobe made about aboriginal activities at Guadalupe Bay.Several classes were recognized, primarily using theexcellent set of vessel diagrams illustrated by Phillips(1970), but modified as necessary to fit slight dif-ferences in coastal Texas ceramics. Included were:(1) beakers, (2) jars, (3) beakers or jars, (4) bottles,(5) simple bowls, (6), shallow bowls, and (7) globularbowls (see Table 7-1). No plates were recognized,although the presence of a significant number of sherdswith interior decoration suggests that plates may havebeen utilized. On the other hand, it also is possiblethat all sherds with interior decoration came fromshallow bowls, a vessel form that can be documentedin the collection.

Rim sherds also were used to estimate the ori-fice diameter of vessels if the sherd was large enoughor curved enough to allow for a reasonable measure-ment to be obtained (see Table 7-1). Sherds weremeasured by placing them on a board marked byconcentric circles spaced one centimeter apart. Itshould be emphasized that the overwhelming ma-jority of the sherds were very small and their ori-fice diameters could not be measured.

Lastly, the wall thickness of every sherd wasrecorded to the nearest millimeter in an effort to obtainpotential chronological and functional information(see Table 7-1). Measurements were taken with aset of calipers. In the past, several investigators havetaken great pains to measure the wall thickness ofeach sherd in their respective collections. Althoughthe extreme range varied slightly from collection tocollection, the average thickness remained relatively


248

A Vertical lines, straight L Painted dot1 thin2 medium M Curved line3 wide

N Open circlesB Vertical lines, slightly wavy

1 thin O Line-filled triangle2 medium3 wide P Parallel lines

C Vertical lines, highly wavy Q Crosshatched lines1 thin2 medium R Open triangle3 wide

S Unclassified incisedD Horizontal lines, straight

1 thin T Red filmed2 medium3 wide U Unknown line orientation (incised)

E Horizontal lines, slightly wavy V Punctations1 thin2 medium W Chevron pattern3 wide

X Zigzag linesF Horizontal lines, highly wavy

1 thin Y Random dabbing2 medium3 wide Z Swastika pattern

G Diagonal lines, straight A A Scored lines (scallop impressions)1 thin2 medium AB Crossed lines3 wide

A C Multiple unidentifiable designsH Unknown line orientation (painted)

1 straight, thin AOI Vertical overincised lines2 straight, medium3 straight, wide GOI Diagonal overincised lines4 slightly wavy, thin5 slightly wavy, medium QOI Crosshatched overincised lines6 slightly wavy, wide7 highly wavy, thin Lip Modifications8 highly wavy, medium AD Lip banding (painted)9 highly wavy, wide 1 thin10 unidentifiable line, thin 2 medium11 unidentifiable line, medium 3 wide12 unidentifiable line, wide

AE Lip incisingI Unidentifiable painted design 1 perpendicular lines across flat lip

2 vertical lines on pointed lipJ Unclassified brushed 3 diagonal lines across flat lip

K Perpendicular lines

Table 7-3. Alpha-Numeric Sorting Codes Utilized in the Analysis of the DecoratedAboriginal Ceramics from Guadalupe Bay.


249

consistent. Suhm and Jelks (1962) summarized mostof these data and noted that Goose Creek ware rangedfrom 2 to 10 mm in thickness with an average of6�mm. Rockport ware, on the other hand, was some-what thinner, ranging between 1.5 and 7 mm in thick-ness with an average of 3�mm.

Color

Color has been the focus of a great deal of at-tention by previous researchers working along theTexas coast. Core and surface colors have been de-scribed in pain-staking detail. As an example, Hesterand Parker (1970) established ten groups of bone-tempered ware based solely on exterior surface col-ors. Although color is easily recognizable, the cur-rent authors are of the opinion that it may not yieldmuch information. The final color of fired clay de-pends on a number of factors, two of which predomi-nate. One concerns the size, amount, and distribu-tion of impurities in the clay. Main impurities areiron and organic material. The second factor con-cerns the firing process, including time, tempera-ture, and atmosphere during firing (Rice 1987:333-345).

Color development resulting from iron inclusionscannot begin until all of the carbonaceous (organic)materials have been burned out of the clay (Rice1987:335), and the final color depends upon thestate of the iron. Iron in a reduced state (rare)produces grays, blues, greens, or gray-browns. Ironin an oxidized state produces reds and reddishbrowns. Generally, iron oxides in amounts of onepercent will produce a yellow tone, one and one-half percent will cause light browns and oranges,while three percent and higher will produce red tones(Rice 1987:335).

A dark core in a freshly broken cross section ofa sherd usually indicates that organic material waspresent in the raw clay, or carbonaceous materialwas deposited during firing. If the dark core occursin the center of the cross section, and both outer surfacesexhibit lighter colors, then this usually indicates thatthe organic material was present in the raw clay butnot completely removed during the firing process(Rice 1987:334). If the dark color occurs near thesurface and not in the center, then this is indicativeof smudging. Smudging is a technique used duringfiring in which an open fire is covered with manureor some other material, disabling oxygen from reachingthe pots, thereby depositing carbon on the vessel’ssurface (Rice 1987:335).

When a clay is free of these two classes of im-purities, it is white in color. When fired, it produceswhite and cream colors. Unfortunately, it is nearlyimpossible to determine if a dark color is due to thepresence of iron, organic material, or both. Gener-ally, the natural color of the raw clay has little bear-ing on the color of the final fired clay product (Rice1987:333).

Other materials, such as lime, can contribute tothe color of fired clay when temperatures around 800˚C and above are attained (average firing tempera-ture of prehistoric pottery was 800˚ to 900˚ C).Decomposed calcium carbonate (CaCo3) may re-act with clay to form calcium silicates with paleyellow or white colors. Several other materials,such as manganese, magnetite, titanium, sulfides,sulfates, and chlorides, also have varying influ-ences on the color of fired clays (Rice 1987:336).Their effects have not been observed on Texas pot-tery, however.

There are other contributing factors responsiblefor the various colors of ceramics (i.e., cooking residue,fire clouding, placement of the pot during firing, andpost-depositional factors). Overall, due to the problemsinvolved in determining which, if any, of the abovefactors may actually have contributed to the finalcolor of a vessel, recording the colors exhibited byaboriginal ceramics generally provides limited in-formation with little bearing on chronological or culturalquestions. Thus, sherd color was not recorded sys-tematically during the present analysis.

Ceramic Classification

Aboriginal ceramics were identified by MichelleHutchins according to the type-variety system ofceramic classification employed by Duay and Weinstein(1992) for sherds collected from sites along the VictoriaBarge Canal in 1989. This system has the flexibil-ity of pinpointing subtle differences in paste anddecorative techniques that can then be utilized torecognize fine-scale chronological units and/or cul-turally meaningful ceramic assemblages. Althoughothers, such as Story (1968), and Hester and Hill(1971), have attempted to examine the local ceram-ics in a careful and precise manner, their systemshave not been adopted, both due to the attributesthey chose to examine and the overall complexityof their sorting criteria. The type-variety system buildsupon these earlier investigations, but provides a setof sorting criteria and ceramic nomenclature thathopefully will eventually allow for replicability during


250

future analyses and a simplified system of commu-nication.

The type-variety analysis is primarily a descriptivesystem that has great utility in organizing and dis-cussing the local prehistoric pottery. Its main vir-tue derives from the fine-scale chronological and/or regional control that is theoretically obtainablethrough its use. It does not, however, lend itself tomany functional interpretations, other than a few caseswhere specific types or varieties may be associatedwith a specialized purpose, such as those types thatonly are represented by serving plates or bowls (AnnaIncised, for instance, in the Lower Mississippi Val-ley). The type-variety system can, nevertheless, beused in conjunction with other systems, such as thosethat identify vessel form and size, thereby provid-ing both chronological/spatial and functional infor-mation

The type-variety system first was developed byWheat et al. (1958) for the southwestern United States.Phillips (1958) subsequently modified the systemfor use in the Southeast, and later (1970) employedit as the backbone of his lower Yazoo Basin research.It has since been used on a regular basis by archae-ologists working in the Lower Mississippi Valley andadjacent areas. Aten (1979; 1983b) eventually broughtthe type-variety system into southeast Texas. Duayand Weinstein (1992:89-95) modified the system foruse at sites along the Victoria Barge Canal, and aslightly updated version of their system is utilizedfor the current study.

The following descriptions provide a brief re-view of the sorting criteria necessary for recogniz-ing the various types and varieties utilized in thecurrent study. Figure 7-1 offers a dendritic chartthat illustrates the step-by-step procedure of ceramicclassification, while Table 7-4 provides a list of alltypes and varieties present at Guadalupe Bay. Lastly,Table 7-5 lists all sherds by major provenience (ei-ther sample unit, excavation unit, or surface) recoveredduring the 1992 investigations.2

It should be emphasized, as has been done be-fore (Duay and Weinstein 1992; Duay et al. 1994),that the system employed here is only a first stepin sorting the local ceramics into types and vari-

eties. It is expected that subsequent research oflarge collections, such as that from Guadalupe Bay,will refine or alter these varieties, in some caseseliminating or combining one or more of them intomore useful categories. Nevertheless, it is hopedthat the use of the type-variety system will con-tinue, and analysis of the ceramics of the regionwill become an important key in subdividing theLate Prehistoric period along both temporal andspatial lines.

Rockport Series

Ceramics of the Rockport series have long beenrecognized at sites on the central and south Texascoasts (Campbell 1952, 1958a, 1960, 1962; Suhmand Krieger 1954). As discussed earlier in this chapter,ceramics of the Rockport series exhibit a well-con-solidated, silty or fine sandy paste. Ricklis (1990b:121)notes that this clay matrix is indistinguishable fromnatural clays found in the Beaumont Formation, andsuggests that most of the material gathered to pro-duce Rockport ceramics came from this Pleistocene-age feature. Generally, the clay matrix of Rockportware either contains silt-size particles only or a com-bination of silt, very fine sand, and/or fine sand (allparticles <1/14 mm) (see Table 7-1). Sometimes vesselswere fashioned from this clay matrix without theaddition of any temper, the naturally occurring siltand sand serving as the only tempering agents. Atother times, however, additional particles of bone,shell, or caliche were added, presumably as inten-tional tempering material. The addition (or lack) ofthese “secondary inclusions” provides the basis foridentifying specific varieties under the present clas-sification scheme.

Prior to the current study, there were three pre-viously recognized ceramic types within the Rockportseries: Rockport Plain, Rockport Incised, and RockportBlack-on-gray (Campbell 1952, 1958a, 1962; Duayand Weinstein 1992; Duay et al. 1994; Suhm andKrieger 1954; Suhm and Jelks 1962). The exten-sive collection from Guadalupe Bay has allowed forthe recognition of three new types: Rockport Black,Rockport Red, and Rockport Polychrome. Each ofthese six types, plus their constituent varieties, aredescribed below. Additions or changes to defini-tions supplied in Duay and Weinstein (1992) and/or

2 Appendix B also provides a detailed breakdown of the ce-ramics recovered from each excavation unit, by stratum and level.Also included is information on the presence or absence of as-

phaltum coating on each sherd, plus the specific location of thatcoating.


251

Fig

ure

7-1

.D

end

riti

c c h

art

of c

e ram

ic s

orti

ng

pro

c ed

ur e

s u

sed

du

r in

g th

e c u

r re n

t st

ud

y.

(Mod

ifie

d f

r om

Du

ay a

nd

We i

nst

e in

199

2:F

ig-

ur e

�5-

1; D

uay

et

al. 1

994:

Fig

ure

5-1.

)


252

Duay et al. (1994) are noted in parentheses in thesubsequent headings.

Rockport Plain, var. Rockport (n=15,699)

This is the so-called established variety of thetype Rockport Plain (see Campbell 1958a:437-438,1962:331-332; Suhm and Krieger 1954:385), and thegeneral sorting criteria noted by earlier investiga-tors holds true today. It was the most abundant va-riety found at Guadalupe Bay. Predominantly, thevariety consists of vessels with a plain or asphal-tum-coated interior and/or exterior, and a silty orfine sandy paste that lacks any visible secondary

inclusions. As noted above, the asphaltum presenton some of the sherds of this type is the thick, glossycoating that should not be confused with intentionalblack decoration. It almost certainly was used as awaterproofing agent on the interior of vessels andas a glue or sealant along the margins of cracks bothon the interior and exterior of vessels.

Rockport Plain, var. Guadalupe (n=8,312)

This is was the second most common variety ofRockport Plain found at Guadalupe Bay. In earlierstudies, it had been included in the type descriptionfor Rockport ware (see Campbell 1962:331; Suhm

Table 7-4. Ceramic Types and Varieties Recovered at the Guadalupe Bay Site.

ROCKPORT S ERIES

GOOS E CREEK S ERIES

Rockport Plainvar. Rockportvar. Guadalupevar. Green Lakevar. Seadriftvar. Austwell

Rockport Inci sedvar. Rockportvar. Mission Lakevar. Plank Bridgevar. Sommervillevar. Mustang Lake

Rockport Black-on-grayvar. Rockportvar. Long Mottvar. Hog Bayouvar. Mosquito Pointvar. Buffalo Lake

Rockport Blackvar. Rockportvar. Lolitavar. Kuy Creekvar. Spring Bayouvar. Elm Bayou

Rockport Red

Rockport Polychrome

Goose Creek Plainvar. Anaquavar. Traylor Ranchvar. Goff Bayouvar. Tivolivar. Bloomingtonvar. Kendrick's Hillvar. Lavaca

Goose Creek Inci sed

var. Panther Reef


253

Tabl

e 7-

5.G

ener

al D

istr

ibut

ion

of A

bori

gina

l C

eram

ic T

ypes

and

Var

ieti

es R

ecov

ered

Dur

ing

the

1992

Inv

esti

gati

ons

atG

uada

lupe

Bay

.

(con

tin

ued

)

N4

0W

69

N5

0W

79

N5

1W

90

N6

0W

90

N7

0W

10

0N

70

W1

10

N7

0W

12

0N

80

W1

20

N8

0W

13

0N

90

W1

30

N9

0W

14

0

Roc

kpor

t Bla

ckva

r. E

lm B

ayou

--

22

-1

--

--

-va

r. K

uy C

reek

--

--

--

-2

-1

-va

r. L

olit

a-

-7

33

23

11

-1

var.

Roc

kpor

t1

-3

1-

16

--

1-

var.

Spr

ing

Bay

ou-

--

--

1-

--

--

Roc

kpor

t Bla

ck-o

n-gr

ayva

r. B

uffa

lo L

ake

--

42-

46

33-

2-

-va

r. H

og B

ayou

-1

12-

24

262

10-

5va

r. L

ong

Mot

t3

240

83

1047

916

-11

var.

Mos

quit

o P

oint

--

11-

1-

142

--

-va

r. R

ockp

ort

-3

161

47

161

3-

4

Roc

kpor

t Inc

ised

var.

Mis

sion

Lak

e-

-3

--

-5

--

-1

var.

Mus

tang

Lak

e-

--

--

84

1-

--

var.

Pla

nk B

ridg

e-

--

-1

-1

-1

1-

var.

Som

mer

vill

e-

--

--

11

1-

--

var.

Roc

kpor

t-

--

-1

32

-1

--

Roc

kpor

t P

lain

var.

Aus

twel

l-

-34

615

2575

333

2-

var.

Gre

en L

ake

12

182

2029

112

2097

1236

var.

Gua

dalu

pe8

411

014

2448

216

3916

127

56va

r. R

ockp

ort

94

6516

4244

159

2341

1043

var.

Sea

drift

--

314

1614

316

101

1

Roc

kpor

t Red

var.

uns

peci

fied

--

--

--

1-

--

-

Roc

kpor

t Pol

ychr

ome

var.

uns

peci

fied

--

--

--

--

--

-

Goo

se C

reek

Inci

sed

var.

Pan

ther

Ree

f-

--

--

--

--

--

Goo

se C

reek

Pla

inva

r. A

naqu

a-

--

--

--

--

--

var.

Blo

omin

gton

--

--

--

--

--

-va

r. K

endr

ick'

s H

ill-

-4

--

--

--

--

var.

Lav

aca

--

--

--

20-

3-

-va

r. T

ivol

i-

--

--

--

--

--

var.

Tra

ylor

Ran

ch-

--

--

--

--

--

Unc

lass

ifie

d B

rush

ed-

--

--

--

--

--

Unc

lass

ifie

d Pu

ncta

ted

--

--

--

--

--

-

TO

TA

L2

21

63

98

57

13

62

04

77

21

10

37

95

51

58

Sam

ple

U

nit

s


254

(con

tin

ued

)

Tabl

e 7-

5.C

onti

nued

.

N1

00

W1

50

N1

10

W1

50

N5

8W

10

0N

60

W1

00

N6

0W

10

2N

62

W1

02

N6

4W

10

0N

64

W1

02

N6

6W

10

0N

66

W1

02

Roc

kpor

t Bla

ckva

r. E

lm B

ayou

--

5-

22

1-

1-

-va

r. K

uy C

reek

--

3-

--

--

--

-va

r. L

olit

a-

-2

11

-2

42

--

-va

r. R

ockp

ort

--

13

-5

-1

--

--

var.

Spr

ing

Bay

ou-

-1

--

--

--

--

Roc

kpor

t Bla

ck-o

n-gr

ayva

r. B

uffa

lo L

ake

--

87

511

2522

1014

911

var.

Hog

Bay

ou-

-6

28

26

-3

32

-va

r. L

ong

Mot

t2

-1

51

85

6319

1210

26

var.

Mos

quit

o P

oint

--

28

4938

158

1-

-2

var.

Roc

kpor

t2

-5

782

8078

4014

49

11

Roc

kpor

t Inc

ised

var.

Mis

sion

Lak

e1

-1

01

-1

-4

--

-va

r. M

usta

ng L

ake

--

13

22

31

71

21

var.

Pla

nk B

ridg

e-

-4

--

--

--

--

var.

Som

mer

vill

e-

-3

13

23

41

-2

var.

Roc

kpor

t-

-7

12

23

51

-2

Roc

kpor

t P

lain

var.

Aus

twel

l-

11

94

132

115

231

156

100

118

8586

var.

Gre

en L

ake

45

35

837

2956

199

917

13va

r. G

uada

lupe

229

73

861

2510

530

1026

2845

var.

Roc

kpor

t10

84

74

835

521

1147

629

356

410

232

319

var.

Sea

drift

--

11

423

064

5231

3813

1312

Roc

kpor

t Red

var.

uns

peci

fied

--

1-

-4

--

--

1

Roc

kpor

t Pol

ychr

ome

var.

uns

peci

fied

--

0-

--

--

--

-

Goo

se C

reek

Inci

sed

var.

Pan

ther

Ree

f-

-0

--

--

--

--

Goo

se C

reek

Pla

inva

r. A

naqu

a-

-0

--

-1

2-

--

var.

Blo

omin

gton

--

0-

--

--

--

-va

r. K

endr

ick'

s H

ill-

-4

--

--

-2

2-

var.

Lav

aca

--

23

--

--

--

--

var.

Tiv

oli

--

0-

--

-1

--

-va

r. T

rayl

or R

anch

--

0-

--

-1

--

-

Unc

lass

ifie

d B

rush

ed-

-0

--

--

--

-1

Unc

lass

ifie

d Pu

ncta

ted

--

0-

--

1-

--

-

TO

TA

L4

12

32

,37

11

45

39

04

17

94

96

95

79

61

34

01

51

2

Sam

ple

U

nit

sS

am

ple

Un

itT

ota

ls

Blo

ck

1 U

nit

s


255

(con

tin

ued

)

Tabl

e 7-

5.C

onti

nued

.

Blo

ck

1 U

nit

s

N6

8W

10

0N

54

W8

8N

54

W9

0N

54

W9

2N

54

W9

4N

70

W1

18

N7

2W

11

8N

72

W1

20

N7

2W

12

2

Roc

kpor

t Bla

ckva

r. E

lm B

ayou

-6

--

--

03

-2

2va

r. K

uy C

reek

-0

--

--

0-

62

2va

r. L

olit

a-

92

511

52

317

812

12va

r. R

ockp

ort

-6

3-

-3

610

337

13va

r. S

prin

g B

ayou

-0

--

--

04

13

-

Roc

kpor

t Bla

ck-o

n-gr

ayva

r. B

uffa

lo L

ake

-1

07

210

1758

87

2815

6256

var.

Hog

Bay

ou-

24

31

1216

32

819

3332

var.

Lon

g M

ott

371

62

1629

4877

17

048

5284

97va

r. M

osqu

ito

Poi

nt-

11

32

12

71

227

1626

25va

r. R

ockp

ort

43

22

1753

119

292

18

105

6883

126

Roc

kpor

t Inc

ised

var.

Mis

sion

Lak

e1

7-

11

13

27

68

var.

Mus

tang

Lak

e4

23

-1

41

64

-5

15va

r. P

lank

Bri

dge

11

1-

34

8-

11

4va

r. S

omm

ervi

lle

21

8-

--

11

62

41

var.

Roc

kpor

t1

17

21

14

88

717

6

Roc

kpor

t P

lain

var.

Aus

twel

l11

01

13

310

815

021

432

88

00

652

297

380

348

var.

Gre

en L

ake

212

10

1520

8967

19

113

616

625

026

1va

r. G

uada

lupe

233

53

4482

157

181

46

432

224

755

371

8va

r. R

ockp

ort

281

47

30

206

390

882

1011

2,4

89

1042

927

861

809

var.

Sea

drift

334

86

2615

233

76

104

315

159

141

Roc

kpor

t Red

var.

uns

peci

fied

-5

12

--

33

2-

-

Roc

kpor

t Pol

ychr

ome

var.

uns

peci

fied

-0

--

--

0-

-1

-

Goo

se C

reek

Inci

sed

var.

Pan

ther

Ree

f-

0-

--

-0

--

--

Goo

se C

reek

Pla

inva

r. A

naqu

a-

3-

1-

-1

--

--

var.

Blo

omin

gton

-0

--

--

03

41

-va

r. K

endr

ick'

s H

ill-

42

--

13

2-

--

var.

Lav

aca

-0

--

--

06

-28

25va

r. T

ivol

i-

1-

--

-0

--

--

var.

Tra

ylor

Ran

ch-

1-

--

55

8-

1-

Unc

lass

ifie

d B

rush

ed-

1-

--

-0

-1

--

Unc

lass

ifie

d Pu

ncta

ted

-1

--

1-

1-

--

-

TO

TA

L5

18

7,7

43

45

07

62

15

63

18

32

4,6

07

25

48

21

94

25

81

27

01

Blo

ck

1T

ota

ls

Blo

ck

2 U

nit

sB

lock

2

To

tals

Blo

ck 3

Uni

ts


256

Tabl

e 7-

5.C

oncl

uded

.

N7

4W

11

8N

74

W1

20

N7

4W

12

2N

74

W1

24

N7

4W

12

6N

76

W1

20

N7

6W

12

2N

76

W1

26

Sit

e T

otal

s

Roc

kpor

t Bla

ckva

r. E

lm B

ayou

11

32

-3

1-

18

13

0va

r. K

uy C

reek

13

2-

-1

2-

19

42

6va

r. L

olit

a6

27

178

415

81

16

21

19

0va

r. R

ockp

ort

98

75

-6

85

11

11

11

47

var.

Spr

ing

Bay

ou-

--

--

-1

11

01

12

Roc

kpor

t Bla

ck-o

n-gr

ayva

r. B

uffa

lo L

ake

6255

6452

5562

9310

17

05

13

99

9va

r. H

og B

ayou

4060

178

100

9950

125

130

87

41

41

,00

6va

r. L

ong

Mot

t53

156

214

177

129

130

167

269

15

76

32

2,0

91

var.

Mos

quit

o P

oint

1219

1611

3029

3726

27

44

43

1va

r. R

ockp

ort

2211

398

7832

3646

688

75

31

,47

5

Roc

kpor

t Inc

ised

var.

Mis

sion

Lak

e7

314

914

812

59

53

11

8va

r. M

usta

ng L

ake

93

164

611

87

88

41

34

var.

Pla

nk B

ridg

e6

46

29

515

55

85

76

var.

Som

mer

vill

e-

1-

--

33

12

10

43

var.

Roc

kpor

t4

25

-3

27

76

82

10

2

Roc

kpor

t P

lain

var.

Aus

twel

l20

632

728

821

415

016

523

116

23

42

06

05

,60

7va

r. G

reen

Lak

e24

821

538

643

934

917

926

424

73

14

01

11

4,0

10

var.

Gua

dalu

pe34

964

375

362

961

743

172

146

56

44

83

09

8,3

12

var.

Roc

kpor

t40

765

072

559

636

836

763

948

67

87

71

29

15

,69

9va

r. S

eadr

ift84

6961

4871

6713

647

13

02

37

2,0

15

Roc

kpor

t Red

var.

uns

peci

fied

--

3-

-1

-1

10

01

9

Roc

kpor

t Pol

ychr

ome

var.

uns

peci

fied

--

--

--

1-

20

2

Goo

se C

reek

Inci

sed

var.

Pan

ther

Ree

f-

--

--

--

-0

11

Goo

se C

reek

Pla

inva

r. A

naqu

a-

--

--

--

-0

04

var.

Blo

omin

gton

--

--

--

--

80

8va

r. K

endr

ick'

s H

ill-

--

--

--

-2

01

3va

r. L

avac

a4

710

-4

-4

49

20

11

5va

r. T

ivol

i-

--

--

--

-0

01

var.

Tra

ylor

Ran

ch-

--

--

--

-9

01

5

Unc

lass

ifie

d B

rush

ed-

--

--

--

-1

02

Unc

lass

ifie

d Pu

ncta

ted

1-

1-

--

31

61

9

TO

TA

L1

53

12

34

12

85

72

38

31

94

41

56

02

53

92

04

62

7,2

25

76

64

2,7

12

Blo

ck

3 U

nit

sB

lock

3T

otal

sSu

rfac

e


257

Figure 7-2. Portion of loop handle from a vessel of RockportPlain, var. Guadalupe . Note the bulge on theinterior of the sherd produced by the “rivet”used to attach the handle. (See Appendix Kfor provenience data.)

0 5

cm

and Krieger 1954:385). It includes vesselsor sherds with a plain or asphaltum-coatedexterior, either a plain or asphaltum-coatedinterior, and a silty or fine sandy paste thatcontains fragments of crushed bone and/orburned bone. The latter presumably wasadded as a tempering agent.

Interestingly, this was the only Rockportvariety to produce the remains of a vesselhandle (Figure 7-2). Luckily, the handlefragment also includes a portion of the bodyof the vessel, and this indicates that it hadbeen attached by extending a clay “rivet”through the vessel wall to anchor the handleto the interior of the container. Such riv-eted handles are common on Goliad ceramicsfrom Mission Espíritu Santo (Mounger1959:170-172), and it originally was thoughtthat the handle from Guadalupe Bay mightbe from a vessel of Goliad Plain that hadoriginated at the mission. However, exami-nation of the handle’s paste indicates thatit is typical of the Rockport series, and al-most certainly is of local manufacture.

Although relatively rare, the presence of handlesin Rockport assemblages is not unknown, as bothMartin (1931:55) and Campbell (1962:332) earlierhad noted that some sherds of Rockport Plain con-tained evidence of loop handles. Considering theextensive quantity of handles found at Espíritu Santo,however, it is likely that similar handles on Rockportware represent a very late addition to the ceramicindustry, and probably are representative of proto-historic and/or historic occupations.3 Consideringthe nearby presence of Mission Refugio in the 1790s,plus other evidence of an eighteenth-century occu-pation at Guadalupe Bay, it may not be too specula-tive to suggest an association between the handleand this late component. Such an association maybe supported further by the fact that the handle camefrom XU N54W92, one of the units in Block 2 spe-cifically excavated to examine the potential historicoccupation noted in that area of the site.

Rockport Plain, var. Green Lake (n=4,010)

This variety consists of pottery with a plain orasphaltum-coated exterior or interior, and a silty or

fine sandy paste that contains fragments of crushedshell. The shell probably was added as a temperingagent, although Story’s (1968) research at the InglesideCove site suggests that some shell may simply rep-resent natural inclusions in the clay selected for vesselmanufacture.

Rockport Plain, var. Seadrift (n=2,015)

Var. Seadrift can be recognized by sherds witha nondecorated exterior, a plain or asphaltum-coatedexterior or interior, and a silty or fine sandy pastethat contains small pieces of caliche as secondaryinclusions. As with the shell inclusions discussedabove, these latter items probably served as inten-tionally added tempering agents.

Rockport Plain, var. Austwell (n=5,607)

This variety can be recognized by sherds with aplain or asphaltum-coated exterior or interior sur-face, and a silty or fine sandy paste that contains aheterogeneous assortment of secondary inclusions.The latter can consist of shell, bone, and caliche;bone and caliche; shell and caliche; or any combi-nation thereof.

3 A very recent study by Ricklis (2000:78), received too latefor proper citation, discusses 16 loop handle fragments from Mission

Rosario that occur on Rockport paste and in an assemblage dat-ing to the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries.


258

Rockport Incised, var. Rockport (n=102)

As with Rockport Plain, var. Rockport, this va-riety represents the established variety of the typeand includes only those incised designs on sherdswith silty or fine sandy paste that lacks any notice-able secondary inclusions. Asphaltum coating maybe present on the interior of Rockport Incised sherds,and, in some instances, the asphaltum extends overthe lip and down over the upper few centimeters ofthe exterior rim. Since the decoration usually is lo-cated on or just below the rim of the vessel, the as-phaltum can cover either a portion of the inciseddecoration or the entire decoration.

Rockport Incised, var. Mission Lake (n=118)

This variety consists of predominantly horizontallines placed around the exterior, upper portion orrim of a vessel. The vessel may or may not containasphaltum on its interior and/or lip and exterior rim.Vessel paste consists of a silty or fine sandy matrixthat includes crushed and/or burned pieces of boneand represents the incised equivalent of RockportPlain, var. Guadalupe.

Rockport Incised, var. Plank Bridge (new variety) (n=76)

This is a new variety recognized in the expandedcollection analyzed for the current project. It con-sists of predominantly horizontal lines placed aroundthe exterior, upper portion or rim of a vessel, althoughother decorative elements may be added to this ba-sic design. The vessel may or may not contain as-phaltum on its interior and/or lip and exterior rim.Vessel paste consists of a silty or fine sandy matrixthat includes small pieces of shell presumably addedas temper. As such, Plank Bridge represents the in-cised equivalent of Rockport Plain, var. Green Lake.

One unique rim sherd of Plank Bridge came fromthe surface of the site and is worthy of further dis-cussion (Figure 7-3). It exhibits four horizontal in-cised lines running parallel to the lip on the exteriorof the sherd, a series of pendant triangles situatedbelow the horizontal lines, a painted black band alongthe top and outer edge of the lip, and red pigmentwithin the incised lines. A hint of red pigment alsois noticeable on the sherd’s surface adjacent to sev-eral of the incised lines, suggesting that the entiredecorative field may once have been covered by redfilm. The presence of the red pigment and the blackband could conceivably place the sherd within the

type Rockport Polychrome, to be discussed below.However, it is quite clear that the primary decora-tive motif was formed by the incised lines, whileboth the black band and red pigment were second-ary decorative elements added to “embellish” theprimary decoration. Thus, it is felt that the sherdshould more properly be classed as Rockport Incised.More will be said of this sherd later in the discus-sion on decorative motifs.

Rockport Incised, var. Sommerville(new variety) (n=43)

This is another new variety recognized duringthe current project. As with the other varieties ofRockport Incised, Sommerville consists of predomi-nantly horizontal lines placed around the exterior,upper portion or rim of a vessel. The vessel may ormay not contain asphaltum on its interior and/or lipand exterior rim. Vessel paste consists of a silty orfine sandy matrix that includes small pieces of cali-che presumably added as temper. Sommerville thereforerepresents the incised equivalent of Rockport Plain,var. Seadrift.

Rockport Incised, var. Mustang Lake (n=134)

Mustang Lake is named for the Mustang Lakesite (41 CL 3) which has produced a large assem-blage of Rockport series ceramics (see Campbell1960:Figure 2, 1962:Figure 1). Basically, the vari-ety consists primarily of horizontally incised linesplaced around the exterior, upper portion or rim ofa vessel that may or may not contain asphaltum onits interior, lip, and/or upper exterior rim. The paste

Figure 7-3. Unique sherd of Rockport In-cised, var. Plank Bridge , withblack lip band and red pigmentin incised lines. The specimenis an excellent example of the“Bendewald Point motif,” as dis-cussed later in this chapter. (SeeAppendix K for proveniencedata.)

0 3

cm


259

is composed of a silty or fine sandy matrix that containsa heterogeneous mixture of secondary inclusions similarto those found in Rockport Plain, var. Austwell. In-cluded in the collection from Guadalupe Bay is theonly partially reconstructed vessel discovered dur-ing the excavations. It consists of eight incised sherdsand nine plain body sherds from Sample UnitN70W110. More will be said of this vessel in a sub-sequent section on decorative motifs.

Rockport Black-on-gray, var. Rockport (revised definition) (n=1,475)

This is a modified version of the original typeRockport Black-on-gray (Campbell 1958a:435-437,1962:332; Suhm and Krieger 1954:382-384). As notedabove, the present definition of var. Rockport includesall intentionally decorated asphaltum paint or washapplied over a gray or white slip, usually to the out-side of a vessel. In rare instances, the decorationmay also occur on the interior of shallow bowls and/or plates. When it was uncertain whether the as-phaltum was applied intentionally or might actuallyrepresent residue from crack mending or simple carelessspattering, then the term “Unclassified Black Coated”was used. Where the gray or white slip is present,without any black decoration, the sherd still was clas-sified as Rockport Black-on-gray. Paste consists ofa silty or fine sandy matrix that lacks any visiblesecondary inclusions. As such, the paste is compa-rable to that noted for Rockport Plain, var. Rockport.

It should be noted that the present definition ofRockport Black-on-gray is a slight departure fromthat offered by Duay and Weinstein (1992) and Duayet al. (1994). Previously, those authors had assignedall painted pottery to the type Rockport Black-on-gray, whether or not a white or gray slip was present.There simply were so few examples of painted de-signs on nonslipped pottery that it was not consid-ered necessary to set up a new type. However, withanalysis of the expanded collection now available,it has become clear that a significant minority ofpainted designs occurs on nonslipped pottery. Tocontinue to place this material into the black-on-graycategory would be misleading. Thus, a new type,Rockport Black, has been established to cover blackpainting on vessels that lack a gray or white slip.

Rockport Black-on-gray, var. Long Mott(revised definition) (n=2,091)

In all outward respects this variety matches thedefinition of the established variety. However, the

paste contains crushed and/or burned fragments ofbone, and in that regard it is equivalent to RockportPlain, var. Guadalupe and Rockport Incised, var.Mission Lake. It was the most common variety ofRockport Black-on-gray found at the Guadalupe Baysite.

Rockport Black-on-gray, var. Hog Bayou(revised definition) (n=1,006)

Classification is the same as for vars. Rockportand Long Mott, except that the paste contains piecesof shell, and thus is equivalent to Rockport Plain,var. Green Lake.

Rockport Black-on-gray, var. Mosquito Point(new variety) (n=431)

This is a new variety set up to cover paintedpottery on a white or gray slip that occurs on typi-cal Rockport paste that contains bits of caliche. Thus,it is the Rockport Black-on-gray equivalent to RockportPlain, var. Seadrift and Rockport Incised, var. PlankBridge.

Rockport Black-on-gray, var. Buffalo Lake(revised definition) (n=999)

This variety is externally identical to vars.Rockport, Long Mott, Hog Bayou, and Mosquito Point.However, its paste consists of a mixture of varioussecondary inclusions, making it equivalent to the pasteof Rockport Plain, var. Austwell and Rockport In-cised, var. Mustang Lake.

Rockport Black, var. Rockport(new type and variety) (n=147)

As alluded to above, Rockport Black has beenset up as a new type to cover those vessels paintedwith asphaltum designs, but which lack any evidenceof the gray or white slip typical of Rockport Black-on-gray. There simply were too many sherds withinthis category to justify their continued placement withinthe black-on-gray type. Not only would this place-ment have masked possible chronological and/or spatialdifferences between the two forms of decoration, butit would continue to force numerous sherds lackinggray slip into a type that specifically mentions thepresence of such slip in its name.

Rockport Black, var. Rockport is the establishedvariety of this new type. It represents all intention-ally decorated asphaltum paint or wash applied over


260

the original, nonslipped surface of a vessel. In mostcases, the decoration was applied to the outside ofthe vessel, although, in rare instances, the decora-tion also was placed on the interior of shallow bowlsand/or plates. Paste is equivalent to the Rockportvariety of Rockport Plain.

Rockport Black, var. Lolita(new type and variety) (n=190)

This variety consists of all asphaltum decora-tion applied to nonslipped vessels with bone inclu-sions in their paste. As such, the paste of var. Lolitais equivalent to the Guadalupe variety of RockportPlain. It represents the most prevalent variety ofRockport Black.

Rockport Black, var. Kuy Creek(new type and variety) (n=26)

This variety consists of all asphaltum decora-tion applied to nonslipped vessels that have shellinclusions in their paste. Thus, the paste of var. KuyCreek is equivalent to the Green Lake variety ofRockport Plain.

Rockport Black, var. Spring Bayou(new type and variety) (n=12)

Spring Bayou consists of all asphaltum decora-tion applied to nonslipped vessels that have calicheinclusions in their paste. The paste of Spring Bayou,therefore, is equivalent to the Seadrift variety ofRockport Plain.

Rockport Black, var. Elm Bayou(new type and variety) (n=30)

As with other varieties of the Rockport Blacktype, var. Elm Bayou includes all asphaltum deco-ration applied to nonslipped vessels. In this case,the paste contains two or more categories of the varioussecondary inclusions (bone and shell; caliche andbone; caliche, bone and shell; etc.) making it equivalentto the Austwell variety of Rockport Plain.

Rockport Red (new type) (n=19)

This is a relatively rare ceramic type that wasrepresented by 19 sherds in the overall collectionfrom Guadalupe Bay (Figure 7-4, a-c). To the au-thors’ knowledge, this represents the largest collec-tion of red-painted pottery from the central Texascoast, as the only other examples of what appear to

be similar painted specimens were reported from theIngleside Cove site in San Patricio County (Story1968:19, Figure 25, C). Gatschet (1891:68), how-ever, notes, that red paint sometimes was used todecorate Karankawan pottery, and additional speci-mens can be expected from sites in the region.

Basically, Rockport Red includes all vessels withRockport paste that had a thin red slip applied totheir exterior and/or interior surfaces. Unlike RockportPolychrome, to be discussed next, the red slip onRockport Red covers all or almost all of a vessel’ssurface(s). At Guadalupe Bay, nine sherds had redslip on the exterior, three had it on the interior, andtwo had slip on both the interior and exterior. Fivesherds were too small to determine placement of theslip. Only one sherd of Rockport Red was of suffi-cient size to suggest vessel form; a beaker. How-ever, those five sherds with interior slip probablycame from shallow bowls or, less likely, plates.

Because of the scarcity of the type, no varietieshave been established for the current study. Rather,all examples, regardless of the presence or absence

Figure 7-4. Rockport Red and Rockport Poly-chrome. (a-c) Rockport Red, var. un-specified (interior view of sherds);(d-e) Rim sherds of Rockport Poly-chrome, var. unspecified. (See Ap-pendix K for provenience data.)

a b

c d

e0 3

cm


261

of secondary inclusions, are listed as Rockport Red,var. unspecified. Nevertheless, for comparative pur-poses it is worth noting that three of the sherds havepaste equivalent to the Rockport variety of RockportPlain, while two have paste equivalent to the Seadriftvariety. Nine have paste equivalent to the Guadalupevariety of Rockport Plain, and three have paste equalto the Austwell variety (see Appendix B).

Rockport Polychrome (new type) (n=2)

This is another new type, based on two sherdsfrom Guadalupe Bay (see Figure 7-4, d-e), plus thepresence of a few other sherds and at least one wholepolychrome vessel from additional sites along thecentral Texas coast (Calhoun 1964; Campbell 1962:332;Story 1968:18, Figures 20, D, and 23, H; Suhm andKrieger 1954:384, Plate 72, F, L; Suhm and Jelks1962:131, Plate 66, F, L). Interestingly, two of theadditional polychrome sherds are from the MustangLake site located on the west side of San AntonioBay (Suhm and Krieger 1954:384, Plate 72, F, L;Suhm and Jelks 1962:131, Plate 66, F, L).

Rockport Polychrome is represented by Rockportware vessels with typical asphaltum painted designsto which was added a red wash. On the few ex-amples known, the red wash was applied to a spe-cific area of the vessel, rather than the overall ves-sel surface. These same examples also indicate thatthe red and black painted areas had been applied toboth slipped and nonslipped surfaces. Because ofthe extreme rarity of the type, however, no distinc-tion has been made at this time between those sherdswith slip and those without. Perhaps with more data,it may be possible to establish two separate typesusing criteria similar to those employed in separat-ing Rockport Black from Rockport Black-on-gray.Along similar lines, no varieties have been estab-lished for the overall type. The present small samplesimply does not warrant such fine-scale division atthis point.

Regardless of the above, it is worth noting thatone of the sherds from Guadalupe Bay exhibited athin, horizontal, black lip band with a narrow, hori-zontal, red band located slightly below the lip onthe exterior (see Figure 7-4, d). Both bands had beenapplied over a white slip, on a vessel with paste equiva-lent to the Green Lake variety of Rockport Plain.The other sherd also exhibited black and red hori-zontal bands, both on the lip and just below the lip,respectively, on the exterior of the vessel (see Fig-ure 7-4, e). The vessel surface had not been slipped

prior to painting. Its paste is equivalent to theGuadalupe variety of Rockport Plain. Unfortunately,neither sherd was large enough to provide data relativeto vessel form.

