Institutional Database of Staff Publications Tennessee Division of Archaeology

Title: North American Historic Sites Zooarchaeology. Year: 1983 Name(s): Robert L. Jolley Source: Historical Archaeology 17(2):64-79.

Publisher Link: https://sha.org/publication-links/historical-archaeology-journal/

Division of Archaeology • 1216 Foster Ave. • Cole Bldg #3 • Nashville, TN 37243 Tel: 615-741-1588 • Fax: 615-741-7329 • www.tennessee.gov/environment/section/arch-archaeology ROBERT L. JOLLEY The Integration Period, a direct outgrowth of the '"New Archaeology," was characterized by fauna! reports that integrated fauna! analy­ North American Historic Sites sis into the main body of the report (e.g., Zooarchaeology Winters 1969; Munson et al. 1971). Reports during the Integration Period focus on fauna! analysis as a tool in determining site seasonal­ ity and subsistence and are characterized by a ABSTRACT greater emphasis on theory. The current status of historic sites zooarchaeology in Although the history of fauna! analysis goes North America is examined from an analytical and be­ back to the 1870s, its application to the field of havioral perspective. This review article emphasizes historic sites archaeology has been more the weaknesses, strengths, and potential of the disci­ recent. The first North American Euro/ Afro pline. American historic sites fauna! report was pub­ lished by Parmalee in 1960. Thus, it can be Introduction asserted that North American historic sites zooarchaeology is only a 22 year old disci­ Zooarchaeology, defined as the identification pline. and analysis of animal bones from archae­ ological sites (Grayson 1973:432), is the sub­ Methods: Procedures and Problems ject of this study. The paper will focus on North American zooarchaeology of Euro/ Afro Since the publication of White's American American historic sites. After a brief history Antiquity article in 1953, zooarchaeologists of the science is presented, the study of his­ have been concerned with determining the toric sites fauna! assemblages will be re­ actual number of fauna! species represented at viewed in the context of current methods and a site and at assessing their dietary signifi­ practices. The paper will then focus on vari­ cance. Basic to the reconstruction of the num­ ous aspects of historic sites zooarchaeology, ber of fauna! species represented is the con­ including historic documentation, dietary cept of Minimum Number of Individuals practices, husbandry practices, butchering, (White 1953), hereafter referred to as MNI. site interpretation, and the inference of cul­ Although White is generally attributed with tural practices. An attempt has been made to the origination of this concept, MNI was used review most published studies and selective­ in the analysis of fauna! remains from archae­ ly include a number of unpublished works. ological sites in Russia during the 1880s and used by paleontologists for at least two Historical Background decades prior to White's 1953 article (Casteel 1977: 125). Robinson ( 1978) has divided the science of White's calculation of MNI was based upon zooarchaeology into three periods: the Forma­ the greatest number of paired right and left tive Period (1870-1952), the Systemization elements from any given animal species. Since Period ( 1953-1969), and the Integration Period the publication of White's article, alternate (1969-present). The Formative Period was a methods have been proposed. Krantz (1968) time of development and experimentation, maintains that MNI should be calculated by while the Systemization Period incorporated pairing off the right and left bones from the fauna! studies into archaeological reports as same species and adding all the remaining left appendices and focused on dietary factors, and right elements. Bokonyi (1970:291) pro­ hunting patterns, and butchering practices. posed that MNI should be calculated on the NORTH AMERICAN HISTORIC SITES ZOOARCHAEOLOGY 65 basis of age and animal size. Although calculation in order to determine the dietary Krantz's and Bokonyi's methods of calculat­ significance of each fauna! species in relation ing MNI reflect a more realistic representation to one another. White (1953) proposed a stand­ of the actual number of individuals repre­ ardized estimate for poundage of edible meat sented at an archaeological site, application of afforded by significant food animals. How­ their methods would be time consuming and ever, the weight of animals vary with season­ impractical for most faunal assemblages. ality, sex, and age (Smith 1974; Stewart and There is a great deal of variation in the way Stahl 1977), and there are discrepancies be­ MNI is calculated (Casteel 1977: 125) and there tween White's proposed meat yield and the is no agreement as to its proper calculation weight of several animal species (Stewart and (Grayson 1973:433). Variations in the applica­ Stahl 1977). Since White's figures do not in­ tion of MNI will produce varying results that clude domestic species, historic sites archae­ cannot be directly compared. This is particu­ ologists have had to rely upon well-docu­ larly a problem when the majority of historic mented comparative collections and use other site zooarchaeologists do not indicate which sources to calculate meat yields (e.g., Bidwell MNI technique they have used. Recently, and Falconer 1925). However, there is more Casteel ( 1977) examined this problem and variation in the meat yield for domestic ani­ concluded that there is no best way to calcu­ mals than wild species. Historic documenta­ late MNI and that testing of new approaches tion of the weight of different cattle acquired should continue. by the Continental Army ranged from 100 to Modifications in application of the MNI 400 lbs. with one notable exception weighing method have been suggested. White ( 1953) 2270 lbs. (Olsen 1964:507). applied his concept of MNI to the entire site A method, other than MNI, has been pro­ while others have applied it to separate strati­ posed for calculating the meat yield of animal graphic zones of the site (Flannery 1967; species. This method assumes that the bone Perkins and Daley 1968). In their study, weight amounts to between 7 and 7. 7% of the Perkins and Daley ( 1968) were able to docu­ live weight of the animal (Reed 1963:214-15: ment the differential exploitation of fauna! Uerpmann 1973:310-11). However, the live resources through time at the same site. The weight calculation will be affected by mineral­ separate calculation of MNI for different fea­ ization, fragmentation, differential weather­ tures and different historic occupations at the ing, and differential representation of skeletal same site has been successful in determining elements (Reed 1963:215). This method has differences in exploitative patterns (Cleland not been used extensively by zooarchae­ 1970) and seasonality (Shapiro 1979). ologists and has been applied to only two his­ The MNI concept has recently been criti­ toric sites fauna! studies (Cumbaa 1975; Otto cized because it cannot provide a valid 1975). measure of taxonomic abundance that is Recently, a slightly different technique for greater than ordinal in scale because the rela­ estimating meat yield from skeletal remains tionship between MNI and the actual number was devised. Animal biomass is calculated of individuals in faunal assemblage is never from bone weight through use of an allometric known (Grayson 1979:201). Thus, all that can equation (Wing and Brown 1979: 127). This be known is that the actual number of individ­ technique has been used in two historic faunal uals lies somewhere between the MNI and the studies (Reitz 1979; Honerkamp 1980). The total number of elements identified for that advantage of the technique is that it yields a species. calculation that is based upon archaeological The calculation of MNI is a means to an data (Honerkamp 1980: 147). Disadvantages end. The end result is to derive a meat yield with the technique are that skeletal weight and 66 HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, VOLUME 17 body weight are not directly proportional 1978; Loucks 1979; Miller 1979; Reitz 1979; (Wing and Brown 1979: 127) and the calcula­ Schultz 1979; Sharpiro 1979; Lyman 1979; tion is based upon constants that need to be Bostwick 1980; Mainfort 1980; Polhemus continually refined (Honerkamp 1980: 147). 1980; Drucker 1981) it has been determined Meat yield estimates are idealized figures that the number of fauna! elements was not that represent the maximum amount of meat quantified in 23% of the reports, MNI was not available; they do not reflect the amount of calculated in 36% of the reports, and meat meat consumed. As stated by Lyman (1979: yield was not calculated in 69% of the reports. 539), four left cow femurs may represent four The prevalent lag between practice and cows but not 2,000 lbs. of meat. Lyman be­ method and theory is illustrated in Table I. lieves that the butchering unit, defined as the Fauna! reports that were contained in jour­ portion of the animal body that results from nals, conference bulletins, theses, or disserta­ the act of butchering, is the proper analytic tions were more complete in their analysis unit. The analytic unit, which is culturally than fauna! studies contained in site reports. derived, would more realistically reflect con­ This is particularly evident in the calculation sumption. This recently defined approach has of meat yield, which was calculated 44% of the been applied to only one historic site, Fort time in the conference and journal articles but Walla in southeastern Washington (Lyman was not calculated for any of the site reports. 1979). There has been a consistent lack of concern for fauna! studies by a number of historic sites Historic Sites Fauna! Methods archaeologists. Historic sites archaeologists in the mid 1970s stated "time did not permit us to In many cases, the aforementioned methods make a thorough study of these remains and concepts have never been applied to his­ (fauna!) and as this was certainly not represen­ toric faunal assemblages. Through examina­ tative of a total population, it was felt that tion of 39 historic sites fauna! reports (Parma­ there was no need" (Hanson and Hsu 1975: lee 1960, 1967, 1973; Olsen 1964; Brose 1967; 164) and "detailed identification and analysis Butsch 1970; Guilday 1970; Cleland 1970; of this quantity of bone would be a lengthy Olsen and Penman 1972; Thurmond 1973; process and would not be of sufficient value to Ehrenhard 1973; Losey 1973; Stephenson justify the time spent" (Stephenson 1974:326). 1974; Bowen 1975; Cumbaa 1975; Hanson and As indicated in Table 2, there has been a Hsu 1975; Honerkamp 1975, 1980; Otto 1975; steady improvement in the methods used. Of Cardinal 1976; Olsen and Wilson 1976; Barber the 26 reports examined during the period 1976; Breitburg 1976, 1979a, 1979b, 1980; from 1975 to 1981, 84.6% contained quantifi­ Robinson 1977; Mudar 1978; Miller and Lewis cation of the fauna! elements, 73.1% the MNI,

