Mill Creek Chert Hoes and Prairie Soils: Implications for Cahokian Production and Expansion

Mill Creek Chert Hoes and Prairie Soils:Implications for Cahokian Productionand ExpansionScott W. HammerstedtUniversity of Oklahoma, USA

Erin R. HughesUniversity of Colorado, Boulder USA

Population growth in the American Bottom after A.D. 1050 may haveoutstripped agricultural productivity. It has been suggested that farmersexpanded agricultural practices into previously unused upland prairies toexpand production. Historic accounts describe the difficulty that early settlershad with prairie, making this supposition questionable. However, experimentswith replica Mill Creek hoes suggest that these tools were capable of convert-ing prairie into farmland.

keywords Cahokia, American Bottom, Mill Creek hoes, agriculture, prairie

An increase in the population at Cahokia and in the American Bottom after A.D.1050 may have raised it to levels that the existing agricultural system could notsupport. Benson et al. (2009) suggest that farmers may have used Mill Creekchert hoes to convert upland prairie to farmland in the Richland complex areaeast of Cahokia, thereby increasing production to support this larger populace.Given the difficulties early Euro-American settlers had with breaking the prairiewith metal tools, we were skeptical that this would have been possible with theavailable technology. In this article, we discuss the results of tests to determine ifMill Creek hoes could indeed be effective. All experiments featured a replica MillCreek chert hoe of the type commonly found near Cahokia. Prairie settings testedwere within the Richland complex area near Cahokia; the Hughes Farm inLaSalle County, Illinois; and the Tallgrass Prairie Preserve in north-centralOklahoma.

midcontinental journal of archaeology, Vol. 40 No. 2, Summer, 2015, 149–165

© Midwest Archaeological Conference Inc 2015 DOI 10.1179/2327427114Y.0000000020

Background

EnvironmentThe American Bottom lies within the Prairie Peninsula, a wedge of grasslands thatextends into the Midwest from the Great Plains (Transeau 1935). A combinationof climate and fire produced the peninsula, and there is diversity even within asingle valley because dry, mesic, and wet prairies (along with woodlands) are allpresent (Nelson 1985:77–97; Schroeder 1997). The dynamic nature of the Missis-sippi River has also contributed to ecological variability (e.g., Milner 1998).The productive Mississippi River floodplain is flat and flanked by steep bluffs.

Soils are fertile and allow the cultivation of maize; forests contain nut-bearingtrees; a wide variety of animal species are represented; and numerous lakes andswamps provide fish, birds, and edible plants (Johannessen 1984; Kelly 1997;Kelly and Cross 1984; Milner 1998; Milner and Oliver 1999). Tallgrass andnarrow hill prairies are found in both the floodplain and the surrounding uplands(Schwegman 1973); these were maintained by periodic fires (Nelson 1985; Oliver1924:61–67; Telford 1926). This resource abundance made the American Bottomcapable of supporting a relatively large population, both today and in the past.

Cahokia and its populationArchaeologically, the American Bottom is best known as the location of Cahokiaand related large mound centers. Prior to the Lohmann phase (A.D. 1050–1100),American Bottom sites did not show evidence for strong social differentiation,and the regional population density was relatively low. Population density hits itspeak during the Lohmann phase, and Cahokia was rapidly constructed and conso-lidated. During the subsequent Stirling (A.D. 1100–1200), Moorehead (A.D. 1200–1275), and Sand Prairie (A.D. 1275–1350) phases, population density declined andCahokia was eventually abandoned (Alt 2002; Emerson 1997; Fortier et al. 2006;Kelly 1990; Milner 1986, 1998; Pauketat 1998, 2003, 2004).Of greatest relevance to this paper is the population and settlement aggregation of

the Lohmann and early Stirling phases. Population estimates of 3,000–8,000(Milner 1998) and 10,200–15,300 (Pauketat and Lopinot 1997) have been calcu-lated for Cahokia itself, with a high of perhaps 50,000 people living in the entireAmerican Bottom (Milner 1998:120–125). Data from the East St Louis area(e.g., Fortier 2007; Pauketat 2005) have the potential to increase AmericanBottom population estimates, as does ongoing but as yet unpublished work in thearea by the Illinois State Archaeological Survey (Thomas Emerson, personal com-munication 2014).Despite the resource richness of the American Bottom, populations of this magni-

tude may have taxed the landscape’s ability to support them. Floods, droughts, andother natural disasters are a problem for modern farmers, who cope by diversifyingtheir planting strategies (Chmurny 1973:243). These conditions undoubtedlyaffected prehistoric farmers as well since much of the available farmland was routi-nely underwater prior to modern flood control projects (Milner 1993, 1998:77–78,126–127). Large increases in population combined with limitations on soilproductivity (Schroeder 1999) would have magnified these risks.

150 SCOTT W. HAMMERSTEDT AND ERIN R. HUGHES

Pauketat (2003) has described the Richland complex, a series of over 50 EarlyMississippian upland settlements that encompassed at least 300 km2 to the east ofCahokia. Richland complex farmers settled on forest-prairie ecotones and interfaces(Alt 2002; Pauketat 1998, 2003), a pattern also followed by early Euro-Americansettlers of eastern prairies (e.g., Jordan 1964; McManis 1964; Peters 1970). Thesesites were occupied from A.D. 1000 to 1150, placing them in the Lohmann andearly Stirling phases, when the population of the American Bottom was at a peakand stresses on Cahokia’s resources were highest. Benson et al. (2009:471–472)suggest that in order to alleviate this pressure, Richland complex residents convertedthese upland prairies to farmland using Mill Creek hoes.

