OVERCOMING GENDER BIAS
IN PALEOLITHIC RESEARCH:
Gender Bias May Have Prevented
Paleolithic Basket-Weaving Technology
from Being Recognized and Accepted
In 1907 she was one of the first women to earn an M.D. degree in Australia.
(University of Melbourne, Mary de Garis)
ABSTRACT:
An early invention of basket-weaving technology was not considered possible until recently. There were two principal reasons. The first was that no evidence of basketry had been found that was older than about 15 kya. And the second reason, which was consistent with the first, was that baskets would only have been made in the Neolithic agricultural time period because this time-consuming craft would not have been practical in the earlier period of the Upper Paleolithic nomadic hunter-gatherer tribes. Making baskets would have required too much time and therefore was incompatible with the constant search for food in mobile nomadic cultures.
However, both of these ideas were seriously flawed. No evidence of basket making or weaving was found because fiber materials would have decayed. And the second reason was an assumption that was not based on fact and was later proven to be wrong.
But there was a third and I believe more important reason which no one articulated and which was an unconscious bias. Around 1900, when these ideas were being formulated, basket-weaving was seen by the men, who were excavating caves, as 'women's work'. And the work of women was not considered important. In addition, few men were familiar with even the most basic basket making skills. For these reasons the importance of basket-weaving was dismissed out of hand until positive proof was found that it existed much earlier -- proof that would be almost impossible to find -- but which now has finally been found.
However, around 1900 there was ample evidence that clearly pointed to the possibility that basket making had occurred very early and needed to be considered. In this article, I discuss Native American Indian basket making skills, skills that were used extensively by pre-Neolithic nomadic and semi-nomadic hunter-gatherer tribes. And I also detail the large number of basket making tools that were found in Paleolithic caves and sites but which were not identified as such.
It might be vitally important to understand when basket-weaving began because the technology, and development of basket-weaving may have affected human evolution and human culture in much the same way as stone tool making. My contention is that gender bias prevented this important line of inquiry from going forward.
See a listing of 14 blogs about basket weaving technology from its earliest stages in the Paleolithic era to its implementation in the world's first civilizations.
Free Download
A PDF of this blog-article at:
https://unc.academia.edu/RickDoble/DRAFTS#drafts
ALSO FREE:
The Illustrated Theory
of Paleo Basket-Weaving Technology
by Rick Doble
Download a 300-Page PDF eBook
-- no ads/no strings --
DOWNLOAD NOW
Figshare
Academia.edu
FOREWORD
A MAYAN MYTH
"Myth has it that Our Grandmother the Moon, the goddess Ixchel, taught the first woman how to weave at the beginning of time. Since then, Maya mothers have taught their daughters, from generation to generation uninterruptedly for thousands of years, how to wrap themselves around the loom and produce exquisite cloth." (Mayan Hands, 2020)
I use this mythological story as an example of how the skill of weaving was passed down from mother to daughter and the reverence with which it was regarded. While this particular myth deals with textiles, which is a more recent craft than basket-weaving, there are similar myths about basketry.
NOTE:
Unfortunately the term, basket-weaving, does not convey the full power, capabilities and versatility of this technology. For example, Native American Indians had over 80 uses and configurations (see the Appendix). In addition I believe that basket-weaving and textile weaving were closely related. Textile weaving probably evolved from basket-making. I have suggested the term woven-fiber technology as a better name.
INTRODUCTION
After I wrote my blog-post entitled "The History and Final Acceptance of a Rejected Idea: Basket-Weaving in the Paleolithic Era," I was still puzzled about why it took paleoarchaeologists about 100 years to accept that baskets, which were made in all cultures and which were made with a wide variety of natural materials that were available worldwide, had not been considered as possible tools during early human development in the Paleolithic era.
Read My Earlier Article
https://deconstructingtime.blogspot.com/2020/09/the-history-of-rejected-idea-basket.html
PART 1: BASIC ASSUMPTIONS AND BIASES
When I researched the topic some more, two things jumped out.
#1. The first was that paleoanthropologists and paleoarchaeologists assumed that something as intricate and time-consuming as basketry could only have been done in the sedentary environment of a farming culture, beginning in the Neolithic era. They believed basketry would have been impossible for mobile nomadic hunter-gatherers or semi-nomadic pre-Neolithic people who were on the move and who had less free time due to the constant pressures of looking for food. And since no baskets had been found that were older than the Neolithic era, this confirmed the idea.
"The conventional wisdom has been that a time-consuming task like weaving would only be practiced by sedentary, agrarian cultures." [ED: Which generally means the more recent Neolithic era and not the earlier Paleolithic era.]
From an interview with Dr. James Adovasio. (Menon, 1996)
#2. And the second thing was an unconscious bias that virtually all educated Western men in archaeology and paleoanthropology shared at the time when this field of study was taking shape around 1900. The bias was so deep and so widespread it was taken for granted. And since it was for the most part unspoken and not addressed, it was hard to identify. This bias was that baskets were 'women's work'. And while basketry might be decorative and supplemental to a culture, it was not important. So in general this work of women was seen as peripheral but not central.
NOTE:
I say all educated Western 'men' in archaeology and paleoanthropology because around 1900, when these ideas were starting to become fixed in paleolithic research, virtually all these professionals were men. It was not until 1929, for example, that Margaret Mead became one of the first women to earn a PhD in Anthropology.
ABOUT THESE ASSUMPTIONS AND THEIR IMPORTANCE
Neither of these assumptions was based on science or scientific evidence. And furthermore, evidence to prove that these ideas were wrong was available in the early days of paleoarchaeology, i.e., around 1900. So in this article, I will focus further on the thinking around 1900 because that is when these attitudes became set in stone.
Surprisingly these two assumptions were intertwined and formed a barrier to scientific inquiry when the age of basketry or weaving or fiber structures was involved. The lack of evidence that basket-weaving was older than about 15 kya seemed to confirm that basket-weaving was a more recent technology and therefore not as critical to the evolution of humans as stone tool making, for example, which began perhaps 2 million years ago.
This barrier was not crossed until recently when Drs. Soffer & Adovasio were able to conclusively prove what seemed impossible, i.e., they found concrete datable evidence of weaving and basketry in the Upper Paleolithic era about 27,000 years ago.
Today the long-overdue acceptance of evidence about basket-weaving in the Paleolithic era rewrites a considerable amount of history. If basket-weaving is much older, perhaps as old as the making of stone tools, it is a game-changer. It is so important it could alter the story of human evolution, human cognition, and the development of culture along with our understanding of who we are, what we believe, and how we got to where we are today.
ABOUT GENDER BIAS
What are little boys made of?
Snips and snails, and puppy dogs' tails; That's what little boys are made of.
What are little girls made of?
Sugar and spice and all that's nice, That's what little girls are made of.
"Gender bias is an insidious problem throughout society. It arises most obviously through deliberate discrimination but also EXISTS THROUGH WIDESPREAD UNCONSCIOUS BIAS [ED: My emphasis]. This permeates our culture, our workplaces, and even our language, often in ways we are unaware of." (arXivarchive, 2018)
I would suggest that it goes even further. Scientific ideas or theories that involve the role of women or the products that women produce are often dismissed as unimportant. And evidence to the contrary must often meet difficult tests that include a higher standard than that required for male-oriented ideas.
This classic well-designed study at Yale University clearly shows how gender bias operates.
"Researchers at Yale published a study proving that physicists, chemists and biologists are likely to view a young male scientist more favorably than a woman with the same qualifications. Presented with identical summaries of the accomplishments of two imaginary applicants, professors at six major research institutions were significantly more willing to offer the man a job. Surprisingly, female scientists were as biased as their male counterparts." (Pollack, 2013)
In another example, women who were applying for a job in a scientific field reported that they had to go the extra mile:
"Those interviewed also recognized Prove-It-Again! bias, which requires women to provide more evidence of competence than men in order to be seen as equally competent..."You know that the rule only applies to the people it applies to,” observed one woman. 'Generally speaking, women—and women of color—would be strictly held to rules and then some.' ” (Williams, 2014)
THE CONSEQUENCES
An unspoken rejection of the idea that basket-weaving could have begun much earlier than previously thought, i.e., in the Middle and Lower Paleolithic eras, means that there will be fewer students who pursue this idea, there will be little research to build on and there will be little, if any funding, for such research. Furthermore, students will be reluctant to follow such a path as it will affect their careers.
THE PROBLEM OF FINDING EVIDENCE
After reading an almost forgotten book by noted French archeologist Gustave Chauvet, Dr. Paul Bahn wrote in 2001 that, “It is a long overdue development that, 90 years after Chauvet’s publication, prehistory seems ready to at last accept the probably HUGE IMPORTANCE OF BASKETRY [ED: my emphasis] and simple weaving in the Upper Palaeolithic.” (Bahn, 2001, pp. 271-272)
Speaking about the lack of archaeological interest in basketry, mats, and textiles, Grace M. Crowfoot wrote the following in A History of Technology, Volume 1.
