Anthropological Approaches to Zooarchaeology
eBook - ePub

Anthropological Approaches to Zooarchaeology

Colonialism, Complexity and Animal Transformations

Douglas V. Campana, Pamela Crabtree, S. D. deFrance, Justin Lev-Tov, A. M. Choyke, Pamela Crabtree, S. D. deFrance

Share book
  1. 320 pages
  2. English
  3. ePUB (mobile friendly)
  4. Available on iOS & Android
eBook - ePub

Anthropological Approaches to Zooarchaeology

Colonialism, Complexity and Animal Transformations

Douglas V. Campana, Pamela Crabtree, S. D. deFrance, Justin Lev-Tov, A. M. Choyke, Pamela Crabtree, S. D. deFrance

Book details
Book preview
Table of contents
Citations

About This Book

Animals in complex human societies are often both meal and symbol, related to everyday practice and ritual. People in such societies may be characterized as having unequal access to such resources, or else the meaning of animals may differ for component groups. Here, in this book, 28 peer-reviewed papers that span 4 continents and the Caribbean islands explore in different ways how animals were incorporated into the diets and religions of many unique societies. The temporal range is from the Neolithic to the Spanish colonization of the New World as well as to modern tourist trade in indigenous animal art. The volume explores various themes including the interaction of foodways with complex societies, the interaction between diet and colonialism and the complex role that animals, and parts of animals, play in all human societies as religious, identity markers, or other types of symbols. Organized according to these themes, rather than geographic location or time period, the papers presented here crosscut such divisions. In so doing, this book presents an opportunity for scholars divided by geography especially, but also by temporal period, to explore each other's research and demonstrate that different archaeological settings can address the same problems cross-culturally.

Frequently asked questions

How do I cancel my subscription?
Simply head over to the account section in settings and click on “Cancel Subscription” - it’s as simple as that. After you cancel, your membership will stay active for the remainder of the time you’ve paid for. Learn more here.
Can/how do I download books?
At the moment all of our mobile-responsive ePub books are available to download via the app. Most of our PDFs are also available to download and we're working on making the final remaining ones downloadable now. Learn more here.
What is the difference between the pricing plans?
Both plans give you full access to the library and all of Perlego’s features. The only differences are the price and subscription period: With the annual plan you’ll save around 30% compared to 12 months on the monthly plan.
What is Perlego?
We are an online textbook subscription service, where you can get access to an entire online library for less than the price of a single book per month. With over 1 million books across 1000+ topics, we’ve got you covered! Learn more here.
Do you support text-to-speech?
Look out for the read-aloud symbol on your next book to see if you can listen to it. The read-aloud tool reads text aloud for you, highlighting the text as it is being read. You can pause it, speed it up and slow it down. Learn more here.
Is Anthropological Approaches to Zooarchaeology an online PDF/ePUB?
Yes, you can access Anthropological Approaches to Zooarchaeology by Douglas V. Campana, Pamela Crabtree, S. D. deFrance, Justin Lev-Tov, A. M. Choyke, Pamela Crabtree, S. D. deFrance in PDF and/or ePUB format, as well as other popular books in Sozialwissenschaften & Physische Anthropologie. We have over one million books available in our catalogue for you to explore.

Information

Publisher
Oxbow Books
Year
2010
ISBN
9781842178799
PART I
ARCHAEOZOOLOGY AND SOCIAL COMPLEXITY
editors
Susan D. deFrance and Justin Lev-Tov
Archaeozoology and Social Complexity