Mill Creek chert hoes

Mill Creek chert outcrops in southwestern Illinois. It occurs in large, tabular, easilyworked, and readily procurable nodules that are well suited for making large toolsas they are essentially ready-made preforms (Cobb 2000:51; Koldehoff 1990;Koldehoff and Brennan 2010). Mill Creek chert is also known for its toughnessand durability (Dunnell et al. 1994), and many tools exhibit highly polished surfacesfrom use. This polish begins to form within 30 continuous minutes of initial use(Milner et al. 2010) and is likely caused by abrasion from soils and/or grass fibers(e.g., Sonnenfeld 1962; Witthoft 1967).Flared and notched hoes made of Mill Creek chert have long been recognized

as common digging tools that were in widespread use in the American Bottomand beyond (Brown et al. 1990; Cobb 2000; Holmes 1919; Phillips 1900; Rau1864, 1869; Winters 1981). These hoes were of great importance to Mississippianfarmers, as shown by their symbolic depiction on the Birger figurine and perhapsalso the Schild pipe (Emerson 1997:196–197, 205–207; Emerson and Jackson1984:254–258). Hoes were often placed into caches along structure walls, furtherdemonstrating their significance and value (Milner 1983, 1984). Once hoes wereexhausted or broken, they were often recycled into smaller flake tools (Koldehoff1990; Koldehoff and Brennan 2010). Koldehoff and Brennan (2010:152)argue that large bifaces, including hoes, “had two ‘layers’ of utility: primarily asspecialized, curated tools and secondarily as cores for generating simple,expedient tools” and suggest that this explains their popularity in the Mississippiand Ohio valleys.An increase in the number of hoes and hoe flakes is often cited as one indicator of

agricultural intensification at Mississippian sites in the Midsouth (Cobb 2000;Sussenbach 1993). Chipped-stone hoe blades are uncommon in the AmericanBottom during the preceding Late Woodland period. Koldehoff and Galloy (2006)argue that agricultural practices shifted from a Late Woodland forest-fallowswidden agriculture based on axes, digging sticks, and fire to Mississippian maizecultivation in large fields. Pauketat (1998:68–69, 2004:103) noted that more MillCreek hoe fragments and resharpening flakes are present at Richland complexsites than at sites closer to Cahokia, thus suggesting that agricultural activitieswere more common there (see also Benson et al. 2009:471–472).

MILL CREEK CHERT HOES AND PRAIRIE SOILS 151

Hoes have proved effective in woodland floodplain soils. Digging experimentswith Mill Creek hoes were conducted by Hammerstedt (2005:45–47) and Milneret al. (2010) on floodplains in the eastern United States and Mexico. In bothcases, floodplain soils were easily turned with these tools, particularly after theinitial sod breaking allowed one to excavate into a vertical face.However, although upland prairies possess fertile soil, some archaeologists have

concluded that they would not have been suitable for early agriculture because ofa combination of high soil acidity, poor drainage, and a dense root system thathoes would have penetrated only with great difficulty (Woods 1986, 1987, 2004).Others believe that farming upland prairies was not only plausible but also actuallytook place (e.g., Fowler and Hall 1978; Perino quoted in Williams 1971:15–16).Since prairie soils are difficult to till even with more modern metal tools, the effec-tiveness of chert hoes was uncertain. In order to test the supposition that farmerswould not have been able to successfully use Mill Creek hoes in these uplandcontexts, we conducted digging experiments focused on testing how effectivethese hoes were for tilling prairie soils.We used a replica L-shaped flared hoe made and hafted by Larry Kinsella

(Figure 1). Our replica had three components: a 20 × 10 × 2 cm stone blade, a43 cm long elm/hackberry handle, and an animal hide lashing material. Given therelatively short length of the handle, digging was more effective (and less stressfulon one’s back) when done in a kneeling or squatting position. Unlike in previousexperiments (Hammerstedt 2005:45–47; Milner et al. 2010), our handle did notbreak nor did the hoe blade. Milner et al. (2010) suggest that short handles likethe one depicted on the Birger figurine are not merely a matter of artistic license;rather, they are an accurate depiction of the relative length of these handles.Similar tools in use today have handles of this length, and longer handles mayhave increased stress on the stone blades, making them more susceptible to breakage(Milner et al. 2010; Shaw 1970).

figure 1 Replica Mill Creek hoe used in these experiments.


Experiments

IllinoisThe first experiment was conducted in October 2009 on a patch of prairie in theRichland complex area just a few miles from Cahokia. Typical prairie vegetationwas present (Figure 2); soils were a well-drained silt loam. Two 1 × 1 m testpatches were excavated,1 one with the grass cut short to simulate burning and theother with the grass left intact. Excavation was surprisingly easy, and the top10 cm of soil was removed in less than 10 minutes in both cases; this is comparableto results from previous studies in floodplain settings (Hammerstedt 2005:45–47;Milner et al. 2010).Some roots were present, but these were less than 1 cm in diameter (Figure 3) and

were easily cut. We learned later that the test patches had been previously plowed.Because this “prairie” was only about 30 years old, the root development weexpected was not present. Therefore, the results of this experiment were not orig-inally thought to be of much value. Most prairie in Illinois was broken by around1920 (Weaver 1968:195) and only 2–3 percent of all prairie in the United Statessurvives intact today (Smith et al. 2010).The second set of experiments was conducted in April and May 2011 on prairie

waterways on the Hughes Farm in LaSalle County. For over 10 years, native Illinoisgrasses (Indian grass, big and little blue stem, Virginia wild rye, and side oats) havegrown on these uncultivated natural grass waterways. One area had previously beenplanted in alfalfa, which has large roots similar to prairie grasses. Two tests wereconducted soon after a rain and two took place when the soil was dry. As in previoustests, 1 × 1 m squares were excavated.Results were similar to the Richland plots. All tests were dug in less than 10

minutes, although the one containing alfalfa roots proved to be slightly more diffi-cult to excavate. Interestingly, a long-handled steel hoe proved to be less effectivethan the stone tool; the stone hoe was heavier and more easily penetrated the roots.

figure 2 Richland complex upland prairie.


OklahomaOne floodplain and two adjacent upland areas in the Tallgrass Prairie Preserve inOsage County were tested in May and July 2010. Examination of 1937 aerialphotos and GLO records shows that these three areas have never been plowed.Loamy soils and typical prairie vegetation (big and little bluestem, Indian grass,and switchgrass) were observed. One of these upland areas had been burned theday before our arrival; much of the 16,000 hectare area is burned annually andgrazed by bison.One test was excavated in each area: 50 × 30 × 20 cm in the unburned upland

area; 30 × 20 × 10 cm in the burned upland area; and 50 × 30 × 5 cm in the flood-plain area. Digging was easy; the plots were cleared in 7, 4, and 2 minutes, respect-ively. The largest roots encountered were only about 1 cm in diameter and wereeasily dispatched. No plowzone was detected either in profiles (Figure 4) or witha split-core auger. A similar profile was observed by the senior author in an augertest taken from unbroken prairie adjacent to the Alkalai Station site (25KH7)near Ogalalla, Nebraska, in the spring of 2012, although no formal tests were under-taken there at that time.

