The Residues of Feasting and Public Ritual at Early Cahokia

Transcription

The Residues of Feasting and Public Ritual at Early Cahokia
Society for American Archaeology
The Residues of Feasting and Public Ritual at Early Cahokia
Author(s): Timothy R. Pauketat, Lucretia S. Kelly, Gayle J. Fritz, Neal H. Lopinot, Scott Elias
and Eve Hargrave
Reviewed work(s):
Source: American Antiquity, Vol. 67, No. 2 (Apr., 2002), pp. 257-279
Published by: Society for American Archaeology
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2694566 .
Accessed: 17/10/2012 17:32
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
.
Society for American Archaeology is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
American Antiquity.
http://www.jstor.org
THE RESIDUES OF FEASTING AND PUBLIC RITUAL
AT EARLY CAHOKIA
Timothy
R. Pauketat,
LucretiaS. Kelly,GayleJ.Fritz,Neal H. Lopinot,
ScottElias,andEve Hargrave
borrowpit in themiddleoftheCahokiasite
Archaeologicalremainsexcavatedfrom
thestratified
layersofa pre-Columbian
our understanding
inform
ofhow ritualeventswererelatedto thesocial and politicalfoundationsof thatenormouscenter
and extraordinary
debrisand sumptuary
Ordinary
refuse,ranging
fromfoodsand cookingpots tocraft-production
goods,are
associatedwitha seriesoflarge-scale,single-event
dumping
episodesrelatedtoactivitiesthatoccurredintheprincipalplaza.
Takenas a set,thelayersofceramic,lithic,zooarchaeological,archaeobotanical,
osteological,paleoentomological,
and sedmaterialsrevealthattheconstruction
imentological
ofCahokia'sMississippianorderwas an active,participatory
process.
Restosarqueologicosrecuperados
de la excavacio'n
de las capas estratigrdficas
de un "pozode prstamo de tierra"precolombinoen la partecentraldel sitiode Cahokiaamplfannuestroentendimiento
de comolos sucesosritualesse relacionabancon la
base socialypoliticadel enormecentro.La basuracotidianay extraordinaria
comprende
desdecomiday ollas de cocinahasta
los desechosde la produccio'n
artesanaly bienessuntuarios
y se asocian a una seriede episodiossingularesde granescala, llevadosa cabo en la plaza principal,en los cuales se depositabala basura.Tomadascomoun conjunto,
las capas de materiales
cerdmicos,
Ifticos,
arqueobotdnicos,
osteolo'gicos,
paleoentomol6gicos
y sedimentol6gicos
revelanlos mecanzooarqueol6gicos,
ismosmediantelos cuales la comunidad
y la entidadpolftica
fusionadaspara crearel ordenMississippian
de Cahokia.
fiueron
In
recentyears,explanations
at
ofsocialcomplex- an abruptand large-scale
politicalconsolidation
ityhaveprominently
featured
havebeen
commensal
poli- Cahokia(ca.A.D. 1050)wouldnecessarily
between
tics(see Deitler1996;DeitlerandHayden2001; attended
byequallylarge-scale
negotiations
views,
In
people
with
diverse
or
conflicting
"traditional"
Hayden1996;Hendon1996;Potter
east2000).
construction
ernNorthAmerica,publicritesinvolving
beliefs,
interests,
and
dispositions.
The
feasting
havebeenrecognized
tolieattheintersection
ofpeo- and use of earthen
pyramids
and plazas mayhave
2000b).For
the
embodied
these
negotiations
(Pauketat
ple and polityduring Mississippianperiod
(Muller1997; Pauketatand Emerson1991; Rees instance,
central
Cahokia's
19-ha"GrandPlaza"was
totheeleventh
century
Welch
and
Such
a
massive
labor
project
dating
1997;
Scarry1995).
feastsmayhave
then
comprised
intergroup
negotiations
led
to
A.D.
would
have
necessitated
and
enabled
that
longthat
termandlarge-scale
collective
gatherings
ona scalenotseenintheregion
socialchanges.
Withspecific
tothelargest
ofMississippian priortoA.D. 1050(Dalan 1997;Holleyetal. 1993;
regard
polities,
1994,2000a).
Pauketat
(1994,1997a,
1998b)hasargued
that Pauketat
TimothyR. Pauketat* Department
ofAnthropology,
109 Davenport
Hall,607 S. MathewsAvenue,University
of Illinois,
Urbana,IL 61801
LucretiaS. Kelly* Department
ofAnthropology,
One BrookingsDrive,CampusBox 1114,Washington
University,
St. Louis,
MO 63130
One BrookingsDrive,CampusBox 1114,Washington
GayleJ. Fritz* Department
ofAnthropology,
University,
St. Louis,
MO 63130
Neal H. Lopinot* CenterforArchaeological
Research,901 SouthNational,Southwest
MissouriStateUniversity,
Springfield,
MO 65804
ScottElias * Geography
ofLondon,Egham,Surrey,
TW20 OEX, UnitedKingdom
Department,
RoyalHolloway,University
Eve Hargrave* IllinoisTransportation
Archaeological
ResearchProgram,
209 NuclearPhysicsLab, 23 East StadiumDrive,
of Illinois,Urbana,IL 61820
University
American
Antiquity,
67(2), 2002,pp. 257-279
2002 bytheSocietyforAmerican
CopyrightO
Archaeology
257
258
AMERICAN ANTIQUITY
[Vol. 67, No. 2, 2002
Suchpublicgatherings
werenotunivariate
behav- wererefilled
andnowlie buriedbeneathor alongioralphenomena
butwerea multiplicity
ofpractices sidetheGrandPlaza (Dalan 1997).One suchearly
coordinated
as discrete
events(Bell 1997;Kellyand Cahokianborrow
pitwas encountered
bychancein
Kaplan1990;Kertzer1988).Accordingly,
individ- 1966 underMound51, a rectangular,
flat-topped
platform
approximately
150m southeast
of
ual eventsmayhavebeenquiteunlikeotherevents. earthen
The mixofhostsandattendees
andtheprovisions thelargecentral
MonksMound(Figure1).
pyramid,
andlabormobilizedfortheeventswouldhavedif- In 1961,Mound51 itselfwas beingbolTowedby
timeand,certainly,
fromregionto localresidents
ofa subdivision
forfilldirt,
promptferedthrough
of Illinois,
themodeofprovisioning
region.
Quitepossibly,
and ingCharlesJ.Bareis,oftheUniversity
thequantity
ofprovisions
W.Porter,
ofSouthern
IllinoisUniversity,
mayhavebeenuniqueat andJames
intheupper
theprocess toconductlimitedsalvageexcavations
Cahokia'sinception.
Thus,understanding
In 1966, as Porter
of negotiation-ifnotpan-eastern
Mississippian fillsof thatearthenplatform.
oftheremaining
a portion
privately
owned
social history-requires
evidenceof removed
fine-grained
cultural
deposits
whatpeople and how people came together
and moundwitha backhoe,stratified
werediscoveredbeneaththebase of Mound51.
andpolity.
forged
community
Porter'strench
and
onthisnegotia- Bareiscleanedup andprofiled
Microchronological
information
tionprocessis precisely
whatseemstoexistwithin retumed
thefollowing
summer
toconduct
additional
thesub-Mound
excavations
intowhatherecognized
as a
51 borrowpitatCahokia.Multiple controlled
'
linesofceramic,
lithic,
zooarchaeological,
archaeob- significant
anomaly.
otanical,
osteological,
paleoentomological,
andsedBareisrecognized
theanomaly
tobea refilled
borevidencearecontained
inthestratifiedrowpit.Thispitwasup to3-mdeepandmorethan
imentological
Wecon- 56-mlong(north-south)
layersofthisremarkable
subsuiface
feature.
and19-mwide(east-west);
cludethatmultiple
linesofevidence
indicate
thatthe theactualnorth-south
dimensions
mayextendupto
submound
refusewas derivedfromdiscrete
public an additional
50 m tothesouthgiventhedepthand
intheheartofCahokiathathad,as a cen- dip of thestratavisiblein Bareis's southernmost
gatherings
theconsumption
units
tralfeature,
offoods.Inthispaper, excavation
units.Bareisexcavated103-x-3-m
we highlight
theselinesofevidencetodelineate
the intothesub-Mound
51pitin1966,1967,1968,1970,
character
ofearlyCahokia'scommensal
politics. and 1971(Bareis1975;Chmurny
1973).Fivesuch
unitswereexcavatedbeneathMound 51, while
The Sub-Mound51 BorrowPit
fivewereexcavated
another
50 mtothenorth
(atthe
end of theburiedborrowpitin an area
Thecentral
oftheCahokiasiteis comprised northern
precinct
thelargest
such archaeologists
callthe"RameyField").Visibleinall
oflargeearthen
platforms,
including
inNorthAmerica,surrounding
theGrand 10 unitsat bothendsofthepitweresevenclearly
platform
owndistinct
somewiththeir
subzones.
Plaza (Figure1). Whilethemoundsin andaround defined
strata,
thiscentral
construc- All strata date to the late-eleventh-century
havedifferent
plazaprobably
tionhistories,
theGrandPlaza itselfseemstohave "Lohmann"phase(A.D. 1050-1100),basedon 12
ofdiagnosbeentheresultofa largeconstruction
effort
(Dalan radiocarbon
assaysandlargequantities
sherds(see Pauketat
andEmerson1997).
1997;Holleyetal. 1993;Pauketat
2000a; Pauketat ticpottery
to theGrandPlaza maymean
and Rees 1996). As Dalan and associateshave The pit'sproximity
oftheplaza,ifnotalso thattheaboriginal
defined
excavators
dughereforfilltolevel
it,theconstruction
theearly
theinitialstagesoftheadjacentplatforms,
oftheGrandPlaza ortoconstruct
involved portions
andfillingtheformerly
natural stagesof thecentralpyramids.
Likewise,thesubcutting
undulating
Fillforthisearth-moving
to theplaza mayhelp
surface.
wasmined Mound51 pit'sproximity
project
fromridgesthatwerebeingleveledor was "bor- explainitsapparent
rapidin-filling
(see below).
51 borrowpit'sconrowed"froma seriesoflargepits.Manyborrow
Untilnow,thesub-Mound
pits
stilldottheperipheral
ofthecentral
portions
precinct tentshavebeen subjectto limitedstudy.William
from
(Fowler1997).
Chmumy
(1973)analyzedsomeoftheremains
Giventhecontinuous
andintensive
constructionthe1966and 1967 seasonsfora doctoraldissertain Cahokia'scentralprecinct,
itis notsur- tion.Unfortunately,
the 1966 excavationswere
activity
andartifacts
werenotcollectedbystrathatsomeareaswerereclaimed;
borrow
prising
pits exploratory
Pauketat et al.]
RESIDUES OF FEASTING AND PUBLIC RITUAL AT EARLY CAHOKIA
259
0
Figure1.TheCentral
Precinct
oftheCahokiaSiteandthelocation
ofthesub-Mound
51 borrow
pit
focusedon specificzonesor
tum.Furthermore,
Chmurny
(1973) did notreport andElias necessarily
the1967datainsufficient
detailtoallow specific"bulk" samples,the latterbeing entire
quantitative
to
hundred
forcomparisons
withotherregionaldatasets(e.g., unprocessed
chunksofmatrix-several
cm3each-extracted
enmasse(see
Collins1990; Emerson1997; Holley1989; Kelly severalthousand
1991,1997;Lopinot1991,1994;Milneretal. 1984; below).The 1970sexcavations
haveyettobe anaPauketat
1993,1998b).Thus,weundertook
ananaly- lyzed,although
of those
preliminary
observations
sisofthefour3-x-3-m
unitsexcavated
artifact
assemblages
during1967 collections
byPauketat
suggest
In
and1968,whenmaterials
werecollected
bycultural similar
tothosefromthe1967-1968excavations.
stratum
(a reanalysisof some 1966 samplesdid fact,mostofthepitstillliesintactandunexcavated
locationofMound51 atCahokia.
occur).Giventhehighdensityof materialsfrom undertheformer
unitsanalyzedhererepresent
thoseunits,
andgivensomecollection
irregularities The four3-x-3-m
anda lackofflotation
vol(32 m3) ofthepit'sestimated
samples,
Kelly,Fritz,
Lopinot, about5 percent
260
AMERICAN
ANTIQUITY
[Vol.67, No. 2, 2002
Figure2. Sub-Mound51 pitproFreat S50-53,E388.
umeof3,000m3.Thisis a sizableexcavated
volume, waterlaid
layersofsiltandfinesandthatwashedover
nearlya quarter
to one-half
thetotalvolumeexca- thefilledpit sometime
just beforeor duringthe
vatedateachoftworesidential
tracts
oftheCahokia twelfth
century.
