Examining 18Th Century French Colonial Identity Through Selective Consumption of Animal Resources in the North American Interior

Western Michigan University ScholarWorks at WMU

Master's Theses Graduate College

6-2004

Eating Ethnicity: Examining 18th Century French Colonial Identity Through Selective Consumption of Animal Resources in the North American Interior

Rory J. Becker

Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/masters_theses

Part of the Social and Cultural Anthropology Commons

Recommended Citation Becker, Rory J., "Eating Ethnicity: Examining 18th Century French Colonial Identity Through Selective Consumption of Animal Resources in the North American Interior" (2004). Master's Theses. 3925. https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/masters_theses/3925

This Masters Thesis-Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate College at ScholarWorks at WMU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at WMU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. EATING ETIINICITY: EXAMINlNG 1811-1 CENTURYFRENCH COLONIAL IDENTITY THROUGHSELECTIVE CONSUMPTION OF ANIMAL RESOURCES IN THE NORTIIAMERICAN INTERIOR

Rory J. Becker

A Thesis Submitted to the FacultyofThe Graduate College in partial ful:fillmentof the requirements forthe Degreeof Master of Arts Departmentof Anthropology

WesternMichigan University Kalamazoo,Michigan June2004 Copygt by Rory J. Becker 20 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to acknowledgethe numerousindividuals who have provided advice andsupport for this project. I would like to thankDr. Michael S. Nassaney, my thesis advisorand chairperson, for his suggestionsand patience throughout this research. A special thanksto Dr. TerranceJ. Martin,Curator of Anthropology at the

IllinoisState Museum, for granting access to the faunalcollections housed at the IllinoisState Museum's Researchand Collections Center, providingguidance in the methods offaunal analysis, and for opening his home to me as aguest duringthe courseof this research. Tue manytrips to Springfieldwould not have been feasible without this added kindnessfrom the MartinFamily. My thanksgo out to the other membersof my thesiscommittee, Dr. WilliamCremin and Dr. Michael Chiarappa, fortheir enthusiasm andopen mind concerningthis project. Additionally,I would like to thankSupport the FortInc., the FortSt. Joseph Museum,and the participants ofthe2002 WesternMichigan University archaeological fieldschoolwhose efforts resultedin the FortSt. Josephspecimens used in this analysis. BrockGiordano and Daniel Lynch receivespecial thanks for the manyhours ofconversation and informationsharing that have ledto the ideaspresented in thisthesis. Finally,I would like to express my deepestgratitude to my wife Eliz.abethBecker and myparents Harleyand Jackie Becker for their continued support throughout thisproject. All interpretationsof the data and anyshortcomings or deficienciesfound in thiswork remainthe sole responsibilityof the author.

RoryJ. Becker

ll EATINGETIINICITY: EXAMINING 18m CENTURYFRENCH COLONIAL IDENTITYTHROUGH SELECTIVE CONSUMPTIONOF ANIMAL RESOURCES IN 11IENORTII AMERICANINTERIOR

RoryJ. Becker,M.A.

WesternMichigan University, 2004

Culturalidentities can becreated and maintainedthrough daily practiceand foodconsum.ption is one such practice. Peopleneed food in orderto survive, but the typesof food they eat arelargely determinedby the interaction of culture and their environment. By approaching the topic of subsistence practicesas being culturally constituted, the studyof foodways provides anavenue to examine issues of cultural identitythrough selective consumption. Eatingcertain foods to the exclusion of othersis one method forestablishing social distance betweenpeoples and is simultaneously a reflectionof this relationshipand the types of interactions that take place betweengroups. Thisstudy explores the issue of cultural identityas expressed throughselective consumption of animal resources. Tueoutpost known as Fort St.

Joseph will serveas an example ofhow one canutiliz.e animal exploitation pattems to determine selectiveconsumption and theseresults are compared to animal exploitationpattems at Fort Ouiatenon, French Cahokia,Fort de ChartresI, andFort de Chartresm. Variationin thesepattems suggests the differentways in which culturalidentities were expressed ateach site. TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...... u

LIST OF TABLES ...... -...... V LIST OF FIGURES...... vi CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION...... 1 II. LITERATURE REVIEW...... 7 Ill. ENVIRONMENTAL AND IIlSTORICOVERVIEW ...... 19 Environmental andHistorical Context ofFort St. Joseph...... 19 Social and DemographieContext at Fort St. Joseph...... 25 Environmental, Historical, and Social Context at the other Four Sites ...... 28 IV. METHODOLOGY...... 36 V. ANALYSIS...... 45 Number ofIdentified Specimens ...... 47 Minimum Number oflndividuals...... 52 Biomass Estimates...... 54 Summary...... 55 VI. INTER-SITECOMPARISON OF RESULTS...... 57 Fort Ouiatenon...... 57 French Cahokia...... 63 Fort de ChartresI...... 64

111 Table of Contents-continued

Fort de Chartres ill...... 66

VII. CONCLUSION ...... 73

APPENDICES

A Skeletal Portions ofWhite-tailed Deer from Feature Contexts at Fort St. Joseph ...... 81

B Elements Utilized to Calculate Minimum Number of Individuals for LargeMammals from Each Featureat Fort St. Joseph...... 82

C Species Composition fromIndividual Features at Fort St. Joseph ...... 83

BIBLIOGRAPHY...... ;...... 88

lV LIST OF• TABLES

1. Class Composition fromAll Feature Contexts at Fort St. Joseph: Combined Macro andWet Screen Recovery...... 46 2. Species Composition fromAll Feature Contexts at Fort St. Joseph: Combined Macro andWet Screen Recovery...... 48