Discussion

On the surface, neither of these experiments produced conclusive results because theexpected thick root mat was not encountered. In Illinois, the prairie was plowedrelatively recently and test patches did not have well-developed roots. The resultof the Oklahoma experiment was more unexpected, because the area has neverbeen plowed.There are several possible explanations for the ease of digging in Oklahoma. The

area is subject to an annual burn and grazed by a large bison herd. It is well docu-mented that grazing and burning have effects on aboveground plant physiology,

figure 3 Typical root development in tested Richland complex prairie.


productivity, and species composition (e.g., Collins et al. 1998; Collins and Smith2006; Fuhlendorf et al. 2008; Geis and Boggess 1968; Gibson 2009; Gibson et al.1990; Keeler 2000; Knapp 1985; Rice and Parenti 1978; Towne and Kemp2003). Bisons were not present in significant numbers during Cahokia’s heyday(e.g., McMillan 2006); therefore, this was likely only a contributing factor inOklahoma.Burning is a more likely explanation. Experiments have shown that burning is

very effective at removing aboveground vegetation. Further, intense heat rarelyextends more than approximately 10 cm below the surface (Gibson 2009:190),but this is sufficient to weaken the upper portion of the roots enough for hand agri-culture. This practice is also seen in historic accounts, as this quote from Illinoissuggests: “So effectually does the fire do its work, that the earth is left quite bare,and a person may walk upon it without sustaining any injury, immediately afterthe fire has passed” (Oliver 1924:65). Multiple accounts describe the use of fireby Native Americans for hunting and agriculture (e.g., Doolittle 2004; Fritz 2000;Hammett 1992; Irving 1956; Stewart 1951). Natural fires are also common; there-fore, fire cannot be ruled out as a contributing factor, especially since historicdescriptions of fires are readily available (Courtwright 2011; Hammett 1992;Nelson 1985; Oliver 1924; Telford 1926).Given the results of the experiments, we argue thatMill Creek hoes were tools that

were well suited to both floodplain and prairie environments. As we outline below,this is due to multiple factors, including the nature of prairie root systems and differ-ences between Euro-American and Native American farming practices. It is impor-tant to note, however, that other types of digging implements were probably alsoused (e.g., Muller 1997:254–255), although we did not test them here. Diggingsticks were used throughout North America, and bison scapula and shell hoeswere also used in some regions (e.g., Bolton 1987; Campbell 1959; Gunther

figure 4 Profile of excavation in burned prairie. Note the thin roots and lack of plowzone.Depth is 10 cm.


1945; Hudson 1976:297; Sturtevant 1968; Swanton 1911, 1942:127, 129; Waugh1916:15, 159). Further, Cobb (2000) and Koldehoff and Brennan (2010) suggestthat the use of Mill Creek hoes may not have been solely due to their effectivenessbut may also have been linked to political agendas. This is an intriguing possibility,but it is outside the scope of this paper.

Prairie grasslands and root systemsPrairies encompass much of what is now the midwestern and western United States,with the Prairie Peninsula extending into parts of the Eastern Woodlands, includingIllinois (Transeau 1935; Weaver 1954, 1968). Prairie grasses are dominated by bigand/or little bluestem; these often compose up to 75 percent of the species in a givenpatch of prairie (Bazzaz and Parrish 1982; Weaver 1954:23). Indian grass andswitchgrass are also common in upland prairies, but other species occur. Roots ofthese upland species can extend up to 3 m deep and extend vertically rather thanhorizontally. Although they are deep, bluestem, Indian grass, and switchgrassroots are thin, usually less than 4 mm (Weaver 1954:88–93), but woody taprootsof 2.5–7 cm are sometimes present. Roots of 2 cm were easily dispatched with aMill Creek hoe both in our experiments and in a previous study (Milner et al. 2010).Bluegrass and Indian grass are both sod species (those that form a thicket of

shoots) and bunch species (those that grow close together and form clusters ofaround 10 cm in diameter) (Weaver 1968:37–39). In upland prairies, where theonly water available is through precipitation, bunches are more pronounced andthe volume and weight per hectare is less than that in the well-watered floodplainprairies. This leaves more space between bunches for other species to grow.The thin fibrous roots of these upland prairie species, as seen in experimental plots

by Weaver (1968:Figure 37), closely match the roots we cut through in bothunburned and burned contexts. The combination of this type of root, the effectsof fire on the top 10 cm of soil, and the overall effectiveness of the Mill Creek hoesuggest that our digging experiments may have been reflective of typical conditionsin upland prairie.

Historic accounts of prairie sod breakingEarly historic accounts describe the difficulties in breaking prairie and penetratingthe formidable root mat (Bogue 1968; Coffin 1902; Costello 1969; Hokanson1994; Schob 1973). John Muir, describing the heavy plows used for sod bustingin the 1850s, provides a good account of the task as follows:

Most of these ploughs were very large, turning furrows from eighteen inches totwo feet wide, and were drawn by four or five yoke of oxen. They were usedonly for the first ploughing, in breaking up the wild sod woven into a toughmass, chiefly by the cordlike roots of perennial grasses, reinforced by thetap-roots of oak and hickory bushes, called “grubs,” some of which weremore than a century old and four or five inches in diameter. In the hardestploughing on the most difficult ground, the grubs were said to be as thick asthe hair on a dog’s back. If in good trim, the plough cut through and turnedover these grubs as if the century-old wood were soft like the flesh of carrots


and turnips; but if not in good trim the grubs promptly tossed the plough out ofthe ground [Muir 1913:227–228].

Sod busting required multiple yokes of oxen or horses, a wheeled beam of 3.5–4 min length, an iron or steel plowshare, and at least two people (Coffin 1902;McManis1964; Schob 1973). Between 1830 and 1860, the development of steel plows madesod busting and other prairie plowing much simpler, primarily because soil could notstick to the smooth steel plowshare (Kendall 1959). In addition, farmers eventuallyswitched from plowing deep furrows to simply removing a “thin rind of grassand roots” (Bogue 1963:8) and the typical sod-busting plow tilled a furrow of5–15 cm deep (Schob 1973). One farmer, writing not long after most Iowa prairieshad been broken, remarked as follows:

The original prairie sod was one web of tough, small roots…The season for“breaking prairie” varied as the spring and summer were early or late, wetor dry. The best results were had by beginning to plow after the grass had apretty good start, and quitting the work some time before it was ready forthe scythe. The main object aimed at was to secure as complete a rotting ofthe sod as possible. To this end, the plow was gauged to cut only one andone-half to two inches deep. The object was to have the land in as good ashape as possible for sowing wheat the following spring. A dry season, thinbreaking, “kinky” furrows, and not too long breaking accomplished this,and made the putting in of wheat the following spring an easy task. But onthe contrary, if broken too deeply, and the furrows laid flat and smooth, orin a wet season, or if broken too late, the job of seeding the wheat on toughsod was a hard and slow one [Coffin 1902:448–449, emphasis added].