Theseare similarto mound-wash
site.2Moreover,
theanalyzed1967-1968sampleof zonesdocumented
nearbyat thebase ofCahokia's
thesubmoundrefuseis consistent
betweenexca- Mound49 andwereprobably
derivedfromprecipvatedunitswithinzones.Thesezonesincludethe itation
eventsthaterodedtheadjacentplazasurface
highestdensitiesof carbonizedand uncarbonized ortheearlystagesofMound51 itself(Pauketat
and
animalbones,fossilinsects,
plants,
broken
pots,craft Rees 1996;see also Holleyetal. 1993).
objects,icons,varioussortsofdetritus,
andpartsof
Fourzones (D2, E, F, and G) are consistently
humanskeletons
knownin trashdepositsfromthe homogeneous
fromtoptobottom,
inthickvarying
Greater
Cahokiaregion.Theminimum
numbers
of nessfroma fewcentimeters
to .5 m depending
on
andorganicremainsarecompa- thelocationat theedgeorcenteroftheborrowpit
analyzedartifacts
rablein somewaystothosefromwholeresidential (Figure3).4 Threezones(D, DI, andH) areconsistracts
at Cahokia.3In addition,
notonlyareuncar- tently
less homogeneous
butarenonetheless
combonizedarchaeobotanical
remains
uncommon
foran prisedoffinesandyloams,silts,andsiltyclaysthat
open-airsitein theeasternUnitedStates,butthe areeasilydistinguished
onefromanother.
Allofthe
locationof thepit on thenortheastern
fringeof principal
zonesarefoundthroughout
all portions
of
Cahokia'sGrandPlaza is potentially
x 19-mborrow
uniquerelative themore-than-56-m
pit,as visiblein
tootherknowndomestic
andmortuary
contexts. Bareis'sexcavation
units,someofwhicharemore
than50 m apart.It is therefore
likelythateventhe
Depositional
History
zoneswerestillrelatively
more-heterogeneous
disThesevenprincipal
fillzoneswithin
thesub-Mound cretefilling
events.Thereis littleevidencethatthe
51 pitaredesignated
D, D1, D2, E, F,G,andH (Fig- pitwasfilledwithtertiary
deposits
from
(i.e.,borrow
ure2). Threeotherupperzones(A, B, andC) are elsewhere)
exceptforpartofzoneD (inwhichsome
Pauketat et al.]
RESIDUES OF FEASTING AND PUBLIC RITUAL AT EARLY CAHOKIA
261
Sub-Mound51 PitCompositeProfile@ S49
building
thatpost-dates
walltrenchofMississippian
thesub-mound
pitand pre-datesMound51
excavatedsurfacebeneathMound51
E396
E392
\E393
/
E389
E388
......--_
''-'''
.....................
...
.. .
.......................,,,.,,.............-.--......
. : .e
',',. . ................
......................,--':::...............,l
E385
...
;; projectedimitsoffillzones ..........
. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . . .
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,................S...I
pit
projectedbase ofborrow
unexcavated
Figure3. A profileofthecentraleast-westunitsofthesubmoundexcavations.
20-30-cm"basket-loading"
isevident),
zoneE (anearthen
man- natedwaterlaid
siltsor sands),another
tleoverzone F), andpossiblycertainsubzonesof thicklayerof refuse-laden
fill,zone G (withtwo
zoneH. Thus,incidental
artifactual
admixture
from subzones),was depositedatopzone H. Then,and
a thick
earlieroccupations
atCahokiais minimal.
Instead, againwithout
signsofprolonged
weathering,
mostlygrassstems(probaand ignoring
theorganicdecomposition
and post- layerofplantmaterial,
ofthefills,theestimates blyroofthatch),
was laidintothepit,appearing
to
depositional
compression
ofzonevolumeforthewholepitindicate
thatexceed- coverorfillitinitsentirety.
ThiszoneF thatch
then
inglylargeamounts
ofdebrisweredumpeddirectly appearseitherto have been burnedin place,and
intothepitovera shortperiodof time(Table 1). immediately
coveredwithzone E earth,or,more
sterile
earth
first
Therefore,
thebestexplanation
forthedeposition
of likely,
coveredwitha layerofnearly
mostzones is thatmaterialswerecollectedfrom (thatcontained
a highdensity
ofants).Inthesecond
large,relatively
discrete
eventsand sweptintothe scenario,thethatchbelow seemsto have spontapitatonetimeorovera short
period.Forthisreason neouslycombusted,
burning
muchof thezone F
alone it seemsunlikely
thatthepitcontainsmere thatchand theoverlying
zone E loamysilt;some
(again,
remained
uncarbonized
of Cahokianhouseholddebris,as lowerlevelsofthatch
accumulations
inChmumy's
implicit
(1973) earlierstudy.
forthespontaneous
combustion
scenario).
arguing
Thedepositional
history
maybereconstructed
as The quantity
ofthatch
was suchthat,afterburning
zoneF stillmeasured
up to
follows.AftertheCahokiansexcavatedtheborrow andlatercompression,
amount
oftimewith 30-cmthick.
vitrified
pit,itsatopenforanuncertain
Thefrequent
globules
irregular
intothepitbottom. ofplantsilicamarktheintensity
ofthezoneF incinsomerefusedisposaloccurring
Thatthishugegapingholesatopenforovera year eration.
is demonstrated
bya thick,
odorous,
preserved
layer
NextcamezoneD2, atopzoneE. Zone D2 is a
ofuncarbonized
marshgrassinthepitatthislowest consistent
zone comprisedof threesubzones-a
level.Itspreservation
also meansthatmuchofthe lower,thinlayerofsand,a lensofash,andanorganfillontop.Owingtoitsconsubsequent
fill,zoneH, wasa singlemassivefilling icallyrich,artifact-heavy
of
alivethemarshgrass.However,
the sistency
acrossthe50-mlength
and19-mbreadth
event,burying
extent
towhichthefiveorso subzonesreflect
diverse thesubmound
pit,zoneD2 appearsto havebeena
fillsourceshauledin to coverthegrassis unclear. tightly
spaceddepositional
sequencealso involving
Whatis certain
is thatzoneH marksthebeginning incineration.
Atopthiswas zoneDl, againlacking
inthevarsurface
erosion
ofa consecutive
seriesofmassivefillepisodes,each obvioussignsofprolonged
theprevious
iousprofiles
andagaincontaining
burying
entirely
layer.
pocketsofashin
obvioussignsofweathering
Without
(i.e.,lami- itsloamysilttosiltyclayfill.Thefinalzone,D, was
262
AMERICAN ANTIQUITY
[Vol. 67, No. 2, 2002
Table 1. Fill Characteristics
andVolumeEstimatesBased on the1967-1968Sub-Mound51 Excavations.
Zone
D
Dl
D2
E
F
G
H
Total
ExcavatedVolume
Cubic meters
13.62
3.66
3.64
.48
.72
2.66
6.85
31.63
MinimumEstimatedVolumeof
EntirePit (cubicmeters)a
1292
347
345
46
68
252
650
3000
N of Zones/
Subzones
?5
3
3
1
1
<2
?5
Fill Description
loamysiltsandclays
loamysilts,pocketsofash,siltyclays
loam,ash,siltyclay
loamysilt
charredgrassand sandysiltloam
loamysiltsandclays
loamysiltsandsandysiltloams
fromBareis 1975:figure
18 andestimated
of60 x 19 x 2.65 m.
aGivenadditionalinformation
averagedimensions
ofbeeclearlydepositedas severalfillevents,including zoneD2. Thisis matched
bya highdensity
ofall sortsinzonesG andH (carsomeintentional
loadsofsiltyandclayeyearth.
Sub- tles(Coleoptera)
sequentto beingcompletely
filled,and afterthe rioneaters,planteaters,and predators)and an
beetlesinzoneE. Richplant
depositssettled,at leasttwo largeMississippian absenceofplant-eating
buildings
wereconstructed
atoptheredeposited
sed- and animalwasteswereapparently
discardedin
iments.
Then,sandsandsiltswashedoverthefloors zonesD, G,andH andwereexposedtotheelements
ofthesebuildings
leavingbehindthelaminated
and forsufficient
time,severaldaystoseveralweeks,to
iron-mottled
zonesA, B, andC. Notlongafter
this, allowinsectcolonization.
may
ThezoneD2 detritus
depotheconstruction
orenlargement
ofMound51 itself havebeenburiedrelatively
quicklyfollowing
coveredoverthearea of thesouthern
excavation sitionand thusattracted
fewerflies.Zone E was
initsfewinsects,
unliketheother
lownitrounits.
pitstrata
ofthedisposaleventsrep- genlevels,fewartifacts,
thetiming
andnumerous
ants(probaObviously,
resented
in thesub-Mound
51 pitis keyto under- bly exterminated
whenthezone-Fthatchburned
The frombelow).
standingwhateach layerof fillrepresents.
ofzoneE, all
paleoentomological
analysisof insectremains,
by
Thus,withthepossibleexception
Elias,establishes
someparameters
surrounding
the ofthesubmound
pitzonescontained
sizablequanofrefusein theborrowpit.A minimum titiesof insectsactiveduringthe warmmonths
deposition
AprilandOctober.
Somezonescouldhave
of 146 insectswas extractedfrom6 previously between
openfora fullyear,although
theabsence
unprocessed
bulksamples(totaling
6250 cm3)of6 remained
thatanyzoneswere
principal
zonesusinga kerosene
flotation
procedure ofweathering
makesitunlikely
formuchmorethanthat.In
(Table2; see Elias 1994).5In termsof numberof exposedtotheelements
thesub-Mound
insectspercm3,ants(Hymenoptera)
aremostcom- short,
51 pitwasdug,satopenforat
probably
zoneH. Therem- leasta year,andwasthenin-filled
rapidly,
montozoneE and,tolesserextent,
nantexuvialcasingsofflypupae(Diptera)aremost overno morethana fewyearswithout
significant
commontozonesD, G, andH, andlesscommonin depositional
hiatuses.The heterogeneous
textures
Table2. InsectRemainsfromSub-Mound51, 1967-1968.
Numberof IndividualSpecimens
Zone
D
SampleSize (ccm)
1,200
Dl
notanalyzed
D2
825
E
475
F
3,275
G
175
H
300
Total
6,250
Coleoptera Hymenoptera Diptera
4
12
18
-
-
-
5
2
18
32
16
85
1
12
1
5
23
3
10
2
5
38
Density(NIS/cubicmeter)
Coleoptera
100
-
61
42
55
1,829
533
2,620
Hymenoptera Diptera
33
150
-
-
12
253
3
167
468
63
31
114
167
525
-
RESIDUES OF FEASTING AND PUBLIC RITUAL AT EARLY CAHOKIA
Pauketat et al.]
263
Table3. Summary
ofFaunalMaterialsIdentified
fromtheSub-Mound51 Pit.
Zones
KellyAssemblage
Mammals
NISP
Fish
Not Identified
Totals
%Total
1,553
2,681
57.9
583
215
1
4
3
8
2
2
-
206
2
2
25
30
265
5.7
#Taxa
5
2
4
7
873
-
1
NISP
2
261
27
1,163
25.1
#Taxa
9
-
1
7
4
NISP
NISP
NISP
#Taxa
Reptiles
H
295
#Taxa
DeerMNIb
Fish
G
1
1
Assemblage
Chinurn1y
Birds
F
35
NotIdentified NISP
Total
NISP
Mammals
E
3
14
#Taxa
Deer MNIa
Birds
D2
NISP
#Taxa
NISP
#Taxa
NISP
Total
NISP
aKelly%NISP Deer
%NISP Deer
bChmurny
-
274
2,906
37
25
324
175
1,044
44
316
518
4,627
11.2
2,847
159
392
647
250
4,295
40.4
1
5
4
9
5
8
2
5
36
327
363
109
6
23
1,363
21
1,549
11
1
1
4
27
1
-
-
-
5,760
99.8
99.2
222
100.0
100.0
11
1,040
11
-
1,759
100.0
99.0
thefinalzone,D, probably
andsubzoneswithin
representseveralfillingepisodes,theadditionalfill
beingpackedintoorpiledatopthepitas itsettled.
As evidenced
bythezonecontents,
theformer
borrowpitwas excavatedandcompletely
filledwithin
the50-year
spancalledtheLohmann
phasethatsaw
theplannedconstruction
ofCahokia'scentral
monumental
landscape.
15
1,359
9
2
-
2,198
-
12
155
4,130
6
-
-
20.7
-
38.9
3
1
2,371
99.5
98.6
-
514
10,626
98.6
99.6
-
51 faunalsamless,itispossiblethatthesub-Mound
ple maybe biasedtowardlargeranimals,butthe
at thistime.Fish
degreeof thebias is uncertain
bytherecovery
techremains
maybe mostaffected
niquesemployed.
However,
becauseofthehighlevel
ofcareandthoroughness
ofBareis'sexcavation
(see
Chmumy1973),theamountofbias is assumedto
be mitigated
toa largedegree.