"In considering gaps in the knowledge of textiles, it must be remembered that there are vast areas where little archaeological study has been undertaken...Surviving pieces of rag were often rejected as without interest...Determination of the exact botanical origin of the fibres used in basketry and weaving has only quite recently been recognized as of archaeological importance." (Crowfoot, 1954, Kindle Edition location = 8905)
When he was just learning about early fiber constructions, Dr. Adovasio wrote that he familiarized himself,
"Not only with the incredible technical diversity of prehistoric basketry, but also [developed] an ever-escalating appreciation of what one of my colleagues, Bob Bettinger, call[ed] "soft technology." Significantly, and in sharp contrast to lithic [e.g. stone tools] or durable technology--which is usually the province of males--basketry, cordage, netting, and related plantfiber-derived products are often the work of females. Almost unconsciously, at least at first, I was developing a view of past societies and their actions that was by default far more oriented to female activities as opposed to the macho-male orientation derived from stone tools." (Adovasio, 2006, p. 37)
"The Upper Paleolithic record has largely been interpreted by males who are closet macho hunters of the steppes--if not explicit ones, he says. Their emphasis has been on stone technology, large-animal hunting, and the accoutrements of machismo. Weaving isn’t as exciting as running around sticking things into mammoths."
From an interview with Dr. James Adovasio. (Menon, 1996)
PROVING THE IMPOSSIBLE
All experts and professional paleo-researchers knew that finding evidence of fiber constructions that were older than 15 kya was virtually impossible, as fiber materials decay and leave no trace. Yet Drs. Soffer and Adovasio were able to breach the barrier because they found clear fiber impressions in clay that could be dated. What follows next is an account of their find, derived from a New York Times article entitled "Find Suggests Weaving Preceded Settled Life" by Brenda Fowler in 1995.
At the Society for American Archeology, Dr. Olga Soffer of the University of Illinois at Urbana and Dr. James M. Adovasio of Mercyhurst College in Erie, Pa. announced they had finally found what they had been looking for -- a quest that had occupied most of their professional lives.
Dr. Soffer had found pieces of clay with clear impressions of the earliest fabric artifacts -- the first to be confirmed from the Paleolithic time period. Since the impressions were so small they could not tell whether these were from textiles or from baskets. The leading world paleo-fiber expert, Dr. Adovasio, confirmed the find.
This one discovery pushed back the beginnings of these 'soft' technologies about 10,000 years well into the 'old stone age' and well beyond the Neolithic or 'new stone age' when everyone in the field had assumed that textiles and weaving had begun. These new findings have now been dated to 27,000 years ago.
When the clay impressions were examined closely they revealed at least two different weaving techniques. Dr. Adovasio commented that the regularity of the weave and the 'narrow-gauge' indicated that the technology was quite advanced so that the origins of weaving must have begun much earlier.
But this discovery may have pushed back the origins of human culture even further, perhaps hundreds of thousands of years further, because this find opened the door deep into the Paleolithic era which spanned two million years.
Dr. Soffer also noted that the clay fragments revealed a surprising variety of weaving techniques such as open and closed twines, nets, and plain weave. The intriguing thing about the plain weave impression was that it required a loom. This fact alone meant that 'old stone age' nomadic people were making fiber constructions with a basic loom -- something that again was thought impossible. (Fowler, 1995)
ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT GENDER ROLES IN 1900
It is hard to document and pinpoint an attitude that was unspoken around 1900. People just assumed that women's roles and the value of their work were a reflection of the real world, the world the way it was, the world that no one could change.
Queen Victoria set the tone by saying, “Let women be what God intended, a helpmate for man, but with totally different duties and vocations.”
Queen Victoria's mention of 'vocations', however, does get close. Some less important tasks or subjects were appropriate for women (such as being a nurse but not being a doctor), while the important male jobs were not appropriate. Women were told to "know their place" and the assumption was also that work associated with them mattered less than the work and duties of men.
(University of Melbourne, Mary de Garis)
My now-famous Australian grandaunt, Mary de Garis (above), was the second woman in Victoria, Australia to earn the Doctorate of Medicine at the University of Melbourne in 1907. When the First World War broke out in 1914, she volunteered to work in military hospitals but was famously told to “go home and sit still” which, of course, she did not do. She instead went to Scotland where women doctors were allowed and became the director of a front-line hospital. She was well known for her nerves of steel such as performing an operation during an artillery bombardment. (Moo, Women Doctors)
As historians know, women are not mentioned very often in the historical record. Women and their work were almost invisible, although they obviously lived at the same time as their men.
National Renaissance Museum, Ecouen."
(Commons.wikimedia.org, 15th century, Penelope)
I believe that in the West women's work was taken for granted. As a result, men did not know much about it or want to know or felt the need to know. And for this reason basket-weaving -- since this is the subject of this article -- was not really dismissed as unimportant, it was never even considered.
The above outline of the attitudes toward women and women's work around 1900 may explain, but does not excuse, the reason that basket-weaving was not valued as an important technology that helped the human race survive, although stone tool making, a male technology, did achieve such a status. Basket-weaving was also a tool-making technology but it was not perceived as such.
MISCONCEPTIONS
Another misconception may have been due to the artwork found in many baskets, such as those by Native American Indians in North America. They often contained exquisite designs that were collected and admired for their beauty. But for the Indians, the designs were often cultural signatures derived from their tribes and they also had a spiritual meaning relating to the importance of the basket to their way of life. Western authorities probably thought of these as merely decorative and did not understand the baskets were also useful and well made.
THE CRUX OF THE PROBLEM
It was obvious to most paleoarchaeologists that finding direct evidence of weaving or basketry that was much older than the Neolithic era of sedentary farming would be almost impossible. Nevertheless, at the same time, it was clear that earlier Paleolithic humans used plant materials extensively to help them.
"In whichever way archaeological remains are interpreted, one must always be aware that the vast majority of the materials with which prehistoric people were surrounded and with which they worked is lost to us today. ...organic materials start to decay as soon as they are deposited in the ground." (Grömer, 2016)
Dr. Adovasio has made the point that there is "ample ethnographic evidence that perishable technologies form the bulk of hunter-gatherer material culture even in arctic and sub-arctic environments (e.g. Damas 1984; Helm 1981). Archaeologists working with materials recovered from environmental contexts with ideal preservation clearly confirm that this is also true for the past as well. Taylor (1966:73), for example, notes that in dry caves he recovered 20 times more fiber artifacts than those made of stone, Croes (1997:536) reports that wet sites yield inventories where >95% of prehistoric material culture is made of wood and fiber, and Collins (1937) confirms the same for sites in Alaskan permafrost." (Soffer, Adovasio et al, 1998)
Nevertheless, the idea that direct evidence, direct proof of weaving or basketry had to be found became a fixture in paleolithic research. Yet finding such evidence was virtually impossible since fiber decayed. So it was this hurdle that prevented research or hypotheses about an early development of weaving and basketry.
But I believe this was a variation on the "Prove-It-Again!" (mentioned earlier) requirement for ideas that authorities unconsciously rejected. In other words, the idea of an earlier basket-weaving technology had to meet a standard that was not required of other hypothetical ideas such as the currently popular 'savanna hypothesis' which has no direct proof but has a large following.
"The savanna hypothesis is a hypothesis that human bipedalism evolved as a direct result of human ancestors transition from an arboreal lifestyle to one on the savannas."
(Savanna hypothesis)
In a current example of gender bias, it was recently confirmed that a number of prehistoric hunter-gatherer women were buried with big game stone-age weapons which indicated that they might have been big game hunters themselves. While this data had been available for years, it had been overlooked due to the perception that women could not be these kinds of hunters.
"Marin Pilloud, an anthropologist at the University Of Nevada, Reno...tells Live Science that many cultures don’t share the same concept of the gender binary as modern Americans and Europeans. She adds, 'When we step back from our own gendered biases we can explore the data in nuanced ways that are likely more culturally accurate.' " (Gershon, 2020)
GENDER BIAS CONSEQUENCES
It is true that in many societies, basketry and weaving were done by women -- although there were plenty of exceptions. In some tribes, the men made nets that the women did not make, for example. So it was not a mistake to think of basket-weaving as a craft performed mostly by women.
The drawing is after Thomas Hariot, ca. 1585.
(Aboriginal American Basketry, 1904, Fig. 120, p. 383)
However, whether basketry was women's work or not was irrelevant. It was a mistake to think that basketry was not important and possibly crucial to the evolution and development of the human race. And it was a mistake to think that this work was not well respected. And it was a mistake to think that women could not have developed a refined, sophisticated, 'hi-tech' kind of technology.
To have let this bias stand in the way of research and archeology did science a disservice -- and further it handicapped science. Science should be objective and gender-neutral. If we really want to understand how humans evolved and how we became what we are today, a gender bias stands in the way of truth.