Clearly, breaking prairie was a formidable task for these early settlers. It is notclear, however, that these obstacles would have affected Native American farmersin the same way. To demonstrate this, we now turn to a discussion of nativeagriculture.

Native American agricultureThe literature on farming practices indicates that Native Americans approachedagriculture in a far different way than did Euro-American settlers. While the formand scale of production varied across North America (e.g., Scarry and Scarry2005), it is clear that crops in many areas were planted in hills and ridges ratherthan in wide open tracts of plowed land. The Omaha planted crops in hills48–60 cm in diameter, up to 48 cm tall, and spaced .6–.9 m apart (Fletcher andFlesche 1992:269). Similarly, the Hidatsa spaced hills .9–1.2 m apart and arrangedwithin rows about 1.2 m apart. The hills were likely at least 48 cm in diameter(Wilson 1987:22–23). Another source suggests that the Mandan, Arikara, andHidatsa used hills 30–48 cm in diameter and “a good long step apart” (probably.6–.9 m) (Will and Hyde 2002:79). Other western groups did not use hills orridges and did not plant seeds very deeply, as seen in the following example fromthe Hasinai:


In preparing the ground the brush and weeds were cleared off and the soillightly scratched with a crude instrument, the usual one being a mattox, orpick, made of bone or of fire-hardened wood tied by bark cord to a woodenhandle. The favorite wood used for this purpose was walnut, and we maysuppose that, as was the case with the neighboring Plains Indian, the favoritebone was the shoulder blade of the buffalo [Bolton 1987:96–97, emphasisadded].

Farther east, the Haudenosaunee (Iroquois) planted corn in round hillocks .9 m indiameter (Lafitau 1974:54), as did the Huron (Kinietz 1965:16) and a number ofsoutheastern groups (Swanton 1946:306–308). It should be noted that NativeAmericans on the Great Plains, such as the Hidatsa and Pawnee, did not farmupland soils because of the tough sod, although they used weaker bison scapulahoes rather than the stronger Mill Creek chert hoes used in our experiments(Hurt 1987; Wilson 1987). In the upper Midwest, the Potawatomi grew maize,beans, squash, pumpkins, gourds, and tobacco using regularly spaced round hil-locks roughly 1 m in diameter, but linear raised beds were also used (Sasso andJoyce 2006). The Winnebago also utilized circular mounds arranged in straightrows (Radin 1990:68).Ridged or hilled fields are difficult to find archaeologically, perhaps because many

have been destroyed by modern agriculture (Gallagher 1992); however, Doolittle(1992a) argues that one reason fields have not been found is because there hasnot been a systematic survey to look for them. Extant hills and ridges have beenidentified in the Midwest (particularly in Wisconsin) and New England (Buckmaster2004; Delabarre and Wilder 1920; Doolittle 1992b:Figure 4, 2000:194–216;Gallagher 1992; Sasso 2003, 2008); most examples known to Schoolcraft(1860:59) in Michigan were on prairies or oak savannas. When found, they areoften in unplowed modern fields in which ridges can still be seen (Sasso 2008).Excavations sometimes confirm ridged fields (e.g., Gartner 2003; Riley 1987;

Sasso 2008). A number of these sites have been tested in Wisconsin (Gallagheret al. 1985; Gallagher and Sasso 1987; Sasso 2003, 2008), Massachusetts(Mrozowski 1994), and at Macon Plateau in Georgia (Kelly 1938; Riley 1994), toprovide only a few examples. In Illinois, linear bands seen in aerial photographsof Lunsford-Pulcher were suggested to be analogous to the ridged fields found atMacon Plateau and the ridges excavated at the Texas site (Fowler 1969; Riley andSaid 1993). Fowler and Benchley (1980) also interpreted linear anomalies inaerial photos at the Interpretive Center Tract at Cahokia as possible ridged fields,but later excavations were inconclusive (Nassaney et al. 1983). The recentapplication of geochemical techniques suggests the likelihood that new fields willbe identified in the future (Nolan 2014).A full discussion of soil productivity and crop production is an important and

interesting topic, but it is outside the scope of this paper. These topics have beendebated by others (Baden and Beekman 2001; Schroeder 1999, 2001), and inter-ested readers are referred there. It is important, however, to note here that thesenative field systems were extremely productive. Research has shown that Iroquoismaize farmers often out-produced contemporary Euro-American wheat farmers.


This is in part because maize is better suited to roughly prepared, untilled soil, it iseasier to weed because of the wider space between plants, and it can be planted indi-vidually or in small groups to take advantage of local conditions (Mt. Pleasant 2006,2011; Mt. Pleasant and Burt 2010). Experimental hill and ridge gardens in theMidwest and northern Plains have also demonstrated the effectiveness of thisform of agriculture (Demchik and Demchik 2011; Munson-Scullin and Sculling2005; Schneider 2002). The utility of no-till farming as opposed to plow agriculturehas become a topic of interest to soil scientists (e.g., Lal et al. 2007).We suggest that the idea that Native American farmers in the Richland complex

area would have been incapable of farming upland prairie is a relic of outdatedassumptions linked to Eurocentric farming practices. Cahokian farming of uplandprairie was plausible for a few simple reasons. First, Mill Creek hoes are extremelyeffective. Second, native farming practices differed from European farming prac-tices. Rather than deep tilling of large contiguous sections of land, in many places,native farming consisted of shallow digging used to form low ridges or hills forplanting. These excavations may not have exceeded 10 cm or so in depth, likelyshallow enough that the root mat (burned or unburned) may have been less of afactor. Further, European staple crops, such as wheat, have different requirementsthan Native American staple crops such as corn, squash, and beans. Third,European expectations of farming (e.g., open, cleared fields) heavily influencedtheir impressions of cultivating prairie. Therefore, the writings of Euro-Americansettlers may not be good indicators of the suitability of prairie for individualsusing native techniques.