Only faunalremainsthatcould be definitely
Zooarchaeological
Remains
zonewereanalyzed;therefore,
assignedtoa specific
Faunalremains
fromzones
wererecovered
invarying
particularly
amounts largeamountsof material,
fromall zonesofthesubmound
pit.Somematerials D and D 1, were not includedbecause in many
fromthe1967fieldseasonwereexamined,
butthe instances
zoneshadbeenmixed.Here,we focuson
majority
studiedwas fromthe1968season.Faunal thetwozones,D2 andG,from
the1968excavations
remainswererecoveredthrough
handexcavation analyzedbyKellythatyieldedthelargestamounts
and fromthemechanizedscreeningof sediment offaunaldebris.ZoneE didnothaveenoughfaunal
(NISP = 37),
tomakerelevant
observations
through
a quarter-inch
mesh(Chmumy
1973).Bulk material
samplesofsediment
andthatch
comweresubsampled
and whilezonesF andH yieldedsmallassemblages
intheWashington
dryfine-screened
University
pale- prisedof fewtaxa(Table3). Mammalianremains
lab andexaminedforsmallbones.A accounted
oethnobotany
forall 299bonesinzoneF exceptfortwo
deer
fewfishbonesand scaleswereobservedbutmost birdbonesand twofishbones.White-tailed
bonespresent
wereunidentifiable
was theonlymammalian
fragments.
Thus, (Odocoileusvirginianus)
boneswere
it was determined
thatthequantity
All othermammalian
of identifiabletaxonidentified.
bonein thesesampleswas insignificant.
Nonethe- putintothelargemammal
andaremorethan
category
264
AMERICAN
ANTIQUITY
[Vol.67, No. 2, 2002
is borneoutby a Spearman'srho
of preservation
correlation
runon bulkbone densitythatshowed
70.
animalunits)and bone density
MAU (minimum
correlated
(p = .2312forzone
werenotsignificantly
andMAU,
D2; p = .4457forzone G). Food utility
forbothzones
correlated
however,
weresignificantly
(p < .0001,see Kelly2000).As canbe seeninFig140
deerpartsaremuch
ure4,bothhigh-andmid-utility
deerwerereturned
ifa complete
higher
thanexpected
to thesite(see Kelly2000 formorecompletedisWhenfoodutility
is comcussionoffoodutility).
10
areaofCahokia,the
paredtotheICT-Ilresidential
bya higher
persub-Mound
51 deerarerepresented
0
MidUtety
OWUtility
HighUtility
of
and a lowerpercentage
centageof mid-utility
Food ut
kbix
of
high-utility
parts.Thismayindicatetheportions
of white-tailed
deer eleFigure4. Contrastingproportions
in
were
chosen
more
deer
the
submound
assemblage
ments.
thanforthecombined
of
utility
forthemeatutility
thattheseutillikelydeer.OfthoseinzoneF,53percent
ofthemam- meat,bonegrease,andbonemarrow
malianboneswereburned
to somedegree,indicat- ityindicesmeasure(Binford1978; Metcalfeand
and
ingperhapsthemorefragilebirdandfishremains Jones1988;Purdueetal. 1989).Bone marrow
ThezoneH assemblage greasemayhavebeenmoredesiredinthedomestic
weredestroyed
byburning.
ofthetotal context
ina higher
ofhigh-utilresulting
proportion
yieldedmoretaxathanF,but86 percent
Thenearcompleteness
number
ofindividual
specimens
(NISP) was mam- itydeerpartsbeingpresent.
offewlong
ofthebonefrom
zoneH exhib- ofmanyforelimb
bonesandthepresence
mals.Only9 percent
in thesubmound
assemblagealso
ited burningand few bones (NISP = 2) were bonefragments
forbone
indicate
thatdeerboneswerenotprocessed
weathered.
Bonesfrom
zone
TheanimalbonesfromzonesD2 andG arevery greaseorheavilyforbonemarrow.
intheGreater G exhibit
someweathering
andcarnivore
different
from
elsewhere
gnawing,
assemblages
northedepth
other
areasoftheCahokia butneither
exposureto theelements
Cahokiaregion,
including
siteitself.
Onlythree
reptile
bones,onebeinga drilled of thezone G depositappearsto havenegatively
theassemblage.
alligatortoothfoundin 1967 in zone D2, and no affected
birdandfish
remainswererecovered
fromthesubamphibian
OnlyzoneD2 yieldedappreciable
andfewerthan
moundpit.In bothzoneD2 andG, however,
there remains
fromthe1968excavations,
is a largeamount
ofwhite-tailed
ofspecieswereidentified
(Table
deer(NISP = 1653; theaveragenumber
MNI = 22). OutsideCahokiaproper,
deerremains 3). Itshouldbenotedthattheassemblages
Chmurny
atcontemporary
American
Bottom (1973)reported
from
the1966and1967excavations
arenotabundant
morefishandbirdtaxa.The specieshe
sites(Kelly2000).Axialbones,including
ribs,ver- contained
aremostcommon identified
werethesame as
mostoften,however,
tebrae,
scapulae,andinnominates
in thesubmound
(Kelly
fromthe 1968 excavations
pit,although
upperforeandhind thoseidentified
in zone
limbsarealso morenumerous
thanexpected(Fig- 2000). Onlyfivebirdtaxawereidentified
indomesure4). A number
ofdeerbonesfrom
zoneD2 appear D2; usuallytwiceas manyareidentified
in orderof
to articulate,
sectionsof thoracicand ticcontexts
particularly
(L. Kelly1997).Identified
Elements
withlowstructural
wereswans(Olorsp.orOlor
lumbar
vertebrae.
den- descending
frequency
andscapulaeusually buccinator),
chickens
cupido),
(Tympanuchus
sities-vertebrae,
innominates,
prairie
or nonexistent
in manyassem- Canadageese (Brantacanadensis),commonmerquitefragmentary
and mallard(Anas
blages-arerelatively
coplete inzonesD2 andG. gansers(Mergusmerganser),
elements
About72 percent
oflow-density
recovered platyrhynchos).
in zone D2 are
fromzoneD2 and86 percent
ofthesefromzoneG
Overhalfthebirdsrepresented
areatleasthalfcomplete.
Thisis anindication
ofthe swans; another28 percentof the zone D2 bird
in thispit.The highlevel remains
areprairie
chickens.
Swanbonesfromconexceptional
preservation
90o
I:-
I:
Pauketat et al.]
RESIDUES OF FEASTING AND PUBLIC RITUAL AT EARLY CAHOKIA
265
temporary
sitesin theregionarerareoccurrences. are definite
or probablefoods.In addition,about
Theyarelimited
tomodified
wingbonesprimarily 22,000 nonfoodspecimensfrom40 samplescolmeshscreens,
atsubsidiary
centers
(see Kelly2000foranin-depth lectedby Bareis,usingquarter-inch
discussion).
Remainsofprairiechickens
fromMis- weresortedbyLopinotintocarbonized
anduncarthatwerethenfurther
sampled
elsewhereat Cahokiaare only bonizedcategories
sissippianfeatures
from
elitecontexts
(L. Kelly1997).Thelimited
Mis- foranalysis.
Morethan30 different
of thesetwobirdspeciesat
sissippiandistribution
typesofedibleplantsare
inzonesD through
H,thelatter
contamtheuniquequal- represented
Cahokiaandintheregion
highlights
itiesof thesubmound
refuse.In thesubmound
pit inatedbynatural
marshvegetation
(Tables4 and5).
orcultivated
there
arenoswanwingelements
plantsincludecorn(Zea
present
andnoswan Domesticated
bones exhibitbutchery
marksor otherformsof mays),bottlegourd(Lagenaria siceraria),two
humanmodification.
Perhapsthesubmound
swans speciesof squash(Cucurbitapepo and Cucurbita
wereprocessedfortheirwingsandfeathers,
rather argyrosperma,
seeFritz1994),sunflower
(Helianthus
werecommonly
used annuusvar.macrocarpus),
thanforfood.Swanfeathers
sumpweed(Iva annua
inrituals
during
thehistoric
period(see Kelly2000, var. macrocarpa), chenopod (Chenopodium
2001).
berlandieri
ssp.jonesianum),maygrass(Phalaris
in zone caroliniana),
Like avianspecies,fisharerepresented
anderectknotweed
(Polygonum
erecD2 byfewtaxa.Ordinarily,
domesticsitesproduce tum).Fourgeneraofnuts(Caryaspp.,Juglans
nigra,
largeassemblages
ofas manyas twodozenormore Quercussp.,andCorylus
americana)arerepresented
taxa.Whilethelackoffine-mesh
screened
samples alongwithninekindsofsweetorsourfruits:
grape
inthe1968collection
mayunderrepresent
fish,
espe- (Vitissp.),persimmon
straw(Diospyros
virginiana),
fromlargeriverfishsuch berry
ciallysmallones,remains
(Fragariavirginiana),
plum(Prunussp.),bramas buffalo-sucker
(Sambucuscanadensis),
(Ictiobus
sp.),gar(Lepisosteus
sp.), ble (Rubussp.),elderberry
and freshwater
are blackhaw(Viburnum
sp.),mulberry
(Morussp.),and
drum(Aplodinotus
grunniens)
moreabundant
in zone D2 thanbackwater
(Solanumcf.ptycanthum).
Seeds from
species nightshade
fromordinary
plants
thatmight
havebeengathered
forgreens
commonly
recovered
domesticmid- native
orharvested
dens(L. Kelly1997).
as smallgrainsincludeamaranth
(Amaranthus
sp.),purslane
(Portulaca
oleracea),panicoid
Remains
Archaeobotanical
grasses(Digitariasp.,Leptolomasp.,and/or
Panand
Differences
betweenthesubmound
faunalremains icumsp.), carpetweed
(Mollugoverticillata),
and
domestic
assem- spurges
(Acalyphasp.,Euphorbiacf.corollata,
andthoseofother
Lohmann-phase
Thesamemaybe said Euphorbiacf.maculata).
observable.
blagesarereadily
Therichness
The
oftheplantassemblage
is increased
ofsome,butnotall,archaeobotanical
remains.
sub-Mound
51 plantremainsstandapartfromtypi- by thepresenceof uncarbonized
specimens,but
as wellas uncharred
seeds
notonlybytheuncarbonized manytaxaincludecharred
cal domestic
middens
ofmanyofthem,butalso bytheirsheer (Table 4). The analyzedsubmoundassemblage,
condition
all otherclassesofartifacts includingsamplesreported
by Chmurny,
yielded
quantity,
outnumbering
and bones combined.Unfortunately,
as Bareis's morethan3,000squashseeds,allbuta fewfragments
with
Hundreds
wereassociated
excavations
offlotation beinguncarbonized.
predatethestandardization
intheCahokiaarea,manyhand- thesamplesfromeach submound
zone exceptDl
recovery
techniques
collectedor water-screened
submoundarchaeob- andE. Sometimes
squashseedsfrombulksamples
withmaterial
resemotanicalsamplesareless amenableto quantitativewerestucktogether
andcovered
thathad
Themanyhand-collected
offruits
analysis.
samplesarevalu- blingdriedpulp,as ifthecontents
left
to flotation
or,alternatively,
able,butnotcomparable
assemblages. beenscoopedoutanddiscarded
fruits.
wasgiventoa seriesof20 previously todecayalongwithpiecesofrindsorentire
Thus,attention
Giventhedensityof otheruncarbonized
bulksampleslikethosenotedearlier,
unprocessed
plant
and a singlesamplelabeled"FloatedAsh."These remains,it is perhapssurprisingthatonly one
richinseedsandother
cornspecimen-acupulefragment-was
samples,
phenomenally
plant uncharred
intheanalyzed
wereanalyzedbyFritzandstudents,
result- found
remains,
assemblage.
Chmurny's
(1973)
ofthecornfrom
the1967excavations
revealed
of50taxa,atleast30ofwhich study
ingintheidentification
AMERICAN ANTIQUITY
266
[Vol. 67, No. 2, 2002
Table4. FruitsandEconomicSeed TypesfromSub-Mound51.
Total
Zone D
Fruits
Persimmon
Strawberry
Zone D2
Zone G
Zone H
Zone Unknown Charred
Uncharred
4
9
3
3
2
5
16
-
26
212
98
1
17
3
-
-
336
1
49
Plum
-
-
-
Bramble (Rubus sp.)
Elderberry
-
2
1
29
7
Nightshade
6
66
139
-
-
1
-
-
6
3
-
-
423
7
11
740
1
537
-
Blackhaw
-
-
-
Grape
5
30
41
526
1
45
Mulberry
-
5
22
1
-
-
28
1
-
25
2
4
5
11
3
4
3
3
3
42
10
-
-
NativeSeed Crops
Sunflower
Sumpweed
Chenopod:
charreda
thin-testa
uncharred
uncharred
thick-testa
Maygrass
ErectKnotweed
Barley
OtherEconomicSeed Types
PanicoidGrasses
Amaranthb
Purslaneb
Carpetweed
-
12
2
51
364
134
-
22
8
150
15
-
67
55
301
1,442
244
-
-
-
29
126
316
389
66
18
50
294
58
36
-
-
-
145
4
60
4,299
469
2
271
6,552
882
2
170
208
987
23
16
147
233
32
283
928
1,361
2,151
1,352
31
10
48
40
10
133
90
1
128
11
Spurge (Euphorbia spp.)
aMostcharTed
chenopodseedsappearto be thin-testa.
bMostamaranth
andpurslaneseedswereuncharred,
buttheywerenotsortedintocharredvs. uncharred.