1. A Bird’s Eye View of Ritual at the Cahokia Site

Lucretia S. Kelly
Over the last century, and particularly the last 50 years, large quantities of faunal remains have been excavated and studied from sites in the American Bottom, a region in Illinois where the largest Mississippian (AD 1020–1400) mound center, Cahokia, is located. A large faunal database has been amassed enabling the delineation of significant patterns regarding the use of various species of animals over time. In this chapter I examine the potential ritual significance of several rare bird taxa found at the Cahokia site in two locations separated in time by about 150 years. One area, sub-Mound 51 that dates to the Lohmann phase AD 1050, contains the remains of large communal ritual feasts. The second area, Mound 34 that dates to the Moorehead phase AD 1200–1275, was a significant locus for special activities, events, and religious ceremonies. I present three lines of evidence, zooarchaeological data, archaeological context, and ethnographic and ethnohistoric accounts of how American Indians in the mid-continent used and regarded the identified archaeological bird species to help elucidate what roles they may have played in ritual and ceremonial activities in the past. The bird remains present also contribute to ongoing studies regarding a significant change in symbolism and ideology in the region at the end of the twelfth century.
Keywords: ritual, bird, Mississippian, Cahokia, symbolism

Introduction

Within the North American mid-continent and southeast, the late prehistoric (AD 1000–1500) Mississippian Cultural Tradition includes communities that reflect relatively complex forms of socio-political organization, characterized as chiefdoms. They possess common features such as distinctive ceramic technology, the presence of platform mounds and plazas, dependence upon maize agriculture, extensive exchange networks, ranked socio-political structures, and a shared ideology. The Cahokia site, an early Mississippian center on the northern edge of Mississippian development, is located in the American Bottom region of the central Mississippi river floodplain, just east of St. Louis, Missouri (Fig. 1.1). As the largest Mississippian site with over 100 mounds within a 14 sq. km. area, Cahokia undoubtedly represents the most complex of all Mississippian societies. Over the last century, and particularly the last 50 years, large amounts of faunal remains have been excavated and studied from Cahokia and the surrounding region (Kelly 1997, Kelly and Cross 1984, Parmalee 1975) resulting in a large faunal database enabling the recognition of interesting patterns regarding various taxa of animals over time (Kelly 2000).
In this chapter I examine the ritual significance of several rare bird taxa found at two locations in the Cahokia site (Fig. 1.2) separated in time by nearly 150 years: sub-Mound 51 dating to the Lohmann phase AD 1050–1100 contains the remains of large communal ritual feasts (Kelly 2000, 2001; Pauketat et al. 2002) and Mound 34 dating to the Moorehead phase AD 1200–1275 is a significant locus where special events and religious ceremonies took place (Brown and Kelly 2000; Kelly et al. 2007). I present three lines of evidence to help elucidate the various roles in ritual and ceremonial activities that these birds may have played in the past: zooarchaeological data, archaeological context, and ethnographic and ethnohistoric accounts of how American Indians in the mid-continent used and regarded the identified archaeological bird taxa. The bird remains present also contribute to ongoing studies regarding a significant change in symbolism and ideology in the region at the end of the twelfth century (Kelly et al. 2007), referred to by James Brown (2001) as the Moorehead Moment.
A rich avian iconography exists from the late pre-contact Mississippian period throughout the Southeastern United States, including those of birdmen with hawk or falcon attributes (Brown 2007), owls (Aftandilian 2003), and “duck effigies” (Kelly 1993). The symbol most associated with Cahokia is a birdman image (Fig. 1.3) found incised on a small sandstone tablet (Williams 1975) that dates late (ca. AD 1300) in the site’s history. But, ethnohistoric accounts illustrate that many species of birds played important roles in all aspects of American Indian life. Because Cahokia was abandoned late in the thirteenth century before European contact, there is no direct connection between historic American Indian groups and the inhabitants of Cahokia. Because of striking similarities between Dhegiha-Siouan speaking groups such as the Osage, Omaha, and Quapaw and Cahokian society, some scholars now believe these groups may be the direct descendants of Cahokian populations (Hall 2004, 2007; Brown 2007). Early European explorers that traversed the Southeastern United States came into contact with American Indian societies that archaeologists refer to as Mississippian peoples, and who historically are known as Muskhogean-speaking groups such as the Creek, Choctaw, Chickasaw, and the Iroquoian-speaking Cherokee. Therefore the Dhegiha-Siouan and Muskhogean ethnohistoric literature are potential sources for analogs to help interpret the birds found at Cahokia.
Figure 1.1
Figure 1.1. The American Bottom region showing location of Mississippian mound centers, with an insert showing the extent of the Middle Mississippian cultural tradition. (From Kelly 2001, fig. 12.1 with permission of Michael Dietler and Brian Hayden).
Figure 1.2
Figure 1.2. Map of Central Cahokia showing location of faunal assemblages and plaza arrangement.
Figure 1.3
Figure 1.3. Birdman tablet from Cahokia Mounds Ramey Tract. (Modified from Brown and Kelly 2000, fig. 4a).

