6 ONTARIO ARCHAEOLOGY No. 58, 1994

MORTUARY PROGRAMMES OF THE EARLY ONTARIO IROQUOIANS

Michael W. Spence

Over the past few years, excavations and ring in small ossuaries located within the analyses of a number of sites and collections village. He contrasts this pattern with that of have increased our understanding of Early the Glen Meyer people, who are said to have Ontario Iroquoian burial practices. Although preferred burial practices which left no ar- this data base is still distressingly small and chaeological record, perhaps because they used uneven, it has become apparent that neither of scaffolds or had final burial well beyond the the generally recognized cultural constructs of village confines. This distinction, however, is the period (Glen Meyer and Pickering) can be flawed in two respects. In terms of raw data, characterized by a single, coherent mortuary Wright has not considered a number of Early programme. Rather, each small group of Ontario Iroquoian burials (Table 1), though to interacting communities apparently developed be fair, information on many of these was not its own distinctive set of burial practices, re- readily available when he wrote his article. sponsive to the particular social, environmen- Even now, much of the information exists only tal and ideological factors affecting it. The in unpublished manuscripts and in reports absence of any overarching mortuary pro- locked away in the files of various government gramme brings into question the integrity of agencies. the Glen Meyer and Pickering constructs, and On a more fundamental level, Wright has the ability of either to mount the sort of con- erred in approaching burial practices from a certed and sustained endeavour that is implied typological perspective. He characterizes by J.V. Wright's conquest hypothesis. burials in formal terms, viewing them as iso- lated features with a limited set of attributes (e.g., flexed versus bundle, single versus multi- INTRODUCTION ple), rather than as expressions of mortuary programmes which are complex and dynamic, J.V. Wright (1990, 1992) has recently reaf- responsive to a variety of social and economic firmed his belief in what has come to be known factors (Binford 1971:6; Brown 1981: 31). These as the "conquest theory, which he initially programmes, which include not only the pat- proposed in 1966 to explain the extensive terned behaviour that a society displays in its changes between the Early and Middle Ontario treatment of the dead but also the concepts, Iroquois stages (Wright 1966:40-41,53; Wright values and social judgements conditioning that and Anderson 1969:78-79). Put briefly, at about behaviour, underlie and constrain individual 1300 AD the Pickering peoples of south-central burials. If they are to be effective, then, inter- and eastern Ontario are said to have conquered cultural comparisons should be structured in their Glen Meyer contemporaries in terms of these mortuary programmes, rather southwestern Ontario, absorbing the survivors than the resulting burial forms. The reconstruc- to produce the following Uren horizon. Al- tion of mortuary programmes is not, however, a though Wright has presented a broad range of straightforward matter. It involves an additional evidence in support of his hypothesis, I shall level of inference, one beyond the relatively confine myself here to the data base with which concrete evidence of the burials them-selves. I am most familiar, the burial practices of the Comparisons based on these more hypothetical Early Ontario Iroquoian peoples (for other constructs will inevitably be more difficult. critiques see Jamieson [1991], Pearce One potential stumbling block is the difficulty [1984:391-395], and Williamson [1990a:311- in distinguishing between fundamental 312]). differences in mortuary programmes and mere Wright (1992:12) has characterized Pickering burials as generally secondary, often occur- SPENCE MORTUARY PROGRAMMES OF THE EARLY ONTARIO IROQUOIANS 7 shifts in the attendant circumstances (Spence of dismemberment) in true ossuaries, since 1986:88). For example, among the Historic much more time would have been allowed for period Huron a person who died violently was the decomposition of soft tissue in the primary left in the primary grave, rather than being burials. Jackes (1988:140) adds the further exhumed for the final ossuary burial (Ramsden stipulation that in ossuaries the remains of 1991:32; Trigger 1976:52). The Ball and individuals are mixed, rather than deposited in Warminster sites, located near each other in discrete bundles. Simcoe County and probably representing To further confuse matters, there might also successive occupations of the same Huron have been a transitional stage between annual community (Fitzgerald 1986), have both been reburial and ossuaries. Individual primary extensively excavated. A total of fourteen burials may have been exhumed for annual burials, six of them adults, have been found to joint reburial, and later (perhaps with village date in the Ball village (Knight and Melbye relocation) these annual reburial features may 1983; Dean Knight, personal communication have been exhumed for a joint final "ossuary" 1993). In contrast, the only burial recorded burial. This pattern would be very difficult to within the confines of the later Warminster identify without extensive excavation of the village is the joint interment of two infants in community. one of the longhouses (Kapches 1976:33). It is Deciphering these complex mortuary pro- not clear whether this discrepancy is due to a grammes and identifying the factors underlying reduction in the categories of people who were them will require a comprehensive data base. normally excluded from the ossuary, which To this end, brief outlines of the extant Early would constitute an actual change in the mor- Ontario Iroquoian and early Middle Ontario tuary programme, or whether it simply reflects Iroquoian burials are presented below (see also (at least in the case of some of the adults) a Table 1). Unfortunately, practical constraints decrease in the impact of warfare. preclude discussion of the numerous sites that The question of ossuary burial is another have not produced burials (e.g., Fox 1976; example of this potential for confusion. Most Timmins 1992), although these must eventually archaeologists have defined ossuaries on the be considered if mortuary pro-grammes are to basis of their formal properties (number of be properly situated in the economic and social included individuals and secondary nature of cycles of their communities. The fact that interments), rather than in terms of their role in burials are found in a variety of sites (e.g., the mortuary programme (e.g., Dodd et al. villages, fishing camps, and specialized burial 1990:353; Johnston 1979:95; Mullen and Hoppa sites) gives some hint of the complexity of the 1992:38 cf. Jackes 1988:140). While this is un- task. derstandable, given the difficulty of interpreting Reconstruction of these mortuary program- mortuary programmes, it can lead to some mes requires a wide variety of observations. uncertainty. For example, the appearance in a Some of these are gleaned from the literature local archaeological sequence of burial pits on the seventeenth-century Huron and Neutral containing a dozen or more disarticulated peoples, whose burial practices represent the individuals might represent nothing more than a culmination of long mortuary traditions that growth in size of the contributing community, began at least as early as the Early Ontario leading to the inclusion of more individuals in Iroquoian expressions described below. Under an annual reburial ceremony. On the other normal circumstances both Huron and Neutral hand, it could mark a fundamental change in practices involved some form of primary dis- the mortuary programme, perhaps a shift from a posal of the corpse near the time of death, pattern of annual exhumation and joint followed at some later point by the exhumation reburial of the community's dead to a less of part or all of the primary burial and its frequent final burial ceremony, triggered by transfer to a final secondary burial, which it events like village relocation, the death of a generally shared with the selected remains of leader, or a reformulation of inter-village alli- other exhumed primary burials (Ramsden ances. The term "ossuary" is best reserved for 1990, 1991; Trigger 1976:51-54). The exhuma- the archaeological manifestation of the latter tion and reburial were tied to the settlement practice. The two may be difficult to distin- cycle and social life of the community, as well guish, although one would expect more individ- as to a specific ideology. Within this very gen- uals and fewer articulations (or less evidence eral pattern there was, of course, a great deal 8 ONTARIOARCHAEOLOGY No. 58, 1994