-
237
1,022
-
67
-
1,394
703
5,942
144
341
238 cobfragments
inzoneF (outofa totalof263 in squashseedsandpaucity
ofcorn,andunlikethelow
his sample,all charred).Zone D1, by contrast, speciesdiversity
of thezooarchaeological
assemyieldedno cob fragments;
zone D2 yieldedfour; blage,thesubmound
plantfoodassemblageis as
ker- diverse
as anordinary
domestic
assemblage.
Inorder
zoneG had14;andzoneH hadseven.Charred
withonefromzone ofabundance,
ranksatthetopofthestarchy
nelsweresimilarly
distributed,
maygrass
zone seed remains,withmorethan6,500 seeds sorted
D 1,29from
zoneD2,23 from
zoneE, 687from
F, 19fromzoneG, andsevenfromzoneH. Someof fromthebulksamples.A totalof 1,530chenopod
andthin-testa
forms,
thesecob fragments
andwholekernelscouldhave seedsincludeboththick-testa
been previously
removedby Chmurny
frombulk the latter being domesticated, dark-coated
samplesanalyzedrecently
atWashington
University Chenopodium
berlandierissp.jonesianum.Erect
inSt.Louis,butChmurny's
lowcountsofcornfrom knotweed,
thenextmostabundant
starchy
seedtype
a foodcropas well.
all zones exceptzone F matchtherelatively
low (n = 949,was almostcertainly
numbers
offragments
remaining
(seeTable5). Sim- Mostknotweed
from
thepitarenakedkerspecimens
in newlysoitedsam- nels,andmostofthepericarps
ilarlylow densities
occurred
aresmooth
rather
than
ples fromthe 1968 excavations,
whichwerenot striate-papillose.
Littlebarley(Hordeum
pusillum),
is strangely
absent,withtheonlytwobarand appearedto havehad however,
analyzedby Chmurny
of leyspecimens
nothing
separated
fromthem.The low visibility
resembling
H. jubatum.
corn-charredor uncharred-inthesamplesfrom
Exceptforbarleygrass,nativestarchy
seedcrops
in thesame orderof
sub-Mound51 indicatesthatrelatively
littlecorn fromthepitare represented
inthefirst
abundanceas thoserecoveredby flotation
from
wasdeposited
place.
Otherthanthe prominenceof uncarbonized Cahokia's Interpretive
CenterTract-Il(ICT-1I).
Pauketat et al.]
RESIDUES OF FEASTING AND PUBLIC RITUAL AT EARLY CAHOKIA
cn
267
0
t
V
00
cq \I
kr
v OC 3 : '?vc~~~~~~~~OC
cq
| g~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~c
u
r: |s
:
=
0<k)
t
s OC
4 M:_
k|3c>
kr):0001Xc
Nt
)
|
s
4-c
C
5
OC
>_
c
>
(01 C )cq
|
C
>
s
-
ff f
)rO9
X
t
A
>
2
C1It
2
4
rn
X
s
7
268
AMERICAN ANTIQUITY
[Vol. 67, No. 2, 2002
Lopinot(1991)foundmaygrass
seedstobethemost
Lopinotrandomlyselectedsubsamplesof 50
abundant
(n = 269) inthosedomestic
wood specimens
contexts,
fol- carbonizedand50 uncarbonized
lowedbybarley(n = 234),chenopod(n = 161),and fromeachofthe40 sortedwoodsamplescollected
erectknotweed
(n= 47).TheICT-I1seedsweresorted by Bareis. Judgingfromthesesubsamples,carfrom189litersoffloatedfeature
filltakenfrom15 bonizedwoodis moreabundant
inzonesD, D 1,D2,
external
pits,oneinternal
pit,andfourstructures,
a andE, whileuncarbonized
woodis moreabundant
thathighlights
notofdifferential
comparison
theabundanceofsmall in zonesF, G, andH, a function
butofincomplete
burning
intheselatseedsintheunfloated
bulksamplesfrom
sub-Mound preservation
51. Nativecropseedsoutnumber
corninLohmann terthreezones.Uncarbonized
barkis particularly
atICT-I1as theydointhesub-Mound abundant
in mostofthesamples,comprising
phasedeposits
over
51 pit,butnotbyas greata margin.
Lopinotreports one-halfof thewoodymaterialsfromsix of the
inthesam259 cupulesor glumesand 174 kernelfragmentssevenzones.Itis noticeably
infrequent
fromtheICT-I1,givinga cornto starchy
at about10 percent
seedratio ples fromzone D2, estimated
of.541compared
to .023forthenewlysortedsam- of over 1,400specimens.Thenagain,small,terofeastern
redcedar(Juniperus
virples fromsub-Mound
51 (excluding
uncarbonized minalbranchlets
inzoneD2. A totalof
of giniana)treesareprominent
seeds).Thisis duein largeparttothethousands
charred
seedsin thepit,manyof which 44 branchlets,
werefoundinthe
maygrass
all uncarbonized,
occurin clumps.Theseratiosneedto be carefully zone-D2bulksamples.
considered
byarchaeologists
whoassumethatcorn
One of themoststriking
aspectsof theuncardominated
bothdietandritualsymbolism
great
forearly bonizedwooddataforthepitis therelatively
Cahokians.
abundance
ofuncarbonized
coniferous
wood,includAll 700 amaranth
seedsfromsub-Mound
baldcypress
(Taxodium
and
51 are ingredcedar,
distichum),
inthe
black-coated
flattish,
typesthat,likethethick-testapine(Pinusspp.).Allthreewoodsarepresent
chenopod,
mayeitherrepresent
foodor incidental domestic
middens
ofCahokia'sICT-I1,severalhunPurslaneis extremely
weedyinclusions.
common, dredmeterssouthof Mound 51 (Figure 1; see
with5,920seedsactuallycountedandtensofthou- Lopinot1991). However,theyare seldomif ever
sandsmoreintheunsorted
residueofothersamples. associated
withdomestic
refuse
outsideofCahokia.6
wereverycommonin Manyoftheuncarbonized
cypresswoodfragments
Grapesandpersimmons
conthepit.One samplefroman uncertain
provenience anda fewoftheredcedarandpinespecimens
fromzone D2 or G) sistofthinsplitpieceswithroughly
parallelsides.
(excavatedin 1966,probably
consistedof 400 uncarbonized
grapeseeds,with Someofthesethinpiecescouldhavebeenderived
driedskinsofthefruits
stilladhering,
the fromdiscardedfragments
of basketry
or matting,
resembling
summer
by-products.
grape(Vitisaestivalis).Zone G was espe- butmostare probablywoodworking
with41 grape Thin,butirregular-sided
chipsandsplintered
fragciallyrichin grapesandotherfruits,
seeds comingfromone sample,along with212 ments,
withcutmarks,
occurinmanyof
sometimes
thesamples.Few piecesofcarbonized
wood,most
strawberry
seeds,28bramble
(blackberry/raspbenry,
fromuplandforests
etc.) seeds,and 139 Americannightshade
seeds, oftenwhiteoaksandhickories
whosefruits
arenottoxicwhenfullyripe(Heiser overthree-km
away,appearto havebeen shaped.
wouldhave
Thesehardwoods,
unliketheconifers,
1969).
theprincipal
fuelforfires.
Ofthenonfood
tobaccoseedswerefound comprised
plants,
inlargenumbers
in zonesD andD2 andinsmaller
Items
numbersin the otherzones. The totalcountof Pots,CraftDebris,andMagicoritual
tobaccoseedsfromsortedsubsamplesis 917, but Theremaining
material
culture,
analyzedbyPaukeresiduesofthebulksamplescontainthou- tat,revealsthesubmound
unsorted
pittobeinsomewaysordiThequalitative
sandsmore.Thehighest
concentration
ofcarbonized naryandinother
waysextraordinary.
of mostindividual
vesselsin the
anduncarbonized
tobaccoseedsis inzoneD, atthe attributes
pottery
pitarenotunique.Mostpottery
vessels,
topofthepit.Mostoftheseseedsdo notconform submound
to thefamiliar
Nicotianarustica, especiallycookingjars,aretypicalCahokianvarimorphologically
ceramic
backmorecloselyNicotianaquadrivalvis
or eties;theystandoutagainsta regional
butresemble
N. multivalvis.
butnotagainsta purely
Cahokianone(Table
ground
Pauketat et al.]
RESIDUES OF FEASTING AND PUBLIC RITUAL AT EARLY CAHOKIA
269
Table6. Pottery
VesselsbyZone, 1967-1968Sub-Mound51 Excavations.
Zone
Jars
D
DI
D2
E
F
158
33
53
G
H
Total
Seed
Jars
Bowls/
Beakers
Funnels/
Stumpware
Hooded
Bottles
24
10
7
6
1
-
-
-
1
-
221
58
83
5
26
3
1
12
1
1
2
197
133
723
1
-
8
6
33
15
22
4
11
113
73
439
43
31
121
37
27
149
Total
-
Table7. CeramicCookingJarOrificeDiameters,1967-1968Sub-Mound51 Excavations.
Zone 6-9
D
3
Dl
NumberofVesselsbyOrificeDiameterRange(cm)
10-13 14-17 18-21 22-25 26-29
30-33 34-37 38-41 42-45
12
15
25
15
22
8
7
7
25
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
1
4
17
14
14
1
15
6
1
2
8
13
5
3
3
72
42
66
45
16
16
10
couldnotbe measuredonjars represented
Note:Orificediameters
bysmallrimsherds.
1
-
-
8
1
3
6
1
1
7
95
63
378
-
5
9
-
13
11
-
1
G
3
H
5
Total12
1
7
7
32
1
12
12
54
-
-
2
7
1
1
3
3
2
1
4
1
1
-
total
145
-
2
3
-
D2
E
F
1
-
46-49 50-53
1
5
-
26
40
been
sizesandsooting
matchthe diskbeads. Such necklaceshavepreviously
6).7 Cooking-jar
patterns
standard
profile
ofdomestic
assemblages
(e.g.,Table foundonlyin special centralmortuaries
around
7). Thatis,thecookingactivities
represented
bysub- Cahokia.
Thenagain,
andindomestic
moundpotsparallela domestic
pattern.
Alsoinoneofthesemortuaries,
thelargesizeofindividual
vesselfragments,
theden- refuseon Cahokia's Tract 15A, are numerous
projectilepoints(see Fowler1991;
sitiesofbroken
vesselsand,tolesserextent,
thepro- Cahokia-style
domestic Fowleretal. 2000; Pauketat1998a).Thesearerepportions
ofvesselforms
areunlikeordinary
thesubmound
intheanalyzedsamplesfrom
assemblages(e.g.,Figure5; see Pauketat1998a). resented
a disproportionately
Seedjarscomprise
largenumPoibryVessl Assemblages
ber-overa quarter-ofthetotalnumber
ofceramic
vesselsfrom
lowerzonesF,G,andH (Table6),while
60 i
a distinctive
beakeror
varietyof brownfineware
50.F1IT1A
ofcontemporary
restwopercent
bowl-ordinarily
identialceramicrefuse(see Holley1989;Pauketat
inthesubmound
entirely
pit.
1998a)-is missing
thismixof
Otherartifacts
helpus understand
andextraordinary
evidence(Table
ordinary
pottery
ofbeadmanufacture,
save
8). Thereis scantevidence
10.
threebrokenmarine-shell
diskbeads,one broken
marine-shell
columellabead,
and21 fractured
pieces
ofmarineshellintheanalyzedlayersofthepit(cf.
Bote
Jr
Bowl
Sed Jr
Fuwel
VeYd Type
Pauketat
notrepresenting
evidence
1993).Although
formanufacturing
there
arealsofiveAncuactivities,
Figure 5. Comparisonof potteryvessel type proportions
losa snail-shell
beads,oneMarginella
bead,andone betweena Lohmannphase Cahokian domesticassemblage
entirebead necklacemadeup of 345 marine-shell(Tract15A) and thesub-Mound51 Pit.
-r
llL
ap20
AMERICAN
ANTIQUITY
270
[Vol.67, No. 2, 2002
use, and disposalof shellbeadsand
manufacture,
ofpigment
usagepointsto
the
pattern
arrowheads,
4600 - U Sandstone
ofmatemanipulation
anactiveandlikelyritualized
Basalt
4000 activities.
as partoftherefuse-producing
rialculture
Che.
35
3- , o3Burlington
vesselsor
ofpottery
Thereareatleastfourinstances
vesselsthathadbeenusedtomix
ofpottery
portions
or dispensered and black paint,as revealedby
15000
andsmudgesoftheresidues
smears,encrustations,
~2000seemstohave
thekaolinite
In
addition,
themselves.
cp1500
white
of
a
paintapplied
been
the
basal
component
1000
refired.
to a suiteof vesselsthatwerethenlightly
500
Therearea totalof28 paintedpotsintheexcavated
0
pit,abouttwicethetotal
thesubmound
samplefrom
SubMd Zone D2 SubMd Zone G
Tract15A
the
restofCahokiaand
from
pots
number
of
such
Asembla
Halfofthe
relatedLohmannphasesitescombined.