Cahokia Excavations and Contexts

The Cahokia site originally contained more than 100 earthen mounds. Monks Mound stands 30.5 m tall, covers about 6–7 ha at its base, and faces the 16 ha Grand Plaza (Holley et al. 1993). Three smaller plazas (5–12 ha) flank its three other sides (Fig. 1.2) (Kelly 1996). On the northeast edge of the Grand Plaza, about 150 m southeast of Monks Mound, stood Mound 51. In the 1960s when much of the Cahokia site was still in private ownership, this mound was removed and sold for fill-dirt. Archaeologists James Porter and Charles Bareis were allowed to conduct some excavation of the mound area prior to the final removal. They discovered that the mound was built on top of part of a reclaimed borrow pit (Bareis 1975). This pit is estimated to have measured at least 50 m north-south and 20 m east-west and was 3 m deep (Chmurny 1973; Pauketat et al. 2002). It was rapidly filled in, possibly within 1 to 3 years by seven very distinct, stratified, fill zones that were quite homogeneous across the pit. Very large amounts of material were needed to create these fills. The animal and plant preservation in these zones was extraordinary, in part because of the very rapid filling-in that created an anaerobic environment (Chmurny 1973; Kelly 2000, 2001; Pauketat et al. 2002).
The experts who performed the analyses on the very large quantity of excavated materials from sub-Mound 51 concluded they were the result of ritual feasting activity that involved large numbers of people from all segments of Cahokian society (Kelly 2000, 2001; Pauketat et al. 2002). The faunal assemblage was different from any other American Bottom site including other areas of Cahokia. It possessed classic feasting signatures including: low sample diversity (over 99% of total mammal bones were deer), high meat yielding species, bulk meat cuts, bulk cooking, little butchering debris, bones not completely broken or disarticulated, and large quantities of bone in a single deposit (Hayden 1996, Jackson and Scott 1995, Kelly 2000).
The Mound 34 area (Fig. 1.2), the second area of Cahokia with very large and significant faunal assemblages, is located northeast of Mound 51, and about 400 m directly east of Monks Mound. It is at the north edge of a line of mounds that define the western boundary of the Ramey Plaza. Past and recent investigations here are providing significant information about the site’s Moorehead phase (AD 1200–1275) occupation and about the mound’s morphology and contexts (Brown and Kelly 2000; Kelly et al. 2007). In 1950, James Griffin and Albert Spaulding (1951) conducted test excavations into the mound. In 1956 Gregory Perino (n.d.) of the Gilcrease Institute conducted extensive excavations into Mound 34. Excavations conducted by James Brown and John Kelly from 1998 to the present have been redefining Perino’s earlier work to obtain detailed profile maps and to better understand the contexts of the material he recovered, which includes finely made arrowpoints, spatulate celts, a chert spade, real and chert effigy sharks’ teeth, wooden bowl fragments, negative painted pottery sherds, copper nuggets, among other items. A fragment of an engraved marine shell cup found in the Michigan test excavations, as well as 12 fragments from the Gilcrease excavations, provided the impetus for Jim Brown and John Kelly to conduct the recent investigations. These cup fragments are engraved with Braden style designs that epitomize the Southeastern Ceremonial Complex (SECC), a late pan-Mississippian iconography that was wide-spread in the US Southeast. They can now be placed firmly in the Moorehead phase, which puts Cahokia in the mainstream of SECC development (Brown 2004; Brown and Kelly 2000). In addition, it is being revealed that this area of the site in the Moorehead phase was a significant locus where special activities, events, and religious ceremonies were taking place and indicates the site was not yet in a state of social decline (Brown and Kelly 2000, Kelly et al. 2007, Trubitt 2000) as previously thought (Emerson 1997, Pauketat 1994), although the population at the site had declined from its peak during the preceding Lohmann and Stirling phases (Milner 1998).
Perino’s excavations were approximately one acre in extent and included Mound 34 and nearby areas of the Ramey Tract to the north and west. He recovered a large quantity of well-preserved animal bone from both areas. Paul Parmalee (1957) identified nearly 9800 pieces of bone from Perino’s excavations, and published in a single list an impressive array of fauna: 10 taxa of fish, one of frog, 5 of turtle, 58 of birds, and 19 of mammals. I examined Parmalee’s original identification sheets on file at the Illinois State Museum and use the general provenience data they provide to separate the fauna from his single list into two assemblages – one from the Ramey Tract and the other from Mound 34. The Mound 34 assemblage is highlighted here. Although exact provenience data from Perino’s excavations is limited, Kelly and Brown’s recent excavations shed some light on where within Mound 34 Perino’s faunal material may have been derived.