Rockport Series Ceramics by Analysis Unit

Table 7-6 provides data on the distribution ofthe various ceramic types and varieties, by analysisunit, at Guadalupe Bay. Although almost every analysisunit contained ceramics, it is reasonable to concludethat those sherds found in the deeper, Archaic-agedeposits (AUs 8 through 10 and 12 through 16) rep-resent items that had been displaced downward bybioturbation, had been accidentally mixed duringwaterscreening in the field (as seems likely for thesherds from AU 13 which all were found among theremains associated with one level from XU N76W122),or had been accidentally included in the soil from adeep level, probably by being dislodged from theupper portion of a unit’s wall during digging (as seemsalmost certain for the one sherd associated with AU16, the earliest AU at the site). Thus, the followingexamination of the distribution of Rockport seriesceramics will concentrate on those AUs believedassociated with the Rockport occupation(s) at thesite (AUs 1 through 7).

As can be seen, the greatest quantity of Rockportceramics (over 14,000 sherds) came from AU 3. Thisis almost twice as many as AU 5 which had the sec-ond greatest quantity (over 7,000 sherds). Additionally,when the roughly 5,000 sherds from AU 6 are addedto the totals from AUs 3 and 5, then it is clear thatBlock 3 produced the majority of the ceramics re-covered at Guadalupe Bay. This is only logical, sincethat area of the site was specifically chosen for ex-cavation because of the tremendous quantity ofRockport-related artifacts recovered in the sampleunits in that location.

Chronologically, several interesting patternsemerge, despite the fact that much of Stratum 2appears to have been partly disturbed by recenttreefalls and bioturbation. By combining the sherdcounts from AUs 2 and 3 (the uppermost levelsin Stratum 2 in all three block excavations) andthen comparing those counts to combined totalsfor AUs 4 and 5 (the lower levels in the blockexcavations), it is possible to recognize subtle,and perhaps meaningful, differences in the per-centages for the various types and varieties(Table 7-7). When these counts then are comparedagainst those from AU 6, the slightly deeper, dis-


262

Table 7-6. Distribution of Aboriginal Ceramic Types and Varieties, by Analysis Unit.

(continued)

N o . % N o . % N o . % N o . % N o . % N o . %

Rockport Blackvar. Elm Bayou 5 0.20 3 0.06 8 0.06 4 0.08 5 0.07 4 0.08var. Kuy Creek 2 0.08 0 0.00 6 0.04 0 0.00 4 0.06 8 0.15var. Lolita 8 0.32 18 0.33 65 0.46 25 0.49 30 0.42 21 0.41var. Rockport 12 0.47 7 0.13 70 0.49 7 0.14 21 0.29 16 0.31var. Spring Bayou 2 0.08 0 0.00 4 0.03 1 0.02 2 0.03 1 0.02

Rockport Black total 2 9 1 . 1 4 2 8 0 . 5 2 1 5 3 1 . 0 8 3 7 0 . 7 2 6 2 0 . 8 6 5 0 0 . 9 7

Rockport Black-on-grayvar. Buffalo Lake 32 1.26 100 1.84 300 2.12 122 2.39 228 3.18 174 3.36var. Hog Bayou 42 1.65 18 0.33 356 2.51 43 0.84 265 3.69 236 4.56var. Long Mott 129 5.08 123 2.26 753 5.31 173 3.39 480 6.68 309 5.97var. Mosquito Point 17 0.67 70 1.29 149 1.05 33 0.65 74 1.03 52 1.00var. Rockport 94 3.70 195 3.59 479 3.38 240 4.70 244 3.40 135 2.61

Rockport Black-on-gray total 3 1 4 1 2 . 3 7 5 0 6 9 . 3 2 2 , 0 3 7 1 4 . 3 7 6 1 1 1 1 . 9 6 1 , 2 9 1 1 7 . 9 8 9 0 6 1 7 . 5 0

Rockport Incisedvar. Mission Lake 5 0.20 5 0.09 40 0.28 6 0.12 26 0.36 24 0.46var. Mustang Lake 0 0.00 11 0.20 43 0.30 14 0.27 25 0.35 21 0.41var. Plank Bridge 6 0.24 1 0.02 23 0.16 4 0.08 21 0.29 12 0.23var. Sommerville 2 0.08 7 0.13 15 0.11 9 0.18 4 0.06 2 0.04var. Rockport 4 0.16 13 0.24 43 0.30 8 0.16 7 0.10 18 0.35

Rockport Incised total 1 7 0 . 6 7 3 7 0 . 6 8 1 6 4 1 . 1 6 4 1 0 . 8 0 8 3 1 . 1 6 7 7 1 . 4 9

Rockport Plainvar. Austwell 238 9.38 869 16.00 1,621 11.43 815 15.95 973 13.55 699 13.50var. Green Lake 175 6.90 166 3.06 1,699 11.99 214 4.19 805 11.21 626 12.09var. Guadalupe 501 19.74 340 6.26 3,335 23.53 480 9.40 1,700 23.67 1,273 24.59var. Rockport 1,152 45.39 3,205 59.00 4,359 30.75 2,767 54.16 1,929 26.86 1,291 24.94var. Seadrift 109 4.29 263 4.84 731 5.16 131 2.56 300 4.18 233 4.50

Rockport Plain total 2 , 1 7 5 8 5 . 7 0 4 , 8 4 3 8 9 . 1 6 1 1 , 7 4 5 8 2 . 8 5 4 , 4 0 7 8 6 . 2 6 5 , 7 0 7 7 9 . 4 7 4 , 1 2 2 7 9 . 6 2

Rockport Redvar. unspecified 3 0.12 5 0.09 6 0.04 1 0.02 3 0.04 1 0.02

Rockport Red total 3 0 . 1 2 5 0 . 0 9 6 0 . 0 4 1 0 . 0 2 3 0 . 0 4 1 0 . 0 2

Rockport Polychromevar. unspecified 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.01 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.02

Rockport Polychrome total 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 0 . 0 2

Goose Creek Incisedvar. Panther Reef 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00

Goose Creek Incised total 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0

Goose Creek Plainvar. Anaqua 0 0.00 4 0.07 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00var. Bloomington 0 0.00 0 0.00 4 0.03 0 0.00 4 0.06 0 0.00var. Kendrick's Hill 0 0.00 6 0.11 0 0.00 5 0.10 0 0.00 0 0.00var. Lavaca 0 0.00 0 0.00 62 0.44 0 0.00 30 0.42 15 0.29var. Tivoli 0 0.00 1 0.02 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00var. Traylor Ranch 0 0.00 1 0.02 2 0.01 5 0.10 0 0.00 1 0.02

Goose Creek Plain total 0 0 . 0 0 1 2 0 . 2 2 6 8 0 . 4 8 1 0 0 . 2 0 3 4 0 . 4 7 1 6 0 . 3 1

Unclassified Brushed 0 0 . 0 0 1 0 . 0 2 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 0

Unclassified Punctated 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 0 . 0 1 2 0 . 0 4 0 0 . 0 0 4 0 . 0 8

Site Total 2 , 5 3 8 1 0 0 . 0 0 5 , 4 3 2 1 0 0 . 0 0 1 4 , 1 7 6 1 0 0 . 0 0 5 , 1 0 9 1 0 0 . 0 0 7 , 1 8 1 1 0 0 . 0 0 5 , 1 7 7 1 0 0 . 0 0

AU 1 AU 2 AU 3

Analysis Units

AU 4 AU 5 AU 6


263

(continued)

N o . % N o . % N o . % N o . % N o . % N o . %

Rockport Blackvar. Elm Bayou 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00var. Kuy Creek 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.38 0 0.00var. Lolita 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 1.41 0 0.00 0 0.00var. Rockport 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00var. Spring Bayou 1 0.34 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00

Rockport Black total 1 0 . 3 4 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 1 . 4 1 1 0 . 3 8 0 0 . 0 0

Rockport Black-on-grayvar. Buffalo Lake 2 0.69 17 1.75 1 0.60 0 0.00 8 3.07 0 0.00var. Hog Bayou 5 1.72 8 0.82 0 0.00 1 1.41 8 3.07 0 0.00var. Long Mott 8 2.76 40 4.12 0 0.00 1 1.41 15 5.75 2 16.67var. Mosquito Point 4 1.38 11 1.13 10 5.99 0 0.00 2 0.77 0 0.00var. Rockport 2 0.69 46 4.74 16 9.58 2 2.82 6 2.30 0 0.00

Rockport Black-on-gray total 2 1 7 . 2 4 1 2 2 1 2 . 5 8 2 7 1 6 . 1 7 4 5 . 6 3 3 9 1 4 . 9 4 2 1 6 . 6 7

Rockport Incisedvar. Mission Lake 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 1.41 2 0.77 0 0.00var. Mustang Lake 2 0.69 10 1.03 2 1.20 0 0.00 1 0.38 0 0.00var. Plank Bridge 0 0.00 1 0.10 0 0.00 1 1.41 0 0.00 0 0.00var. Sommerville 0 0.00 3 0.31 1 0.60 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00var. Rockport 0 0.00 3 0.31 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.38 0 0.00

Rockport Incised total 2 0 . 6 9 1 7 1 . 7 5 3 1 . 8 0 2 2 . 8 2 4 1 . 5 3 0 0 . 0 0

Rockport Plainvar. Austwell 59 20.34 178 18.35 7 4.19 5 7.04 41 15.71 5 41.67var. Green Lake 42 14.48 34 3.51 8 4.79 12 16.90 47 18.01 2 16.67var. Guadalupe 71 24.48 46 4.74 5 2.99 7 9.86 77 29.50 2 16.67var. Rockport 70 24.14 473 48.76 65 38.92 28 39.44 50 19.16 1 8.33var. Seadrift 16 5.52 100 10.31 52 31.14 12 16.90 1 0.38 0 0.00

Rockport Plain total 2 5 8 8 8 . 9 7 8 3 1 8 5 . 6 7 1 3 7 8 2 . 0 4 6 4 9 0 . 1 4 2 1 6 8 2 . 7 6 1 0 8 3 . 3 3

Rockport Redvar. unspecified 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00

Rockport Red total 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0

Rockport Polychromevar. unspecified 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00

Rockport Polychrome total 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0

Goose Creek Incisedvar. Panther Reef 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00

Goose Creek Incised total 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0

Goose Creek Plainvar. Anaqua 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00var. Bloomington 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00var. Kendrick's Hill 2 0.69 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00var. Lavaca 1 0.34 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00var. Tivoli 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00var. Traylor Ranch 5 1.72 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.38 0 0.00

Goose Creek Plain total 8 2 . 7 6 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 0 . 3 8 0 0 . 0 0

Unclassified Brushed 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0

Unclassified Punctated 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0

Site Total 2 9 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 9 7 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 1 6 7 1 0 0 . 0 0 7 1 1 0 0 . 0 0 2 6 1 1 0 0 . 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 . 0 0

AU 7 AU 8 AU 9 AU 10 AU 11

Analysis Units

Table 7-6. Continued.

AU 12


264

N o . % N o . % N o . % Total % Total

Rockport Blackvar. Elm Bayou 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.08 3 0 0 . 0 7var. Kuy Creek 0 0.00 0 0.00 5 0.40 2 6 0 . 0 6var. Lolita 0 0.00 0 0.00 22 1.77 1 9 0 0 . 4 4var. Rockport 0 0.00 0 0.00 14 1.12 1 4 7 0 . 3 4var. Spring Bayou 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.08 1 2 0 . 0 3

Rockport Black total 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 4 3 3 . 4 5 4 0 5 0 . 9 5

Rockport Black-on-grayvar. Buffalo Lake 0 0.00 0 0.00 15 1.20 9 9 9 2 . 3 4var. Hog Bayou 1 1.22 0 0.00 23 1.85 1 , 0 0 6 2 . 3 6var. Long Mott 7 8.54 0 0.00 51 4.09 2 , 0 9 1 4 . 9 0var. Mosquito Point 0 0.00 0 0.00 9 0.72 4 3 1 1 . 0 1var. Rockport 1 1.22 0 0.00 15 1.20 1 , 4 7 5 3 . 4 5

Rockport Black-on-gray total 9 1 0 . 9 8 0 0 . 0 0 1 1 3 9 . 0 7 6 , 0 0 2 1 4 . 0 5

Rockport Incisedvar. Mission Lake 3 3.66 0 0.00 6 0.48 1 1 8 0 . 2 8var. Mustang Lake 0 0.00 0 0.00 5 0.40 1 3 4 0 . 3 1var. Plank Bridge 1 1.22 0 0.00 6 0.48 7 6 0 . 1 8var. Sommerville 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 4 3 0 . 1 0var. Rockport 0 0.00 0 0.00 5 0.40 1 0 2 0 . 2 4

Rockport Incised total 4 4 . 8 8 0 0 . 0 0 2 2 1 . 7 7 4 7 3 1 . 1 1

Rockport Plainvar. Austwell 5 6.10 1 100.00 92 7.38 5 , 6 0 7 1 3 . 1 3var. Green Lake 4 4.88 0 0.00 176 14.13 4 , 0 1 0 9 . 3 9var. Guadalupe 15 18.29 0 0.00 460 36.92 8 , 3 1 2 1 9 . 4 6var. Rockport 40 48.78 0 0.00 269 21.59 1 5 , 6 9 9 3 6 . 7 6var. Seadrift 5 6.10 0 0.00 62 4.98 2 , 0 1 5 4 . 7 2

Rockport Plain total 6 9 8 4 . 1 5 1 1 0 0 . 0 0 1 , 0 5 9 8 4 . 9 9 3 5 , 6 4 3 8 3 . 4 5

Rockport Redvar. unspecified 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 9 0 . 0 4

Rockport Red total 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 9 0 . 0 4

Rockport Polychromevar. unspecified 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0 . 0 0

Rockport Polychrome total 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 0 . 0 0

Goose Creek Incisedvar. Panther Reef 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.08 1 0 . 0 0

Goose Creek Incised total 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 0 . 0 8 1 0 . 0 0

Goose Creek Plainvar. Anaqua 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 4 0 . 0 1var. Bloomington 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 8 0 . 0 2var. Kendrick's Hill 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 3 0 . 0 3var. Lavaca 0 0.00 0 0.00 7 0.56 1 1 5 0 . 2 7var. Tivoli 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0 . 0 0var. Traylor Ranch 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 5 0 . 0 4

Goose Creek Plain total 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 7 0 . 5 6 1 5 6 0 . 3 7

Unclassified Brushed 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 0 . 0 0

Unclassified Punctated 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 0 . 0 8 9 0 . 0 2

Site Total 8 2 1 0 0 . 0 0 1 1 0 0 . 0 0 1 , 2 4 6 1 0 0 . 0 0 4 2 , 7 1 2 1 0 0 . 0 0

No AUAU 13* AU 16**

Analysis Units

Table 7-6. Concluded.

* Ceramics in this analysis unit almost certainly mixed accidently during waterscreening—most likely from a single bucket of soil from a level associated either with AU 3, 5, or 6.

** The sherd in this analysis unit clearly is an accidental inclusion. Most likely from either AU 2 or 4.


265

N o . % N o . % N o . % N o . % Total % Total

Rockport Blackvar. Elm Bayou 11 0.06 9 0.07 4 0.08 0 0.00 2 4 0 . 0 6var. Kuy Creek 6 0.03 4 0.03 8 0.15 0 0.00 1 8 0 . 0 5var. Lolita 83 0.42 55 0.45 21 0.41 0 0.00 1 5 9 0 . 4 3var. Rockport 77 0.39 28 0.23 16 0.31 0 0.00 1 2 1 0 . 3 2var. Spring Bayou 4 0.02 3 0.02 1 0.02 1 0.34 9 0 . 0 2

Rockport Black total 1 8 1 0 . 9 2 9 9 0 . 8 1 5 0 0 . 9 7 1 0 . 3 4 3 3 1 0 . 8 9

Rockport Black-on-grayvar. Buffalo Lake 400 2.04 350 2.85 174 3.36 2 0.69 9 2 6 2 . 4 8var. Hog Bayou 374 1.91 308 2.51 236 4.56 5 1.72 9 2 3 2 . 4 7var. Long Mott 876 4.47 653 5.31 309 5.97 8 2.76 1 , 8 4 6 4 . 9 4var. Mosquito Point 219 1.12 107 0.87 52 1.00 4 1.38 3 8 2 1 . 0 2var. Rockport 674 3.44 484 3.94 135 2.61 2 0.69 1 , 2 9 5 3 . 4 7

Rockport Black-on-gray total 2 , 5 4 3 1 2 . 9 7 1 , 9 0 2 1 5 . 4 8 9 0 6 1 7 . 5 0 2 1 7 . 2 4 5 , 3 7 2 1 4 . 3 8

Rockport Incisedvar. Mission Lake 45 0.23 32 0.26 24 0.46 0 0.00 1 0 1 0 . 2 7var. Mustang Lake 54 0.28 39 0.32 21 0.41 2 0.69 1 1 6 0 . 3 1var. Plank Bridge 24 0.12 25 0.20 12 0.23 0 0.00 6 1 0 . 1 6var. Sommerville 22 0.11 13 0.11 2 0.04 0 0.00 3 7 0 . 1 0var. Rockport 56 0.29 15 0.12 18 0.35 0 0.00 8 9 0 . 2 4

Rockport Incised total 2 0 1 1 . 0 3 1 2 4 1 . 0 1 7 7 1 . 4 9 2 0 . 6 9 4 0 4 1 . 0 8

Rockport Plainvar. Austwell 2,490 12.70 1,788 14.55 699 13.50 59 20.34 5 , 0 3 6 1 3 . 4 8var. Green Lake 1,865 9.51 1,019 8.29 626 12.09 42 14.48 3 , 5 5 2 9 . 5 1var. Guadalupe 3,675 18.74 2,180 17.74 1,273 24.59 71 24.48 7 , 1 9 9 1 9 . 2 7var. Rockport 7,564 38.58 4,696 38.21 1,291 24.94 70 24.14 1 3 , 6 2 1 3 6 . 4 5var. Seadrift 994 5.07 431 3.51 233 4.50 16 5.52 1 , 6 7 4 4 . 4 8

Rockport Plain total 1 6 , 5 8 8 8 4 . 6 0 1 0 , 1 1 4 8 2 . 2 9 4 , 1 2 2 7 9 . 6 2 2 5 8 8 8 . 9 7 3 1 , 0 8 2 8 3 . 1 8

Rockport Redvar. unspecified 11 0.06 4 0.03 1 0.02 0 0.00 1 6 0 . 0 4

Rockport Red total 1 1 0 . 0 6 4 0 . 0 3 1 0 . 0 2 0 0 . 0 0 1 6 0 . 0 4

Rockport Polychromevar. unspecified 1 0.01 0 0.00 1 0.02 0 0.00 2 0 . 0 1

Rockport Polychrome total 1 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 1 0 . 0 2 0 0 . 0 0 2 0 . 0 1

Goose Creek Plainvar. Anaqua 4 0.02 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 4 0 . 0 1var. Bloomington 4 0.02 4 0.03 0 0.00 0 0.00 8 0 . 0 2var. Kendrick's Hill 6 0.03 5 0.04 0 0.00 2 0.69 1 3 0 . 0 3var. Lavaca 62 0.32 30 0.24 15 0.29 1 0.34 1 0 8 0 . 2 9var. Tivoli 1 0.01 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0 . 0 0var. Traylor Ranch 3 0.02 5 0.04 1 0.02 5 1.72 1 4 0 . 0 4

Goose Creek Plain total 8 0 0 . 4 1 4 4 0 . 3 6 1 6 0 . 3 1 8 2 . 7 6 1 4 8 0 . 4 0

Unclassified Brushed 1 0 . 0 1 1 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 0 . 0 1

Unclassified Punctated 2 0 . 0 1 2 0 . 0 2 4 0 . 0 8 0 0 . 0 0 8 0 . 0 2

Site Total 1 9 , 6 0 8 1 0 0 . 0 0 1 2 , 2 9 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 5 , 1 7 7 1 0 0 . 0 0 2 9 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 3 7 , 3 6 5 1 0 0 . 0 0

AUs 2 & 3

Analysis Units

AUs 4 & 5 AU 7AU 6

Table 7-7. Distribution of Aboriginal Ceramic Types and Varieties in those Analysis Units Associated withthe Rockport Occupation at Guadalupe Bay. Note that counts for the “Upper” (AUs 2 and 3)and “Lower” (AUs 4 and 5) Rockport Analysis Units have been Combined.


266

crete Rangia deposits in Block 3, then additionalpotentially important patterns can be seen.3

For example, Rockport Black, Rockport Black-on-gray, and Rockport Incised all have slightly higherpercentages in the deeper, and presumably slightlyearlier, deposits related to AU 6, rather than in thosedeposits associated with AUs 2 through 5 (seeTable 7-7). Rockport Black-on-gray is perhaps thebest example. Its percentages decrease from 17.5 per-cent in AU 6, to 15.5 percent in AUs 4 and 5, to13.0 percent in AUs 2 and 3. On the other hand,Rockport Plain increases in percentage in the higher,and presumably slightly later, deposits: from 79.6 per-cent in AU 6, to 82.3 percent in AUs 4 and 5, to84.6 percent in AUs 2 and 3 (see Table 7-7). Ofparticular interest, also, is the rather strong show-ing of Rockport Red in AUs 2 and 3 (11 sherds for0.1 percent). All of this suggests that black-paintedand incised ceramics, particularly Rockport Black-on-gray, were slightly more popular during the ear-lier part of the Rockport occupation at GuadalupeBay, while plain and red-painted ceramics gainedin popularity towards the latter part of that occupa-tion. The red-painted sherds, may, in fact, repre-sent very late additions to the assemblage, perhapsreaching their greatest use during protohistoric and/or historic times.

As far as specific varieties are concerned, fivestand out for their contrast to the general trends notedin their respective types. These are vars. Green Lakeand Guadalupe of Rockport Plain; var. Sommervilleof Rockport Incised; and vars. Rockport and Mos-quito Point of Rockport Black-on-gray. Both GreenLake and Guadalupe have greater percentages as-sociated with the deeper AU 6, while the other plainvarieties have greater percentages related to the over-lying AUs. Since Green Lake and Guadalupe con-tain shell and bone inclusions, respectively, as probabletempering agents, it is possible that a slight trendaway from these added materials occurred duringthe course of the Rockport occupation at GuadalupeBay. The higher percentages of Sommerville andMosquito Point in the upper deposits associated withAUs 2 through 5 may also mark a slight increase inthe use of caliche as a tempering agent for RockportIncised and Rockport Black-on-gray, respectively.

The meaning for the greater percentage of RockportBlack-on-gray, var. Rockport in the upper AUs, if,in fact, there is a meaning to the increase, is not known.All of the other Rockport varieties appear to mirrorthe general trends expressed by their parent types.

Analysis of the ceramics from the 1989 testingproject at Guadalupe Bay (Weinstein and Scott 1992)suggested that sherds with heterogeneous pastes,particularly the Austwell variety of Rockport Plain,appeared to have their greatest showings in levelsrelated to Stratum 2, as opposed to the overlyingStratum 1. It even was suggested that Austwell mayrepresent a prime marker of the prehistoric occupa-tion, while sherds associated with Stratum 1, par-ticularly the Green Lake and Guadalupe varietiesof Rockport Plain, were possibly related to the lat-est, historic Live Oak occupation (Weinstein and Scott1992:158, Table 7-7). The exact reverse of the lat-ter assumption now appears to be true, as just dis-cussed above. Given the much greater sample fromthe 1992 excavations, it seems reasonable to con-clude that the previous inferences were incorrect,and that Green Lake and Guadalupe may have hadtheir highest popularity early in the Rockport occu-pation. The data on var. Austwell, on the other, tendto support the previous suggestions. Although thevariety generally maintains its same frequency inAUs 2 through 6 (between 14.6 and 12.7 percent),it is interesting to note its much higher percentagein AU 7 (20.3 percent). This may be one of the fewinstances where the AU 7 data actually are provid-ing useful information; information that suggests thatrelatively large amounts of var. Austwell may sig-nal a potentially early Rockport II subphase occu-pation.

In summary, there does not appear to be a greatamount of difference in the vertical distribution ofmost of the ceramic types and varieties at GuadalupeBay. This undoubtedly is a reflection of the dis-turbed nature of Stratum 2 and the relatively shorttime span involved in the deposition of most of theidentifiable Rockport midden deposits (Stratum 2in all blocks and Strata 3 and 5 in Block 3). Never-theless, a few trends can be seen. Most decoratedtypes and varieties have their greatest showings inthe deeper deposits, suggesting a trend towards the

4 Sherds from AU 7 are not used for comparison at this point,since that analysis unit contained such a small ceramic sample.In fact, if it was not for the seemingly consistent radiocarbon

dates associated with the Stratum 5 oyster deposit representedby AU 7, one could legitimately question whether the middenwas even Rockport in age (see the discussion in Chapter 5).


267

use of slightly more plainwares in the later portionof the occupation. Rockport Red is the lone excep-tion as far as decorated types are concerned, as itfollows the plainware trend and has its greatest showingin the uppermost portion of Stratum 2. This maysuggest that the type is very late in the overall Rockportsequence. Lastly, plain sherds with bone and shellin their pastes, and/or a combination of these andother materials, have slightly higher percentages inthe deeper, and presumably somewhat earlier, Rockportlevels.

Additional Observations onRockport Series Ceramics

In addition to the information on Rockport ce-ramics noted above, a few other observations weremade during the course of the analysis. Observa-tions such as these may prove useful in future stud-ies. At least, future analysts should be aware of theirpotential possibilities. Each is discussed briefly below.

Sherds with White Paste and/orWhite Slip (n=273)

Although, as reviewed above, sherd color wasnot systematically examined during the current study,several color tendencies were observed during theanalysis and these led to additional research on sherdsof the Rockport series. Small percentages of all fivevarieties of Rockport Black-on-gray, one sherd ofRockport Black, var. Elm Bayou, and several sherdsof Rockport Plain, vars. Austwell, Green Lake,Guadalupe, and Seadrift, contained a very light, al-most white, paste that was uniformly distributedthroughout the interior of each sherd. The RockportBlack-on-gray sherds also exhibited a white outerslip, rather than the gray slip typical of that type.

Initially, it was thought that sherds exhibitingthis white paste had been manufactured from a dif-ferent clay source than the majority of the sherds inthe collection, and that they might provide informationon trade or the range of travel of the occupants ofthe site. It also was thought that the white slip ap-pearing on the sherds of Rockport Black-on-gray mighthave resulted from use of the same clay source asan element of the surface finish. In order to verifythese assumptions, four sherds were submitted to theDepartment of Geology and Geophysics at Louisi-ana State University (LSU) for X-ray diffractionanalysis. Two of the sherds (Rockport Black-on-gray, var. Buffalo Lake) contained the white paste,while the other two (Rockport Plain, var. Rockport)

exhibited typical dark gray to black paste. Specificresults of the analysis are presented in Appendix A,prepared by Dr. R. E. Ferrell, Jr.

Basically, the x-ray diffraction indicated that thesame clay source was used to manufacture all foursherds. Quartz made up the greatest percent, by weight,of the minerals comprising each sherd’s paste, fol-lowed by feldspars and illite (mica). Importantly,calcite was found only in the white-paste samples,almost certainly indicating that caliche (most prob-ably of the “soft” variety) had been added to the clayto produce the white color. This also suggests thatcaliche was utilized in the white slip on the RockportBlack-on-gray specimens. Rather than indicatingtrade or travel, sherds with white paste appear to befrom vessels that were manufactured for a specialpurpose, possibly as fine-ware serving bowls and/or plates.

Sherds with white paste were present in all analysisunits associated with the Rockport occupation atGuadalupe Bay, although they clearly were moreprevalent in those AUs from Block 3 (Table 7-8).As can be seen, AUs 3, 5, and 6 provided the bulkof all sherds with white paste (n=242; 88.6 percent).If the assumption expressed above is correct, thenthe area around Block 3 may have served as the lo-cus for special feasts and/or social gatherings thatutilized fine-ware serving vessels. The roughly con-temporaneous nature of AUs 3, 5, and 6 is borneout by the general lack of any noticeable frequencydifferences regarding the white-paste sherds fromthese analysis units (93, 65, and 84 sherds, respec-tively). About all that can be said is that AU 7, theunderlying oyster deposit in Block 3, was practicallyvoid of white-paste sherds. Although sample sizeis probably the main cause for this, the lack of white-paste sherds may indicate that activities associatedwith AU 7 did not involve feasting or the use of fine-ware vessels. The fact that AU 7 is believed to dateto the early part of the Rockport II subphase couldfurther suggest that most of the white-paste sherdsprobably date to the latter portion of the Rockport�IIoccupation.

Sherds with Excessive Bone Temper (n=674)

Besides the identification of sherds with eithera white paste or a white slip, several of the sherdsclassified as Rockport Plain, vars. Austwell andGuadalupe; Rockport Black-on-gray, vars. BuffaloLake and Long Mott; Rockport Black, var. Lolita;and Rockport Incised, vars. Mission Lake and Mus-


268

Tabl

e 7-

8.D

istr

ibut

ion

of S

herd

s w

ith

Whi

te P

aste

, by

Ana

lysi

s U

nit.

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

To

tal

% T

otal

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c kva

r. E

lm B

ayou

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

11.

540

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

0.3

7

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k

tota

l0

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

01

1.5

40

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

01

0.3

7

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k-o

n-g

ray

var.

Buf

falo

Lak

e0

0.00

218

.18

2021

.51

00.

0020

30.7

719

22.6

21

100.

000

0.00

00.

006

22

2.7

1va

r. H

og B

ayou

450

.00

19.

0939

41.9

42

25.0

032

49.2

345

53.5

70

0.00

00.

002

100.

001

25

45

.79

var.

Lon

g M

ott

225

.00

19.

095

5.38

337

.50

00.

001

1.19

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

24

.40

var.

Mos

quit

o P

oint

112

.50

00.

0010

10.7

51

12.5

01

1.54

33.

570

0.00

00.

000

0.00

16

5.8

6va

r. R

ockp

ort

00.

003

27.2

70

0.00

225

.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

005

1.8

3

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k-o

n-g

ray

tota

l7

87

.50

76

3.6

47

47

9.5

78

10

0.0

05

38

1.5

46

88

0.9

51

10

0.0

00

0.0

02

10

0.0

02

20

80

.59

Roc

kp

ort

Pla

inva

r. A

ustw

ell

00.

000

0.00

1718

.28

00.

0011

16.9

215

17.8

60

0.00

00.

000

0.00

43

15

.75

var.

Gre

en L

ake

00.

003

27.2

71

1.08

00.

000

0.00

11.

190

0.00

00.

000

0.00

51

.83

var.

Gua

dalu

pe0

0.00

00.

001

1.08

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

10

.37

var.

Sea

drift

112

.50

19.

090

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

110

0.00

00.

003

1.1

0

Roc

kp

ort

Pla

in

tota

l1

12

.50

43

6.3

61

92

0.4

30

0.0

01

11

6.9

21

61

9.0

50

0.0

01

10

0.0

00

0.0

05

21

9.0

5

Sit

e T

otal

81

00

.00

11

10

0.0

09

31

00

.00

81

00

.00

65

10

0.0

08

41

00

.00

11

00

.00

11

00

.00

21

00

.00

27

31

00

.00

An

alys

is

Un

its

AU

1

AU

2

AU

3

AU

4

AU

5

AU

6

AU

7A

U 1

0A

U 1

1


269

tang Lake, contained relatively extensive amountsof bone in their paste.5 At first it was thought thatthese might represent examples of Goliad ware, aceramic category first reported from Mission EspírituSanto (Mounger 1959) and believed to have beenmade by the historic Aranama Indians who residedthere during the eighteenth century. If such was thecase, then probable contact between these missionIndians and the occupants of the Guadalupe Bay sitecould be recognized.

After examination of ceramic collections fromMission Espíritu Santo, now curated at TARL, it becameclear that the sherds from Guadalupe Bay were notGoliad ware. Although the pastes of the two wareswere very similar, the Goliad material was much thickerand typically came from extremely large vessels thatoften exhibited loop handles, characteristics not as-sociated with the sherds from Guadalupe Bay. De-spite this, it still was felt that some type of connec-tion might exist between the two wares, and/or withLeon Plain of the interior regions of south Texas,and that the Guadalupe Bay sherds with heavy bonetempering might represent a local, Rockport seriescounterpart to either Goliad ware or Leon Plain. Ifso, then these sherds might have chronological and,perhaps, cultural significance.

Table 7-9 lists those sherds with excessive bonetemper in their pastes. Again, the majority camefrom AUs 3, 5, and 6 in Block 3 (n=503; 74.6 per-cent), with lesser amounts from the other Rockportanalysis units (AUs 2, 4, and 7). Those few sherdsassociated with AUs 8 through 11 represent itemsthat had worked their way downward throughbioturbation into these Late Archaic deposits. It isinteresting to note, but almost certainly only the re-sult of coincidence, that the counts for AUs 2 and 4are identical (n=57 each), while those for AUs 5 and6 also are identical (n=152 each). Because of this,little chronological interpretation can be gleaned fromthe sherd counts.

It is possible to recognize one clear association,however, and that is the overwhelming preponder-ance of Rockport Plain sherds in the sample. Ofthe total collection of specimens with excessive bonetemper, 567 (84.1 percent) were typed as RockportPlain, either vars. Austwell or Guadalupe. This is

in sharp contrast to those sherds with white paste,where Rockport Black-on-gray dominated, and suggeststhat heavily bone-tempered vessels were primarilyplain and may have served a utilitarian function.

Sherds with Highly Oxidized Surfaceand “Ashy” Bone (n=289)

Another observation included sherds with boneinclusions that had been fired at such a high tem-perature that the surface of the sherds generally ex-hibited a highly oxidized orange color. In addition,the bone inclusions had been transformed into a powderor ash. This “ashy” bone was identified with theaid of a high-powered microscope by Dr. Ferrell atthe Department of Geology and Geophysics at Loui-siana State University.

The majority of these sherds were classified asRockport Black-on-gray, var. Long Mott, althoughsome were identified as Rockport Black-on-gray, var.Buffalo Lake, Rockport Plain, var. Guadalupe, andRockport Black, var. Lolita (Table 7-10). Severalof the Long Mott specimens also had the white cali-che slip applied over the orange surface. All of thissuggests a strong relationship with those sherds rec-ognized above for their white paste, and argues thatthe two groups may have served like purposes.

An orange color similar to that noted in the presentsample originally was included as one of the pri-mary sorting criteria for the Goliad types recognizedby Mounger (1959:164-169) at Mission Espíritu Santo.Although the orange sherds from Guadalupe Bay donot match true Goliad ware, they may indicate tiesto the mission complex at Goliad. Thus, these sherdsmay also have chronological and/or cultural impor-tance.

Unfortunately, as seen in Table 7-10, the samedistribution pattern recognized for the white-pasteand heavily bone-tempered sherds generally pertainsto the sherds with ashy bone inclusions. The ma-jority again are from Block 3, AUs 3, 5, and 6 (n=197;68.2 percent), although there are a few from the otherRockport AUs, plus several from AUs 8, 11, and 12,the latter clearly in displaced contexts. If these sherdsdo represent relatively late items similar to the Goliadwares from Mission Espíritu Santo, then their strati-

5 Two sherds of Goose Creek Plain, var. Lavaca also had ex-cessive amounts of bone in their paste, and they are included in

Table 7-9, below. Because of such excessive bone, a close rela-tionship to the Rockport series is suggested.


270

Tabl

e 7-

9.D

istr

ibut

ion

of S

herd

s w

ith

Exc

essi

ve B

one

Tem

per,

by

Ana

lysi

s U

nit.

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

To

tal

% T

otal

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c kva

r. L

olit

a0

0.00

00.

002

1.01

11.

752

1.32

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

005

0.7

4

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k

tota

l0

0.0

00

0.0

02

1.0

11

1.7

52

1.3

20

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

05

0.7

4

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k-o

n-g

ray

var.

Buf

falo

Lak

e0

0.00

00.

007

3.52

23.

510

0.00

53.

290

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

42

.07

var.

Lon

g M

ott

13.

850

0.00

2412

.06

712

.28

2516

.45

159.

870

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

111

.11

73

10

.78

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k-o

n-g

ray

tota

l1

3.8

50

0.0

03

11

5.5

89

15

.79

25

16

.45

20

13

.16

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

11

1.1

18

71

2.8

5

Roc

kp

ort

Inc i

sed

var.

Mis

sion

Lak

e0

0.00

00.

006

3.02

00.

001

0.66

10.

660

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

111

.11

91

.33

var.

Mus

tang

Lak

e0

0.00

00.

003

1.51

00.

001

0.66

00.

000

0.00

120

.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

50

.74

Roc

kp

ort

Inc i

sed

to

tal

00

.00

00

.00

94

.52

00

.00

21

.32

10

.66

00

.00

12

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

01

11

.11

14

2.0

7

Roc

kp

ort

Pla

inva

r. A

ustw

ell

311

.54

3154

.39

3216

.08

1628

.07

1610

.53

3523

.03

00.

000

0.00

110

0.00

00.

005

50.0

00

0.00

13

92

0.5

3va

r. G

uada

lupe

2284

.62

2645

.61

123

61.8

131

54.3

910

770

.39

9663

.16

510

0.00

480

.00

00.

004

100.

005

50.0

07

77.7

84

30

63

.52

Roc

kp

ort

Pla

in

tota

l2

59

6.1

55

71

00

.00

15

57

7.8

94

78

2.4

61

23

80

.92

13

18

6.1

85

10

0.0

04

80

.00

11

00

.00

41

00

.00

10

10

0.0

07

77

.78

56

98

4.0

5

Goo

se

Cr e

e k

Pla

inva

r. L

avac

a0

0.00

00.

002

1.01

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

002

0.3

0

Goo

se

Cr e

e k

Pla

in

tota

l0

0.0

00

0.0

02

1.0

10

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

02

0.3

0

Sit

e T

otal

26

10

0.0

05

71

00

.00

19

91

00

.00

57

10

0.0

01

52

10

0.0

01

52

10

0.0

05

10

0.0

05

10

0.0

01

10

0.0

04

10

0.0

01

01

00

.00

91

00

.00

67

71

00

.00

An

alys

is

Un

its

AU

1

AU

2

AU

3

AU

4

AU

5

AU

6

No

AU

AU

11

AU

10

AU

9A

U 8

AU

7


271

graphic placement at Guadalupe Bay does not bearthis out.

Sherds with Contorted Paste

Thirteen sherds with a highly contorted pastewere recovered from the 1-by-1-m sample unit atN80W130. Although these may be nothing morethan the aberrant work of a single potter who didnot properly wedge the clay prior to vessel manu-facture, the paste has an “early” look to it, and issomewhat reminiscent of Tchefuncte ware from theLouisiana coast and Galveston Bay areas. Whilethere is no question that these sherds are part of theRockport series, their contorted nature may indicate

an early effort at pottery manufacture similar to thatof the Tchefuncte series. As such, these sherds mightrepresent a very brief and potentially early Rockportoccupation at Guadalupe Bay.

Ten of the 13 sherds came from Stratum 3 inthe sample unit, and this is believed to be equiva-lent to Stratum 3 (AU 6) in nearby Block 3. In ad-dition, one sherd came from Stratum 2 (AU 3), whiletwo came from Stratum 4 (AU 7). Although thisdoes not unequivocally point to an early occupation,the majority of the sherds do appear to be related tothe deepest ceramic-bearing strata in the unit, sug-gesting that an early occupation may be present butmasked by the overwhelming numbers of typical

N o . % N o . % N o . % N o . % N o . %

Rockport Blackvar. Lolita 0 0.00 1 5.00 1 1.11 1 4.35 1 1.92

Rockport Black total 0 0 . 0 0 1 5 . 0 0 1 1 . 1 1 1 4 . 3 5 1 1 . 9 2

Rockport Black-on-grayvar. Buffalo Lake 0 0.00 1 5.00 4 4.44 1 4.35 1 1.92var. Long Mott 12 100.00 16 80.00 75 83.33 15 65.22 47 90.38

Rockport Black-on-gray total 1 2 1 0 0 . 0 0 1 7 8 5 . 0 0 7 9 8 7 . 7 8 1 6 6 9 . 5 7 4 8 9 2 . 3 1

Rockport Plainvar. Guadalupe 0 0.00 2 10.00 10 11.11 6 26.09 3 5.77

Rockport Plain total 0 0 . 0 0 2 1 0 . 0 0 1 0 1 1 . 1 1 6 2 6 . 0 9 3 5 . 7 7

Site Total 1 2 1 0 0 . 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 9 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 2 3 1 0 0 . 0 0 5 2 1 0 0 . 0 0

AU 1 AU 2 AU 3 AU 4

Analysis Units

AU 5

N o . % N o . % N o . % N o . % N o . % Total % Total

Rockport Blackvar. Lolita 1 1.82 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 5 1 . 7 3

Rockport Black total 1 1 . 8 2 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 5 1 . 7 3

Rockport Black-on-grayvar. Buffalo Lake 4 7.27 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 1 3 . 8 1var. Long Mott 46 83.64 29 100.00 6 100.00 1 100.00 0 0.00 2 4 7 8 5 . 4 7

Rockport Black-on-gray total 5 0 9 0 . 9 1 2 9 1 0 0 . 0 0 6 1 0 0 . 0 0 1 1 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 5 8 8 9 . 2 7

Rockport Plainvar. Guadalupe 4 7.27 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 100.00 2 6 9 . 0 0

Rockport Plain total 4 7 . 2 7 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 1 0 0 . 0 0 2 6 9 . 0 0

Site Total 5 5 1 0 0 . 0 0 2 9 1 0 0 . 0 0 6 1 0 0 . 0 0 1 1 0 0 . 0 0 1 1 0 0 . 0 0 2 8 9 1 0 0 . 0 0

AU 6 AU 8 AU 11 AU 12 No AU

Analysis Units

Table 7-10. Distribution, by Analysis Unit, of Sherds with Highly Oxidized Surfaces and Inclusions of “Ashy”Bone in their Pastes.


272

Rockport ware associated with AU 3. Interestingly,eleven of the sherds were classified as Rockport Plain,var. Green Lake, while the remaining two sherds wereidentified as Rockport Plain, var. Austwell. This isin keeping with the overall ceramic data discussedabove, in which Austwell and Green Lake have theirhighest percentages in the deeper, presumably slightlyearlier, Rockport levels at Guadalupe Bay.