90
vesselsarebowls,followedby
paintedsubmound
80
*Quartz Xstl_
Thepaintsinclude
andahoodedbottle.
seedjars,jars,
* 70- _ ExoticChert
linesoras a sliptoentire
appliedas thick
a
white
film,
2
_OP ...ats
paintapplied
vessels,anda thinblackcarbonaceous
lines.Justoverhalfofthe28 vesselshave
as narrow
designsovera redslip.Another
whitefilmorpainted
~40ofthepaintedvesselshaveblackpaintover
quarter
~30
haveeither
plainwhite
redslips,andtheremainder
20 one
With
possible
films.
only
or
black-on-white
0
theblackandwhitepaintsseemtohave
exception,
vessel.The redbeen appliedto an already-fired
0
blackand white
were
vessels
that
painted
slipped
Tract 15A
SubMd Zone SubMd Zone G
D2
Lohmann
phasebowls,seed
common
wereotherwise
Assmblage
jars,andjars.Thus,itis likelythattheextrapaints
oforas partof
wereappliedinanticipation
Figure6. Comparisonof Lohmannphase artifactdensities orfilms
betweenCahokia's tract15A and thesub-Mound51 Pit,by thesortsofevents
inthesubmound
pit.
represented
weight(top) and count(bottom).
oddsandends
artifactual
Amongtheremaining
anda barbed inthe1967-1968unitsarea boneearspool,a bropitbyeightchippedstonespecimens
pipe,
limestone
smoking
a broken
stone,
bonetip.UnliketheLohmannphasepointsfrom kenchunkey
be
assothat
can
calcite
and
were
and
crystals
stone
points
plagioclase
thechipped
Tract1SA,however,
coninother
archaeological
made mostlyfromexoticcherts(not thermally ciatedwithpublicevents
Like
and
beyond.
in
Cahokia
region
texts
the
Greater
stone
chert).Oneofthechipped
Burlington
altered
pigment
flakes theseobjects,and thebeads,arrowheads,
wasmadefrom
quartzcrystal,
points
projectile
of
five
the
expepresence
and
pots,
than
painted
residues,
indensities
10timeshigher
ofwhichwerefound
on
indicate
icons
or
sketched
pots
soil
In
one
engraved
diently
thatofTract1SArefuse(Figure6). fact,
Fromzones
culture.
ofmaterial
manipulation
sample(probablyfromzone D2) producedthe a ritual
one
cross-hatched
and
H
are
two
eyes,
D2,
D,
DI,
perfromquartzcrystalknapping,
microdebitage
anda charcoalsketch
ofquartzcrys- design,a possiblewingmotif,
fromtheproduction
hapsoriginating
the
faceofa largepoton
human
of
a
figure
possible
talprojectile
points.
ofa seated
terra
cotta
is
also
a
figurine
sherd.
There
galena,
Thereis evidenceofpigments-rubbed
the
terra
cotta
This
figurine,
from
zone
G.
beingexceedingly person
andkaolinite
(thelatter
hematite,
be
called
sketch
could
and
the
51 pit.In the engravedsherds,
rareat Cahokia)-in thesub-Mound
used
items,as theywereprobably
evidence "magico-ritual"
themosttelling
caseofpigments,
however,
Wilson
1996).
1989;
in
contexts
(Emerson
special
butoftheresiduesof
density
is notthatofmineral
of
andtheunusualcharacteristics
usage.Like thepossibleevidenceof the Thesedepictions
pigment
6000 -
-
-
Pauketat et al.]
RESIDUES OF FEASTING AND PUBLIC RITUAL AT EARLY CAHOKIA
271
Interpretations
thematerial
cultureassemblagemaybe indicative
ofmanufacture,
ofcontexts
use,anddisposalsimilarinthenondomestic
applications
totobacco,med- The sub-Mound
51 strata
provideevidencethatthe
andmanipulation
ofcraftgoodswas in
icinalplants,
andspecialwoods.Ifso,thentheywere production
all potentially
usedindivinations
oratpubliccere- alllikelihood
a component
ofthesamegarbage-promoniesandimportant
socioreligious
functions.
ducingeventsinwhichpaints,pots,crystals,
beads,
andboneswereused.Besidesthequartz-crystal
debHuman Remains
itageand,perhaps,
theconiferous-wood
chippage,
Thehuman
bones,studied
byHargrave,
maybecom- thisproduction
is indicated
bylargebiface-reduction
flakes,
exoticchert
debitage,
andbasaltaxheaditemsabove.In theana- chert
parabletothemagicoritual
lyzed1967-1968collection,
theyincludeisolated making
debitage
(Table8). Specifically,
theBurlingandunburned
cranialandpostcranial
bonesfrom
one ton-chert
bifacereduction
flakeswereassociated
child(7-9 years),oneadolescent
fromtheman(12-18years),and withzoneD2 andseemtobe derived
ofoneormorelarge"Ramey"knives
oradze
threeadults(one ofunknown
sex,one youngadult ufacture
male,andone mid-oldadultfemale).The isolated bladesviasoftpercussion.
Thissortofprimary
reducbonesoftheadultsandthechildwerefoundinzones tionis notanordinary
ofdomestic
activcomponent
was itiesat Cahokia,wheremostdomesticdebitage
D, D 1,D2, orG,whiletheadolescent
individual
represented
byboneinzoneH. Noneofthefiveindi- originated
fromexpedient
toolmaking.
The exotic
vidualsappearedtobe intentional
bulials.8
chert
islessdiagnostic
oftooltype,
butmay
debitage
Cutmarks,fractures,
from
themanufacture
ofarrow
points
carnivore-gnawing
marks, haveoriginated
onthehuman
andpolishwereobserved
boneandmay andunifacial
tools.The submound
exoticdebitage
helpexplainitsrelationship
tothesubmound
pit.Cut waslargely
limited
toCobdenchert
(oneofthealnow
markswereobservedon a leftfibula(bothanterior pointswas madefromCobdenchert)and Hixton
andpostelior
tothemidshaft)
andon a right
radius silicified sediment.Oddly, anothercommon
to thetuberosity
(inferior
on theproximalradius) Lohmannphaseexoticchert,
FortPayne,wascomofpostmortem
A greenstickpletely
suggestive
processing.
absentinthesubmound
pit.Theaxheadmakispresent
fracture
onthefibulaimmediately
superior ingdebitage
iscomparable
tothatfound
onTract15A
to thecutmarks.
Carnivore
gnawingin theformof at CahokiaandfewotherLohmannphasecontexts
furrows
andtoothpunctures
was pre- (Pauketat
1997b,1998a).Thewaste,whichincludes
tooth-groove
endofa leftfemur,
of unfinishedcelts, consists
senton theproximal
theproxi- brokenfragments
malendofa lightulna,anda right
radius.Finally, entirely
ofigneousrockfrom
dikesintheSt.Francois
is present
onseveralelements, Mountains
evidenceofpolishing
100kmsouthofCahokia.Thehighdenin mostcases to generaltaphonomic sitiesof thisrock(calculatedas gramsperm3of
attributable
the excavated
thatthe
processessuchas abrasionwithsand.However,
fill)inthesubmound
pitindicate
femur
nota natural, manufacture
ofaxheadsfrom
exoticrock,alongwith
was probably
polishon a right
effectof sand abrasion,and the chippedstonebifaces,
that
postdepositional
mayhavebeenanactivity
femur
andsumptheuseofother
fragment
mayhavebeenusedas a tool.This accompanied
magicoritual
socialeventsproducedthe
fact,alongwiththecutmarksandtheevidencefor tuaryitemsin whatever
thecarnivore
thattheseparticular submound
indicates
refuse.
gnawing,
hadbeenretained,
elements
andpreservaClearly,in termsoftype,density,
used,andexposedforan
indeterminate
51 pitrefuseis unliketypical
periodoftime,perhapsina mortuarytion,thesub-Mound
suchas a charnel
houseortemple
middens
either
atCahokia
phasedomestic
facility
(seeDePrat- Lohmann
ter1991).Theabsenceofweathering
orsunbleach- oratoutlying
As a pointofcomparison,
settlements.
ingon thisandotherelements
suggests
that,ifthey we may look to the Lohmannphase domestic
wereexposedin thepit,exposurewas fora brief remainsofCahokia'sTract15Aandoutlying
sites,
indicate
theimportanceremainsthatthemselves
pointto Cahokia'sapical
period.Thehumanremains
ormanipulating
ina regional
oftheactofprocessing
themateri- position
economy
(Pauketat
1998b:Figinthesubmound
als subsequently
toruralsites,higher
dendeposited
pitlike ure6). Thatis,compared
ornumber/
orexotic
thevariousornaments,
woods,medicinalplants, sities(grams/m3
mi3)ofallcraft
ofMillCreekchert
hoe
andpots.
materials
(exceptforresidues
beads,magicoritual
objects,pigments,
272
AMERICAN
ANTIQUITY
[Vol.67, No. 2, 2002
Table8. OtherArtifacts
fromthe1967-1968Sub-Mound51 Excavations.
Zone
D
DI
D2
E
F
G
H
Burlington Mill Creek
Chert
Chert
Wt (g)
Wt (g)
5,170.7
1,282.7
3,711.7
132.5
572.1
3,052.2
2,789.1
Total 1,6711.0
Zone
D
Quartz Unmodified UnmodifiedAxhead-making
Crystal Limestone Sandstone
Debitage
Abraders
Wt (g)
Wt (g)
Wt (g)
Wt (g)
N
62.8
.6
3.2
27.3
7.1
73.7
-
-
-
1.3
6.0
1.2
75.1
.8
31.8
1.8
142.5
3.6
92.1
2.2
23.7
62.6
23,092.0
10,106.5
80,498.1
219.9
3301.0
49,236.8
12,075.0
178,529.3
6,613.0
319.0
1,898.0
-
323.2
3,146.7
3,682.0
15,981.9
Fresh-waterMarine-shellGastropod Marine-disk HammerBeads
stones
Copper ShellFrags. Fragments Beads
N
N
N
N
N
N
2
3
1
46
345
115
-
151
10
2
-
3
140
234
2
1
1
7
690
DI
1
D2
1
E
F
G
H
-
Total
Exotic
Chert
Wt (g)
1
21
2
-
1
2
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
6
349
3
1
447.0
54.1
1,821.4
7
-
1
7.4
3
1
5
2
19
120.6
5,965.9
245.5
8,661.9
Pigment- Pottery
stones Icons
N
N
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
6
Arrowheads
N
2
1
2
-
1
1
2
5
8
-
Tract15A's domesticrefuse ofthewholeornearlycomplete
blades) characterize
largesecartifacts,
whiledensities
dropoffwithdistance
from
Cahokia.9 tionsofpots,articulating
animalbones,clumpsof
Yetthedensities
ofcertain
craftorexoticmaterials squashseedsandpulp,absenceofobviously
weathinthesubmound
pitzonesD2 andG arehigher
than eredfillsandartifacts,
verandtheunderrepresented
theTract15Apeakvalues(Figure6).
sus overrepresented
remainsofotherartifact
types
As arguedearlier,thecontinuous
and discrete (i.e., FortPayne and Mill Creek chert,brown
zonesofconsistent
ifnothomogeneous
fillsinclude finewares,
littlebarley,
maize,variousanimaltaxa
ofmaterial
extraordinarily
highdensities
objectsin vs. quartzcrystal,
paintedpots,seedjars,funnels,
and
thesubmound
maygrass,
woodchippage,
pitthatarematched
bythehighden- tobaccoseeds,fruits,
In zone F and somesub- deer,swan,andprairiechickenparts).
sityof organicdetritus.
zones,thereis almostno associatedearthen
Givena single-event
zones,
matrix;
originforsubmound
it is purelycarbonizedand uncarbonized
organic the densityfiguresderivedfromthe excavated
In otherzones, 1967-1968samplesofartifacts
canbe
anddetritus
materials
and associatedartifacts.
D2 andG, thefillmatrix
estimates
ofvolumefor
bytheminimum
notably
includeslessearth multiplied
toordinary
intheregion theentire
compared
secondary
refuse
zoneinthesubmound
pittogiveusa rough
(precisequantitative
measuresof soil samplesare senseoftheoverallquantities
ofpots,foods,magicothedisposal
objects,
insects,
etc.thatcomprised
LikezonesA-C,thesiltsandsandsin ritual
unavailable).
thesezonesmayderiveinpartorall fromtheGrand events.Assuming
a relatively
uniform
artifact
denPlaza's earthenmantlevia erosionor intentional sityacrossthepit,theresulting
quantities
pointto
procesweeping.Combinedwithartifactdensity,the hugeevents(Table9). Eveniftheestimation
matrices
thetotalsinvolved,10
individual
organic-rich
appeartoindicate
thatmostof dureoverinflates
A.D.
thesubmoundzones werederivedfroma tightly gatherings
at Cahokiain theeleventh
century
theuse andbreakageofhunspacedseriesoflarge-scale
depositional
episodes.In seemtohaveinvolved
of
thecase oftheliveburialofmarshgrassbyzoneH dredsifnotthousands
ofpots,theconsumption
deer,andtheuse
orthecombusted
zonesor subzonesofD1, D2, E, hundreds
ofindividual
white-tailed
of
andF,themassivesingle-deposit
orrapid-sequence-of sufficient
tobaccoto leave behindhundreds
is wellsupported.
ofseeds!
deposithypothesis
Rapiddisposal thousands
inthe
eventsseemlikelyforzonesD2 andG alsobecause
Therichness
anddiversity
ofplantremains
Pauketat et al.]
