The materiality of spiritual engagement: art and the end of Ohio Hopewell

Abstract

This paper addresses the question, ‘If art makes society, under what conditions does society cease to make art?’ The answer, I suggest, lies in art's loss of social efficacy. The case I use to explore the cessation of art is that of the Ohio Hopewell. In southern Ohio, between AD 1–400, a ceremonial system known as Ohio Hopewell developed, flourished, and was then entirely abandoned. This ceremonial system was characterized by elaborate material objects (art) made from exotic materials, communal rituals involving pageantry and burial of the dead that were held in large geometric earthwork enclosures, and large-scale offerings of objects in these ceremonial precincts. After AD 400, art, the large earthen enclosures, and elaborate offerings ceased to be made for a considerable period of time in the Midwestern US. This paper draws on theoretical, historical, and ethnographic information to make the argument that the collapse of Ohio Hopewell and its art represents a radical transformation in how people perceived materiality. The paper argues that the cessation of art represents a widespread and active rejection of ritual authority and of the power of material objects to mediate with the spiritual world.

Keywords:

• Ohio Hopewell
• archaeology
• religious change
• art
• materiality

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Dr John Robb and Dr Elizabeth DeMarrais for inviting me to participate in their very stimulating Society for American Archaeology symposium and to contribute my paper to this issue. I am very grateful for the insightful and constructive comments and suggestions from Jarrod Burks, Chris Carr, Liz DeMarrais, Mark Lynott, John Robb, Mark Seeman, and two anonymous reviewers on earlier versions of this paper. The paper is much better for them, though none are responsible for its contents. I would also like to thank the Ohio Historical Society for making their images available to me for publication and reducing their fee.

Notes

1. In earlier versions of this paper, the terms ‘sacred’ and ‘supernatural’ were used. Chris Carr rightfully pointed out that such terms suggest natural/supernatural and sacred/profane dichotomies that are incorrect with regard to the Eastern Woodlands, and ignore the interdependent relations between humans and non-humans in Eastern Woodland thought and practice. Thus, the author has adopted terminology used by other Woodland scholars.

2. Date ranges are approximate as divisions between archaeological periods vary in time across the region under discussion.