TABLE 1 KINDS OF METHODS USED BY REPORT TYPE Quantification Calculation Calculation Sample of of of size faunal elements MN! meat yield

Site reports 12 8 (66.6'7o) 6 (50'7o) 0 Journal, conference articles, M.A. theses, and Ph.D. dissertations 27 22 (81.5'7o) 19 (70.4'7c) /2 (44.4'7c) Total 39 30 (76.9'7c) 25 (64. l'lo) 12 (30.8'7c) NORTH AMERICAN HISTORIC SITES ZOOARCHAEOLOGY 67

TABLE2 KINDS OF METHODS USED BY YEAR GROUPINGS Quantification Calculation Calculation Sample of of of Year size fauna! elements MNI meat yield

1960-1969 4 3 (75%) I (25%) 0 1970-1974 9 5 (55.5%) 5 (55.5%) 2 (22%) 1975-1981 26 22 (84.6%) 19 (73.1%) to (38.5%) Total 39

and 38.5% the meat yield. However, when it is biased toward large mammals and older age considered that the aforementioned methods class mammals (Payne 1974). Moreover, the were outlined almost 30 years ago (White larger elements of a skeleton are overrepre­ 1953) and are commonly accepted as the sented, affecting inferences of butchering proper way to analyze fauna! remains, an methods (Payne 1974: I l). Most archaeological incredible discrepancy between what has been recovery techniques are biased against the practiced and what has been considered recovery of smaller species of animals, par­ acceptable exists. ticularly fish (Limp and Reidhead 1979). Cor­ rection values, derived from multiple mesh Analytical Tools and Problems screening of sample units at Nevada sites, have been formulated to alleviate recovery Diversity and equitability indices are valu­ biases (Thomas 1969) and techniques for able analytical tools (cf., Cumbaa 1975; Reitz measuring and correcting recovery biases by 1979). Diversity is a measure of the number of analyzing the fragmentation pattern of animal species exploited and equitability is a measure bones have been established (Watson 1972). of the degree of dependence upon the utilized However, neither technique has been applied species (Reitz 1979: 124). These measures have to historic fauna! assemblages. been used to determine that a St. Augustine site Differential bone preservation will affect had a aboriginal procurement pattern (Cumbaa interpretations of historic faunal exploitation. 1975:209). They have also been used to Skeletal elements may be subject to differen­ demonstrate that at St. Augustine and Frederi­ tial preservation dependent upon their durabil­ ca site inhabitants were reliant upon only a few ity and the context of their deposition. The taxa even though there was a large number of exceedingly high incidence of a small game different species exploited (Reitz 1979: 130). animal (rabbit) recovered from an exceptional­ There are a number of analytical problems ly well preserved feature, a privy, suggested that must be considered when a fauna! assem­ to Robison (1977:200) that small game played blage is analyzed. These problems include not only a greater part in the Fort Southwest sample size, recovery methods, preservation Point garrison diet but also at other forts with factors, and modification of the fauna! assem­ poor bone preservation. On the other hand, an blage by natural and cultural processes. These analysis of !Kung Bushman fauna! remains problems are usually not addressed by historic indicates that smaller animal bones preserve sites fauna! analysts. better because they are not extensively In order for zooarchaeologists to properly broken (Yellen 1977:319). assess the fauna! sample, they must know the Another basic analytical problem that is recovery methods (Ziegler 1973:3). A study of often neglected is the differentiation of intru­ a Neolithic and Bronze Age site in Northern sive fauna from cultural fauna. A number of Greece indicates that those remains recovered intrusive animals, including rodents, raptorial when material is unscreened will be heavily birds, and carnivores, in an archaeological 68 HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, VOLUME 17 faunal assemblage may reflect natural proc­ bone discs and/or bone buttons from cow ribs esses (e.g., scavenging and natural deposi­ and scapulas may skew the frequency of these tion). Intrusive faunal remains can be identi­ elements. Consequently, the presence of bone fied as such if they were non-edible wild artifacts and their manufacturing residue species, not butchered, skeletally complete, should be taken into consideration when the unbroken, or unburnt (Thomas 1971:368; faunal remains are analyzed and interpreted. Ziegler 1973: 16). A study of the distribution Another analytical problem is created by pattern of non-edible wild species at Fort variation in the number of identifiable skeletal Michilimackinac has demonstrated that they elements. For example, pigs have twice as tend to occur in cultural features that were many identifiable foot bones as deer and sheep potential shelters or natural traps (Butsch (Daley 1969: 149). Thus, the differential num­ 1970:61). A statistical method, employing cor­ ber of identifiable bones for different species relation coefficients, has been devised to may skew the MNI and meat yield figures. quantify natural bone at a site (Thomas 1971); Although a corrective technique, based upon however, this method has not been used in the division of the archaeological sample of any of the studies examined. skeletal elements of each species by the num­ Natural processes may modify a faunal ber of identifiable skeletal elements for that assemblage. The differential destruction of species has been devised (Perkins 1964), this skeletal elements by attritional processes technique has not been used by historic sites (e.g., dogs and other carnivores) has been faunal analysts. examined by the study of archaeological Problems with analytical terms and their use assemblages and experimental replication are prevalent in faunal studies. The terminol­ (Binford and Bertram 1977). The probabilities ogy and systems of abbreviations currently in of survival for a given anatomical part will use are poorly defined, redundant, ambigious, vary with bone density, a factor that is de­ and unnecessarily cumbersome (Casteel and pendent upon the age of the animal (Binford Grayson 1977:239). A uniform terminological and Bertram 197: 148). Thus, the age classes of approach through the use of terms already a species in a faunal assemblage may be defined and by explicitly defining new terms is skewed by attritional processes. advocated by Casteel and Grayson to alleviate Cultural processes can create analytical the problem. problems. Different food preparation tech­ The aforementioned analytical and termin­ niques, cooking techniques, butchering, and ological problems indicate that the scientific disposal practices affect the faunal assem­ study of faunal remains is still in its infancy. blage (Otto 1975:300; Honerkamp 1980: 145). Standardized methods for calculating MNI The differential distribution of elements and and meat yield need to be developed and addi­ species at a site may be the result of food shar­ tional corrective techniques for various prob­ ing and butchering practices (Loucks 1979: lems need to be devised before valid inter-site 230). comparisons can be made. Until this stage is White (1953:391) emphasized the impor­ attained, faunal analysts must recognize the tance of distinguishing between the portion of limitations that these problems impose upon the animal used for food and that used for their data. utensils and clothing. The differential repre­ sentation of skeletal elements at a site may Role of Historic Documentation and reflect tool manufacture or use. The absence Historical Studies of ulnas at Fort Moultrie, South Carolina, sug­ gested to Stephenson ( 1974:331) that these The potential for advances in the field of elements were used for awls or punches. The zooarchaeology is greater for historic faunal common historic practice of manufacturing studies than prehistoric fauna! studies. The NORTH AMERICAN HISTORIC SITES ZOOARCHAEOLOGY 69 proper use of historic documents can resolve archaeological record can lead to the develop­ analytical problems. Often there are written ment of alternate explanations. For example, records (e.g., military correspondence, pro­ since hunting was not encouraged at Fort bate inventories, diaries and daybooks of Enterprise in the Northwest Territory (the planters) that state the kind, number, and commanding officer considered the cost of average weight of livestock animals; the na­ ammunition greater than the return), the pres­ ture of the meat supply (i.e., whether the sup­ ence of a small number of bird and mammal ply was on the hoof, acquired by the