Paper 2
Dating the Chickasaw Beads

Home

Glass Trade Beads
Interviews

Database Fields: Artifacts

Database Fields: Glass Beads

Glass Bead Descriptions

Glass Bead Database

Glass Bead Sequence
A Beginning

Major Bead Types/Varieties
Glass Bead Chronology - Start/Finish

Glass Bead Sequence
Major Bead Fields

Glass Bead Sequence
Minor Bead Fields

Glass Bead Sequence
Major & Minor Glass Bead Fields

Glass Bead Chronology
An End, A Beginning

Glass Bead Chronology
Dating

Other Artifacts - Dating

Beads as Heirlooms

Bead Dating Conclusions

Other Factors
Appreciation

Paper 2 Figures

Paper 2 Tables

Paper 2 References

Database Records: Glass Beads

Prior to the interviews, glass bead database records were developed generally employing the Kidd and Kidd (Kidd and Kidd 1970 46) glass bead classification system as amended by Brain (Brain 1981 7). To expedite the comparison of this work to Tunica, use of Brain's typology was followed except as noted below.

First, a basic description of the Kidd and Kidd bead classification system follows. The Kidd and Kidd system's first level of classification relied on the method of bead production, i.e. tube (drawn) or wire-wound. Tube beads were manufactured by drawing apart a hollow glob of molten glass. Wire-wound beads were produced by melting a solid rod of glass around a spinning mandrel.

The tube beads were divided into four classes (I-IV) based on whether or not the bead shape is rounded and whether its construction is simple, compound, complex or composite. A simple bead has only one layer of glass; a compound bead has two or more layers of glass. A complex bead is a simple bead with surface decoration and a composite bead is a compound bead with surface decoration. The type of beads (A-B) distinguishes various combinations of these criteria.

Following Kidd and Kidd, Brain (Brain 1981 3) reintroduced the eight types of drawn beads developed by Kidd and Kidd. Brain's type descriptions differed slightly from Kidd and Kidd and parentheses are added below to note the changes . . .

Kidd and Kidd used "tubular form" to define a tubular shape and "rounded tube form" described a tube shape that had been altered by reheating, grinding or tumbling.

Wire-wound beads, which begin with a 'W', are divided into three classes - I, II and III, based on construction, shape and additional decoration, after Brain,

A further division of wire-wound classification is "type" which defines more closely details of shape and decoration. The type classification follows Brain's work with the Tunica material, i.e. A, B, etc.

Brain (Brain 1981 3) modified Kidd and Kidd's classification indicating that variety "of all bead types, drawn and wire-wound, take into account variations in size, degree of opacity versus translucency, color and where appropriate, qualities of surface decoration". Brain's variety then expresses the bead's individuality. For Tunica, Brain noted 96 varieties of glass trade beads - 49 wire-wound and 47 drawn. Brain used variety as the basic unit of description, comparison and interpretation. An example of a drawn bead variety from Brain is IIA1, which is a simple bead with rounded ends and white color; the color in this case draws the "1" variety. Brain sized his IIA1 examples as very small to very large. Brain elected not to use size to define any bead variety; rather he reported a size range for each variety.

Table 1 indicates the Chickasaw glass bead typology. Note that Table 1 documents the Chickasaw bead types/varieties and those varieties used by Brain for the Tunica beads. The selection of the Chickasaw types/varieties follows Brain's Tunica work and references it, but note the differences. The Chickasaw glass bead database, if divided into varieties strictly invoking Brain's typology, would include several hundred varieties, perhaps in excess of 300. The goals of this paper are not to identify varieties but rather to develop a sequence of glass beads and establish a chronology for that sequence. With 300 bead varieties divided among 188 features, Table 2, the number of features/bead variety would render developing a chronology difficult at best. Therefore, an attempt was made to express the glass bead varieties as a manageable, solvable number of types/varieties.

The Chickasaw bead types/varieties generally exclude color as an attribute of classification. That is, bead varieties were combined into types when color was the only attribute that separated them. This was practiced for most of the bead types below.

Table 1 Chickasaw Glass Bead Typology

Two Chickasaw type/varieties, IIA1/IVA1 and IIA7/IVA7, maintain their color attribution on Table 1. These color bead varieties were permitted because the beads occurred in a significant number of features, see Tables 2 and 3. For the benefit of comparison, prevalent colors of the bead types/varieties are provided in column four of Table 1.