of localized variation. For example, secondary often disarticulated and defleshed, when reburial features range from the large ossua- exhumed from the primary grave, to reduce ries of the Huron (some of which included them to bones and allow selection of elements several hundred individuals from a number of for the reburial [Ramsden 1991; Spence 1988]. In contributing villages and which were deliber- southern Ontario an exposed corpse can ately designed to obliterate any individual, decompose in a matter of months, while a lineage or clan distinctions [Kidd 1953; Rams- subsurface burial may retain a considerable den 1990:174]), to considerably smaller fea- amount of soft tissue for several years); tures at some Neutral sites which may have (6) data on pathology and perimortem trau- been restricted to families (Kenyon 1982; Jack- ma (the health or particular physical qualities es 1988:139-141). of individuals or their cause of death may In any case, we cannot simply project our affect their postmortem treatment [Ramsden understanding of Historic period practises back 1991:32-33; von Gernet 1994:44-46]); into the past. Although some elements of (7) season of interment (pollen or flotation Native ritual and ideology may indeed have analysis may allow determination of the sea-son considerable temporal depth (von Gernet of burial. Reburial might have been timed to 1992:137-138), change over time is inevitable. coincide with seasonally recurring events in the Thus, the presence of a similar practice or community cycle [e.g., Fox 1988]); burial form in two different places or times (8) metric and epigenetic characteristics of need not mean that it arose from the same the individuals (it may be possible to identify needs or performed the same function in both and characterize the contributing population settings (Binford 1971:16). Each early Iroquoian through the frequency and distribution of community likely tailored its mortuary pro- particular traits [Saunders 1978:49; Spence gramme to suit its own particular mix of social, and Fox 1992:40]); environmental, and ideological imperatives. (9) the contexts of the burial features (the To unravel these complex programmes will location of a burial with respect to the village require extensive excavation of communities palisade and house structures is particularly and detailed analyses of the burials. A wide important. A reburial feature in a longhouse, for range of observations should be made with example, may have been reserved for extended each burial (e.g., Saunders 1978). In the case family or lineage members, rather than open to of secondary burials, these should include: people from the community as a whole). (1) the number of individuals represented (in Unfortunately, much of this information is not a secondary burial feature this would be, in available for many of the burials outlined below. part, a function of the size of the contributing Political constraints, post-interment community and the time elapsed since the disturbances, and incomplete analysis and previous reburial event); reporting have all contributed to gaps in the (2) the age and sex structure (under- data. Readers wishing further details may represented categories may indicate age- or consult the references listed for each site. For gender-specific practices in the mortuary convenience the sites are organized under the programme [e.g., Saunders and Spence 1986] ); traditional culture-chronological labels (Glen (3) a comprehensive inventory of the skeletal Meyer, Pickering and Uren), though these elements of each individual present in the distinctions are now becoming more of a feature (the exhumation of primary burials hindrance than a help to interpretation (Pearce sometimes involved fairly rigid guidelines on 1984; Williamson 1990a, 1992). Glen Meyer and what should, or should not, be included in the Pickering may represent artificially segregated secondary burial [Spence 1988]); points in a spatial continuum, and there ap- (4) detailed data on the degree of articulation pears to be some disagreement about the among elements (this information can help in temporal border between the Early Ontario distinguishing exhumed primary from sec- Iroquoian stage and Uren. Sites presently ondary burials, and in determining the time identified as late Glen Meyer or Pickering, such that had elapsed between the primary burial as Reid, Tara, Force and Bennett, would be and the exhumation and reburial); considered Uren by some investigators (Wright (5) cutmarks and other postmortem alter- 1992:12; Bursey 1994). ations (incompletely decomposed bodies were For the more numerous Glen Meyer finds, SPENCE MORTUARY PROGRAMMES OF THE EARLY ONTARIO IROQUOIANS 9 sites are organized by areas that may represent the most part by long bones, crania and man- clusters of related communities, or the dibles. One mandible has a number of drilled successive occupations of a single community holes in the corpus. Only this mandible, one (Williamson 1990a, 1992). Site locations are cranium, and one long bone bear cut marks shown in Figure 1. (Spence 1994). Boisclair (AfHh-28). Although a burial pit was completely destroyed in construction work at GLENMEYERBURIALS this spring-summer occupation site, a salvage effort directed by William Fox resulted in the Dutton Area recovery of most of the human bone. A prelimi- nary analysis indicates the presence of at least Downham Nurseries (AeHi-29). Two concen- six individuals: three adults, one young adult or trations of human bone were exposed by adolescent, and two children. At least some of agricultural activities on a village site by the these were incomplete secondary burials. Thames River near Dutton (Mayer and Antone Several bones bear cut marks. Material from 1988). Linda Gibbs and the author examined nearby pits produced radiocarbon dates of 950 the surface-collected bone. One feature in- B.P. ± 80 and 645 B.P. ± 75¹, the latter consid- cluded bones from at least one adult while the ered unacceptable (Fox 1983:3). other had material from five distinct individu- als: three adults, a child of 8-11 years, and a Norfolk Area child of 3-6 years. Elliott (AfHc-2). This is a palisaded inland Caradoc Area village in the Norfolk sand plain (Fox 1988; Spence 1988). A large pit just inside the pali- Roeland (AfHj-33). A primary adult burial sade produced a date of 760 B.P. ± 80 and a was found in one of the houses of a late Glen deposit of human bone made sometime during Meyer palisaded year-round village (William- the late winter or early spring. The deposit son 1985:180). included the very incomplete and almost entirely disarticulated remains of one adult and Byron Area three children. No crania and very few of the major long bones were present. Analysis of the London Ski Club (AfHi-78). The primary elements and their distribution, and of the burial of an elderly female was exposed during other pit contents, suggests that this was a land alteration at one of several Glen Meyer discard location where primary burials ex- sites in the Byron area, near London (Pearce humed from throughout the community were 1984:351). reduced and sorted, the major elements being Warbler Woods (AfHi-57). The primary burial withheld for final burial elsewhere while those of an adolescent of about 12-13 years was considered to be of lesser importance were found at this site (Spence 1982). Although no discarded in the pit. settlement could be identified, Glen Meyer Bruce Boyd (AdHc-4). Although primarily an ceramics were found in the immediate vicinity. Early Woodland site, the Bruce Boyd site near The Glen Meyer Dunn site is some 300 m to the Long Point also has a minor but significant west (Pearce 1984:139). Glen Meyer occupation, probably related to the Praying Mantis (AfHi-1 78).This small palisad- warm-season Glen Meyer fishing station on the ed village was fully excavated by Robert Pearce knoll immediately to the north (Fox 1976: 169; for the London Museum of Archaeology. Only Spence 1988). A few disturbed burials were two burials were found. One, near the palisade found on the latter site, but little is known about and beyond the house structures, was the them. Three Glen Meyer burials were excavated primary burial of an adult female from which on the Bruce Boyd site, none of them within the long bones, cranium, mandible, and a few house structures. One held the incomplete other elements had been exhumed. The other remains of a single adult, another feature, which may have been inside a house (analysis has not yet been completed), contained the disarticulated elements of eight ¹All radiocarbon dates are presented in their adults and subadults. They are represented for uncalibrated form using the 1950 AD baseline. 10 ONTARIOARCHAEOLOGY No. 58, 1994