butcher­ remains were interpreted as animals collected ing unit or preserved by salting, pickling or by the expedition naturalist (Losey 1973: 141- smoking); and the daily food allotments for 42). soldiers and slaves. Although these forms of There are a number of historical studies on documentation have been recognized by his­ dietary practices (cf., Hilliard 1969, 1972; toric sites archaeologists and applied to faunal Anderson 1971). These studies are invaluable studies (e.g., Olsen 1964; Parmalee 1966; to historic site faunal studies, however, they Bowen 1975; Otto 1975; Olsen and Wilson have received limited usage. Inferences on 1976; Breitburg 1976), they have not been status, butchering and dietary patterning can used to resolve analytical problems. These be derived from historical studies (cf., Otto documentary items hold potential for estab­ 1975; Schultz 1979; Honerkamp 1980; Drucker lishing accurate meat yield calculations and 1981). The combined use of historical studies determining whether the total meat yield or and historic fauna! remains have emphasized the butchering unit is the proper analytic tool. the importance of beef in the diet of late 19th One of the most valuable research tools century settlers in the American West available to historic sites archaeologists is his­ (Schultz 1979:57). Subsistence models, based toric documentation. The combined use of this upon an ethnohistorical study (Anderson research tool and zooarchaeological data can 1971), and historical documentation have been suggest the uses of animals. Discrepancies be­ formulated and tested with archaeolog­ tween the zooarchaeological data and probate ical data (Cumbaa 1975; Reitz 1979; Honer­ inventories at the Mott Farm allowed the kamp 1980). Anderson's (1971) model, based archaeologist to identify the animals used for upon a synthesis of British foodways, was not food consumption versus those raised for applicable to Fort Frederica, a British colonial market purposes, draft, and clothing (Bowen site in North America, because of its frontier 1975). location (Honerkamp 1980:280). Historic documentation provides a check on what is manifested archaeologically. At Fort Sumner, New Mexico, the historic documen­ Fauna! Analysis and Historic Settlement Types tation coincided so well with the faunal assem­ blage that all faunal remains were reflected in There are 55 sites represented in the 39 the historic documentation, including the re­ fauna! studies examined. Eighteen are military mains of an officer's pet hawk (Olsen and garrisons or encampments, 14 are fortified Wilson 1976: 16). Historic documentation can towns, 6 are plantations, 2 are hotels or inns, 2 be used as a check on the real versus the ideal; are missions, 6 are lower-to-middle class rural written records often reflect what people residences, 5 are urban residences, l is a should have done, not necessarily what hap­ mining camp, and I is a jail. There is more pened. The historic documentation at Fort known about the diet of military garrisons Ligonier suggests that hunting was officially than about the diet of civilians. The irony is that forbidden; however, the fauna! remains indi­ so little is known ~bout the most prevalent cate that hunting was practiced (Guilday type of historic settlement-the lower-to­ 1970). Discrepancies between the historic and middle class residence. 70 HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, VOLUME 17 Dietary patterning should vary with the set­ and the fauna! remains of the French occu­ tlement type. Plantations are specialized pants of Fort Michilimackinac, Michigan economies and military garrisons have regi­ (Cleland 1970), reflect a greater exploitation of mented dietary practices (i.e., rations) and the natural environment when compared to prescribed status distinctions. The military British occupations of the same or neighboring subsistence economies are more rigid and thus sites. In the case of Fort Michilimackinac, more predictable than the subsistence differences in faunal exploitation were related economies of the lower-to-middle class resi­ to differences in site function; the French dences. Since socio-economic factors, ethnic­ occupation was primarily a trading mission ity, and the local ecology should be more in­ center while the British occupation was a mili­ fluential in the subsistence economies of the tary garrison (Cleland 1970). Robison ( 1977) latter settlement type, a more varied adapta­ attributed the greater exploitation of wild tion should result. species at the American garrison of Fort Dietary patterning should also vary with the Southwest Point in comparison to the British location of the settlement type. The composi­ garrison at Fort Loudoun, Tennessee, to the tion of urban and rural faunal assemblages dif­ prolonged seige of Fort Loudoun by hostile fers because of differential access to resources forces. However, this pattern just as likely and commercial markets (Mudar 1978). reflects the American's greater familiarity with the land and their ability to more fully Dietary Practices, Preferences and Limitations exploit it. Although beef appears to be the staple sup­ Most of these 55 historic sites reflect a de­ ply of meat at a number of historic sites, pork pendence on domestic animal species. The is also important. The historic documentation three sites that suggest a greater reliance and faunal remains at one site in central upon wild animal species are a 17th century Tennessee suggest that pork was the staple Spanish mission (Loucks 1979:228), a 16th supply of meat (Breitburg 1976). The dietary century St. Augustine site (Reitz 1979: 136), importance of pork relates to the economic and a 19th century fortified outpost (Losey feasibility of raising an animal with a short 1973). The only site which suggests an equal gestation period, a fast rate of maturation, and exploitation of both wild and domestic species an ability to produce numerous offspring and is an early Massachusetts colonial residence consume practically anything (Bowen 1975: (Olsen and Penman 1972). Although the re­ 20; Breitburg 1976:263). Its importance is mains from all sites may be biased by sample emphasized by the number of cultural meth­ size, a greater dependence on wild faunal ods that have been devised to preserve pork species would be anticipated for these sites (Breitburg 1976:263). because of the type of adaptation. These sites The consumption of invertebrate species of reflect a short-term adaptation by an expedi­ saltwater fauna (e.g., scallops, oysters, and tionary force (Losey 1973) and early colonial clams) is evident at a few historic sites (Brose adaptations (Olsen and Penman 1973; Loucks and Reed 1967:80; South 1974:225; Mudar 1979; Reitz 1979). 1978:351). Cumbaa (1975: 138) maintains that The data suggests that cattle, pigs, and shellfish were intensively exploited at one St. sheep were the mainstay of the diet for most of Augustine site; however, Reitz (1979: 106) ex­ these sites. The exploitation of wild animals cluded shellfish from her analysis of St. species was evident at most sites. The fauna! Augustine sites because they were also used remains of the American garrison at Fort as a building material. The exploitation of Southwest Point, Tennessee (Robison 1977), aquatic freshwater mussels as a food resource NORTH AMERICAN HISTORIC SITES ZOOARCHAEOLOGY 71 has been suggested by Parmalee (1973:82), techniques (Otto 1975:336). The absence of however, others have discounted this possibil­ netted fish species such as mullet suggests that ity (Breitburg 1976:266). nets were not used at Fort Frederica (Honer­ In order to accurately reconstruct dietary kamp 1980:286) while the presence of large practices, the faunal analyst must determine species of fish from the Sciaenidae family sug­ the nature of the meat supplies. If meat was gests sophisticated fishing techniques (Honer­ acquired after it was butchered, boned, and kamp 1975: 133). salted elsewhere, no fauna) remains would Differences in dietary patterning may reflect result. Consequently, any attempt at comput­ ethnicity. A study of the fauna) remains from ing the amount of meat available would be early 19th century Detroit suggests that the nonsensical (Guilday 1970). If the supply of consumption of mutton and saltwater mol­ meat was acquired by the butchering unit, cer­ lusks was related to ethnicity (Mudar 1978: tain fauna) elements would be overrepre­ 368). On the other hand, ethnic differences sented and butchering residue (e.g., skull and between black slaves and white overseers hoof elements) absent. Without