Conclusions

These experiments indicate that farmers usingMill Creek hoes could have convertedupland prairie into farmland. If so, then Richland complex farmers may have indeedbeen able to increase production to provision the growth of Cahokia during theLohmann and early Stirling phases. This supports the archaeological evidence of(a) an increase of sites in the uplands and (b) higher frequencies of hoe sharpeningdebris at these upland sites compared to sites in the floodplain. Further study ofupland prairie expansion should take into account that not all prairies are thesame; some are more desirable for settlement than others (e.g., Jordan 1964). Theresults presented here merely report on the test of the potential of Mill Creek hoesto break the soils in the upland prairie.

Acknowledgements

We thank Paul Welch for suggesting this project to us. Steven Boles, CassidyHammerstedt, John Harryman, Jack Hughes, John Hughes, Sue Hughes, andAmanda Regnier assisted us at various times in the field. Bob Hamilton and KurtRange facilitated access to the Tallgrass Prairie Preserve and Southwestern IllinoisCollege, respectively. Larry Kinsella made the replica Mill Creek chert hoe. Wealso thank Wayne Elisens, Bruce Hoagland, Geoffrey Levin, and John Taft for


helpful comments on grass physiology. Comments from Charles Cobb, Brad Kol-dehoff, Sheila Savage, Gregory Wilson, and an anonymous reviewer greatlyimproved the paper. Funding for travel was provided by the University of Okla-homa, College of Arts and Sciences, and the Oklahoma Archaeological Survey.

Notes on contributor

Scott W. Hammerstedt is a member of the research faculty at the Oklahoma Arche-ological Survey, University of Oklahoma. His current research includes geophysicaland settlement archaeology of late prehistoric societies at and near Spiro in easternOklahoma.Correspondence to: Oklahoma Archeological Survey, University of Oklahoma,

111 E. Chesapeake St, Norman, OK 73019. [email protected] R. Hughes is a graduate student at the University of Colorado, Boulder. Her

research focuses on lithic material in regards to cultural influences and interactionbetween people in the Great Plains and Cahokia.Correspondence to: Department of Anthropology 1350 Pleasant St. Boulder, Co

80309-0233. [email protected]

References CitedAlt, Susan M. (2002) Identities, Traditions, and Diversity in Cahokia’s Uplands. Midcontinental Journal of

Archaeology 27:217–235.

Baden, William W., and Christopher S. Beekman (2001) Culture and Agriculture: A Comment on Sissel

Schroeder, Maize Productivity in the Eastern Woodlands and Great Plains of North America. American

Antiquity 66:505–516.

Bazzaz, F. A., and J. A. D. Parrish (1982) Organization of Grassland Communities. In Grasses and Grasslands:

Systematics and Ecology, edited by James R. Estes, Ronald J. Tyrl, and Jere N. Brunken, pp. 233–254.

University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.

Benson, Larry V., Timothy R. Pauketat, and Edward R. Cook (2009) Cahokia’s Boom and Bust in the Context of

Climate Change. American Antiquity 74:467–483.

Bogue, Allan G. (1963) Farming in the Prairie Peninsula, 1830–1890. Journal of Economic History 23:3–29.

Bogue, Allan G. (1968) From Prairie to Cornbelt: Farming on the Illinois and Iowa Prairies in the Nineteenth

Century. Quadrangle, Chicago.

Bolton, Herbert E. (1987) The Hasinais: Southern Caddoans as Seen by the Earliest Europeans. University of

Oklahoma Press, Norman.

Brown, James A., Richard A. Kerber, and Howard D. Winters (1990) Trade and the Evolution of Exchange

Relations at the Beginning of the Mississippian Period. In The Mississippian Emergence, edited by Bruce

D. Smith, pp. 251–280. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Buckmaster, Marla M. (2004) Northern Limits of Ridge Field Agriculture. In An Upper Great Lakes

Archaeological Odyssey: Essays in Honor of Charles E. Cleland, edited by William A. Lovis, pp. 30–42.

Wayne State University Press, Detroit, MI, USA.

Campbell, T. N. (1959) Choctaw Subsistence: Ethnographic Notes from the Lincecum Manuscript. Florida

Anthropologist 12:9–24.

Chmurny, William W. (1973) The Ecology of the Middle Mississippian Occupation of the American Bottom.

Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Illinois, Urbana.

Cobb, Charles R. (2000) From Quarry to Cornfield: The Political Economy of Mississippian Hoe Production.

University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.


mailto:[email protected]






Coffin, L. S. (1902) Breaking Prairie. Annals of Iowa, 3rd series. 5:447–452.

Collins, Scott L., Alan K. Knapp, John M. Briggs, John M. Blair, and Ernest M. Steinauer (1998) Modulation of

Diversity by Grazing and Mowing in Native Tallgrass Prairie. Science 280:745–747.

Collins, Scott L., and Melinda D. Smith (2006) Scale-Dependent Interaction of Fire and Grazing on Community

Heterogeneity in Tallgrass Prairie. Ecology 87:2058–2067.

Costello, David F. (1969) The Prairie World. Thomas Y. Crowell, New York.

Courtwright, Julie (2011) Prairie Fire: A Great Plains History. University Press of Kansas, Lawrence.

Delabarre, Edmund B., and Harris H. Wilder (1920) Corn-Hills in Massachusetts. American Anthropologist

22:203–225.

Demchik,Mike, and Emily Demchik (2011) Observations on the Productivity and Time Required for a Corn and

Squash Polyculture, Portage County, Wisconsin. Plains Anthropologist 56:71–81.

Doolittle, William E. (1992a) Before There Was a Cornbelt: A Prospectus on Research. In Late Prehistoric

Agriculture: Observations from the Midwest, edited by William I. Woods, pp. 217–240. Illinois Historic

Preservation Agency, Springfield.

Doolittle, William E. (1992b) Agriculture in North America on the Eve of Contact: A Reassessment. Annals of

the Association of American Geographers 82:386–401.

Doolittle, William E. (2000) Cultivated Landscapes of Native North America. Oxford University Press,

New York.

Doolittle, William E. (2004) Permanent vs. Shifting Cultivation in the Eastern Woodlands of North America

Prior to European Contact. Agriculture and Human Values 21:181–189.