V LIST OF FIGURES

1. Fort St. Joseph Site Map ...... 38

2. Graph: Percent of Class Representation from Feature Contexts at Fort St. Joseph ...... 45

3. Graph: Total NISP % forWhite-Tailed Deer vs. Domesticates at Fort St. Joseph ...... 52

4. Graph: Total MNI% forWhite-Tailed Deer vs. Domesticates at Fort St. Joseph...... 53

5. Graph: Total Biomass % for White-Tailed Deer vs. Domesticates at Fort St. Joseph...... 54

6. Graph: Total NISP Count, MNI, and Biomass % forWhite-Tailed Deer vs. Domesticates at Fort St. Joseph...... 55

7. Graph: NISP Count % for White-Tailed Deer vs. Domesticates at All Five Sites...... 60

8. Graph: MNI % forWhite-Tailed Deer vs. Domesticates at All Five Sites...... 60

9. Graph: Biomass % forWhite-Tailed Deer vs. Domesticates at All Five Sites...... 61

VI CHAPTERI INTRODUCTION

Tue creationand maintenanceof culturalidentity can be realizedthrough daily practices(Meskell 2002). Language,clothing, and personal adormnent can all be utilizedas markersof coltural identity. In addition, foodtypes are largely determined by resourceavailability and culturalpreference and as such, subsistence is a cultural practicethat canbe manipulated to create andreproduce social boundaries(Meigs

1988). By approachingthe topic of subsistencepractices as beingculturally constituted, the studyof foodways providesan avenue to examineissues of cultural identitythrough selective consumption. Culturalnonns and mores, health issues, personal preferences, andreligious beliefs can all in:fluencea person's diet and so, too,can the conscious effortto distinguish oneselffrom members of another group

(Beoku-Betts 1995; Fergusonand Zuk:in 1995). Tue culturalpractice of eatingcertain foodsserves to createand maintain perceived boundaries or cultural distinctions that act to identifymembers of one groupfrom another. Through these markerspeople canposition themselves in relationto othergroups and reify their own cultural identity.

Eatingfoods certain to the exclusion of othersis one methodfor establishing social distancebetween two peoples and is simultaneously an expression of this relationshipand indicates the types of interactionsthat take place between the groups

(Messer 1984). Subsistence patternsthat aredissimilar between groupsthat share a

1 2 similarset of available resources indicate socio-cultural factors thatinfluence füods chosen fürconsumption as opposedto environmentalconstraints. As such, social interactionbetween the groupscan examinedbe through similarities or variations foundin the subsistence pattems ofdifferent groups.

Thisstudy will explorethe issue ofcultural identity as expressed through selectiveconsumption ofanimal resources forEuropeans andNative Americans at five French colonial sites in NorthAmerica. Tue American frontierin the18 th centuryprovides a context fürexamining two groupsof people with differentcultural practicesand world views. Values and meanings held byboth groups were being challengedthrough what White (1991) calls a process of''mutual accommodation" andthis creolizationcreates a frameworkfor studying the types of interactionsthat may have beent:aking place. Warfareand sexual relations provideunique examples ofinteractions that reflect the attitudes of differentpeoples towards one another

(White 1991). In the instanceof the fürtrade, violence breaks down trade networks andindicates the two peoplesare sharing little in the wayof mutual accommodation.

However, inter-marriages betweengroups strengthen trade through the establishment ofkinship ties betweenpeoples (White 1991). This not only facilitatedaccess to fürs, but also increased personal safetythrough alliances. An informalrelation such as marriage draws people together andreduces social distance while warfare breaks down cultural interactionand maintains social distance (Sleeper-Smith2001).

One such place where cultural interactionand creolization between French colonists andNative Americans in theGreat Ulkes für trade may be examined is the 3 ruraloutpost known as Fort St. Joseph. Thissite will serveas an exampleofhow one canutilize animal exploitation pattems to detennine selective consumption. FortSt.

Joseph, located in present day Niles, Michigan, was a remote outpostthat was not a govemmentalcenter forNew Francenor wasit subjectto a strongmilitary presence

(Hulse 1981). lt was, however, a valuable trade outpostsituated at the St. Joseph KankakeeRiver portagewhere trade with localnative groups flourished for nearly one hundredyears. Tueresults of the analysis of animal remains fromthis site will be comparedto aoima1 exploitationpattems at locations that occupy a similar environmental settingto Fort St. Joseph,but display di:fferencesin importanceto the

Frenchgoveroment, function in thefür trade, and demographic make-up. Fort Ouiatenon, French Cahokia, Fortde ChartresI, and Fort de Chartresm will serveas the basisfor comparison with FortSt Joseph. Fort Ouiatenonwas the most similarof thesefour commuoities to FortSt. Joseph in terms ofbothsize andsocial setting

(Tordoff1983). FrenchCahokia was anagricultural commuoity located near the largergoveromental center ofFort de ChartresI, andlater Fort de Chartresm, along the Mississippi River. Thesesites experienced more stringent goveromental control, a strongermilitary presence,and increasedsocial strati:ficationthan did Fort

Ouiatenonand Fort St Joseph(Tordoff 1983, Wise 2001). Variationin theaoimal exploitation pattems may lend insightinto the differentways culturalidentity and

Europeao/NativeAmerican interaction was expressedat each of these locations throughthe maintenanceof social distaoce. 4 lt is hypothesizedthat as the Europeansinteracted more intensively withlocal