these deter­ were not evident in the fauna! assemblages minations, dietary practices may become con­ recovered from Cannon's Point Plantation fused with dietary preferences or dietary re­ (Otto 1975:356). strictions and limitations (cf., Cumbaa 1975: Differences in social and ideological sys­ 20 I; Loucks 1979:228). tems are reflected in dietary practices. The The differential representation of skeletal presence of a greater number of fish remains elements may reflect dietary preferences or during the French occupation at Fort Michili­ dietary limitations. At Fort Walla Walla, mackinac in comparison to the British occupa­ Washington, 65% of the bones of pigs were tion relates to religious dietary regulations: the pigs feet, suggesting that pig knuckles or pigs French were Catholic and the British Protes­ feet were eaten (Lyman 1977:69). An analysis tant (Cleland 1970: 16). Aspects of the social of the animals consumed by the Continental system are reflected as status distinctions by Army indicated that all cow elements were the presence of quality cuts of meat and a poor quality meat cuts that could only have more diverse fauna) assemblage, particularly been used as soup bones (Olsen 1964:508). at military sites (cf. Brose 1967:80; Losey 1973 ). A study of three western sites indicates Cultural Inferences From Faunal that quality cuts of meat correspond with high Assemblages socio-economic status (Schultz 1979:59). A study of three St. Augustine sites (Cumbaa Aspects of a culture's technological system 1975) and a study of socio-economic differ­ can be inferred from fauna) assemblages. The ences within a southern plantation have deter­ exploitation of a greater variety of fowl by mined that quality cuts of meat and a more Europeans at Fort Michilimackinac was re­ diverse fauna) assemblage are correlated with lated to the use of firearms (Cleland 1970: 16). social status (Otto 1975). A positive correla­ Most technological inferences used by historic tion between wild resource utilization and sites fauna) analysts are with fishing. The high socio-economic status was demonstrated presence of turbot at Fort Michilimackinac at St. Augustine, Florida (Cumbaa 1975), and indicates· deep sea fishing (Cleland 1970). The Cannon's Point Plantation, Georgia (Otto presence of a greater species diversity of fish 1975:308). However, the high biomass contri­ and turtle at the planter's kitchen at Cannon's bution of wild animals at a St. Augustine site Point Plantation suggests that slaves and over­ has been interpreted to a low socio-economic seers may have possessed inadequate fishing standing (Reitz 1979: 138). A dietary pattern of 72 HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, VOLUME 17 limited variety has been used to support the ma! bones at Fort Moultrie was interpreted as hypothesis that Fountainhead Plantation, the result of broiling or stewing meat (Ste­ South Carolina, was occupied by low socio­ phenson 1974:33 l). economic blacks (Drucker 1981: 190). On the other hand, fauna! diversity has been inter­ Husbandry Practices preted to dietary preferences (Butsch 1970: 62). Differences in the number of animals and Political factors (i.e., alliances and wars) their age classes reflect husbandry practices may affect the faunal resources that are (Noodle 1974:248) which can be reconstructed exploited. The first Spanish period pattern of by using the detailed age criteria established using immediately available resources at St. by Silver (1963). There is an optimal slaughter Augustine may relate to their relations with age when rapid growth rate has ceased and the neighboring Indians and British colonies lo­ meat output no longer increases relative to the cated to the north (Reitz 1979: 149). food output (Uerpman 1973:315). However, Differences in dietary practices can also re­ variations in the age of pig slaughter were flect leisure time or sport. A high incidence of discerned at the Mott Farm, Massachusetts, game animals at Drayton Hall Plantation, (Bowen 1975:23), The Hermitage, Tennessee South Carolina, was hypothesized prior to the (Breitburg 1976:259), Pettus Plantation and fauna! analysis to be the result of leisure time Utopia Cottage, Virginia (Miller 1979: 168- (Miller and Lewis 1978:252). The presence of 171). Miller (1979: 171) suggests that variation duck, grouse and passenger pigeon remains at in the age of slaughter may reflect whether the Fort Stanwix, New York, was interpreted as animals were penned or not. The wider age hunting for sport (Hanson and Hsu 1975: 164). range of domestic mammals recovered from Food taboos are an important considera­ the planter's kitchen at Cannon's Point Planta­ tion. According to Simoons (1961), food tion on Saint Simon Island, Georgia, suggests avoidances relate to religious practices, hy­ status differences (Otto 1975:334). Other un­ giene, and man's familiarity with animals. considered factors (e.g., supply and demand, Revolutionary War and Civil War accounts local ecology, and type of adaptation) may indicate that starving troops would not eat rats also affect the age of slaughter. or cats (Martin 1962:83; Watkins 1962:96). The purposes for which the animals were The food taboos against domestic pets is raised are reflected by age and sex categories. considered to be so great that zooarchae­ At Drayton Hall Plantation, Virginia, male ologists have offered alternate explanations swine were over represented in the fauna! for cut marks on cat elements. Reitz ( 1979: assemblage because females were retained for 14 l) suggests that the cut mark may actually breeding purposes (Miller and Lewis 1978: be a plow mark and Otto (1975:356) suggests 256). Animals that were used for labor and that the cat may have been cut up for fish bait. purposes other than consumption can be Cultural preferences for the preparation of recognized by age categories that extend be­ foods should be reflected in the fauna! re­ yond the optimal slaughter age. They can also mains; however, fauna! analysts rarely distin­ be recognized on the basis of sex. Male ani­ guish charred from uncharred bone. The pres­ mals tend to be used more often than females ence of charred articular ends of bone suggest for labor purposes and only female animals that the animals were prepared by open fire would be retained for dairying. roasting and the random burning of bone sug­ The raising of animals for market purposes gests that the animal remains were deposited can be discerned by discrepancies between in hearths after they were consumed (Loucks the fauna! remains and the historic documen­ 1979:273). The absence of burnt small mam- tation (Bowen 1975 :22; Breit burg 1976:263 ). NORTH AMERICAN HISTORIC SITES ZOOARCHAEOLOGY 73 The differential representation of skeletal ele­ individuals among whom the meat must be ments can be attributed to market practices. shared (Yellen 1977:285). Although historic The high ratio of swine skull parts at Drayton butchering practices differ from those of Hall Plantation was interpreted to the raising hunters and gatherers, they are known to vary of pork for market purposes (Miller and Lewis with ethnicity and nationality. An American 1978:264) while the absence of chicken head butchering pattern has been defined (Schultz and feet elements from urban residences in 1979:58). Differences in the way French and Detroit was attributed to the purchase of Americans butcher their meat should be re­ chickens from urban markets (Mudar 1978: flected in the archaeological record (Yellen 339). 1977:329). Since many historic forts in Eastern Husbandry practices may also reflect as­ North American have mixed occupations of pects of the social system relating to status different nationalities (e.g., Spanish, French, and recreation. The age of slaughter can be British and American), it is therefore theoret­ used as a means of assessing social status by ically possible to use this culturally distinct assuming that different age categories reflect process to segregate mixed occupations at differences in the quality of meat (Miller 1979: some sites. 