Table 1. Early Ontario Iroquoian Burials

Site No. of Location of No. of Condition Burials Burials Individuals

Downham 2 in village area >1,5 unknown Nurseries

Roeland 1 in house 1 primary

London Ski 1 in village area 1 primary Club

Warbler 1 no settlement nearby 1 primary Woods

Praying Mantis 2 1 at village edge 1 exhumed primary 1 in house 8 secondary

Boisclair 1 in village area 6 secondary

Elliott 1 at village edge 4 discarded elements of exhumed burials

Bruce Boyd 3 in village area 1-5 in each secondary

Stafford 1 in village area 2 secondary

(?) Reid 2 in house 5,7 secondary

Force 2 1 in house 1 unknown 1 in village area 8 secondary

Rogers 1 unknown >28 secondary (ossuary)

Zamboni several no settlement nearby 1-5 in each secondary

Macallan 1 in village area 2 secondary (?)

Winona Rock- 1 no settlement nearby 4 secondary shelter

Chedoke Falls 1 near settlement unknown unknown

Tara 4 1 in house 1 primary 2 in village, outside 2,4 discarded elements of houses exhumed burials 1 in village, outside 7 secondary houses

Bennett 13 most in houses 1-2 in each 10 primary, 3 secondary or exhumed

Miller 7 1 in house 1 exhumed primary 5 outside houses 3-4 in each secondary or exhumed 1 beyond village 13 1 primary, 12 secondary