Dunnell, Robert C., P. T.McCutcheon, M. Ikeya, and S. Toyoda (1994) Heat Treatment ofMill Creek and Dover

Cherts on the Malden Plain, Southeast Missouri. Journal of Archaeological Science 21:79–89.

Emerson, Thomas E. (1997) Cahokia and the Archaeology of Power. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.

Emerson, Thomas E., and Douglas K. Jackson (1984) The BBB Motor Site. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.

Fletcher, Alice C., and Francis La Flesche (1992) The Omaha Tribe, 2 vols. University of Nebraska Press,

Lincoln.

Fortier, Andrew C. (editor) (2007) The Archaeology of the East St. Louis Mound Center Part II: The Northside

Excavations. Transportation Archaeological Research Reports 22, Illinois Transportation Archaeological

Research Program, University of Illinois, Champaign.

Fortier, Andrew C., Thomas E. Emerson, and Dale L. McElrath (2006) Calibrating and Reassessing American

Bottom Culture History. Southeastern Archaeology 25:170–211.

Fowler, Melvin L. (1969) Middle Mississippian Agricultural Fields. American Antiquity 34:365–375.

Fowler, Melvin L., and Elizabeth Benchley (1980) Final Report of 1979 Archaeological Investigations at the

Interpretive Center Tract, Cahokia Mounds Historic Site. Archaeological Report of Investigations 40.

University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee.

Fowler, Melvin L., and Robert L. Hall (1978) Late Prehistory of the Illinois Area. In Northeast, edited by Bruce

G. Trigger, pp. 560–568. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 15, William C. Sturtevant, general

editor, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Fritz, Gayle J. (2000) Native Farming Systems and Ecosystems in the Mississippi River Valley. In Imperfect

Balance: Landscape Transformations in the Precolumbian Americas, edited by David L. Lentz,

pp. 225–249. Columbia University Press, New York.

Fuhlendorf, Samuel D., David M. Engle, Jay Kerby, and Robert Hamilton (2008) Pyric Herbivory: Rewilding

Landscapes through the Recoupling of Fire and Grazing. Conservation Biology 23:588–598.

Gallagher, James P. (1992) Prehistoric Field Systems in the Upper Midwest. In Late Prehistoric Agriculture:

Observations from the Midwest, edited by William I. Woods, pp. 95–135. Studies in Illinois Archaeology

8, Illinois Historic Preservation Agency, Springfield.

Gallagher, James P., Robert F. Boszhardt, Robert F. Sasso, and Katherine Stevenson (1985) Oneota Ridged Field

Agriculture in Southwestern Wisconsin. American Antiquity 50:605–612.

Gallagher, James P., and Robert F. Sasso (1987) Investigations into Oneota Ridged Field Agriculture on the

Northern Margin of the Prairie Peninsula. Plains Anthropologist 32:141–151.


Gartner, William G. (2003) Raised Field Landscapes of Ancient North America. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation,

Department of Geography, University of Wisconsin, Madison.

Geis, James W., and William R. Boggess (1968) The Prairie Peninsula: Its Origin and Significance in the

Vegetational History of Central Illinois. In The Quaternary of Illinois: A Symposium in Observance of the

Centennial of the University of Illinois, edited by R. E. Bergstrom, pp. 89–95. University of Illinois College

of Agriculture Special Publication 14, University of Illinois, Urbana.

Gibson, David J. (2009) Grasses and Grassland Ecology. Oxford University Press, New York.

Gibson, David J., David C. Hartnett, and Gary L. S. Merrill (1990) Fire Temperature Heterogeneity in

Contrasting Fire Prone Habitats: Kansas Tallgrass Prairie and Florida Sandhill. Bulletin of the Torrey

Botanical Club 117:349–356.

Gunther, Erna (1945) Ethnobotany of Western Washington: The Knowledge and Use of Indigenous Plants by

Native Americans. University of Washington Press, Seattle.

Hammerstedt, Scott W. (2005) Mississippian Construction, Labor, and Social Organization in Western

Kentucky. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Pennsylvania State University,

University Park.

Hammett, Julia E. (1992) The Shapes of Adaptation: Historical Ecology of Anthropogenic Landscapes in the

Southeastern United States. Landscape Ecology 2:121–135.

Hokanson, Drake (1994) Reflecting a Prairie Town: A Year in Peterson. University of Iowa Press, Iowa City.

Holmes, William H. (1919) Handbook of Aboriginal American Antiquities. Bureau of American Ethnology

Bulletin No. 60, pp. 187–194. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Hudson, Charles (1976) The Southeastern Indians. University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville.

Hurt, Douglas R. (1987) Indian Agriculture in America: Prehistory to the Present. University Press of Kansas,

Lawrence.

Irving, Washington (1956) A Tour on the Prairies. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.

Johannessen, Sissel (1984) Paleoethnobotany. InAmerican Bottom Archaeology, edited by Charles J. Bareis, and

James W. Porter, pp. 197–214. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.

Jordan, Terry G. (1964) Between the Forest and the Prairie. Agricultural History 38:205–216.

Keeler, Kathleen H. (2000) Influence of Past Interactions on the Prairie Today: A Hypothesis. Great Plains

Research 10:107–125.

Kelly, Arthur R. (1938) A Preliminary Report on Archaeological Explorations at Macon, Georgia. Bureau of

American Ethnology Bulletin No. 119, pp. 1–68. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Kelly, John E. (1990) The Emergence of Mississippian Culture in the American Bottom Region. In The

Mississippian Emergence, edited by Bruce D. Smith, pp. 113–152. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Kelly, Lucretia S. (1997) Patterns of Faunal Exploitation at Cahokia. In Cahokia: Domination and Ideology in

the Mississippian World, edited by Timothy R. Pauketat, and Thomas E. Emerson, pp. 69–88. University of

Nebraska Press, Lincoln.

Kelly, Lucretia S., and Paula G. Cross (1984) Zooarchaeology. In American Bottom Archaeology, edited by

Charles J. Bareis, and James W. Porter, pp. 215–232. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.

Kendall, Edward C. (1959) John Deere’s Steel Plow. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Kinietz, Vernon W. (1965) The Indians of the Western Great Lakes, 1615–1760. University of Michigan Press,

Ann Arbor.

Knapp, Alan K. (1985) Effect of Fire and Drought on the Ecophysiology of Adropogon gerardii and Panicum

virgatum in a Tallgrass Prairie. Ecology 66:1309–1320.