"Throughout much of the history of the study of the Paleolithic and Paleoindian periods we have given ourselves over to a narrowed idea of lifeways revolving around big game, stone tools, and manly behaviour. What is becoming increasingly apparent as we restudy materials from previously excavated sites is that the diversity we take for granted in the ethnographic present and our current modern world may well have been a hallmark of previous lives as well. We must continue to think "out of the box" and "beyond the idol" that has constrained our understanding of the ancient world." (Hyland et al, 2002, p. 8)
PART 2:
WAS THERE EARLY EVIDENCE
THAT BASKET-WEAVING
BEGAN BEFORE THE NEOLITHIC?
BASIC QUESTIONS
Based on the widely-held presumption in 1910 "that, in the view of most prehistorians, there was no Magdalenian weaving, [ED: Upper Paleolithic/Mesolithic] and there is no question of basketry before the Neolithic. [ED: sedentary farming and agriculture]" (Bahn, 2001, pp. 271-272) and also the general opinion that nomadic hunter-gatherer groups would not have had the time to make baskets, several key questions needed to be answered to refute this opinion with evidence that was available at the time.
An Explicit Question based on the above:
#1. Was there any substantial evidence that basket-weaving was compatible with pre-Neolithic, i.e., pre-sedentary agricultural farming societies?
Implicit questions that the above presumes:
#2. Was basket-weaving important or essential to the life and survival of cultures where it was found?
#3. Was the technology of basket-weaving well developed and sophisticated where it was found?
If the answers are all yes to the above, then the next follow-up questions need to be asked:
#4. How much earlier could basket-weaving have begun than was previously thought?
#5. If basket-weaving began much earlier, how could it have affected human evolution and cognition?
A LITTLE BACKGROUND
Keeping in mind that there is no clear division between different eras of human development, the following time periods are used in Paleoanthropology to roughly map out the evolution of human beings and cultures. Generally, earlier cultures had less advanced technologies and later ones more advanced -- although it has been found recently that some advanced technologies have been found, on occasion, in earlier cultures.
Upper Paleolithic = Small bands of mobile, nomadic hunter-gatherers who moved often in search of food but made advanced stone tools and some made magnificent complex paintings on cave walls.
Mesolithic = After the Upper Paleolithic era and before the Neolithic, Mesolithic (Middle Stone Age) societies were larger, semi-nomadic, hunting and gathering along with farming, but often practiced farming seasonally and moved seasonally.
Neolithic = The beginning of permanent villages and a sedentary way of life based on agriculture. The use of advanced polished stone tools also characterizes this period.
Archaic = A lifestyle by Native American Indians that existed right up to 1900 that was similar to the Mesolithic (pre-Neolithic) cultures in Europe. Indian tribes described as semi-nomadic often fall into this category.
The stone age semi-nomadic way of life of some 1900s Native American Indians was called Archaic. "Some Archaic cultures...persisted well into the 19th century. Archaic cultures in the Americas are somewhat analogous to the Old World’s Mesolithic [pre-Neolithic] cultures."
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Archaic-culture
Paleoindian = Early Native American Indian cultures that were similar to the Upper Paleolithic in Europe. Prehistoric evidence was found in the Great Basin areas in the northwest United States and these cultures are considered to be very similar to those of the European Upper Paleolithic. Furthermore, evidence from excavations revealed a wide variety of basketry that had survived due to the dry climate and due to the fact that the Paleoindian cultures were dated to about 11,000 BP which meant that basketry could have survived.
EVIDENCE OF BASKETRY WITH PRE-NEOLITHIC PEOPLES
There was solid evidence around 1910 that many Native American Indians lived a pre-Neolithic lifestyle and also had a fully developed basket-weaving technology. This was clear from contemporary living tribes who lived a Mesolithic (pre-Neolithic) way of life and others who lived an Upper Paleolithic nomadic hunter-gatherer way of life.
The following book, published in 1904 by the Smithsonian Institution, contained detailed information about Native American Indian basket-weaving along with numerous photographs and illustrations. Many of the Indian tribes were semi-nomadic and others were nomadic hunter-gatherers or they had recently been nomadic hunter-gatherers until they were forced onto reservations where their mobility was limited. The information in this book contained more than enough detail to bring into question the Neolithic limit to basket-weaving.
Aboriginal American Basketry: studies in a textile art without machinery. Contributors: Mason, Otis Tufton; Coville, Frederick Vernon. Annual Report of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution; Report of the U.S. National Museum. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1904.
https://archive.org/details/aboriginalbasket00masorich
NOTE:
In 1904 this book, Aboriginal American Basketry, listed over 250 Indian tribes (pages 367-372) that had a basket-weaving culture. Most of these cultures were Archaic (see above) but some were farming and sedentary like the Neolithic and some were mobile nomadic hunter-gatherers like the Upper Paleolithic peoples in Europe. Yet all made baskets. (Aboriginal American Basketry, 1904, pp. 367-372)
In 1904 the following tribes, listed next, were documented in this book. These basket-weaving Native American Indian tribes exhibited behaviors consistent with Mesolithic or Upper Paleolithic cultures in Europe, i.e., pre-Neolithic. It would take an anthropologist who specialized in this to map out the exact spectrum but generally speaking, all of these cultures would be considered pre-Neolithic and therefore refute the claim in 1910 "that, in the view of most prehistorians, there was no Magdalenian weaving,[ED: Upper Paleolithic] and there is no question of basketry before the Neolithic. [ED: sedentary farming and agriculture]." (Bahn, 2001, pp. 271-272)
In the following list of eleven Native American Indian tribes, semi-nomadic (similar to Mesolithic cultures in Europe) make up about two-thirds of the list and nomadic hunter-gatherer (similar to Upper Paleolithic cultures in Europe) make up the other third. I have chosen these tribes because this Smithsonian book includes photos and drawings from these tribes that clearly document my thesis.
These tribes are listed in alphabetical order. Please click on the tribal name to read more about each Indian culture.
* Apache = nomadic hunter-gatherer
* Chemehuevi = nomadic hunter-gatherer
* Chippewa = semi-nomadic
* Maidu = semi-nomadic
* Navajo (or Navaho) = semi-nomadic
* Paiute = considered nomadic hunter-gatherer although some tribes were semi-nomadic
* Pima (or Akimel O'odham) = semi-nomadic
* Pomo = semi-nomadic
* Tlinkit (Or Tlingit) = semi-nomadic
* Ute = nomadic hunter-gatherer
* Yokut = nomadic hunter-gatherer
EXAMPLES OF BASKETRY FROM THESE TRIBES
(Aboriginal American Basketry, 1904, Plate 42, explanation p. 285)
(Aboriginal American Basketry, 1904, Plate 232, explanation p. 519)
Chippewa bark matting
(Aboriginal American Basketry, 1904, Plate 122, explanation p. 374)
(Aboriginal American Basketry, 1904, Plate 117, explanation p. 361)
(Aboriginal American Basketry, 1904, Plate 50, explanation p. 236)
(Aboriginal American Basketry, 1904, Plate 97, explanation p. 350)
(Aboriginal American Basketry, 1904, Plate 146, explanation p. 409)
(Aboriginal American Basketry, 1904, Plate 21, explanation p. 236)
(Aboriginal American Basketry, 1904, Plate 97, explanation p. 350)
RIGHT: Yokut woman sifting meal
(Aboriginal American Basketry, 1904, Plate 99, explanation p. 361)
THE IMPORTANCE OF BASKET-WEAVING
TO NATIVE AMERICAN INDIAN CULTURES
So evidence was available around 1900 that clearly showed basketry was well developed and not incompatible with a semi-nomadic or nomadic pre-Neolithic lifestyle.
In fact, the reverse may have been true. Basketry was light, strong, durable, flexible, versatile, and portable which is what nomadic cultures needed. They relied on basketry to provide them with many of the essential items they required -- and so basketry may have been central to their lifestyle.
The Smithsonian Aboriginal American Basketry publication made this clear:
"Basketry supplied nearly every domestic necessity of the Indians, from an infant's cradle to the richly decorated funerary jars burned with the dead. The wealth of a family was counted in the number and beauty of its baskets and the highest virtue of woman was her ability to produce them." (Aboriginal American Basketry, 1904, p. 335)
(University of Southern California, ca.1900, Three Indian basket papoose carriers)
If researchers had asked living Native American Indians around 1900, they probably would have said something similar to the following which is from a modern Indian website (Kachina House):
"Basket Weaving’s Importance In Native American Culture:
"One of the oldest crafts in Native American cultures is basket weaving. Each tribe has its own Native American specific methods and materials to create woven baskets...In fact, basket weaving can be traced back to the beginning of mankind.
"In a world where there were no cupboards, plates, or bowls to hold your belongings, baskets served as indispensable items that had multiple purposes. They allowed people to carry water, [wear] clothing, [gather and cook] food, and much more.