Serpent Pits 3 no settlement nearby 15-29 in secondary each

Richardson 2 in house 1,5 secondary

(?) Reid- 1 no settlement nearby >10 secondary Cummins SPENCE MORTUARY PROGRAMMES OF THE EARLY ONTARIO IROQUOIANS 11 12 ONTARIO ARCHAEOLOGY No. 58, 1994 the secondary burial of two adults. The third count of the extant femora gives a minimum feature was a multiple secondary burial of five population of 28 individuals, although Wilfrid individuals: two adults, a youth, a child and an Jury is reported to have removed another 19 infant. All but the infant showed some degree of femora from the pit. articulation, but none were complete or fully Zamboni (AgHb-144). This early Glen Meyer articulated. There is a radiocarbon date on cemetery in Brantford includes a number of human bone from the feature of 900 B.P. ± 60, warm season burial pits (Woodley et al. 1992). supported by a date on charcoal from another Each contains from one to five individuals, and feature with Glen Meyer ceramics of 860 B.P. may represent the annual burial of those in the 65 (Spence et al. 1981:61). community who had died over the preceding Stafford (AeHg-3). This is a village on the year. A larger central pit, unfortunately dis- Norfolk sand plain, with the secondary burial of turbed when the site was initially discovered, a single adult male and, in the same grave, the may have marked a longer-term burial event, mandible of a second adult (Lee 1958:39-40). an additional ossuary stage in the mortuary Reid (AdHc-5). Reid is a warm season village programme, in which burials in the annual pits site near Long Point Bay with both late Glen were exhumed for a joint final burial. The pit Meyer and Middleport occupations (Saunders cluster was not within a village. and MacKenzie-Ward 1988; Wright 1978). The Macallan (AgHa-59). This is a Glen Meyer two burial features, near one another inside the occupation site near Brantford, with at least same longhouse, each held multiple secondary one house structure (Glencross 1992; Woodley burials, seven individuals in burial 1 and five 1994; Gary Warrick and Phil Woodley, personal individuals in burial 2. It is not clear whether communication 1993). Scattered human bone the burials are associated with the Glen Meyer probably derives from two or more disturbed (Saunders and MacKenzie-Ward 1988:21) or multiple burial features, but little can be said Middleport (Wright 1992:12) occupation. Until about them. A third burial feature with early this point is settled, it is best to treat the Reid Glen Meyer ceramics was partially exposed site data with caution. during Ontario Ministry of Transportation Force (AgHd-l). This site is a late Glen Meyer excavations. When it became apparent that it village on the Norfolk sand plain (Bill Fox and held human bone, excavation of the pit stopped El Molto, personal communication 1993). The by agreement with Six Nations. At least two late Glen Meyer assignment of the site is based individuals, and quite possibly more, were in on the ceramics and is corroborated by the burial. One adult male was a secondary radiocarbon dates of 715 B.P. ± 75 and 705 B.P. burial, while the method of interment of the ± 75 (Fox 1980; Bill Fox, personal other individual could not be deter-mined. A communication 1993). Two burials were found. radiocarbon date on human bone supports the The burial of a child in a longhouse had been early Glen Meyer assignment (Woodley 1994: disturbed, but was probably a secondary 15). The pit was not inside a house. interment. The other feature held the secondary interment of eight adults and subadults. Hamilton Area Although within the village, the relationship of this pit to the house structures is not known. Winona Rockshelter (AhGv-3). Situated on the Niagara Escarpment near Winona, the Grand River Area Winona Rockshelter contained the secondary burial of four individuals (Spence and Fox Rogers Ossuary (AgHb-131). This site, situ- 1992). Although no occupation site was located ated near Brantford, can be assigned to early and no ceramics were found with the burial, a Glen Meyer on the basis of two separate radio- radiocarbon date on the bone of 1190 B.P. ± 60 carbon dates, both 1110 B.P. ± 60, and a very suggests a late Princess Point or, more proba- low incidence of caries. The circumstances of bly, an early Glen Meyer assignment. its original excavation in 1935 leave many Chedoke Falls (AhGx-265). This is a late unanswered questions, but Mullen and Hoppa Glen Meyer site in Hamilton, with burials (1992:37) believe that the site represents a reported from a nearby rockshelter (William- single event, the secondary interment of a son 1990a: Table 9-1; 1990b:116). number of individuals who had died over some Tara (AiGw-124). The Tara site consists of period of time. No cut marks were observed. A SPENCE MORTUARY PROGRAMMES OF THE EARLY ONTARIO IROQUOIANS 13 two overlapping thirteenth century villages in (Kenyon 1968; Ossenberg 1969). One, the Burlington (Bursey 1994; Gibbs 1990; Lang exhumed grave of a primary interment, was in 1991; Warrick 1992; Gary Warrick, personal a house. Five other graves were outside the communication 1993). The burials are appar- houses and near (either just within or just ently associated with the earlier eastern village. outside) the palisade. These are complex Burial 2, the primary interment of an adult, features, and their role in the community's was inside a longhouse. The other three burial mortuary programme is not always clear. Some features were all located outside the houses but may be exhumed graves (e.g., the lower layer of within the palisade. Two of these (burials 1 and burial 3 and all of burial 6), but it is not possible 3) contained primarily the disarticulated lesser to say whether they were originally primary skeletal elements (unfused epiphyses, teeth, graves, or secondary annual burials that were ribs, vertebrae, and bones of the hands and then partially exhumed for a third stage in the feet) of adults and subadults. There were four burial procedures. Others may be secondary individuals represented in burial 1 and two in and final burials (e.g., burial 2). Burial 1 is burial 3. Both features had probably been used different in several respects from all the others. to discard the less important elements from It was located much further from the village, exhumed primary burials, much like the pit at included some grave goods, and contained the Elliott site (Lang 1991). Burial 4, on the elements of at least 13 individuals. One of other hand, seems to represent the these was a primary infant burial. The rest complementary aspect of the village's mortuary were secondary burials, although some programme, the joint reburial of the larger articulations were noted. skeletal elements selected and retained from Serpent Pits (BbGm-2). Situated on the north exhumed primary burials. The bundled remains shore of Rice Lake, near the Serpent Mounds of seven individuals, adults and sub-adults, site (Anderson 1968; Johnston 1968, 1979), were included. Crania, mandibles, long bones, these three pits each included a number of and a number of lesser elements were present. incomplete and totally disarticulated secondary burials, largely of adults: 15 individuals in Pit PICKERINGBURIALS 1, 29 in Pit 2 and 25 in Pit 3. There are radiocarbon dates on bone of 905 B.P. ± 60 for Bennett (AiGx-l). This palisaded village Pit 1, 510 B.P. ± 60 for Pit 2, and 660 B.P. ± 60 northeast of Hamilton was originally identified for Pit 3. Johnston (1979:93) rejects the 510 B.P. by Wright (Wright and Anderson 1969) as late date and places the pits in the 1000 - 1300 AD Pickering, but is believed by some to be Uren span, while noting that some ceramic features (Bursey 1994; Ron Williamson, personal com- may indicate a relatively early date in the munication 1993). Thirteen burial features were Pickering sequence. found, nine of them associated with the one Richardson (BbG1-3). At a palisaded village fully excavated house. Most were primary in Percy Township, southeast of Rice Lake, two burials, although two pits held either secondary burials were located in a house: the secondary (but partially articulated) or primary dis- burial of a partially articulated adult male and, membered adults, while a third pit contained nearby, the joint secondary burial of five com- the missing elements of one of these adults and pletely disarticulated adults (Pearce 1978). the bundle burial of a child. This latter pit was Reid-Cummins (AJGh-62). Near Sandbanks one of only two features that contained more Provincial Park in Prince Edward County, a than one individual, the other feature holding burial pit slightly over one metre in diameter two primary adults. Two burials appear to have was exposed in quarrying activities that af- been placed in semi-subterranean sweat lodges fected approximately two-thirds of the feature (Ron Williamson, personal communication (Molto and Fox 1988; Bill Fox and El Molto, 1994; see Wright and Anderson 1969:22-23). personal communication 1993). The extant The burial pattern, then, is predominantly one skeletal material indicates a minimum of ten of single primary burials, with no evidence of individuals, including adults and subadults exhumation. and representatives of both sexes. An articu- Miller (AlGs-l). This palisaded village near lated segment of a vertebral column was Pickering produced seven burial features observed in situ, and none of the extant ele- ments bear cut marks. Given the number of individuals and the small size of the feature, it 14 ONTARIOARCHAEOLOGY No. 58, 1994 seems most likely that the feature held a multi- impossible to determine whether the burial was ple secondary burial (Bill Fox, personal com- primary or secondary. A second feature munication 1993). No cultural material was contained the incomplete remains of three directly associated, but an early Pickering individuals: an adult male, a child of about 7 fishing camp lies 50 m to the south. However, years, and an infant of 6-9 months. Each was the patterns of dental pathology and cranial represented by a mixture of major and lesser morphology suggest a somewhat later date, elements. Although three of the adult thoracic perhaps in the 1250-1500 AD span (Molto and vertebrae were still articulated, the sacrum had Fox 1988). been pierced for suspension. Myers Road (AiHb-13). Located at Cam- URENBURIALS bridge, this village was fully excavated by Archaeological Services Inc. (Ramsden et al. Klassen (AdHd-6). Located on the Norfolk 1992). There appears to have been a discontin- sand plain, near the Lake Erie shore, this site uous occupation throughout the Uren and into produced surface evidence of the presence of the Middleport period. Five burials were found, burials (Dodd et al. 1990:354). all inside longhouses. Three of these were from Port Royal (AdHd-4). Situated near Klassen, separate features in the east end of House 1, this site had two multiple secondary burials and probably date to the Uren period: a (Dodd et al. 1990:353-354; Fox 1976:170). One secondary adult, a primary adult, and a was at the site, with two individuals, while the primary child burial. In House 7, a Uren other, with four individuals, was located on the structure, the articulated lower right leg of an other side of the creek. adult was found in a feature, probably repre- senting an exhumed primary burial. The pri- Uren (AfHd-3). Situated further inland on the mary burial of an infant was recovered from a Norfolk sand plain, Uren was a major village Middleport longhouse. (Jamieson 1978; Wright 1986:16-21). Three pits Olmstead (AhGx-32). This village was occu- inside houses each contained a few lesser elements (phalanges, patellae, teeth, etc.), and pied from terminal Glen Myer through Uren (Welsh and Williamson 1994; Ron Williamson, are probably primary burial pits from which bones had been exhumed for secondary personal communication 1993). A burial feature reburial. Three others contained only a single just outside the palisade, disturbed prior to tooth each, perhaps also representing exhumed archaeological excavation, produced elements of at least two individuals, an adult and an primary burials or merely teeth lost through age or disease. Several other pits, both in and infant. Post-interment disturbance makes it outside longhouses, each held one or a few impossible to say whether the burial was major bones. Their role in the burial originally primary or secondary. programme is not clear, although Jamieson Tabor Hill (AkGt-5). At this site in Toronto, (1978) raises the possibility of prisoner sacri- two associated ossuaries produced a mini-mum fice. One pit in a longhouse held the incomplete of 213 individuals (Churcher and Kenyon 1960). and largely disarticulated remains of an adult The assignment of the ossuaries to Uren is based female, a teen-age male, and a child of about 12 on the fact that Thompson, a Uren site two years. The major elements were well kilometres away, is the nearest known village. represented, the minor ones less so. Jamieson This dating is dubious in the absence of any (1978) and M. Wright (1986:18-19) suggest that supporting evidence (Dodd et al. 1990: 353). this feature may represent the secondary burial of three individuals who, for reasons of age or cause of death, may have been excluded from DISCUSSION final ossuary burial with the other members of the community. However, no evidence of an The data outlined above are unfortunately ossuary has been found. very uneven in quality, ranging from a vague Bonisteel (AfGu-2). This site is located on the reference to the presence of burials at or near a north shore of Lake Erie, near Port Colborne site (e.g., Chedoke Falls) to detailed published descriptions with osteological analysis (e.g., (Cybulski 1976; Spence 1989). One burial pit held the remains of a child of 9-11 years, but