Native populationsin ruralareas, patterns of animal exploitatioll forthe colonists may

bave telldedto mimic those of their Nativeallies more so than in largeror more

accessiblelocations. Thelarger colonial sitesthat experiellced stronger govemmelltal

colltroland anincreased military presellce also had greateraccess to imported

Europeangoods such as domesticated animals� Wild gamespecies would bavebeell just as plelltifulin these locations; however colonists in the!arger forts may bave

colltinuedto prefer domestic speciesfor consumption. Dailylife at a regional

distributiollcellter (Tordoff1983) would not llecessarilybe depelldellt on the aidof

Nativeallies andso interactioll between the two groupswould bavebeen more formal

and the cultural idelltitiesof colonists andNatives more rigidlydefined. Thiscreates

social distancing thatmay be reflected in the animal exploitationpatterns that served

to maintain more discrete culturalidentities. The interactions betweenEuropeans and

Nativesat outposts Oll the fringesof thefrontier may havehad an air of informalityas

the daily lleeds of colonists, bothsocial and ecollomic,were depelldentOll

cooperationwith localtribes (Sleeper-Smith 2001; White 1991).

Specifically, this study seeksto compareanimal exploitation patterns at the

recentlyexcavated Fort St Josephwith animal remains collected from several other

COlltemporaneoussites in the North American interior to examinevariation in the

subsistellcestrategies of the occupants. Numberof IdentifiedSpecimens (NISP),

Minimum Numberoflndividuals (MNI), and biomass estimates made fromthe faunal

assemblagesrecovered from each of thesesites will providean ordinal ranking of 5 species consumedat each locatioll. Of major COllcemwill be the depelldenceOll domesticatedanimals in comparisoll to wild game species, specificallywbite-tailed deer,in an effortto idelltifymarkers ofEuropean cultural identity as expressed through subsistellce. Relations between colonists and Natives areproposed to have beellmore formal at sites with a distinctmilitacy presence, stronggovernmental

COlltrol,and increased internal social stratificatiollsuch as Fort de Chartres. Colonists reliedOll domesticated species out of cultural practiceand this served as a meansof maintainingsocial distance andclear lines of cultural identitybetweell themselves and the Nativetribes. However, moving awayfrom governmental centers results in more informal relations with localNative peoples (White 1991) and as such the distinctions betweell Europeansand Native Americans become blurred. Increasedinter-marriages that took place betweellEuropeans and Natives at these locations andthe presellce of mts populationsmay beexpressed in the animal exploitation patterns. An increase in the dependency on wild game speciesat the ruraloutposts is expectedas aresponse to a relaxingof the desireto maintaincultural and socialdistance while larger governmelltalcenters are expected to exhibit higherproportions of domesticated speciesreflecting more formal relationships betweencolonists and Natives at these

sites.

In Chapter2, I examine the literatureconceming the constructiollof cultural

identitythrough the selectiveconsumptioll of foods. Also, archaeological

investigationsinto issues of identitywill be highlighted. Chapter 3 exploreshistorical

and archaeologicalevidence for animal resources in the areaof southwestem 6 Michiganthat would have beenavailable to colonists at FortSt. Joseph during the

18th century. Tue history, environmental,and social conditions foreach of the five sites will also be presented. Chapter4 provides the methodology forthis researchand detailsexcavation and recovery procedures atthe Fort St Joseph site (20BE23) during the 2002 field season. Chapter 5 presents the resultsof the analysis of the faunalremains from the Fort St Josephsite, andChapter 6 comparesthese results to Fort Ouiatenon, FrenchCahokia, Fort de ChartresI, andFort de Chartresm. Finally, Chapter 7 summam.esthis researchand suggests additionalquestions that may be explored. CHAPTERII

LITERATUREREVIEW

Thischapter explores some of the literatureconcerning cultural identity as expressedthrough foodways in both contemporaryand past societies. Ethnographie studies provideexamples of themanner in which selectiveconsumption may be employedby certaingroups to differentiate peoples (Holtzman 2003). The interactionsbetween groups of people who actively maintain discrete cultural identitiesmay then be examinedthrough the subsistence practicesof thosepeople.

Thematerial remains:from meals, such as the faunalassemblage recovered fromFort

Micbilimackinac,can also be examined in order to identifyvariation in the types of subsistence thatwas practicedby various occupantsof a site (Cleland1970; Scott

1985). Thesedifferences may indicate markers of culturalidentity for the colonists who were present.

To begina discussion onthe expressionof culturalidentity through selective consumption, definitionof these termsis necessary. For the purposesof this study, culturalidentity is definedas the creation, manipulation, and continuation of markers, bethey verbal or non-verbal, that are utilizedto distinguish one culturally "distinct" groupfrom another (Craib 1992; Shennan1994). Thereare three aspects that complicate the definitionof identity, beit cultural, social, or otherwise: (1) identityis situationaland often context dependent,(2) identitycan cbange quickly during the course of an interaction, and(3) interactionswith membersof another cultureare

7 8 often influenced by one' s own positionwithin society (Bourdieu 1977; Mann1999; Messer 1984; Wise 2001). The above definition of cultural identity was fonnulated withthese concernsin mind. Cultural identitymay be expressed through many fonns of material culture (Shennan 1994) and this researchfocuses on the study of foodways andhow subsistence practicesmay be manipulated as a marker of culturalidentity. Assuch, selective consumption in this study refersto a literal understanding of the tennthat implies the exploitation of certainanimals to the exclusionof others(Gust

1993; Messer 1984).

The ideathat consumption practices can be utilizedmarker asa of cultural identity has found fertilesoil in the work of ethnographers. Subsistence patternshave often received aplace of prominence in the identificationof culturalpractice along side such broadbased topics as social structure, economics,and religion (Biesele

1993; Evans-Pritchard1940; Fine 1995; Firth1936; Holtzman2003; Kahn1986;

Mintz1985). This sectionwill review some of the literatureregarding how people selectivelyconsume subsistence resources to distinguishthemselves and maintain markers of theircultural identity.