"In Native American cultures, baskets took the place of every modern convenience we take for granted and also served as a representation of tribes and stories." (Kachina House)
Basket-weaving skills were central to many if not most Native American Indian cultures. "Tribal women provided almost all household tools and utensils, storage containers, cups, and cradles by using one art: basket weaving." (Boule, 1992, p. 38)
LEFT: Apache Coiled Basket
(Aboriginal American Basketry, 1904, Plate 52, explanation p. 297)
RIGHT: "Apache Indian maiden with an olla on her head, ca.1900"
(University of Southern California, ca. 1900, Apache Indian maiden)
LEFT: Carrying Basket, Paiute Indians, Utah
(Aboriginal American Basketry, 1904, Fig. 185, p. 494)
RIGHT: "Apache Indian woman carrying a "Kathak" on her back, Arizona, ca.1880"
(University of Southern California, ca.1880, Apache Indian woman carrying a "Kathak")
LEFT: Pima Carrying Frame
(Aboriginal American Basketry, 1904, Fig. 100, p. 294)
RIGHT: "Pima Indian woman...carrying firewood in her Kathak"
(University of Southern California, 1904, Pima Indian woman)
EVIDENCE THAT NATIVE AMERICAN INDIAN BASKET-WEAVING
WAS ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
AND NOT PERIPHERAL OR SUPPLEMENTAL
Basket-weaving was not only part of the nomadic hunter-gatherer lifestyle and central to its culture, but also highly developed. Nevertheless, the sophistication of this craft was not recognized by most authorities in 1900. 100 years ago, I do not think the traditional educated Western male paleoanthropologists understood basket-weaving in any detail. They did not understand, for example, the full range of basket related implements that could be made (see the Appendix). Nor did they understand the various basket-weaving processes which included the critical time of when to gather plants, how to process and store them, and then how to use them when constructing an item. They did not understand that a basket maker could design exquisite baskets with local plants no matter the environment. And they also did not understand the durability of these tools and the precision with which they were made.
As an example, a tradition of very sophisticated coiled baskets was developed by Native American Indian women.
COILING:
The sophisticated technology of coiling:
"Coiling is a technique which involves sewing. A foundation material (such as split root bundles) is coiled upwards and stitched into place. A pointed tool called an awl is used to pierce a hole in each coil. The sewing element (such as the shiny outer surface of a split cedar root) is then threaded through the hole and sews that coil down to the coil below it.
"Coiled baskets can be woven so tightly that they hold water. In the past, coiled baskets were also used for cooking." (Burke Museum, Teacher's Guide)
One skill that was particularly valued, was the ability to make baskets that were waterproof containers. Depending on what resources were available, they used naturally occurring asphaltum which was common in many areas as a sealant or resin from pine or mesquite trees.
WATERPROOFING:
"The use of asphaltum by aboriginal peoples is well documented in early historic accounts and abundant archeological evidence extends its use well back into the prehistoric era. Asphaltum was the caulk, glue, and paint...: when heated, the viscosity decreases and the molten asphaltum can be applied, cooling to form a jet-black, waterproof coating, an adhesive or a decorative paint." (Calhoun, 1964)
The woman "making such baskets, [was] distributing the pitch over the inside of the receptacle by placing lumps of asphaltum in the basket with hot stones and shaking the whole with a rotary motion, causing the melting asphaltum to be distributed evenly over the surface." (Barrows, 1900, p. 41)
COOKING WITH BASKETS:
"Baskets also made fine cooking pots. Very hot rocks were taken from a fire and tossed around inside baskets with a looped tree branch until food in the basket was cooked." (Boule, 1992, p. 8)
"Closely woven, watertight containers were also used to cook foods. Red-hot rocks were placed in a water-filled basket, bringing the water to boil and cooking the contents. As the rocks cooled off, they were removed from the water with wooden tongs and replaced with newly heated rocks." (Burke Museum, Teacher's Guide)
POST-1910:
EARLY & MODERN CONFIRMATION OF BASKET-WEAVING
IN UPPER PALEOLITHIC CULTURES
Since the 1900s there has been further evidence that ancient Native American Indian (Paleoindian) cultures were similar to the Upper Paleolithic way of life in Europe. But because these Indian cultures continued to exist until a more recent time in North America there were large numbers of fiber artifacts and baskets that survived -- which showed that basket-weaving and the Upper Paleolithic way of life were entirely compatible.
"In western North America, the oldest extant fiber artifacts derive from a series of sites in the northern Great Basin. The developmental basketry sequence in this area begins ca. 11,000 BP and includes such items as open and close, simple, Z twined bags, mats, burden baskets, trays, and coarse receptacles of a variety of configurations. These items are invariably twined." (Hyland et al, 2002, p. 7)
(Aboriginal American Basketry, 1904, Plate 32, explanation p. 258)
"A second concept which underlay the general model of Great Basin prehistory was the Pecos Classification, formulated in 1927 [by Kidder].
"The classification...contains...sequential stages or periods: Basket Maker I, or Early Basket Maker; Basket Maker II, or Basket Maker; Basket Maker 111, or Late (Post-) Basket Maker" Furthermore Kidder defined Basket Maker I as 'pre-agricultural' stage meaning that it was very similar to the Upper Paleolithic in Europe and mobile nomadic hunter-gatherers. (Kidder, 1924, p. 589-591)
(Aboriginal American Basketry, 1904, Fig. 203, p. 524)
An example of a complex basket used to hold threshed grain.
A good durable design was vital for keeping food,
(Aboriginal American Basketry, 1904, Plate 7, explanation p. 208)
RIGHT: Coiled basket of Pine Needles
(Aboriginal American Basketry, 1904, Plate 128, explanation p. 379)
THE SIMILARITY BETWEEN PALEOINDIAN AND UPPER PALEOLITHIC
Explaining the similarity of Upper Paleolithic cultures in Europe and North America, Hyland et al wrote:
"Systematic visual and microscopic examination of impressions on these [excavated] Far Eastern ceramics [Eastern European Upper Paleolithic impressions in clay] reveals the presence of a sophisticated plantfiber-based perishable technology. Interestingly, the technological types represented in this assemblage PRECISELY MIMIC THOSE RECOVERED FROM THE EARLIEST LEVELS OF A NUMBER OF WESTERN NORTH AMERICAN SITES [ED: my emphasis] and may represent the prototype for this venerable industry as expressed in the New World." (Hyland et al, 2002, p. 1)
There are "technological similarities between European Upper Paleolithic artifacts and 13,000 year old Native American artifacts." (Pennsylvania Archaeology, Paleoindian Period)
MODERN SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE
THAT HUNTER-GATHERERS HAVE MORE LEISURE TIME
Farmers have less leisure time than hunter-gatherers (ScienceDaily, 2019):
In a recent detailed study of the Agta people in the Philippines, researchers found that hunter-gatherers "who adopt farming work around ten hours a week longer than their forager neighbours."
Dr. Dyble, first author of the study, said: "For a long time, the transition from foraging to farming was assumed to represent progress, allowing people to escape an arduous and precarious way of life.
"But as soon as anthropologists started working with hunter-gatherers they began questioning this narrative, finding that foragers actually enjoy quite a lot of leisure time. Our data provides some of the clearest support for this idea yet."
PART 3: WHAT PALEOARCHAEOLOGISTS
COULD HAVE/SHOULD HAVE KNOWN IN 1910
Since it has taken about 100 years for paleoarchaeologists to accept that basket-weaving had begun much earlier than the Neolithic era, I wondered if there was a way to recreate the atmosphere of thought 100 years ago to see what barriers had prevented an investigation into basket-weaving technology.
So I looked for works that were published around 1900. With the help of the Internet, I was able to find a substantial number of books and papers about paleoarchaeology, basket making instructions, and Native American Indian basket-making.
As everyone knows, it is hard to prove a negative. But in the following, I will attempt to show how the use of tools found in Paleoindian caves and various prehistoric sites was interpreted in a masculine manner and the feminine craft of basketry technology was not recognized.
NUMEROUS PREHISTORIC AWLS WERE UNEARTHED
In just about every prehistoric site or cave in Europe and North America where tools were found, bone awls were found in quantity. In North America, bone awls were the indispensable basket-making tool used by most Indian women. And needles were also found in large numbers which were used in basket-weaving.
But because these men, these paleoarchaeologists, were not familiar with basketry they did not make the connection. The men instead made the assumption that the pointed tools were used to punch holes in animal skins so that they could be bound together, which was not wrong as modern research has confirmed but was only part of the way these tools were used.
As a test about gender bias, I studied a book written around 1900 that described a huge number of bone awls that had been uncovered -- since bone awls, in particular, were the tools of choice for Native American Indian women when they wove baskets:
Beauchamp, William M. Horn And Bone Implements Of The New York Indians. University of the State of New York, New York State Museum, Bulletin 50, March 1902.
"Awls are the most common form of bone tool. They are from 2 inches to 8 or 10 inches in length. They are sometimes spoken of as needles, but it is most likely that their use was to perforate bark and skin before inserting the thong or fiber employed for sewing..." (Beauchamp, 1902, p. 330)
(Aboriginal American Basketry, 1904, Fig. 40, p. 245)
William Beauchamp wrote. "It is probable that for finer stitching the bone awl was used, as a shoemaker uses an awl in leather." (Beauchamp, 1902, p. 312) In other words, Beauchamp 'assumed' that the prehistoric awls he found were used in a way that was familiar to him and in a work that was dominated by males.