Goose Creek Series

The Goose Creek ceramic series originally wasbased on collections from sites along the upper Texascoast (Ambler 1967, 1970, 1973; Aten 1967, 1983b;Aten and Bollich 1969; Aten and Chandler 1976;Aten et al. 1976; Shafer 1966; Suhm and Krieger1954; Suhm and Jelks 1962; Wheat 1953; Worthing-ton 1959). It generally includes all sherds that havea relatively high quantity of fine to coarse sand in aclay matrix. Most authorities (see Aten 1983b:217)believe that the high sand content simply reflectsthe likelihood that the aboriginal potters were uti-lizing naturally sandy clays, and not adding sand asa tempering agent. Others (Kelley et al. 1994) havesuggested that not all sandy-paste Goose Creek warewas the result of the clay source, but, rather, mayinclude some sand intentionally added to the paste.Whatever the case, the relatively high sand contentis one of the key attributes used to sort Goose Creekware from Rockport. Furthermore, Wheat (1953:189)and Suhm and Krieger (1954:378) noted that thesandiest sherds often had the texture of fine sand-paper, and that the surfaces usually were poorlysmoothed and uneven. Aten (1983b:231) noted thatGoose Creek ware was represented by poorly sortedsand grains, usually fine to medium in size, in a claymatrix. Because of the excessive quantity of sandin relation to the amount of clay, the paste often isextremely friable. All of these attributes help iden-tify Goose Creek ware and make it possible to sortit from Rockport ware in cases where the two seriesoverlap geographically.

Duay and Weinstein (1992) originally recognizedsherds of the Goose Creek series at Guadalupe Bayby the presence of what they identified as mediumto coarse sand. As reviewed above, this criterionwas applied subjectively, relying upon the abilityof the analyst to see sand grains without the aid of amicroscope. This procedure was discarded duringthe present study, and a Wentworth chart of grainsizes was used to measure sand grains. Because ofthis, many sherds that would have been classifiedas members of the Goose Creek series in 1989 now

have been placed in the Rockport series. In fact,one variety of Goose Creek Plain, Goff Bayou, wasnot even recognized in the present collection, de-spite the fact that 28 Goff Bayou sherds were iden-tified in 1989 (Duay and Weinstein 1992:94). Nev-ertheless, there still remains a significant quantityof ceramics that meet the present criteria set up toidentify Goose Creek ware, particularly when theanalyst takes into consideration the quantity of sandin the paste, the friable nature of the sherds, and theoverall rough surface finish—qualities that are notto be found in Rockport ware.

In a slight departure from the sorting criteriagenerally employed by analysts working with ce-ramic collections from sites on the upper Texas coast,Duay and Weinstein (1992) set up local varietiesof Goose Creek types along the same lines theyhad employed for Rockport types. Thus, the pres-ence or absence of secondary inclusions withinthe paste of Goose Creek ceramics became thekey to varietal identification. This seemed onlylogical for sites along the central Texas coast, wherethe Rockport and Goose Creek ceramic traditionsappear to merge geographically. Although thecurrent investigators have modified the overallcriteria used to identify Goose Creek ware, theystill feel that the recognition of secondary inclu-sions is a viable method of separating varieties ofGoose Creek types at sites along the central Texascoast, and this method is continued for the presentcollection.

In addition to the secondary inclusions, the presentsorting criteria for Goose Creek ware includes thepresence of asphaltum coating, similar to that notedfor Rockport ware. This coating, again, should notbe confused with actual asphaltum paint, but in-stead resulted from waterproofing or crack mending.The idea of applying asphaltum to serve thesepurposes should come as little surprise when con-sidering Goose Creek ceramics from the centralTexas coast. The strong local tradition of asphaltumuse on Rockport pottery almost certainly carriedover onto vessels with Goose Creek paste. Basedon all of the above, therefore, two ceramic types,Goose Creek Plain and Goose Creek Incised, alongwith their constituent varieties, have been identifiedat Guadalupe Bay.

Goose Creek Plain, var. Anaqua (n=4)

This is the local equivalent of Goose Creek Plain,var. Goose Creek (Weinstein et al. 1988), a rede-


273

fined version of Aten’s (1983b) Goose Creek Plain,var. unspecified. It is named after the Anaqua site(41 JK 7) at which Story (1968) recognized a sandy-paste ware that she then considered similar to GooseCreek Plain. After reviewing additional reports inthe area (Fawcett 1978:203-205; Fritz 1975; Malloufet al. 1973), plus examining numerous examples fromthe current project, it now is clear that the paste ofthis “Goose Creek-like” ware is, in fact, practicallyidentical to that of typical Goose Creek pottery, andthus it should be set up as a local variety.

Basically, Goose Creek Plain, var. Anaqua canbe recognized by vessels or sherds with plain or as-phaltum-coated interiors and/or exteriors, and a highpercentage of fine- to coarse-size sand in a relativelysoft and friable paste that lacks any evidence of sec-ondary inclusions. As just noted, the potential forasphaltum-coated surfaces reflects the local tradi-tion of waterproofing vessels with asphaltum, andhelps to sort Anaqua from the established variety ofGoose Creek.

Goose Creek Plain, var. Traylor Ranch (n=15)

This variety is defined by a plain or asphaltum-coated interior or exterior, and a high percentage offine- to coarse-size sand in a relatively soft and fri-able paste that contains crushed and/or burned frag-ments of bone. As such, the variety is the GooseCreek series counterpart to Rockport Plain, var.Guadalupe.

As noted above, the inclusion of what probablyrepresents bone temper in the type Goose Creek Plainis a departure from the definition supplied by Aten(1983b). Aten (1983b:244) did not include bone temperin his Goose Creek wares, but rather set up a sepa-rate, unnamed descriptive category that subsumedall bone-tempered ceramics. This was done simplybecause the sample from the upper Texas coast wasnot particularly large, and there was no need to dealwith bone-tempered ceramics in anything other thana superficial fashion. Considering the relative im-portance of bone tempering in the pastes of ceram-ics from the current study area, however, it seemsonly logical to recognize a local bone-tempered va-riety of Goose Creek pottery. Perhaps with moredata, it eventually will be possible to separate thebone-tempered Goose Creek (and possibly the bone-tempered Rockport) into new types. As Aten(1983b:244) suggested and as Hester and Hill (1971)implied, Leon Plain may prove to be the logical choicefor the parent type.

Goose Creek Plain, var. Tivoli (n=1)

Tivoli consists of a plain or asphaltum-coatedexterior, a plain or asphaltum-coated interior, and ahigh percentage of fine- to coarse-size sand in a rela-tively soft and friable paste that contains small piecesof caliche as secondary inclusions. As such, it isthe Goose Creek series equivalent to Rockport Plain,var. Seadrift.

Goose Creek Plain, var. Bloomington (n=8)

Outwardly, Bloomington has all of the charac-teristics of vars. Anaqua, Traylor Ranch, and Tivoli.Internally, however, it is marked by a high percent-age of fine- to coarse-size sand in a relatively softand friable paste that contains a heterogeneous mixtureof secondary inclusions. Thus, it is the Goose Creekequivalent to Rockport Plain, var. Austwell.

Goose Creek Plain, var. Kendrick’s Hill(revised definition) (n=13)

This is the first of two varieties that initiallywere identified at sites along the lower Lavaca River(Weinstein 1994).6 At that time these varieties wereplaced in the Rockport series and listed as constitu-ents of the type Rockport Plain (Duay et al. 1994:81).It also was felt that they might have geographicalsignificance, since all examples previously noted hadcome from the area around Lavaca and Matagordabays. In fact, Duay et al. (1994:81) noticed thatthese varieties might be similar to what Calhoun(1962:325) identified years ago as “Rockport warewith a coarse sand temper” from the area around LavacaBay. They also indicated that these varieties couldpossibly equate with a sample of sherds noted byFritz (1975:100, 104) that could not be classifiedeither as Rockport Plain or Goose Creek Plain dur-ing her investigations in the Matagorda Bay region.

The rather nebulous, borderline nature of thesesherds clearly is reflected by the fact that Duay etal. (1994:81) first placed them in the Rockport se-ries, while the present investigators have moved themto the Goose Creek series. This latter switch wasenacted to account for the relatively large sand grainspresent in the paste of the sherds, most of which are

6 Duay et al. (1994:81) actually set up three new varieties,based on their research along the lower Lavaca River. One ofthese, var. Possum Bluff, was not found in the collection fromGuadalupe Bay, so it is not discussed in this section.


274

of medium size, that are not found in Rockport ware.However, these sherds exhibit a well-consolidatedpaste and have a fine surface finish, both attributesappearing more in line with typical Rockport ma-terial. It was these latter attributes, in fact, thatswayed Duay et al. toward placing the varietiesin the Rockport series. Nevertheless, the presentauthors feel that the size of the sand grains issufficiently different from that of all other Rockportvarieties to justify the change to the Goose Creekseries.

Specifically, Kendrick’s Hill includes vessels orsherds with a plain or asphaltum-coated exterior, eithera plain or asphaltum-coated interior, a silty or finesandy paste that contains fragments of crushed boneand/or burned bone, along with relatively sparse,medium-size (1/4 to 1/2 mm) sand grains. Both thebone and medium sand grains may have been addedas tempering agents. As such, this variety is almostidentical to Rockport Plain, var. Guadalupe, savefor the addition of the medium sand grains.

Goose Creek Plain, var. Lavaca(revised definition) (n=115)

This variety can be recognized by its similarityto Rockport Plain, var. Austwell, except for the ad-dition of the sparse, medium-size sand grains notedabove. As such, it is characterized by vessels or sherdswith a plain or asphaltum-coated exterior, either aplain or asphaltum-coated interior, a silty or fine sandymatrix that contains a heterogeneous assortment ofsecondary inclusions (such as shell, bone, caliche,etc., or any combination of these inclusions), and asparse amount of medium sand grains.

Goose Creek Incised, var. Panther Reef (n=1)

This variety is the local equivalent of Goose CreekIncised, var. Goose Creek (Aten 1983b; Weinsteinet al. 1988), and is identified by incised lines usu-ally, but not always, placed horizontally around theexterior, upper portion of a vessel’s rim (Figure 7-5, a).Other motifs, such as line-filled triangles, diamonds,

Figure 7-5. Goose Creek Incised, Unclassified Brushed, and Unclassified Punctated.(a) Rim sherd of Goose Creek Incised, var. Panther Reef; (b) Unclas-sified Brushed with Guadalupe paste; (c-g) Unclassified Punctatedwith Guadalupe paste; (h-i) Unclassified Punctated with Rockport paste;(j) Unclassified Punctated with Austwell paste. (See Appendix K forprovenience data.)

a b

c d e f

gh i j

0 3

cm


275

or diagonal lines, also may occur (see Aten1983b:Figure 12.2 for examples of other decorativemotifs). The exterior and/or interior of the vesselcan be either plain or coated with asphaltum, and,as with Rockport Incised, the asphaltum may extendonto and slightly over the lip of the vessel. Paste isequivalent to that for Goose Creek Plain, var. Anaqua,and consists of a high percentage of fine- to coarse-size sand in a relatively soft and friable matrix thatlacks any signs of secondary inclusions.

Goose Creek Series Ceramicsby Analysis Unit

With the revised sorting criteria applied to the1992 ceramics, there now is an exceedingly smallerpercentage of Goose Creek sherds at GuadalupeBay (157 out of 42,712 sherds; 0.4 percent) thanthere was in 1989 (155 out of 467 sherds; 33.2 per-cent). Although this greatly limits the discussionon distribution of the ware, there are a few pat-terns that still are noticeable (see Tables 7-6 and7-7).

Perhaps most striking is the complete lack ofany Goose Creek ceramics in Stratum 1. When thisis coupled with the strong showing of Goose Creekware in AU 7 (2.8 percent), then it seems likely thatGoose Creek ceramics had their highest popularityduring the earliest Rockport occupation at GuadalupeBay. After that occupation, the percentages dropdramatically, and average between 0.3 percent (AU 6)and 0.4 percent (combined AUs 2 and 3) (see Table 7-7).This is only logical, since it has been theorized thatGoose Creek wares represent the earliest ceramicsfound along the central Texas coast (Weinstein1992:63-64). Interestingly, the Goose Creek variet-ies with the greatest percentages in AU 7 areKendrick’s Hill and Traylor Ranch, both with boneinclusions in their pastes. Again, this suggeststhat relatively high percentages of sherds with bonein their pastes may signal a slightly earlier Rockport IIsubphase occupation.

Miscellaneous Ceramics

Several ceramic items fall into categories dis-tinct from the types and varieties discussed above.Included are a few sherds that exhibit decorative treat-ments other than incising or painting, plus ceramicdiscs fashioned from former sherds. A clay coil alsowas present in the collection. Each will be reviewedbriefly below.

Unclassified Brushed (n=2)

Two body sherds exhibiting what appears to bebrushing were recovered and identified as “Unclas-sified Brushed.” One came from Block 1, from theupper part of the mixed Stratum 2 Rangia and oys-ter midden (AU 2). The other came from the lowerpart of Stratum 2 in Block 3 (AU 5) (see Figure 7-5, b).One (the illustrated example) had exterior brushing;the other interior brushing. One (again, the illus-trated example) had a bone-tempered paste equal tothe Guadalupe variety of Rockport Plain, while theother had a heterogeneous paste equivalent to theAustwell variety (see Appendix B).

Brushing has been reported on rare occasionsfrom sites along the Texas coast, but these prima-rily have come from the Galveston Bay area (Weinsteinet al. 1988:Figure 4-38, D). A possible brushed speci-men from Test Unit N62W100 was recovered at theGuadalupe Bay site during the 1989 testing project(Weinstein 1992:95, Table 7-7). Thus, two of thebrushed sherds so far noted from the site have comefrom the vicinity of Block 1. As with one of thesherds noted above, it had paste equivalent to theGuadalupe variety of Rockport Plain.

Unfortunately, considering the scanty data ob-tained so far, it is difficult to suggest a chronologi-cal placement for brushing along the central Texascoast. About all that can be said at present is thatthe sherds at Guadalupe Bay probably can be relatedto the middle Rockport subphase occupation(Rockport�II) dating between about A.D. 1300 and1400.

Unclassified Punctated (n=9)

Nine sherds, eight body and one rim, containedlinear rows of fine exterior punctations without anyother form of decoration (see Figure 7-5, c-j). Al-though these probably represent portions of eitherRockport Black or Rockport Incised vessels that in-cluded punctations in the areas between the paintedor incised bands or lines, it is possible that they arefrom vessels that only had punctations. Addition-ally, at least three of the sherds appear to come fromthe spout portions of bottles, indicating that somebottles may have contained rows of linear puncta-tions on their spouts and wavy, painted lines on theirbodies. Since it is not possible at this time to defi-nitely determine the true nature of any of these ves-sels, all of these sherds simply are identified as “Unclas-


276

sified Punctated.” One came from the surface ofthe eroding bankline, one from the lower portion ofStratum 2 in Block 1 (AU 4) (see Figure 7-5, h),another from the lower part of Stratum 2 in Block 2(also AU 4) (see Figure 7-5, i), while the remaindercame from Block 3: two from the upper part of Stra-tum 2 (AU 3) (see Figure 7-5, g and j) and four fromthe Stratum 3 Rangia deposit (AU 6) (see Figure7-5, c-f). The majority (n=6) were on paste equiva-lent to the Guadalupe variety of Rockport Plain, twowere on paste equal to the Rockport variety, and onewas on paste equal to the Austwell variety (see Ap-pendix B).

No similar sherds were reported from Guada-lupe Bay during the 1989 testing project, althoughtwo Unclassified Punctated specimens were re-covered from the Kendrick’s Hill site (41 JK 35)on the lower Lavaca River during test excavationsat that locale in 1992 (Duay et al. 1994:83). Bothof the latter consisted of linear rows of puncta-tions reminiscent of the rows that alternate be-tween painted wavy lines on Rockport Black andRockport Black-on-gray vessels. What made thesespecimens unique was the fact that both occurredon what then was identified as Goose Creek ware.Since the sorting criteria used to identify GooseCreek paste have now been changed (see above),it is likely that both of these sherds now wouldbe classified as having Rockport paste. If that, infact, is correct, then they most likely represent partsof Rockport Black vessels.

Although the radiocarbon dates suggest that thereis little chronological difference between Strata 2and 3 in Block 3, both principally dating betweenca. A.D. 1300 and 1400, it is interesting to note thatsix of the nine punctated sherds came either fromthe lower part of Stratum 2 (AU 4) (n=2) or Stra-tum 3 (AU 6) (n=4). This suggests a possible earlydate for the use of punctations during middle Rockporttimes.

Ceramic Discs (n=14)

Fourteen ceramic discs or fragments of discs,fashioned from both decorated and plain sherds, wererecovered at Guadalupe Bay (Table 7-11, Figure 7-6).All have smooth and nicely rounded edges and rangein diameter between 11 and 27 mm, with an aver-age diameter of 19.7 mm. None was perforated.Interestingly, all but three came from excavation unitseither within Block 3 or immediately adjacent to thatblock. Although the exact function of these discs is

subject to debate, it is clear by their distribution thatthe area around Block 3 was the main locus of whateveractivities once were associated with these artifacts.Perhaps they were used as gaming pieces or wereemployed in some form of counting.

Ten of the discs were made out of plain sherds(see Figure 7-6, a-j). Of these, four occur on pasteequivalent to the Guadalupe variety of Rockport Plain,two each are on pastes equal to the Rockport andAustwell varieties of Rockport Plain, and two havepaste equal to the Green Lake variety. Four discswere made from portions of Rockport Black-on-grayvessels (see Figure 7-6, k-n): one from a var. LongMott vessel, two from var. Buffalo Lake vessels, andone from a Hog Bayou vessel.

Ceramic discs of the type recovered at GuadalupeBay are present in limited numbers at other sites alongthe central Texas coast. Story (1968:Table 8, Fig-ure 25, G) notes a disc from the Ingleside Cove site,while Ricklis (1990b:173) briefly mentions a discfrom adjacent site 41 SP 120. The largest collec-tion of discs comes from the last location of Mis-sion Espíritu Santo near Goliad (Mounger 1959:175).There, 21 discs fashioned out of sherds of Goliadware were recovered, while two other discs were madefrom fragments of majolica vessels. Such a largequantity of discs from the mission, including the twofashioned from majolica, indicates that such itemswere manufactured relatively late in the aboriginalsequence of the region, perhaps with their greatestfrequency occurring during the Protohistoric andHistoric periods.

The chronological placement of the discs fromGuadalupe Bay, on the other hand, suggests thatthey occur throughout much of the Rockport phase.Most were associated with the Stratum 2 mixedRangia and oyster deposit that has been dividedinto AUs 2 through 5 (see Table 7-11). As dis-cussed numerous times previously, these analy-sis units are believed to date primarily betweenA.D. 1300 and 1400. One disc was associatedwith AU 6, the Stratum 3 Rangia deposit under-lying the Stratum 2 deposit in Block 3, while an-other was located beneath Stratum 3, resting di-rectly on the underlying noncultural colluvium/alluvium of Stratum 6 (AU 11). Since there isvirtually no difference in ages between Strata 2and 3, it is likely that these latter discs also dateto middle Rockport (Rockport II) times, ca.A.D. 1300 to 1400. Of course, there is the pos-sibility that some of the discs, particularly those from


277

An

aly

sis

Pro

ven

ien

ceU

nit

Ty

pe

Var

iety

Dia

met

erT

hic

kn

ess

Po

rtio

nC

om

men

ts

Sam

ple

U

nit

s

N70

W10

02

Roc

kpor

t P

lain

Gua

dalu

pe27

mm

5 m

mw

hole

dis

cN

one

N80

W12

05

Roc

kpor

t P

lain

Gua

dalu

pe11

mm

4 m

mw

hole

dis

cN

one

Blo

ck

1

N66

W10

02

Roc

kpor

t P

lain

Roc

kpor

t20

mm

3.5

mm

who

le d

isc

Con

cave

inte

rior

Blo

ck

3

N72

W12

06

Roc

kpor

t P

lain

Roc

kpor

t12

mm

5 m

mfr

agm

ent

Bur

nish

ed, c

onca

ve in

teri

orN

74W

118

11R

ockp

ort

Pla

inA

ustw

e ll

17 m

m5

mm

who

le d

isc

Non

eN

74W

120

3R

ockp

ort

Pla

inG

uada

lupe

15 m

m5

mm

frag

men

tIn

teri

or b

urni

shed

, con

cave

inte

rior

N74

W12

05

Roc

kpor

t Bla

ck-o

n-gr

ayL

ong

Mot

t22

mm

5 m

mw

hole

dis

cC

onca

ve in

teri

or, p

aint

ed in

teri

orN

74W

122

6R

ockp

ort

Pla

inG

uada

lupe

27 m

m5

mm

who

le d

isc

Tra

ces

of a

spha

ltum

coa

ting

on e

xter

ior

N74

W12

23

Roc

kpor

t Bla

ck-o

n-gr

ayB

uffa

lo L

ake

27 m

m3.

5 m

mw

hole

dis

cPa

inte

d in

teri

orN

74W

124

3R

ockp

ort

Pla

inA

ustw

e ll

14 m

m5

mm

who

le d

isc

Bla

ck-c

oate

d ex

teri

orN

74W

124

5R

ockp

ort

Pla

inG

reen

Lak

e19

mm

4 m

mw

hole

dis

cB

urni

shed

, con

cave

inte

rior

N74

W12

45

Roc

kpor

t P

lain

Gre

en L

ake

25 m

m5

mm

who

le d

isc

Con

cave

inte

rior

N76

W12

63

Roc

kpor

t Bla

ck-o

n-gr

ayH

og B

ayou

15 m

m3.

5 m

mw

hole

dis

cA

bsen

ce o

f pa

int

Su

r fac

e

Bea

ch S

urfa

ceN

one

Roc

kpor

t Bla

ck-o

n-gr

ayB

uffa

lo L

ake

25 m

m6

mm

who

le d

isc

Pain

ted

on e

xter

ior

Tabl

e 7-

11.

Dat

a on

the

14

Cer

amic

Dis

cs R

ecov

ered

Dur

ing

the

1992

Inv

esti

gati

ons

at G

uada

lupe

Bay

.


278

the upper portion of Stratum 2 (AUs 2 and 3) maydate to succeeding centuries, possibly during theRockport III and/or Live Oak phases, but the mixednature of Stratum 2 makes it impossible to sort thesefrom the others.

Ceramic Coil (n=1)

One fired ceramic coil was recovered from theupper part of Stratum 2 (AU 3) in Block 3 at GuadalupeBay. It has paste equivalent to the Seadrift varietyof Rockport Plain, indicating that it probably wasto be used in the manufacture of a Rockport warevessel. Clay coils have been found at several sitesalong the central Texas coast, indicating that localpottery was made by the coiling method (Calhoun1962:321-326; Ricklis 1990b:121-122). This is notunusual, as the coiling method was the primary meansby which pottery was manufactured throughout theSoutheast and along the Texas coast.

Spatial Distribution of Ceramic Typesat Guadalupe Bay

One of the main goals of the fieldwork atGuadalupe Bay was to piece plot all artifacts en-countered during the excavations so that subsequentspatial analyses could be attempted. It was hopedthat relationships might be recognized between cer-tain artifact types and specific areas of the site orthat potential small-scale activity loci might be iden-tified around possible hearth locations. In that re-gard, a review of the ceramic distribution data seemsappropriate at this point. Subsequent chapters willexamine the distribution of lithic artifacts, modifiedshell, bone tools, and historic artifacts.

It should be noted at the outset that the piece-plotted data appear to have been affected by severalfactors that bias some of the results. First, it be-came apparent during the course of the excavations

Figure 7-6. Ceramic discs. (a-d) Rockport Plain, var. Guadalupe; (e-f) Rockport Plain, var. Rockport;(g-h) Rockport Plain, var. Austwell; (i-j) Rockport Plain, var. Green Lake; (k) RockportBlack-on-gray, var. Long Mott; (l-m) Rockport Black-on-gray, var. Buffalo Lake; (n) RockportBlack-on-gray, var. Hog Bayou. (See Appendix K for provenience data.)

a b c d e

f g h i j

k l m n

0 3

cm


279

that not all people are capable of recognizing indi-vidual artifacts at the same level of accuracy, de-spite their best intentions and the slow, methodicaldigging procedures employed during the fieldwork.Simply stated, people’s eyesight varies, and somefolks can find hundreds of minute flakes and tinysherdlets, while others miss even the largest dart points.Thus, an excavation unit that is dug by a person withexcellent eyesight will usually yield a large numberof individually piece-plotted field specimens, whilean adjacent unit dug by a person with inferior eye-sight will most likely yield less field specimens.

A second factor that apparently affected the na-ture of the piece-plotted data was that of time. Aswill be seen clearly by the artifact plots presentedbelow, it is obvious that excavation units dug to-wards the end of the project produced a significantlysmaller number of field specimens per unit than thosedug earlier during the project. Although excavatorswere not directed to hasten their digging towardsthe end of the project by reducing the number offield specimens recorded, there apparently was anunconscious effort to meet the impending deadlineby digging quicker and decreasing the effort neededto document piece-plotted items. A quick glance atthe piece-plotted remains from Block 3 is a goodexample of this bias (see Figure 7-9, below). Thoseunits excavated during the initial phases of digging(XUs N70W118, N72W120, N74W118, N74W122,and N76W120) produced much greater quantities offield specimens, and this clearly is reflected in thechecker-board pattern of units exhibiting greaterconcentrations of piece-plotted material. Unfortu-nately, this factor was not recognized until after allof the field specimens were plotted, long after thefieldwork had ended.

In an effort to combat the biases just discussed,the following distribution plans illustrate both theindividually plotted field specimens and the countsfor all recovered artifacts, the latter including bothfield specimens and those artifacts captured in the1/4-inch screens. Thus, it is easy to compare totalartifact yield per excavation unit against the num-ber of field specimens recorded, thereby identify-ing those units affected by the “eyesight” and “time”biases.

It also should be noted here that the followingdistribution plans include the locations of “possiblehearths.” These were identified by examining theweight of burned shell vs. the weight of unburnedshell for each level of each unit. Specific details

regarding this procedure, plus illustrations of the variousisopleths of the burned-shell concentrations result-ing from this analysis, are presented in detail laterin Chapter 12. For now it is necessary only to real-ize that these possible hearths represent potential areasof activity in addition to those hearths identified duringthe actual fieldwork, the latter discussed in Chap-ter�5 and assigned specific feature numbers.

Figures 7-7 and 7-8 present the distribution ofall ceramics associated with AU 2, the upper por-tion of the Stratum 2 midden in Blocks 1 and 2. Ascan be seen in Figure 7-7, the biases just discusseddo not appear to have affected the recovery of fieldspecimens in Block 1 to any great extent. This al-most certainly is because Block 1 was the first ofthe blocks to be excavated. With the full projecttime lying ahead, the excavators did not feel pres-sured to complete the excavations quickly, and maxi-mum effort was devoted to the recovery of field speci-mens. The only major discrepancy between the numberof piece-plotted items (shown to the left of the fig-ure) and total counts (shown to the right) appears inXU N60W102, where there seems to be too few piece-plotted sherds for the total amount (n=491) recov-ered. Piece-plotted remains in all other units reflectreality reasonably well.

Unfortunately, it is hard to determine what thisreality might mean, aside from the obvious fact, notedseveral times previously, that most artifacts wereconcentrated in those units situated closest to thecanal bankline at the south end of the block. Per-haps it is this factor that is responsible for the greaterquantity of painted ceramics (Rockport Black andRockport Black-on-gray) recovered in the units southof N62. Or, perhaps there are greater numbers ofpainted sherds in this area because there was a pos-sible hearth present in XU N60W102, and the hearthwas the focus of food consumption and/or limitedceremonialism, as opposed to food preparation andstorage. As discussed in more detail later in thischapter, this assumes that painted wares were em-ployed primarily as serving vessels and/or ceremo-nial items, whereas plain and incised vessels wereutilized more for food preparation and storage. In-terestingly, the distribution of incised ceramics mayhelp support this possibility, as 16 sherds of RockportIncised came from those units north of N62 whilethe more prolific units south of N62 yielded only10 sherds.

The distribution of sherds for that part of AU 2situated in Block 2 is even more difficult, if not im-


280

Figure 7-7. Distribution of aboriginal ceramics associated with Analysis Unit 2 in Block�1.Plan view on the left shows distribution of piece-plotted specimens. Planview on the right shows totals (including piece-plotted items) for individualsample and excavation units.


281

possible, to interpret (see Figure 7-8). One fact thatis very clear, however, is that practically no effortwas devoted to the recovery of field specimens inXU N54W92. Although this unit yielded a total of362 sherds, not a single field specimen was recorded.Aside from that, the only other recognizable patternis the relative abundance of painted sherds in thetwo westernmost units in the block. Perhaps the samefactors responsible for the large amount of paintedsherds in the southern portion of Block 1 also con-tributed to the large number of painted sherds in thewestern part of Block 2.

In contrast to Blocks 1 and 2, the upper portionof the Rockport midden in Block 3 produced a tre-mendous quantity of ceramics, and this is reflectedin the distribution pattern for AU 3 (Figure 7-9).Unfortunately, as noted above, the units in Block 3clearly illustrate the discrepancy in effort associatedwith the collection of field specimens, and one caneasily identify those units excavated during the ini-tial phases of digging vs. those excavated towardsthe end of the project. Nevertheless, it may be pos-sible to recognize a few potentially meaningful pat-terns. Once again, aside from the obvious fact that

Figure 7-8. Distribution of aboriginal ceramics associated with Analysis Unit 2 in Block 2. Plan viewon the top shows distribution of piece-plotted specimens. Plan view on the bottom showstotals (including piece-plotted items) for individual sample and excavation units.


282

Figure 7-9. Distribution of aboriginal ceramics associated with Analysis Unit 3in Block 3. Plan view on the top shows distribution of piece-plot-ted specimens. Plan view on the bottom shows totals (includingpiece-plotted items) for individual sample and excavation units.


283

those units nearest to the canal bankline producedthe greatest number of sherds, it is interesting to notethe presence of the only possible hearth associatedwith AU 3 in that same ceramically prolific area,roughly at N70W120. Unlike Block 1, however, theredoes not appear to be any type of association be-tween painted ceramics and the hearth, or any typeof negative association between incised sherds andthe hearth area. On the contrary, the greatest quan-tity of painted sherds can be associated with the twowesternmost units, N74W126 and N76W126, with388 and 234 painted sherds, respectively. Perhapsthese units are at the edge of an area where foodconsumption and/or ceremonialism occurred moreintensely than in the rest of Block 3. If such wasthe case, however, then most of that area appears tolie to the west of the block beyond the limits of theexcavations. About all that can be said with anydegree of certainty is that the upper Rockport middenin Block 3 represents an area where a tremendousamount of ceramics, of all types, was used and dis-carded.

The distribution of ceramics associated with AU 4in Block 1 is somewhat different than that for theoverlying AU 2, although the lack of piece-plotteditems in XU N64W102 is clearly evident (Figure 7-10).The greatest quantity of sherds was recovered fromthe three western units south of N64, with the larg-est amount obtained in XU N60W102. This is incontrast to AU 2, where XUs N58W100 and N60W100were two of the most prolific ceramic-producing units.Apparently, the presence of two possible hearths,one in N64W102 and the other in N60W102, mayaccount for the large number of sherds in that area.Again, the association between at least one of thesehearths and large numbers of painted sherds canbe postulated, as seen in XU N60W102. Unfor-tunately, the inverse relationship between this hearthand incised sherds does not appear to be particu-larly strong, so it may be more reasonable to con-clude that none of the potential associations havemuch meaning.

Interpretation of the ceramic distribution for AU 4in Block 2 is equally difficult (Figure 7-11). Asidefrom the obvious fact that very little effort again wasdevoted to the collection of field specimens in XUN54W92, one can see the relative abundance of paintedsherds in contrast to those present in Block 1. Thisis particularly true for the sample unit at N51W90where 103 painted sherds were recovered. If a 2-by-2-munit had been dug in that area, then it is conceiv-able that over 400 painted sherds might have been

collected. Although two possible hearths were noted,and a positive correlation between the quantity ofceramics and the hearths’ presence can be recognized,the area encompassed by Block 2 would appear tobe too small for such a correlation to have muchvalidity.

The distribution of ceramics related to AU 5 inBlock 3, also representing the lower part of the Stra-tum 2 Rockport deposit, is presented in Figure 7-12.Once more, the effects of the “time” bias are easilyrecognizable. In addition, it should be rememberedthat the absence of sherds associated with AU 5 inXU N72W120 simply reflects the fact that Stratum 2was removed by a single excavation level in thatunit. Since there was no lower cut into Stratum 2,there are no AU 5 ceramics. Regardless, as withthe overlying distributions of AU 3, there does notappear to be any clear-cut ceramic patterning in AU 5.Although two of the units with possible hearths (XUsN72W122 and N74W120) would, at first glance, seemto contain potentially meaningful quantities of plainand painted sherds, this significance is offset by thepresence of even greater numbers of similar sherdsin XU N74W124 where no evidence of a hearth wasuncovered. Likewise, the overwhelming preponderanceof ceramics in N74W124 is in sharp contrast to itstwo adjacent units (N74W122 and N74W126) thatproduced greatly reduced totals. About all that probablycan be said with any degree of confidence is thatBlock 3 once again was the locus of intense usageand discard of ceramics during the Rockport IIsubphase. While there may have been some sort ofactivity area (or areas) situated around the varioushearths in the block, the data are equivocal.

Analysis Unit 6 consisted of four distinct Rangiadeposits and associated shell and artifact scatters locatedbeneath AU 5 in the eastern part of Block 3 (Fig-ure 7-13). For convenience, the separate shell de-posits have been identified as “Shell Pockets” 1through 4. Because evidence of these deposits waslacking in XUs N74W120, N74W124, N74W126,and N76W126, there are no AU 6 artifacts illustratedon Figure 7-13 for these units. There are, however,three possible hearths and one definite hearth (Fea-ture 2) associated with AU 6. Interestingly, the onedefinite hearth is located adjacent to Shell Pocket(SP) 3, and not within the pocket itself. This is identicalto the situation normally found in hearth/refuse pilecouplets farther up the Texas coast, particularly inthe Galveston Bay area (see Aten 1983a), and it ishighly likely that Feature 2 and the majority of theartifacts recovered in Units N70W118, N72W118,


284

Figure 7-10. Distribution of aboriginal ceramics associated with Analysis Unit 4 in Block1. Plan view on the left shows distribution of piece-plotted specimens.Plan view on the right shows totals (including piece-plotted items) for in-dividual sample and excavation units.


285

N72W120, and Sample Unit N70W120 are relatedto activities occurring on and around SP 3. Like-wise, it is reasonable to conclude that the artifactsrecovered from XUs N74W122 and N76W122 canbe related to SP 1, while those in N76W120 andN72W122 can be tied to SPs 2 and 4, respectively.

With that in mind, it is worth noting the pre-ponderance of ceramics, of all types, associated withSP 1. It is also worth noting the relatively high numbersof painted sherds associated with SPs 1, 2, and 3.On the other hand, SP 4 appears to lack such highnumbers, but this almost certainly reflects the fact

that only a very small portion of the pocket was un-covered in Block 3. Overall, these data may be theclearest expression at Guadalupe Bay of special-activityareas where food consumption and associated trashand shellfish disposal occurred around specific hearthlocations. Considering the relatively large quantityof painted ceramics associated with SP 1, it may notbe stretching the data too far to further suggest thatsome form of ceremonial activity requiring the useof finely painted ceramic vessels took place in thenorth-central portion of Block 3 during the time thatthe shells and artifacts now identified as AU 6 werelaid down.

Figure 7-11. Distribution of aboriginal ceramics associated with Analysis Unit 4 in Block 2. Planview on the top shows distribution of piece-plotted specimens. Plan view on the bottomshows totals (including piece-plotted items) for individual sample and excavation units.


286



287



288

Analysis Unit 7, represented by the oyster de-posits of Stratum 5 in Block 3, is tentatively thoughtto represent the earliest of the Rockport II occupa-tions at Guadalupe Bay. As seen in Figure 7-14,there were two main oyster pockets situated in thesoutheastern corner of the block, plus the edge ofwhat probably was a third pocket situated in the extremenorthwestern corner. Although two hearths (Fea-tures 8 and 9) and a possible hearth could be tied totwo of the AU 7 oyster deposits, there were veryfew associated sherds recovered, thus precluding anymeaningful attempts at the recognition of ceramicpatterns. Nevertheless, the presence of the AU 7oyster pockets helps support the notion that hearth/refuse pile couplets do exist at Guadalupe Bay andthat the patterns recognized for AU 6 probably arelegitimate.

Decorative Design Elements and Lip Decoration

As discussed earlier in this chapter, all sherdsobtained during the current investigations were ex-amined for the presence of decoration. Generally,these fell into two broad categories: intentionallypainted decoration (including Rockport Black-on-gray and Rockport Black), and incised decoration(Rockport and Goose Creek Incised). Two othercategories, overall red filming (Rockport Red) andpolychrome painting (Rockport Polychrome), wererecognized, but these were not subjected to furtherstudy as they, respectively, either lacked variationin decorative design or were so limited in numberthat it would have been meaningless to record theirdecorative elements.

Design Elements

As noted, decorated sherds initially were sepa-rated by type and variety, and then each was givenan alpha-numeric code that described the decorationpresent (see Tables 7-1 and 7-3). Once coded, sherdsof the same type and variety then were placed intogroups consisting of recurring decorative patternsthat were termed “design elements.” Incised sherdsexhibited 15 design elements: (1) vertical straightlines, (2) horizontal straight lines, (3) diagonal straightlines, (4) curved lines, (5) perpendicular straight lines,(6) parallel straight lines, (7) horizontal zigzag lines,(8) diagonal overincised lines, (9) vertical overincisedlines, (10) crosshatched overincised lines, (11) chevronpattern, (12) open triangles, (13) line-filled triangles,(14) crosshatched lines, and (15) crossed lines (seeTable 7-1). A sixteenth category, “unknown lineorientation,” also was set up for those incised lines

that could not be placed in one of the primary groups.In most cases, a single design element probably wasthe only decoration present on a vessel. For instance,a jar might only exhibit a horizontal zigzag line lo-cated around its neck just below the rim. In otherinstances, however, two or more design elements mightoccur together on the same vessel. For example,horizontal straight lines might be present on the jar’sneck just below the rim, while a series of line-filledtriangles could occur immediately below the lowesthorizontal line. In both of these cases, a higher or-der of decoration is formed, and referred to later as a“motif.” Thus, depending on the situation, a motifmay consist of a single design element if that elementis the only decoration present on the vessel, or it canconsist of multiple design elements if two or more el-ements coalesce to form the overall decoration.

Painted sherds (both with and without gray slip)exhibited 14 design elements: (1) vertical straightlines, (2) vertical wavy lines, (3) horizontal straightlines, (4) horizontal wavy lines, (5) diagonal straightlines, (6) pendant loops, (7) curved lines, (8) per-pendicular lines, (9) lines of unknown orientation,(10) dots, (11) open circles, (12) triangles, (13) ran-dom dabbing (splotching that resembles blobs madeby dabbing the vessel with asphaltum paint), and(14) swastika (see Table 7-1).

Each of the design elements was subdivided furtherby the width of the lines forming the element. Thewidths of dots and dabbed areas also were recordedwhen appropriate. Lines and/or dots and dabbed areasless than 2 mm across were considered “narrow.”Those between 2 and 4 mm were considered “me-dium,” while those greater than 4 mm were “wide.”

As with the incised sherds, painted sherds thenwere grouped according to the various design ele-ments that were present. Sherds with “unidentifiabledesign elements” also were recorded, but, by virtueof their totally unrecognizable quality, such speci-mens do not constitute a particularly useful groupamenable to future analysis and interpretation. Ex-amples of single design elements include verticallines, horizontal lines, diagonal lines, curved lines,perpendicular lines, parallel lines, horizontal zig-zaglines, etc. Examples of multiple design elementsinclude horizontal and diagonal lines, vertical linesand dots, vertical and curved lines, horizontal andcrosshatched lines, etc.

Tables 7-12 through 7-14 list the various designelements recognized for the excavated examples of


289



290

Tabl

e 7-

12.

Des

ign

Ele

men

ts R

ecor

ded

for

Sher

ds o

f R

ockp

ort

Bla

ck-o

n-G

ray.

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)*

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)N

o.(E

xt./I

nt./B

oth)

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)N

o.(E

xt./I

nt./B

oth)

No

.(E

xt.