In orderto understand the ways in which foodcan activelybe manipulated as a markerof cultural identity,food must :firstunderstood be as a culturalconstruct in its own right. Taste is oftenperceived of as natural(Ulin 1995). The perception of taste is generally thought to be in large part due to climatic and environmental conditionsthat combine to producea distinctflavor in the fruit, vegetables, wine,and even meat fromcattle, sheep, and hogs fromdistinct areas (Bourdieu 1984). This is 9 not to saythat soil conditions and weather have nothingto do with food production.

Certainlydifferent conditions give riseto variationin the way foodstaste. However, the perception ofthisdifference requires a preconceivednotion ofhow the foods shouldtaste (Meigs 1988; Messer1984 ). Experiencewith certain foods provides a cultural precursor that shapesthe expectations of how foods taste. In thesame mannerthat phonemes may not beby heard someonennfamiliar with a given language,taste is also dependenton social conditioningfor its interpretation

(Bourdieu 1984). Thus,one may bave an acquired taste for certain dishes while other foods,though perfectlyedible, are not eaten. Takento extremes, the case offood taboos providea uniqueopportuoity to clearlydistinguish one groupfrom another throughsubsistence (Douglas 1966). Culturalconstructivists argue that taste is as much a cultural preferenceas the types of clothing peoplewear. Taste,that is preferencefor a certain flavor,is a matterof culturaland personal experience which may delineatedbe through natural processes; however its creationhas moreto do with social interaction than with soil composition(Hobsbawm 1983; Meigs 1988; Messer

1984; Ulin1996).

Social interaction as negotiatedthrough foodways can beseen in thesocial interactionsfor the Wamirans of Melanesia. Kahn (1986) suggests thatthrough food, issues of sexual politics,gender relations,k:inship, and economicscan be understood forthe Wamirans. Foodfunctions as apowerful metaphor in thissociety where

"famine"and ''hunger" arequalitative and moral evaluations ofhuman behavior as opposedto astate of nutritiooal well-beiog(Kahn 1986). Foodin Wamiraosociety 10 represents something other thanthe nourishment ofa bodywhich is based on Western concepts ofbiology. For them, foodrepresents how you live, how you interact with others in the society,and the expressionof cultural beliefs.

Tue Warniransalso cameto understandthe differences between the ethnographer'ssociety and their own culture throughthe metaphor offood. When the

Warniranstried to explaintheir culture in relationto Westernsociety, they explained that"We aretoro (similar to yams or sweetpotatoes) people, but whereyou come from,people aremoney people. . .. In your place, peopleare different, that is their life,that is whothey are"(Kahn 1986: 154). Throughthis sortof statement, the

Warniransdistinguish themselves in comparison.. to Westernersthrough food which is bothmetaphorical and empirical. Thetoro is atone level, a type offood. Peopleeat toro andit is the stapleof Wamiran diets. However, Kahn (1986) pointsout thatthe • analogybetween Wamirans and toro, in comparisonto Westernersand money, is surprisingly accurate. TheW amirans have used food not only to represent different aspectsof their ownsociety, butalso as ametaphorfor their societyin general. This representationof food shows just one instanceof the use offoodways as a social and culturalmarker. Thedelineation of different peoples and aspects of cultural identity canbe seen throughthe Wamiranuse offood (Kahn 1986).

Theconstruction of ethnic boundaries or culturalmarkers can also be accomplished throughselective consumptionof certain foods (Messer 1984). An example ofthis canbe seen in thedietary restrictions of the Samburu in Africawhich include fish, reptiles, birds, donkeys, elephants, and manywild gameanima1s 11 (Holtzman2003). In this instance,food taboos are employed to delineate the differencesbetween Samburu and neighboring tribes of Turkana pastoralists and

Doroboforagers. Tue Turkanaand Dorobo do not practice similarfood taboos,and theSamburu claim this provesthe savage, or pre-cultural,nature of their local rivals

(Holtzman2003). Consumptionof these forbiddenanimals could be practicedby the

Samburuto noill effecton their physical weil being. In fact,it may beargued that increased variety in their diet would improve the overall health ofthe community.

However, theSamburu consume mainly cattle from their herds as part of cultural practice that sets them apartfrom these other tribes(Holtzman 2003). Tueelephant, forinstance, is perceivedto bevery similar to humansby the Samburuand so the

Turkanaand Dorobo consumption of these anima1s carries anespecially strong stigma

(Holtzman2003). The Samburuuse the establishedfood taboos to dehumanizethe other local tribesand this becomesa self-empoweringprinciple that the Samburuuse to rankthemselves above their less-than-human, pre-cultural neighbors(Douglas

1966).

Samburupatterns of subsistence also create the opportunityfor social stratificationwithin their own society. Tue Samburuidentity ofthose tribalmembers who areof Dorobodescent can drawnbe into questionthrough the claim thatthey continueto eat elephants in secret(Holtzman 2003). While these claims may be unsupported,it is difficultto removethe socialstigma associated with such accusations. Tuefood taboos established by Samburupastoralists against most forms ofmeat other thancattle maintain a cleardivision betweenthemselves and 12 neighboringtri.bes and are also used to reinforcesocial statuswithin theirown tribe

(Douglas 1966; Holtzman2003).