Even today this perception lingers. The following is a quote from the contemporary website of the Smithsonian Institution which does not mention basketry: "Middle Stone Age Tools: By 200,000 years ago, [ED: after Homo sapiens had emerged]... toolkits included...stone awls, which could have been used to perforate hides..." (The Human Origins Initiative, 2020)
My Personal Observation: It is not that unusual for an 'expert' to be quite ignorant about some aspects of her/his work. For example, when I was teaching photography to teenagers after school, I was shown a blue print by the architect of the new darkroom that was going to be part of a recreation center. What he did not tell me at the time, and what I only found out when I started teaching there, was that he had assumed a darkroom should be all black -- black counters, dark walls, floors etc. But this was completely incorrect -- and made working in the darkroom quite difficult. A darkroom needs white counters and light walls that are lit by a safe light which is just the right wavelength for the photographic material. The counters and walls need to be light so that a worker can see what she is doing under that safe light. But the architect had assumed a darkroom needed black counters and never consulted me.
A DETAILED STUDY OF HORN AND BONE IMPLEMENTS BY NEW YORK INDIANS
To test my ideas about gender bias, I did a basic content analysis of Beauchamp's book. I thought it might be a good indicator of the point-of-view of men around 1900.
The word 'women' (or woman) was mentioned only three times in Beauchamp's book. But in general, these short mentions were related to men's activities such as fishing and the making of netted snowshoes.
Quoting noted authority W. Wallace Tooker who said that "In a space 10 feet square, I found five bone needles," Beauchamp believed the needles were related to fishing and the use of thread. Then Beauchamp did say that "Indian women were expert in making fine thread" for fishing. (Beauchamp, 1902, p. 313)
Quoting from David Boyle's book Notes on primitive man in Ontario of 1895, Beauchamp believed that women made snowshoes but again the weaving connection to basketry was not made. "Another form also known as a needle...was almost certainly employed in the netting of snowshoes." (Beauchamp, 1902, p. 330)
Beauchamp added that women made grass mats which is a basic type of basketry but did not make the connection with basket-weaving, weaving or textiles.
With so many awls being found consistently at prehistoric sites, why did Beauchamp not ask living members of the Native American Iroquois Confederacy, for example, about these finds? The name 'Iroquois' is mentioned 21 times in the book. If he had asked, he would have discovered what was common knowledge among most American Indians, that the bone awl was the indispensable tool for the Indian woman and it was often used along with a bone needle. (See next section.)
WORD COUNTS:
Male words (men/he/him/his) = 132
[I did not include the word 'man' because 'man' back then often meant both men and women such as in the phrase 'primitive man'.]
Female words (woman/women/she/her/hers) = 5
Tools/Implements = 150
Awls Pictured = 80
Awls Mentioned = 234
Needles Pictured = 17
Needles Mentioned = 76
Fishing = 169
Arrow Words = 71
Hunt/Kill/Animal Skins = 26
Gather/gatherer (plant gathering was women's work) = 0
Basket-weaving/basketweaving/weaving/textiles = 0
[Although the making of simple mats and cordage by women is briefly described in 2 places.]
Basket = 1 [There was one passing mention of a 'basket' that was found in a burial site but nothing further was said.]
SUMMARY:
The 'invisible' female of the 1900s.
The role and work of women were barely mentioned. Although awls were the most common tools that were found, the author never realized that this tool was the essential tool for basket-weaving and never engaged in any further research beyond his assumption that they were for puncturing holes in skins and leather. Women were mentioned only a few times and when they were it was usually in association with male activities. While hunting (a male activity) was mentioned often, gathering (a traditional female activity) was not mentioned at all.
IT WAS COMMON KNOWLEDGE THAT AWLS WERE USED FOR BASKET-WEAVING
It was common knowledge that the bone awl was the primary tool for basket-making as is shown by the references in the following books that were published around the same time.
A basket-making book published n 1903 by Navajos referred to "the ever present bone awl of the Indian Woman" and goes on to say. "The squaw uses a bone awl made usually from the thigh bone of some fowl or animal." (Navajo School of Indian Basketry, 1903, p. 10)
In his book about making baskets, Luther Turner wrote, "But the expression of thought through basketry, requires almost no tools (a knife and scratch-awl), has variety as to form and color and almost unlimited possibilities in design." (Turner, 1909, p. 5)
The in-depth Smithsonian Aboriginal American Basketry book stated, "The tool almost universally employed in the manufacture of coiled ware [ED: coiled baskets] is a bone awl or pricker." (Aboriginal American Basketry, 1904, p. 191)
Describing the Native American Indian woman's methods in his book Practical basket making, George James wrote, "Her tool...is a bone awl." (James, 1914, p. 82)
So the information about bone awls and basket making was available around the early part of the 1900s and not hard to find, but paleoarchaeologists did not feel the need to investigate further, even though these tools were so plentiful and obviously were widely used.
MODERN SCIENTIFIC DATA CONFIRMS THAT
PALEOLITHIC AWLS WERE USED FOR BASKETRY
The latest modern information confirms what should have been known 100 years ago, i.e., that awls are often used in the making of baskets.
"Although authors have differing theories as to the uses of bone awls, the two main uses agreed upon are as manipulators in the making of basketry and as perforators in the working of hide." (Buc and Loponte, 2007, p. 145)
THE CRAFT OF WOMEN
While 'women's work' was not valued very highly in the West, this attitude stood in sharp contrast to the value Indians had for the basket-weaving skills of their women. While there were clear gender roles in Native American Indian societies, the work of women was highly regarded.
Like the Mayan weavers mentioned at the beginning of this article, these skills were passed down from mother to daughter. A well-made basket might be used by a family for generations and have a special meaning for that reason.
Here is what the Navajo people had to say about basketry and the women who performed this craft:
"Indian basketry has taught us to appreciate the beauty of primitive weaving, and furnishes the most striking illustration of the wonderful patience, fertility of resource and inventive genius of the aboriginal woman in using nature's materials, roots, grasses, twigs, vines, rushes, palm fibres, shells, and feathers, shaping them into useful and beautiful forms.
"Baskets are the Indian Woman's poems; the shaping of them her sculpture. They wove into them the story of their life and love." (Navajo School of Indian Basketry, 1903, p. 7)
The wonderful Smithsonian Aboriginal American Basketry book (but with horribly dated language) was published in 1904. Seven thousand copies were available for the public. If paleoarchaeologists had read this it might have radically changed their views about the complexity of basket-weaving, the skill of women, the uses of baskets by mobile hunter-gatherers, and the age of basket-weaving.
"As you gaze on the Indian basket maker at work, herself frequently unkempt, her garments the coarsest, her house and surroundings suggestive of anything but beauty, you are amazed. You look about you, as in a cabinet shop or atelier, for models, drawings, patterns, pretty bits of color effect. There are none. Her patterns are in her soul, in her memory and imagination, in the mountains, water courses, lakes, and forests, and in those tribal tales and myths... Her tools are more disappointing still, for of these there are few: a rude knife, a pointed bone [ED: the awl], that is all. Her modeling block is herself. Her plastic body is the repository of forms. Over her knee she molds depressions in her ware, and her lap is equal to all emergencies for convex effects. She herself is the Vishnu of her art, the creator of forms." (Aboriginal American Basketry, 1904, p. 221)
"Wherever Western researchers have come in contact with native people, whether in Britain, Africa, Polynesia, or America, it has found the woman enjoying the most friendly acquaintance with textile plants and skillful in weaving their roots, stems, and leaves into basketry, matting, and other similar products without machinery. Basketry was well-nigh universal throughout the western hemisphere." (Aboriginal American Basketry, 1904, p. 187)
As the Smithsonian book shows, the work of women was fundamental and well respected by their tribe. Women engineered, designed, and created basket-type tools made with their weaving skills. This technology developed into a diverse tool-making industry that was crucial for the survival of nomadic hunter-gatherers and probably even earlier hominins.
GETTING INFORMATION IN 1900
Some might argue that this kind of detailed information was not available or easily located 100 years ago. But this is not true as it was standard procedure, then as now, to do a review of the literature.
While paleoanthropologists did not have the luxury of the Internet as we do today, there were other ways to do a review of the literature. For example, in an entirely different field, the field of aeronautics, the Wright Brothers wrote: "the Smithsonian Institution on May 30, 1899, asking for Smithsonian publications on aeronautics and suggestions for other readings." This review had a major impact on their experiments. (Wright Brothers, Smithsonian Institution Archives)
Due to their thorough research and experimental testing of commonly accepted tables of lift and drag which were incorrect, these two poorly funded bicycle makers were able to scientifically leapfrog over other well-funded airplane builders.
NOTE: To see what was available go to Archive.org and search for "American Indian" or "Native American" while limiting your search to those publications before 1910 (or another date). And of course, these are only the publications that have survived as many have probably been lost.
CONCLUSION
With just the Smithsonian book Aboriginal American Basketry as evidence, it is clear that basketry was an integral part of a number of nomadic and semi-nomadic hunter-gatherer Native American Indian tribes. This contradicts the long-held assumption that basketry could only have begun with sedentary agricultural societies of the Neolithic. And this should have been recognized around 1900.