Koldehoff, Brad (1990) Household Specialization: The Organization of Mississippian Chipped-Stone-Tool

Production. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology, Southern Illinois University,

Carbondale.

Koldehoff, Brad, and Tamira Brennan (2010) Exploring Mississippian Polity Interaction and Craft

Specialization with Ozarks Chipped-Stone Resources. Missouri Archaeologist 71:131–164.

Koldehoff, Brad, and Joseph M. Galloy (2006) Late Woodland Frontiers in the American Bottom Region.

Southeastern Archaeology 25:275–300.


Lafitau, Joseph-Francois (1974) Customs of the American Indians Compared with the Customs of Primitive

Times. Champlain Society, Toronto.

Lal, R., D. C. Reicosky, and J. D. Hanson (2007) Evolution of the Plow over 10,000 Years and the Rationale for

No-Till Farming. Soil and Tillage Research 93:1–12.

McManis, Douglas R. (1964) The Initial Evaluation and Utilization of the Illinois Prairies, 1815–1840.

Research Paper 94, Department of Geography, University of Chicago.

McMillan, Bruce R. (editor) (2006) Records of Early Bison in Illinois. Scientific Papers 31. Illinois State

Museum, Springfield.

Milner, George R. (1983) The Turner and DeMange Sites. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.

Milner, George R. (1984) The Julien Site. American Bottom Archaeology, FAI-270 Reports 7. University of

Illinois Press, Urbana.

Milner, George R. (1986) Mississippian Period Population Density in a Segment of the Central Mississippi River

Valley. American Antiquity 51:227–238.

Milner, George R. (1993) Settlements amidst Swamps. Illinois Archaeology 5:374–380.

Milner, George R. (1998) The Cahokia Chiefdom: The Archaeology of a Mississippian Society. Smithsonian

Institution, Washington, D.C.

Milner, George R., Scott W. Hammerstedt, and Kirk D. French (2010) Chert Hoes as Digging Tools. Antiquity

84:103–113.

Milner, George R., and James S. Oliver (1999) Late Prehistoric Settlements and Wetlands in the Central

Mississippi River Valley. In Settlement Patterns in the Americas: Fifty Years since Viru, edited by Brian

R. Billman, and Gary Feinman, pp. 79–95. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Mrozowski, Stephen A. (1994) The Discovery of a Native American Cornfield on Cape Cod. Archaeology of

Eastern North America 22:47–62.

Mt. Pleasant, Jane (2006) The Science Behind the Three Sisters Mound System: An Agronomic Assessment of an

Indigenous Agricultural System in the Northeast. In Histories of Maize: Multidisciplinary Approaches to the

Prehistory, Linguistics, Biogeography, Domestication, and Evolution of Maize, edited by John E. Staller,

Robert H. Tykot, and Bruce F. Benz, pp. 529–537. Academic Press, New York.

Mt. Pleasant, Jane (2011) The Paradox of Plows and Productivity: An Agronomic Comparison of Cereal Grain

Production under Iroquois Hoe Culture and European Plow Culture in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth

Centuries. Agricultural History 85:460–492.

Mt. Pleasant, Jane, and Robert F. Burt (2010) Estimating Productivity of Traditional Iroquoian Cropping

Systems from Field Experiments and Historical Literature. Journal of Ethnobiology 30:52–79.

Muir, John (1913) The Story of My Boyhood and Youth. Houghton Mifflin, Boston.

Muller, Jon (1997) Mississippian Political Economy. Springer, New York.

Munson-Scullin, Wendy, and Michael Sculling (2005) Potential Productivity of Midwestern Native American

Gardens. Plains Anthropologist 50:9–21.

Nassaney, Michael S., Neal H. Lopinot, Brian M. Butler, and Richard W. Jefferies (1983) The 1982

Excavations at the Cahokia Interpretive Center Tract, St. Clair County, Illinois. Center for Archaeological

Investigations, Research Paper 37. Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University,

Carbondale.

Nelson, Paul W. (1985) The Terrestrial Natural Communities of Missouri. Missouri Natural Areas Committee,

Jefferson City.

Nolan, Kevin C. (2014) Prospecting for Prehistoric Gardens: Results of a Pilot Study. Archaeological

Prospection 21:147–154.

Oliver, William (1924) Eight Months in Illinois, with Information to Immigrants. Walter M. Hill, Chicago.

Pauketat, Timothy R. (1998) Refiguring the Archaeology of Greater Cahokia. Journal of Archaeological

Research 6:45–89.

Pauketat, Timothy R. (2003) Resettled Farmers and the Making of a Mississippian Polity. American Antiquity

68:39–66.

Pauketat, Timothy R. (2004) Ancient Cahokia and the Mississippians. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.


Pauketat, Timothy R. (editor) (2005) The Archaeology of the East St. Louis Mound Center Part I: The Southside

Excavations. Transportation Archaeological Research Reports 21. Illinois Transportation Archaeological

Research Program, University of Illinois, Champaign.

Pauketat, Timothy R., and Neal H. Lopinot (1997) Cahokian Population Dynamics. In Cahokia: Domination

and Ideology in the Mississippian World, edited by Timothy R. Pauketat, and Thomas E. Emerson,

pp. 103–123. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln.

Peters, Bernard C. (1970) Pioneer Evaluation of the Kalamazoo County Landscape. Michigan Academician

3:15–25.

Phillips, William A. (1900) Aboriginal Quarries and Shops at Mill Creek, Illinois. American Anthropologist

2:37–52.

Radin, Paul (1990) The Winnebago Tribe. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln.

Rau, Charles (1864) Agricultural Implements of the North American Stone Period. In Annual Report for 1863,

pp. 379–380. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Rau, Charles (1869) A Deposit of Agricultural Flint Implements in Southern Illinois. In Annual Report for 1868,

pp. 402–404. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Rice, Elroy L., and Robert L. Parenti (1978) Causes of Decreases in Productivity in Undisturbed Tall Grass

Prairie. American Journal of Botany 65:1091–1097.

Riley, Thomas J. (1987) Ridged-Field Agriculture and the Mississippian Economic Pattern. In Emergent

Horticultural Economies of the Eastern Woodlands, edited by William F. Keegan, pp. 295–304. Center for

Archaeological Investigations, Occasional Paper No. 7. Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern

Illinois University, Carbondale.