Foodwayshave also been utilized differentiate to people throughoutan entire region. TueNorthem Paiute system of food-nam.ing distinguishednot only thegroups of people living in a certainlocation, but also the majotfood resources consumed by those groups. For instance,the namefor the k:ucadikadipeople of the Mono Basin in eastemCalifomia means "eaters of brine-:0:ypupae" ,. (Arkush 2000). Thisdesignation alludes to the Mono Basin Paiutepractice of collectingthe brine-flypupae andlarvae duringthe late summer. Long windrows of this insectwould blow on shorefrom

Mono Lakeand the k:ucadikadi would scoop them up in baskets, dry them in the sun, andthen husk the larvaeby band (Arkush 2000). Once thiswas accomplished the insects could beeaten or storedfor thefall and wintermonths.

Otherareas of the westemGreat Basin were knownNorthem to Paiute according to thisfood-name system. Tue nameof a peoplereflected their major food resourceand indicated to other NorthemPaiute thetypes of foodresources available in thearea (Ark:ush 2000). In the instanceof thisfood-nam.ing system, cultural identityas representedby selective consumption is establishednot thoughthe use of food taboos, but by the recognition of certain subsistence patterns. Group identityfor

NorthemPaiute, and indeedtheir very name, comes fromdifferential patterns of subsistence betweenseveral groups (Ark:ush 2000).

Tue issueof culturalidentity as establishedthrough foodways can also be examinedat the nationallevel. France,perhaps more thanany other Western... nation, 13 is knownfor its culinaryarts. A sourceof cultural pride, French foodshave been a

centralpart of national identity since at leastthe timeof Grimod de la Reyniere in the

earlynineteenth century (Fantasia 1995). Reyniere's firstpublication ofhis

Almanachdes Gourmands began a series thatchronicles thedevelopment ofFrench

tastewhich would later become immortalizedin 1825 withPhysiology ofTaste by

Anthelme Brillat-Savarin(Bourdieu 1984). These publications document the French

perspective on such matters as taste,the properpreparation ofmeals, the social

characterof dining, and the philosophyand aesthetics of food, table presentation, and

the humanbody in general. Over a centurylater, the NationalCouncil of Culinary

Artswas formed in 1989 by the FrenchMinistry of Culture (Fantasia 1995). This

council is charged withprotecting the culinarypatrimony of France which includes

the identificationand inventory of major sites relatedto French culinary heritage, the

creation of a national day ofgourmandize, andthe fonnationof a conservatoryof

culturalculinary heritage which will promoteresearch, expositions, and educational

activitiesthat furtherFrench heritage as realizedthrough foods (Fantasia 1995). Tue

establishmentof cultural identity through foodways in Francehas movedbeyond the

rea1m ofpersonal taste and social preferenceto beresearched, defined, andactively

maintainedby the Frenchgovernment.

Although the exampleof French foods may bemore extremethan is truefor

most Westem nations, it providesa clearcase of a consciouseffort to express cultural

identity throughfoodways. TueNational Council of CulinaryArts actively

distinguishesFrench heritage from that of surrounding nations in an effortto preserve 14 some notion of Frenchness in the face of intrusionssuch as fastfood and the

"Americaniz.ation"of food (Fantasia1995). The creationof thecouncil lends credenceto the ideathat there really exists a pureor trueset of recipesand ways of preparing food thathave always been French. In reality,contemporary French culinarypractices are the result of hundredsof yearsof change,adaptation, appropriation, domination, and expansion (Bourdieu 1984; Fantasia1995).

Whenpeople agree that certain sets of foodsare acceptable and have been preparedin ways thatadhere to cultural norms, thesepeople find themselves identifyingwith one anotherin ways not seenwith members of differentcultures througha sense of shared heritage andtradition (Cooper 1986; Hobsbawm1983).

Throughthis type of interaction, culturalidentity can expressedbe through selective consumptionof certainfoods. Whether it beWamiran islanders, Samburu pastoralists,Basin Mono Native Americans, or theFrench govemment, selective consumption of certainfoods can be used to create social solidaritywithin groups and simultaneously establishsocial distance between groups (Beoku-Betts 1995;

Counihan t 992; Dahlberg2001; Ferguson andZuJcin 1995; Friedmann1982; Orlove andSchmidt 1995;Welch andScarry 1995).

Ethnographieand historic accounts such as thosedetailed above provide examplesof howselective consumptionserves to express cultural identity in living populations. However, archaeologistshave also been interestedin questions of identity,although the subjects of their research are often peoples who mayhave lived long ago (Beaudryet al. 1991; Craib 1992; Nassaney 2001; Shennan 1994). Cultural 15 and socialidentity are topics that can exploredbe through archaeological inquiry and arcbaeologistshave examinedissues such asclass, race, gender, status,and ethnicity through the material expressions ofthese identities (Conkeyand Spector 1984;

Meskell 2002;Nassaney 2001 ). Materialsand objects are often imbued with a certain level of symbolicmeaning that conveys messages aboutthe user' s identity(Paynter andMcGuire 1991). Throughthe recognition that objects canand do cany informationabout identity, archaeologists have investigated questions conceming socialrelations in the pastby examiniog materialculture recovered in the present

(Brumfiel1992; Conkey and Gero1997; Craib 1998; Gibbs 1987; McGuire 1982;

Shanks andTilley 1982; Wylie 1991).

This study also explores issues ofidentity as expressed through the arcbaeological andrecord, here it will beaccomplished through the identificationof variation in the remainsof meals. Since subsistence practices arean expression of culturalidentity, sigoificant di:fferences in thecomposition of refuse pits andmiddens wheretable scraps,leftovers, and unused food portionsare discarded could also provideevidence forthe maintenance and reification of cultural identity in the communities responsiblefür the depositionof those remains (Gust 1993).