/In

t./B

oth

)%

Tot

al

Sin

gle

Des

ign

Ele

men

ts

Ver

tica

l L

ines

Str

aigh

tna

rrow

4(4

/0/0

)3

(2/1

/0)

0—

—0

——

0—

—7

(6/1

/0)

0.4

3m

ediu

m2

(2/0

/0)

1(1

/0/0

)1

(0/0

/1)

3(2

/0/1

)1

(1/0

/0)

8(6

/0/2

)0

.49

wid

e3

(2/1

/0)

2(2

/0/0

)3

(3/0

/0)

4(4

/0/0

)0

——

12

(11

/1/0

)0

.74

med

ium

and

wid

e1

(0/0

/1)

0—

—0

——

0—

—0

——

1(0

/0/1

)0

.06

Sli

ghtl

y w

avy

narr

ow2

(2/0

/0)

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

3(3

/0/0

)0

.19

med

ium

5(5

/0/0

)3

(2/1

/0)

0—

—4

(4/0

/0)

0—

—1

2(1

1/1

/0)

0.7

4w

ide

2(2

/0/0

)4

(4/0

/0)

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

4(4

/0/0

)1

1(1

1/0

/0)

0.6

8H

ighl

y w

avy

med

ium

1(1

/0/0

)1

(0/1

/0)

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)3

(2/1

/0)

0.1

9w

ide

5(5

/0/0

)4

(4/0

/0)

2(1

/1/0

)0

——

5(5

/0/0

)1

6(1

5/1

/0)

0.9

9m

ediu

m a

nd w

ide

0—

—3

(3/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

0—

—3

(3/0

/0)

0.1

9St

raig

ht a

nd H

ighl

y w

avy

wid

e an

d w

ide

0—

—0

——

0—

—0

——

1(0

/1/0

)1

(0/1

/0)

0.0

6m

ediu

m a

nd w

ide

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)2

(2/0

/0)

0.1

2

Dia

gon

al

Lin

e sS

trai

ght

narr

ow0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

2(2

/0/0

)0

.12

med

ium

5(5

/0/0

)2

(2/0

/0)

0—

—2

(2/0

/0)

1(1

/0/0

)1

0(1

0/0

/0)

0.6

2w

ide

5(4

/1/0

)1

(1/0

/0)

2(0

/2/0

)0

——

1(1

/0/0

)9

(6/3

/0)

0.5

6

Pen

dan

t L

oop

sm

ediu

m0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

.06

Cu

rved

L

ine s

narr

ow2

(2/0

/0)

3(3

/0/0

)2

(2/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

7(7

/0/0

)0

.43

med

ium

4(4

/0/0

)8

(7/1

/0)

4(4

/0/0

)2

(2/0

/0)

4(4

/0/0

)2

2(2

1/1

/0)

1.3

6w

ide

11(1

0/1/

0)27

(26/

1/0)

19(1

5/4/

0)4

(4/0

/0)

17(1

6/1/

0)7

8(7

1/7

/0)

4.8

1na

rrow

and

wid

e1

(1/0

/0)

0—

—2

(2/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

3(3

/0/0

)0

.19

Pe r

pe n

dic

ula

r L

ine s

Str

aigh

tna

rrow

3(3

/0/0

)1

(1/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)5

(5/0

/0)

0.3

1m

ediu

m2

(2/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

0—

—0

——

2(2

/0/0

)0

.12

wid

e2

(2/0

/0)

9(9

/0/0

)1

(1/0

/0)

1(0

/1/0

)0

——

13

(12

/1/0

)0

.80

narr

ow a

nd w

ide

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0.0

6

Par

alle

l L

ine s

Str

aigh

tna

rrow

2(2

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

0—

—2

(2/0

/0)

0.1

2m

ediu

m0

——

0—

—0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

1(1

/0/0

)0

.06

wid

e0

——

0—

—0

——

2(1

/1/0

)0

——

2(1

/1/0

)0

.12

var.

Ro

ckp

ort

var.

L

ong

Mot

tva

r.H

og B

ayou

var.

Mos

quit

o P

oin

t

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

ck-o

n-g

ray

(con

tin

ued

)

var.

Buf

falo

Lak

e


291

Tabl

e 7-

12.

Con

tinu

ed.

(con

tin

ued

)

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)*

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)N

o.(E

xt./I

nt./B

oth)

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)N

o.(E

xt./I

nt./B

oth)

No

.(E

xt.

/In

t./B

oth

)%

Tot

al

Un

kn

own

L

ine

Ori

enta

tion

Str

aigh

tna

rrow

37(3

7/0/

0)29

(28/

1/0)

15(1

4/1/

0)12

(12/

0/0)

12(1

2/0/

0)1

05

(10

3/2

/0)

6.4

8m

ediu

m47

(46/

1/0)

48(4

8/0/

0)12

(12/

0/0)

7(6

/0/1

)15

(15/

0/0)

12

9(1

27

/1/1

)7

.96

wid

e45

(44/

1/0)

62(5

5/6/

1)39

(32/

7/0)

18(1

6/2/

0)17

(16/

1/0)

18

1(1

63

/17

/1)

11

.17

narr

ow a

nd w

ide

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0.0

6m

ediu

m a

nd w

ide

1(0

/0/1

)0

——

0—

—2

(2/0

/0)

0—

—3

(2/0

/1)

0.1

9S

ligh

tly

wav

yna

rrow

10(1

0/0/

0)22

(22/

0/0)

10(9

/1/0

)2

(2/0

/0)

6(6

/0/0

)5

0(4

9/1

/0)

3.0

8m

ediu

m11

(11/

0/0)

32(3

1/1/

0)9

(9/0

/0)

6(6

/0/0

)3

(3/0

/0)

61

(60

/1/0

)3

.76

wid

e23

(22/

1/0)

48(4

6/2/

0)13

(12/

1/0)

7(7

/0/0

)18

(18/

0/0)

10

9(1

05

/4/0

)6

.72

narr

ow a

nd w

ide

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

1(0

/0/1

)0

——

1(1

/0/0

)3

(2/0

/1)

0.1

9H

ighl

y w

avy

narr

ow4

(4/0

/0)

5(5

/0/0

)1

(1/0

/0)

1(1

/0/0

)2

(2/0

/0)

13

(13

/0/0

)0

.80

med

ium

2(1

/1/0

)3

(3/0

/0)

4(4

/0/0

)0

——

4(4

/0/0

)1

3(1

2/1

/0)

0.8

0w

ide

8(8

/0/0

)31

(30/

1/0)

12(1

2/0/

0)5

(4/1

/0)

24(2

4/0/

0)8

0(7

8/2

/0)

4.9

4St

raig

ht a

nd S

ligh

tly

wav

yna

rrow

and

wid

e0

——

0—

—2

(0/1

/1)

0—

—0

——

2(0

/1/1

)0

.12

wid

e an

d m

ediu

m0

——

1(0

/0/1

)0

——

0—

—0

——

1(0

/0/1

)0

.06

wid

e an

d w

ide

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0.0

6St

raig

ht a

nd H

ighl

y w

avy

wid

e an

d m

ediu

m0

——

0—

—0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

1(1

/0/0

)0

.06

Stra

ight

and

Uni

d. li

new

ide

and

narr

ow0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

.06

Slig

htly

wav

y an

d U

nid.

line

narr

ow a

nd n

arro

w0

——

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

.06

Uni

dent

ifia

ble

line

narr

ow41

(40/

1/0)

47(4

6/1/

0)18

(18/

0/0)

8(7

/1/0

)5

(5/0

/0)

11

9(1

16

/3/0

)7

.34

med

ium

43(4

0/3/

0)30

(28/

2/0)

12(1

1/1/

0)5

(5/0

/0)

9(9

/0/0

)9

9(9

3/6

/0)

6.1

1w

ide

36(3

5/1/

0)31

(31/

0/0)

21(1

7/3/

1)8

(8/0

/0)

16(1

5/1/

0)1

12

(10

6/5

/1)

6.9

1na

rrow

and

med

ium

0—

—2

(1/1

/0)

0—

—0

——

0—

—2

(1/1

/0)

0.1

2na

rrow

and

wid

e0

——

2(2

/0/0

)1

(1/0

/0)

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

4(4

/0/0

)0

.25

Do

tsna

rrow

3(3

/0/0

)2

(2/0

/0)

01

(1/0

/0)

2(2

/0/0

)8

(8/0

/0)

0.4

9m

ediu

m6

(6/0

/0)

5(5

/0/0

)3

(3/0

/0/)

1(1

/0/0

)5

(5/0

/0)

20

(20

/0/0

)1

.23

wid

e7

(7/0

/0)

4(4

/0/0

)3

(2/1

/0)

0—

—6

(5/1

/0)

20

(18

/2/0

)1

.23

narr

ow a

nd m

ediu

m0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

.06

Op

en

Cir

c le

wid

e1

(1/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

.06

Tr i

angl

eS

trai

ght

line

sw

ide

0—

—0

——

0—

—0

——

1(0

/1/0

)1

(0/1

/0)

0.0

6

var.

Ro

ckp

ort

var.

L

ong

Mot

tva

r.H

og B

ayou

var.

Mos

quit

o P

oin

t

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

ck-o

n-g

ray

var.

Buf

falo

Lak

e


292

Tabl

e 7-

12.

Con

tinu

ed.

(con

tin

ued

)

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)*

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)N

o.(E

xt./I

nt./B

oth)

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)N

o.(E

xt./I

nt./B

oth)

No

.(E

xt.

/In

t./B

oth

)%

Tot

al

Dab

bin

g narr

ow1

(1/0

/0)

0—

—2

(2/0

/0)

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

4(4

/0/0

)0

.25

med

ium

0—

—4

(3/1

/0)

2(2

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—6

(5/1

/0)

0.3

7w

ide

13(1

0/3/

0)36

(33/

3/0)

19(1

7/1/

1)1

(1/0

/0)

17(1

7/0/

0)8

6(7

8/7

/1)

5.3

1m

ediu

m a

nd w

ide

0—

—0

——

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)1

(1/0

/0)

0.0

6na

rrow

, med

ium

, and

wid

e0

——

0—

—0

——

0—

—2

(2/0

/0)

2(2

/0/0

)0

.12

Mul

tiple

Des

ign

Ele

men

ts

Ver

tica

l L

ines

an

d C

urv

ed L

ine

Hig

hly

wav

y an

d C

urve

dw

ide

and

wid

e0

——

1(0

/0/1

)0

——

0—

—0

——

1(0

/0/1

)0

.06

Ve r

tic a

l L

ine s

an

d

U

nid

enti

fiab

le

De s

ign

Slig

htly

wav

y an

d U

nid.

Des

ign

med

ium

and

wid

e0

——

0—

—0

——

1(0

/0/1

)0

——

1(0

/0/1

)0

.06

Cu

rved

Lin

e an

d U

nk

now

n L

ine

O

r ie n

tati

onC

urve

d an

d St

raig

htna

rrow

and

nar

row

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)2

(2/0

/0)

0.1

2na

rrow

and

wid

e1

(0/1

/0)

0—

—0

——

0—

—0

——

1(0

/1/0

)0

.06

med

ium

and

med

ium

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0.0

6w

ide

and

med

ium

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0.0

6C

urve

d, S

trai

ght,

and

Uni

d. li

new

ide,

nar

row

, and

nar

row

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0.0

6

Pe r

pe n

dic

ula

r L

ine s

an

d

Un

kn

own

L

ine

Or i

e nta

tion

Stra

ight

and

Str

aigh

tw

ide

and

wid

e0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

.06

Dot

s an

d V

e rti

c al

Lin

eD

ots

and

Slig

htly

wav

yw

ide

and

narr

ow0

——

0—

—0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

1(1

/0/0

)0

.06

Dot

s an

d U

nk

now

n L

ine

O

r ie n

tati

onD

ots

and

Stra

ight

wid

e an

d w

ide

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0.0

6w

ide

and

narr

ow0

——

0—

—1

(0/0

/1)

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

2(1

/0/1

)0

.12

Dot

s an

d Sl

ight

ly w

avy

wid

e an

d w

ide

0—

—0

——

0—

—0

——

1(0

/0/1

)1

(0/0

/1)

0.0

6

Dot

s an

d

Un

iden

tifi

able

D

e sig

nna

rrow

and

wid

e0

——

1(0

/1/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

1(0

/1/0

)0

.06

wid

e an

d w

ide

1(0

/1/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

0—

—1

(0/1

/0)

0.0

6

var.

Ro

ckp

ort

var.

L

ong

Mot

tva

r.H

og B

ayou

var.

Mos

quit

o P

oin

t

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

ck-o

n-g

ray

var.

Buf

falo

Lak

e


293

Tabl

e 7-

12.

Con

clud

ed.

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)*

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)N

o.(E

xt./I

nt./B

oth)

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)N

o.(E

xt./I

nt./B

oth)

No

.(E

xt.

/In

t./B

oth

)%

Tot

al

Dab

bin

g an

d U

nk

now

n L

ine

O

r ie n

tati

onD

abbi

ng a

nd S

trai

ght

wid

e an

d na

rrow

0—

—0

——

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)1

(1/0

/0)

0.0

6w

ide

and

med

ium

0—

—0

——

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)1

(1/0

/0)

0.0

6w

ide

and

wid

e0

——

1(0

/1/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

1(0

/1/0

)0

.06

Dab

bing

and

Slig

htly

wav

yw

ide

and

wid

e0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

.06

Dab

bing

and

Uni

d. li

nem

ediu

m a

nd m

ediu

m1

(0/1

/0)

0—

—0

——

0—

—0

——

1(0

/1/0

)0

.06

Un

kn

own

L

ine

Or i

e nta

tion

an

d

Un

iden

tifi

able

D

e sig

n S

trai

ght a

nd U

nid.

Des

ign

narr

ow a

nd n

arro

w1

(1/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

.06

wid

e an

d m

ediu

m0

——

1(0

/1/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

1(0

/1/0

)0

.06

wid

e an

d w

ide

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0.0

6

Uni

dent

ifab

le D

esig

nna

rrow

12(1

2/0/

0)8

(8/0

/0)

3(2

/1/0

)7

(7/0

/0)

7(7

/0/0

)3

7(3

6/1

/0)

2.2

8m

ediu

m10

(10/

0/0)

7(6

/1/0

)3

(3/0

/0)

5(5

/0/0

)6

(6/0

/0)

31

(30

/1/0

)1

.91

wid

e10

(5/2

/3)

13(1

2/1/

0)6

(5/1

/0)

10(9

/1/0

)10

(8/2

/0)

49

(39

/7/3

)3

.02

narr

ow a

nd w

ide

0—

—1

(0/0

/1)

0—

—0

——

0—

—1

(0/0

/1)

0.0

6m

ediu

m a

nd w

ide

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0.0

6

T

otal

44

2(4

17

/20

/5)

55

9(5

26

/29

/4)

25

3(2

21

/26

/6)

13

2(1

21

/7/4

)2

35

(22

6/8

/1)

1,6

21

(1,5

11

/90

/20

)1

00

.00

var.

Ro

ckp

ort

var.

L

ong

Mot

tva

r.H

og B

ayou

var.

Mos

quit

o P

oin

t

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

ck-o

n-g

ray

* I

ndic

ates

loca

tion

of th

e de

sign

on

eith

er th

e ex

teri

or, i

nter

ior,

or

both

the

exte

rior

and

inte

rior

of

the

sher

d.

var.

Buf

falo

Lak

e


294

Tabl

e 7-

13.

Des

ign

Ele

men

ts R

ecor

ded

for

Sher

ds o

f R

ockp

ort

Bla

ck.

(con

tin

ued

)

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)*

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)N

o.(E

xt./I

nt./B

oth)

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)N

o.(E

xt./I

nt./B

oth)

No

.(E

xt.

/In

t./B

oth

)%

Tot

al

Sin

gle

Des

ign

Ele

men

ts

Ver

tica

l L

ines

Str

aigh

tna

rrow

0—

—0

——

0—

—0

——

1(0

/1/0

)1

(0/1

/0)

0.4

6w

ide

2(1

/1/0

)3

(3/0

/0)

0—

—1

(0/0

/1)

0—

—6

(4/1

/1)

2.7

4S

ligh

tly

wav

yw

ide

2(2

/0/0

)1

(1/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

0—

—3

(3/0

/0)

1.3

7H

ighl

y w

avy

wid

e0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

.46

Stra

ight

and

Sli

ghtl

y w

avy

med

ium

and

med

ium

0—

—0

——

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)1

(1/0

/0)

0.4

6St

raig

ht a

nd H

ighl

y w

avy

wid

e an

d w

ide

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0.4

6

Hor

izon

tal

Lin

e sS

trai

ght

wid

e1

(1/0

/0)

1(0

/1/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

2(1

/1/0

)0

.91

Sli

ghtl

y w

avy

wid

e1

(1/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

.46

Dia

gon

al

Lin

e sS

trai

ght

narr

ow1

(1/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

2(2

/0/0

)0

.91

med

ium

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0.4

6m

ediu

m a

nd w

ide

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0.4

6

Cu

rved

L

ine s

narr

ow1

(1/0

/0)

1(0

/1/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

2(1

/1/0

)0

.91

med

ium

1(1

/0/0

)1

(1/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

0—

—2

(2/0

/0)

0.9

1w

ide

1(0

/1/0

)4

(3/1

/0)

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

1(1

/0/0

)7

(5/2

/0)

3.2

0

Pe r

pe n

dic

ula

r L

ine s

Str

aigh

tm

ediu

m0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

.46

wid

e0

——

1(0

/1/0

)0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

2(1

/1/0

)0

.91

narr

ow a

nd w

ide

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0.4

6

Par

alle

l L

ine s

Str

aigh

tna

rrow

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0.4

6m

ediu

m1

(1/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

.46

wid

e0

——

1(0

/1/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

1(0

/1/0

)0

.46

var.

Ro

ckp

ort

var.

Lo

lita

var.

Ku

y B

ayou

var.

Spr

ing

Bay

ou

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

ck

var.

Elm

Bay

ou


295

Tabl

e 7-

13.

Con

tinu

ed.

(con

tin

ued

)

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)*

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)N

o.(E

xt./I

nt./B

oth)

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)N

o.(E

xt./I

nt./B

oth)

No

.(E

xt.

/In

t./B

oth

)%

Tot

al

Un

kn

own

L

ine

Ori

enta

tion

Str

aigh

tna

rrow

2(2

/0/0

)6

(5/1

/0)

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

1(1

/0/0

)1

0(9

/1/0

)4

.57

med

ium

3(3

/0/0

)7

(6/1

/0)

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

2(2

/0/0

)1

3(1

2/1

/0)

5.9

4w

ide

11(1

0/1/

0)22

(19/

3/0)

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

3(3

/0/0

)3

7(3

3/4

/0)

16

.89

narr

ow a

nd w

ide

0—

—0

——

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)1

(1/0

/0)

0.4

6m

ediu

m a

nd w

ide

0—

—0

——

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)1

(1/0

/0)

0.4

6S

ligh

tly

wav

yna

rrow

2(2

/0/0

)1

(1/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

0—

—3

(3/0

/0)

1.3

7m

ediu

m8

(8/0

/0)

7(7

/0/0

)0

——

1(1

/0/0

)1

(1/0

/0)

17

(17

/0/0

)7

.76

wid

e1

(0/1

/0)

8(6

/2/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

9(6

/3/0

)4

.11

Hig

hly

wav

yna

rrow

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0.4

6m

ediu

m0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

.46

wid

e2

(2/0

/0)

12(1

2/0/

0)0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

15

(15

/0/0

)6

.85

Stra

ight

and

Sli

ghtl

y w

avy

wid

e an

d w

ide

0—

—1

(0/0

/1)

1(0

/1/0

)0

——

0—

—2

(0/1

/1)

0.9

1St

raig

ht a

nd U

nid.

line

wid

e an

d na

rrow

0—

—0

——

0—

—1

(0/0

/1)

0—

—1

(0/0

/1)

0.4

6U

nide

ntif

iabl

e lin

ena

rrow

7(7

/0/0

)3

(3/0

/0)

2(2

/0/0

)2

(2/0

/0)

0—

—1

4(1

4/0

/0)

6.3

9m

ediu

m2

(2/0

/0)

3(3

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

5(5

/0/0

)2

.28

wid

e4

(3/1

/0)

7(7

/0/0

)0

——

1(0

/1/0

)2

(0/2

/0)

14

(10

/4/0

)6

.39

narr

ow a

nd w

ide

0—

—3

(3/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

0—

—3

(3/0

/0)

1.3

7

Do

tsna

rrow

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0.4

6m

ediu

m1

(1/0

/0)

3(3

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

44

/0/0

)1

.83

wid

e1

(1/0

/0)

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

2(2

/0/0

)0

.91

Dab

bin

g med

ium

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0.4

6w

ide

6(6

/0/0

)2

(1/0

/1)

1(0

/0/1

)0

——

2(1

/1/0

)1

1(8

/1/2

)5

.02

med

ium

and

wid

e0

——

0—

—0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

1(1

/0/0

)0

.46

Sw

as t

ika

wid

e0

——

2(2

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

2(2

/0/0

)0

.91

Mul

tiple

Des

ign

Ele

men

ts

Ve r

tic a

l L

ine s

an

d

Dot

sSt

raig

ht a

nd D

ots

wid

e an

d m

ediu

m0

——

0—

—0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

1(1

/0/0

)0

.46

Cu

rved

Lin

e an

d U

nk

now

n L

ine

O

r ie n

tati

onC

urve

d an

d H

ighl

y w

avy

wid

e an

d w

ide

0—

—2

(2/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

0—

—2

(2/0

/0)

0.9

1

var.

Ro

ckp

ort

var.

Lo

lita

var.

Ku

y B

ayou

var.

Spr

ing

Bay

ou

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

ck

var.

Elm

Bay

ou


296

Tabl

e 7-

13.

Con

clud

ed.

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)*

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)N

o.(E

xt./I

nt./B

oth)

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)N

o.(E

xt./I

nt./B

oth)

No

.(E

xt.

/In

t./B

oth

)%

Tot

al

Pe r

pe n

dic

ula

r L

ine s

an

d

Par

alle

l L

ine s

Stra

ight

and

Str

aigh

tw

ide

and

wid

e0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

.46

Un

kn

own

L

ine

Or i

e nta

tion

an

d

Un

iden

tifi

able

D

e sig

n S

trai

ght a

nd U

nid.

Des

ign

wid

e an

d w

ide

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0.4

6

Uni

dent

ifab

le D

esig

nm

ediu

m2

(2/0

/0)

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

4(4

/0/0

)1

.83

wid

e2

(1/1

/0)

00

——

0—

—0

——

2(1

/1/0

)0

.91

narr

ow a

nd w

ide

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0.4

6

T

otal

68

(62

/6/0

)1

13

(99

/12

/2)

10

(8/1

/1)

7(4

/1/2

)2

1(1

7/4

/0)

21

9(1

90

/24

/5)

10

0.0

0

var.

Ro

ckp

ort

var.

Lo

lita

var.

Ku

y B

ayou

var.

Spr

ing

Bay

ou

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

ck

* I

ndic

ates

loca

tion

of

the

desi

gn o

n th

e ex

teri

or, i

nter

ior,

or

both

the

exte

rior

and

inte

rior

of

the

sher

d.

var.

Elm

Bay

ou


297

Tabl

e 7-

14.

Des

ign

Ele

men

ts R

ecor

ded

for

Sher

ds o

f R

ockp

ort

Inci

sed.

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)N

o.(E

xt./I

nt./B

oth)

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)N

o.(E

xt./I

nt./B

oth)

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)N

o.

(Ex

t./I

nt.

/Bo

th)

% T

otal

Sin

gle

Des

ign

Ele

men

ts

Ver

tica

l L

ines

Str

aigh

t (S

ingl

e li

ne)

narr

ow1

(1/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

.23

Str

aigh

t (M

ulti

ple

line

s)na

rrow

3(3

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—3

(3/0

/0)

0—

—6

(6/0

/0)

1.3

7

Hor

izon

tal

Lin

esS

trai

ght

(Sin

gle

line

)na

rrow

7(7

/0/0

)6

(6/0

/0)

3(3

/0/0

)1

(1/0

/0)

8(8

/0/0

)2

5(2

5/0

/0)

5.6

9m

ediu

m0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

2(2

/0/0

)0

.46

Str

aigh

t (M

ulti

ple

line

s)na

rrow

50(5

0/0/

0)58

(58/

0/0)

40(4

0/0/

0)22

(22/

0/0)

67(6

7/0/

0)a

23

7(2

37

/0/0

)5

3.9

9m

ediu

m0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

2(2

/0/0

)0

.46

wid

e1

(1/0

/0)

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

3(3

/0/0

)0

.68

Dia

gon

al

Lin

e sS

trai

ght

(Mul

tipl

e li

nes)

narr

ow2

(2/0

/0)

1(1

/0/0

)1

(1/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

4(4

/0/0

)0

.91

Cu

rved

L

ine s

Cur

ved

(Sin

gle

line)

narr

ow0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

.23

Pe r

pe n

dic

ula

r L

ine s

Str

aigh

t (S

ingl

e li

ne)

narr

ow0

——

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)1

(1/0

/0)

2(2

/0/0

)0

.46

Str

aigh

t (M

ulti

ple

line

s)na

rrow

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)2

(2/0

/0)

0.4

6

Par

alle

l L

ine s

Stra

ight

(T

wo

line

s)na

rrow

1(1

/0/0

)1

(1/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

0—

—2

(2/0

/0)

0.4

6St

raig

ht (

Mor

e th

an tw

o li

nes)

narr

ow1

(1/0

/0)

1(1

/0/0

)3

(3/0

/0)

2(2

/0/0

)3

(3/0

/0)

10

(10

/0/0

)2

.28

Hor

izon

tal

Zig

z ag

Lin

e sZ

igza

g (S

ingl

e lin

e)na

rrow

2(2

/0/0

)9

(9/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

2(2

/0/0

)1

3(1

3/0

/0)

2.9

6m

ediu

m0

——

8(8

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

8(8

/0/0

)

Ch

evro

n

Pat

ter n

narr

ow0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0—

—2

(2/0

/0)

3(3

/0/0

)0

.68

Op

en

Tr i

angl

e sSt

raig

ht (

Sing

le tr

iang

le)

narr

ow0

——

0—

—0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

1(1

/0/0

)0

.23

Stra

ight

(M

ulti

ple

tria

ngle

s)na

rrow

0—

—0

——

0—

—0

——

3(3

/0/0

)a3

(3/0

/0)

0.6

8

var.

Ro

ckp

ort

var.

Mis

sion

Lak

eva

r.P

lan

k B

ridg

eva

r.S

om

mer

vill

e

Roc

kp

ort

Inci

sed

(con

tin

ued

)

var.

Mus

tang

Lak

e


298

Tabl

e 7-

14.

Con

tinu

ed.

(con

tin

ued

)

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)N

o.(E

xt./I

nt./B

oth)

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)N

o.(E

xt./I

nt./B

oth)

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)N

o.

(Ex

t./I

nt.

/Bo

th)

% T

otal

Lin

e-F

ille

d

Tri

angl

esSt

raig

ht (

Sing

le tr

iang

le)

narr

ow0

——

2(2

/0/0

)3

(3/0

/0)

4(4

/0/0

)4

(4/0

/0)

13

(13

/0/0

)2

.96

Stra

ight

(M

ulti

ple

tria

ngle

s)na

rrow

0—

—5

(5/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)6

(6/0

/0)

1.3

7

Cro

ssh

atch

ed

Lin

esS

trai

ght

narr

ow8

(8/0

/0)

1(1

/0/0

)4

(4/0

/0)

0—

—6

(6/0

/0)

19

(19

/0/0

)4

.33

Cro

ssed

L

ines

Str

aigh

tna

rrow

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0.2

3

Mul

tiple

Des

ign

Ele

men

ts

Ve r

tic a

l L

ine s

, H

oriz

onta

l

Lin

e s,

and

D

iago

nal

L

ine s

Str

aigh

t (S

ingl

e li

ne),

Str

aigh

t (

Sin

gle

line

), a

nd S

trai

ght

(M

ulti

ple

line

s)na

rrow

and

nar

row

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

0.2

3

Hor

izon

tal

Lin

e s a

nd

Dia

gon

al

Lin

e sSt

raig

ht (

Sing

le li

ne)

and

S

trai

ght

(Sin

gle

line

)na

rrow

and

nar

row

2(2

/0/0

)1

(1/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

0—

—3

(3/0

/0)

0.6

8St

raig

ht (

Sing

le li

ne)

and

S

trai

ght

(Mul

tipl

e li

nes)

narr

ow a

nd n

arro

w0

——

0—

—0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

1(1

/0/0

)0

.23

Stra

ight

(M

ulti

ple

line

s) a

nd

S

trai

ght

(Sin

gle

line

)na

rrow

and

nar

row

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)1

(1/0

/0)

1(1

/0/0

)3

(3/0

/0)

0.6

8St

raig

ht (

Mul

tipl

e li

nes)

and

Str

aigh

t (M

ulti

ple

line

s)na

rrow

and

nar

row

0—

—0

——

3(3

/0/0

)0

——

2(2

/0/0

)5

(5/0

/0)

1.1

4

Hor

izon

tal

Lin

e s a

nd

Cr o

ssh

atc h

e d

Lin

e sSt

raig

ht (

Mul

tiple

line

s) a

nd

Str

aigh

t (S

ingl

e li

ne)

narr

ow a

nd n

arro

w0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

2(2

/0/0

)1

(1/0

/0)

4(4

/0/0

)0

.91

Hor

izon

tal

Lin

e s a

nd

Cr o

sse d

L

ine s

Stra

ight

(M

ultip

le li

nes)

and

S

trai

ght

(Mul

tipl

e li

nes)

narr

ow a

nd n

arro

w0

——

2(2

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

2(2

/0/0

)0

.46

var.

Ro

ckp

ort

var.

Mis

sion

Lak

eva

r.P

lan

k B

ridg

eva

r.S

om

mer

vill

e

Roc

kp

ort

Inci

sed

var.

Mus

tang

Lak

e


299

Tabl

e 7-

14.

Con

tinu

ed.

(con

tin

ued

)

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)N

o.(E

xt./I

nt./B

oth)

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)N

o.(E

xt./I

nt./B

oth)

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)N

o.

(Ex

t./I

nt.

/Bo

th)

% T

otal

Hor

izon

tal

Lin

es

and

O

pen

T

rian

gles

Stra

ight

(Si

ngle

line

) an

d S

trai

ght

(Mul

tipl

e tr

iang

les)

narr

ow a

nd n

arro

w0

——

0—

—0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)b

1(1

/0/0

)0

.23

Stra

ight

(M

ultip

le li

nes)

and

Str

aigh

t (M

ulti

ple

tria

ngle

s)na

rrow

and

nar

row

0—

—2

(2/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

9(9

/0/0

)c1

1(1

1/0

/0)

2.5

1

Hor

izon

tal

Lin

e s

and

L

ine -

F

ille

d

Tr i

angl

e sSt

raig

ht (

Mul

tiple

line

s) a

nd S

trai

ght (

Sin

gle

tria

ngle

)na

rrow

and

nar

row

2(2

/0/0

)2

(2/0

/0)

0—

—0

——

2(2

/0/0

)6

(6/0

/0)

1.3

7

Hor

izon

tal

Lin

e s

wit

h

Cr o

ssh

atc h

e d

Ove

r in

c isi

ng

Stra

ight

(M

ultip

le li

nes)

and

S

trai

ght

(Mul

tipl

e li

nes)

narr

ow a

nd n

arro

w2

(2/0

/0)

3(3

/0/0

)2

(2/0

/0)

1(1

/0/0

)2

(2/0

/0)

10

(10

/0/0

)2

.28

Hor

izon

tal

Lin

e s

wit

h

Ve r

tic a

l O

ver i

nc i

sin

gSt

raig

ht (

Mul

tiple

line

s) a

nd

Str

aigh

t (M

ulti

ple

line

s)na

rrow

and

nar

row

0—

—2

(2/0

/0)

4(4

/0/0

)0

——

4(4

/0/0

)1

0(1

0/0

/0)

2.2

8

Hor

izon

tal

Lin

e s

wit

h

Dia

gon

al

Ove

r in

c isi

ng

Stra

ight

(M

ultip

le li

nes)

and

S

trai

ght

(Mul

tipl

e li

nes)

narr

ow a

nd n

arro

w0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

2(2

/0/0

)0

.46

Hor

izon

tal

Lin

e s a

nd

Pu

nc t

atio

ns

Stra

ight

(M

ultip

le li

nes)

and

P

unct

atio

nsna

rrow

and

nar

row

0—

—0

——

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)1

(1/0

/0)

0.2

3

Pe r

pe n

dic

ula

r L

ine s

an

d

Par

alle

l L

ine s

Stra

ight

(M

ulti

ple

line

s) a

nd

S

trai

ght

(Mul

tipl

e li

nes)

narr

ow a

nd n

arro

w1

(1/0

/0)

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

3(3

/0/0

)0

.68

var.

Ro

ckp

ort

var.

Mis

sion

Lak

eva

r.P

lan

k B

ridg

eva

r.S

om

mer

vill

e

Roc

kp

ort

Inci

sed

var.

Mus

tang

Lak

e


300

Tabl

e 7-

14.

Con

clud

ed.

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)N

o.(E

xt./I

nt./B

oth)

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)N

o.(E

xt./I

nt./B

oth)

No.

(Ext

./Int

./Bot

h)N

o.

(Ex

t./I

nt.

/Bo

th)

% T

otal

Uni

dent

ifab

le D

esig

n

Un

kn

own

L

ine

Or i

e nta

tion

Str

aigh

t (S

ingl

e li

ne)

narr

ow0

——

0—

—0

——

0—

—2

(2/0

/0)

2(2

/0/0

)0

.46

Str

aigh

t (M

ulti

ple

line

s)na

rrow

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

1(1

/0/0

)3

(3/0

/0)

0.6

8U

nide

ntif

ied

(Sin

gle

line)

narr

ow2

(2/0

/0)

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—1

(1/0

/0)

4(4

/0/0

)0

.91

Uni

dent

ifie

d (M

ultip

le li

nes)

narr

ow0

——

0—

—0

——

0—

—2

(2/0

/0)

2(2

/0/0

)0

.46

Un

kn

own

L

ine

Or i

e nta

tion

an

d P

un

c tat

ion

sU

nid.

(Si

ngle

line

) an

d Pu

ncta

tion

narr

ow a

nd n

arro

w0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

——

0—

—0

——

1(1

/0/0

)0

.23

T

otal

87

(90

/0/0

)1

12

(11

2/0

/0)

68

(70

/0/0

)4

0(3

9/0

/0)

13

2(1

13

/0/0

)4

39

(43

9/0

/0)

10

0.0

0

var.

Ro

ckp

ort

var.

Mis

sion

Lak

eva

r.P

lan

k B

ridg

eva

r.S

om

mer

vill

e

Roc

kp

ort

Inci

sed

a T

wo

sher

ds a

re f

rom

the

part

ially

rec

onst

ruct

ed ja

r fo

und

in S

ampl

e U

nit N

70W

110.

b

Fro

m th

e pa

rtia

lly r

econ

stru

cted

jar

foun

d in

Sam

ple

Uni

t N70

W11

0. c

Fiv

e sh

erds

are

fro

m th

e pa

rtia

lly r

econ

stru

cted

jar

foun

d in

Sam

ple

Uni

t N70

W11

0.

var.

Mus

tang

Lak

e


301

Rockport Black-on-gray, Rockport Black, and RockportIncised, the three types with the greatest number ofdecorated sherds. The small sample of decoratedsherds from the surface collections (n=106) are notincluded on these tables. Since these sherds couldnot be related to any specific analysis unit withinthe site, it was felt that they would be of little use inidentifying fine-scale chronological, social, and/orfunctional differences at Guadalupe Bay. However,unique sherds from the surface will be discussed asnecessary. Also listed on Tables 7-12 through 7-14are the various varieties associated with each de-sign element, plus the location of the design elementon the vessel (exterior, interior, or both).

Rockport Black-on-gray Design Elements

There were over 1,600 sherds of Rockport Black-on-gray (see Table 7-12). As to be expected in acollection consisting of thousands of small sherds,the greatest quantity included sherds with single designelements that exhibited straight lines of unknownorientation (n=419; 25.9 percent). This was fol-lowed by painted lines both of unidentifiable typeand unknown orientation (n=336; 20.7 percent).Sherds with slightly wavy lines of unknown ori-entation comprised the next most common group(n=223; 13.8 percent), followed by sherds withcurved lines (n=110; 6.8 percent), sherds with highlywavy lines of unknown orientation (n=106; 6.6 per-cent), and those with dabbed designs (n=99; 6.1 per-cent). Of the sherds containing lines of recog-nizable orientation, those with vertical lines werethe most common (n=79; 4.9 percent), followed bydiagonal lines (n=21; 1.3 percent). Sherds with dots(n=49; 3.0 percent) also made up a reasonable por-tion of the sample.

The most common group of sherds exhibitingmultiple design elements contained curved lines andlines of unknown orientation (n=6; 0.4 percent). Thiswas followed by sherds with dabbing and lines ofunknown orientation (n=5; 0.3 percent), and thosewith dots and lines of unknown orientation (n=4;0.3 percent) (see Table 7-12).

Interestingly, of all sherds exhibiting painted lines,522 contained straight lines, while 258 containedslightly wavy lines, and 133 contained highly wavylines. Additionally, of those sherds with painted lines,326 exhibited narrow lines (<2 mm in width), 373exhibited medium lines (between 2 and 4 mm in width),and 664 contained wide lines (>4 mm in width). Thiswould suggest that the most common from of deco-

ration for Rockport Black-on-gray at the GuadalupeBay site consisted of relatively straight lines thatwere greater than 4 mm in width. Slightly wavylines of medium width appear to represent the nextmost common form of decoration, followed by highlywavy lines of narrow width. These figures are some-what misleading, however, if one realizes that manyof the straight lines almost certainly represent por-tions of wavy lines on sherds that were too smallfor the full extent of the wave to be recognized. Theyprobably are classified as “straight” more by defaultthan by their actual form.

In a similar vein, many of the perpendicular andparallel lines may be nothing more than residue fromsloppy painting where asphaltum dripped onto ad-jacent areas of the vessel. Likewise, some of thelines classified as “parallel” are located next toportions of sherds where asphaltum had been ap-plied as a crack-mending agent. These lines, there-fore, may simply represent dribbled asphaltum as-sociated with the mending process, rather thanintentionally painted lines. Unfortunately, noneof the sherds with parallel or perpendicular linesis large enough to determine the exact nature of thelines.

At this point it may be worth noting a discrep-ancy between many of the sherds of Rockport Black-on-gray recovered at Guadalupe Bay with similaritems reported by Ricklis (1995a:199) from sites hehas examined. Ricklis noted that vessels with wavyor squiggled lines (his Rockport Black-on-grayII) did not contain bone temper in their pastes.This was in contrast to other Rockport vessels thatoften included bone. Such bone-tempered ves-sels, Ricklis suggested, were used primarily forcooking and the bone was a necessary elementadded to the paste to reduce “thermal shock” (Ricklis1995a:199). The lack of bone in the vessels withwavy lines, plus their overall finer finish, sug-gested that they probably served as serving orstorage vessels for water or other liquids. As canbe seen by Table 7-12, many of the sherds withwavy or squiggled lines from Guadalupe Bay wereclassified as Rockport Black-on-gray, var. Long Mott,the variety with bone inclusions that presumably hadbeen added as a tempering agent. Although the au-thors agree with Ricklis that these vessels probablyserved as fine-ware items with a function or func-tions different from other Rockport ceramics, the datafrom Guadalupe Bay suggest that bone served as acommon tempering agent for all forms of Rockportvessels.


302

Rockport Black Design Elements

The data for Rockport Black are similar to thatfor Rockport Black-on-gray (see Table 7-13). Again,the most common decorative category included sherdswith painted straight lines of unknown orientation(n=62; 28.3 percent). This also was followed byunidentifiable lines of unknown orientation (n=36;16.4 percent), and slightly wavy lines of unknownorientation (n=29; 13.2 percent). Unlike RockportBlack-on-gray, sherds with highly wavy lines ofunknown orientation (n=17; 7.8 percent) comprisedthe next most common group, followed by those withdabbing (n=13; 5.9 percent), and those with curvedlines (n=11; 5.0 percent). Rounding out the list weresherds with dots (n=7; 3.2 percent), diagonal lines(n=4; 1.8 percent), perpendicular lines (n=4; 1.83 per-cent), horizontal lines (n=3; 1.4 percent), parallellines (n=3; 1.4 percent), and swastika design (n=2;0.9 percent).

Only five sherds with multiple design elementswere noted for Rockport Black. Of these, two sherdsexhibited a curved line along with a highly wavyline of unknown orientation. The rest included in-dividual sherds with vertical lines and dots, perpen-dicular lines and parallel lines, and lines of unknownorientation coupled with an unidentifiable design.Again, it should be recognized that many of the sherdswith parallel and/or perpendicular lines may sim-ply represent portions of vessels onto which asphaltumhad dribbled due to careless painting or crack mending.

One sherd of particular note exhibited what maybe part of a swastika design painted on the interiorof a shallow bowl. The uniqueness of the sherd isenhanced further by the fact that the swastika ap-pears to have been formed by negative painting (Fig-ure 7-15).

Ninety of the Rockport Black sherds exhibitedstraight lines, 36 contained slightly wavy lines, and21 contained highly wavy lines. Additionally, 37Rockport Black sherds exhibited narrow lines, 43exhibited medium lines, and 114 contained wide lines.In both the type and width of the lines, the RockportBlack sample mirrors that of the Rockport Black-on-gray group. Once again, it would appear thatthe application of relatively straight, wide lines wasthe most common form of painted decoration. Slightlywavy lines of medium width were the next mostcommon form of decoration, followed by highly wavylines of narrow width. Again, however, these fig-ures may not reflect the true situation, as many of

the straight lines probably are elements of wavy linesthat simply were on sherds too small for proper iden-tification.

Regardless, all of this shows the extremely close,and not unexpected, relationship between RockportBlack and Rockport Black-on-gray, at least in termsof the design elements present on the two types. Onlyhorizontal lines and the swastika design occurredon Rockport Black sherds, to the exclusion of RockportBlack-on-gray, while open circles and triangles werepresent only on sherds of Rockport Black-on-gray.Perhaps most interesting of all, however, was therelatively minor percentage of sherds from both typesexhibiting multiple design elements: 24 for RockportBlack-on-gray (1.5 percent) and five for RockportBlack (2.3 percent). This is in contrast to RockportIncised, to be discussed next, which contained 63sherds (14.4 percent) exhibiting multiple design el-ements.

Rockport Incised Design Elements

Single design elements associated with RockportIncised are quite varied, although one element inparticular, that of straight, multiple horizontal lines(n=241; 55.0 percent), clearly outnumbers all oth-ers (see Table 7-14). This is followed by straight,single horizontal lines (n=27; 6.2 percent), single,horizontal zigzag lines (n=21; 4.8 percent), cross-hatched lines (n=19; 4.3 percent), line-filled triangles(n=19; 4.3 percent), and parallel lines of unknown

Figure 7-15. Sherd of RockportBlack, var. Lolita exhib-iting a possible negative-painted swastika designon the interior of a shal-low bowl. (See Appen-dix K for proveniencedata.)

0 3

cm


303

orientation (n=12; 2.7 percent). If one considers thelikelihood that many of the 27 single horizontal linesprobably are from vessels that actually containedmultiple horizontal lines, but are on sherds too smallfor more than one line to be recognized, then theabundance of the first design element noted aboveincreases even further.

As just discussed, multiple design elements madeup over 14 percent of all recognizable incised deco-ration. This figure may be somewhat lower thanreality, since many of the single design elementsundoubtedly represent portions of multiple designelements on sherds that simply were too small tocontain all of the decorative field. For example, twoof the three sherds with multiple, open triangles arepart of the partially reconstructed vessel from SampleUnit N70W110. These sherds came from the low-est part of the decorative field and did not containthe associated horizontal lines.