Faunal Remains

Much of the animal bone may have come from the D zone, a deposit used in the construction of an initial platform, approximately 70 cm in thickness. Throughout the D zone are lenses or deposits of ash and charcoal and large amounts of animal bone can be observed in the profile walls. The D zone fills also extend into a large refuse trench (Feature 3) under the mound (Kelly et al. 2007). Although the context of the faunal remains from this area of the site is not as secure as those from sub-Mound 51, the amount of material suggests that feasting and other ritual activities were taking place as this stage of the mound was being created.
One of the striking features of the faunal assemblages from sub-Mound 51 and from Mound 34 is the rare bird taxa present. A total of 25 bird taxa, 13 of which are ducks, were identified from the sub-Mound 51 pit (Kelly 2000, Chmurny 1973). Two taxa, swan (Cygnus) and prairie chicken (Tympanuchus cupido) not commonly recovered archaeologically in the American Bottom region, however, together represent 37% of the bird assemblage. Three other rare bird species, bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), possible red-tailed hawks (cf. Buteo jamaicensis), and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus), are represented in low numbers by wing elements.
The Mound 34/Ramey Field area had a much greater variety of birds present with 58 taxa identified (Parmalee 1957). After isolating the remains recovered from Mound 34 from those recovered from the Ramey Tract, and after grouping the waterfowl remains into categories of swans, geese, puddle ducks, and diving ducks, the number of taxa or bird categories represented is reduced to 36. The variety of waterfowl in Mound 34 is over three times greater than was found in sub-Mound 51.
About three-fourths of the bird NISP from the 1956 Mound 34 excavations is waterfowl, which is typical for assemblages at Cahokia. Swans, however, make up 20.6% of the waterfowl remains at Mound 34 and this is unusual for the site. The remaining quarter of the Mound 34 bird assemblage reveals some other striking aspects. Nine bird species, great blue heron (Ardea herodias), swallow-tailed kite (Elanoides forficatus), red-shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus), rough-legged hawk (Buteo cf. lagopus), golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos), kestrel (Falco sparverius), Carolina parakeet (Conuropsis carolinensis), great-horned owl (Bubo virginianus), and ivory-billed woodpecker (Campephilus principalis), are not reported from any other area of Cahokia. If the area is expanded to encompass assemblages from other areas of the Ramey Plaza, an additional 15 species occur only in this area of the site: pied-billed grebe (Podilymbus podiceps), white pelican (Pelecanus erythrorhynchos), great egret (Ardea albus), American bittern (Botaurus lentiginosus), Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii), marsh hawk (Circus cyaneus), long billed curlew (Numenius americanus), woodcock (Scolopax minor), whimbrel (Numenius phaeopus), upland sandpiper (Bartramia longicauda), sanderling (Calidris alba), barn owl (Tyto alba), screech owl (Otus osio), short-eared owl (Asio flammeus), and raven (Corvus corax).
What is anomalous about the birds in these two lists is that very few, if any, would be considered food items, and therefore...

Table of contents