RESIDUES OF FEASTING AND PUBLIC RITUAL AT EARLY CAHOKIA
273
Table9. ProjectedTotalNumbersofSelectMaterialsin theSub-Mound51 Pit.a
Zone
D
DI
D2
E
Ceramic
Vessels
20,961
MNI
Deer
-
Arrowheads
190
-
95
7,872
2,031
190
474
1,518
-
5,501
Tobacco
Seeds
624,0911
Fossil
Coleoptera
129,181
-
1,398,988
-
21,060
1,912
95
2,466
3,897
3,756
18,685
5,440
663,927
446,809
352
12,615
190
9,485
346,290
Total
760
68,574
13,238
8,313,311
949,008
aExcavatedmaterialdensity(N percubicmeter)from1967-68excavations
multiplied
byminimum
estimated
volumeofentire
pit,dividedbyexcavatedvolume;deernumbers
derivedfrom1968sampleonly.
F
G
H
sub-Mound
51 pitindicatethattheprocessing
and Lopinot1991; Pauketat1998a).Cypresswas also
in important
community
marker
postsand
eatingof plantfoodswas in somewayssimilarto featured
mostdomesticcontextsin theGreaterCahokia possiblycanoes(e.g.,Porter1977:Figure
60), and
region.Particularly
evidentis thelow densityof the manycypresswood chips and prodigious
maizeandthehighdensity
of somestarchy
seeds amounts
ofbarkseemto indicatewoodworking
as
suchas maygrass(see Lopinot1991, 1994). Pro- a significant
partoftheactivities
represented
inthe
portions
ofotherplantfoodsvary,inpartowingto submound
pit.
theuniquedepositional
factors
Chmumy(1973:150),havingculledwoodfrom
surrounding
theinfilling
ofthepit.Thenearabsenceoflittle
barley,
for the1967excavation,
notedwhatcouldhavebeenporinstance,
is unusualbutcouldbe due eitherto the tionsof "wall support
posts"and "one verylarge
post,8 inchesin diameter."
Besidesthese
short-term
accumulation
of refuseor to thecon- hickory
Inaddi- posts,thewood chips,and thebark,theabundant
ofmealsthatexcluded
little
sumption
barley.
of fruits,
notunlikeone other zoneF thatch
tion,thefrequency
anda fewpiecesofworkedwoodare
Cahokiandomesticcontext(ICT-1I)butdifferentalso suggestiveof architectural
construction
and
fromnon-Cahokian
domesticrefuse,
mayindicate reconstruction.
Cahokian
buildings
presumably
posoftheaddedflavorofCahokianrecipes, sessedthatched
something
roofsthatwereperiodically
replaced;
at leastone knownhigh-status
Cahokianbuilding
possiblyforpublicgatherings
(see below).
thefrequent
tobaccoseeds,redcedar was associated withshaped wooden elements
Certainly,
andcypress
woodchippage
is suggestive (Dunavan1993; Pauketat1995). It is potentially
branchlets,
thentonotethatrebuilding
andrethatchofmeaning-laden
"ritual"
oftheincorporation
plants important
andwoodsalongsidethetraditional
foodsof ingof templesandcertainhousesat Cahokiamay
starchy
events(Pauketheregion.
there
areethnographic
accounts havebeentiedtoannualceremonial
Certainly
with tat1993).
oftheuseofswanwingsanddeerinconjunction
feasts(Douglas1976;Radin1990).
Based on an extensively
redcedarinritual
analyzedbodyofconRed cedarwas a wood withmanymythical,
reli- textually
and
controlled
ceramic,
archaeobotanical,
gious,andmedicinal
usesamongitsmorepractical mound-construction
Cahokiaresearchers
evidence,
redcedarbroomssweptawaydustand havepreviously
inferred
thatcentral
publicriteswere
applications:
ofsociallife(e.g.,Emerevil spirits;
cedarandcedarpostswereassociated annual,integrative
features
withsacredspaces,directions,
creation
and son1989,1997;Pauketat
andEmer1993;Pauketat
stories,
mythical
figures;
twigs,leaves,andbarkwereused son 1991; Porter1974). Such early Cahokian
inpurification
cedarwoodwasusedtocon- ceremoniespresumably
wouldhave involvedthe
rituals;
structnon-domesticbuildings (e.g., Lopinot manipulation
ofthecontents
ofmound-top
buildings
1991:51-53; Moerman1986:241-249). In and (following
Knight1986).Templesin laterMissisaroundCahokia,red cedarwas used in thecon- sippiancentersin theSoutheasthousedancestral
struction
of specialbuildings,
as thepostsof the bones and sumptuary
objectsand werethefocal
andas thepolesofbur- pointsofannualfertility
andrenewalrites(DePratmonumental
"woodhenge,"
ial litters
inMound72 (Fortier
1992;Fowler1991; ter1991;Hall 1989;Knight1986,1989).Thearray
274
AMERICAN ANTIQUITY
[Vol. 67, No. 2, 2002
of
Moreover,
itshouldbe notedthatthepresence
of thesubmound
materials
and
pit'smagicoritual
sumptuary
goods beads,quartzcrystals,
pigments, suchgameanimalsmakessenseas partofsomeperiicons,fancypots,tobaccoseeds,cedarbranchlets,odiccalendrically
basedmobilization
ofmeat.That
gameanimals,unlikedomesticstock
and a smokingpipe are consistentwiththese is, terrestrial
analogs.At suchannualgatherings,
peopleateand orspecialherds,maynothaveprovedveryreliable
friend- provisions
ifregularity
ofavailability
wasa concern.
drankfoodsingroupsforged
alongkinship,
and,
lines(seeBell 1990;Howard1968; Thenagain,meatscanbe driedandstockpiled
ship,andgender
as documentedin complexsocietiesaroundthe
Waring1968;Witthoft
1949).
Besidessuggestive
fruit
remains
andthehighden- world,specialsumptuary
rulesand gamereserves
themeanstoregulate
meatavailsityofbrokencookingjars,thesubmound
pitpro- couldhaveprovided
vides strong evidence of select faunal ability
(see Rees 1997;Zeder1996).Inanycase,the
provisions-swans,
prairie
chickens,
largefish,and sortoflarge-scale
seeninthesubmound
provisioning
in pitwouldhaverequiredsomesubstantive
measure
deer-notfoundinsuchquantities
orproportions
domestic
contexts.
The articulations
andcomplete- ofcoordination
suitedtoa ritualcalendar.
in
nessofmanydeerbonesmayreflect
themanner
All of thelinesof submound
evidencepointin
whichmeatwas brought
to Cahokiaforwhatever thedirection
ofa seriesofshort-term
andlarge-scale
inthesubmound
eventsarerepresented
theuse ofmagicolitual
and
feasts,
specific
pit. eventsinvolving
Butchering
debris,
suchas skullfragments
andlower sumptuary
goods,theshapingof craftgoods and
limbs metapodials,
phalanges,and carpals are wood,andpossibly
therethatching
orreconstruction
almostnonexistent
in theanalyzedassemblages. ofarchitecture.
Theabundant
insectremains
clearly
Thus,itis reasonableto concludethatmeat,espe- indicatethattheseeventsoccurredduringwarm
on sitein theformofbulkcuts, weather
ciallydeer,arrived
months.
Fruitsinthepitindicate
bothearly
andexpected
and mulberries),
latersumpossibly
prescribed
bytradition
bythe summer(strawberries
hostsof publicevents.At leastsomeof thebones mer(blackberries,
elderberries,
andgrapes),andfall
inthepitina semi-artic- (persimmon)
wereseemingly
all couldhavebeen
deposited
harvests,
although
ulatedstateandwithraw,softtissuestilladhering
to eatenfrom
driedstores.
Thedeerandwaterfowl
may
someas evidenced
intheearlyautumn
bytheflyexuviae.Thisindicates havebeenmosteasilycaptured
thatthemeatwasprobably
cutfromthebonesprior (seeBent1962)andcertainly
abundant
starchy-seed
tocookingandthebonewastetossedintothesub- cropswouldhavebeenharvested
bythattime.Thus,
moundpit.II
a mid-summer
to earlyautumnorigin,at leastfor
The submound
faunalpattern,
differs zonesD2 andG, is mostlikely.
therefore,
fromdomesticcontexts
elsewhereat
Thecontextual
evidencefortheuseorconsumnpsignificantly
foodsand the
CahokiaandacrosstheGreater
Cahokiaregion.
The tionof certainobjectsor traditional
is generally
withmod- absenceofothers
is as interesting
as thegeneralpatconsistent
pattern,
however,
els of "ritualfeasting"elsewhere(Hayden1996; terns
andseasonalindicators.
thesubmound
Viewing
Jackson
andScott1995).Thecharacteristics
thatthe strataas a timeseries,we maysee someclearand
inartifact
Themost
sub-Mound
51 faunalassemblagesharewiththese othersuggestive
trends
density.
densedeposits
is theextraordinarily
feastingmodelsincludelow taxonomicdiversity,obviouspattern
materihighmeat-yielding
speciesinall faunalclassespre- offruits,
primemeats,uniquemagicoritual
objectsinzonesD2 andG. Zones
sent,relatively
completeandin somecases articu- als,andsumptuary
ofmanythings.
The
latedbones,largequantities
of bonespresentin a E andH havelowerdensities
rarespecies(swansandprairie
chick- alrtifact
ofzoneF is difficult
toassessowing
density
singledeposit,
ens),andconsistent
body-part
representation
(sug- to its thatchmatrix.The zone appearsto contain
deerportionsor bulk fairly
ofthesamesortsofdebrisfound
highdensities
gestingpossiblyprescribed
cutsof meat).All of thesecharacteristics
suggest in zonesD2 and G. Lastly,zonesD and DI have
densities
ofmaterial,
owingtoaccuperhaps
feastingon meatthatwas in some way selected reduced
becauseof thesymbolicmeaningwithwhichthe mulations
thatspanned
moretimethantheother
layanimalswereimbuedandpresumably
provisioned ers or to the intentionalfillingof the pit with
in Cahokia'scen- sediments
to thegreatcollective
hauledfromelsewhere
on site.
gatherings
tralplaza.
We couldposit,basedon thepaleoentomologi-
Pauketat et al.]
RESIDUES OF FEASTING AND PUBLIC RITUAL AT EARLY CAHOKIA
275
cal,zooarchaeological,
archaeobotanical,
andsediThereis muchinthepitthatcouldbe interpreted
mentological
evidence,thatzonesD2 andG were as ordinary
domesticrefuseifviewedin isolation.
comparable
deposits
perhaps
resulting
from
thesame Amongthesethingsarecookingpotsandtheplant
annualevent-possibly
a harvest
feastora renewal foodscookedinthem.However,
theseemingordinisquiteprobceremonyin twoconsecutive
years.In anycase, aryprofile
materials
ofsomesubmound
thetwozones are quitealike,althoughtheabun- ablywhatwe shouldexpectto see giventhatmost
danceofcedarbranchlets
butreducedquantities
in large-scalegatherings
wouldhave
of participants
barkinzoneD2 contrasts
withzoneG. In addition, beenofordinary
status.
On theother
hand,thecomthereis no quartzcrystalin zone G (or in zone H binedqualitative
andquantitative
aspectsoftheanibeneath
specialwoods,quartzcrystals,
it)atthesametimethattherearehighden- mal bones,fruits,
points,
sitiesof exoticchertandexoticigneousrockdeb- shellbeadnecklace,paintedpots,projectile
of axheads.Compared tobacco,andhumanbonesdo notmatchthewellitagefromthemanufacture
to this,zone D2 has lowerdensities
of theaxhead established
domestic
fortheregion.
Thisdoes
profile
arehighdebitage,
negligible
quantities
ofexoticchert,
buta notmeanthatthesubmound
pit'scontents
veryhighdensity
ofquartzcrystal.
statusrefuse.Instead,theexoticandmagico-ritual
craftgoods,and nonfoodplantremains
Thebetween-zone
variance
is alsoattested
bythe materials,
actuallyusedand
different
proportions
ofanimalandplantfoods,the appearmoreas theparaphernalia
reduction
ofspecialevents.
byparticipants
presence
oflarge-biface
flakes,
thegreater- discarded
observation,
as thepitneed
than-usual
numbers
ofseedjarsinlowerzones,and
Thisis an important
thevirtual
absenceofsuchthings
as FortPaynechert, notbe interpreted
as the"materialization"
of some
and local brown alreadyestablished
Mississippian
ideology(in the
shell-bead-making
tools,funnels,
fineware.