Bennett). In many cases there is too little the circumstances of its discovery make it information to even attempt reconstruction of SPENCE MORTUARY PROGRAMMES OF THE EARLY ONTARIO IROQUOIANS 15 the underlying mortuary programme. Despite Spence 1988). The Reid site burials may seem their limitations, however, these data do dem- to contradict this pattern (Saunders and onstrate that there was considerable variation MacKenzie-Ward 1988:23), but their temporal in Early Ontario Iroquoian mortuary program- assignment is uncertain. mes (Mullen and Hoppa 1992:38; Spence and A similar mortuary programme can be traced Fox 1992:40; Woodley et al. 1992). back into the Middle Woodland period in some One Glen Meyer pattern, suggested for the areas (Spence 1986). It may also have Norfolk sand plain area, is tied to the rhythm of characterized the earlier Princess Point occu- the annual settlement-subsistence cycle of the pation along the north Lake Erie shore, if the community (Fox 1976, 1988; Spence 1988). The two multiple burial pits at the Varden site on evidence for this mortuary programme derives Long Point were indeed associated with the largely from the Elliott and Bruce Boyd sites. At Princess Point component there (Molto 1983). the time of death each individual was given a The persistence of this pattern into the Middle separate primary interment. The absence of Ontario Iroquoian stage in the area may be primary burial pits at some of the major inland indicated by the Uren, Port Royal and Bonisteel Glen Meyer sites (i.e., Porteous, DeWaele, and burials. Elliott) suggests that scaffold burial or some The burials at the Elliott, Bruce Boyd, Tara, other form may have been used (Wright 1992: and perhaps Force and Boisclair sites seem to 12). Then, in the warm season, when the com- fit this pattern of annual exhumation and joint munity moved to settlements along the north reburial of the community dead. However, it shore of Lake Erie, these burials were exhumed was not characteristic of all of the Early On- and a selection of the remains, emphasizing tario Iroquoian occupations of southwestern crania and the larger elements of the Ontario. Preliminary analysis of the Praying postcranial skeleton, were put aside for joint Mantis data suggests a pattern of longhouse, reburial. Those elements considered inconse- rather than community, secondary burial, and quential (or perhaps simply overlooked) were perhaps a longer spacing between reburial left in the primary burial feature, discarded in episodes than merely a year. The enigmatic refuse pits, or scattered on the surface or in Reid site burials may also indicate that the middens (Spence 1988). longhouse group took precedence over the The final burial pit for the retained elements community in some cases, if they are indeed would thus include the incomplete remains of Glen Meyer features. most or all of those in the community who had In the Grand River area the Rogers Ossuary, died over the preceding year. Given that some and perhaps the Zamboni and Macallan sites northern horticulturalists have a crude annual (Woodley 1994:22), would seem to represent death rate of about forty per thousand (Pfeiffer still another tradition. This area may have 1983:10; Spence 1988:15; Ubelaker 1978:96), witnessed a relatively early development of some two to ten individuals might be expected ossuary burial, with the final collective inter- in such a feature. A number of elements would ment locked into a longer cycle than the annual still be in articulation since there would have one which dominated the Norfolk sand plain been only a year, at most, of decomposition. If settlements (Mullen and Hoppa 1992:37). It may there were few or no articulated elements, some also have included most or all of those in the evidence of forceful disarticulation in the form community who had died since the previous of cut marks on the bones might be expected. episode, instead of focusing on one particular As noted above, crania and the major social unit. None of these features was inside a postcranial bones would be common while longhouse, and at least Zamboni was lesser elements like the bones of the hands and apparently well removed from any settlement. feet, ribs and vertebrae would be under- Pickering mortuary patterns are even more represented. These annual reburial pits would difficult to assess. The initial burial is often in not have been located inside the house struc- the house, as at Miller and Bennett (and some tures, since they would normally have drawn Glen Meyer sites). However Bennett, with its on the residents of more than one house. pattern of predominantly single in-house Although some reburial features were appar- primary burials, is anomalous among Early ently located in the main village, as at the Force Ontario Iroquoian sites. Bursey (1994) believes site, others are associated with the warm season that Bennett is actually a Uren site. The associ- lakeshore settlements (Fox 1976; 16 ONTARIO ARCHAEOLOGY No. 58, 1994 ation of two Bennett burials with sweat lodges CONCLUSIONS is a Middle Ontario Iroquoian trait (Ron Williamson, personal communication 1994). It is possible that the Bennett people had adopt- Death in Early Iroquoian communities, as in ed the practice of final ossuary burial at the all societies, must have been an erratic event, time of village relocation, but had been forced occurring unpredictably and usually striking by some unexpected occurrence to forgo their only one person at a time. It would not have usual exhumation and reburial ceremony. offered an opportune venue for wider social Miller, further to the east and somewhat statements. Thus the primary burial, which earlier, is complex. There is some evidence to took place at or near the time of death, proba- suggest annual reburial but it is possible that bly involved only a limited participation by the an ossuary stage, perhaps tied to village broader social network of the deceased. Wider movement, had been added to the mortuary participation, and the expression of social and programme. Burial 1, with at least 13 individu- political concerns that underlay it, was de- als, might represent this third stage, although it ferred to a more appropriate occasion, at could also be the annual burial for a year of which time some or all of the primary burials unusually high mortality. In this one respect, were exhumed and redeposited together in a Miller seems to resemble Zamboni more closely secondary burial. Apparently the timing of that than it does other Pickering sites, although occasion and the breadth of participation neither Miller nor Zamboni are particularly varied considerably (Mullen and Hoppa 1992: well understood. 38; Spence and Fox 1992:40), echoing the The Serpent Pits are probably ossuaries, variability noted in Early Ontario Iroquoian village relocation reburial features, to judge by material culture and settlement patterns the number of individuals in each and the (Williamson 1990a; Wright 1986:66-67). In some absence of any articulated elements. Jamieson cases it may have taken place once a year, (1991:5,7) suggests that they represent influ- responsive to the annual disruption in commu- ences from the Middle Atlantic coast. However, nity life that occurred with the warm-season the Pickering people of the area may have dispersal from the main village. In others, simply continued a local tradition of periodic perhaps with more sedentary communities, it mass reburial that extended back into the coincided with the shift in village location, an Middle Woodland period (Spence et al. 1984: event that occurred only once every decade or 137). Serpent Mounds Mound E, Cameron's so but which must have become the major Point Mound C and the Le Vesconte mound point of dislocation in the community cycle. In were probably mass reburial events. The some cases the reburial event was restricted Preston Mound and mounds G and I of the to members of a single longhouse group, while Serpent Mounds site, each containing a mix- in others the effective social context of the ture of numerous and largely disarticulated deceased may have been the village as a individuals, may represent a late Middle whole. It is even possible that more than one Woodland continuation of this pattern (Spence community, or a particular social group repre- et al. 1990:165). sented in more than one community, may have At first glance, the larger Richardson site been involved. burial pit appears to be similar to the annual Mortuary programmes also changed over community reburial pits discussed above. It is, time, adding a further level of complexity to however, located inside a house structure, their analysis. As villages became more sed- suggesting that the five individuals buried in it entary and more committed to an agricultural (and the one secondary burial from a nearby subsistence base, the mortuary cycle may pit) may have been residents of the house, have lengthened because the major disruption rather than of the village as a whole. Richard- in the social life of the community shifted from son seems to be similar in this respect to the an annual event to a more widely spaced one, distant Reid, Praying Mantis, and Uren sites, the periodic relocation of the village. Also, the which also had multiple secondary in-house primary social context of the individual may burial pits. have changed from the longhouse to the vil- lage as a whole, although the longhouse or some larger segment of the village may later have regained priority with the development of SPENCE MORTUARY PROGRAMMES OF THE EARLY ONTARIO IROQUOIANS 17 cross-cutting, pan-residential institutions Early Ontario Iroquoian mortuary programmes. (Williamson 1992:28). As Chapdelaine (1993) has demonstrated, these changes did not occur Acknowledgments. I am grateful to Mike regularly nor at a uniform pace through-out the Henry for preparing Figure 1, to Bill Fox and El Iroquoian area. Malta for sharing data with me on the Force Wright (1992:12) attempted to enlist mortuary and Reid-Cummins sites, to Bob Pearce for practices in support of his contrast between Praying Mantis, to Gary Warrick for Tara and Glen Meyer and Pickering. However, the data Macallan, to Phil Woodley for Zamboni and reveal that no uniform set of practices charac- Macallan, to Ron Williamson for Olmstead and terized either "culture". Rather, each local Myers Road, to Dean Knight for Ball, and to group of interacting communities tailored its John Reid and Allen Tyyska for Warminster. burial practices to fit its own particular circum- Claude Chapdelaine, Bill Fox and Ron stances. The absence of a single, coherent Williamson were kind enough to read and mortuary programme in either Glen Meyer or comment on an earlier version of this paper. My Pickering raises doubts about their social thanks especially to Bill Fox, with whom I integrity. If we accept the principle that burial worked on the Warbler Woods, Boisclair, Elliott, practices reflect the operation of social factors, Bonisteel, Bruce Boyd, and Winona Rockshelter and indeed play a major role in defining and sites and collections. Finally, I express my mobilizing social networks, we must then gratitude to Shelley Saunders and Jim Wright question the plausibility of these larger cultural for their careful consideration of the paper as constructs and the potential for their collective reviewers for Ontario Archaeology, and to Alex action that is implicit in the conquest hypothe- von Gernet for his editorial contribution. Their sis (see Wright 1990:498). It is recognized that comments have, I believe, improved the final Wright's characterization of these constructs product. and their interactions embraces a much broader range of evidence than just mortuary behaviour, which in fact plays rather a minor part in his theory. Nevertheless, Ontario Iro- quoians seem generally to have assigned burial REFERENCESCITED practices a key role in sociopolitical integration. The absence of any overarching mortuary Anderson, J. E. programme, then, brings into question the cohesiveness and effectiveness, if not the 1968 The Serpent Mounds Site Physical reality, of these constructs. If Early Ontario Anthropology. Royal Ontario Museum Iroquoians were organized into sociopolitical Occasional Paper 11. Royal Ontario units that extended beyond the village, these Museum, Toronto. would more likely have been at a smaller scale; Binford, L. the Grand River and Norfolk sand plain clusters 1971 Mortuary Practices: Their Study and may be cases in point. their Potential. In Approaches to the The data described above offer some tanta- Social Dimensions of Mortuary Prac- lizing hints on these topics, but to date many of tices, edited by J. Brown, pp. 6-29. the distinctions stressed here have not been Memoirs of the Society for American readily apparent in the archaeological record. Archaeology 25. Society for American More burials, described in more detail (and the Archaeology, Washington. full analysis and publication of extant burials), Brown, J. are required. Given the current political con- 1981 The Search for Rank in Prehistoric straints on the excavation and analysis of Burials. In The Archaeology of Death, burials (e.g., Woodley 1994:9,14), it is not clear edited by R. Chapman, I. Kinnes and that we will ever achieve the data base neces- K. Randsborg, pp. 25-37. Cambridge sary to resolve these questions. Compounding University Press, Cambridge. this uncertainty is the fact that a well-described Bursey, J. corpus of data in any one area or time period 1994 The Pottery from the Tara and Ireland will not necessarily inform us even about Sites: Three Terminal Glen Meyer contemporaneous sites in adjacent areas, given Components in the Burlington/ Craw- the highly localized orientation of most ford Lake Area. KEWA 94(3):2-15. 18 ONTARIO ARCHAEOLOGY No. 58, 1994