168). Evidence that cocks were raised for Butchering patterns suggest what portions recreational activities (i.e., gaming purposes) of the animal were consumed. A study of the at Fort Sumner, New Mexico, was suggested butchering patterns of cattle from Fort by the large size of their spur cores (Olsen and Loudoun indicate that the entire animal, in­ Wilson 1976:30). cluding the head, was eaten (Parmalee 1960: 28). Butchering Practices, Techniques, and Butchering remains indicate the quality of Cultural Inferences the cut of meat. The butchering remains from the Netherland Inn, Tennessee, and the Butchering practices have received wide­ Custer Road Dump Site, Michigan, indicate spread attention among historic sites fauna! that roasts and steaks were consumed (Brose analysts. Observations on butchering marks 1967:78; Parmalee 1973:84). On an interpreta­ have been used to infer butchering methods, tive level, a decline in the military importance the types of butchering implements used, and of Fort Mackinac in the 1880s was correlated the quality of the meat cuts. Although most with the decline in the quality of beef cuts fauna! analysts use a descriptive approach, a (Brose 1967:80). more rigorous technical approach is advo­ The use of different implements for butcher­ cated. Only one of the historic sites fauna! ing reflects temporal variation, status, and the studies examined contained a detailed quanti­ cuts of meat desired. Temporal variation was tative study of the location, orientation, and noted at Fort Stanwix-not a single saw mark frequency of the butchering marks (Lyman was found on 18th century bones while the 1977). This study placed the butchering 19th century bones were almost exclusively methods in an historical perspective that sawed (Hanson and Hsu 1975: 165). Thus, the varied slightly from those recorded for the ability to discern the use of different butcher­ military in 1924 and present day practices ing implements is a potential chronological (Lyman 1977:73). aide at some sites. Different butchering imple­ Butchering practices reflect culturally ments may be used depending upon the cuts of prescribed patterns of consumption and dis­ meat desired and the difficulty involved with tribution. The distribution pattern of meat and butchering the animal. For example, the dif­ the degree of butchering among the !Kung ferential use of saws and an ax/cleaver for Bushman is dependent upon the number of butchering correlate with different skeletal 74 HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, VOLUME 17 areas of the animals (Lyman 1977:67-69). The tions (Miller 1979: 174). The ratio of bone to use of different butchering implements may artifacts is the primary variable for distin­ also relate to status. At Cannon's Point Planta­ guishing an adjacent from a peripheral midden tion the faunal remains from the planter's deposit (South 1977: 182). The differential dis­ kitchen were carefully butchered by saw while tribution of fauna) remains at historic sites the fauna) remains from the slave and overseer indicates where food was prepared, eaten, and cabins were butchered by axes and cleavers discarded (Butsch 1970: Robison 1977:202). (Otto 1977: 104). The differential horizontal distribution of dif­ ferent skeletal elements throughout a site sug­ Ecological Considerations gests what areas of the site were used for the deposition of butchering refuse and kitchen Only a few historic site faunal studies have refuse (Thurmond 1973:240; Stephenson 1974: considered ecological factors. Site catchment 330; Lyman 1977:70). Differences in the hori­ studies indicate that all the species exploited at zontal density of faunal remains correlate with St. Augustine, Frederica, and Baptizing Spring the occurrences of historic structures (Breit­ mission would have been found within a two burg 1976:249) and can be used to interpret the mile radius of the sites (Loucks 1979:276; Reitz function of structures (Miller and Lewis 1978: 1979: 130). The available literature indicates 264-65). The concentration of certain species that differences in British and French faunal of intrusive animals defines the function of assemblages reflect adaptations to local en­ certain structures (Breitburg 1979a:58) and vironmental factors (Reitz 1979:61 ). Differ­ correlates with the occurrence of certain fea­ ences in 18th century British exploitation of ture types (Butsch 1970:61). Furthermore, fish and birds at Frederica and St. Augustine faunal analysis has confirmed the function and have been related to environmental factors cultural affiliation of features (Cardinal 1976). (Reitz 1979: 156). Honerkamp (1980:288) has The properly combined use of historic attributed the greater utilization of pig over documentation and fauna! analysis may pro­ cattle in early colonial Georgia to highly dis­ vide more accurate interpretations of the persed grazing and foraging lands. socio-economic status of the site occupants. The proper use of both these research tools Bones as a Food Resource was instrumental in altering the interpretation of Utopia Cottage from a slave-quarters to a The bones themselves may be cracked for tenancy (Miller 1979). When historic docu­ marrow and treated as a food resource. Shat­ mentation has been lacking, fauna! remains tered bone may also result from the use of have aided in interpreting socio-economic bone as raw material in tool production status (Drucker 1981:190). (Uerpman 1973:310). The extensive crushing Most prehistoric fauna! studies are con­ of bones at encampments of the Continental cerned with enhancing site interpretations by Army suggests that bone marrow was extract­ establishing the seasonality of occupation. ed and consumed (Olsen 1964:508). At another Since most historic sites are assumed to have site, evidence suggests that starving men were been occupied year around, site seasonality is attempting to extract residual bone grease usually neglected. However, Shapiro's (1979) (Losey 1973: 141). ability to determine the seasonality of differ­ ent features at Fort Michilimackinac chal­ Role of Fauna! Analysis in the Interpretation of lenged Cleland's ( 1970) previous interpreta­ Historic Sites tions of the site. Shapiro's data suggest that the exploitation of fauna! resources by the Faunal analysis can significantly contribute French occupants of Fort Michilimackinac to more dependable and valid site interpreta- reflect adjustments to the seasonality of NORTH AMERICAN HISTORIC SITES ZOOARCHAEOLOGY 75 natural resources similar to prehistoric adap­ Conclusions tations to the region (cf., Cleland 1966). The purpose of this paper has been to assess New Directions the potential applications of historic sites fauna! studies. The potential applications are Since 1970, significant advances in the field both numerous and varied. Historic sites of zooarchaeology have been made. These in­ fauna! analysts can aid in advancing methods clude the testing of hypotheses (Butsch 1970; and analytical procedures through the com­ Cleland 1970; Losey 1973; Cumbaa 1975; bined use of historic and archaeological data. Miller and Lewis 1978; Mudar 1978; Loucks Additional applications include the interpreta­ 1979; Miller 1979; Reitz 1979; Shapiro 1979) tion and cultural identification of site occupa­ and the use of predictive models (Smith 1974) tions and the determination of various aspects and computer systems (Brock 1974; Gifford of social and ideological systems. and Crader 1977). The application of the com­ In conclusion, historic sites fauna! analysts parative approach (Brock 1974:21; Noodle should establish goals that are concerned 1974:248) and the importance of deploying a primarily with the documentation and com­ fauna! analyst in the field (Shapiro 1979:320) parison of inter- and intra-site variability in have been advocated. Most historic site fauna! subsistence practices. These comparisons analysts have not made use of these ap­ should take into consideration the affects of proaches. settlement type, socio-economic status, tem­ Differences between cultural systems have poral variation, and spacial variation, on inter­ been the subject of a few recent historic fauna! and intra-site variability. studies (Cleland 1970; Reitz 1979; Bostwick 1980). A comparison of British and French ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS occupations at Fort Michilimackinac (Cleland 1970) and comparisons between British and I am grateful for the comments received by Ronald Spanish occupations at St. Augustine (Bost­ Spores, Robert Newman and the three anonymous re­ wick 1980) have suggested differences in sub­ viewers selected by the editor of this journal. sistence patterning between cultural systems. An inter-site comparative study between REFERENCES British and Spanish subsistence strategies has been conducted (Reitz 1979). Changes through A:-.ioERSON, 1A Y ALLEN 1971 A Solid Sufficiency: An Ethnography of Yeoman time within the same cultural system have Foodways in Stuart England. Ph.D. dissertation, been examined by Honerkamp (1980) and University of Pennsylvania.