Thisvariancemayhavebeenan sense of DeMarriset al. 1996). Rather,thesubpottery
outcomeofsituational
orformalsocialvariation
in Mound 51 pit dates to theearliestphase of the
theactivitiesthatproducedthedense submound youngest
andlargestMississippian
polityin North
theprocesswhereby
Americaandmayencapsulate
deposits.
(orevenresisted)
peopleacceptedoraccommodated
Conclusions
a Cahokianorganization,
or way of life.
identity,
Viewedtogether,
themultiple
linesofevidenceana- Thatprocessseemstohaveinvolved
a dramatically
andcentralized
senseofcommunity,
the1967-1968excavation
ofsub-Mound enlarged
polity,
lyzedfrom
At thesametime,material
remains
51 indicate
thatthestratified
layersofrefuseastride and economy.
thatCahokiawascontinuously
derived
from
being
Cahokia'sGrandPlazaprobably
large- seemtoindicate
via thecentralized
manufacheldintheGrand createdandre-created
scalecollective
gatherings,
perhaps
Plaza and articulated
ofpotsandcraft
withannualtemplerenewals tureanddispersal
goodsandviathe
of architecture,
earthen
orother
GivenitsLohmann continuousconstruction
ceremonies.
mound-top
andvariousothermonuments
(Pauketat
takeonadded pyramids,
phasedate,thesubmound
pit'sremains
inunderstanding
andEmerson1991,
Cahokiaitself.
Thepit 1997a,1997b,2000b;Pauketat
significance
to feedthegathmayhavebeendugtoleveltheplazaortoraisethe 1999).The cookingofprovisions
earliest
Theopenpit, eredthrongs
wouldhavebeenan integral
certainly
stagesofthecentral
platforms.
rather
then,mayhavebeenrefilled
quicklyas part partofsucha process.Theuseofhumanbonesand
of thecontinued
andplaza ritualsof templesumptuary
ofcraft
constructions
objects,themanufacture
densities
all couldhave
ofmagi- goods,andthedisposalofroofthatch
earlyCahokia.Theextraordinary
ofthissamecultural-construccoritual
materials,
sumptuary
goods,human
remains, beenan integral
palrt
foodresidues,brokenpots,woodworking
practicesmayhave
debris, tionprocess.Thatcoordinated
craftproduction
and been components
of a collectiveculturalprocess
waste,architectural
elements,
howpeopleaccommoevenfirewood
fromdiscrete
andseemingly maybe central
toexplaining
perhaps
to
shifts
theinter- datedthesocialanddemographic
thought
large-scale
depositional
episodeswarrant
thatthesub-Mound51 pitcontainsthe have attendedtheLohmannphaseregimein the
pretation
remains
Cahokiaregion(see Pauketat1998b).
ofpublicritesfocusedaroundfeasts.Ifthis Greater
individuis correct,
thenthesubmounddata
Itis worthy
ofmention
thatprominent
interpretation
inCahokia'sLohmann
phase
pointtocommensal
politicson a grandscale.
als,suchas thoseburied
276
AMERICAN ANTIQUITY
[Vol. 67, No. 2, 2002
MuseumResearchSeries,Papersin Anthropology
No. 3,
Mound72 (Fowler1991,1997;Fowleretal. 2000),
Springfield.
mayhaveplayedkeyrolesinCahokia'scommensal Bell,A. R.
politics.However,
mostpeopletakingpartin such
1990 SeparatePeople:SpeakingofCreekMenandWomen.
American
Anthropologist
92:332-345.
eventswould nothave been of highrankor of
Bell,C.
of whohosted
esteemedreputation.
So, regardless
1997 Ritual:Perspectives
a)tdDimensions.
OxfordUniverthepresumed
orcoordinated
GrandPlaza rites,the
sityPress,Oxford.
events
themselves
wouldhavebeencollective
exper- Bent,A.
1962 LifeHistoriesofNorthAmzericanz
WildFowl,PartII.
iencesthatdefypigeonholing
intostatuscategories.
DoverPublications,
NewYork.
wouldhavebeensimultaneously
lowsta- Binford,
Suchevents
L. R.
AcademicPress,New
1978 Nutnamiut
Ethnoarchaeology.
tusandhighstatusorcommunal
andpolitical(see
York.
Pauketat
2000;Pauketat
andEmerson1999).
W.W.
Chmurny,
EarlyCahokiamayhavebeena blendoftheordi1973 The EcologyoftheMiddleMississippian
Occupation
of
the
American
Bottom.
Unpublished
Ph.D.
dissertation,
and
the
a
extraordinary,
recipe
cooked
up
along
naly
Departmentof Anthropology,
University
of Illinois at
withthefeastfoodsduring
collective
of
gatherings
Urbana-Champaign.
a grandscale.In theend,thismaybe theonlyway Collins,J.M.
MoundsICT-II: Site
oftheCaahokia
to understand
whypeopleof theeleventh
century 1990 TheArchaeology
IllinoisCultural
Strulctutre.
ResourcesStudyNo. 10.Illinois
haveparticipated
inwhatconstituted,
A.D.might
at
Historic
Preservation
Agency,
Springfield.
leastin scalarterms,
a radicaldeparture
frompre- Dalan,R. A.
ofMississippian
1997 TheConstruction
Cahokia.InCahokia:
traditions
Mississippian
(Alt2001;Pauketat
1998b).
Domination
andIdeologyintheMississippian
edited
World,
byT. R. Pauketat
andT. E. Emerson,
pp. 89-102.UniversityofNebraskaPress,Lincoln.
DeManiis,E., L. J.Castillo,andT. Earle
andPowerStrategies.
Cur1996 Ideology,Materialization,
rentAnthropology
17:15-31.
De Mott,R. C., D. J.Marcucci,andJ.A. Williams
1993 ChippedLithicMaterials.In TheArchaeology
ofthe
CahokiaMoundsICT-II:Testing
andLithics,
byW.I.Woods,
R. C. De Mott,D. J.Marcucci,J.A. Williams,and B. L.
ResourcesStudy
Gums,PartII,pp. 1-135.IllinoisCultural
13.IllinoisHistoric
Preservation
Agency,
Springfield.
C. B.
DePratter,
in the
1991 Late Prehistoric
and EarlyHistoricChiefdoms
Southeastern
UnitedStates.GarlandPress,NewYork.
M.
Dietler,
1996 FeastsandCommensalPoliticsin thePoliticalEconomy:Food,Power,andStatusinPrehistoric
Europe.InFood
edited
andtheStatusQuest:AnInterdisciplinaty
Perspective,
andW.Schiefenhovel,
byP.Wiessner
pp.87-126.Berghahn
Books,Oxford.
Dietler,
M., andB. Hayden(editors)
2001 Feasts:Archaeological
andEthnographic
Perspectives
onFood,Politics,
andPower.Smithsonian
Institution
Press,
D.C.
Washington,
Douglas,J.G.
1976 Collins:A LateWoodlandCeremonial
Complexinthe
Woodfordian
Northeast.
Ph.D. dissertation,
Unpublished
Departmentof Anthropology,
Universityof Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign.
Dunavan,S. L.
1993 PlantRemains.In Temples
forCahokiaLords.Prestoni
ReferencesCited
Holder's1955-1956Excavations
Mound,by
ofKunzeenannz
Alt,S. M.
T. R. Pauketat,
ofMichigan,
Mempp. 125-133.University
2001 CahokianChangeand theAuthority
of Tradition.
In
oirsoftheMuseumofAnthropology,
No. 26. AnnArbor.
TheArchaeology
ofTraditions:
AgencyandHistoty
Before Elias,S. A.
andAfter
Columbus,
editedbyT. R. Pauketat,
pp. 141-156.
Smith1994 Quaternaty
Insectsand TheirEnvironments.
PressofFlorida,Gainesville.
University
sonianInstitution
D.C.
Press,Washington,
Bareis,C. J.
T. E.
Emerson,
1975 Reportof 1971University
ofIllinois-Urbana
ExcavaAn Exploration
andtheUnderworld:
1989 Water,
Serpents,
tionsat theCahokiasite.In CahokiaArchaeology:
Field
In TheSouttheastern
Ceremonial
intoCahokiaSymbolism.
Reports,editedby M. L. Fowler,pp. 9-11. IllinoisState
editedbyP.Galloway,
Complex:
Artifacts
andAnalysis,
pp.
We are mostfortunate
to havebeen given
Acknowledgments.
access to the sub-Mound51 materialsand notesby thelate
CharlesJ.Bareisand theUniversity
ofIllinoisDepartment
of
The qualityofourresultsis directly
Anthropology.
due to his
excavationskillsand theeffort
of University
of Illinoisfield
schoolstudentsin 1966, 1967,and 1968. The Department's
Lab ofAnthropology
AngelaNeller,patiently
assisted
Curator,
our workwiththislargecollectionbetween1994 and 1999.
The NationalScience Foundationprovidedprimarysupport
forouranalyses(BNS-9305404),partof the"EarlyCahokia
Project"(1993-1997).Additionalassistancewas givenby the
IllinoisTransportation
Archaeological
ResearchProgram,
the
of Oklahoma,Washington
Southwest
University
University,
MissouriStateUniversity,
and theCahokiaMoundsMuseum
Society.Assistants
compiledmuchof thedatareported
here,
mostnotablyGregWilson,StephaniePauketat,
andKatherine
Roberts,withadditionalwork by Ksenija Borojevic,Paul
Blonsky,Steve Casper,Karla Hansen,ElisabethHildebrant,
KimberlySchaefer,and KristiTaft.Additionalthanksare
owed LeonardBlake, WilliamChmurny,
Hugh Cutler,and
JamesSchoenwetter
fortheirrecollections
and original1970s
analyses,and to MelvinFowler,forgraciouslyallowinghis
Cahokiamapto be adaptedforFigure1. Thanksare owed to
HelaineSilvermanfortheSpanishabstract
and to
translation,
the anonymousreviewersfor their helpful suggestions.
in presentation
areentirely
ourown.
Shortcomings
Pauketat et al.]
RESIDUES OF FEASTING AND PUBLIC RITUAL AT EARLY CAHOKIA
277
45-92. University
ofNebraskaPress,Lincoln.
Kelly,J.E.
1997 Cahokiaand theArchaeology
of Power.University
of
1997 Stirling-Phase
Sociopolitical
Activity
atEastSt.Louis
AlabamaPress,Tuscaloosa.
andCahokia.In Cahokia:Domination
andIdeologyinthe
Fortier,
A. C.
Mississippian
World,
editedbyT.R. Pauketat
andT.E. Emer1992 StoneFigurines.
In TheSponemann
Site2: TheMisofNebraskaPress,Lincoln.
son,pp. 141-166.University
A. Kelly,L. S.
sissippianand OneotaOccupations,
byD. K. Jackson,
andJ.A. Williams,
BotC. Fortier,
pp.277-303.American
1991 Zooarchaeological
Remains.InTheArchaeology
ofthe
tomArchaeology,
FAI-270Reports
24.University
ofIllinois
CahokiaMoundsICT-II: BiologicalRemains,by N. H.
Press,Urbana.
Lopinot,L. S. Kelly,G. R. MilnerandR. Paine,pp. 1-78.
Fowler,M. L.
IllinoisCulturalResourcesStudyNo. 13. IllinoisHistoric
atCahokia.InNew
1991 Mound72 andEarlyMississippian
Preservation
Agency,
Springfield.
Perspectives
on Cahokia:Views
fromthePeriphey,edited
ofFaunalExploitation
1997 Patterns
atCahokia.InCahokia:
byJ.B.Stoltman,
pp. 1-28.Prehistory
Press,Madison,WisDomination
andIdeologyintheMississippian
World,
edited
consin.
andT. E. Emerson,
byT. R. Pauketat
pp.69-88.University
ofNebraskaPress,Lincoln.
1997 The CahokiaAtlas: A HistoricalAtlas of Cahokia
Archaeology.Illinois Transportation
Archaeological
2000 Social Implicationsof Faunal Provisioning
forthe
ResearchProgram,
No. 2. UniverStudiesinArchaeology,
CahokiaSite:InitialMississippian,
Lohmann
Phase.UnpublishedPh.D. dissertation,
Department
of Anthropology,
sityofIllinois,Urbana.
Fowler,M. L., J.Rose,B. VanderLeest,andS. R. Ahler
Washington
University,
St.Louis,Missouri.
2000 TheMound72 Area:Dedicatedand SacredSpace in
2001 A Case ofRitualFeasting
attheCahokiaSite.InFeasts:
EarlyCahokia.IllinoisStateMuseum,ReportsofInvestiArchaeologicaland Ethnographic
Perspectives
on Food,
No. 54. Springfield.
gations,
Politics,and Power,editedbyM. DietlerandB. Hayden,
Fritz,G. J.
pp. 334-367. Smithsonian
Institution
Press,Washington,
1994 Precolumbian
Cucurbitaargyrospermna
ssp. argyrosD.C.
intheEastern
ofNorth Kertzer,
penna(Cucurbitaceaae)
Woodlands
D.