Chapdelaine, C. Jamieson, J. B. 1993 The Sedentarization of the Prehistoric 1978 Scattered and Interred Human Re- Iroquoians: A Slow or Rapid Transfor- mains from the Uren Site, Oxford Co., mation? Journal of Anthropological Ontario. Ms. on file, Department of Archaeology 12:173-209. Anthropology, McMaster University, Churcher, C., and W. A. Kenyon Hamilton, Ontario. 1960 The Tabor Hill Ossuaries: A Study in Jamieson, S. Iroquois Demography. Human Biology 1991 A Pickering Conquest? KEWA 91(5):2- 32:249-273. 18. Cybulski, J. S. Johnston, R. B. 1976 Identification of Human Remains and 1968 The Archaeology of the Serpent Associated Materials from near Port Mounds Site. Royal Ontario Museum Colborne, Ontario. Ms. on file, Archives Occasional Paper 10. Royal Ontario of the Archaeological Survey of Canada, Museum, Toronto. Ottawa. 1979 Notes on Ossuary Burial among the Dodd, C. F., D. R. Poulton, P. A. Lennox, D. G. Ontario Iroquois. Canadian Journal of Smith, and G. A. Warrick Archaeology 3:91-104. 1990 The Middle Ontario Iroquoian Stage. In Kapches, M. The Archaeology of Southern Ontario to 1976 The Interment of Infants of the Ontario A.D. 1650, edited by C. J. Ellis and N. Iroquois. Ontario Archaeology 27:29- Ferris, pp. 321-359. Occasion-al 39. Publication of the London Chapter, Kenyon, W. A. Ontario Archaeological Society 5. 1968 The Miller Site. Royal Ontario Museum London, Ontario. Occasional Paper 14. Royal Ontario Fitzgerald, W. Museum, Toronto. 1986 Is the Warminster Site Champlain's 1982 The Grimsby Site: An Historic Neutral Cahiague? Ontario Archaeology 45:3- Cemetery. Royal Ontario Museum, 7. Toronto. Fox, W. A. Kidd, K. 1976 The Central North Erie Shore. In The 1953 The Excavation and Historical Identifi- Late Prehistory of the Lake Erie Drain- cation of a Huron Ossuary. American age Basin: A 1972 Symposium Revised, Antiquity 18:359-379. edited by D. Brose, pp. 162-192. Knight, D., and J. Melbye Cleveland Museum of Natural History, 1983 Burial Patterns at the Ball Site. Ontario Cleveland. Archaeology 40:37-48. 1980 Southwestern Ontario Radio-carbon Lang, C. Dates II. KEWA 80(6):5-7. 1991 The Tara Burials. Ms. on file, Ontario 1983 Southwestern Ontario Radio-carbon Ministry of Transportation, Toronto. Dates IV. KEWA 83(6):1-4. Lee, T. 1988 The Elliott Village: Pit of the Dead. 1958 Appendix. Ontario Archaeological KEWA 88(4):2-9. Society Publication 4:39-42. Gibbs, L. Mayer, R., and A. P. Antone 1990 Osteological Assessment, Tara Site 1988 Archaeological Resource Assessment (AiGw-124), Primary Burial Feature 1. Downham Nurseries Site (AeHi-29), Ms. on file, Ontario Ministry of Trans- portation, Toronto. Southwold Township, Elgin County, Glencross, B. Ontario. Ms. on file, Ontario Ministry of Culture, Tourism and Recreation, 1992 Human Skeletal Remains at Mac-Allan Toronto. Site Ms. on file, Ontario (AgHa-59). Molto, I. E. Ministry of Transportation, Toronto. 1983 The Varden Site: Skeletal Biology. Ms. Jackes, M. on file, Department of Anthropology, 1988 The Osteology of the Site. Ms Grimsby Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, on file, Department of Anthropology, Ontario. University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta. SPENCE MORTUARY PROGRAMMES OF THE EARLY ONTARIO IROQUOIANS 19