Similarities in thefood remains may lead to theconclusion thatfoodways were not acting as a markerof cultural identityin these communitieswhile variation in the remainsmay require explanation.

Tue animal remains recoveredfrom Fort Micbilimackinacexhibit the sort of variationthat can be explained by cultural di:fferences between the Frenchand British 16 occupations ofte site (Clelad 1970; Scot 1985). For te French occuion ofFort

Michilimackc ( 1715 - 1761 ), a lage pron ofte ful assemblage is comprise offsh rmains wit a wide variet offisb, bir and mama1 spies rprnt

(Scott 1985). However, the subsequent Britsh depsits at the frt (1761 - 1781) displa hevier depndene on mammalia spies ingenerl ad the conon of may more domestcated animals, Clelad (1970) agues tat this distinction may b aibu to sia1 ad cultu difernces be the fr's ocut. The Frnch ppulaton at Fort Michilimackinac mainly consiste oflower class Caholics who immig fm Frce or Frnch C Te pple wer accustome to te ts offood resources locally available at the Stts ofMacknac ad were " ... in essnce, Frnch pts bing Frnh pts a Michilimackac" (Clelad 1970:

18). Tue fr itself was locae at te end ofa long supply line fom Monteal ad

Quebecwher gos fm New Frc arrive iuently (Scott 1985). In cnt when the Brtsh tok contol ofthe frt it bame pa ofa network ofEnglish militar gaisns thatwer linke by a well-evelop supply line andgo communications (Clelad 1970). Trrton of domesticate aima1s to the

Stits of Mak bme mor fesible. Social scaon alsobomes more apant during the British ocupaon fm 1761 to 1780 ad te prsonnel sttione a te frt generlly cnsist of higher class citns thanwas the c dug the

Frnch ocupaton. Tese pple sougt to maintain conr titions fm

Englad althoug tey wer gegphically dt fm their hmelad (Clelad 1970). 17 Thesedifferences in thereligion, social status, and general affinityto their homeland resultin variationsbetween French andBritish subsistence at Fort

Michjlimackinac (Cleland 1970; Scott 1985). Tuepoor French colonists exploited localresoW'CeS in a mannerconsistent withtheir need to findnourishment in a marginalenvironment and in tbe absence of a means to· procureimported goods. Tue

British, on the otber hand,were "transported Englishmen" who wantedto live as tbough tbestreets ofLondon extended to tbeStraits ofMackinac(Cleland 1970).

Thesedifferences are expressed in tbe faunalassemblage from Fort Michilimackinac witb its low dependency on domesticates and wide rangeof species exploitedby tbe

French,while English depositsshow a greaterdependence on domesticspecies

(Cleland 1970; Scott 1985).

Thischapter has reviewedsome of tbeliterature pertaining to tbeconstruction of culturalidentity as expressedtbrough foodways. Ethnographieevidence and studiesof living populations have demonstratedtbe useof selectiveconsumption as a meansfor establisbing and maintainingmarkers of culturalidentity (Arkush 2000;

Hol1zman2003; Kahn 1986; Ulin 1996). Foodremains can also be used to explore issues of culturalidentity tbrough selectiveconsumption as has been expressedin tbe faunal remainsfrom Fort Michilimackinac(Cleland 1970; Scott 1985). Tuequestions of concem fortbis study,however, include tbeinteractions between European colonists andNative Americans at differentlocations in NorthAmerica. As such, tbe

French occupations offive colonialsites, Fort St. Joseph, Fort Ouiatenon,French Cahokia,Fort de Chartres1, andFort de Chartresm will betbe focusof tbisresearch. 18 Tuenext chapter,Chapter 3, will provide anenvironmental and historic contextfor Fort St. Joseph that focuses on the availability of food resourcesat thefort throughan examinationof pre-contactNative subsistence practicesin the areaof southwestem Michigan. Also, subsistence practices andinternal social stratification as seenin documentaryand archaeologicalevidence fürFort St. Josephmay lend insight into the availability of domesticspecies at this site. Finally, the environmental settingand social conditions atthe other foursites in thisstudy are detailed. CHAPTERID ENVIRONMENTALAND HISTORIC OVERIVEW

Tue previous chapter reviewedsome of the literaturepertaining to cultural identityas expressed through selective consumptionfrom both ethnographic and archaeological accounts. Selective consumption is ultimately constrained to the aoimal resourcesavailable for consumption. lf a certainresource in unavailable,then peoplecanoot actively manipulate this resource as anexpression of culturalidentity.

Thisprinciple seems simple enough;however, detenniningthe availableresources for peoplesand societiesof the past is a necessarypart of understandingthe manipulation of thoseresources. This sectionwill discussthe availablefood resources at Fort St

Joseph through documentaryand archaeological evidence in aneffort to identify the rangeof possible speciessuitable foraoimal exploitation in thearea of southwestem

Michiganduring the fort'soccupation. Also, issues conceming identityand

Europeao/Nativeinteractions at this location will be examined.historical A context will also beprovided forthe other foursites includedin thisstudy.

Environmentaland Historical Contextof Fort St Joseph

SouthwestemMichigan was occupied by Native peoples long before

Europeansarrived. Prior tocontact, this region was theancestral homeland of the

Potawatomi (Cremin 1996). Following a split with their Algonquin relatives the

Ojibwa andOttawa, the Potawatomi occupied tlie area along theeastem shoreline of

19 20 LakeMichigan fromabout the beginningof thefifteenth century until the mid-1600s.