One of the most common multiple design ele-ments consists of horizontal and diagonal lines onthe upper part of the vessel just below the lip (n=12;2.7 percent). In most cases the diagonal lines de-scend downward from the lowest horizontal line,although there are examples where the diagonal linesoccur above the horizontal lines. Many of the de-scending diagonal lines may represent portions ofline-filled triangles placed below the horizontal lines;not enough of the decoration was present, however,to unquestionably support this possibility.

Another common group of multiple design ele-ments consists of horizontal lines, almost always placedon the upper portion of the vessel just below the lip,and a multiple set of open triangles placed belowthe lowest horizontal line (n=12; 2.7 percent). Thiscombination of horizontal lines and either incisedtriangles or triangular punctations is a common deco-rative motif on ceramics along the Gulf coast andwithin the Lower Mississippi Valley. It occurs onsherds of Goose Creek and San Jacinto Incised inthe Galveston Bay area (Aten 1983b:Figure 12.6;W. Black 1989:16-17; Ricklis 1994a:Figures 7.15,7.21, 7.22, 7.24) and on Coles Creek Incised on theLouisiana coast and within the Lower MississippiValley (Ford 1951; Phillips 1970; Williams and Brain1983; plus numerous others). Interestingly, 10 ofthe 12 sherds with this combination of design ele-ments came from the partially reconstructed Mus-tang Lake vessel from Sample Unit N70W110 (seeTable 7-14). Because of the small size of one of thelatter sherds, it only contained one horizontal line.

Other sherds with multiple design elements in-clude those with horizontal lines and crosshatchedoverincising (n=10; 2.3 percent), horizontal lines andvertical overincising (n=10; 2.3 percent), horizon-tal lines and line-filled triangles (n=6; 1.4 percent),horizontal lines and crosshatched lines (n=4; 0.9 per-cent), perpendicular lines and parallel lines (n=3;0.7 percent), and horizontal lines with diagonaloverincising (n=2; 0.5 percent). The sherds withoverincised lines (whether vertical, crosshatched, ordiagonal) all form an interesting set of decorativepatterns that have been illustrated on several occa-sions in the past (Campbell 1962:Figure 1, T-U; Suhmand Jelks 1962:Plate 67, I). More will be said ofthese below.

In the case of sherds with horizontal lines andcrosshatched lines, the crosshatched element alwaysoccurs below the horizontal element on the exteriorportion of the vessel. As with the open trianglesand line-filled triangles, such crosshatched lines actas a form of embellishment beneath the horizontallines and serve to highlight or define the overalldecorative field. Ricklis (1994a:192-208) set up similarembellishments as “secondary decorative elements”in his study of the ceramics from the Mitchell Ridgesite on Galveston Island.

Lastly in regard to incised sherds, it is worthnoting that the vast majority exhibited straight lines.Only one sherd of var. Mission Lake contained a curvedline (see Table 7-14). It also is worth noting therelative paucity of incised lines with medium or widewidths. Of the 438 sherds of Rockport Incised re-covered from the excavations, only 12 (2.7 percent)had lines with widths between 2 and 4 mm, whileonly three (0.7 percent) had lines with widths greaterthan 4 mm. Perhaps importantly, of the 12 sherdswith medium lines, eight are from sherds with singlezigzag lines located immediately below the lip, andmost of these probably are from one Mission Lakevessel.

Lip Decoration

The excavated sample produced 601 rim sherdsthat exhibited decoration on the lip or the lip andthe very upper portion of the rim. Such decorationoccurred in four principal forms: painted black bands,incised lines across a flat lip, incised vertical lineson a pointed lip, and lip notching (see Tables 7-1and 7-3). By definition, sherds with black bandingand no other decoration were classified as eitherRockport Black or Rockport Black-on-gray. These


304

are equivalent to what Ricklis (1990b:616-617) iden-tified as Rockport Black-on-gray I. Such sherdsrepresent the greatest quantity of black-banded rims(n=465; see “Carancahua Bay” and “Steamboat Is-land” motifs, below), and, as such, would appear tobe the most common form of decoration for RockportBlack and Rockport Black-on-gray vessels. How-ever, because many of these sherds are relativelysmall, and painted designs on the body of Rockportvessels are usually limited to narrow vertical lines(most likely wavy), dots, dabs, etc., this numbermay be somewhat misleading. Many of the rimsherds that exhibit only black banding may, in fact,come from vessels that had some form of bodypainting. Unfortunately, without either wholevessels or relatively large sherds, it is impossible todetermine the exact relationship between banded rimsand decorated bodies. If, on the other hand, black-banded sherds also exhibited incised lines, red film,or polychrome decoration, then they were classifiedas Rockport Incised, Rockport Red, or RockportPolychrome, respectively.

The other three types of lip decoration are muchless numerous. Unlike the banded sherds, these deco-rations alone did not place the sherd into a specifictype. For example, sherds with lines across the lipwere not classed as Rockport Incised unless they alsoexhibited incised decoration elsewhere. As such,these types of decoration are more akin to “modesof decoration” that crosscut type and variety bound-aries (see Phillips 1970:28-29 for a discussion onmodes). Lip notching is a good case in point, asit was found on most of the common Rockporttypes: Rockport Black, Rockport Black-on-gray,and Rockport Plain. Ricklis (1990b:616) earlier hadclassified such notched sherds as the type RockportCrenelated. Under the current classification system,lip notching is considered a rim mode and not a separatetype. Each of the four forms of lip decoration arediscussed below.

Black Banding (n=588)

As can be seen by Table 7-15, black bandingoccurred on the top of the lip if the vessel had a flatlip (Top), on the exterior or interior portion of therim just below the lip (usually on vessels with pointedrims) (Ext. or Int.), on the lip and either the ex-terior or interior portion of the rim (Top/Ext. andTop/Int.), and on the top and both the exterior andinterior parts of the rim (All). As with the paintedand incised design elements discussed above, the blackbanding was further sorted by the width of the band:

narrow (<2 mm), medium (2 to 4 mm), and wide(>4 mm).

Black banding occurred on 163 sherds of RockportBlack (representing 27.7 percent of the total bandedsherds and 27.1 percent of all sherds with lip deco-ration), 398 sherds of Rockport Black-on-gray(67.7 percent of all banded sherds and 66.2 percentof all sherds with lip decoration), 24 sherds of RockportIncised (4.1 and 4.0 percent, respectively), two sherdsof Rockport Polychrome (0.3 and 0.3 percent, re-spectively) and one sherd of Rockport Red (0.2 and0.2 percent), with the greatest quantity (n=139; 23.6 per-cent) associated with Rockport Black-on-gray, var.Rockport. Of all banded sherds, the greatest quan-tity (n=368; 62.6 percent) exhibited banding on thetop of the lip and both the exterior and interior por-tions of the rim. Sherds with banding only on thetop of the lip (n=72; 12.2 percent) and on the top ofthe lip and either the exterior portion of the rim (n=63;10.7 percent) or the interior portion of the rim (n=77;13.1 percent) were present in relatively moderateamounts. Sherds with banding only on the exterior(n=1; 0.2 percent) or interior (n=2; 0.3 percent) portionsof the rim, without any associated banding on thelip, were rare. The largest number of sherds (n=426;72.5 percent) contained wide bands, followed by sherdswith medium bands (n=107; 18.2 percent), and sherdswith narrow bands (n=55; 9.4 percent). Clearly, themost common form of painted bands (n=340; 57.8 per-cent) consisted of those sherds with wide bands andband placement on the top of the lip and both theexterior and interior portions of the rim.

Incised Lines Across Lip (n=11)

The next most common lip decoration occurredon 11 sherds and consisted of incised lines placedacross the top of a flat lip (see Table 7-15). Theselines either were positioned perpendicular to the longaxis of the lip (n=8; 72.7 percent) or were slanted atabout a 45-degree angle to the long axis (n=3; 27.3 per-cent). Lip lines occurred on six sherds of RockportBlack (54.6 percent), two sherds of Rockport Black-on-gray (18.2 percent), and three sherds of RockportPlain (27.3 percent). All incised lines were of thenarrow version. Somewhat surprisingly, no incisedlips were associated with any of the sherds of RockportIncised.

Vertical Incised Lines on Lip (n=1)

Only one rim, a sherd of Rockport Plain, var.Green Lake, exhibited short, vertical incised lines


305

Top

Ext

.In

t.T

op/E

xt.

Top

/Int

.T

op/?

*A

ll%

Per

p.Sl

ante

d%

No.

%N

o.%

To

tal

% T

otal

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

ckva

r. E

lm B

ayou

narr

ow**

20

00

00

00

.34

10

9.0

90

0.0

00

0.0

02

0.3

3m

ediu

m0

00

01

00

0.1

70

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

10

.17

wid

e0

00

21

013

2.7

20

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

16

2.6

6va

r. K

uy C

reek

med

ium

10

00

00

00

.17

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

01

0.1

7w

ide

00

02

20

51

.53

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

09

1.5

0va

r. L

olit

ana

rrow

70

03

10

01

.87

20

18

.18

00

.00

21

5.3

81

11

.83

med

ium

20

01

10

21

.02

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

06

1.0

0w

ide

00

04

20

326

.46

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

03

86

.32

var.

Roc

kpor

tna

rrow

60

02

00

01

.36

02

18

.18

00

.00

00

.00

81

.33

med

ium

30

05

60

32

.89

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

01

72

.83

wid

e0

00

27

038

7.9

90

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

47

7.8

2va

r. S

prin

g B

ayou

narr

ow1

00

11

00

0.5

10

19

.09

00

.00

00

.00

30

.50

med

ium

00

00

10

00

.17

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

01

0.1

7w

ide

00

01

00

20

.51

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

03

0.5

0

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k

tota

l2

20

02

32

30

95

27

.72

33

54

.55

00

.00

21

5.3

81

63

27

.12

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k-o

n-g

ray

var.

Buf

falo

Lak

ena

rrow

100

00

00

22

.04

20

18

.18

00

.00

00

.00

12

2.0

0m

ediu

m1

10

12

01

1.0

20

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

61

.00

wid

e0

00

53

040

8.1

60

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

48

7.9

9va

r. H

og B

ayou

narr

ow2

00

00

00

0.3

40

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

20

.33

med

ium

30

02

20

52

.04

00

0.0

00

0.0

01

7.6

91

22

.00

wid

e1

00

44

030

6.6

30

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

39

6.4

9va

r. L

ong

Mot

tna

rrow

20

00

00

00

.34

00

0.0

00

0.0

01

7.6

92

0.3

3m

ediu

m4

00

17

04

2.7

20

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

16

2.6

6w

ide

10

04

90

661

3.6

10

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

80

13

.31

var.

Mos

quit

o P

oint

med

ium

30

02

00

21

.19

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

07

1.1

6w

ide

10

04

12

275

.95

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

03

55

.82

var.

Roc

kpor

tna

rrow

110

10

11

02

.38

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

01

42

.33

med

ium

60

010

91

85

.78

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

03

45

.66

wid

e1

01

59

174

15

.48

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

09

11

5.1

4

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k-o

n-g

ray

tota

l4

61

23

84

75

25

96

7.6

92

01

8.1

80

0.0

02

15

.38

39

86

6.2

2

Bla

ck B

ande

dIn

cise

d

Lin

es

Acr

oss

Fla

t L

ip

Dec

orat

ed

Lip

s

a b e

c d

Tabl

e 7-

15.

Lip

Dec

orat

ions

Rec

orde

d fo

r R

im S

herd

s fr

om G

uada

lupe

Bay

.

(con

tin

ued

)

Inci

sed

Ver

tica

l Lin

eson

Poi

nted

Lip

Not

ched

Lip


306

Top

Ext

.In

t.T

op/E

xt.

Top

/Int

.T

op/?

*A

ll%

Per

p.Sl

ante

d%

No.

%N

o.%

To

tal

% T

otal

Roc

kp

ort

Inci

sed

var.

Mis

sion

Lak

em

ediu

m0

00

10

00

0.1

70

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

10

.17

wid

e0

00

11

06

1.3

60

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

81

.33

var.

Mus

tang

Lak

em

ediu

m1

00

00

00

0.1

70

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

10

.17

wid

e0

00

01

04

0.8

50

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

50

.83

var.

Pla

nk B

ridg

em

ediu

m1

00

00

00

0.1

70

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

10

.17

wid

e0

00

02

01

0.5

10

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

30

.50

var.

Roc

kpor

tm

ediu

m0

00

01

00

0.1

70

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

10

.17

wid

e0

00

02

02

0.6

80

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

40

.67

Roc

kp

ort

Inc i

sed

to

tal

20

02

70

13

4.0

80

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

24

3.9

9

Roc

kp

ort

Pla

inva

r. G

reen

Lak

ena

rrow

00

00

00

00

.00

00

0.0

01

10

0.0

00

0.0

01

0.1

7va

r. G

uada

lupe

narr

ow0

00

00

00

0.0

02

01

8.1

80

0.0

02

15

.38

40

.67

med

ium

00

00

00

00

.00

00

0.0

00

0.0

02

15

.38

20

.33

var.

Roc

kpor

tna

rrow

00

00

00

0.0

01

09

.09

00

.00

00

.00

10

.17

med

ium

00

00

00

00

.00

00

0.0

00

0.0

03

23

.08

30

.50

wid

e0

00

00

00

0.0

00

00

.00

00

.00

21

5.3

82

0.3

3

Roc

kp

ort

Pla

in

tota

l0

00

00

00

0.0

03

02

7.2

71

10

0.0

09

69

.23

13

2.1

6

Roc

kp

ort

Pol

ych

rom

eva

r. u

nspe

cifie

dna

rrow

10

00

00

00

.17

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

01

0.1

7m

ediu

m0

00

00

01

0.1

70

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

10

.17

Roc

kp

ort

Pol

ych

rom

e to

tal

10

00

00

10

.34

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

02

0.3

3

Roc

kp

ort

Re d

var.

uns

peci

fied

med

ium

10

00

00

00

.17

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

01

0.1

7

Roc

kp

ort

Re d

to

tal

10

00

00

00

.17

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

01

0.1

7

Sit

e T

otal

72

12

63

77

53

68

10

0.0

08

31

00

.00

11

00

.00

13

10

0.0

06

01

10

0.0

0

*

Indi

cate

s pr

esen

ce o

f bl

ack

pain

t on

top

of li

p, p

lus

eith

er e

xter

ior

or in

teri

or o

f ri

m, b

ut u

nsur

e of

latte

r pl

acem

ent d

ue to

sm

all s

ize

of s

herd

.**

In

dica

tes

wid

th o

f pa

inte

d ba

nds,

inci

sed

lines

, or

notc

hes.

Nar

row

= <

2mm

. M

ediu

m =

2 to

4 m

m.

Wid

e =

>4

mm

.a

Sh

erd

cont

ains

asp

halt

um o

n to

p of

lip.

For

that

rea

son

it a

lso

is li

sted

und

er b

lack

ban

ded.

The

she

rd is

cou

nted

onl

y on

ce, h

owev

er, i

n th

e to

tal c

olum

ns a

t the

rig

ht o

f th

e ta

ble.

b

One

she

rd c

onta

ins

asph

altu

m o

n to

p of

lip;

oth

er c

onta

ins

asph

altu

m o

n to

p an

d in

teri

or o

f lip

. Fo

r th

ose

reas

ons

they

als

o ar

e lis

ted

unde

r bl

ack

band

ed.

The

she

rds

are

coun

ted

only

onc

e, h

owev

er, i

n th

e to

tal c

olum

ns to

the

righ

t.

cO

ne s

herd

con

tain

s as

phal

tum

on

top

of li

p; o

ther

con

tain

s as

phal

tum

on

top

and

exte

rior

of

lip.

For

thos

e re

ason

s th

ey a

lso

are

liste

d un

der

blac

k ba

nded

. T

he s

herd

s ar

e co

unte

d on

ly o

nce,

how

ever

, in

the

tota

l col

umns

to th

e ri

ght.

d

Sher

d co

ntai

ns a

spha

ltum

on

top

and

inte

rior

of

lip.

For

that

rea

son

it a

lso

is li

sted

und

er b

lack

ban

ded.

The

she

rd is

cou

nted

onl

y on

ce, h

owev

er, i

n th

e to

tal c

olum

ns a

t the

rig

ht o

f th

e ta

ble.

e

Sher

d co

ntai

ns a

spha

ltum

on

top

of li

p. F

or th

at r

easo

n it

als

o is

list

ed u

nder

bla

ck b

ande

d. T

he s

herd

is c

ount

ed o

nly

once

, how

ever

, in

the

tota

l col

umns

at t

he r

ight

of

the

tabl

e.

Bla

ck B

ande

dIn

cise

d

Lin

es

Acr

oss

Fla

t L

ip

Dec

orat

ed

Lip

s

Tabl

e 7-

15.

Con

clud

ed.

Inci

sed

Ver

tica

l Lin

eson

Poi

nted

Lip

Not

ched

Lip


307

on the exterior of a pointed lip (see Table 7-15).Although this represents a unique form of lip treat-ment, the lack of any comparative specimens limitsfurther discussion at this point.

Lip Notching (n=13)

The final form of lip decoration, that of lip notch-ing, was present on 13 sherds at Guadalupe Bay (seeTable 7-15 and Figure 7-16). Included were twosherds of Rockport Black (15.4 percent), two sherdsof Rockport Black-on-gray (15.4 percent), and ninesherds of Rockport Plain (69.2 percent). Of the lat-ter, four examples occurred on var. Guadalupe andfive occurred on var. Rockport. Five of the notchedlips (38.5 percent) contained notches that were lessthan 2 mm across, six sherds (46.2 percent) exhib-ited notches between 2 and 4 mm in width, and twosherds (15.4 percent) had notches that were greaterthan 4 mm across.

Discussion of Lip Decoration

Overall, it is interesting, but certainly not un-usual, to note the strong relationship between bandedrim decoration and Rockport Black and RockportBlack-on-gray (561 of 588 sherds; 95.4 percent).7

Obviously, a painted vessel was likely to receive apainted rim. In contrast, however, was the lack ofany relationship between sherds of Rockport Incisedand the various incised lip treatments. In fact, ascan be seen in Table 7-15, 24 sherds of RockportIncised had banded rims, but none had any in-cised lines on the lip. One would have expectedincised sherds to have received incised lip deco-ration, but that apparently did not occur at Guada-lupe Bay.

Also interesting is the relatively strong relationshipbetween notched lips and Rockport Plain (9 of 13sherds; 69.2 percent). Although notching occurs onseveral ceramic types, it apparently was the preferredform of lip decoration on plain vessels. Likewise,four (33.3 percent) of the 12 sherds with incised lipswere classed as Rockport Plain.

In addition to the above, an effort was made toexamine the relationships of the different decoratedlip forms to the various analysis units identified at

Guadalupe Bay. It was hoped that potential chro-nological data and/or intrasite spatial patterning mightbe recognized. As such, Tables 7-16 through 7-18list the three main forms of lip decoration (blackbanding, incising, and notching) and their associ-ated analysis units.

Rims with black banding were found through-out most analysis units (see Table 7-16), although,as noted many times earlier, those found in AUs 8through 14 clearly were displaced downward bybioturbation or, in the case of AU 13, may have beenmixed accidentally during the waterscreening op-eration. As with the distribution of all previously

7 Obviously, this strong relationship is heightened by the factthat all banded sherds without associated body decoration alsowere classed as Rockport Black or Rockport Black-on-gray. However,

96 sherds (17.1 percent) of these two types included both lip bandingand body painting, suggesting that the relationship is legitimate.

Figure 7-16. Notched lips. (a-d) Notched lips ofRockport Plain, var. Rockport ; (e-g) Notched lips of Rockport Plain,var. Guadalupe; (h) Notched lip ofRockport Plain, var. Seadrift; (i-j)Notched lips of Rockport Black, var.Lolita. (See Appendix K for prove-nience data.)

a b c

d e f

g h

i

j0 3

cm


308

N o . % N o . % N o . % N o . % N o . % N o . % N o . %

Rockport Blackvar. Elm Bayou

Top 0 0.00 1 1.09 1 0.56 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00Top/Exterior 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.56 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 1.37 0 0.00Top/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 1.09 1 1.37 0 0.00Top/Exterior/Interior 1 2.17 3 3.26 4 2.26 0 0.00 1 1.09 3 4.11 1 6.67

var. Kuy CreekTop 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 1.37 0 0.00Top/Exterior 1 2.17 0 0.00 1 0.56 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00Top/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.56 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 1.37 0 0.00Top/Exterior/Interior 2 4.35 0 0.00 3 1.69 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00

var. LolitaTop 0 0.00 1 1.09 6 3.39 0 0.00 1 1.09 1 1.37 0 0.00Top/Exterior 2 4.35 0 0.00 3 1.69 1 1.41 0 0.00 2 2.74 0 0.00Top/Interior 0 0.00 1 1.09 1 0.56 0 0.00 2 2.17 0 0.00 0 0.00Top/Exterior/Interior 1 2.17 6 6.52 7 3.95 4 5.63 7 7.61 7 9.59 0 0.00

var. RockportTop 3 6.52 0 0.00 1 0.56 1 1.41 2 2.17 2 2.74 0 0.00Top/Exterior 0 0.00 0 0.00 5 2.82 1 1.41 3 3.26 0 0.00 0 0.00Top/Interior 3 6.52 1 1.09 4 2.26 1 1.41 1 1.09 3 4.11 0 0.00Top/Exterior/Interior 1 2.17 1 1.09 26 14.69 4 5.63 3 3.26 6 8.22 0 0.00

var. Spring BayouTop 0 0.00 1 1.09 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00Top/Exterior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 1.09 1 1.37 0 0.00Top/Interior 1 2.17 0 0.00 1 0.56 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00Top/Exterior/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 1.13 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00

Rockport Black total 1 5 3 2 . 6 1 1 5 1 6 . 3 0 6 7 3 7 . 8 5 1 2 1 6 . 9 0 2 2 2 3 . 9 1 2 9 3 9 . 7 3 1 6 . 6 7

Rockport Black-on-grayvar. Buffalo Lake

Top 0 0.00 3 3.26 1 0.56 3 4.23 1 1.09 2 2.74 1 6.67Exterior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 1.37 0 0.00Top/Exterior 1 2.17 2 2.17 2 1.13 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 1.37 0 0.00Top/Interior 0 0.00 1 1.09 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 2.17 2 2.74 0 0.00Top/Exterior/Interior 3 6.52 8 8.70 12 6.78 10 14.08 6 6.52 4 5.48 0 0.00

var. Hog BayouTop 1 2.17 1 1.09 2 1.13 0 0.00 2 2.17 0 0.00 0 0.00Top/Exterior 0 0.00 0 0.00 5 2.82 1 1.41 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00Top/Interior 1 2.17 1 1.09 3 1.69 0 0.00 1 1.09 0 0.00 0 0.00Top/Exterior/Interior 2 4.35 0 0.00 10 5.65 2 2.82 13 14.13 6 8.22 1 6.67

var. Long MottTop 0 0.00 1 1.09 2 1.13 0 0.00 2 2.17 1 1.37 1 6.67Top/Exterior 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.56 2 2.82 2 2.17 0 0.00 0 0.00Top/Interior 0 0.00 4 4.35 6 3.39 1 1.41 2 2.17 3 4.11 0 0.00Top/Exterior/Interior 3 6.52 5 5.43 22 12.43 12 16.90 18 19.57 6 8.22 0 0.00

var. Mosquito PointTop 0 0.00 2 2.17 1 0.56 1 1.41 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00Top/Exterior 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 1.13 1 1.41 1 1.09 1 1.37 1 6.67Top/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 1.09 0 0.00 0 0.00Top/? 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 1.13 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00Top/Exterior/Interior 1 2.17 4 4.35 9 5.08 2 2.82 5 5.43 4 5.48 1 6.67

var. RockportTop 1 2.17 6 6.52 1 0.56 6 8.45 1 1.09 3 4.11 0 0.00Interior 1 2.17 1 1.09 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00Top/Exterior 3 6.52 7 7.61 2 1.13 2 2.82 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 6.67Top/Interior 4 8.70 4 4.35 7 3.95 2 2.82 1 1.09 0 0.00 1 6.67Top/? 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.56 1 1.41 0 0.00 1 1.37 0 0.00Top/Exterior/Interior 8 17.39 25 27.17 8 4.52 12 16.90 8 8.70 5 6.85 7 46.67

Rockport Black-on-gray total 2 9 6 3 . 0 4 7 5 8 1 . 5 2 9 9 5 5 . 9 3 5 8 8 1 . 6 9 6 6 7 1 . 7 4 4 0 5 4 . 7 9 1 4 9 3 . 3 3

Rockport Incisedvar. Mission Lake

Top/Exterior 0 0.00 1 1.09 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 1.09 0 0.00 0 0.00Top/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 1.37 0 0.00Top/Exterior/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 4 2.26 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00

var. Mustang LakeTop 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00Top/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 1.09 0 0.00 0 0.00Top/Exterior/Interior 0 0.00 1 1.09 2 1.13 1 1.41 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00

var. Plank BridgeTop 1 2.17 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00Top/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 2.17 0 0.00 0 0.00Top/Exterior/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.56 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00

var. RockportTop/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.56 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 2.74 0 0.00Top/Exterior/Interior 1 2.17 0 0.00 1 0.56 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00

Rockport Incised total 2 4 . 3 5 2 2 . 1 7 9 5 . 0 8 1 1 . 4 1 4 4 . 3 5 3 4 . 1 1 0 0 . 0 0

Rockport Polychromevar. unspecified

Top 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.56 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00Top/Exterior/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 1.37 0 0.00

Rockport Polychrome total 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 0 . 5 6 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 1 . 3 7 0 0 . 0 0

Rockport Redvar. unspecified

Top 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.56 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00

Rockport Red total 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 0 . 5 6 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0

Site Total 4 6 1 0 0 . 0 0 9 2 1 0 0 . 0 0 1 7 7 1 0 0 . 0 0 7 1 1 0 0 . 0 0 9 2 1 0 0 . 0 0 7 3 1 0 0 . 0 0 1 5 1 0 0 . 0 0

AU 2 AU 3 AU 4

Analysis Units

AU 5 AU 6AU 1

Table 7-16. Distribution of Sherds with Black Lip Banding, by Analysis Unit.

(continued)

AU 8


309

N o . % N o . % N o . % N o . % N o . % N o . % Total % Total


Top 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0 . 3 4Top/Exterior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0 . 3 4Top/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0 . 3 4Top/Exterior/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 3 2 . 2 1

var. Kuy CreekTop 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0 . 1 7Top/Exterior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0 . 3 4Top/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0 . 3 4Top/Exterior/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 5 0 . 8 5

var. LolitaTop 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 9 1 . 5 3Top/Exterior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 8 1 . 3 6Top/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 4 0 . 6 8Top/Exterior/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 100.00 1 14.29 3 4 5 . 7 8

var. RockportTop 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 9 1 . 5 3Top/Exterior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 9 1 . 5 3Top/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 3 2 . 2 1Top/Exterior/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 4 1 6 . 9 7

var. Spring BayouTop 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0 . 1 7Top/Exterior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0 . 3 4Top/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0 . 3 4Top/Exterior/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0 . 3 4

Rockport Black total 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 1 0 0 . 0 0 1 1 4 . 2 9 1 6 3 2 7 . 7 2

Rockport Black-on-grayvar. Buffalo Lake

Top 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 1 1 . 8 7Exterior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0 . 1 7Top/Exterior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 6 1 . 0 2Top/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 5 0 . 8 5Top/Exterior/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 4 3 7 . 3 1

var. Hog BayouTop 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 6 1 . 0 2Top/Exterior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 6 1 . 0 2Top/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 6 1 . 0 2Top/Exterior/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 100.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 3 5 5 . 9 5

var. Long MottTop 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 7 1 . 1 9Top/Exterior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 5 0 . 8 5Top/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 6 2 . 7 2Top/Exterior/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 4 57.14 7 0 1 1 . 9 0

var. Mosquito PointTop 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 4 0 . 6 8Top/Exterior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 6 1 . 0 2Top/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0 . 1 7Top/? 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0 . 3 4Top/Exterior/Interior 3 27.27 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 9 4 . 9 3

var. RockportTop 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 8 3 . 0 6Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0 . 3 4Top/Exterior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 5 2 . 5 5Top/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 9 3 . 2 3Top/? 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 3 0 . 5 1Top/Exterior/Interior 8 72.73 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 14.29 8 2 1 3 . 9 5

Rockport Black-on-gray total 1 1 1 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 1 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 5 7 1 . 4 3 3 9 8 6 7 . 6 9

Rockport Incisedvar. Mission Lake

Top/Exterior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0 . 3 4Top/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0 . 1 7Top/Exterior/Interior 0 0.00 1 100.00 1 100.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 6 1 . 0 2

var. Mustang LakeTop 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 14.29 1 0 . 1 7Top/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0 . 1 7Top/Exterior/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 4 0 . 6 8

var. Plank BridgeTop 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0 . 1 7Top/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0 . 3 4Top/Exterior/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0 . 1 7

var. RockportTop/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 3 0 . 5 1Top/Exterior/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0 . 3 4

Rockport Incised total 0 0 . 0 0 1 1 0 0 . 0 0 1 1 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 1 4 . 2 9 2 4 4 . 0 8

Rockport Polychromevar. unspecified

Top 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0 . 1 7Top/Exterior/Interior 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0 . 1 7

Rockport Polychrome total 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 0 . 3 4

Rockport Redvar. unspecified

Top 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0 . 1 7

Rockport Red total 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 . 0 0 1 0 . 1 7

Site Total 1 1 1 0 0 . 0 0 1 1 0 0 . 0 0 1 1 0 0 . 0 0 1 1 0 0 . 0 0 1 1 0 0 . 0 0 7 1 0 0 . 0 0 5 8 8 1 0 0 . 0 0

AU 9 AU 10 No AUAU 11 AU 13

Analysis Units

AU 14

Table 7-16. Concluded.


310

discussed ceramics at Guadalupe Bay, the majorityof the black banded rims were found in those AUsassociated with Block 3 (AUs 3, 5, and 6) (342 sherds;58.2 percent). The relatively strong showing of bandedlips in AU 3 (177 sherds; 30.1 percent), the upper-most portion of the Stratum 2 Rockport component,might, at first, be taken as an indication that lip bandingwas more common towards the latter portion of thatoccupation. This is supported somewhat by the to-tal lack of banded lips from AU 7, the Stratum 5oyster lens in Block 3 believed to be the earliestRockport deposit uncovered. All of this is offset,however, by the recognition that the combined totalfor AUs 5 and 6 (n=165; 28.1 percent) is almost ex-actly the same as the total for AU 3. Not only doesthis argue against any chronological change in bandingfrequency, but it supports the notion expressed ear-lier in Chapters 5 and 6 that much of the materialfound in the lower part of Stratum 2 in Block 3 (AU 3)may actually represent items that had originally been

deposited in Stratum 3 (AU 6), but had been dis-placed upward by subsequent bioturbation.

Regardless of the above, it also is interesting tonote the percentages of each ceramic type across theAUs. For instance, Rockport Black amounted to 16.3percent of the total black-banded sherds from AU 2and 16.9 percent of black-banded sherds from AU 4,both in the area of Blocks 1 and 2 (see Table 7-16).On the other hand, Rockport Black made up 37.9,23.9, and 39.7 percent of the black-banded sherdsfrom AUs 3, 5, and 6, respectively, from Block 3.In contrast, Rockport Black-on-gray sherds with bandedlips comprised 81.5 percent of the banded sherds inAU 2 and 82.0 percent in AU 4. In Block 3, bandedlips on Rockport Black-on-gray sherds comprised55.9, 71.7, and 54.8 percent for AUs 3, 5, and 6.These percentages suggest that Rockport Black vesselswith banded lips were somewhat more common inBlock 3, while similar Rockport Black-on-gray vessels

N o . % N o . % N o . % N o . % Total % Total


Flat lip, perpendicular lines 1 20.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 8 . 3 3var. Lolita

Flat lip, perpendicular lines 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 100.00 0 0.00 2 1 6 . 6 7var. Rockport

Flat lip, slanted lines 1 20.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 100.00 2 1 6 . 6 7var. Spring Bayou

Flat lip, slanted lines 1 20.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 8 . 3 3

Rockport Black total 3 6 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 1 0 0 . 0 0 1 1 0 0 . 0 0 6 5 0 . 0 0

Rockport Black-on-gray var. Buffalo Lake

Flat lip, perpendicular lines 0 0.00 2 50.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 1 6 . 6 7

Rockport Black-on-gray total 0 0 . 0 0 2 5 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 1 6 . 6 7

Rockport Plainvar. Green Lake

Pointed lip, vertical lines 0 0.00 1 25.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 8 . 3 3var. Guadalupe

Flat lip, perpendicular lines 2 40.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 1 6 . 6 7var. Rockport

Flat lip, perpendicular lines 0 0.00 1 25.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 8 . 3 3

Rockport Plain total 2 4 0 . 0 0 2 5 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 4 3 3 . 3 3

Site Total 5 1 0 0 . 0 0 4 1 0 0 . 0 0 2 1 0 0 . 0 0 1 1 0 0 . 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 . 0 0

AU 3 AU 4 AU 5 AU 6

Analysis Units

Table 7-17. Distribution of Sherds with Incised Lips, by Analysis Unit.


311

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

To

tal

% T

otal

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c kva

r. L

olit

a0

0.00

240

.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

002

15

.38

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k

tota

l0

0.0

02

40

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

21

5.3

8

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k-o

n-g

ray

var.

Hog

Bay

ou0

0.00

120

.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

var.

Lon

g M

ott

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

110

0.00

17

.69

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k-o

n-g

ray

tota

l0

0.0

01

20

.00

00

.00

00

.00

11

00

.00

21

5.3

8

Roc

kp

ort

Pla

inva

r. G

uada

lupe

133

.33

240

.00

00.

001

33.3

30

0.00

43

0.7

7va

r. R

ockp

ort

266

.67

00.

001

100.

002

66.6

70

0.00

53

8.4

6

Roc

kp

ort

Pla

in

tota

l3

10

0.0

02

40

.00

11

00

.00

31

00

.00

00

.00

96

9.2

3

Sit

e T

otal

31

00

.00

51

00

.00

11

00

.00

31

00

.00

13

3.3

31

31

00

.00

AU

2

AU

3

AU

4

AU

5

An

alys

is

Un

its

AU

6

Tabl

e 7-

18.

Dis

trib

utio

n of

She

rds

wit

h N

otch

ed L

ips,

by

Ana

lysi

s U

nit.


312

were relatively common in both areas. Although thecounts are very low, it also is worth noting that allof the Rockport Polychrome and Rockport Red sherdswith banded lips came from Block 3. This is in keepingwith the data on those Rockport Black-on-gray sherdswith white paste, as discussed above, and supportsthe idea that the Block 3 area was the locus of finerand more elaborately decorated ceramics than else-where across the site.

A few words can be said of the distribution ofincised lips across the various AUs (see Table 7-17).Over half (n=7; 58.3 percent) were present in thelower levels of the mixed Rangia and oyster middenof Stratum 2 (AUs 4 and 5) along with the Stratum 3Rangia deposit in Block 3 (AU 6), and this couldindicate a possible early Rockport II subphase as-sociation. Although the total frequencies are rela-tively low, the additional fact that no incised rimswere found in either AUs 1 or 2 provides some sup-port for this potential association.

In contrast, notched lips were more common inthe upper portion of the Stratum 2 deposit (AUs 2and 3) (n=8; 61.5 percent), with lesser amounts inthe lower part of the same deposit (AUs 4 and 5)plus the Stratum 3 Rangia midden in Block 3 (AU 6)(n=5; 38.5 percent) (see Table 7-18). Again, althoughthe total frequencies are extremely low, this suggeststhat notched lips may have been more common inthe later stages of the Rockport occupation at thesite. Together, incised and notched lips may proveuseful in the future in separating early and late Rockportcomponents. For now, it can only be suggested thatincised lips were more prevalent during early RockportII times, and that notched lips assumed a similar rolelater during the Rockport phase.

Decorative Motifs

Once all excavated sherds were sorted by de-sign element(s) and/or lip decoration, it was pos-sible to recognize recurring decorative patterns ormotifs that form the highest order of decorative in-tent on the part of the aboriginal potters at GuadalupeBay. As noted earlier, such motifs consisted of singledesign elements if the motif was relatively simple,or multiple design elements if it was slightly morecomplicated. At present, there are eight motifs rec-ognized for Rockport Incised, seven motifs for RockportBlack, and seven motifs for Rockport Black-on-gray.Each motif will be discussed individually below bytype.

Since the current type-variety system of ceramicclassification was developed as a means of recog-nizing the paste characteristics of Rockport ceram-ics, simply because there were so few decorated sherdsavailable for analysis at the time it was created, itcannot be used for motif classification, although thatgenerally is how the type-variety system is employedelsewhere in the Southeast and Lower MississippiValley. For that reason, a slightly modified versionof the type-variety system has been employed formotif classification in the present study. Thus, mo-tifs are given names, like varieties, but such namesare enclosed in quotation marks and followed by theword “motif,” whereas variety names are italicizedand preceded by the abbreviation “var.”8 Thus, amotif is written as Rockport Incised, “Ayres Pointmotif,” while a variety is written as Rockport In-cised, var. Mustang Lake. By providing motifs withnames, it will be possible in the future to simplyincorporate these names into the type-variety sys-tem if it later is decided to eliminate the current paste-oriented type-variety system and to establish a moreconventional, decoration-oriented type-variety sys-tem.

Rockport Incised Motifs

There are eight motifs recognized for RockportIncised, based on a total of 85 sherds that are suffi-ciently large enough to allow for motif identifica-tion (Table 7-19). Although Rockport Incised sherdsmade up only a modest portion of the total ceramicassemblage at Guadalupe Bay, a reasonably largenumber of the specimens were recognizable to mo-tif. Since Rockport Incised designs are almost al-ways confined to the rim and/or upper portion ofthe vessel, it is possible to find individual rim sherdsthat contain a major portion of the overall decora-tive motif. This, in turn, leads to greater certaintyon the part of the analyst as to which motif actuallyis represented. Painted vessels, on the other hand,as discussed earlier, usually employed designs that

8 An effort has been made to name motifs after prominentgeographical landmarks in and around San Antonio, Lavaca, andMatagorda bays. In order to further clarify the nomenclature, allRockport Incised motifs have the word “Point” included in theirnames, while all Rockport Black-on-gray motifs include the word“Island.” Likewise, all Rockport Black motifs include the word“Bay.”


313

included portions of the lip, neck, and body of thevessel. Although the lip area usually was entirelypainted, decoration on the neck and body portionsof the vessel often was less inclusive (i.e., individualwavy lines, isolated dots, dabs, etc.), leaving rela-tively large, intervening, nondecorated areas. There-fore, the chance of finding groups of associated de-sign elements on individual body sherds, even whenexamining thousands of examples from painted vessels,is extremely small.

Rockport Incised,“Grassy Point motif” (n=28)

This is the most common motif recognized onall incised pottery at Guadalupe Bay. It consists simplyof a series of narrow, parallel lines incised in a hori-zontal band around the upper part of the exterior ofthe vessel (Figures 7-17 and 7-18). The lines werecarelessly executed, usually on the vessel when thepaste still was relatively wet. Sometimes the linesrun together or, on rare occasions, cross or overlapone another. This is not true crosshatching, how-ever, but simply the result of sloppy incising.

There are only two complete rims in the cur-rent collection that show the entire decorative field

associated with the “Grassy Point motif” (see Fig-ure 7-17, b-c). In both cases, the decoration beginsimmediately below the lip and extends down the neckof the vessel for a distance of between 1.2 and 1.9 cm.On the same sherds there are four and seven indi-vidual lines, respectively. Another 26 sherds lackrims, but include the lower portion of the decora-tive field. Thus, it is possible to safely classify theseas “Grassy Point” specimens. Although not com-plete, these sherds exhibit between two and eightindividual lines. It is possible that many of the othersherds with design elements listed as either singleor multiple horizontal lines (see Table 7-14) also arefrom “Grassy Point” vessels. Since they lack thelower portion of the decorative field, however, suchan assumption cannot be known for certain. Thesherds could be from “Foster Point,” “BendewaldPoint,” or “Ayres Point” vessels, to be discussed below.

The “Grassy Point motif” occurs on all variet-ies of Rockport Incised: eight sherds each on vars.Rockport and Mission Lake, five each on vars. PlankBridge and Mustang Lake, and two on var. Sommerville.This diversity probably is a reflection of the rela-tive abundance of the motif; since it occurs on moresherds than any other incised motif, it is logical thatit would occur on more varieties than any other motif.

Rim Body Rim Body Rim Body Rim Body Rim Body Total % Total

Motifs

"Grassy Point" 0 8 2 6 0 5 0 2 0 5 2 8 3 2 . 9 4

"Marsh Point" 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 . 7 1

"Cox Point" 0 0 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 9 . 4 1

"Cedar Point" 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 3 0 6 7 . 0 6

"Keeran Point" 0 1 1 5 0 5 1 1 1 5 2 0 2 3 . 5 3

"Ayres Point" 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 5 5 . 8 8

"Bendewald Point" 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 6 4 1 2 1 4 . 1 2

"Foster Point" 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 2 . 3 5

Total 2 1 0 1 4 1 5 0 1 1 2 4 1 1 1 6 8 5 1 0 0 . 0 0

var .Rockport

var .Mission Lake

var .Plank Bridge

var .Sommerv i l l e

var .Mustang Lake

Rockport Incised

Table 7-19. Decorative Motifs Recognized on Sherds of Rockport Incised at Guadalupe Bay.


314

a

b c

de

f g

h i j k

lm

n o

p q r

0 3

cm

Figure 7-17. Rockport Incised, “Grassy Point motif.” (a) Idealized “Grassy Point” vessel; (b-c) Complete“Grassy Point” rim sherds of Rockport Incised, var. Mustang Lake; (d-j) Partial “GrassyPoint” rim sherds of Rockport Incised, var. Rockport; (k-r) Partial “Grassy Point” rimsherds of Rockport Incised, var. Mission Lake. (See Appendix K for provenience data.)