Molto, J. E and W. A. Fox Spence, M. W. 1988 Reid Skeletal Analysis: Preliminary 1982 The Warbler Woods Burial. Ms. on file, Report. Ms. on file, Department of Ontario Ministry of Culture, Tour-ism Anthropology, Lakehead University, and Recreation, Toronto. Thunder Bay, Ontario. 1986 Band Structure and Interaction in Mullen, G., and R. Hoppa Early Southern Ontario. Canadian 1992 Rogers Ossuary (AgHb-131): An Early Journal of Anthropology 5(2):83-95. Ontario Iroquois Burial Feature from 1988 The Human Skeletal Material of the Brantford Township. Canadian Jour- Elliott Site. KEWA 88(4):10-20. nal of Archaeology 16:32-47. 1989 The Bonisteel Burial. Ms. on file, De- Ossenberg, N. partment of Anthropology, University 1969 Osteology of the Miller Site. Royal of Western Ontario, London, Ontario. Ontario Museum Occasional Paper 18. 1994 The Praying Mantis Burials: Technical Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto. Report. Ms. on file, Department of Pearce, R. Anthropology, University of Western 1978 Archaeological Investigations of the Ontario, London, Ontario. Pickering Phase in the Rice Lake Area. Spence, M. W., and W. A. Fox Ontario Archaeology 29:3-16. 1992 The Winona Rockshelter Burial. On- 1984 Mapping Middleport: A Case Study in tario Archaeology 53:27-44. Societal Archaeology. Unpublished Spence, M. W., R. H. Pihl, and J. E. Molto Ph.D. dissertation, Department of 1984 Hunter-gatherer Social Group Identi- Anthropology, McGill University, Mon- fication: A Case Study from Middle treal. Woodland Southern Ontario. In Ex- Pfeiffer, S. ploring the Limits: Frontiers and 1983 Demographic Parameters of the Ux- Boundaries in Prehistory, edited by S. bridge Ossuary Population. Ontario De Atley and F. Findlow, pp. 117-142. Archaeology 40:9-14. British Archaeological Reports, Inter- Ramsden, P. G. national Series 223. Oxford. 1990 Death in Winter: Changing Symbolic Spence, M. W., R. H. Pihl, and C. Murphy Patterns in Southern Ontario Prehis- 1990 Cultural Complexes of the Early and tory. Anthropologica 32:167-182. Middle Woodland Periods. In The 1991 Alice in the Afterlife: A Glimpse in the Archaeology of Southern Ontario to Mirror. In Coping with the Final Trag- A.D. 1650, edited by C. J. Ellis and N. edy: Cultural Variation in Dying and Ferris, pp. 125-169. Occasional Publi- Grieving, edited by D.R. Counts and cation of the London Chapter, Ontario D.A. Counts, pp. 27-41. Baywood Pub- Archaeological Society 5. Lon-don, lishing Co., Amityville, N.Y. Ontario Ramsden, C., R. Williamson, R. MacDonald, Spence, M. W., S. G. Wall, and R. H. King and C. Short 1981 Fluorine Dating in an Ontario Burial 1992 Settlement Patterns. In The Myers Site. Canadian Journal of Archaeology Road Site (AiHb-13), a Prehistoric 5:61-77. Iroquoian Village, Cambridge, On- Timmins, P. A. tario, edited by R. F. Williamson. Ms. 1992 An Interpretive Framework for the on file, Archaeological Services Inc., Early Iroquoian Village. Unpublished Toronto, Ontario. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Saunders, S. Anthropology, McGill University, Mon- 1978 The In Situ Analysis of Huron Burials. treal. Ontario Archaeology 29:47-52. Trigger, B. G. Saunders, S., and D. MacKenzie-Ward 1976 The Children of Aataensic: A History of 1988 The Reid Site Burials. KEWA 88(4):21- the Huron People to 1660. 2 vols. 26. McGill-Queen's University Press, Saunders, S., and M. W. Spence Montreal and London. 1986 Dental and Skeletal Age Determina- tions of Ontario Iroquois Infant Buri- als. Ontario Archaeology 46:45-54. 20 ONTARIOARCHAEOLOGY No. 58, 1994