Riley, Thomas J. (1994) Ocmulgee and the Question of Mississippian Agronomic Practices. In Ocmulgee

Archaeology, 1936–1986, edited by David J. Hally, pp. 96–104. University of Georgia Press, Athens.

Riley, Thomas J., and Chaksana Said (1993) Fly Ash Analysis Supports Emergent Mississippian Agricultural

Features at the Lunsford-Pulcher Site (11-S-40) in the American Bottom, Illinois. Plains Anthropologist

38:177–186.

Sasso, Robert F. (2003) Vestiges of Ancient Cultivation: The Antiquity of Garden Beds and Corn Hills in

Wisconsin. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 28:195–231.

Sasso, Robert F. (2008) Ridged and Corn Hill Agricultural Fields: Wisconsin, Michigan, and Iowa Examples of

Late Prehistoric Agriculture in the Midwest. In Archaeology in America: An Encyclopedia, edited by Linda

S. Cordell, Kent Lightfoot, Francis McManamon, and George Milner, pp. 169–172. Greenwood, Westport,

CT, USA.

Sasso, Robert F., and Dan Joyce (2006) Ethnohistory and Archaeology: The Removal Era Potawatomi Lifeway

in Southeastern Wisconsin. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 31:165–201.

Scarry, Margaret C., and John F. Scarry (2005) Native American “Garden Agriculture” in Southeastern North

America. World Archaeology 37:259–274.

Schneider, Fred (2002) Prehistoric Horticulture in the Northeastern Plains. Plains Anthropologist 47:33–50.

Schob, David E. (1973) Sodbusting on the Upper Midwestern Frontier, 1820–1860. Agricultural History

47:47–56.

Schoolcraft, Henry R. (1860) Archives of Aboriginal Knowledge, Vol. 1. J. B. Lippincott, Philadelphia.

Schroeder, Sissel (1999) Maize Productivity in the Eastern Woodlands and Great Plains of North America.

American Antiquity 64:499–516.

Schroeder, Sissel (2001) Understanding Variation in Prehistoric Agricultural Productivity: The Importance of

Distinguishing among Potential, Available, and Consumptive Yields. American Antiquity 66:517–525.

Schroeder, Walter (1997) Environmental Setting of the St. Louis Region. In Common Fields: An Environmental

History of St. Louis, edited by Andrew Hurley, pp. 13–37. Missouri Historical Society Press, St Louis.

Schwegman, John E. (1973) The Natural Divisions of Illinois. Illinois Nature Preserve System, Springfield.

Shaw, Thurston (1970) Methods of Earthwork Building. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 34:380–381.

Smith, Daryl, Dave Williams, Greg Houseal, and Kirk Henderson (2010) The Tallgrass Prairie Center Guide to

Prairie Restoration in the Upper Midwest. University of Iowa Press, Iowa City.

Sonnenfeld, J. (1962) Interpreting the Function of Primitive Implements. American Antiquity 28:56–65.


Stewart, Omer C. (1951) Burning and Natural Vegetation in the United States. Geographical Review

41:317–320.

Sturtevant, William C. (1968) Lafitau’s Hoes. American Antiquity 33:93–95.

Sussenbach, Tom (1993) Agricultural Intensification and Mississippian Developments in the Confluence Region

of the Mississippi River Valley. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of

Illinois, Urbana.

Swanton, John (1911) Indian Tribes of the Lower Mississippi Valley and Adjacent Coast of the Gulf of Mexico.

Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 43. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Swanton, John (1942) Source Material on the History and Ethnology of the Caddo Indians. Bureau of American

Ethnology, Bulletin 132. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Swanton, John (1946) The Indians of the Southeastern United States. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin

137. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Telford, Clarence J. (1926) Third Report on a Forest Survey of Illinois. Natural History Survey, Bulletin 16.

Natural History Survey, Urbana.

Towne, Gene E., and Ken E. Kemp (2003) Vegetation Dynamics from Annually Burning Tallgrass Prairie in

Different Seasons. Journal of Range Management 56:185–192.

Transeau, Edgar N. (1935) The Prairie Peninsula. Ecology 16:423–437.

Waugh, F. W. (1916) Iroquois Foods and Food Production. Memoir 86. Canada Geological Survey, Government

Printing Office, Ottawa.

Weaver, J. E. (1954) North American Prairie. Johnson, Lincoln, NE, USA.

Weaver, J. E. (1968) Prairie Plants and Their Environment: A Fifty-Year Study in the Midwest. University of


Will, George F., and George E. Hyde (2002) Corn among the Indians of the Upper Missouri. University of


Williams, Stephen (1971) Session I: Round Table on Definition of Mississippian. Southeastern Archaeological

Conference Newsletter 10:1–19.

Wilson, Gilbert L. (1987) Buffalo Bird Woman’s Garden: Agriculture of the Hidatsa Indians. Minnesota

Historical Society Press, St Paul.

Winters, Howard D. (1981) Excavating in Museums: Notes on Mississippian Hoes and Middle Woodland

Copper Gouges and Celts. In The Research Potential of Anthropological Museum Collections, edited by

A. E. Cantwell, James B. Griffin, and N. A. Rothschild, pp. 17–34. Annals of the New York Academy of

Sciences 376, New York.

Witthoft, John (1967) Glazed Polish on Flint Tools. American Antiquity 32:383–388.

Woods, William I. (1986) Prehistoric Settlement and Subsistence in the Upland Cahokia Creek Drainage.

Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Geography, University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee.

Woods, William I. (1987) Maize Agriculture and the Late Prehistoric: A Characterization of Settlement Location

Strategies. In Emergent Horticultural Economies of the Eastern Woodlands, edited by William F. Keegan,

pp. 275–294. Center for Archaeological Investigations, Occasional Paper No. 7. Center for Archaeological

Investigations, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale.

Woods, William I. (2004) Population Nucleation, Intensive Agriculture, and Environmental Degradation: The

Cahokia Example. Agriculture and Human Values 21:255–264.

Note1 In all three of our experiments, the size of our plots

was determined by a combination of time con-

siderations and landowner permission. Since the

objective was simply to test the effectiveness of

hoes rather than to recreate an entire garden

plot, a small area was deemed sufficient.


Mill Creek Chert Hoes and Prairie Soils: Implications for Cahokian Production and Expansion

Documents

Transcript of Mill Creek Chert Hoes and Prairie Soils: Implications for Cahokian Production and Expansion