But having made that point, there is much more to say. It appears from the sophistication of this hunter-gatherer basketry that basket making was crucial to the life and the survival of the tribes. Women not only made superb baskets for dozens of purposes but did so with local plants which varied greatly from region to region. They also knew how to use different parts of the plants as well as when to harvest them and how to process them. Moreover, they often used a variety of plant materials in the same basket for different parts of the basket and a variety of techniques to weave the basket. As several anthropological observers noted, they probably knew more about these plants, local botany, and how the plants could be used than western-educated scientists. (Aboriginal American Basketry, 1904, p. 198)
Instead of thinking that basketry was incompatible with a nomadic hunter-gatherer lifestyle, the truth may be the opposite. These societies needed well-designed light, strong, durable, flexible, versatile, and portable basket items, and implements that they could carry with them as they traveled. And they needed to be able to make baskets from whatever plants they found as they moved around -- which women were expert at harvesting. So baskets fit well with their mobile way of life.
However, the perception of these societies has been very different. They have been characterized as 'primitive' 'illiterate' 'savages' who lived in the 'stone age'. This opinion came about because they were judged by sedentary farmers and city dwellers who lived in industrial societies but who did not understand the Native American Indian way of life and, as a result, saw it as inferior. And this may be part of the reason it was assumed that something as complex as basketry and textiles could only have been created by more 'advanced' cultures such as those of the Neolithic, cultures that were much more similar to our own.
Yet, these nomadic and semi-nomadic hunter-gatherers did the best they could with the technology they had available to them. However, unlike cities and large civilizations, they did not need a written language -- a small tribe was able to function with a spoken language which often had complex ways of conveying information.
Yet many western authorities did not recognize their expertise in basketry and instead focused on their lack of a written language which to these men meant that they were primitive savages.
"Aboriginal languages include extensive botanical vocabularies, such as plant names, terms for stages of plant growth, and terms for parts of plants. For some plant species there are specialised verbs for describing the method of collecting fruits and seeds, and of processing and eating them (Laramba Women & Green 2003)."
"Pioneering work by Conklin (1957) and others documented that traditional peoples...often possessed exceptionally detailed knowledge of local plant and animals and their natural history, recognizing in one case some 1,600 plant species." (Inglis, 1993)
I think it is now clear that 100 years ago paleoanthropologists could have been reasonably sure that basket-weaving occurred in the Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic eras with prehistoric nomadic and semi-nomadic hunter-gatherer tribes, based on the ethnocultural examples of the nomadic hunter-gatherer Native American Indians at the time and the findings from Paleoindian sites. And this belief might have helped paleoarchaeologists when they were excavating tools and artifacts. Awls, for example, might have been found in the same area as other related basket-making evidence.
In any case, today the recognition of the importance of basketry has begun. And the point is to look at Paleolithic and Mesolithic remains with a new perspective -- and not just those in the Upper Paleolithic, but also the Middle and Lower Paleolithic.
It is possible that evidence of ancient basketry might be hiding in plain sight but only now are we able to see it.
____________________________________
DISCARDING OTHER RELATED ASSUMPTIONS
The Assumption That Certain Technologies Or Advances
Only Occurred In Certain Time Periods
In addition to discarding a gender bias, some other long-held assumptions should be questioned. Paleoanthropologists need to rethink the sharp delineation between different prehistoric eras. The assumption has been that each era, (i.e., Lower, Middle, Upper Paleolithic, Mesolithic, and Neolithic) had technologies that were particular to each era and which progressed as time went on. However, discoveries have shown that this is not necessarily true. As Dr. Adovasio et al. describes next some 'Neolithic technologies' have been found 15,000 years earlier in Upper Paleolithic sites.
"Finally, the identification of textiles and basketry ca. 25,000 B.P., together with extensive evidence of Upper Paleolithic ceramic technologies (Vandiver et al. 1990), raise serious questions about the technological “signatures” or artifactual associations used to define particular epochs in prehistory. The Moravian sites are by chronological assignation clearly Paleolithic and not Neolithic in age, preceding the “Neolithic Revolution” (Childe l936) by some 15,000 years. They were occupied by people who subsisted by foraging, not by horticulture and whose settlement systems, as a result, featured residential mobility rather than year round sedentism. Yet, these populations produced geometric microliths, made ceramics, manufactured ground stone tools, and wove textiles and basketry, all supposed “hallmarks” of the Neolithic." (Soffer, Adovasio et al, 1998)
So while many of the Native American Indian tribes were nomadic hunter-gatherers who made old stone age tools and seemed to live a life similar to Upper Paleolithic cultures in Europe, they also may have developed what we might call a 'hi-tech' basket technology. The sophistication of this technology is clear as the waterproofing of basket canteens has shown along with the durability and wide variety of baskets.
"Many times our preconceived notions as to what ought or ought not to be present at a given site of a given age clouds and limits our ability to admit new possibilities. Ideological and theoretical biases can be quite powerful and often subtly alter our ability to see new and wonderful things." (Hyland et al, 2002, p. 8)
The Assumption That Basket-Weaving
Could Have Developed In A Relatively Short Time Period
As mentioned earlier, authorities in 1910 assumed that basket-weaving could not have begun earlier than the Neolithic era or about 10 - 15 kya. Today that date has been pushed back to about 25 kya. Nevertheless, both dates contain the assumption that the fully developed technology, from start to finish, could have evolved in only 5,000 - 20,000 years since it was fully developed in Egypt and Sumer by 5 kya. This in itself seems unlikely. If stone tools took 2 million years or so to develop, why would basketry be any different?
By about 5 kya the civilizations of Sumer and Egypt depended on a complete range of woven items that were widely available and that were crucial for the development of these civilizations. This short time span for basketry assumes that basic simple basket-making such as random weave baskets could have developed into 60 ft water-sealed ocean-going boats capable of carrying 50 tons of cargo in a relatively short period of time -- which was unlikely. (National Geographic, 1979, Video: The Tigris expedition)
Once the possibility of early basket-weaving is considered, there is evidence pointing toward older origins but which has been overlooked in the past. For example, in the following quote, a number of bone awls were found from the Middle Paleolithic (70 kya) which might have been tools for weaving with fibers since it is now generally agreed that awls were used for basket-weaving along with other uses.
"Twenty-eight bone tools were recovered in situ from ca. 70 ka year old Middle Stone Age levels at Blombos Cave between 1992 and 2000...Detailed analyses show that tool production methods follow a sequence of deliberate technical choices starting with blank production, the use of various shaping methods and the final finishing of the artefact to produce 'awls' and 'projectile points'. " (Henshilwood et al, 2001, p. 631)
But of course, the length of time basket-weaving took to evolve is an open question -- but the assumption that basketry could have been developed in a short time needs to be looked at.
________________________________________________
APPENDIX:
- MATERIALS USED FOR BASKET-WEAVING
- LIST OF DIFFERENT KINDS OF BASKETS AND DIFFERENT WAYS BASKETS WERE USED IN NATIVE AMERICAN INDIAN CULTURES
MATERIALS FOR BASKETRY
From the Smithsonian's Aboriginal American Basketry of 1904, pp. 197-198.
NOTE: This language in the Smithsonian's Aboriginal American Basketry of 1904 is outdated, but the observations are quite useful.
"The chief dependence, however, of the basket maker is upon the vegetal kingdom. Nearly all parts of plants have been used by one tribe or another for this purpose roots, stems, bark, leaves, fruits, seeds, and gums. It would seem as though in each area for purposes intended the vegetal kingdom had been thoroughly explored and exhausted above ground and underground.
"Is it not marvelous to think that unlettered savages should know so much botany? Mr. Chesnut, in his Plants used by Indians of Mendocino County, California, calls attention to the fact that in our advanced state we are yet behind these savages, not having caught up with them in the discovery and uses of some of their best textile materials.
"How did the savages find out that the roots of certain plants hid away under the earth were the best possible material for this function* And for another use the stem of a plant had to be found, perhaps miles away, so that in the makeup of a single example leagues would have to be traveled and much discrimination used. Unless the utmost care is exercised the fact will be overlooked that often three or four kinds of wood will be used in the monotonous work of the weft. One is best for the bottom, another is light and tough for the body, a third is best for the flexible top. This in addition to the employment of half a dozen others for designs, for warp or foundation, or for decorative purposes." (Aboriginal American Basketry, 1904, pp. 197-198)
MATERIAL SOURCES
From the Burke Museum, (UW College of Arts & Sciences), Teacher's Guide For Basketry, Northwest Coast Basketry.
"Materials used in basketry vary, depending upon the type of basket being made, its intended function, the tastes of the maker and the materials available. A basket used for heavy loads would use stiff, sturdy material such as cedar withe or cedar root. A container made to fold flat requires flexible material such as spruce root.
"Some of the more common materials used in basketry include cedar bark, cedar root, spruce root, cattail leaves and tule.
