Archaeological identification of historically referenced sixteenth-century Native provinces: the example of Soto's Capachequi

ABSTRACT

Archaeological confirmation of the location of the Native province of Capachequi is presented along with new details concerning its Late Mississippian character. Previously, the polity has been known mainly from descriptions left by chroniclers of Hernando de Soto's sixteenth-century entrada. The new information is the outcome of a decade-long archaeological project in the Chickasawhatchee Creek basin of southwestern Georgia. Projects of this kind advance the larger enterprise, initiated by Charles Hudson, of illuminating the social landscape and social history of the Indigenous Southeast during and following the Late Mississippian period.

KEYWORDS:

• Capachequi
• Hernando de Soto
• Lamar culture
• Chickasawhatchee Creek
• Flint River
• Dougherty Plain

Acknowledgements

Many people and organizations have been instrumental in any success this project may claim. Above all, I must recognize the steadfast endorsement and support I have received from the property owners, Doug and Kay Ivester. Year in and year out they have allowed us to explore and study numerous archaeological sites and they have put at our disposal the talents of the plantation staff, not to mention equipment and housing. Also, Fernbank Museum of Natural History has provided essential funding, material support, and encouragement from the start. Our ongoing collaboration has insured continuity of mission and collection management. Members of the Greater Atlanta Archaeological Society, a chapter of the Society for Georgia Archaeology, have been critical to the effort, having fielded teams of skilled volunteers and mustering periodic funding. A number of special projects were made possible with funding from David Noble and Bob Skarda. Game-changing information about local sites was shared by Eric Kimbrel and Brian McClure. Several groups of James Madison University field school students have propelled the work, making possible the more ambitious excavation efforts. Numerous, consulting, and professional colleagues have brought vital expertise to the project. Foremost among them are Spencer Barker, Charlie Cobb, Jeffery Glover, Brad Kruse, Josh Lewis, Steve Smith, Chet Walker, and Jared Wood. Many other volunteers, ranging from professional colleagues to university students to retirees, have contributed significantly. The champion volunteer of all has been Brett Tabb. And, finally, I am grateful for the helpful comments from two anonymous reviewers.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data availability statement

A separate data set is not provided for this paper. Supporting details are supplied in summary tables in the article and in referenced, project-related technical reports.

Notes

1 The one exception is an intriguing usage of the name among historic Mikasuki in Florida during the nineteenth century. Ethnohistorian Patsy West (2016:369) documents the honorific title “Cappechimicco” in reference to elders and leaders in the group. She also specifically notes that this usage may represent a linguistic linkage of the Mikasuki to the Soto-related territory in today's Georgia.

2 The author carried out limited investigation of the Magnolia Mounds (9DU1) site in the summer 2022 for the purpose of better documenting the site's landscape and assessing the potential for evidence of a sixteenth-century Spanish encounter. In addition to collection of LIDAR and geophysical data, a systematic and intensive metal detector survey was made of 5.3 hectares at the site's core. No obvious early European metal artifacts were recovered. Also, limited surface collection recovered only ceramic artifacts diagnostic of a Middle Mississippian, Roods-related component (beyond Archaic period lithics).

3 There is also an intriguing description from the nineteenth century of what seems to be similar features just north of the study area. In 1818, an observer described “ancient” structural features at a Creek Indian town in nearby Lee County: “On the south side [of the creek] are the remains of an ancient and very large town, large trees growing on innumerable little mounds disposed with some degree of regularity, on which the houses were probably built” (Young 1934:134).

4 Charles Hudson, working with various colleagues, continued to update interpretations of the Soto route after the 1990 article was published and for some sections of it significant revisions were introduced. However, the view of Capachequi presented in 1990 remained largely unchanged since so little new archaeology had been conducted in the area of the province. For example, see Hudson 1997:146–150.

5 Archaeological investigations in the Capachequi area have been designed to make a basic evaluation of several sites rather than to extensively excavate the sites. That approach, coupled with the fact that deposits on all sites tend to be shallow, means that the ceramic assemblages available for analysis tend to be modest in size and to be comprised of relatively small fragments. It is for that reason only a limited number of individual contexts are conducive to meaningful analysis and interpretation.

6 The single fragment of a glass bead from the Heritage Mounds site indicates the original shape to have been elongated, or somewhat olive pit shaped, and to have been made of opaque white glass featuring wavy, thin blue stripes oriented to the long axis. It strongly resembles beads classified by Smith (1992:110–111) as Type 20 in the San Luis de Apalachee assemblage (see also Mitchem 1993). Likewise, similar beads elsewhere in the Southeast, especially farther west, also tend to be recovered in seventeenth- or even early eighteenth-century contexts (Brain 1979:106–107; Waselkov 2005). However, the lead and tin-heavy composition of the Heritage bead aligns with that of pre-1650 beads in the region (Blair 2016:104–106). Thus, while context of the bead's discovery at Heritage Mounds, and the associated material culture, are most suggestive of a sixteenth-century date, the true age of the bead remains undetermined.

Additional information

Funding

This work has received primary support from Fernbank Museum of Natural History in Atlanta, Georgia. It has received supplemental support from the National Geographic Society under Grant NGS-CRE 8765-8710. Occasional donor-based support has also been received from the Greater Atlanta Archaeological Society, Doug and Kay Ivester, Dr. David Noble, and Robert Skarda.

Notes on contributors

Dennis B. Blanton

Dennis B. Blanton is an associate professor in the Department of Sociology and Anthropology at James Madison University. He has directed investigation of the sites reported here. His active research concerns late prehistoric and early historic developments in coastal plain Georgia.