CONSTRUCTING COMMUNITY AND COSMOS: A BIOARCHAEOLOGICAL ANALYSIS OF WISCONSIN EFFIGY MOUND MORTUARY PRACTICES AND MOUND CONSTRUCTION By Wendy Lee Lackey-Cornelison A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILSOPHY Anthropology 2012 ABSTRACT CONSTRUCTING COMMUNITY AND COSMOS: A BIOARCHAEOLOGICAL ANALYSIS OF WISCONSIN EFFIGY MOUND MORTUARY PRACTICES AND MOUND CONSTRUCTION By Wendy Lee Lackey-Cornelison This dissertation presents an analysis of the mounds, human skeletal remains, grave goods, and ritual paraphernalia interred within mounds traditionally categorized as belonging to the Wisconsin Effigy Mound Tradition. The term ‘Effigy Mound Tradition’ commonly refers to a widespread mound building and ritual phenomenon that spanned the Upper Midwest during the Late Woodland (A.D. 600-A.D. 1150). Specifically, this study explores how features of mound construction and burial may have operated in the social structure of communities participating in this panregional ceremonial movement. The study uses previously excavated skeletal material, published archaeological reports, unpublished field notes, and photographs housed at the Milwaukee Public Museum to examine the social connotations of various mound forms and mortuary ritual among Wisconsin Effigy Mound communities. The archaeological and skeletal datasets consisted of data collected from seven mound sites with an aggregate sample of 197 mounds and a minimum number of individuals of 329. The mortuary analysis in this study explores whether the patterning of human remains interred within mounds were part of a system involved with the 1) creation of collective/ corporate identity, 2) denoting individual distinction and/or social inequality, or 3) a combination of both processes occurring simultaneously within Effigy Mound communities. The results from the mortuary analysis suggests that Effigy Mound monumentalism and mortuary practices likely played a role in the creation and celebration of both corporate and individual identities within communities participating in this ceremonial movement. The findings also suggest that mound building was not performed solely for burial; rather mound construction and ceremonialism were possibly part of a panregional world renewal ceremonial and religious movement that sometimes included human burial. This study also illustrates how the Effigy Mound religious movement may have permeated other aspects of the social structure, particularly the creation of social inequality and/or 'masked hierarchy' within communities participating in this movement. This study suggests that burial within mounds was a communicative act to those responsible for mound construction and burial. Burial within conical and oval mounds was likely symbolic of collective identity creation. Burial within effigy mound forms, on the other hand, was much more limited and likely reflective of a system of individual distinction. The differential treatment of those buried within mounds belonging to the Effigy Mound Movement reveals that mound construction and burial likely performed processes of integration and distinction simultaneously among communities participating in this ceremonial movement. Copyright by Wendy Lee Lackey-Cornelison 2012 Dedication To my mother, who inspired my interest in physical anthropology, encouraged my dreams, and sadly did not get to see me finish. You are missed but never forgotten. To my amazing husband Jered, you have made all my dreams come true. v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank the Milwaukee Public Museum for allowing access to the Effigy Mound skeletal collection and archaeological documents. I would like to extend a special “Thank you” to Ms. Dawn Scher-Thomae of the Milwaukee Public Museum. You are a wonderful collections manager and made every trip run smoothly and efficiently. But perhaps, the best part of my work at the MPM was getting to you know you and your family and gaining a new friend. I would like to thank all the members of my doctoral committee, Dr. Goldstein, Dr. Lovis, Dr. O’Gorman, Dr. Sauer, and Dr. Bice. This dissertation could not have been completed without the help and support of the entire committee. I would, however, like to acknowledge the contribution of the archaeologists who threw me a much needed rope when I was teetering over the edge of the “graduate student cliff”. I will never forget that moment and extend my sincerest thanks to you. Dr. Lovis, thank you for your continued thoughtful and constructive criticism. I know this dissertation is better because of your comments. Dr. O’Gorman, thank you for your encouragement and interest throughout the project. I always felt energized and inspired after our meetings. Dr. Bice, thank you for your incredibly close