Note on Table 1 that several of the Chickasaw bead types/varieties combine drawn bead classes, when compared to Tunica: IA and IIIA, IB and IIIB, IIA and IVA and IIB and IVB. These combinations join bead types of differing taxonomic construction and seemingly defy the basis of Kidd and Kidd system. In fact, the combinations join simple beads and compound beads identical in all of Brain's variety attributes: size, degree of opacity and translucency, color and surface decoration, save those that exhibit a thin layer of clear glass on the exterior of the matrix bead. The combining of these types joins the simply constructed bead with those compound beads that have an identical matrix save the matrix is coated with a thin layer of clear glass. Brain noted a thin clear glass coating on a prevalent Tunica bead variety, IVA1. Bead varieties IIA1 and IVA1, were identical at Tunica, save the thin clear exterior coating of glass on IVA1. At Tunica IIA1 represented 5,887 specimen and IVA1 113,501. For IIA1/IVA1 within the Chickasaw typology of the medium, large and very large beads perhaps 10% had a visible layer of thin clear glass. Most of the Chickasaw thin, clear glass coating was observed on the IA/IIIA Opaque, specifically the white colors.

Note that IF/IIIF bead type combination does not concern the thin, clear glass coating. Most of the IIIF include a core of a different glass, i.e. the interior may be different glass (density or color) than the exterior.

Table 1 notes two Chickasaw glass bead type/varieties attributable to Brain (Brain 1981 8) - IIIA1 and, IVA2 and another IVB (IVA2), which was not found at Tunica, that represent varieties of the same core bead, the 'Cornaline d'Aleppo'. These bead varieties were maintained in the Chickasaw typology, since they may exhibit late seventeenth century contexts.

The entire Chickasaw glass bead typology is distinguished by size, see Table 1. As stated earlier, all of the beads included in this study are sized medium, large, very large or extra large. Note the IA/IIIA XL and IB/IIIB XL fields, which exclusively contain extra large sized tube beads (measuring the length, not the diameter) and IA/IIIA VL 1 and 2 include exclusively very large tube beads, while the IA/IIIA Opaque, IA/IIIA Translucent type/varieties include beads only of medium and large size lengths.

Neither Kidd and Kidd nor Brain used an extra large size. This typology selected the extra large size to differentiate the opaque IA/IIIA and IB/IIIB tubes. In this study large is sized 10 mm to 18 mm and Extra Large size, greater than 18 mm.

The range of sizes used herein are very small: less than 2mm; small: 2 to 4 mm; medium: 4 to 6 mm; large: 6 to 10 mm; very large: 10 to 18 mm and extra large: greater than 18mm.

In this study, size is the maximum glass bead dimension, whether length or diameter. IA/IIIA XL and IB/IIIB XL use length as the sizing dimension and typically IIJ, WIE, WIB, WIB Wrap and WIA VL/XL use diameter as the maximum dimension. The argument for recording maximum dimensions stems from bead mass and the cost of manufacturing and transporting that mass.

Two types describe WIB - WIB and WIB Wrap. The Chickasaw WIB is identical to Brain while WIB Wrap represents a single, course wrap with distorted shaped holes and a surface with less polishing, i.e. the surface of WIB Wrap is not of a consistent cross section. The WIB Wrap glass texture is finer than WIB. The colors differ too, with WIB trending toward WIA VL/XL and WIIA while WIB Wrap glass colors hues appear subtler than WIB.

The Chickasaw types/varieties WIA VL/XL, WIC and WIIC XL are dominated by Brain's WIA1, WIC1 and WIIC1 varieties, which share identical glasscolor, pale blue. The urge to combine these types was resisted due to shape differences.

Kidd and Kidd's system further distinguished compound striped beads, IIB and IVB, by a BB designation when stripes were composed of more than one rod of glass. The Chickasaw typology combines all B and BB stripes (except IVB (IVA2)) into the category IIB/IVB. Within Table 1 note that Brain's WIIIA types have been included in the Chickasaw types/varieties - IIB/IVB (includes Brain's WIIIA1, WIIIA2, and WIIIA3). Brain's WIIIA4-6 are the Chickasaw type/variety IIJ. The Tunica varieties, if identical to the Chickasaw, are actually drawn beads.