315

Since the “Grassy Point motif” is representedby a relatively simple design, it is no wonder thatsimilar designs occur across most of the Texas coastand eastward into Louisiana and beyond. Clearly,the most common connection lies with examples ofGoose Creek and San Jacinto Incised ceramics fromthe Galveston Bay area (Aten 1983b:Figures 12.4,12.6; W. Black 1989:1-7; Ricklis 1994a:Figures 7.13,

7.14, 7.15, 7.20, 7.21) and Coles Creek Incised pot-tery, particularly the relatively late Hardy variety,from the Louisiana coast and Lower Mississippi Valley(Phillips 1970). Along the central Texas coast, the“Grassy Point motif” is known in limited amountsfrom a few scattered sites (Campbell 1962:332, Figure1; Suhm and Jelks 1962:133, Plate 67), with GuadalupeBay providing the largest sample to date. As notedby several previous researchers (Campbell 1962:332;Corbin 1974:45; Ricklis 1990b:614), this motif, alongwith all other motifs associated with Rockport In-cised, is more common in the northern part of therange of Rockport ceramics, thereby strengtheningits close ties to Goose Creek and San Jacinto In-cised. Corbin (1974:45), in fact, sees the most ob-vious relationship with Galveston Bay ceramics thatdate to Aten’s (1983b) Old River period, ca. A.D.1350 to 1700.

Rockport Incised, “Marsh Point motif” (n=4)

This is another motif composed of a relativelysimple, single design element. It consists of a se-ries of narrow, parallel lines incised either in a con-tinuous diagonal band around the upper part of thevessel’s exterior, or in a series of distinct diagonalsets separated by undecorated areas, also around theupper part of the vessel’s exterior (Figure 7-19). Inthe future, with more specimens available for study,it may be possible to separate these two patterns intodifferent motifs. For now, they are simply listed as“Marsh Point.” Generally, the lines of “Marsh Point”were more carefully incised than those of the “GrassyPoint motif,” apparently at a time when the clay hadreached a leather-hard state. As with “Grassy Point,”the “Marsh Point motif” begins directly below thelip and extends down the neck of the vessel fromthat point.

There are four rim sherds that can be confidentlyassigned to this motif. Only one contains a com-plete set of four individual lines (see Figure 7-19, c),with the overall set measuring 5 mm across. Therest of the sherds have between three and five lines.Since none of these latter sherds exhibits a completeset of lines, the line totals should be viewed as minimumfigures. In addition, none of the sherds showed thefull decorative field, so it is impossible to determineexactly how far the overall decoration extends be-low the lip. Since there are only four “Marsh Point”sherds present in the collection from Guadalupe Bay,they occur on a limited number of varieties: twoeach on Rockport Incised, vars. Rockport and Mis-sion Lake.

Figure 7-18. Additional sherds with the “GrassyPoint motif.” (a-e) Partial “GrassyPoint” rims of Rockport Incised, var.Plank Bridge; (f-h) Partial “GrassyPoint” rims of Rockport Incised, var.Mustang Lake; (i-j) Partial “GrassyPoint” rims of Rockport Incised, var.Sommerville. (See Appendix K forprovenience data.)

a b

c

e f g

h

d

i

j

0 3

cm


316

Unlike “Grassy Point,” the “Marsh Point mo-tif” appears to be less closely tied to motifs in theGalveston Bay area. Although a few similar designshave been illustrated for San Jacinto and Goose CreekIncised (Aten 1983b:Figure 12.6; W. Black 1989b:26),sherds of these types more commonly exhibit verti-cal, rather than diagonal, incised lines (Aten1983b:Figure 12.6; W. Black 1989b:25; Ricklis1994a:Figures 7.16, 7.18, 7.21). Diagonal incisedlines actually are more common in sherds of MaziqueIncised, especially the Manchac variety, from coastalLouisiana and the Lower Mississippi Valley (Phillips1970). Interestingly, no examples of “Marsh Point”are illustrated in any of the previous studies cover-ing the coastal bend area, although it is likely thatat least a few specimens occur at scattered sites inthe northern part of the region.

Rockport Incised, “Cox Point motif” (n=8)

The “Cox Point motif” is a relatively commondesign that has been recognized as an element ofRockport ceramics since the 1930s (Potter 1930:Plate�7;Campbell 1962:332, Figure 1). It consists of a single,

horizontal zigzag line that circles the upper part ofthe vessel’s exterior just below the lip (Figure 7-20).Unlike all other Rockport Incised motifs, the linethat forms “Cox Point” is relatively wide, and fallsin the medium category (between 2 and 4 mm) asdefined in the present study. It also is particu-larly sloppy, and exhibits burred edges formed byincising in a wet paste. These characteristics serveto set the motif off from other horizontal zigzaglines that most likely are elements in more-com-plicated motifs. All “Cox Point” examples fromGuadalupe Bay are unzoned; however, specimensillustrated by other researchers (Potter 1930:Plate 7,1 and 3) include zoned examples that could even-tually be set up as a separate motif.

There are seven rims and one body sherd of “CoxPoint” in the current collection. All were classifiedas Rockport Incised, var. Mission Lake. Two of therims fit together, while three other sherds almostcertainly are from the same vessel. Thus, the entirecollection most likely represents the remains of onlyone or two vessels. Regardless, on all rim sherdsthe highest point (that closest to the lip) on the zig-

Figure 7-19. Rockport Incised, “Marsh Point motif.” (a) Idealized “Marsh Point” vessel; (b-c) “MarshPoint” rims of Rockport Incised, var. Rockport; (d-e) “Marsh Point” rims of RockportIncised, var. Mission Lake. (d and e are probably from the same vessel.) (See AppendixK for provenience data.)

a

b c

ed

0 3

cm


317

zag line is between 5 and 7 mm from the sherd’slip. Individual zigs (or zags) measure about 15 mmin length, while the entire zigzag pattern has an overallwidth of between 10 and 15 mm.

As noted, this motif has been recognized as aRockport design since the first ceramic studies wereattempted, and it has been illustrated on severalprevious occasions (Campbell 1962:Figure 1; Corbin1974:Figure 14; Potter 1930:Plate 7; Suhm andJelks 1962:Plate 67). Only a few sherds exhibit-ing designs similar to the “Cox Point motif” havebeen reported in the Galveston Bay area (Ricklis1994a:Table 7.7, Figure 7.21, c), while no coun-terparts are known from the Louisiana coast orthe Lower Mississippi Valley. This suggests thatthe “Cox Point motif” is principally confined tothe central Texas coast, and probably is a true Rockportdiagnostic.

Rockport Incised, “Cedar Point motif” (n=6)

This motif is represented by crosshatched linesthat occur in a band that circles the upper part ofthe vessel’s exterior (Figure 7-21). At times the cross-hatched band is positioned immediately below thelip, while other examples include an obvious non-decorated zone between the top of the band and thevessel’s lip. The crosshatched lines are narrow, butsomewhat sloppy, suggesting that the clay was relativelywet when the vessel was incised.

There are four examples of “Cedar Point” rimsin the present collection (see Figure 7-21, b-d, f).Three have the decorative band beginning imme-diately below the lip, while one has the band be-ginning 9 mm below the lip. Three were classi-fied as Rockport Incised, var. Mustang Lake andone as var. Mission Lake. The other two speci-

a

b c

e

f

g

h

d

0 3

cm

Figure 7-20. Rockport Incised, “Cox Point motif.” (a) Idealized “Cox Point” vessel; (b-g) Complete“Cox Point” rim sherds of Rockport Incised, var. Mission Lake; (h) Partial “Cox Point”rim of Rockport Incised, var. Mission Lake. (b composed of two sherds that fit together;c, e, and g probably from same vessel.) (See Appendix K for provenience data.)


318

mens are body sherds that exhibit enough of thedecorative field to allow for their identificationas “Cedar Point.” One is on Plank Bridge paste,and the other is on Sommerville paste. Additionalexamples of crosshatching are present in the col-

lection from Guadalupe Bay, but, since none is arim or contains a large enough area to identifythe decorative band, it is impossible to determineif these latter sherds are examples of the “CedarPoint motif” or if they are parts of the crosshatched

Figure 7-21. Rockport Incised, “Cedar Point motif.” (a) Idealized “Cedar Point” vessel with decora-tive band located immediately below the lip; (b-d) Complete “Cedar Point” rims withdecorative band below lip, all Rockport Incised, var. Mustang Lake; (e) Partial “CedarPoint” rim of Rockport Incised, var. Plank Bridge; (f-g) Partial “Cedar Point” rims withdecoration in a band placed several millimeters below the lip (f on Mission Lake paste, gon Sommerville paste); (h) Idealized “Cedar Point” vessel with decorative band sepa-rated from the lip by a nondecorated zone. (See Appendix K for provenience data.)

a

b c

e

f g

h

d

0 3

cm


319

element associated with the “Foster Point motif,”to be discussed below.

Rare examples of “Cedar Point” have been notedand/or illustrated by past researchers working withRockport ceramics (Campbell 1962:332, Figure 1;Suhm and Jelks 1962:133). A similar design morecommonly occurs on Goose Creek and San JacintoIncised sherds from the upper Texas coast (W. Black1989b:23, S-4; Corbin 1974:Figure 14; Ricklis1994a:Table 7.7, Figures 7.17, 7.19, 7.23) and onsherds of the type Harrison Bayou Incised from theLouisiana coast and Lower Mississippi Valley (Phillips1970). All of this implies an upper coast “connec-tion” for the motif.

Rockport Incised, “Keeran Point motif”(n=20)

The general decorative idea of the “Keeran Pointmotif” is similar to that of “Cedar Point,” with theimportant exception that “Keeran Point” exhibitsmultiple horizontal lines with subsequent overincising.At Guadalupe Bay, “Keeran Point” comes in threebasic patterns: horizontal lines with vertical overincisedlines (Figure 7-22), horizontal lines with diagonaloverincised lines (Figure 7-23), and horizontal lineswith crosshatched overincised lines (Figure 7-24).Eventually, these three patterns may be set up asseparate motifs. For now, however, it is the tech-nique of overincising that allows them to be groupedtogether as “Keeran Point.” As with “Cedar Point,”the “Keeran Point motif” occurs in a band aroundthe upper part of the vessel, sometimes with a non-decorated zone between the band and the lip, some-times with the motif occurring immediately belowthe lip.

Of the 20 sherds that comprise this motif atGuadalupe Bay, eight sherds (one rim, seven bodies)exhibit vertical overincised lines, another four sherds(all bodies) contain crosshatched overincised lines,and eight sherds (two rims, six bodies) have di-agonal overincised lines. Those with verticaloverincised lines were classified as Rockport In-cised, vars. Mission Lake (n=2), Mustang Lake(n=3), and Plank Bridge (n=3). The four withcrosshatched overincising were identified asRockport Incised, vars. Mustang Lake, PlankBridge, Sommerville, and Rockport, while those withdiagonal overincising were classified as vars. Mis-sion Lake (n=4), Mustang Lake (n=2), Plank Bridge(n=1), and Sommerville (n=1).

Two of the sherds with vertical overincising fittogether and allow for measurements to be recordedregarding placement and width of the decorative field(see Figure 7-22, b). These sherds indicate that thedecorated band is 12 mm wide and is positioned 10 mmbelow the lip of the vessel. In addition, two ofthe sherds with diagonal overincising exhibit adecorative field that begins immediately belowthe lip (see Figure 7-23, b-c). Since the lowerpart of each sherd is missing, however, it is notpossible to determine the width of the decoratedfield. One of the crosshatched overincised sherdshas a decorated band that is 14 mm wide, but therim is missing making it impossible to determinethe distance between the top of the band and the lip(see Figure 7-24, b). Interestingly, this latter sherd(one of the Mustang Lake specimens) contains redpigment within its incised lines.

Several examples of the “Keeran Point motif”are known from the central Texas coast, having beenillustrated in past publications from the region(Campbell 1962:Figure 1; Corbin 1974:Figure 14;Suhm and Jelks 1962:Plate 67). It also is a fairlycommon motif along the upper Texas coast where ithas been recorded on Goose Creek and San JacintoIncised sherds (Aten 1983b:Figures 12.4, 12.6; W.Black 1989b:10-12, 19, S-3 to S-4; Ricklis 1994a:Figure 7.16). Overincising is relatively rare farthereast along the Louisiana coast, although several ex-amples of Plaquemine Brushed, var. Plaquemine andColes Creek Incised, var. Hardy are known to ex-hibit the technique (Phillips 1970; Weinstein and Kelley1992). This may indicate that the geographical “heart-land” of overincising is in the Galveston Bay area.

Rockport Incised, “Ayres Point motif” (n=5)

This is another motif that has been recognizedfor Rockport Incised sherds for many years (Campbell1962:332). It is represented by multiple design ele-ments consisting of a band of narrow, horizontallyincised lines that circle the upper part of the vessel’sexterior immediately below the lip, plus a series ofpendant, line-filled triangles located beneath the lowestof the horizontal lines (Figures 7-25 and 7-26). Thehorizontal incised lines are identical to those notedabove for the “Grassy Point motif,” while the line-filled triangles exhibit three main patterns: slantedlines, crossed lines, and coalescing lines. At leastone other pattern, that of horizontal lines within thetriangles, is illustrated by Corbin (1974:Figure 14)but not present at Guadalupe Bay.


320

There are four body sherds and one rim inthe current sample. Three (all body sherds) arerepresented by the slanted-line pattern of line-filledtriangles, and one each by the crossed and coa-lescing patterns (the latter represented by the lonerim). Three of the sherds were classified as RockportIncised, var. Mustang Lake (including the coa-lescing pattern and two of the slanted-line pat-terns), and one each as Mission Lake (the otherslanted-line pattern) and Rockport (the crossed-line pattern). Only the sherd with the coalescingpattern was complete enough to measure (see Fig-ure 7-26, c). It includes an 8-mm-wide band ofthree horizontal lines extending downward fromthe lip, plus one complete triangle that extendsdownward from the lowest horizontal line for an-

other 13 mm. Although broken, the other foursherds have between three and seven horizontallines above the triangles.

There are 16 other sherds in the present collec-tion that exhibit portions of line-filled triangles, andthese probably represent elements off “Ayres Point”vessels. However, all are from body sherds that lackany of the associated horizontal lines needed foraccurate motif assignment. They could, instead, befrom vessels that only have line-filled triangles presentimmediately below the lip. Definite examples ofsuch a motif are missing from Guadalupe Bay, butare known from other sites along the central Texascoast (i.e., Corbin 1974:Figure 14; Suhm and Jelks1962:Plate 67, D).

Figure 7-22. Rockport Incised, “Keeran Point motif” with vertical overincising. (a) Idealized “KeeranPoint” vessel showing band of horizontal lines with vertical overincised lines; (b) Com-plete “Keeran Point” rim of Rockport Incised, var. Mustang Lake; (c) Partial “KeeranPoint” rim on Mustang Lake paste; (d-e) Partial “Keeran Point” rims of Rockport In-cised, var. Mission Lake ; (f-h) Partial “Keeran Point” rims of Rockport Incised, var.Plank Bridge. (b composed of two sherds that fit together.) (See Appendix K for prove-nience data.)

a

b

c

d

e f

g h

0 3

cm


321

As noted above, the “Ayres Point motif” is presentin minor amounts at sites yielding Rockport ceram-ics (Campbell 1962:332, Figure 1; Corbin 1974:Fig-ure 14; Suhm and Jelks 1962:Plate 67, M). It is farmore common at sites in the Galveston Bay area whereit occurs on sherds of Goose Creek Incised and SanJacinto Incised (W. Black 1989b:15-17; Ricklis1994a:Table 7.7, Figures 7.13, 7.22, 7.23). It doesnot appear on sherds farther to the east in Louisianaor within the Lower Mississippi Valley, suggestingthat it is principally an upper Texas coast motif.

Rockport Incised, “Bendewald Pointmotif” (n=12, including one partiallyreconstructed vessel)

The “Bendewald Point motif” is similar to the“Ayres Point motif” save that the pendant trianglesare open rather than filled with incised lines (Fig-ure 7-27). Sometimes there is a single horizontal

zoning line present beneath the triangles, and on afew occasions there are single vertical lines withinalternating pendant triangles.

There are four sherds plus one partially recon-structed vessel that exhibit the “Bendewald Pointmotif.” 9 Of the sherds, two (one rim and one bodysherd) were classified as Rockport Incised, var. MissionLake while the other two (also one rim and one body

Figure 7-23. Rockport Incised, “Keeran Point motif” with diagonal overincised lines. (a) Ideal-ized “Keeran Point” vessel with horizontal lines overincised by diagonal lines;(b-c) “Keeran Point” rims with lip present, indicating decorative zone begins im-mediately below lip (b on Mustang Lake paste, c on Sommerville paste); (d-h) Par-tial “Keeran Point” rim sherds (d-e on Mission Lake paste, f-g on Mustang Lakepaste, h on Plank Bridge paste). (See Appendix K for provenience data.)

a

b c d

e f

g h

0 3

cm

9 Although sherds from the surface collection were not includedin the motif analysis, it is worth noting again the unique sherd ofRockport Incised, var. Plank Bridge (see Figure 7-3) that exhib-its red pigment within, and adjacent to, the incised lines, as it isan excellent example of the “Bendewald Point motif.” The sherdcontains four close-spaced, horizontal, parallel lines situated im-mediately below the lip, plus black banding on the top and outeredge of the lip. Overall, the parallel lines extend downward fromthe lip for a distance of about 5 mm, while the pendant trianglesextend another 6 mm below the lowermost line.


322

Figure 7-24. Rockport Incised, “Keeran Point motif” with crosshatched overincising. (a) Idealized“Keeran Point” vessel with band of horizontal lines overincised by crosshatchedlines; (b-e) Partial “Keeran Point” rims with crosshatched overincising (b onMustang Lake paste with red pigment in lines, c on Sommerville paste, d on Rockportpaste, and e on Plank Bridge paste). (See Appendix K for provenience data.)

a

b c

d e

0 3

cm

Figure 7-25. Rockport Incised, “Ayres Point motif” with pendant triangles filled withslanted lines. (a) Idealized “Ayres Point” vessel; (b-c) Partial “Ayres Point”rims exhibiting pendant triangles with slanted lines (b on Mustang Lakepaste and c on Mission Lake paste). (See Appendix K for provenience data.)

a

b

c

0 3

cm


323

Figure 7-26. Additional examples of Rockport Incised, “Ayres Point motif.” (a) Idealized“Ayres Point” vessel with pendant triangles filled with crossed lines; (b) Par-tial rim of Rockport Incised, var. Rockport exhibiting the crossed-line, pen-dant-triangle version of the “Ayres Point motif;” (c) Complete rim of RockportIncised, var. Mustang Lake with the “Ayres Point motif” and coalescing lineswithin the pendant triangle; (d) Idealized “Ayres Point” vessel with pendanttriangles filled with coalescing lines. (See Appendix K for provenience data.)

a

b

c

d

0 3

cm

0 3

cm


324

sherd) were identified as var. Mustang Lake. TheMission Lake rim contains four horizontal lines thatoccur in a band that extends from the lip downwardfor 5 mm (see Figure 7-27, e). Below these lines,the open triangles extend down for another 4 mm.Thus, the entire motif covers only the upper 9 mmof the vessel. The Mustang Lake rim also exhibitsfour horizontal lines in a band extending down from

the lip for 7 mm (see Figure 7-27, c). The pendanttriangles cover an additional 7 mm, limiting the entiredecorative field to the upper 14 mm of the vessel.

The partially reconstructed vessel is the mostimpressive ceramic item recovered during the ex-cavations at Guadalupe Bay (see Figure 7-27, a-b).It is made up of nine nondecorated body sherds, two

Figure 7-27. Rockport Incised, “Bendewald Point motif.” (a) Idealized “Bendewald Point” vessel;(b) Partially reconstructed vessel of Rockport Incised, var. Mustang Lake exhibiting the“Bendewald Point motif;” (c-d) Complete “Bendewald Point” rims (c on Mustang Lakepaste, d on Mission Lake paste); (e-f) Partial “Bendewald Point” rims (e on MissionLake paste, f on Mustang Lake paste). (See Appendix K for provenience data.)

cm

0 5

a

b

c d e f

0 3

cm


325

rim sherds exhibiting only horizontal lines, and sixsherds with both horizontal lines and the pendanttriangles (three of which are rims). All of those withincisions were classified as Rockport Incised, var.Mustang Lake, while the nondecorated body sherdsoriginally were classed as Rockport Plain, var. Austwell.Taken together, the decorative field is quite broad,and covers the upper 40 mm of the vessel. Thereare nine horizontal lines that occupy the top 27 mmof the field, plus a zoned area of pendant trianglesthat extends down from the lowest horizontal linefor an additional 13 mm.

As far as the authors can determine, the “Bende-wald Point motif” is illustrated in only one otherstudy from the coastal bend region (Ricklis 1995d:Figure 21). However, “Bendewald Point” and/or verysimilar motifs appear, to a limited extent, on GooseCreek and San Jacinto Incised sherds from the up-per Texas coast (Aten 1983b:12.4, 12.6; W. Black1989:17; Corbin 1974:Figure 14; Ricklis 1994a:Table7.7, Figures 7.15, 7.21, 7.22). Similar motifs alsoare common, either as triangular punctations or in-cised triangles, on several ceramic types typical of

the Coles Creek and early Plaquemine cultures inLouisiana and the Lower Mississippi Valley, par-ticularly Coles Creek Incised, Mazique Incised,and Plaquemine Brushed (Belmont n.d.; Phillips1970; Williams and Brain 1983; see also Ricklis1994a:Figure 7.24). Considering all of this, it is likelythat the Guadalupe Bay site is located either at orvery near the southern edge of the overall distribu-tion of the “Bendewald Point motif.” The motif’smajor area of distribution appears to be situated fartherup the Texas coast and on into coastal Louisiana.

Rockport Incised, “Foster Point motif” (n=2)

The final motif recognized for Rockport In-cised at Guadalupe Bay includes the coupling ofmultiple horizontal lines with an underlying zoneof crosshatched lines, all situated around the up-per part of the vessel’s exterior (Figure 7-28). Inthis instance, the horizontal lines are identical tothose noted above for the “Grassy Point,” “AyresPoint,” and “Bendewald Point” motifs. The cross-hatched lines apparently serve the same “embel-lishment” purpose as the pendant triangles recog-

Figure 7-28. Rockport Incised, “Foster Point motif.” (a) Idealized “Foster Point” vessel; (b) Com-plete “Foster Point” rim of Rockport Incised, var. Sommerville; (c) Partial “Foster Point”rim of Rockport Incised, var. Mission Lake. (See Appendix K for provenience data.)

a

b c

0 3

cm


326

nized as elements of the “Ayres Point” and “BendewaldPoint” motifs.

Although there are many sherds exhibiting cross-hatched lines at Guadalupe Bay (see Table 7-14),only two can be confidently assigned to the “FosterPoint motif.” The remainder are from small sherdsthat lack the associated horizontal lines, so it is notcertain if they are elements of “Foster Point” or “CedarPoint.” One of the two sherds is a complete rimclassed as Rockport Incised, var. Sommerville (seeFigure 7-28, b). It exhibits eight narrow, relativelysloppy, horizontal lines that cover the upper 22 mmof the rim. These lines are underlain by equally sloppycrosshatched lines that extend downward for another10 cm. In addition to the general sloppiness of thedecoration, all lines have pronounced areas of “pushed-up” clay or burring along their margins indicatingthat the paste of the vessel was fairly wet when theincising occurred. The other “Foster Point” speci-men is a body sherd classified as Rockport Incised,var. Mission Lake (see Figure 7-28, c). It containstwo relatively fine, well-made horizontal lines overlyinga relatively wide band of crosshatching that is at least23 mm wide. Although some burring is present alongthe margins of the lines, all are more carefully in-cised than those of the other specimen.

The “Foster Point motif” represents one of theearliest designs ever illustrated for Rockport ceramics,having been included by Potter (1930:Plate 7) in hisinitial study of decorated pottery from the coastalbend area. Somewhat surprisingly, to the authors’knowledge no subsequent publications on the regionprovide any additional illustrated examples. It alsois surprising to find that the motif is not particu-larly common farther up the coast. Only one ex-ample of a similar, but not identical, motif has beenillustrated from the Galveston Bay area (W. Black1989b:13). It also is lacking from the Louisiana coastand Lower Mississippi Valley. This strongly sug-gests that the motif may have its strongest showingalong the central Texas coast, and it may prove tobe an excellent marker of Karankawan culture. Itsrelative scarcity even in this potential heartland maylessen its overall usefulness, however.

Rockport Incised Motifs by Analysis Unit

Table 7-20 lists the various motif sherds ofRockport Incised by analysis unit. As with previ-ous discussions of this sort, it was hoped that ex-amination by analysis unit might help identify chro-nological and/or intrasite spatial trends that could

be meaningful to future studies. Unfortunately, dueto the apparent mixed nature of the Stratum 2 midden(AUs 2 through 5) few patterns immediately becomeobvious. For instance, all motifs that occur in theupper portions of Stratum 2 (AUs 2 and 3) (“GrassyPoint,” “Marsh Point,” “Cox Point,” “Cedar Point,”and “Keeran Point”) also occur in the lower portionsof the stratum (AUs 4 and 5), and usually in com-parable amounts. Only “Keeran Point” shows a sig-nificantly greater amount in AU 3 vs. AU 5 (10 vs.4 sherds), but this is offset by the presence of anadditional four sherds from AU 6, the Stratum 3 Rangiamidden beneath Stratum 2 in Block 3 (and the pos-sible origin for many of the sherds located in thelower portion of Stratum 2), plus two sherds fromAU 7, the apparent Rockport oyster deposit in Block 3.

Despite the above, three motifs (“Ayres Point,”“Bendewald Point,” and “Foster Point”) occur onlyin the lower portions of Stratum 2 (AUs 4 and 5)and/or the underlying Stratum 3 Rangia midden inBlock 3 (AU 6). Although the sample size for eachof these motifs is relatively small, and includes theeight sherds of “Bendewald Point” from the partiallyreconstructed vessel found in Sample Unit N70W110,these motifs may represent early Rockport phasedesigns worthy of future chronological consideration.

Spatially, most of the motif sherds, like most ofthe other ceramics, were found in the area of Block3 (AUs 3, 5, 6, and 7), although a small number ofmotif specimens also came from the area around Blocks1 and 2 (AUs 2 and 4). The latter included examplesof “Grassy Point,” “Cedar Point,” “Ayres Point,”“Bendewald Point,” and “Foster Point.” Interest-ingly, of those motifs with relatively large samplesizes, no “Keeran Point” sherds were identified inthe area of Blocks 1 and 2. What this means is un-certain, if it means anything at all, but it may pointto a link between the “Keeran Point motif” and ves-sels associated with feasting and/or ceremonies, ac-tivities believed to have taken place around Block 3.

Rockport Black Motifs

There are seven motifs recognized for RockportBlack (Table 7-21). Some are similar to those notedbelow for Rockport Black-on-gray, although thereare several differences that may prove meaningfulin the future. On the contrary, it may later be found,with greater recognition of motifs from other sites,that there are no differences between the painted wares,and a single set of motif names could be used tocover both Rockport Black and Rockport Black-on-


327

Tabl

e 7-

20.

Dec

orat

ive

Mot

ifs

of R

ockp

ort

Inci

sed,

by

Ana

lysi

s U

nit.

Mo

tifs

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

To

tal

% T

otal

"G

rass

y P

oin

t"va

r. R

ockp

ort

00.

004

18.1

80

0.00

14.

353

16.6

70

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

89

.41

var.

Mis

sion

Lak

e0

0.00

14.

551

9.09

313

.04

211

.11

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

150

.00

89

.41

var.

Pla

nk B

ridg

e0

0.00

14.

550

0.00

14.

351

5.56

00.

000

0.00

110

0.00

00.

001

50.0

05

5.8

8va

r. S

omm

ervi

lle

00.

001

4.55

00.

001

4.35

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

22

.35

var.

Mus

tang

Lak

e3

75.0

01

4.55

00.

001

4.35

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

55

.88

"G

rass

y P

oin

t"

tota

l3

75

.00

83

6.3

61

9.0

97

30

.43

63

3.3

30

0.0

00

0.0

01

10

0.0

00

0.0

02

10

0.0

02

83

2.9

4

"M

arsh

Poi

nt"

var.

Roc

kpor

t0

0.00

29.

090

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

002

2.3

5va

r. M

issi

on L

ake

00.

000

0.00

00.

002

8.70

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

22

.35

"M

arsh

P

oin

t"

tota

l0

0.0

02

9.0

90

0.0

02

8.7

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

04

4.7

1

"C

ox

Poi

nt"

var.

Mis

sion

Lak

e0

0.00

14.

550

0.00

313

.04

422

.22

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

008

9.4

1

"C

ox

Poi

nt"

to

tal

00

.00

14

.55

00

.00

31

3.0

44

22

.22

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

89

.41

"C

edar

Poi

nt"

var.

Mis

sion

Lak

e0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

5.56

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

1.1

8va

r. M

usta

ng L

ake

125

.00

00.

000

0.00

14.

351

5.56

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

003

3.5

3va

r. P

lank

Bri

dge

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

4.35

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

11

.18

var.

Som

mer

vill

e0

0.00

14.

550

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

1.1

8

"C

edar

Poi

nt"

tot

al1

25

.00

14

.55

00

.00

28

.70

21

1.1

10

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

06

7.0

6

"K

e er a

n P

oin

t"va

r. R

ockp

ort

00.

001

4.55

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

11

.18

var.

Mis

sion

Lak

e0

0.00

418

.18

00.

001

4.35

15.

560

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

67

.06

var.

Pla

nk B

ridg

e0

0.00

29.

090

0.00

313

.04

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

55

.88

var.

Som

mer

vill

e0

0.00

29.

090

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

002

2.3

5va

r. M

usta

ng L

ake

00.

001

4.55

00.

000

0.00

316

.67

210

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

67

.06

"K

e er a

n P

oin

t" t

otal

00

.00

10

45

.45

00

.00

41

7.3

94

22

.22

21

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

20

23

.53

"A

yre s

P

oin

t"va

r. R

ockp

ort

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

110

0.00

00.

001

1.1

8va

r. M

issi

on L

ake

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

4.35

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

11

.18

var.

Mus

tang

Lak

e0

0.00

00.

001

9.09

28.

700

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

003

3.5

3

"A

yre s

P

oin

t"

tota

l0

0.0

00

0.0

01

9.0

93

13

.04

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

11

00

.00

00

.00

55

.88

"B

end

ewal

d P

oin

t"va

r. M

issi

on L

ake

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

4.35

15.

560

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

22

.35

var.

Mus

tang

Lak

e*0

0.00

00.

008

72.7

31

4.35

15.

560

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

10

11

.76

"B

end

ewal

d

Poi

nt"

to

tal

00

.00

00

.00

87

2.7

32

8.7

02

11

.11

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

12

14

.12

"F

oste

r P

oin

t"va

r. M

issi

on L

ake

00.

000

0.00

19.

090

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

11

.18

var.

Som

mer

vill

e0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

100.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

11

.18

"F

oste

r P

oin

t"

tota

l0

0.0

00

0.0

01

9.0

90

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

01

10

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

02

2.3

5

Sit

e T

otal

41

00

.00

22

10

0.0

01

11

00

.00

23

10

0.0

01

81

00

.00

21

00

.00

11

00

.00

11

00

.00

11

00

.00

21

00

.00

85

10

0.0

0

AU

2

AU

3

AU

4

An

alys

is

Un

its

AU

5

AU

6

AU

7

* S

herd

s fr

om A

U 4

are

fro

m p

arti

ally

rec

onst

ruct

ed ja

r fr

om S

ampl

e U

nit N

70W

110.

AU

8A

U 1

0A

U 1

1N

o A

U


328

gray designs. Until then, however, the motifs of thetwo types will receive separate names. It also shouldbe noted that several of the motifs are based on smallsherds making establishment of the motifs somewhattentative. It is hoped, however, that future studieseither will confirm or reject the legitimacy of thesemotifs.

It should be reiterated at this point that sherdsexhibiting only painted bands around the lip were,by definition, classified either as Rockport Black orRockport Black-on-gray. As such, these sherds forma large percentage of all decorated designs of thesetwo types. Earlier investigators also had noted thesame preponderance of black-banded rims (Campbell1958a, 1962), and Ricklis (1990b:616-617, Figure 65,1995a:199, Figure 17) set up banded rims as a separatetype that he labeled “Rockport Black-on-gray I.” Sinceonly small rim sherds are present in the current col-lection, as opposed to whole vessels or relativelylarge rims, it is impossible to determine if the paintedband occurs alone, and, thus, is the only decorationon the vessel, or if it actually is associated with otherdecorative elements. For that reason, the presentauthors were somewhat hesitant at first to set up blackbanding as a decorative motif. To have ignored blackbanding, however, would have eliminated one of themost potentially prominent forms of Rockport deco-

ration from the list of recognized motifs. As paststudies (Campbell 1958a, 1962; Potter 1930; Ricklis1990b, 1995a; Suhm and Krieger 1954; Suhm andJelks 1962) have shown that vessels with only blackbanding do, indeed, exist, the decision eventuallywas made to identify rim sherds with black bandingas a specific motif. It should be understood, how-ever, that many of these sherds may actually befrom vessels with some form of body decoration.Until a selection of whole vessels or a sample oflarge-enough sherds is examined, it probably willbe impossible to know the percentage of vessels ina Rockport ceramic assemblage that contain only black-banded rims.

Rockport Black, “Carancahua Bay motif”(n=143)

As just discussed, the “Carancahua Bay motif”(along with its sister motif, “Steamboat Island,” seebelow) consists simply of a black rim band that pri-marily circles the exterior and top portions of a vessel’slip (Figure 7-29). At times the band may also occuron the interior edge of the lip. “Carancahua Bay”apparently represents the most common of all RockportBlack motifs, but, as noted above, that may be morea reflection of sherd size than actual prominence.Sherds exhibiting either the “Carancahua Bay” or


Motifs

"Carancahua Bay" 60 0 17 0 10 0 50 0 6 0 1 4 3 9 2 . 8 6

"Copano Bay" 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 . 3 0

"Espíritu Santo Bay" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 . 6 5

"Pats Bay" 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 . 6 5

"Aransas Bay" 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 1 . 3 0

"Shoalwater Bay" 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 . 6 5

"Mesquite Bay" 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 2 . 6 0

Total 6 4 0 1 9 0 1 1 0 5 3 0 7 0 1 5 4 1 0 0 . 0 0

var .Rockpor

t

var .Elm Bayou

var .Kuy Creek

var .Lol i ta

var .Spring Bayou

Rockport Black

Table 7-21. Decorative Motifs Recognized on Sherds of Rockport Black at Guadalupe Bay.


329

“Steamboat Island” motifs are reported to make upthe bulk of all decorated ceramics from previousRockport assemblages (Campbell 1958a:435,1962:332; Suhm and Krieger 1954:384; Suhm andJelks 1962:131), and, as just noted, Ricklis (1990b:616-617, Figure 65) set up the design as a separate typethat he labeled Rockport Black-on-gray I.

There are 143 “Carancahua Bay” rim sherds inthe current collection. The majority of these (n=117;81.8 percent) originally were classified as RockportBlack, vars. Rockport and Lolita, although all otherRockport Black varieties also were included (seeTable�7-21). As with all black-banded lip deco-ration (see Table 7-15), most of the “CarancahuaBay” sherds contained asphaltum on the top, ex-terior, and interior of the vessel’s lip (n=81; 56.6

percent), while lesser quantities had asphaltumonly on the top of the lip (n=25; 17.5 percent),the top and exterior portion of the lip (n=20;14.0 percent), or the top and interior part of thelip (n=17; 11.9 percent). Six of the sherds, allwith asphaltum paint only on the top of the lip,also had incised lines placed across the lip (threewith perpendicular lines and three with slantedlines) Two others, again with paint only on top ofthe lip, exhibited lip notches (both of the narrow form).

As noted, the “Carancahua Bay motif” has beenrecognized for years as one of the prime decorativedesigns associated with Rockport ceramics (Campbell1958a:435, 1962:332; Suhm and Krieger 1954:384;Suhm and Jelks 1962:131; Ricklis 1990b, 1995a),and it occurs quite commonly on most Rockport sites

Figure 7-29. Rockport Black, “Carancahua Bay motif.” (a) Idealized “Carancahua Bay” vessel; (b-k) Rim sherds exhibiting the “Carancahua Bay motif.” (b-c with Rockport paste, d-hwith Lolita paste, i with Spring Bayou paste, j with Kuy Creek paste, and k with ElmBayou paste.) (See Appendix K for provenience data.)

a

b c d

e f

g h

i j k

0 3

cm


330

along the central Texas coast. It also is worth not-ing the occurrence of similar lip banding on the rimsof several vessels typed by Mounger (1959:168-169,Plates 13, 15, 17, 25) as Goliad Red-on-buff and GoliadBlack-on-buff from Mission Espíritu Santo. Thisindicates that the idea of lip banding lasted into his-toric times in the region.

Rockport Black, “Copano Bay motif”(n=2, but probably ~70)

“Copano Bay” (along with its sister motif“Matagorda Island”) represents one of the most com-mon of all asphaltum-painted motifs found on Rockportceramics. It is marked by a black lip band that usu-ally covers both the top and exterior edge of the vesselrim, sometimes the interior edge, and from whichdescend individually painted wavy or squiggled verticallines on the exterior portion of the vessel (Figure 7-30).Such lines can be either slightly or highly wavy, andbe narrow, medium, or wide in width. With more

data in the future, it may be possible to identify ad-ditional motifs based on the width and “waviness”of the lines. In the past, this motif would have beenincluded in the type “Rockport Black-on-gray II”proposed by Ricklis (1990b:617-619, Figure 65).

Although this motif probably is one of the mostcommon of all motifs present on Rockport Blackceramics, only two rim sherds from Guadalupe Baycould be definitely assigned to the category. Nev-ertheless, most, if not all, of the other Rockport Blacksherds with vertical wavy lines, curved lines, and/or wavy lines of unknown orientation (see Table 7-13)probably are elements of the “Copano Bay motif.”However, since these sherds might be from vesselsthat contain alternating rows of dots and wavy lines(similar to the “Turnstake Island motif” of RockportBlack-on-gray) or other motifs not yet recognized,it is not possible to confidently assign them to “CopanoBay.” Likewise, as noted earlier, it is possible thatmost of the vertical straight lines identified as a single

Figure 7-30. Rockport Black, “Copano Bay motif.” (a) Idealized “Copano Bay” vessel; (b-c) Rim sherds of Rockport Black, var. Rockport with the “Copano Bay motif.”(See Appendix K for provenience data.)

a b

0 3

cm


331

design element on Table 7-13 actually represent verysmall segments of wavy lines that were too short toinclude a recognizable bend or wave in the line. Thus,if all of these additional design elements are included,then something on the order of about 70 “CopanoBay” sherds may actually be represented in the presentcollection.

The two definite “Copano Bay” sherds originallywere classified as Rockport Black, var. Rockport.Both include a wide lip band (greater than 4 mm)on the exterior, interior, and top of a flat lip, coupledwith slightly wavy, wide vertical lines.

The “Copano Bay motif” (and/or the “MatagordaIsland motif”) was one of the earliest of all decora-tive patterns recognized on Rockport ceramics (Potter1930:43, Plate 8), and it has consistently remainedso throughout the years (Campbell 1958a:435, Fig-ure 5, 1962:332, Figure 1; Ricklis 1990b:617-619;Suhm and Krieger 1954:384, Plate 73; Suhm andJelks 1962:131, Plate 66). It also is one of the mostwidespread motifs, occurring on sites throughout allof the central Texas coastal area. Ricklis (1996:30)has suggested that many of the vessels exhibitingthis motif might have functioned specifically as con-tainers for water or other liquids, and that the wavylines symbolically represent the flowing liquid.

Interestingly, Mounger (1959:Plate 23) illustratesseveral sherds of Goliad Black-on-buff from Mis-sion Espíritu Santo that contain vertical wavy linesreminiscent of the “Copano Bay motif.” One of thesherds (in the upper right-hand corner of the plate)appears to be a rim with an associated black band.If the latter is the case, then it can be hypothesizedthat a motif very much like that of “Copano Bay”still was in vogue at least into the eighteenth cen-tury.10

Rockport Black, “Espíritu Santo Bay motif” (n=1)

This motif is similar to that of “Copano Bay”save that the lines descending from the vessel rim

are straight diagonals rather than vertical squiggles(Figure 7-31). Although only one definite exampleof this motif is present in the current sample, Campbell(1958a:435, Figure 5, f-g, 1962:332, Figure 1, I, K)notes its occurrence at other sites in the region. Forthat reason it is considered a viable decorative pat-tern.

The one sherd of “Espíritu Santo Bay” from theGuadalupe Bay site was classed as Rockport Black,var. Spring Bayou. It exhibits a medium-wide bandon the top and interior of a rounded lip, with a single,narrow line descending from the band. Aside fromthe few sherds discussed and illustrated by Campbell,no other examples of this motif are known.

Rockport Black, “Pats Bay motif” (n=1)

The “Pats Bay motif” is almost identical to the“Espíritu Santo motif” except that the lines descendingfrom the vessel rim are vertical rather than diago-nal (Figure 7-32). Again, only one definite exampleof the motif was present at Guadalupe Bay. It con-sists of a rim sherd of Rockport Black, var. Lolitawith a round lip and a wide black band on the exte-rior, interior, and top of the lip. The vertical linesare relatively wide, measuring more than 4 mm across.

Although not common, vertical straight lines areknown from other Rockport assemblages from thecentral Texas coast (Campbell 1958a:435, 1962:332).It may be that these straight lines are nothing morethan aberrant versions of wavy vertical lines. If not,however, than they may have some chronologicalor spatial significance, and, for that reason, futurestudies should address their possible presence in anassemblage.

It may be worth noting that Mounger (1959:Plate17) illustrates several examples of Goliad Red-on-buff from Mission Espíritu Santo that exhibit verti-cal painted lines similar to those of the “Pats Baymotif.” Thus, as with the “Copano Bay motif,” itmay be possible that designs very similar to “PatsBay” lasted into the Historic period in the region.