reading of this dissertation. I also greatly appreciated your listening ear, encouragement, and shear enthusiasm about the work and my defense. Dr. Sauer, thank you for providing me with an excellent education in skeletal biology and forensic anthropology. I appreciated the numerous opportunities to teach physical and forensic vi anthropology (both at MSU and abroad) and assist in forensic cases. But perhaps the most important thing you taught me was that one's legacy is more than just professional accomplishment. One's legacy is also your relationships with family and friends and having a life outside of academia. Dr. Goldstein, I sincerely appreciate all your efforts in the development of this dissertation project, continued support throughout it, and guidance to complete it. I appreciated your honesty and no no-nonsense approach telling me that this was going to be incredibly difficult to start all over but also your belief in me that I could do it, especially when I was struggling to believe in myself. Thank you to my colleagues and fellow graduate students. I would like to extend special thanks to Dr. Michael Koot and Dr. Lindsey Jenny who took time to read various chapters, edit, and provide the all important advice on the dreaded formatting. This process was made much easier because of your help. Thank you to the department of Anthropology for financial and academic support throughout my graduate education. I would also to thank the Department of Radiology for providing me with the opportunity to teach anatomy and histology at MSU, pursue my research interest, and allow me to also take the time to finish my Ph.D. I am truly blessed to have such a wonderful opportunity to pursue my passion. Thank you to my Dad who always encouraged his kids to go to college and work hard. To my sister, April, thank you for the hours of listening to a cranky graduate student whining about the process. I owe you so much for the free telephone 'therapy' session. To my mom, vii thank you for the lifelong encouragement of learning new things: French, paleontology, art – through the Extra Time Classes; looking for "artifacts" and "fossils" whenever the opportunity was available; and forensics. Yes – you had so much to do with my pursuing this field and I know you are here to share this with me. To my daughters, Riley, Mackenzie, and Brynn, thank you for being so understanding while I was locked away working for hours on this project. Brynn, thank you for “playing dissertation with me” for the last two years. The hours you spent sitting next to me “writing” (i.e coloring) your dissertation will always be remembered. And to Jered, thank you for being such an amazing husband, colleague, friend, and fellow researcher. The hundreds of hours spent sitting across the lab table collecting data and discussing our hypotheses regarding the Effigy Mound material have been challenging but also fun. I could not imagine doing this with anyone else. I look forward to many future projects with you – as long as I am first author. I love you more than you will ever know. viii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES xiii LIST OF FIGURES xix Chapter 1: Introduction 1 Effigy Mound Tradition 2 Significance of the Problem: Need for Social Bioarchaeological Approach 6 Conceptual Frameworks 8 Purpose and Scope of the Study 10 Research Goals 12 Assumptions and Limitations 13 Conclusion 15 Organization of Dissertation 16 Chapter 2: Diachronic Analysis of Mound Construction in the Upper Midwest 19 Introduction 19 Environment of the Upper Midwest Region of the Eastern Woodlands 20 Archaeological Investigations of Mound Construction 26 The Middle Archaic Period 27 The Late Archaic Period/Early Woodland Period 32 The Early Woodland 36 The Middle Woodland 38 The Late Woodland 51 General Overview 51 Effigy Mound Monumental Construction 61 Middle Mississippian 77 Summary 91 The Upper Midwest in General 91 Wisconsin Mound Building and Mortuary Behavior through Time 93 The Meaning of Mound Construction in the Upper Midwest 96 Chapter 3: Mortuary Archaeological Theory and Analysis 100 Introduction 100 Mortuary Archaeological Theory 102 The Saxe-Binford Approach 102 Critiques of the Saxe-Binford Approach 107 Agency Theory in Mortuary Analysis 111 Secondary Burial and the Creation of Collective Identity 114 ix Cremation 116 Structuration Theory Applied to Mortuary Practices and Built Environs 118 Discussion 122 Chapter 4: Research Questions and Expectations 126 Introduction 126 Research Question 1 and Corresponding Expectations 127 Expectation 1 129 Expectation 2 130 Expectation 2a 130 Expectation 2b 130 Expectation 3 132 Expectation 4 135 Expectation 5 136 Research Question 2 and Corresponding Expectation 137 Expectation 6 139 Alternative