Reitz (1979). In both studies, a shift from BARBER' MICHAEL swine to cattle as a source of meat was ap­ 1976 The Vertebrate Fauna from a Late Eighteenth parent at both Spanish and British colonial Century Well: The Bray Plantation, Kingsmill, sites in the Southeastern United States. Virginia. Historical Archaeology ( !0):68-73. Studies of the same cultural system have been BIDWELL PERCY WELLS AND JoHN I. FALCONER conducted (Otto 1975; Cumbaa 1975; Reitz 1925 History ofAgriculture in Northern United States 1979) and differences between the fauna! 1620-1860. Carnegie Institute of Washington, Washington, D.C. assemblages attributed to status distinctions and ecological factors. Also, a significant BINFORD, LEWIS R. AND JACK B. BERTRAM 1977 Bone Frequencies and Attritional Processes. In inter-disciplinary study, incorporating the For Theory Building in Archaeology. edited by disciplines of history, historical archaeology, Lewis R. Binford, pp. 77-152. Academic Press, cultural anthropology, and physical anthro­ New York. pology, has been conducted (Gibbs et. al. BoKONYI, SANDOR 1980). 1970 A New Method of the Determination of the 76 HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, VOLUME 17

Number of Individuals in Animal Bone Material. Minimum Number of Individuals Determined American Journal of Archaeology 74:291-92. from Paired Elements: Continuing Problems in Archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Science BOSTWICK, JoHN A. t-980 The Plaza II Site Excavation of a Colonial 4(2): 125-34. Spanish Well in St. Augustine, Florida. His­ CASTEEL, RICHARD w. AND DoNALD K. GRAYSON torical Archaeology 14:73--82. 1977 Terminological Problems in Quantitative Faunal Analysis. World Archaeology 9 (2):235-42. BOWEN, JoANE 1975 Probate Inventories: An Evaluation from the CLELAND, CHARLES E. Perspective of Zooarchaeology and Agricultural 1966 The Prehistoric Animal Ecology and Ethnology History at Mott Farm. Historical Archaeology of the Upper Great Lakes Region. University of 9: 11-25. Michigan Museum of Anthropology, Anthro­ BREITBURG, EMANUEL pological Papers 29. 1976 Fauna) Remains from the First Hermitage. In An 1970 Comparison of the Faunal Remains from French Archaeological and Historical Assessment of the and British Refuse Pits at Fort Michilimackinac: First Hermitage, edited by Samuel D. Smith, pp. A Study in Changing Subsistence Patterns. 249--69. Research Series No. 2. Division of Canadian Historic Sites Occasional Papers in Archaeology, Tennessee Department of Conser­ Archaeology and History No. 3. Ottawa. vation. CUMBAA, STEPHEN L. 1979a Carter House Faunal Remains. In Summary of 1975 Patterns of Resource Use and Cross Cultural Archaeological Explorations at the Carter House Dietary Change in the Spanish Colonial Period. (40CR5) Carter County, Tennessee by Samuel Ph.D. dissertation, University of Florida. D. Smith. Manuscript on file at the Tennessee Division of Archaeology. DALY, PATRICIA 1979b Faunal Remains. In Report of Archaeological 1969 Approaches to Fauna) Analysis in Archaeology. Excavations at the Denney Site, 40SM69, by American Antiquity 34(2): 146--53. Guy Weaver. Rough draft manuscript. DRUCKER, LESLEY M. 1980 Area B. Fauna) Remains. In Historical Back­ 1981 Spiers Landing: An Undocumented Historic Site ground and Archaeological Testing of the Davy in Berkeley County, South Carolina. Ph.D. dis­ Crockett Birthplace State Historic Area, Greene sertation, Tulane University. County, Tennessee, edited by Samuel D. Smith, pp. 62--66. Research Series Number 6, Division EHRENHARD, JoHN E. of Archaeology, Tennessee Department of Con­ 1973 The Rustic Hotel, Fort Laramie National His­ servation. toric Site, Wyoming. Historical Archaeology 7: 11-30. BROCK, J. CLATTON 1974 A System for the Retrieval of Data Relating to FLANNERY, KENT v. Animal Remains from Archaeological Sites. In 1967 Vertebrate Fauna and Hunting Patterns. In The Archaeozoological Studies, edited by A. T. Prehistory of the Tehuacan Valley, Vol. I, Clason, pp. 21-35. North-Holland Publishing pp. 132-77. University of Texas Press, Austin. Company. Amsterdam. GIBBS' TYSON; KATHLEEN CARGILL; LESLIE BROSE, DAVID s. SuE LIEBERMAN AND ELIZABETH REITZ 1967 The Custer Road Dump Site: An Exercise in 1980 Nutrition in a Slave Population: An Anthro­ Victorian Archaeology. Michigan Archaeologist pological Examination. Medical Anthropology 13(2):76--81. 4:175-262.