10 It should be noted, however, that six of the sherds illustratedby Mounger (1959:Plates 21-23), and identified as Goliad Black-on-buff, had been illustrated previously by Suhm and Krieger(1954:Plate 73, A, C, D-E, I, R) as examples of Rockport Black-on-gray. These same sherds subsequently were illustratedby Suhm and Jelks (1962:Plate 66, A, C, D-E, I, R) again asRockport Black-on-gray. Thus, the uncertain classification

of these specimens raises questions about the actual natureof Goliad Black-on-buff and whether it truly represents AranamaIndian ceramics. Perhaps these sherds simply are portionsof Rockport trade vessels that were utilized by the Aranama,or perhaps they pertain to a minor prehistoric Karankawan occu-pation that existed at the site many years prior to its establish-ment as a Spanish mission.


332

Figure 7-31. Rockport Black, “Espíritu Santo Bay motif.” (a) Idealized “EspírituSanto Bay” vessel; (b) Rim sherd of Rockport Black, var. Spring Bayouwith the “Espíritu Santo Bay motif.” (See Appendix K for prove-nience data.)

a

b

0 3

cm

Figure 7-32. Rockport Black, “Pats Bay motif.” (a) Idealized “Pats Bay” vessel;(b) Rim sherd of Rockport Black, var. Lolita with the “Pats Bay”motif. (See Appendix K for provenience data.)

a

b

0 3

cm


333

Rockport Black, “Aransas Bay motif” (n=2)

“Aransas Bay” (and its decorative sister, “KenyonIsland”) appears to be a minor, but relatively con-sistent, motif in Rockport assemblages along the centralTexas coast. It consists of a painted black band aroundthe lip coupled with vertical rows of individuallypainted dots that descend downward from the bandon the exterior portion of the vessel (Figure 7-33).

An excellent example of either the “Aransas Bay”or “Kenyon Island” motif, from the Blink Bonniesite near Rockport, is illustrated by Potter (1930:44,Plate 9). Other potential examples are reported byCampbell (1962:332, Figure 1, L), Suhm and Krieger(1954:384), and Suhm and Jelks (1962:131). Pre-vious investigations at Guadalupe Bay (Weinsteinand Scott 1972:Figures 7-5 and 7-9) also recoveredsherds exhibiting either “Aransas Bay” or “KenyonIsland” motifs.

Two rim sherds of “Aransas Bay” are presentin the current collection. Both have wide bands present

on the exterior, top, and interior portions of flat lips,with medium-wide dots descending down from theband. One sherd was classed originally as RockportBlack, var. Lolita, while the other was identified asRockport Black, var. Rockport.

In addition to sites with Rockport components,designs similar to “Aransas Bay” are shown byMounger (1959:Plates 13, 25) from Mission EspírituSanto near Goliad. In those cases, sherds of bothGoliad Red-on-buff and Goliad Black-on-buff ex-hibit rows of individual dots descending from ves-sel rims. As with the “Copano Bay motif,” it maybe assumed, therefore, that a decorative design similarto “Aransas Bay” lasted at least until the eighteenthcentury.

Rockport Black, “Shoalwater Bay motif”(n=1)

This is a rather unique motif represented by asingle, wide, horizontal black band that circles theupper part of the interior portion of shallow bowls

Figure 7-33. Rockport Black, “Aransas Bay motif.” (a) Idealized “Aransas Bay” vessel;(b-c) Rim sherds with the “Aransas Bay motif” (b with Lolita paste and cwith Rockport paste). (See Appendix K for provenience data.)

a

b c

0 3

cm


334

and/or plates (Figure 7-34). The lone example inthe current collection occurs on a rim sherd of RockportBlack, var. Lolita that also exhibits black coatingon its top and interior portions. The black band is5�mm wide and located 9�mm below the lip.

Similar, though not identical, designs are illus-trated by Campbell (1958a) from the Live Oak Pointsite. One (Campbell 1958a:Figure 5, c) clearly in-cludes a horizontal band on the interior of a shallowbowl or plate, although several vertical wavy lines alsoare present. Another (Campbell 1958a:Figure 5, u) showstwo horizontal bands on what probably is the exte-rior of the vessel.

Rockport Black, “Mesquite Bay motif” (n=4,but probably 12)

“Mesquite Bay” is a tenuous motif representedby irregular areas of blotchy black painting thatMounger (1959:169) referred to as “uneven dabs”(Figure 7-35). This “dabbing” appears as a numberof individual design elements that apparently covera relatively large area of the exterior of the vessel,as compared to the more carefully applied dots foundon Rockport Black and Rockport Black-on-gray.Dabbed rim sherds in the current collection exhibitboth plain and banded lips. For now, both lip formsare included in the motif, but it may be prudent inthe future to establish separate motifs for those sherdsthat contain lip banding and those that lack suchbanding. Whatever the case, it will be necessary

for future studies to acquire a greater sample of the“Mesquite Bay motif,” particularly on larger sherds,before the validity of this motif can be confirmed.

Previous discussions of Rockport ceramics failto mention any designs similar to “Mesquite Bay,”although sloppily applied asphaltum coatings werenoted by Suhm and Krieger (1954:384) and Suhmand Jelks (1962:131). Those authors attributed suchuneven applications to crack-mending and/or water-proofing attempts. While this may be the case inmost instances, it is possible that some of the sloppycoatings actually represent intentional designs similarto the “Mesquite Bay motif.” This is particularlyconceivable if one compares the sherds initially il-lustrated by Suhm and Krieger (1954:Plate 73) andlater by Suhm and Jelks (1962:Plate 66) with thoseshown by Mounger (1959:Plates 21-23). Six of thesherds illustrated by the former authors, and typedas Rockport Black-on-gray, also are illustrated byMounger and identified as Goliad Black-on-buff. Ofthese, at least two (Mounger 1959:Plates 21-22; Suhmand Jelks 1962:Plate 66, I, R) could be examples ofthe random dabbing mentioned by Mounger.

Only four rims in the current sample could beplaced in the “Mesquite Bay” category, although itis likely that the other eight sherds with dabbing (seeTable 7-13) probably are from “Mesquite Bay” ves-sels. Two of the four examples of “Mesquite Bay”originally were classified as Rockport Black, var.Elm Bayou, while one was identified as Rockport

Figure 7-34. Rockport Black, “Shoalwater Bay motif.” (a) Idealized “Shoalwater Bay” ves-sel; (b) Rim sherd of Rockport Black, var. Lolita exhibiting the “Shoalwater Baymotif.” (See Appendix K for provenience data.)

a b

0 3

cm


335

Black, var. Rockport, and the other as Rockport Black,var. Kuy Creek. Two (one Elm Bayou sherd, plusthe Rockport sherd) have wide dabbing on rims thatalso contain black banding on the exterior, interior,and top of a round lip, while another (the other ElmBayou sherd) has black banding on the interior andtop of a flat lip. The Kuy Creek sherd has a roundlip, but no black band.

Rockport Black Motifs by Analysis Unit

Once again, the mixed nature of the Stratum2 deposit makes it difficult to identify any clear-cut chronological trends among the differentRockport Black motifs. Nevertheless, a few ob-servations can be made. First, the most commonmotif, “Carancahua Bay,” has its greatest show-ing in the upper levels of the site (Table 7-22).The majority of specimens came from the upperportion of Stratum 2 (AUs 2 and 3) (n=72; 50.4 per-cent), with an additional 11 sherds (7.7 percent)from the overlying Stratum 1 colluvium (AU 1).In contrast, only 57 sherds (39.9 percent) came

from the lower Rockport deposits, including theStratum 3 Rangia midden (AUs 4, 5, and 6). Thismay suggest a general increase in popularity forthe “Carancahua Bay motif” towards the latterportion of the Rockport phase. Also occurringonly in the upper levels of the site were sherdsof the “Espíritu Santo Bay” (AU 1) and “ShoalwaterBay” (AU 3) motifs, although the small samplesize of each precludes any definitive statements.

Motifs occurring only in the lower Rockport levelsinclude “Copano Bay” (AUs 5 and 6) and “Pats Bay”(AU 6) (see Table 7-22) Again, however, the smallsample size of each makes any conclusive remarksimpossible. Likewise, any statements regarding thedistribution of individual motifs across the site arelimited by the small sample sizes for most motifs.Unfortunately, in the one instance where there areenough sherds for potential interpretation, the dis-tribution of sherds of the “Carancahua Bay motif”generally reflects that of the overall ceramic assem-blage, with the majority of the specimens (n=105;73.4 percent) coming from the Block 3 area.

Figure 7-35. Rockport Black, “Mesquite Bay motif.” (a) Idealized “Mesquite Bay” vessel;(b-c) Rim sherds with the “Mesquite Bay motif” (b with Kuy Creek paste,c with Rockport paste, and d with Elm Bayou paste). (See Appendix K forprovenience data.)

a

c d

0 3

cm

b


336

Mo

tifs

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

To

tal

% T

otal

"Car

anca

hua

Bay

"va

r. R

ockp

ort

433

.33

214

.29

3150

.00

545

.45

731

.82

1137

.93

00.

000

0.00

00.

006

03

8.9

6va

r. E

lm B

ayou

18.

334

28.5

74

6.45

00.

002

9.09

517

.24

110

0.00

00.

000

0.00

17

11

.04

var.

Kuy

Cre

ek3

25.0

00

0.00

58.

060

0.00

00.

002

6.90

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

06

.49

var.

Lol

ita

325

.00

750

.00

1524

.19

545

.45

940

.91

931

.03

00.

001

100.

001

50.0

05

03

2.4

7va

r. S

prin

g B

ayou

00.

001

7.14

34.

840

0.00

14.

551

3.45

00.

000

0.00

00.

006

3.9

0

"C

aran

cah

ua

Bay

" t

otal

11

91

.67

14

10

0.0

05

89

3.5

51

09

0.9

11

98

6.3

62

89

6.5

51

10

0.0

01

10

0.0

01

50

.00

14

39

2.8

6

"C

opan

o B

ay"

var.

Roc

kpor

t0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

19.

091

4.55

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

21

.30

"C

opan

o B

ay"

tot

al0

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

01

9.0

91

4.5

50

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

02

1.3

0

"E

spír

itu

S

anto

B

ay"

var.

Spr

ing

Bay

ou1

8.33

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

10

.65

"E

spír

itu

S

anto

B

ay"

to

tal

18

.33

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

10

.65

"P

ats

Bay

"va

r. L

olit

a0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

13.

450

0.00

00.

000

0.00

10

.65

"P

ats

Bay

" t

otal

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

13

.45

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

10

.65

"A

ran

sas

Bay

"va

r. R

ockp

ort

00.

000

0.00

11.

610

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

0.6

5va

r. L

olit

a0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

4.55

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

10

.65

"A

ran

sas

Bay

" t

otal

00

.00

00

.00

11

.61

00

.00

14

.55

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

21

.30

"S

hoa

lwat

e r B

ay"

var.

Lol

ita

00.

000

0.00

11.

610

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

0.6

5

"S

hoa

lwat

e r

Bay

"

tota

l0

0.0

00

0.0

01

1.6

10

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

01

0.6

5

"M

e sq

uit

e B

ay"

var.

Roc

kpor

t0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

4.55

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

10

.65

var.

Elm

Bay

ou0

0.00

00.

002

3.23

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

21

.30

var.

Kuy

Cre

ek0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

50.0

01

0.6

5

"M

e sq

uit

e B

ay"

tot

al0

0.0

00

0.0

02

3.2

30

0.0

01

4.5

50

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

01

50

.00

42

.60

Sit

e T

otal

12

10

0.0

01

41

00

.00

62

10

0.0

01

11

00

.00

22

10

0.0

02

91

00

.00

11

00

.00

11

00

.00

21

00

.00

15

41

00

.00

AU

1

AU

2

AU

3

AU

4

An

alys

is

Un

its

AU

5

AU

6

Tabl

e 7-

22.

Dec

orat

ive

Mot

ifs

of R

ockp

ort

Bla

ck, b

y A

naly

sis

Uni

t.

AU

8A

U 1

4N

o A

U


337

Rockport Black-on-gray Motifs

As with Rockport Black, there are seven motifsrecognized for Rockport Black-on-gray (Table 7-23).Four are equivalent to motifs found on Rockport Black,but three represent different decorative ideas.

Prior to the individual motif discussions presentedbelow, an explanation should be provided for the lackof a named motif that includes vertical, straight-linepainting on the upper, exterior portion of RockportBlack-on-gray vessels; a motif similar to that iden-tified as “Pats Bay” for Rockport Black. Although28 sherds with vertical straight lines were presentin the collection (see Table 7-12), none was of suf-ficient size, nor did it contain a large-enough rim,for the authors to be certain that a motif equivalentto “Pats Bay” was intended. While it is conceiv-able that some of these sherds may be from vesselswith vertical, straight lines, it is not possible to as-sign any to a new motif. With more data from othersites and collections, however, recognition of sucha motif may be possible.

Rockport Black-on-gray, “Steamboat Islandmotif” (n=322)

This is the Rockport Black-on-gray equivalentto the “Carancahua Bay motif” of Rockport Black,

and most previous statements regarding that motifalso pertain to “Steamboat Island.” It consists sim-ply of a black rim band that primarily circles theexterior and top portions of a vessel’s lip (Figure 7-36). At times the band also occurs on the interioredge of the lip. Because of its relative simplicity,“Steamboat Island” apparently represents the mostcommon of all Rockport motifs (but see the earlierdiscussion regarding Rockport Black motifs). Ac-cordingly, sherds exhibiting the “Steamboat Islandmotif” are reported to make up the bulk of all deco-rated ceramics from previous Rockport assemblages(Campbell 1958a:435, 1962:332; Suhm and Krieger1954:384; Suhm and Jelks 1962:131). Ricklis(1990b:616-617, Figure 65), therefore, set up the designas a separate type—Rockport Black-on-gray I—toreflect the widespread presence of the motif.

There are 322 sherds of “Steamboat Island” inthe current collection from Guadalupe Bay (seeTable�7-23). As with the “Carancahua Bay motif,”the most common sherds of “Steamboat Island” in-clude those with pastes that lack any secondary in-clusions (classed originally as Rockport Black-on-gray, var. Rockport) or contain only bone inclusions(var. Long Mott). Also in keeping with “CarancahuaBay,” the lip banding of “Steamboat Island” mostregularly occurred on the top, exterior, and interiorportions of the vessel’s lip (n=202; 62.7 percent).


Motifs

"Steamboat Island" 120 0 52 0 38 0 75 0 37 0 3 2 2 9 2 . 8 0

"Matagorda Island" 4 0 5 0 2 0 6 0 0 0 1 7 4 . 9 0

"San José Island" 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 3 0 . 8 6

"Rattlesnake Island" 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 . 2 9

"Kenyon Island" 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 . 5 8

"Turnstake Island" 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 . 2 9

"Long Island" 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 . 2 9

Total 1 2 5 0 5 9 0 4 2 0 8 4 0 3 7 0 3 4 7 1 0 0 . 0 0

var .Rockport

var .Buffalo Lake

var .Hog Bayou

var .Long Mott

Rockport Black-on-gray

var. Mosquito Point

Table 7-23. Decorative Motifs Recognized on Sherds of Rockport Black-on-Gray at Guadalupe Bay.


338

Figure 7-36. Rockport Black-on-gray, “Steamboat Island motif.” (a) Idealized “Steamboat Island”vessel; (b-t) Rim sherds exhibiting the “Steamboat Island” motif (b-e with Rockport paste,f-h with Long Mott paste, i-o with Buffalo Lake paste, p-s with Hog Bayou paste, and twith Mosquito Point paste). (See Appendix K for provenience data.)

a

b c

d e

f g

h i j k l

m n o p

q r s t

0 3

cm


339

This was followed by banding only on the top ofthe lip (n=41; 12.7 percent), on the top and interiorof the lip (again n=41; 12.7 percent), and the topand exterior of the lip (n=32; 9.9 percent). Foursherds also exhibited banding on the top and oneside of the lip, but, due to their small size, it wasimpossible to determine whether the latter placementwas on the interior or exterior part of the vessel. Onesherd also had banding only on the exterior of thelip, while another sherd only had banding on the interiorof the lip.

As noted for “Carancahua Bay,” “SteamboatIsland” has been recognized for years as one of theprincipal decorative designs on Rockport ceramics.Of particular interest is the potential association ofthe motif with relatively late components dating intothe Protohistoric and Historic periods, as evidencedby the presence of similar designs on Goliad Red-on-buff and Goliad Black-on-buff vessels from MissionEspíritu Santo at Goliad (Mounger 1959).

Rockport Black-on-gray,“Matagorda Island motif” (n=17,but probably ~480)

This is Rockport Black-on-gray’s equivalentto the “Copano Bay motif” of Rockport Black, andvirtually all statements concerning the design ele-ments of “Copano Bay” also pertain to “MatagordaIsland.” It is characterized by a black lip bandthat usually covers both the top and exterior edgeof the vessel rim, sometimes the interior edge,and from which descend individually painted wavyor squiggled vertical lines on the exterior portionof the vessel (Figure 7-37). As with “Copano Bay,”such lines can be either slightly or highly wavy,and be narrow, medium, or wide in width. Withadditional study, differences in line quality andwidth may allow for the establishment of moremotifs.

Since there are many more sherds of RockportBlack-on-gray than Rockport Black in the presentcollection (and probably in most other collections,as well), there are many more sherds or potentialsherds of “Matagorda Island” than there are of “CopanoBay.” Seventeen rims can unequivocally be assignedto the motif, while upwards of about 480 additionalsherds might also be from portions of “MatagordaIsland” vessels. As noted for “Copano Bay,” mostof the sherds exhibiting curved lines and/or wavylines of unknown orientation (see Table 7-12) prob-ably are from “Matagorda Island” vessels, while many

of the sherds classed as having vertical straight linescould also be representative of the “Matagorda Is-land motif.” In the latter case, the sherds simplyare too small for the full extent of the painted lineto be visible, making it impossible to identify indi-vidual waves or squiggles in the line.

Of the 17 “Matagorda Island” sherds fromGuadalupe Bay, four were classed as Rockport Black-on-gray, var. Rockport, two as var. Hog Bayou, sixas var. Long Mott, and five as var. Buffalo Lake. Allhave black banding present on the lip, and all butone (one of the Long Mott sherds) have banding onthe exterior, top, and interior of the lip. The LongMott sherd only has banding on the interior and topof the lip. Eleven of the 16 sherds have roundedlips, while the remaining five have flat lips. Two ofthe Buffalo Lake sherds fit together and have incised,perpendicular lines across a flat lip (see Figure 7-37, q).The sherds are almost evenly divided between thosewith wide wavy lines, and those with medium wavylines. None has a narrow wavy line. Likewise, allof the associated bands either are wide (n=11) ormedium (n=6).

Rockport Black-on-gray, “San José Islandmotif” (n=3, but probably 21)

This is the Rockport Black-on-gray equivalentto the “Espíritu Santo Bay motif” of Rockport Black.It consists of diagonal straight lines descending fromthe exterior lips of Rockport Black-on-gray vesselsthat also contain black lip bands (Figure 7-38). Again,all statements regarding previous recognition anddistribution of the “Espíritu Santo Bay motif” per-tain to this motif.

There are three rims in the current collectionthat can be classed as “San José Island” without muchhesitation. It is likely that additional sherds withdiagonal straight lines (see Table 7-12) also are rep-resentative of this motif, but, since those sherds ei-ther are too small or lack rims, definite motif as-signment cannot be made. Of the three rims, twowere classed as Rockport Black-on-gray, var. LongMott and one as var. Rockport. All have wide lipbands on the exterior, top, and interior portions ofthe vessels’ lips. Two (one Long Mott sherd and theRockport sherd) have round lips, and the other (thesecond Long Mott specimen) has a flat lip. Narrow,medium, and wide diagonal lines are included; nar-row on one of the Long Mott sherds, medium on theother Long Mott sherd, and wide on the Rockportsherd.


340

Rockport Black-on-gray,“Rattlesnake Island motif” (n=1)

This is a rather unique motif recognized onlyon one sherd classified as Rockport Black-on-gray,var. Long Mott. It consists of a series of semicircu-lar-shaped, pendant loops that circle the upper partof the vessel’s exterior just below the lip (Figure 7-39).The one example in the current collection also con-tains a medium-wide black band covering the exte-rior, interior, and top of a flat lip; the medium-wideloops descend from this band. Other sherds withportions of the motif may lie hidden among those

specimens that exhibit only curved lines as their designelement (see Table 7-12). As noted above, it is im-possible to properly assign these sherds to a motif,since they could also represent segments of wavylines from either the “Matagorda Island” or “TurnstakeIsland” motifs. Similarly, it also is possible that alike motif may be present on Rockport Black sherdsthat exhibit curved lines as single design elements(see Table 7-13). Again, those sherds were too smallfor definite motif recognition.

It is perhaps significant that this motif is simi-lar, if not identical, to several designs present on

Figure 7-37. Rockport Black-on-gray, “Matagorda Island motif.” (a) Idealized “Matagorda Island”vessel; (b-q) Rim sherds exhibiting the “Matagorda Island motif.” (a-e with Rockportpaste, f-g with Hog Bayou paste; h-m with Long Mott paste, and n-q with Buffalo Lakepaste.) (See Appendix K for provenience data.)

a

b c d

e f g

h i j k l

m n o p

q0 3

cm


341

Figure 7-38. Rockport Black-on-gray, “San José Island motif.” (a) Idealized “San José Island”vessel; (b-d) Rim sherds exhibiting the “San José Island motif” (b with Rockportpaste, c-d with Long Mott paste). (See Appendix K for provenience data.)

a

b c

d

0 3

cm

Figure 7-39. Rockport Black-on-gray, “Rattlesnake Island motif.” (a) Ideal-ized “Rattlesnake Island” vessel; (b) “Rattlesnake Island” rim sherdwith Long Mott paste. (See Appendix K for provenience data.)

a

b

0 3

cm


342

sherds of Goliad Red-on-buff from Mission EspírituSanto at Goliad (Mounger 1959:168, Plates 15-18).It also is interesting to note the lack of similar de-signs on any of the Goliad Black-on-buff sherds fromthe same site (Mounger 1959). In fact, the presentauthors cannot find any examples of the “San JoséIsland motif” either discussed or illustrated in anyprevious study on Rockport ceramics. For thesereasons, there may be a relationship between “SanJosé Island” and relatively late protohistoric and/or historic occupations similar to that at EspírituSanto.

Rockport Black-on-gray, “Kenyon Islandmotif” (n=2)

This is the Rockport Black-on-gray equivalentof the “Aransas Bay motif” of Rockport Black. Assuch, it consists of vertical rows of painted dots thatdescend downward from the lip on the exterior por-tion of the vessel (Figure 7-40). Both banded andplain lips are present in the current collection. Al-though grouped under one motif at this time, it maybe possible in the future to sort these into two sepa-

rate motifs once more data are accumulated on chro-nological and/or geographical differences, if any.

The two sherds from Guadalupe Bay are bothrims and were classified as Rockport Black-on-gray,vars. Hog Bayou and Buffalo Lake. The Hog Bayouspecimen exhibits both narrow- and medium-sizeddots below a round lip that also contains a mediumband on its exterior, interior, and top. The BuffaloLake specimen has wide dots below a round lip thatlacks any sign of a band. An additional 47 sherdscontain isolated dots, and these may also be from“Kenyon Island” vessels. Because of their size and/or lack of a rim, however, it is not possible to confi-dently sort these to their proper motif. They might,just as likely, represent sherds from “Turnstake Is-land” vessels, to be discussed next.

Rockport Black-on-gray, “Turnstake Islandmotif” (n=1)

The “Turnstake Island motif” is similar to the“Kenyon Island motif” save that vertical wavy linesalternate with the rows of vertical dots (Figure 7-41).

Figure 7-40. Rockport Black-on-gray, “Kenyon Island motif.” (a) Idealized “Kenyon Island”vessel; (b-c) Rim sherds with the “Kenyon Island motif” (b with Hog Bayou paste,c with Buffalo Lake paste). (See Appendix K for provenience data.)

a

b c

0 3

cm


343

This decorative idea is similar to several examplesillustrated by Potter (1930:Plate 8) in which verticalwavy lines alternate with vertical rows of puncta-tions. However, in the case of “Turnstake Island”all decoration is applied with asphaltum paint. Some-what surprisingly, no other illustrations or discus-sions of the motif are provided in any of the previ-ous studies on Rockport ceramics examined by thepresent authors. At least one sherd of Goliad Red-on-buff from Mission Espíritu Santo has a similardesign, although it is difficult to determine if the verticalline is straight or wavy (Mounger 1959:Plate 13).

The one example in the current collection is arim classified as Rockport Black-on-gray, var. Buf-falo Lake. It contains wide dots and a narrow wavyline, both descending downward from a round lipthat has a wide band on its exterior, top, and inte-rior. As discussed above for “Kenyon Island,” it ispossible that additional sherds from “Turnstake Is-land” vessels are present among those specimens thatonly exhibit painted dots (see Table 7-12). Sincemany of these sherds may be from “Kenyon Island”

vessels, however, they are not assigned to either motif.A stronger case can be made for association of themotif with those sherds that contain dots and linesof unknown orientation (see Table 7-12). Since theorientation of the lines is not known, however, it isimpossible to assign the sherds to “Turnstake Island.”

Rockport Black-on-gray,“Long Island motif” (n=1)

This unique motif is similar to that of the “KenyonIsland motif,” save for one important difference. “LongIsland” consists of vertical rows of painted dots thatdescend downward from the vessel lip on the inte-rior of shallow bowls and/or plates (Figure 7-42).The one example in the current collection has widedots situated below a wide lip band that is presenton the exterior, top, and interior of the lip. It origi-nally was classed as Rockport Black-on-gray, var.Hog Bayou.

Sherds with designs similar to that of the “LongIsland motif” have been noted by Campbell (1958a:437,

Figure 7-41. Rockport Black-on-gray, “Turnstake Island motif.” (a) Idealized“Turnstake Island” vessel; (b) “Turnstake Island” rim sherd withBuffalo Lake paste. (See Appendix K for provenience data.)

a

b

0 3

cm


344

Figure 5, v) from the Live Oak Point site, but noother investigators make mention of comparable sherds.Without additional data from other collections, thereis little to add regarding the potential chronologi-cal, geographical, and/or cultural usefulness of thismotif.

Rockport Black-on-gray Motifs by Analysis Unit

As with Rockport Incised and Rockport Black,an effort was made to examine Rockport Black-on-gray motifs by analysis unit (Table 7-24). The dis-tribution is somewhat similar to that of the variousRockport Black motifs (see Table 7-22), a not un-expected circumstance considering the likeness ofthe two types. “Steamboat Island” is common inmost analysis units, although it has slightly greaternumbers in the upper portions of Stratum 2 (AUs 2and 3) (n=141; 43.8 percent) than in the lower por-tions of Stratum 2 (AUs 4 and 5) and the Stratum 3Rangia deposit in Block 3 (AU 6) (n=129; 40.1 per-cent). If one considers the 25 sherds from AU 1,then additional support for an increase through timeis provided. This mirrors quite well the findings ofthe “Carancahua Bay motif,” as discussed earlier.Surprisingly, no sherds of the motif (or any otherBlack-on-gray motif) came from AU 7, the appar-ent Rockport oyster deposit in Block 3. This is par-ticularly vexing since minor amounts of the motif(obviously displaced) were found in the Late Archaicoyster midden in Block 1 (AUs 8 and 9). Perhapslack of the motif in AU 7 is related to the ratherlimited distribution of that analysis unit across Block�3.

Only the “Turnstake Island motif” occurs in theupper levels of Stratum 2 (AU 3) to the exclusionof the lower Rockport levels. Small sample size,however, mitigates against any chronological state-ments at this time. In contrast, “Rattlesnake Island”was found only in the lower levels of Stratum 2 (AU 4).Again, small sample size, plus the fact that a simi-lar decorative motif is known from the historic mis-sion of Espíritu Santo at Goliad (as discussed above),precludes any attempt at meaningful chronologicalinterpretation. The lone sherd of “Long Island” alsocame from a relatively early deposit, in this case theLate Archaic oyster midden of Block 1 (AU 8), butits provenience is undoubtedly the result of post-depositional disturbance.

A few words can be offered regarding the spa-tial distribution of the various Rockport Black-on-gray motifs across the site. As noted several timespreviously, the majority of the motifs came from thearea around Block 3, along with the majority of re-covered ceramics. Only the lone sherds of “Rattle-snake Island” and “Long Island” came from the areaaround Blocks 1 and 2, rather than Block 3. Al-though small sample size hinders most interpreta-tions, it is worth noting that the “Rattlesnake Island”sherd specifically came from XU N54W90, one ofthe Block 2 units initially excavated to examine thepotential historic aboriginal component in that area.This provides some support for a possible late datefor the motif, although, as just noted above, the sherdwas found in the lower portion of the Stratum 2 middenin that area. Overall, however, considering the datafrom Mission Espíritu Santo, plus the sherd’s loca-

Figure 7-42. Rockport Black-on-gray, “Long Island motif.” (a) Idealized “Long Island” vessel;(b) Rim sherd exhibiting the “Long Island motif” with Hog Bayou paste. (SeeAppendix K for provenience data.)

a

b

0 3

cm


345

Mo

tifs

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

To

tal

% T

otal

"S

team

boa

t Is

lan

d"

var.

Roc

kpor

t16

64.0

037

54.4

115

18.0

720

37.0

49

16.0

77

21.2

17

63.6

48

72.7

30

0.00

120

.00

12

03

4.5

8va

r. B

uffa

lo L

ake

28.

0012

17.6

58

9.64

1120

.37

916

.07

927

.27

19.

090

0.00

00.

000

0.00

52

14

.99

var.

Hog

Bay

ou4

16.0

02

2.94

1619

.28

23.

7011

19.6

42

6.06

00.

000

0.00

13.

030

0.00

38

10

.95

var.

Lon

g M

ott

28.

008

11.7

626

31.3

311

20.3

716

28.5

77

21.2

11

9.09

00.

000

0.00

480

.00

75

21

.61

var.

Mos

quit

o P

oint

14.

005

7.35

1214

.46

47.

416

10.7

15

15.1

51

9.09

327

.27

00.

000

0.00

37

10

.66

"S

team

boa

t Is

lan

d"

to

tal

25

10

0.0

06

49

4.1

27

79

2.7

74

88

8.8

95

19

1.0

73

09

0.9

11

09

0.9

11

11

00

.00

11

00

.00

51

00

.00

32

29

2.8

0

"Mat

agor

da I

slan

d"va

r. R

ockp

ort

00.

002

2.94

22.

410

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

41

.15

var.

Buf

falo

Lak

e0

0.00

00.

002

2.41

23.

700

0.00

13.

030

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

005

1.4

4va

r. H

og B

ayou

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

1.85

11.

790

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

20

.58

var.

Lon

g M

ott

00.

000

0.00

00.

002

3.70

35.

361

3.03

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

61

.73

"M

atag

ord

a Is

lan

d"

tot

al0

0.0

02

2.9

44

4.8

25

9.2

64

7.1

42

6.0

60

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

01

74

.90

"S

an J

ose

Isla

nd

"va

r. R

ockp

ort

00.

001

1.47

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

10

.29

var.

Lon

g M

ott

00.

000

0.00

11.

200

0.00

11.

790

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

20

.58

"S

an J

ose

Isla

nd

" t

otal

00

.00

11

.47

11

.20

00

.00

11

.79

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

30

.86

"R

attl

e sn

ake

Isla

nd

"va

r. L

ong

Mot

t0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

11.

850

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

0.2

9

"R

attl

e sn

ake

Isla

nd

"

tota

l0

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

01

1.8

50

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

01

0.2

9

"K

enyo

n I

slan

d"

var.

Buf

falo

Lak

e0

0.00

11.

470

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

0.2

9va

r. H

og B

ayou

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

3.03

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

10

.29

"K

enyo

n I

slan

d"

tot

al0

0.0

01

1.4

70

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

01

3.0

30

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

02

0.5

8

"T

urn

stak

e Is

lan

d"

var.

Buf

falo

Lak

e0

0.00

00.

001

1.20

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

0.2

9

"T

urn

stak

e Is

lan

d"

tot

al0

0.0

00

0.0

01

1.2

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

01

0.2

9

"L

ong

Isla

nd

"va

r. H

og B

ayou

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

19.

090

0.00

00.

000

0.00

10

.29

"L

ong

Isla

nd

" t

otal

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

19

.09

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

10

.29

Sit

e T

otal

25

10

0.0

06

81

00

.00

83

10

0.0

05

41

00

.00

56

10

0.0

03

31

00

.00

11

10

0.0

01

11

00

.00

11

00

.00

51

00

.00

34

71

00

.00

* S

herd

s fr

om th

is a

naly

sis

unit

alm

ost c

erta

inly

inco

rpor

ated

by

acci

dent

dur

ing

wat

ersc

reen

ing

in th

e fi

eld.

AU

1

AU

2

AU

3

AU

4

An

alys

is

Un

its

AU

5

AU

6

Tabl

e 7-

24.

Dec

orat

ive

Mot

ifs

of R

ockp

ort

Bla

ck-o

n-G

ray,

by

Ana

lysi

s U

nit.

AU

8A

U 9

AU

13*

No

AU


346

tion at Guadalupe Bay, it is suggested that the “Rattle-snake Island motif” may prove useful in recogniz-ing historic and/or protohistoric occupations in theregion.

Vessel Forms

One hundred and fifty-three rim sherds were largeenough to determine vessel form, and these fell intoseven main categories: beaker, jar, beaker or jar,bottle, simple bowl, shallow bowl, and globular bowl(Table 7-25). The identification of a specific formgenerally followed that of Phillips (1970), althoughthe bottle category was added to cover long-neckedvessels commonly present in Rockport phase assem-blages. Such bottles sometimes have been identi-fied as “ollas” in past studies on Rockport ceramics(Ricklis 1990b:607). Beakers were recognized bysherds with straight sides that lacked evidence ofan outflaring (everted) or inflaring (inverted) rim,while sherds with everted rims were identified asjars.11 These latter specimens usually showed evi-dence of a slightly constricted neck area that thenflared outwards towards the rim. Simple bowls, shallowbowls, and globular bowls were sorted by the de-gree of rim closure. Shallow bowls are wide-mouthvessels with flaring sides; some extreme examplesof which might be classified as plates if enough ofthe vessel was present. Simple bowls also includewide-mouth vessels, but exhibit sides that are lessflared than those of shallow bowls. Globular bowlshave a constricted shape with inverted rims and rela-tively narrow mouths. Such vessels lack any evi-dence of a neck, however, precluding their classifi-cation as bottles.

As can be seen by Table 7-25, beakers far andaway outnumbered all other forms combined (n=97),representing 63.4 percent of all vessels. The nextmost common form, that of jars, was representedby 18 rims (11.8 percent), followed by 15 rims fromsimple bowls (9.8 percent). Ten sherds came from

either jars or beakers (6.5 percent), but were too smallfor proper identification, while eight sherds (5.2 per-cent) were from shallow bowls and four (2.6 per-cent) were from bottles. Lastly, one sherd (0.7 per-cent) came from a globular bowl. Taken together,all jars and beakers (n=125) account for 81.7 per-cent of the assemblage, while all bowls (n=24) equal15.7 percent.

It is instructive to note the association of vesselform with the different types and varieties recog-nized in the collection. Beakers occurred on all types,with the greatest quantity (40.2 percent) associatedwith Rockport Plain (see Table 7-25). This was fol-lowed by Rockport Black-on-gray (26.8 percent) andRockport Incised (24.7 percent). Only small per-centages of the beakers were associated with RockportBlack (7.2 percent) and Rockport Red (1.0 percent).A slightly different pattern pertains for jars, withRockport Incised (44.4 percent), Rockport Plain (16.7percent), and Rockport Black-on-gray (also 22.2),making up the majority.12 In this instance, though,Rockport Black (16.6 percent) also made up a mod-est percentage of the total.

Bottles and bowls, on the other hand, exhibit asignificantly different pattern. In all cases, RockportBlack-on-gray vessels had the highest percentagesof each vessel form: 75.0 percent for bottles, 53.3 per-cent for simple bowls, 62.5 percent for shallow bowls,and 100 percent for globular bowls. Although theoverall number of vessels of each of these formsis relatively small compared to jars and beakers,there is no mistaking the association of paintedvessels with bottles and bowls. This association,also recognized by others (Campbell 1958a:435;Ricklis 1995a:199), suggests quite strongly thatpainted vessels represent a “fine ware” categoryof ceramics that were used primarily as servingcontainers. In contrast to this, plain and incisedvessels probably were employed mainly as cookingor storage containers.

11 A potential problem in vessel identification should be notedat this point. Since most of the sherds were relatively small,even those deemed large enough for use in identifying vessel form,there may be cases where a sherd with straight sides was recordedas having come from a beaker, when, in fact, it could have comefrom the upper “spout” portion of a wide-mouth bottle. This isparticularly true for Rockport Black and Rockport Black-on-gray,where it is known from past studies (Ricklis 1990b, 1995a) thatmany of the vessels related to these types consisted of bottles orollas. This problem may also explain the rather limited number

of actual bottles (n=4) identified in the current sample. Thesebottles were recognized primarily by their very narrow spouts.If their spouts had been wider, they might have been classed asbeakers.

12 The totals and percentages for Rockport Incised are some-what inflated, as five of the seven sherds actually represent theremains of the partially reconstructed vessel from Sample UnitN70W110.


347

No.

%N

o.%

No.

%N

o.%

No.

%N

o.%

No.

%T

ota

l%

Tot

al

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

ckva

r. E

lm B

ayou

44.

120

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

004

2.6

1va

r. K

uy C

reek

00.

001

5.56

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

0.6

5va

r. L

olit

a2

2.06

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

112

.50

00.

003

1.9

6va

r. R

ockp

ort

11.

030

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

12.5

00

0.00

21

.31

var.

Spr

ing

Bay

ou0

0.00

211

.11

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

002

1.3

1

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

ck

tota

l7

7.2

23

16

.67

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

22

5.0

00

0.0

01

27

.84

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k-o

n-g

ray

var.

Buf

falo

Lak

e6

6.19

15.

561

10.0

02

50.0

04

26.6

71

12.5

00

0.00

15

9.8

0va

r. H

og B

ayou

22.

061

5.56

110

.00

00.

001

6.67

00.

000

0.00

53

.27

var.

Lon

g M

ott

99.

280

0.00

220

.00

00.

001

6.67

112

.50

110

0.00

14

9.1

5va

r. M

osqu

ito

Poi

nt2

2.06

00.

000

0.00

125

.00

16.

670

0.00

00.

004

2.6

1va

r. R

ockp

ort

77.

222

11.1

13

30.0

00

0.00

16.

673

37.5

00

0.00

16

10

.46

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k-o

n-g

ray

tota

l2

62

6.8

04

22

.22

77

0.0

03

75

.00

85

3.3

35

62

.50

11

00

.00

54

35

.29

Roc

kp

ort

Inc i

sed

var.

Mis

sion

Lak

e10

10.3

10

0.00

00.

000

0.00

16.

670

0.00

00.

001

17

.19

var.

Mus

tang

Lak

e8

8.25

738

.89

110

.00

00.

001

6.67

00.

000

0.00

17

11

.11

var.

Pla

nk B

ridg

e1

1.03

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

112

.50

00.

002

1.3

1va

r. S

omm

ervi

lle

11.

030

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

0.6

5va

r. R

ockp

ort

44.

121

5.56

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

005

3.2

7

Roc

kp

ort

Inc i

sed

to

tal

24

24

.74

84

4.4

41

10

.00

00

.00

21

3.3

31

12

.50

00

.00

36

23

.53

Roc

kp

ort

Pla

inva

r. A

ustw

ell

88.

251

5.56

110

.00

00.

002

13.3

30

0.00

00.

001

27

.84

var.

Gre

en L

ake

99.

280

0.00

00.

000

0.00

16.

670

0.00

00.

001

06

.54

var.

Gua

dalu

pe17

17.5

31

5.56

00.

000

0.00

16.

670

0.00

00.

001

91

2.4

2va

r. R

ockp

ort

44.

120

0.00

00.

001

25.0

00

0.00

00.

000

0.00

53

.27

var.

Sea

drift

11.

031

5.56

110

.00

00.

001

6.67

00.

000

0.00

42

.61

Roc

kp

ort

Pla

in

tota

l3

94

0.2

13

16

.67

22

0.0

01

25

.00

53

3.3

30

0.0

00

0.0

05

03

2.6

8

Roc

kp

ort

Re d

var.

uns

peci

fied

11.

030

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

0.6

5

Roc

kp

ort

Re d

to

tal

11

.03

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

10

.65

Sit

e T

otal

97

10

0.0

01

81

00

.00

10

10

0.0

04

10

0.0

01

51

00

.00

81

00

.00

11

00

.00

15

31

00

.00

* Fi

ve o

f th

e ja

r ri

ms

actu

ally

are

fro

m th

e pa

rtia

lly r

econ

stru

cted

ves

sel f

rom

Sam

ple

Uni

t N70

W11

0.

Bea

ker

Jar

Bea

ker

or J

arB

ott

le

Ves

sel

For

ms

Sim

ple

Bo

wl

Sh

all

ow

Bo

wl

*

Tabl

e 7-

25.

Ves

sel F

orm

s, b

y T

ype

and

Var

iety

, Rec

ogni

zed

for

Sher

ds f

rom

Gua

dalu

pe B

ay.

Glo

bula

rB

owl


348

It should be noted that an additional 144 bodysherds contain painted designs on their interiors, whileanother 11 rim sherds also exhibit interior painting,but all were too small to allow for proper vessel iden-tification. Most, if not all, of these sherds probablyare from simple bowls, shallow bowls, or possiblyeven plates. Twenty-six were classified as RockportBlack, while 129 were identified as Rockport Black-on-gray. Their presence in the overall collection fromGuadalupe Bay significantly increases the numberof painted vessels probably associated with bowlsand/or plates. This further strengthens the likeli-hood that such painted vessels functioned primarilyin a serving capacity.