Settlementpatterns for Native peoples living in thisarea prior to contact followed seasonal availability offood resources. Permanent villages wereoccupied during summer months while temporaryhunting camps were inhabited during the winter

(Fittingand Cleland 1969). Thisyearly pattem of settlementallowed the Potawatomi to take advantageof riverine resources, such as lake sturgeon, during late spring when variousfish species spawn (Fitting and Cleland 1969). Mobile winter huntingcamps allow largegroups of peopleto utilize the wild gamespecies, mainly white-tailed deer,for consumption without overexploitation of theresource (Bettarel and Smith

1973). TueMoccasin Bluff,Spoonville, Zemaitis, Land,and Spring Creek sites are representativeof thesetypes of occupations(Martin 1976; Martinand Richmond

2001). Thistype of settlement pattem was basedon maximizing the yearly cycle of available aoimalspecies, oamely fish, wild game, andwild plantresources, in conjunction with maize and other crops plantedby Native peoples (Fitting and

Cleland1969).

Tue areaof southwestemMichigan is located along thenorthem boundaries of theCarolinian biotic province(Dice 1943). Thisclimatic z.one is suitable babitatfor a varietyof animal speciesincluding white-taileddeer, raccoon, beaver, opossum, black bear,eastem cottontail, wild turkey, passenger pigeon,ruffed grouse, and many varieties of duck, amongothers (Cleland 1966). Wapitiand bison would also have beenfound in the openareas of the Carolinianbiotic province. Lake sturgeon, channel catfish, redhorsesuckers, turtles,and freshwater mussels were some of the 21 aquaticresources available to a communitytbat lived in proximityto a river in this area(Cleland 1966).

TuePotawatomi settlementpattem in southwestem Michigan was disrupted when the Iroquoianexpansion, probablyfrom the areaof southwest Ontario, pushed establishedgroups of Potawatomiout ofthe region by at least 1643 (Hunt1960). Tue refugeestled north to the Straitsof Mackinacand on toSault Ste. Mariewhere they were firstencountered by theFrench. TuePotawatomi finallysettled in the area of whatis nowGreen Bay where they establishedvillages along the bayitself, on Rock

Island, andalong theeastem shoreline ofthe Door Peninsula(Mason 1986). When

LaSallevisited the Green Bay areain 1679, he encountered Potawatomivillages along thewestem shore of Lake Michigan and as farsouth as present day Milwaukee

(Cremin1996).

Following the flightofthe Potawatomi to Wisconsin in themid-17 th century, the areaof southwestem Michigan lacked permanent settlement because it was under constantthreat from Iroquois invaders(Hunt 1960). When LaSalleexplored the St.

Joseph River in 1679, he reportedno established villages along its banks (Creminand

Nassaney 1999).

Tuefall of Fort St Louisto the Iroquoisin 1684 markedthe retum ofNative peoplesto the area. Miamiliving at the fortwere drawnto the mission establishedby

FatherClaude Allouez nearpresent day Niles, Michigan(Idle 2003). In the following

year, Govemor-General Denonville grantedthe Jesuits a tractofland along the St.

Joseph River to continuetheir missionarywork and strengthen the relations with 22 nativesin the area. Tuelocation of the Jesuit mission also proved a strategicmilitary location near the St. Joseph-KaokakeeRiver portageand along major east-west trade routes(Nassaney et al. 2004). To furtherstrengthen the Frenchoccupation ofthis areaand utilize this strategiclocale, Frontenac, who succeededDenonville as the

Govemor..GeneralofNew France,dispatched a smalldetachment of French soldiers to establish a militarypresence among the Miami (ldle2003; Peyser 1978).

In 1691, the Frenchmilitary postthat would beknown as Fort St Josephwas establishedon the St. Joseph River. Thisfort, however, would never prove to be a vitalmilitary bastion. Instead,it provideda valuabletrade center forthe area and becamethe fourthlargest outpost, in termsof the volume of fürsbeing traded, for

New Francein theeighteenth century (Cremin and Nassaney 1999). Tue Miami's hold on thearea would prove to beshort lived, however, as the Potawatomi's return fromthe area of Green Bay brought thesepeople to the St JosephRiver in large numbers by at least 1695 (Cremin 1996). By 1710, most ifnot allof the local Miami population badrelocated to the south and largea communityof Potawatomibad taken up residence acrossthe river fromFort St. Joseph with occasionalvisits to the fortby the Ottawa, !(askaskia, Kickapoo, Mascouten,andWea (Hulse 1981; Idle 2003).

European patternsof settlement did not match those of their NativeAmerican predecessorsin the area. A permanentoutpost was built whereyear-round trade could be conducted. lt is unclear whether thePotawatomi, upontheir returnfrom the Green

Bay area,continued their seasonalsettlement pattem of large stationary summer communities andsmaller nomadic winter hunting campsor if they established a 23 permanentsettlement on thebanks ofthe St.Joseph River to stayin close proximity tothe mission andtrading post.

Despite the changein settlement patternsbetween Europeansand pre-contact

NativeAmericans, similar animal resourceswould havebeen available tothe newly arrived colonists in the area. However, in addition to these local, wild game resources,European colonists would have hadaccess to importedgoods and new technologiesthat could aid in subsistencein ways not available to Native Americans beforeEuropeans arrived. For instance,Europeans were huntingmore bird species andin greaternumbers than contemporaryNative American groups at theStraits of

Mackinac. Thishas been attributed to the useof firearms more asa effective and reliable meansof collecting these species, and evidence can beseen in the frequency of shotholes in bird honespecimens (Cleland 1970). In addition,domestic aoimal species such as cattle, swine, sheep, goats, and chickens could have beentransported to thefort to provide traction, milk, andmeat for the residents.

