“A Hohokam Pottery Bell”

“A Hohokam Pottery Bell” NORTON ALLEN, INTRODUCED BY ALAN FERG This is the only article that Norton Allen ever published. It discusses the most carefully shaped prehistoric pottery bell ever found in the Southwest. Norton found the bell partially exposed on the surface of the Twelve Mile Site; it may or may not have been intact, but broke when he tried to pick it up with the scoop on the end of his crutch. Although the clapper was not recovered, construction details for the bell were obvious from impressions on the interior of the sherds. Using these construction inferences, Ethel had no trouble making and firing a beautiful replica. Norton noted that other pottery bells had been found, but did not emphasize that, although a few from Pecos Pueblo are larger than the bell from the Twelve Mile Site, the photographs and description make it clear that all are rather crudely modeled in comparison (Kidder 1932:138–40). What the Pecos bells lack in sophistication, however, they make up for in number: 189 were recovered from trash deposits. This leads one to suspect that Pecos might even be the source of the other, individual finds of very similar-looking pottery bells known from Awatovi (Fewkes 1898:628–29), Grasshopper Pueblo (Jernigan 1978:fig. 43), near Camp Verde (Barnett 1991:33), and the FF Ranch Site near Dragoon (Fulton 1934:19, pl. X-d), all in Arizona, and from sites near Santa Fe and Albuquerque, New Mexico (Tanner 1976:194). Nevertheless, in spite of the passage of more than fifty years since its discovery, this bell from the Twelve Mile Site remains unique in its craftsmanship. The copper bells found in the Southwest were imported from Mexico, primarily during the Hohokam Colonial and Sedentary Periods, circa AD 600 to 1100 (Sprague 1964; Sprague and Signori 1963; Vargas 1995). This is also the tightest age range for the Twelve Mile Site and Norton’s bell, suggesting that the Mexican bells are its source of inspiALAN FERG is the archivist at the Arizona State Museum, University of Arizona, Tucson, and is on the Editorial Advisory Board of American Indian Art Magazine. Journal of the Southwest 52, 2 and 3 (Summer-Autumn 2010) : 191–199 192 ✜ JOURNAL OF THE SOUTHWEST ration. Although one presumes that the pottery bells at Pecos were also inspired by Mexican copper bells, their late prehistoric age (Glaze V) and distance from the Hohokam area strongly suggest that there is no connection between the Twelve Mile and Pecos pottery bells. Whether any additional pottery bells will be recovered from Hohokam sites remains to be seen. Although the Twelve Mile Site pottery bell was obviously its focus, the remainder of Norton’s article contains a number of cogent remarks summarizing some specific aspects of Colonial and Sedentary Period Hohokam material culture in the Gila Bend area that will be revisited in other articles in this issue. It is regrettable that Norton did not write more. Even though Emil Haury, of the University of Arizona, had encouraged him to do so, Norton was happy to share any information he had with anyone who was interested, but apparently preferred to leave the writing to others. The eminent archaeologist Fred Wendorf can be credited with getting Norton to write this article. Wendorf’s first job at the Museum of New Mexico was to write up some archaeological excavations near Chama, New Mexico. He had seen some of Norton’s maps in Desert Magazine and knew that’s what he wanted for his report (Wendorf 2007). He contacted Norton, they must have struck up a friendship by mail, and Norton did draft the maps for the Chama report (Wendorf 1953). Norton and Wendorf discussed the idea of preparing a summary of prehistoric copper bells discovered in the Southwest, but Wendorf wrote to Norton that in discussing the matter with one of the other staff members here, I found out that this fellow’s father-in-law (named Hawley) who is a mineralogist and an amateur archaeologist, had recently written a paper on copper bells in the Southwest which summarized the data I hoped we could bring out in our proposed paper. . . . Would you instead do...