GATHERING AND PROCESSING THE MATERIALS
"Most raw materials used in weaving are harvested or gathered at specific times of the year. This ensures that the materials are collected when they are best suited for weaving. Weavers understand the growing cycles of the natural materials they use and recognize when a tree or plant is ready for harvesting. Often, special prayers are said or songs are sung by the weaver while she gathers and processes her materials.
"Most materials are collected in the spring or early summer. This includes grasses, which must be picked at just the right time. If it is too early in the season, certain grasses are too soft or narrow for weaving. Other kinds, such as reed canary grass, need to be harvested before the plant blooms.
"The bark of both red and yellow cedar is gathered when the tree sap is running, normally between April and July. The sap allows the bark to be pulled off easily from the tree.
"Once removed, the outer cedar bark is removed from the inner bark by folding and peeling the bark by hand. It is the inner bark which is used for basketry. The inner bark is washed, dried and gathered into bundles. It can now be stored for later weaving projects.
"Spruce or cedar root can be gathered at any time of the year. After they are gathered, the roots are bundled and heated over a fire. After heating, the roots are unbundled and pulled through a split wooden stick which removes the outer bark. The roots are then split one or more times, rebundled and stored until needed.
"If properly prepared and stored, materials can be kept for years before use. Although stored dry, materials are soaked in water before they are used in weaving. This makes them pliable and easier to use. While the basket maker is working, the weaving materials and the object being made are constantly moistened to keep them flexible." (Burke Museum, Teacher's Guide: Northwest Coast Basketry)
ALPHABETICAL LIST OF USES & TYPES OF BASKETS
From the Smithsonian's Aboriginal American Basketry of 1904, pp. 361-363.
- Armor made of slats and rods woven together.
- Awning mats in front of cabins.
- Bags for everything; for gathering, carrying, and storing, made in every quality.
- Bait holding.
- Bases for pottery-making (primitive wheel); also forms for portion of vessels.
- Beds of matting in basketry.
- Boiling baskets, for cooking flesh or mush.
- Bread, for mixing or serving.
- Burden baskets in endless varieties.
- Burial caskets and deposits.
- Cage for insects, birds etc.; also for children on Sioux travois.
- Canoe covers, for cargoes (Swan).
- Canteen, for personal water supply.
- Cape, poncho, or other garment to cover the shoulders, both in animal and vegetable fiber.
- Carrying basket, an immense class, with infinite variety of form and universal distribution.
- Carrying chair, Guatemala and Peru.
- Ceremonial objects; trays in rites and before altar, carried in dances, struggled for, etc.
- Chef d'oeuvres, to show the best one could do.
- Chests for treasures, regalia, and fine costume.
- Children s toys; imitations of more serious objects.
- Clothing; robes of twine, with or without feathers; hats, jewelry, capes, fringes, petticoats, leggings, moccasins, and receptacles for these.
- Coffins of canes and reeds wattled together.
- Cooking baskets, used with hot stones.
- Cradles or pappoose frames, quite widely distributed.
- Creels, all varieties of fishermen s baskets.
- Cremation baskets, burned at the woman's grave.
- Cult baskets, Hupa basket wand (Ray), Ilopi plaque (Fewkes).
- Curtain mats for partitions.
- Cushions in boats and kaiaks.
- Dance baskets, used in ceremonies.
- Ditty baskets for small articles of hunters.
- Dress. (Ree Clothing.)
- Drinking baskets or cups.
- Drum, in Navaho ceremony.
- Drying tray for fruit.
- Eagle traps and cages.
- Etiquette baskets, for giving away on the proper occasion.
- Fences of coarse basket technic; hunting fences.
- Fine art in basketry.
- Fish, holding, transporting, creels, bait baskets.
- Fish trap, fish weirs, fykes, etc.
- Food-serving baskets.
- Foundations for pottery.
- Fringes on garments, in refined basket technic.
- Furniture in basketry. Gambling baskets. Gathering or harvesting. Gift baskets. Granary or storage. Grasshopper baskets, so called. Hammocks in basket work. Harvesting, fan or wand for beating seeds. Hats for men or for women. Head rings, olla rings for carrying. Hedges, employed chiefly in game drives. Hoppers, for acorn and other mortars. Houses, walls, roofs, floors, doors, and other parts.
- Inclosures for the beginning of domestication.
- Insect cage, for lighting and other purposes.
- Jewel baskets, chef d oeuvres of woman's art,
- Jewelry, woven in finest material for adornment.
- Leggings in twined weave. Lined with clay for cooking. Love baskets. Marks on pottery. Meal trays, useful and sacred. Medicine, associated with sorcery. Milling outfit, grinding, hoppers, brushes, sieves, etc.
- Moccasins or sandals. Molds for pottery. Money, mechanism of exchange. Mortuary baskets of many kinds and functions. Mud sandals, Klarnath, for going in marshes.
- Mush bowls for mixing or serving. Musical instruments, rattles and drums. Offerings of food to dead, and mortuary objects. Paho, or prayer-stick wrappings (ancient graves).
- Panniers, with saddles. Papoose baskets. Partitions for dwellings. Patterns for pottery.
- Picking baskets, for gathering nuts and fruits.
- Pitcher basket, with wide mouth.
- Plaques, for meal.
- Plates or platters.
- Ponchos. ( See Capes. )
- Pottery. (See " Marks on Pottery;" also used to line roasting trays (Gushing).)
- Prayer basket, Pahos.
- Preparing food, mixing mush, bread, etc.
- Quivers.
- Receptacles of all sorts, for cooked food, dried fish, and all kinds of preserved meats and fruits. The basket maker herself keeps her splints and stems in a basket.
- Religion, used in services of.
- Roasting trays, for poaching seeds.
- Robes of shredded bark.
- Roof of basketry.
- Sacred meal trays.
- Saddlebags, of late application.
- Sails, in both continents.
- Seats, at home, in boats, etc.
- Seed baskets, harvesting, carrying, and storage.
- Seed beater, for harvesting.
- Serving food, for single persons or a company.
- Sieves, for screening or for shaking.
- Skirts, both of common and ceremonial dress.
- Sleeping mats.
- Storage, fish, berries, pemmican, acorns. All tribes stored some kind of food.
- Trade, medium of.
- Treasure baskets, those considered treasures.
- Trinket and feather storage, also herbs, gum, paint, etc.
- Vizors of Katchina masks, made from segments of coiled basketry (Utetype), Hopi.
- Washbowl, in ceremonies.
- Water bottles, drinking cups, etc., of basketry dipped in pitch. Also what were called water baskets, i.e., large baskets for carrying water.
- Winnowing baskets for seeds.
- Zootechny, or the arts associated with animal life.
(University of Southern California, CA. 1900, Indian male carrying)
BIBLIOGRAPHY
(Picture credits listed separately next)
Aboriginal American Basketry: studies in a textile art without machinery. Annual Report of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution; Report of the U.S. National Museum. Contributors: Mason, Otis Tufton; Coville, Frederick Vernon. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1904. <https://archive.org/details/aboriginalbasket00masorich>. Accessed 28 November 2020.
Adovasio, Dr. James. "The Greatest Journey." Western Pennsylvania History, Summer 2006. <https://journals.psu.edu/wph/article/download/7669/7442>. Accessed 28 November 2020.
arXivarchive page, Emerging Technology. "Computational linguistics reveals pervasive gender bias in modern English novels." MIT Technology Review. Technologyreview.com, August 7, 2018. <https://www.technologyreview.com/2018/08/07/141163/computational-linguistics-reveals-pervasive-gender-bias-in-modern-english-novels/>. Accessed 28 November 2020.
Bahn, Dr. Paul. "Palaeolithic weaving – a contribution from Chauvet." Antiquity, 2001, 75:271-272.
Barrows, David Prescott. The Ethno-botany of the Coahuilla Indians of Southern California. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1900. <https://archive.org/details/ethnobotany00barrrich/page/n7/mode/2up>. Accessed 28 November 2020.
Beauchamp, William. Horn And Bone Implements Of The New York Indians. New York State Museum. Albany: University of the State of New York, 1902. <https://archive.org/details/hornboneimplemen00beau>. Accessed 28 November 2020.
Boule, Mary Null. Hupa Tribe. Kahle/Austin Foundation. Vashon, Washington: Merryant Publishing, 1992. <https://archive.org/details/hupatribe0000boul>. Accessed 28 November 2020.
Buc, Natacha; Loponte, Daniel. "Bone tool types and microwear patterns: Some examples from the Pampa region, South America." Methods and Interpretations in Worked Bone. Inapl.gov.ar., 2007, pp. 143–157. <https://www.academia.edu/739537>. Accessed 28 November 2020.
Burke Museum, UW College of Arts & Sciences. "Northwest Coast Basketry." Teacher's Guide For Basketry by Silvia Koros. Burkemuseum.org. <https://www.burkemuseum.org/static/baskets/Teachersguideforbasketry.htm>. Accessed 28 November 2020.
Calhoun, Cecil. "A Polychrome Vessel from the Texas Coastal Bend." Text from: Bulletin of the Texas Archeological Society, 1964, 35: 205-211. <https://texasbeyondhistory.net/coast/nature/images/asphaltum.html>. Accessed 28 November 2020.