America.EconomicBotany48:280-292.
1988 Ritual,Politics,
andPower.YaleUniversity
Press,New
Haven.
Gums,B. L.
1993 Groundstone
Tools,ModifiedRock,andExoticMate- Knight,
V. J.,Jr.
rials.In TheArchaeology
oftheCahokiaMoundsICT-JI:
of Mississippian
Reli1986 The Institutional
Organization
and Lithics,byW. I. Woods,R. C. De Mott,D. J.
Testing
gion.American
Antiquity
51:675-687.
J.A.Williams,
Marcucci,
andB. L. Gums,PartIII,pp.1-121.
of Mississippian
1989 Symbolism
mounds.In Powhatan's
IllinoisCulturalResourcesStudyNo. 13. IllinoisHistoric
Mantle:Indiansin theColonialSoutheast,
editedbyP. H.
Preservation
Agency,
Springfield.
Wood,G. A. Waselkov,
andM. T. Hatley,
pp.279-291.UniHall,R. L.
ofNebraskaPress,Lincoln.
versity
ofMississippian
1989 TheCultural
Background
Symbolism. Lopinot,N. H.
In TheSoutheastern
Ceremonial
editedbyP.GalRemains.In TheArchaeology
Complex,
1991 Archaeobotanical
ofthe
ofNebraskaPress,Lincoln.
loway,pp.239-278.University
CahokiaMoundsICT-II:BiologicalRemains,
Part1.Illinois
CulturalResourcesStudyNo. 13. IllinoisHistoricPreserHayden,B.
and Traditional
vationAgency,
1996 Feastingin Prehistoric
Societies.In
Springfield.
FoodandtheStatusQuest:AnInterdisciplinary
1994 A New CropofData on theCahokianPolity.InAgriPerspective,
editedbyP. WiessnerandW. Schiefenhovel,
culturalOriginsand Developmentin theMidcontinent,
pp. 127-148.
oftheStateArchaeeditedbyW.Green,
Berghahn
Books,Oxford.
pp.127-153.Office
Hendon,J.A.
ologist,ReportNo. 19.Iowa City,Iowa.
of Metcalfe,
D., andK. T. Jones
1996 ArchaeologicalApproachesto theOrganization
DomesticLabor:HouseholdPracticeandDomesticRelaofAnimalBodyPartIndices.Amer1988 A Reconsideration
tions.AnnualReviewofAnthropology
25:45-61.
icanAntiquity
53:486-504.
J.A. Williams,
and
G. R.,T. E. Emerson,
M. W.Mehrer,
Heiser,C. B.
Milner,
of EarlyPlantDomestication.
D. Esarey
1969 Some Considerations
BioScience19:228-231.
andOneotaPeriod.InAmerican
Bottom
1984 Mississippian
editedby C. J.Bareisand J.W. Porter,
Holley,G. R.
Archaeology,
pp.
CeramofIllinoisPress,Urbana.
1989 TheArchaeology
oftheCahokiaMoundsICT-II:
158-186.University
D. E.
ics. IllinoisCultural
ResourcesStudyNo. 11. IllinoisHis- Moerman,
of
toricPreservation
Agency,
Springfield.
1986 MedicinalPlantsof NativeAmerica.University
TechnicalReports,
Holley,G. R.,R. A. Dalan,andP.A. Smith
Michigan,Museumof Anthropology,
intheCahokiaSiteGrandPlaza.AmerNo. 19.AnnArbor.
1993 Investigations
icanAntiqutity
58:306-319.
Muller,J.
PoliticalEconomy.
Howard,J.H.
1997 Mississippian
Plenum,NewYork.
T. R.
CremonialComplexandItsInterpreta- Pauketat,
1968 TheSouthern
tions.MissouriArchaeologicalSocietyMemoirNo. 6.
1993 Templesfor Cahokia Lords: Preston Holder's
Columbia.
Mound.University
1955-1956ExcavationofKunnemann
H. E., andS. L. Scott
of Michigan,Memoirsof theMuseumof Anthropology,
Jackson,
Elite:TheImpli1995 TheFaunalRecordoftheSoutheastern
Number26. AnnArbor.
PolcationsofEconomy,
andIdeology.SouthSocialRelations,
1994 TheAscentofChiefs:CahokiaandMississippian
ofAlabamaPress,
easternArchaeology
14:103-119.
iticsinNativeNorthAmerica.
University
Tuscaloosa.
Kelly,J.D., andM. Kaplan
andRitual.AnnualReviewofAnthro- 1995 AdditionalNotes on theBurnedBuildingBeneath
1990 Histoiy,
Structure,
Cahokia's KunnemannMound. Illinois Archaeology
pology19:119-150.
278
AMERICAN ANTIQUITY
[Vol. 67, No. 2, 2002
Wilson,G. D.
7:102-108.
8:23-37.
1996 Insight
Through
Icons.IllinoisArchaeology
InCahokia.Domination
1997a CahokianPolitical
Economy.
J.
and Ideologyin theMississippian
World,editedbyT. R. Witthoft,
intheEastern
Woodlands.
1949 GreenCornCeremonialism
Pauketatand T. E. Emerson,pp. 30-51. University
of
ofMichigan,MuseumofAnthropology,
NebraskaPress,Lincoln.
OccaUniversity
1997b Specialization,
PoliticalSymbols,
andtheCrafty
Elite
sionalContributions
No. 13.AnnArbor.
Zeder,M.
ofCahokia.Southeastern
Archaeology
16:1-15.
toComplexity:
A View
1996 Zooarchaeological
Approaches
Cahokia:TheTract15A
1998a TheArchaeology
ofDowntown
at the53rdAnnual
fromtheOld World.Paperpresented
and DunhamTractExcavations.IllinoisTransportation
Archaeological
ResearchProgram,
StudiesinArchaeology
Archaeological
Conference,
Meetingof theSoutheastern
No. 1. University
ofIllinois,Urbana.
Birmingham,
Alabama.
ofGreaterCahokia.
Jour1998b Refiguring
theArchaeology
Research6:45-89.
nal ofArchaeological
Notes
2000a A WaterlineThroughCahokia's Grand Plaza.
1.
There
are
modest
"Green
Corn"or "renewal"pitsconCahokian(Spring):
10-12.
refuseat outlyingsettlements
oftheCommoners.
2000b TheTragedy
InAgency
inArchae- tainingsuggestivesingle-event
ology,editedbyM.-A.DobresandJ.Robb,pp. 113-139. (Emerson 1997:94, 132), but large-scale excavationsat
London.
Routledge,
Cahokiaandoutlying
centershaveproducedonlya fewcomPauketat,
T. R.,andT. E. Emerson
possiblefeasting
parablelargeshallowfillareas containing
and thePowerof thePot. or collective-ritual
1991 The IdeologyofAuthority
refuse(see Fowleret al. 2000; Holleyet
American
Anthropologist
93:919-941.
al. 1993;J.Kelly1997).Thisis thecase despitethelargeresandIdeologyin theMissis1997 Introduction:
Domination
idential"tract"excavationsat Cahokia and the large-scale
anidIdeologyinthe
sippianWorld.In Cahokia:Dominiation
regionthathave,
archaeologyof thesurrounding
Mississippian
World,
editedbyT.R. Pauketat
andT.E. Emer- settlement
collectively,
excavatedhundredsof domesticbuildingsand
ofNebraskaPress,Lincoln.
son,pp. 1-29.University
of Hegemonyas Community
at thousandsof refusepits,fill areas, post molds,etc. (e.g.,
1999 The Representation
Culture
andEconomy
inPre- Collins 1990; Emerson1997; Milneret al. 1984; Pauketat
Cahokia.InMaterialSymbols:
editedbyJ.E. Robb,pp.302-317.OccasionalPaper 1998a, 1998b).
history,
No. 26,CenterforArchaeological
Investigations,
Southern
2. Fromthe Lohmannphase occupationsat Tract15AIllinoisUniversity,
Carbondale.
Dunhamand theICT-II, a totalof 64 and 135 m3of fillwas
Pauketat,
T. R., andM. A. Rees
excavated, respectively (Pauketat 1998a:88; Collins
atMound49,
1996 EarlyCahokiaProject1994Excavations
tothe 1990:Tables5.7-5.33).
Cahokia(11-S-34-2).Unpublished
submitted
report
and
Tract15A/Dunham,
3. For example,thesubmound,
IllinoisHistoric
Preservation
Agency,
Springfield.
ICT-II excavationsproduced723, 506, and 913 Lohmann
J.W.
Porter,
and 17, 34, and 97 kg of
vessels,respectively,
as Viewedfrom
1974 CahokiaArchaeology
theMitchell
Site: phasepottery
(see Collins 1990; De
A Satellite
atAD 1150-1200.Ph.D.dissertation, chippedchertdebitage,respectively
Community
of Anthropology,
of Wisconsin, Mott et al. 1993; Gums 1993; Holley 1989; Kelly 1991;
Department
University
AnnArbor.
Madison.University
Microfilms,
Lopinot1991; Pauketat1998a).
at
1977 TheMitchellSiteandPrehistoric
ExchangeSystems
threeofthefourunitprofilesand
4. Thisfigureillustrates
intoCahokia
Cahokia:AD 1000 ? 300. In Explorations
of the pit availprovidesthe only compositecross-section
Archaeology
(2nd edition),editedby M. L. Fowler,pp.
able. The fourth
unitis offsetfromthesethreeand
analyzed
Bulletin
7. Urbana.
137-164.IllinoisArchaeological
Survey
is notillustrated
here.The westernmost
unit(E393-396) was
J.M.
Potter,
2000 Pots,Parties,andPolitics:CommunalFeastingin the notexcavatedto thebottomofthepitin 1968 anda complete
profileis notavailable.
American
American
Southwest.
65:471-492.
Antiquity
5. Additionalinsectremainswereobservedand counted
Purdue,J.R.,B. W. Styles,andM. C. Masulis
DeerExploitation
from by KatherineRobertsduringsortingof some archaeobotaniandWhite-Tail
1989 FaunalRemains
a LateWoodlandUplandEncampment:
The BoschertSite cal samples at WashingtonUniversity.
These hand-picked
Missouri.Midcontinental samples typicallyoverrepresent
(23SC609), St. CharlesCounty,
Diptera pupae, which are
14:146-163.
Journal
ofArchaeology
more easily recognizableunder the microscope.Diptera
Radin,P.
wererecognizedfromzones D2, G, and H.
pupae
of NebraskaPress,
Tribe.University
1990 The Winnebago
6. Ifthesewoodswereused at domesticsites,butnotcarLincoln.
bonized,theymayhaverottedaway,leavingno archaeologiRees,M. A.
TheRegional callyrecoverablesignatures.
Tribute
andChiefly
1997 Coercion,
Authority:
ofMississippian
PoliticalCulture.
7. Thatis, Cahokianceramicassemblagesincludehigher
SoutheastDevelopment
emArchaeology
16:113-133.
of well-madevessels as opposed to contempoproportions
A. J.,Jr.
Waring,
raryoutlyingvillages(see Alt 2001).
Cultand MuskhogeanCeremonial.In
1968 The Southern
unitsfromtheRameyField
8. In theyet-to-be-analyzed
TheWaring
J.WarPapers:TheCollectedWorks
ofAntonio
portionof the submoundpit, Bareis (1975:11) notedthat
ing,Jr.,editedby S. Williams,pp. 30-69. Papersof the
of humanremainsthathe
zone G containeda concentration
andEthnology
58. HarPeabodyMuseumofArchaeology
"individualswithlittleor no statusin
thoughtrepresented
vardUniversity,
Massachusetts.
Cambridge,
and "placed in
Cahokia society"who were "dismembered"
Welch,P. D., andC. M. Scarry
a
thezone F thatchto constitute
intheMoundville thepit."He theninterpreted
1995 Status-RelatedVariationinFoodways
ritualsealingof thelowerzone G event.
Chiefdom.
American
60:397-419.
Antiquity
Pauketat et al.]
RESIDUES OF FEASTING AND PUBLIC RITUAL AT EARLY CAHOKIA
9. Rock wasteand chipped-stone
debitagedensitiesare
calculatedas grams/m3of excavatedfill,whileformalartifactsand potsare calculatedas number/mr3
of excavatedfill.
10. The reasons, beyond the presentpaper's scope,
include the methods by which Minimum Number of
Individualsor MinimumNumberofVessels,etc.,are calculated and thepotentialforsamplingerror,especiallyusing
thebulkarchaeobotanical
samples.
11. Cut marks,however,are not abundanton the deer
remains.Only32 deerbones(1.9 percent)fromzonesD2 and
279
G possess cutmarks,18 of whichare interpreted
as filleting
marks.If meatwas beingcookedon thebone,however,
more
fragmentation
oftheboneswouldbe expectedso theywould
fitinto the cookingpots. If deer meat was roastedmore
burnedbones or bones singed at their ends would be
expected.
ReceivedMay 15,2001; RevisedOctober15,2001; Accepted
October15,2001.