The association of vessel forms and decorativemotifs also was examined in an effort to find poten-tial meaningful relationships and to locate supportfor the assumptions expressed above. Although thesample is relatively small, amounting to only 65 sherds,a few observations are possible (Table 7-26). First,all incised motifs occur only on beakers or jars, thussupporting the cooking and/or storage function forthe majority of these vessels. The painted motifs,on the other hand, occur on all vessel forms, par-ticularly the two black-banded motifs, “CarancahuaBay” and “Steamboat Island.” This supports the notionthat painted vessels fulfilled several roles, includ-ing that of serving vessels.

Past studies of late prehistoric ceramic assem-blages in the Southeast and Midwest (Kelley 1994:75;Pauketat 1989; Shapiro 1984) have suggested thatthe frequency of jars (and/or beakers in the presentcase) can be used to determine the degree of sitepermanence. Generally, jars made up a maximumof 28 percent of all vessels at several Mississippiperiod sites examined by Shapiro (1984:704), be-tween 45 and 91 percent of the total vessels in do-mestic assemblages at other Mississippi period sitesin the American Bottom area studied by Pauketat(1989:Table 3), and 55 percent of the total assem-blage at the protohistoric and historic McLelland sitein the Caddoan cultural area reported by Kelley(1994:75). This shows a great range of variationfrom one culture area to another, and indicates thatit probably will be necessary to examine a largersample of ceramics from additional sites along thecentral Texas coast before any meaningful statementscan be offered regarding the relationship of vesselforms and site permanence.

Unfortunately, previous ceramic studies from sitesalong the central Texas coast have not provided the

data necessary for comparative purposes. Ricklis(1990b:602, 606, 610), for example, looked at 464rim sherds from four sites in the region—GuadalupeBay (41 CL 2), Live Oak Point (41 AS 2), McGloinBluff (41 SP 11 ), and Kirchmeyer (41 NU 11 )—inan attempt to refine the existing ceramic typology.He chose to divide his vessels into two broad sizecategories based on orifice diameter—those withmouths less than 5 cm in diameter, which he termed“small-mouth” vessels, and those with mouths gen-erally greater than 12 cm in diameter, called “wide-mouth” vessels (Ricklis 1990b:610). The formerincluded bottles, while the latter encompassed bothjars and bowls. Because of this, one cannot sepa-rate cooking and/or storage vessels (jars) from servingvessels (bowls), making it difficult, if not impos-sible, to compare the data to that from GuadalupeBay. About all that can be said is that small-mouthvessels (bottles) made up 10.6 percent of the over-all vessel assemblage from the four sites (Ricklis1990b:Table 28). This is slightly greater than the2.6 percent noted for bottles at Guadalupe Bay, butsuch a difference does not appear to be particularlysignificant.

The only other potentially comparable dataon vessel form comes from Mission Espíritu Santoat Goliad. Mounger (1959:164-167) was able toreconstruct or partially reconstruct 15 vessels ofGoliad Plain, and from these she was able to in-terpret vessel form. Five were identified as pots(four with handles), one as a shallow bowl, fiveas simple bowls, one as a globular bowl, and threeas globular jars. An additional bottle neck alsowas noted (Mounger 1959:169), although it didnot come from a reconstructed vessel. Aside fromthe bottle neck, individual rim sherds were notused to identify vessel form. Using these totals,it is possible to determine that vessels classed aseither jars or pots made up 50 percent of the col-lection, bowls comprised 43.8 percent, and thelone bottle neck represented 6.3 percent. Assumingthat Mounger’s jars and pots are somewhat equiva-lent to the jar and beaker categories at GuadalupeBay, then it is clear that there were significantlygreater numbers of these forms at the latter site(50 percent at Espíritu Santo and 81.7 percent atGuadalupe Bay). In contrast, bowls made up agreater percentage of the vessels at the missionthan they did at Guadalupe Bay (43.8 percent to15.7 percent). Since the mission ceramics wereproduced during the eighteenth century by AranamaIndians, as opposed to what probably was the four-teenth century by Karankawan Indians, such dis-


349

Tabl

e 7-

26.

Ves

sel F

orm

s, b

y D

ecor

ativ

e M

otif

, Rec

ogni

zed

for

Sher

ds R

ecov

ered

at

Gua

dalu

pe B

ay.

No.

%N

o.%

No.

%N

o.%

No.

%N

o.%

No.

%T

ota

l%

Tot

al

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

ck

"C

aran

cah

ua

Bay

mot

if"

var.

Elm

Bay

ou3

8.82

00.

001

14.2

90

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

004

6.1

5va

r. L

olit

a2

5.88

18.

330

0.00

00.

000

0.00

120

.00

00.

004

6.1

5va

r. S

prin

g B

ayou

00.

001

8.33

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

1.5

4

"E

spír

itu

S

anto

B

ay

mot

if"

var.

Spr

ing

Bay

ou0

0.00

18.

330

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

11

.54

"M

esq

uit

e B

ay

mot

if"

var.

Elm

Bay

ou2

5.88

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

23

.08

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k

tota

l7

20

.59

32

5.0

01

14

.29

00

.00

00

.00

12

0.0

00

0.0

01

21

8.4

6

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k-o

n-g

ray

"S

team

boa

t Is

lan

d

mot

if"

var.

Buf

falo

Lak

e4

11.7

61

8.33

114

.29

210

0.00

125

.00

120

.00

00.

001

01

5.3

8va

r. H

og B

ayou

12.

941

8.33

114

.29

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

34

.62

var.

Lon

g M

ott

514

.71

00.

002

28.5

70

0.00

00.

000

0.00

110

0.00

81

2.3

1va

r. M

osqu

ito

Poi

nt2

5.88

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

23

.08

var.

Roc

kpor

t7

20.5

90

0.00

114

.29

00.

001

25.0

03

60.0

00

0.00

12

18

.46

"M

atag

ord

a Is

lan

d m

otif

"va

r. B

uffa

lo L

ake

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

250

.00

00.

000

0.00

23

.08

var.

Lon

g M

ott

12.

940

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

1.5

4

"S

an J

osé

Isla

nd

mot

if"

var.

Roc

kpor

t0

0.00

00.

001

14.2

90

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

1.5

4

"T

urn

stak

e Is

lan

d m

otif

"va

r. B

uffa

lo L

ake

12.

940

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

1.5

4

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k-o

n-g

ray

tota

l2

16

1.7

62

16

.67

68

5.7

12

10

0.0

04

10

0.0

04

80

.00

11

00

.00

40

61

.54

Roc

kp

ort

Inc i

sed

"A

yre s

P

oin

t m

otif

"va

r. M

usta

ng L

ake

12.

940

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

1.5

4

"C

edar

Poi

nt

mot

if"

var.

Mus

tang

Lak

e0

0.00

18.

330

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

11

.54

"C

ox

Poi

nt

mot

if"

var.

Mis

sion

Lak

e4

11.7

60

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

004

6.1

5

"B

end

ewal

d

Poi

nt

mot

if"

var.

Mus

tang

Lak

e0

0.00

650

.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

006

9.2

3

"K

e er a

n

Poi

nt

mot

if"

var.

Mis

sion

Lak

e1

2.94

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

11

.54

Roc

kp

ort

Inc i

sed

to

tal

61

7.6

57

58

.33

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

13

20

.00

Sit

e T

otal

34

10

0.0

01

21

00

.00

71

00

.00

21

00

.00

41

00

.00

51

00

.00

11

00

.00

65

10

0.0

0

*Fi

ve o

f th

e si

x sh

erds

are

fro

m th

e pa

rtia

lly r

econ

stru

cted

ves

sel f

rom

Sam

ple

Uni

t N70

W11

0.

Bea

ker

Jar

Bea

ker

or J

arB

ott

le

Ves

sel

For

ms

Sim

ple

Bo

wl

*

Shal

low

Bow

lG

lobu

lar

Bow

l


350

crepancies in vessel frequencies probably reflecttemporal and cultural differences.

Vessel Forms by Analysis Unit

Table 7-27 lists the various vessel forms by analysisunit. A few minor trends can be seen, but it is un-certain whether these trends can be confidently at-tributed to chronological or functional factors. Ascan be seen, the majority of vessel rims (n=83; 54.3percent) came from the lower Rockport deposits (AUs 4through 7), particularly those associated with theBlock 3 area) as opposed to only 59 rims (38.6 per-cent) from the upper Rockport deposits (AUs 2 and 3),again with most associated with Block 3. Thus, thegreater counts and percentages of those individualvessel forms associated with the lower Rockportdeposits (especially those in Block 3) may simplyreflect the greater quantity of overall rims found inthose same deposits.

Regardless, 41 beaker rims (42.3 percent of allbeakers) came from the upper portion of the Rockportoccupation (AUs 2 and 3), while 49 rims (50.5 per-cent) came from the lower Rockport deposits (AUs 4through 7), thus indicating a potential minor prefer-ence towards the lower deposits. Jars also showeda slightly greater trend towards the deeper Rockportdeposits, consisting of three rims (16.7 percent) fromAUs 2 and 3 and 11 rims (61.1 percent) from AUs 4through 7. (Of the latter 11 rims, however, it shouldbe kept in mind that five came from the partiallyreconstructed vessel found in Sample Unit N70W110.)Beakers or jars also showed a minor tendency to-wards the deeper deposits, with four rims (40.0 per-cent) from AU 2 and five rims (50.0 percent) fromAUs 4 through 6.

Simple bowls also are represented by a greaternumber of rims in the deeper Rockport deposits: three(20.0 percent) associated with AU 3, in contrast tothe 12 (80.0 percent) found in AUs 4 through 7. Shallowbowls are evenly split, however, between the upperand lower Rockport deposits (four rims from AUs 2and 3; four rims from AUs 4 through 6). The loneglobular bowl rim came from the upper Rockportoccupation of AU 3.

Bottle sherds represented the only vessel formto show a potential association with the upper Rockportdeposits. Three of the four sherds (75.0 percent)came from AUs 2 and 3, while only one sherd camefrom AU 6. Unfortunately, small sample size maynegate this apparent trend.

Overall, the various associations of the differ-ent vessel forms to specific AUs is somewhat equivocal,since those AUs with the majority of any particularvessel form also contained the most ceramics. Onlythe four bottle sherds exhibit a chronological ten-dency that is contrary to all others, and suggests avessel form that developed relatively late during theRockport phase. As just noted, however, this ten-dency may simply reflect small sample size.

Vessel Size

Vessel size was determined by measuring theorifice diameter of those rim sherds or joined rimsherds large enough to provide reasonable data. Thesesherds were placed on a board marked by concen-tric circles spaced one centimeter apart and the di-ameter was estimated to the nearest centimeter. Ascan be seen by Table 7-28, one partial vessel and116 individual sherds were large enough to supplyuseful orifice measurements.

Generally, all beakers and jars (including ves-sels that could not be sorted as either beakers or jars)had orifice diameters that averaged between 17.3 and17.6 cm, with a range between 8 and 28 cm. As tobe expected, bottles had much smaller openings,averaging 5.0 cm, although the overall bottle sample(n=2) is exceedingly small. Again as to be expected,simple bowls and shallow bowls had the greatest orificediameters, averaging 20.8 and 20.9 cm, respectively.This is logical, as bowls most likely represent wide-mouth serving containers.

As with vessel form, the size of a vessel hasbeen used in the past to determine its probable function.Kelley (1994:75-76) reviewed data on vessel sizefrom several studies across the Southeast, particu-larly those by Hally (1984, 1986), and found thatlarge, wide-mouth jars, with orifices between 40 and50 cm in diameter, usually were identified as stor-age containers, while jars with smaller mouths wererecognized as cooking vessels. Although no ves-sels with orifices greater than 30 cm were recov-ered at Guadalupe Bay, it still was felt that an ex-amination of the size distributions could prove use-ful. By graphically plotting the size data as a histo-gram, it was hoped that a more recognizable distri-bution pattern might emerge. A unimodal distribu-tion might suggest that the vessels served one func-tion, while a multimodal distribution might suggestthat two distinct functions were involved. Figure 7-43,therefore, provides the jar/beaker size data. As canbe seen, a unimodal pattern is present, indicating


351

Tabl

e 7-

27.

Ves

sel F

orm

s by

Ana

lysi

s U

nit.

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

To

tal

% T

otal

Bea

ker

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

ckva

r. E

lm B

ayou

00.

000

0.00

24.

880

0.00

13.

571

4.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

004

2.6

1va

r. L

olit

a0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

002

7.14

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

21

.31

var.

Roc

kpor

t0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

13.

850

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

10

.65

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

ck-o

n-g

ray

var.

Buf

falo

Lak

e0

0.00

15.

564

9.76

13.

850

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

63

.92

var.

Hog

Bay

ou0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

3.57

14.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

21

.31

var.

Lon

g M

ott

00.

001

5.56

37.

323

11.5

41

3.57

00.

000

0.00

110

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

009

5.8

8va

r. M

osqu

ito

Poi

nt0

0.00

00.

001

2.44

13.

850

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

21

.31

var.

Roc

kpor

t0

0.00

422

.22

12.

441

3.85

00.

001

4.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

007

4.5

8

Roc

kp

ort

Inc i

sed

var.

Mis

sion

Lak

e0

0.00

00.

005

12.2

01

3.85

00.

003

12.0

00

0.00

00.

000

0.00

125

.00

00.

001

06

.54

var.

Mus

tang

Lak

e0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

311

.54

310

.71

28.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

85

.23

var.

Pla

nk B

ridg

e0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

3.57

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

10

.65

var.

Roc

kpor

t0

0.00

211

.11

12.

440

0.00

27.

140

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

005

3.2

7va

r. S

omm

ervi

lle

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

3.85

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

0.6

5

Roc

kp

ort

Pla

inva

r. A

ustw

ell

00.

000

0.00

37.

320

0.00

13.

573

12.0

01

25.0

00

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

008

5.2

3va

r. G

reen

Lak

e0

0.00

00.

003

7.32

00.

002

7.14

312

.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

25.0

00

0.00

95

.88

var.

Gua

dalu

pe1

25.0

00

0.00

819

.51

13.

853

10.7

11

4.00

125

.00

00.

000

0.00

125

.00

00.

001

61

0.4

6va

r. R

ockp

ort

00.

000

0.00

12.

441

3.85

00.

001

4.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

25.0

00

0.00

42

.61

var.

Sea

drift

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

4.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

0.6

5

Roc

kp

ort

Re d

var.

uns

peci

fied

00.

000

0.00

12.

440

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

0.6

5

Bea

ke r

to

tal

12

5.0

08

44

.44

33

80

.49

14

53

.85

17

60

.71

17

68

.00

25

0.0

01

10

0.0

00

0.0

04

10

0.0

00

0.0

09

76

3.4

0

Jar R

ock

por

t B

lac k

var.

Kuy

Cre

ek0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

100.

001

0.6

5va

r. S

prin

g B

ayou

125

.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

3.57

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

21

.31

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k-o

n-g

ray

var.

Buf

falo

Lak

e0

0.00

15.

560

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

10

.65

var.

Hog

Bay

ou1

25.0

00

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

0.6

5va

r. R

ockp

ort

125

.00

00.

001

2.44

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

21

.31

Roc

kp

ort

Inc i

sed

var.

Mus

tang

Lak

e0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

519

.23

13.

571

4.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

007

4.5

8va

r. R

ockp

ort

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

3.85

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

0.6

5

Roc

kp

ort

Pla

inva

r. A

ustw

ell

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

125

.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

10

.65

var.

Gua

dalu

pe0

0.00

15.

560

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

10

.65

var.

Sea

drift

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

3.85

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

0.6

5

Jar

tota

l3

75

.00

21

1.1

11

2.4

47

26

.92

27

.14

14

.00

12

5.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

01

10

0.0

01

81

1.7

6

AU

2

AU

3

AU

4

An

alys

is

Un

its

AU

5

AU

6

AU

1

*

(con

tin

ued

)

AU

7A

U 8

AU

9A

U 1

1N

o A

U


352

(con

tin

ued

)

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

To

tal

% T

otal

Bea

ker

or J

arR

ock

por

t B

lack

-on

-gra

yva

r. B

uffa

lo L

ake

00.

001

5.56

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

0.6

5va

r. H

og B

ayou

00.

001

5.56

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

0.6

5va

r. L

ong

Mot

t0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

28.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

21

.31

var.

Roc

kpor

t0

0.00

211

.11

00.

001

3.85

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

003

1.9

6

Roc

kp

ort

Inci

sed

var.

Mus

tang

Lak

e0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

100.

000

0.00

00.

001

0.6

5

Roc

kp

ort

Pla

inva

r. A

ustw

ell

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

4.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

0.6

5va

r. S

eadr

ift0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

3.57

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

10

.65

Bea

ker

or J

ar t

otal

00

.00

42

2.2

20

0.0

01

3.8

51

3.5

73

12

.00

00

.00

00

.00

11

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

10

6.5

4

Bot

tle

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k-o

n-g

ray

var.

Buf

falo

Lak

e0

0.00

15.

560

0.00

00.

000

0.00

14.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

21

.31

var.

Mos

quit

o P

oint

00.

001

5.56

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

0.6

5

Roc

kp

ort

Pla

inva

r. R

ockp

ort

00.

000

0.00

12.

440

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

0.6

5

Bot

tle

tota

l0

0.0

02

11

.11

12

.44

00

.00

00

.00

14

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

42

.61

Sim

ple

Bow

lR

ock

por

t B

lac k

-on

-gra

yva

r. B

uffa

lo L

ake

00.

000

0.00

12.

442

7.69

13.

570

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

004

2.6

1va

r. H

og B

ayou

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

4.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

0.6

5va

r. L

ong

Mot

t0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

14.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

10

.65

var.

Mos

quit

o P

oint

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

13.

570

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

0.6

5va

r. R

ockp

ort

00.

000

0.00

12.

440

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

0.6

5

Roc

kp

ort

Inc i

sed

var.

Mis

sion

Lak

e0

0.00

00.

001

2.44

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

10

.65

var.

Mus

tang

Lak

e0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

3.57

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

10

.65

Roc

kp

ort

Pla

inva

r. A

ustw

ell

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

13.

570

0.00

125

.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

21

.31

var.

Gre

en L

ake

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

13.

570

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

0.6

5va

r. G

uada

lupe

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

13.

570

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

0.6

5va

r. S

eadr

ift0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

3.57

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

10

.65

Sim

ple

B

owl

tota

l0

0.0

00

0.0

03

7.3

22

7.6

97

25

.00

28

.00

12

5.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

01

59

.80

AU

2

AU

3

AU

4

An

alys

is

Un

its

AU

5

AU

6

AU

1

Tabl

e 7-

27.

Con

tinu

ed.

AU

7A

U 8

AU

9A

U 1

1N

o A

U


353

Tabl

e 7-

27.

Con

clud

ed.

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

To

tal

% T

otal

Shal

low

Bow

lR

ock

por

t B

lac k

var.

Lol

ita

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

4.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

0.6

5va

r. R

ockp

ort

00.

000

0.00

12.

440

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

0.6

5

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k-o

n-g

ray

var.

Buf

falo

Lak

e0

0.00

15.

560

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

10

.65

var.

Lon

g M

ott

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

13.

570

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

0.6

5va

r. R

ockp

ort

00.

001

5.56

00.

002

7.69

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

003

1.9

6

Roc

kp

ort

Inc i

sed

var.

Pla

nk B

ridg

e0

0.00

00.

001

2.44

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

10

.65

Sh

allo

w

Bow

l to

tal

00

.00

21

1.1

12

4.8

82

7.6

91

3.5

71

4.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

08

5.2

3

Glo

bula

r B

owl

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k-o

n-g

ray

Lon

g M

ott

00.

000

0.00

12.

440

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

0.6

5

Glo

bu

lar

Bow

l to

tal

00

.00

00

.00

12

.44

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

10

.65

Sit

e T

otal

41

00

.00

18

10

0.0

04

11

00

.00

26

10

0.0

02

81

00

.00

25

10

0.0

04

10

0.0

01

10

0.0

01

10

0.0

04

10

0.0

01

10

0.0

01

53

10

0.0

0

AU

2

AU

3

AU

4

An

alys

is

Un

its

AU

5

AU

6

AU

1

* T

hese

fiv

e sh

erds

are

fro

m th

e pa

rtia

lly r

econ

stru

cted

ves

sel f

rom

Sam

ple

Uni

t N70

W11

0.

AU

7A

U 8

AU

9A

U 1

1N

o A

U


354

No.

Ran

geA

vg.

No.

Ran

geA

vg.

No.

Ran

geA

vg.

No.

Ran

geA

vg.

No.

Ran

geA

vg.

No.

Ran

geA

vg.

To

tal

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

ckva

r. E

lm B

ayou

218

to

2019

.00

00.

00

00.

00

00.

00

00.

00

00.

02

var.

Kuy

Bay

ou0

00.

01

2020

.00

00.

00

00.

00

00.

00

00.

01

var.

Lol

ita

212

to

1513

.50

00.

00

00.

00

00.

00

00.

01

2020

.03

var.

Roc

kpor

t0

00.

00

00.

00

00.

00

00.

00

00.

01

1111

.01

var.

Spr

ing

Bay

ou0

00.

01

1515

.00

00.

00

00.

00

00.

00

00.

01

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k

tota

l4

12

to

201

6.3

215

t o

20

17

.50

00

.00

00

.00

00

.02

11

t o

201

5.5

8

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k-o

n-g

ray

var.

Buf

falo

Lak

e6

12 t

o 22

17.3

111

11.0

115

15.0

18

8.0

315

to

2219

.01

3030

.01

3va

r. H

og B

ayou

120

20.0

120

20.0

116

16.0

00

0.0

128

28.0

00

0.0

4va

r. L

ong

Mot

t9

12 t

o 20

15.4

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

126

26.0

122

22.0

11

var.

Mos

quit

o P

oint

211

to

1814

.50

00.

00

00.

00

00.

01

2222

.00

00.

03

var.

Roc

kpor

t5

11 t

o 20

16.0

28

to 1

813

.02

18 t

o 19

18.5

00

0.0

118

18.0

218

to

2119

.51

2

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k-o

n-g

ray

tota

l2

311

to

22

16

.24

8 t o

20

14

.34

15

t o

191

7.0

18

8.0

715

t o

28

21

.64

18

t o

302

2.8

43

Roc

kp

ort

Inc i

sed

var.

Mis

sion

Lak

e8

14 t

o 24

18.5

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

123

23.0

00

0.0

9va

r. M

usta

ng L

ake*

615

to

2115

.32

14 t

o 18

16.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

120

20.0

00

0.0

9va

r. P

lank

Bri

dge

124

24.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

124

24.0

2va

r. R

ockp

ort

414

to

1816

.51

2222

.00

00.

00

00.

00

00.

00

00.

05

var.

Som

ervi

lle

116

16.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

1

Roc

kp

ort

Inc i

sed

to

tal

19

14

to

241

8.1

314

t o

22

18

.00

00

.00

00

.02

20

t o

232

1.5

12

42

4.0

25

Roc

kp

ort

Pla

inva

r. A

ustw

ell

815

to

2317

.81

2626

.00

00.

00

00.

02

20 t

o 22

21.0

00

0.0

11

var.

Gre

en L

ake

715

to

2318

.40

00.

00

00.

00

00.

01

1414

.00

00.

08

var.

Gua

dalu

pe12

12 t

o 28

18.6

112

12.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

13

var.

Roc

kpor

t4

22 t

o 26

23.3

00

0.0

00

0.0

12

2.0

00

0.0

00

0.0

5va

r. S

eadr

ift1

1616

.01

1919

.01

2020

.00

00.

01

2020

.00

00.

04

Roc

kp

ort

Pla

in

tota

l3

212

to

28

17

.93

12

t o

261

9.0

12

02

0.0

12

2.0

414

t o

22

19

.00

00

.04

1

Sit

e T

otal

78

11

to

281

7.2

12

8 t o

26

16

.95

15

t o

201

7.6

22

t o 8

5.0

13

14

t o

282

0.8

711

t o

30

20

.91

17

* O

ne o

f th

e ja

r "s

herd

s" a

ctua

lly c

onsi

sts

of f

ive

join

ed r

ims

from

the

part

ially

rec

onst

ruct

ed v

esse

l fro

m S

ampl

e U

nit N

70W

110.

Bea

ker

Jar

Bea

ker

or J

arB

ott

le

Ori

fice

D

iam

eter

s (c

m)

Tabl

e 7-

28.

Ves

sel S

ize,

Bas

ed o

n O

rifi

ce D

iam

eter

s, A

ccor

ding

to

Ves

sel F

orm

and

Typ

e an

d V

arie

ty.

Sim

ple

Bow

lSh

allo

wB

owl


355

that jars and beakers were produced in one broadsize class with orifice diameters generally rangingfrom about 12 to 20 cm. Thus, they most likely servedone function, that of cooking vessels. Support forthis assumption comes from the one partially recon-structed jar of Mustang Lake with the “BendewaldPoint motif.” That vessel contains spots of charredfood residue on its outer surface below the decora-tive field indicating that it was, indeed, used forcooking.

Interestingly, the orifice data agree quite wellwith that presented recently by Ricklis (2000:100,Figure 59) from Missions Espíritu Santo and Rosario.

These latter sites had vessels with diameters gener-ally ranging between 15 and 19 cm. When thesedata were compared to that for vessels from a small,short-term camp site, the Oak Mott site (16 AS 92),Ricklis (2000:100) found that the camp had muchsmaller vessels with orifice diameters ranging be-tween 10 and 14 cm. Thus, he suggested that largesites with semi-permanent or permanent occupa-tions (Group I sites) probably had larger vesselsthat would have been difficult to carry, whilesmaller, short-term hunting or foraging sites(Group II sites) had smaller vessels that were easierto transport. By inference, then, it can be arguedthat the Rockport occupations at Guadalupe Bay

Figure 7-43. Orifice diameters of rim sherds from beakers and jars. (a)Beakers; (b)�Beakers and jars combined.

a

b


356

were of the semi-permanent or sedentary type, moreakin to Group I sites.

Vessel Thickness

As noted earlier, almost every sherd fromGuadalupe Bay was measured for thickness. Thus,a few observations concerning vessel thickness maybe offered.

Table 7-29 provides a summary of sherd thick-ness for 152 of the rims identifiable to a specificvessel form.13 Thickness is in millimeters, with in-dividual sherds ranging between 2 mm (for one ofthe bottle rims) to 8 mm (for one of the beakers andtwo of the simple bowls). As can be seen, the vastmajority of all vessel sherds fell within the 4- to 6-mmrange, with an average for all sherds of 4.8 mm.

Beaker sherds measured between 3 and 8 mm,with an average of 4.8 mm, while jars ranged be-tween 3 and 6 mm, with an average of 4.6 mm. Sherdsclassed as beakers or jars were most similar to jars,ranging between 4 and 6 mm, with an average of4.6 mm. This suggests that many of these sherdsmay actually have come from jars rather than bea-kers. Simple bowls were the thickest of all vessels,averaging 5.1 mm, with a range of between 3 and 8mm, while bottles were the thinnest, averaging 4 mm,although one sherd was 7 mm thick. Shallow bowlsalso had a rather restricted range, between 3 and 6 mm,with a relatively thin average of 4.3 mm. The oneglobular bowl rim measured 4 mm thick, but, be-cause it is the lone representative of that vessel cat-

egory, the sample is considered too small for anydefinitive statements.

Overall, these figures suggest that bottles andshallow bowls were the thinnest vessels producedat Guadalupe Bay, followed by jars, and beakers orjars. Beakers were slightly thicker, while simple bowlswere the thickest of all. Of course the total rangeof averages for each vessel category is not particu-larly great (only from 4 to 5.1 mm), and probablyindicates a relatively uniform manufacturing processthat would appear to represent a well-developed ce-ramic technology.

In addition to the above, it is of interest to notethe minor, though perhaps important, difference be-tween the thicknesses noted for painted, incised, andplain vessels. For instance, all painted vessels, whetherthey be beakers, jars, or bowls, consistently producedrelatively thin sherds, while incised and plain ves-sels yielded somewhat thicker sherds (Table 7-30).As can be seen, Rockport Black-on-gray sherds av-eraged 4.5 mm (beakers), 3.8 mm (jars), 4.4 mm(beakers or jars), 4.3 mm (bottles), 4.6 mm (simplebowls), and 4.8 mm (shallow bowls), for a combinedaverage of 4.4 mm. Rockport Incised sherds, on theother hand, averaged 5.0 mm (beakers), 5.1 mm (jars),5.0 mm (beaker or jar), 5.5 mm (simple bowl), and4.0 mm (shallow bowl), for a combined average of5.1 mm. Rockport Plain vessels also produced a rela-tively thick combined average of 5.0 mm.

Given all of this, it would appear that vesseldecoration (or the lack thereof) went hand in handwith vessel function, and this association is reflectedin vessel thickness. This is in keeping with the no-tion discussed previously that many, if not most, ofthe painted vessels were relatively thin, fine-wareitems used primarily as serving containers, while theplain and incised vessels were somewhat thicker andserved mostly as cooking or, perhaps, storage ves-sels.

13 Although 153 rims actually were identifiable to vessel form,one rim accidentally was omitted from the thickness analysis,resulting in a reduced total of 152 vessel sherds measured forthickness.


357

Tabl

e 7-

29.

Ves

sel T

hick

ness

, Acc

ordi

ng t

o V

esse

l For

m a

nd T

ype

and

Var

iety

.

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

To

tal

Ave

rage

Bea

ker

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

ckva

r. E

lm B

ayou

00.

000

0.00

35.

661

1.61

00.

000

0.00

00.

004

4.2

5va

r. L

olit

a0

0.00

00.

001

1.89

00.

001

4.76

00.

000

0.00

25

.00

var.

Roc

kpor

t0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

11.

610

0.00

00.

000

0.00

15

.00

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

ck-o

n-g

ray

var.

Buf

falo

Lak

e0

0.00

00.

003

5.66

11.

611

4.76

133

.33

00.

006

5.0

0va

r. H

og B

ayou

00.

000

0.00

11.

890

0.00

14.

760

0.00

00.

002

5.0

0va

r. L

ong

Mot

t0

0.00

111

.11

47.

554

6.45

00.

000

0.00

00.

009

4.3

3va

r. M

osqu

ito

Poi

nt0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

23.

230

0.00

00.

000

0.00

25

.00

var.

Roc

kpor

t0

0.00

222

.22

47.

551

1.61

00.

000

0.00

00.

007

3.8

6

Roc

kp

ort

Inc i

sed

var.

Mis

sion

Lak

e0

0.00

00.

002

3.77

711

.29

14.

760

0.00

00.

001

04

.90

var.

Mus

tang

Lak

e0

0.00

00.

001

1.89

34.

843

14.2

90

0.00

00.

007

5.2

9va

r. P

lank

Bri

dge

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

14.

760

0.00

00.

001

6.0

0va

r. R

ockp

ort

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

1.61

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

5.0

0va

r. S

omm

ervi

lle

00.

000

0.00

23.

771

1.61

14.

760

0.00

00.

004

4.7

5

Roc

kp

ort

Pla

inva

r. A

ustw

ell

00.

000

0.00

11.

896

9.68

14.

760

0.00

00.

008

5.0

0va

r. G

reen

Lak

e0

0.00

00.

003

5.66

58.

061

4.76

00.

000

0.00

94

.78

var.

Gua

dalu

pe0

0.00

00.

007

13.2

16

9.68

314

.29

00.

001

33.3

31

74

.94

var.

Roc

kpor

t0

0.00

00.

001

1.89

23.

230

0.00

133

.33

00.

004

5.2

5va

r. S

eadr

ift0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

4.76

00.

000

0.00

16

.00

Roc

kp

ort

Re d

var.

uns

peci

fied

00.

000

0.00

11.

890

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

4.0

0

Bea

ke r

to

tal

00

.00

33

3.3

33

46

4.1

54

16

6.1

31

57

1.4

32

66

.67

13

3.3

39

64

.81

Jar R

ock

por

t B

lac k

var.

Kuy

Cre

ek0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

11.

610

0.00

00.

000

0.00

15

.00

var.

Spr

ing

Bay

ou0

0.00

00.

001

1.89

11.

610

0.00

00.

000

0.00

24

.50

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k-o

n-g

ray

var.

Buf

falo

Lak

e0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

11.

610

0.00

00.

000

0.00

15

.00

var.

Hog

Bay

ou0

0.00

00.

001

1.89

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

14

.00

var.

Roc

kpor

t0

0.00

222

.22

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

002

3.0

0

Roc

kp

ort

Inc i

sed

var.

Mus

tang

Lak

e0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

58.

062

9.52

00.

000

0.00

75

.29

var.

Roc

kpor

t0

0.00

00.

001

1.89

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

14

.00

Roc

kp

ort

Pla

inva

r. A

ustw

ell

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

1.61

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

5.0

0va

r. G

uada

lupe

00.

000

0.00

11.

890

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

4.0

0va

r. S

eadr

ift0

0.00

111

.11

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

3.0

0

Jar

tota

l0

0.0

03

33

.33

47

.55

91

4.5

22

9.5

20

0.0

00

0.0

01

84

.56

34

5

Sh

erd

T

hic

kn

ess

(mm

)

67

2

*

(con

tin

ued

)

8


358

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

To

tal

Ave

rage

Bea

ker

or J

arR

ock

por

t B

lack

-on

-gra

yva

r. B

uffa

lo L

ake

00.

000

0.00

11.

890

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

4.0

0va

r. H

og B

ayou

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

1.61

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

5.0

0va

r. L

ong

Mot

t0

0.00

00.

002

3.77

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

24

.00

var.

Roc

kpor

t0

0.00

00.

001

1.89

23.

230

0.00

00.

000

0.00

34

.67

Roc

kp

ort

Inci

sed

var.

Mus

tang

Lak

e0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

11.

610

0.00

00.

000

0.00

15

.00

Roc

kp

ort

Pla

inva

r. A

ustw

ell

00.

000

0.00

11.

890

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

4.0

0va

r. S

eadr

ift0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

4.76

00.

000

0.00

16

.00

Bea

ker

or J

ar t

otal

00

.00

00

.00

59

.43

46

.45

14

.76

00

.00

00

.00

10

4.6

0

Bot

tle

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k-o

n-g

ray

var.

Buf

falo

Lak

e1

100.

000

0.00

11.

890

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

002

3.0

0va

r. M

osqu

ito

Poi

nt0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

133

.33

00.

001

7.0

0

Roc

kp

ort

Pla

inva

r. R

ockp

ort

00.

001

11.1

10

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

13

.00

Bot

tle

tota

l1

10

0.0

01

11

.11

11

.89

00

.00

00

.00

13

3.3

30

0.0

04

4.0

0

Sim

ple

Bow

lR

ock

por

t B

lac k

-on

-gra

yva

r. B

uffa

lo L

ake

00.

000

0.00

35.

661

1.61

00.

000

0.00

00.

004

4.2

5va

r. H

og B

ayou

00.

001

11.1

10

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

13

.00

var.

Lon

g M

ott

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

133

.33

18

.00

var.

Mos

quit

o P

oint

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

1.61

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

5.0

0va

r. R

ockp

ort

00.

000

0.00

11.

890

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

4.0

0

Roc

kp

ort

Inc i

sed

var.

Mis

sion

Lak

e0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

11.

610

0.00

00.

000

0.00

15

.00

var.

Mus

tang

Lak

e0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

4.76

00.

000

0.00

16

.00

Roc

kp

ort

Pla

inva

r. A

ustw

ell

00.

000

0.00

00.

002

3.23

00.

000

0.00

00.

002

5.0

0va

r. G

reen

Lak

e0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

11.

610

0.00

00.

000

0.00

15

.00

var.

Gua

dalu

pe0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

33.3

31

8.0

0va

r. S

eadr

ift0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

4.76

00.

000

0.00

16

.00

Sim

ple

B

owl

tota

l0

0.0

01

11

.11

47

.55

69

.68

29

.52

00

.00

26

6.6

71

55

.13

34

5

Sh

erd

T

hic

kn

ess

(mm

)

67

2

(con

tin

ued

)

Tabl

e 7-

29.

Con

tinu

ed.

8


359

Tabl

e 7-

29.

Con

clud

ed.

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

To

tal

Ave

rage

Shal

low

Bow

lR

ock

por

t B

lac k

var.

Lol

ita

00.

000

0.00

11.

890

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

4.0

0va

r. R

ockp

ort

00.

001

11.1

10

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

13

.00

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k-o

n-g

ray

var.

Buf

falo

Lak

e0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

4.76

00.

000

0.00

16

.00

var.

Lon

g M

ott

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

1.61

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

5.0

0va

r. R

ockp

ort

00.

000

0.00

23.

771

1.61

00.

000

0.00

00.

003

4.3

3

Roc

kp

ort

Inc i

sed

var.

Pla

nk B

ridg

e0

0.00

00.

001

1.89

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

14

.00

Sh

allo

w

Bow

l to

tal

00

.00

11

1.1

14

7.5

52

3.2

31

4.7

60

0.0

00

0.0

08

4.3

8

Glo

bula

r B

owl

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k-o

n-g

ray

Lon

g M

ott

00.

000

0.00

11.

890

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

4.0

0

Glo

bu

lar

Bow

l to

tal

00

.00

00

.00

11

.89

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

14

.00

Sit

e T

otal

11

00

.00

91

00

.00

53

10

0.0

06

21

00

.00

21

10

0.0

03

10

0.0

03

10

0.0

01

52

4.7

5

* T

hese

fiv

e sh

erds

are

fro

m th

e pa

rtia

lly r

econ

stru

cted

ves

sel f

rom

Sam

ple

Uni

t N70

W11

0.

34

5

Sh

erd

T

hic

kn

ess

(mm

)

67

28


360

Tabl

e 7-

30.

Ves

sel T

hick

ness

, Gro

uped

by

Ves

sel F

orm

and

Cer

amic

Typ

e.

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

To

tal

Ave

rage

Bea

ker

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

ck0

0.00

00.

004

7.55

23.

231

4.76

00.

000

0.00

74

.57

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

ck-o

n-g

ray

00.

003

33.3

312

22.6

48

12.9

02

9.52

133

.33

00.

002

64

.46

Roc

kp

ort

Inci

sed

00.

000

0.00

59.

4312

19.3

56

28.5

70

0.00

00.

002

35

.04

Roc

kp

ort

Pla

in0

0.00

00.

0012

19.0

019

30.6

56

28.5

71

33.3

31

33.3

33

94

.97

Roc

kp

ort

Red

00.

000

0.00

11.

890

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

4.0

0

Jar R

ock

por

t B

lac k

00.

000

0.00

11.

892

3.23

00.

000

0.00

00.

003

4.6

7

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k-o

n-g

ray

00.

002

22.2

21

1.89

11.

610

0.00

00.

000

0.00

43

.75

Roc

kp

ort

Inc i

sed

00.

000

0.00

11.

895

8.06

29.

520

0.00

00.

008

5.1

3

Roc

kp

ort

Pla

in0

0.00

111

.11

11.

891

1.61

00.

000

0.00

00.

003

4.0

0

Bea

ker

or J

arR

ock

por

t B

lac k

-on

-gra

y0

0.00

00.

004

7.55

34.

840

0.00

00.

000

0.00

74

.43

Roc

kp

ort

Inc i

sed

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

1.61

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

5.0

0

Roc

kp

ort

Pla

in0

0.00

00.

001

1.89

00.

001

4.76

00.

000

0.00

25

.00

Bot

tle

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k-o

n-g

ray

110

0.00

00.

001

1.89

00.

000

0.00

133

.33

00.

003

4.3

3

Roc

kp

ort

Pla

in0

0.00

111

.11

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

3.0

0

Sim

ple

Bow

lR

ock

por

t B

lac k

-on

-gra

y0

0.00

111

.11

47.

552

3.23

00.

000

0.00

133

.33

84

.63

Roc

kp

ort

Inc i

sed

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

1.61

14.

760

0.00

00.

002

5.5

0

Roc

kp

ort

Pla

in0

0.00

00.

000

0.00

34.

841

4.76

00.

001

33.3

35

5.8

0

34

5

Sh

erd

T

hic

kn

ess

(mm

)

62

*

(con

tin

ued

)

87


361

Tabl

e 7-

30.

Con

clud

ed.

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

To

tal

Ave

rage

Shal

low

Bow

lR

ock

por

t B

lac k

00.

001

11.1

11

1.89

00.

000

0.00

00.

000

0.00

23

.50

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k-o

n-g

ray

00.

000

0.00

23.

772

3.23

14.

760

0.00

00.

005

4.8

0

Roc

kp

ort

Inc i

sed

00.

000

0.00

11.

890

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

4.0

0

Glo

bula

r B

owl

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k-o

n-g

ray

00.

000

0.00

11.

890

0.00

00.

000

0.00

00.

001

4.0

0

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k

tota

l0

0.0

01

11

.11

61

1.3

24

6.4

51

4.7

60

0.0

00

0.0

01

24

.42

Roc

kp

ort

Bla

c k-o

n-g

ray

tota

l1

10

0.0

06

66

.67

25

47

.17

16

25

.81

31

4.2

92

66

.67

13

3.3

35

44

.44

Roc

kp

ort

Inc i

sed

to

tal

00

.00

00

.00

71

3.2

11

93

0.6

59

42

.86

00

.00

00

.00

35

5.0

6

Roc

kp

ort

Pla

in

tota

l0

0.0

02

22

.22

14

26

.42

23

37

.10

83

8.1

01

33

.33

26

6.6

75

04

.96

Roc

kp

ort

Re d

to

tal

00

.00

00

.00

11

.89

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

00

.00

14

.00

Sit

e T

otal

11

00

.00

91

00

.00

53

10

0.0

06

21

00

.00

21

10

0.0

03

10

0.0

03

10

0.0

01

52

4.7

5

* T

hese

fiv

e sh

erds

are

fro

m th

e pa

rtia

lly r

econ

stru

cted

ves

sel f

rom

Sam

ple

Uni

t N70

W11

0.

34

5

Sh

erd

T

hic

kn

ess

(mm

)

62

87

Documents

CL2, Chapt. 7 · ered as elements within the heavy-fraction flota-tion samples. The flotation samples were care-fully scanned, however, in an effort to identify diagnostic artifacts