Campana, D. Natufian and Protoneolithic Bone Tools. The Manufacture and Use of Bone Implements in the Zagros and the Levant. BAR International Series No 494. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports, 1989. <https://www.academia.edu/8195058/Natufian_and_Protoneolithic_Bone_Tools_The_Manufacture_and_Use_of_Bone_Implements_in_the_Zagros_and_the_Levant>. Accessed 28 November 2020.
Crowfoot, Grace. "Textiles, Basketry, And Mats." A History of Technology, Volume I. From Early Times to Fall of Ancient Empires. Edited by Singer, Charles; Holmyard,E.J.; Hall, A.R. New York: Oxford University Press, 1954. <https://archive.org/details/B-001-001-770>. Accessed 28 November 2020.
Fowler, Brenda. "Find Suggests Weaving Preceded Settled Life." New York Times, 9 May 1995. <https://www.nytimes.com/1995/05/09/science/find-suggests-weaving-preceded-settled-life.html>. Accessed 12 December 2020.
Gershon, Livia. "This Prehistoric Peruvian Woman Was A Big-Game Hunter." The Smithsonian Institution. Smithsonianmag.com. 6 November 2020. <https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/9000-year-old-big-game-hunter-peru-prompts-questions-about-hunter-gatherer-gender-roles-180976218/>. Accessed 28 November 2020.
Grömer, Dr. Karina. "An Introduction to Prehistoric Textiles." Brewminate.com. Vienna: Natural History Museum, 01 March 2016. <https://brewminate.com/an-introduction-to-prehistoric-textiles>. Accessed 28 November 2020.
Henshilwood, Christopher S.; D'errico, Francesco; Marean, Curtis W.; Milo, Richard G.; Yates, Royden (2001). "An early bone tool industry from the Middle Stone Age at Blombos Cave, South Africa: implications for the origins of modern human behaviour, symbolism and language". Journal of Human Evolution. 41 (6): 631–678. doi:10.1006/jhev.2001.0515. PMID 11782112. <https://www.academia.edu/15259171/An_early_bone_tool_industry_from_the_Middle_Stone_Age_at_Blombos_Cave_South_Africa_implications_for_the_origins_of_modern_human_behaviour_symbolism_and_language>. Accessed 28 November 2020.
Hyland, David C.; Zhushchikhovskaya, I. S.; Medvedev, V. E.: Derevianko, A. P.; Tabarev, A. V. "Pleistocene Textiles in the Russian Far East: Impressions From Some of the World's Oldest Pottery." Antropologie: Xl/1 • Pp. 1–10 • 2002, p. 1. <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280385206_Pleistocene_Textiles_in_the_Russian_Far_East_Impressions_From_Some_of_the_World's_Oldest_Pottery>. Accessed 28 November 2020.
Inglis, Julian T., Editor. Concepts and Cases: International Program on Traditional Ecological Knowledge. International Development Research Centre (Canada), 1993, <http://library.umac.mo/ebooks/b10756577a.pdf>. Accessed 12 December 2020.
James, George Wharton. Practical Basket Making. Pasadena, Calif.: James, 1914. <https://archive.org/details/practicalbasketm00jameiala/page/n5/mode/2up>. Accessed 28 November 2020.
Kachina House. "Basket Weaving’s Importance In Native American Culture." Kachinahouse.com, 21 December 2016. <https://blog.kachinahouse.com/basket-weavings-importance-in-native-american-culture/>. Accessed 28 November 2020.
Kidder, Alfred V. "An Introduction to the Study of Southwestern Archaeology." Phillips Academy Southwestern Expedition Papers 1. 1927 Southwestern Archaeology Conference. Science 66 (1716);589-591.
Mayan Hands. "Weaving and Culture." Mayanhands.org, 2020. <https://www.mayanhands.org/pages/weaving-and-culture>. Accessed 28 November 2020.
Menon, Shanti. "The Basket Age." Discovery Magazine, January 1996 Issue. <http://discovermagazine.com/1996/jan/thebasketage619>. Accessed 28 November 2020.
Moo, Michelle. "The Women Doctors Who Fought To Serve." University of Melbourne, April 2017. <https://pursuit.unimelb.edu.au/articles/the-women-doctors-who-fought-to-serve>. Accessed 14 December 2020.
National Geographic. "The Tigris expedition: A National Geographic Special." National Geographic Society, broadcast on PBS 04/01/1979.
Navajo School of Indian Basketry. Indian Basket Weaving. Los Angeles: Wedon & Spreng Co., 1903. <https://archive.org/details/indianbasketweav00nava>. Accessed 28 November 2020.
Pennsylvania Archaeology. "Paleoindian Period." <http://www.phmc.state.pa.us/portal/communities/archaeology/native-american/paleoindian-period.html>. Accessed 12 December 2020.
Pollack, Eileen. "Why Are There Still So Few Women in Science?" The New York Times, 3 October 2013. <https://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/06/magazine/why-are-there-still-so-few-women-in-science.html?_r=0%20>. Accessed 28 November 2020.
Savanna Hypothesis. Wikipedia.org. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savannah_hypothesis>.Accessed 28 November 2020.
ScienceDaily. "Farmers have less leisure time than hunter-gatherers." University of Cambridge. ScienceDaily, 21 May 2019. <https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/05/190520115646.htm>. Accessed 28 November 2020.
Soffer O, Adovasio JM, Hyland DC, Klíma B, Svoboda J. "Perishable Industries from Dolní Vestonice I: New Insights into the Nature and Origin of the Gravettian." Paper Prepared for the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology Seattle, Washington, 25–29 March 1998. <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/257344691_Perishable_Industries_from_Dolni_Vestonice_I_New_Insights_into_the_Nature_and_Origin_of_the_Gravettian>. Accessed 28 November 2020.
The Human Origins Initiative. "Stone Tools." The Smithsonian Institution, 10 November 2020. <http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/behavior/stone-tools>. Accessed 28 November 2020.
Turner, Luther Weston. The Basket Maker. Worchester, Mass.: The Davis Press, 1909. <https://archive.org/details/basketmaker00turniala>. Accessed 28 November 2020.
Williams, Joan. "Why Are There So Few Women in Science, Continued." HuffPost Women; The Huffington Post, 23 January 2014. <https://www.huffpost.com/entry/why-are-there-so-few-wome_b_4045757>. Accessed 28 November 2020.
Wright Brothers. Smithsonian Institution Archives. <https://siarchives.si.edu/history/featured-topics/stories/wright-brothers-pioneers-aviation>. Accessed 12 December 2020.
PHOTOGRAPHY AND IMAGE CREDITS
Aboriginal American basketry: studies in a textile art without machinery. Contributors: Mason, Otis Tufton; Coville, Frederick Vernon. Annual Report of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution; Report of the U.S. National Museum. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1904.<https://archive.org/details/aboriginalbasket00masorich>. Accessed 12/10/2020.
Beauchamp, William. Horn And Bone Implements Of The New York Indians. New York State Museum. Albany: University of the State of New York, 1902. <https://archive.org/details/hornboneimplemen00beau>. Accessed 12/10/2020.
Commons.wikimedia.org. Accessed 12/10/2020.
Penelope <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:P%C3%A9n%C3%A9lope_devant_son_m%C3%A9tier_%C3%A0_tisser_MNR_%C3%89couen.jpg>.
The Wright Flyer <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Wright_Brothers;_first_powered_flight_HU98267.jpg>.
Tigris Model <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Tigris_Model_Pyramids_of_Guimar.jpg>.
University of Melbourne, Photo: Mary De Garis with other Melbourne Hospital residents. Accessed 12/10/2020.
(This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivatives 3.0 Australia (CC BY-ND 3.0 AU), so you can republish our articles for free, online or in print.) <https://res-1.cloudinary.com/the-university-of-melbourne/image/upload/s--_k6MKttB--/c_limit,f_auto,q_75,w_1784/v1/pursuit-uploads/035/a17/99b/035a1799b277364dc9867a3f53812d74618104c3de7f89d26b45b0908dfe.jpg>.
University of Southern California. Libraries and California Historical Society. <http://digitallibrary.usc.edu> Accessed 12/10/2020.
Apache Indian maiden with an olla on her head, ca.1900. <http://digitallibrary.usc.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/p15799coll65/id/16137/rec/78>.
Apache Indian woman carrying a "Kathak" on her back, Arizona, ca.1880. <http://digitallibrary.usc.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/p15799coll65/id/3668/rec/4>.
Indian male carrying a basket on his back, ca.1900. <http://digitallibrary.usc.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/p15799coll65/id/9235/rec/227>.
Pima Indian woman...carrying firewood in her "Kathak", or basket, in Pima, Arizona, 1904. <http://digitallibrary.usc.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/p15799coll65/id/16154/rec/303>.
Three Indian basket papoose carriers displayed against a cloth backdrop, ca.1900. <http://digitallibrary.usc.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/p15799coll65/id/17178/rec/244>.