BUTSCH, ELIZABETH GIFFORD, DIANE P. AND DIANA c. CRADER 1970 The Ethnozoology of Fort Michilimackinac. M. 1977 A Computer System for Archaeological Fauna! A. Thesis, Michigan State University, East Remains. American Antiquity 42(2):225-38. Lansing. ORA YSON, DoNALD K. CARDINAL, ELIZABETH A. 1973 On the Methodology of Faunal Analysis. 1976 Faunal Remains. In Archaeological Excavations American Antiquity 38(4):432-38. at the Marquette Mission Site, St. Ignace, 1979 On the Quantification of Vertebrate Archaeo­ Michigan, in 1972, by James Fitting, pp. 226--34. faunas. In Advances in Archaeological Method Michigan Archaeologist 22:226--34. and Theory, Vol. 2, edited by Michael B. CASTEEL, RICHARD w. Schiffer, pp. 200-39. Academic Press. New 1977 Characterization of Fauna! Assemblages and the York. NORTH AMERICAN HISTORIC SITES ZOOARCHAEOLOGY 77

Gu1LDAY, JoHN E. MAINFORT, ROBERT 1970 Animal Remains from Archaeological Excava­ 1980 Archaeological Investigations at Fort Pillow His­ tions at Fort Ligonier. In Archaeological Inves­ toric Area: 1976-1978. Research Series No. 4. tigations of Fort Ligonier 1960--1965, pp. 177-86, Di vision of Archaeology, Tennessee Department by Jacob L. Grimm. Annals of Carnegie of Conservation. Museum 42. MARTIN, JOSEPH PLUMB HANSON, LEE AND DicK PING Hsu 1962 Private Yankee Doodle. Little, Brown and Com­ 1975 Food Remains. In Casemates and Cannonballs, pany, Boston. Archaeological Investigations at Fort Stanwix, Rome, New York, pp. 164--165. Publications in MILLER, HENRY M. 1979 Pettus and Utopia: A Comparison of the Fauna! Archaeology No. 14. U.S. Department of In­ terior, National Park Service, Washington. Remains from two Late Seventeenth Century Virginia Households. The Conference on His­ HILLIARD, SAM B. toric Site Archaeology Papers 13: 158-80. 1969 Hog Meat and Cornpone: Food Habits in the Ante-helium South. American Philosophical MILLER, HENRY M. AND LYNNE G. LEWIS 1978 Zoocultural Resource Utilization at a Low Society Proceedings 113(1): 1-13. Country South Carolina Plantation. In The Con­ 1972 Hogmeat and Hoecake: Food Supply in the Old ference on Historic Site Archaeology Papers South, 1840-1860. Southern Illinois University 12:250--66. Press, Carbondale. Mu DAR, KAREN HONERKAMP, NICHOLAS 1978 The Effects of Socio-Cultural Variables on Food 1975 The Material Culture of Fort Frederica: The Preferences in Early 19th Century Detroit. The Thomas Hird Lot. M. A. Thesis, University of Conference on Historic Site Archaeology Papers Florida. 12:323-91. 1980 Frontier Process in Eighteenth Century Colonial Georgia: An Archaeological Approach. Ph.D. MUNSON, PATRICK J., PAUL w. PARMALEE AND dissertation, University of Florida. RICHARD YARNELL 1971 Subsistence Ecology of Scovill, a Terminal KRANTZ, GROVER s. 1968 A New Method of Counting Mammal Bones. Middle Woodland Village. American Antiquity American Journal of Archaeology 72:286-88. 36:410--31. NOODLE, B. A. LIMP, W. FREDERICK AND VAN A. REIDHEAD 1974 A Comparison of the Animal Bones from Eight 1979 An Economic Evaluation of the Potential of Fish Medieval Sites in Southern Britain. In Archaeo­ Utilization in Riverine Environments. American zoological Studies, edited by A. T. Clason, pp. Antiquity 44( 1):70--79. 24~1. North Holland Publishing Company. LosEY, TIMOTHY C. Amsterdam. 1973 The Relationship of Fauna! Remains to Social OLSEN, STANLEY J. Dynamics at Fort Enterprise, N.W.T. In His­ 1964 Food Animals of the Continental Army at Valley torical Archaeology in Northwestern North Forge and Morristown. American Antiquity American, edited by Ronald M. Getty and Knut 29:506-09. R. Fladmark, pp. 133-43. University of Calgary Archaeological Association, Calgary, Alberta, OLEN, STANLEY J. AND JoHN PENMAN Canada. 1972 Fauna! Remains in Association with Early Massachusetts Colonists. Occasional Papers in LoucKs, LANA JILL Old Colony Studies No. 3:22-23. 1979 Political and Economic Interactions between Spaniards and Indians: Archaeological and OLSEN' STANLEY J. AND JoHN P. WILSON Ethnohistorical Perspectives of the Mission 1976 Fauna! Remains from Fort Sumner, New System in Florida. Ph.D. dissertation, Univer­ Mexico. Awanyu 4(3): 16-32. sity of Florida. OTTO, JOHN SoLOMON LYMAN' R. LEE 1975 Status Differences and the Archaeological 1977 Analysis of Historic Fauna! Remains. Historical Record-A Comparison of Planter, Overseer Archaeology 11:67-64. and Slave Sites from Cannon's Point Plantation. 1979 Available Meat from Fauna! Remains: A Con­ Ph.D. dissertation, University of Florida. sideration of Techniques. American Antiquity 1977 Artifacts and Status Differences-A Comparison 44:536-546. of Ceramics from Planter, Overseer, and Slave 78 HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, VOLUME 17