Ubelaker, D. 1992 Croissance Demographique et Con- 1978 Human Skeletal Remains: Excavation, tinuité Culturelle dans le Nord-est Analysis, Interpretation. Aldine, Américain. Recherches Amerindiennes Chicago. au Quebec 22(4):26-28. von Gernet, A. Woodley, P. J. 1992 New Directions in the Reconstruction 1994 the Macallan Site (AgHa-59). KEWA of Prehistoric Amerindian Belief Sys- 94(1):3-26. tems. In Ancient Images, Ancient Woodley, P. J., W. R. Fitzgerald, and R. A. Thought: The Archaeology of Ideol- Southern ogy, edited by S. Goldsmith, S. 1992 The Zamboni Cemetery: a Glen Meyer Garvie, D. Selin, and J. Smith, pp. 133- Burial Ground. Paper presented at the 140. Archaeological Association, 25th Annual Meeting of the Canadian University of Calgary, Calgary, Al- Archaeological Association, London, berta. Ontario. Ms. on file, Ontario Ministry 1994 Saving the Souls: Reincarnation Be- of Transportation, Toronto, Ontario. liefs of the Seventeenth Century Hu- Wright, J. V. ron. In Amerindian Rebirth: Reincar- 1966 The Ontario Iroquois Tradition. Na- nation Belief among North American tional Museum of Canada Bulletin Indians and Inuit, edited by A. Mills 210. National Museums of Canada, and R. Slobodin, pp. 38-54. University Ottawa. of Toronto Press, Toronto, Ontario. 1990 Archaeology of Southern Ontario to Warrick, G. A.D. 1650: A Critique. In The Archae- 1992 Ministry of Transportation: Archaeo- ology of Southern Ontario to A.D. logical Investigations in the Central 1650, edited by C. J. Ellis and N. Fer- Region, Ontario. 2nd Annual Archae- ris, pp. 493-503. Occasional Publica- ological Report, Ontario 1991:67-71. tion of the London Chapter, Ontario Welsh, B., and R. Williamson Archaeological Society 5. London, 1994 The Olmstead Site, a Middle Iroquoian Ontario. Village in the City of Hamilton. Arch 1992 The Conquest Theory of the Ontario Notes 94(4):11-34. Iroquois Tradition: A Reassessment. Williamson, R. Ontario Archaeology 54:3-15. 1985 Glen Meyer: People in Transition. Wright, J. V. and J. E. Anderson Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, De- 1969 The Bennett Site. National Museum of partment of Anthropology, McGill Man Bulletin 229. National Museums University, Montreal. of Canada, Ottawa. 1990a The Early Iroquoian Period of South- Wright, M. ern Ontario. In The Archaeology of 1978 Excavations at the Glen Meyer Reid Southern Ontario to A.D. 1650, edited Site, Long Point, Lake Erie. Ontario by C. J. Ellis and N. Ferris, pp. 291- Archaeology 29:25-32. 320. Occasional Publication of the 1986 The Uren Site AfHd-3: An Analysis and London Chapter, Ontario Archaeo- Reappraisal of the Uren Sub-stage logical Society 5. London, Ontario. Type Site. Monographs in Ontario 1990b Archaeological Services Inc.: Archae- ological Assessments in the Province Archaeology 2. Ontario Archaeological Society, Toronto. of Ontario. 1st Annual Archaeological Report, Ontario 1990: 113-118.

Michael W. Spence Department of Anthropology, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario N6A 5C2