Langford tradition and the process of tribalization on the middle Mississippian borders, The

Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology, Spring 1999 by Emerson, Thomas E

In proposing a "core/periphery" perspective for northern Illinois late in prehistory we must be careful to recognize its spatial parameters and not allow the model to exceed its informational base (cf. Jeske 1999a). It is unfortunately easy for centrist models to create a monolithic Cahokian polity that directs and dictates actions across the hinterlands. Such approaches typically rely on Cahokian trade and economy as the driving forces that transformed the north, even to the extent, in some cases, of positing the creation of northern colonies to supply economic needs (e.g., Gibbon 1974; Kelly 1991; Peregrine 1992; Tiffany 1991; and many others). In the extreme, Dincauze and Hasestab (1989) have expanded this concept to argue for a virtual paneastern economic network directed by Cahokia. Griffin (1993), among others, has specifically opposed such an expansive vision of Cahokian economic and military power (Emerson 1991a, 1991b; Milner 1990; also see Jeske's 1999a critique of the Mississippian World System Model). Ongoing research has demonstrated that the Cahokian elites were more concerned with the resources of their immediate locality than those from the far north (Emerson and Hughes 1998; Pauketat 1997; Pauketat and Emerson 1997). Furthermore, such models conflate all interactions to a series of one-on-one connections between the "center" and individual hinterland groups. They obscure the important interrelationships among and between peripheral groups. It is first and foremost the interactions among the latter groups that are the focus of this paper.

When modeling Cahokian-northern relations, we must recognize that there are varying levels of interaction that carry differing degrees of influence and have different spatial parameters (cf. Emerson 1991a, 1991b; Stoltman 1986, 1991a, 1991b). For example, despite arguments to the contrary (e.g., Peregrine 1992; Tiffany 1991), it appears clear that the Cahokian economic sphere of interest was fairly tightly circumscribed (cf. Pauketat and Emerson 1997). On the other hand, Cahokian religious and political ideology may have spread far afield (e.g., Anderson 1997). Consequently, core/periphery models that portray this relationship in a strongly economic "hierarchical" form miss the mark. It is more appropriate to conceptualize it as being "differentiated" (sensu Chase-Dunn and Hall 1991). Such a definition removes many of the exploitative and economic connotations inherent in core/periphery hierarchy models.

It is important in this examination of the impact of core-periphery interaction on the late prehistoric cultures of northern Illinois that we establish spatial, chronological, and cultural parameters. This discussion is limited to the area of northern Illinois between Cahokia and the Wisconsin border, especially to the Apple, central Illinois, middle Rock, and upper Illinois River valleys; chronologically, we are concerned with the period from about A.D. 800 to 1500. This period essentially encompasses the rise and fall of the Cahokian polity as well as the associated Middle Mississippian chiefdoms and Upper Mississippian tribal groups of northern Illinois. The focus is on the cultural interactions during that period of this region's inhabitants, recognized archaeologically as terminal Late Woodland, Apple River and Spoon River Middle Mississippian, and Upper Mississippian Langford tradition peoples. The character of tribal and chiefly societies is examined generally and the asymmetrical interactions between such societies in northern Illinois are specifically examined with a view to understanding the emergence of the Langford tradition.