Sites on an Antebellum Plantation. In Research SCHULTZ, PETER D. Strategies in Historical Archaeology, edited by 1979 Historical Faunal Remains From Panamint City: Stanley South, pp. 91-119. Academic Press, Notes on Diet and Status in a California Boom New York. Town. Pacific Coast Archaeological Quarterly PARMALEE, PAUL w. 15(4):55---04. 1960 Vertebrate Remains from Fort Loudoun, Ten­ SHAPIRO, GARY nessee. Tennessee Archaeologist, Miscellaneous 1979 Early British Subsistence Strategy at Michili­ Paper No. 6:26-29. mackinac: A Case Study in Systematic Particu­ 1967 Food Animals Utilized by the Garrison Stationed larism. The Conference on Historic Sites at Fort Fillmore, New Mexico 1851-1862. El Archaeology Papers 13:315-53. Palacio, pp. 43-45. 1973 Animal Remains from Netherland Inn, Kings­ Sil.VER, I. A. port, Tennessee. In Archaeological Investiga­ 1963 The Aging of Domestic Animals. In Science in tions of the Netherland Inn Complex, by Joseph Archaeology, edited by Donald Brothwell and Eric Higgs, pp. 250-67. Basic Books, Inc., New L. Benthall, pp. 7-18. Report on file with the Tennessee Historical Commission. York. PAYNE' SEBASTIAN S1MOONS, FREDERICK J. 1974 Partial Recovery and Sample Bias. In Archaeo­ 1961 Eat Not this Flesh: Food Avoidances in the Old zoological Sudies, edited by A. T. Clason, pp. World. University of Wisconsin Press. 7-18. North-Holland Publishing Company. SMITH' BRUCE D. Amsterdam. 1974 Middle Mississippi Exploitation of Animal Pop­ PERKINS, DEXTER, JR. ulations: A Predictive Model. American Antiqui­ 1964 The Prehistoric Fauna from Shanidar, Iraq. ty 39:274-92. Science 144: 1565---06. SOUTH, STANLEY PERKINS, DEXTER, JR. AND PATRICIA DALY 1974 Palmetto Parapets. Anthropological Studies #I. 1968 A Hunters Village in Neolithic Turkey. Scientific Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology. American 219(5):96-106. University of South Carolina, Columbia. POLHEMUS, RICHARD 1977 Method and Theory in Historical Archaeology 1980 Archaeological Investigations of the Tellico Academic Press, New York. Blockhouse Site (40MR50): A Federal Military and Trade Complex. Report of Investigations STEPHENSON, ROBERT L. No. 26. Department of Anthropology, Univer­ 1974 A Note on the Bone Refuse from the British and sity of Tennessee. American Middens at Fort Moultrie. In Palmetto Parapets, by Stanley South, pp. 326-32. Anthro­ REED, CHARLES A. pological Studies #1. Institute of Archaeology 1963 Osteo-archaeology. In Science in Archaeology, and Anthropology. University of South Caro­ edited by Donald Brothwell and Eric Higgs, lina, Columbia. pp. 204-16. Thames and Hudson, London. STEWART, FRANCES L. AND PETER W. STAHL REITZ' ELIZABETH J. 1977 Cautionary Note on Edible Meat Poundage 1979 Spanish and British Subsistence Strategies at St. Figures. American Antiquity 42:267-70. Augustine, Florida and Frederica, Georgia Be­ tween 1565 and 1783. Ph.D. dissertation, Uni­ THOMAS, DAVID HURST versity of Florida. 1969 Great Basin Hunting Patterns: A Quantitative Method for Treating Faunal Remains. American ROBISON. NEIL DouGLAS Antiquity 34:392-401. 1977 Vertebrate Remains. In Archaeological Investi­ 1971 On Distinguishing Natural from Cultural Bone in gations at Fort Southwest Point (40RE 119) Archaeological Sites. American Antiquity 36: Kingston, Tennessee, edited by Prentice M. 366-71. Thomas, pp. 195-208. Report on file at the Tennessee Historical Commission. THURMOND, JOHN T. 1978 Zooarchaeology: Its History and Development. 1973 Analysis of Faunal Remains from the 1972-1973 In: A History and Selected Bibliography of Excavations of Fort Toulouse, Elmore County, Zooarchaeology in Eastern North America, Alabama. In Archaeological Investigations at edited by Arthur E. Bogan and Neil D. Robison, Fort Toulouse 1972-1973, Appendix 6, by pp. 1-23. Tennessee Anthropological Associa­ Donald B. Heldman. pp. 235-50. Alabama His­ tion Miscellaneous Paper No. 2. torical Commission. NORTH AMERICAN HISTORIC SITES ZOOARCHAEOLOGY 79

UERP.\IANN' HANS-PETER WINTERS, HOWARD D. 1973 Animal Bone Finds and Economic Archaeology: 1969 The Riverton Culture: A Second Millenium A Critical Study of "Osteo-archaeology .. Occupation in the Central Wabash Valley. Illi­ Method. World Archaeology 4(3 ):307-32. nois Archaeological Survey Monograph No. I

WATKINS, SAM R. and Illinois State Museum Reports of Investiga­ 1962 "Co Aytch". Crowell-Collier Publishing Com­ tions No. 13. pany, New York. YELLEN JoHN E. 1977 Cultural Patterning in Fauna! Remains: Evidence WATSON' J. P. N. 1972 Fragmentation Analysis of Animal Bone Sam­ from the !Kung Bushmen. In Experimental ples from Archaeological Sites. Archeometry Archaeology, edited by Daniel Ingersoll, John E. 14:221-27. Yellen and William MacDonald, pp. 271-332. Columbia University Press, New York. WHITE THEODORE E. I 953 A Method of Calculating the Dietary Percentage ZIEGLER, ALAN c. of Various Food Animals Utilized by Various 1973 Inference from Prehistoric Fauna! Remains. Aboriginal Peoples. American Antiquity 18:396-- Addison-Wesley Module in Anthropology 43. 98. ROBERT L. JoLLEY WING, ELIZABETH s. AND ANTOINETTE BROWN 2403 BELMONT BouLVARD 1979 Paleonutrition. Academic Press, New York. NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE 37212