TueFrench maintainedcontrol ofFort St. Joseph untilit was takeo over by the

British in 1761 (Idle 2003). Thisshift in regime,while perhapshistorically sigoificant, probably did not marka dramaticshift in the lifestylesofthe fort's residents. Approximately 12 to 14 Frenchfamilies wereresiding in about 15 households at the fort during the latter partof the French period andearly portion of

British occupation(Nassaney 2003). ThomasHutchins, an American surveyor who visitedthe fort in 1762, noted the presence of cattle and horses.He writes " ... they

[the French] raise nothing morethan some Indian com andmak:e a little hayto 24 supporttheir horses and mules and a fewmilch cows, which seems to be all the stock they have" (Cremin and Nassaney1999: 20). Thisdocumentation places a few domesticatedanimals at the fortminimally during the earlyperiod of the British occupationand is supportedby archaeologicalevidence (Nassaneyet al.2003).

The1763 uprising knownas Pontiac's Rebellionmark.ed another shift in politicalcontrol for Fort St. Joseph. British militaryoccupation of the forthad been effectivelydispatched and control feil tothe French merchant LouisChevalier who served as aBritish agent and once again established vigorouscommerce between

Europeantraders and Native peoples (Nassaney et al. 2003). Americanadvances into

British occupied territories brought aboutthe re-garrisoning of the fortby a British detachmentfrom Fort Michilimackinacin 1779. When the soldiersarrived, the remaining 8 to 15 French familiesstill living atthe fortwere forcedout (Peyser

1978). In Februaryof 1781, Fort St Josephwas attacked and captured by acombined

French and Native American force sponsored by the Spanishgovemor at St. Louis

(Creminand Nassaney 1999). Thismark.ed the end forFort St. Josephduring the colonial periodand explains the present-daymotto ofNiles, Michiganas the "Cityof

Four Flags," commemoratingthe only placein Michigan where French, British,

Spanish,and American flags have flown(Cremin andNassaney 1999).

No greatclimatic shifts are recorded for the areaof southwestemMichigan fromthe LateWoodland through Contactperiods, so it may be assumedthat the range of available anima1species utilized by Native Americans in this area would have been potentiallyavailable to Europeancolonists throughthe earlypart ofthe 18 th century. 25 Naturalfluctuations in anima1populations are toexpected, be although these are generallynot sodram:ic as to causea declinein the availabilityof species for consumption over prolonged periods(Grayson 2001). Those animalstypical ofthe

Carolinianbiotic provincewould have beenplentiful in the areaof Fort St. Joseph during the early partof the fort's occupation. Speciesavailability and population declineare possible due to over-huntingin thearea through extendedoccupation of thesite, and these effectsmay bereflected in the faunal.. assemblage. However, recognitionof these effects will requireextensive excavationand greater chronologicalcontrol to assess temporalchange withinthe fort's earlyand late periods. For the purposesof this study, it is assumedthat species availability remainedessentially constant during the 90 yearperiod (1691-1781) ofthe fort's occupation due tolow humanpopulation levels andseasonal scheduling of anima] exploitation.

Socialand Demographie Context atFort St. Joseph

While FortSt. Joseph was indeeda Frenchcolonial outpostthat also experiencedBritish occupation, it shouldnot be thought of simply as anisland of

Europeanculture on the outskirtsof a vast American wildemess. Cadillac estimated that200 warriors could berecruited from the Potawatomiliving in southwestem

Michiganin 1694. Thisplaces an approximate populationof 1,200 Native peoplesat or nearFort St. Josephduring the earlypart of itsoccupation (Sleeper-Smith 2001:

38). AdditionalNative tribes in the general vicinity ofthe St. Joseph-Kankakee 26 portageincluded IDini, Miami, Huron, Mahican.Fox, Sauk, andWabunaki. This was a land füllof people with theirown conceptionsof whatwas meant by European expansion into the GreatLakes region, and success meantfür traders bad to negotiate thelandscape according to Nativetraditions, not European custom. Tuemany nations andtribes in thisarea formeda loose communitythat incorporated strangersthrough intermarriagesand occasionally adoption (Sleeper-Smith2001). Kinship tiesnot only formed alliances, butalso provided.. a referencefor people to understand one another's positionwithin this larger community.

Thiswas the world in which GreatLakes French für traders bad to operate fromthe late 1600sthrough the middle tolate 1700s. Kin networks werethe vitalkey to success in tradingwith the manyNative groupsin the GreatLakes region, and intermarriageswith Nativewomen allowedthese Europeans to become apart of this network (Sleeper-Smith2001 ). While this practice facilitatedtrade, it was viewed with contemptby theclergy. Tuehigh instance of maniages and sexual relations between Frenchtraders and Nativewomen was seenby theJesuits as adulterous and threateningto the missiooaryefforts (Sleeper-Smith 2001). However, tradersjustified their actionsby claimingto be''wildemess diplomats"and skillfulIndian negotiators who could operatein bothEuropean and Native societies.

TueNative Americans werealso undergoing culturechange during this time as Catholicismbecame widespread through French missionaries. Baptismalrecords fromFort St. Joseph show the conversion oflocal Potawatomito a new faith in the

Christian god. This conversion, however, did not mark a complete transformation 27 into Europeancustom. On the contrary, Catholicismprovided yet another opportunity forNative peoples to expand the extensivekinship networksthrough the namingof

Godparentsduring the baptismalceremonies of theirsons and daughters (Sleeper

Smith 2001). Throughthis Catholic kinship netwo� commandantsbecame

Godfathersto a growingcommunity of mitiswhile Nativewomen withextensive kinshipnetworks were oftennamed Godmother. The practiceof namingGodparents expandedexisting Native kinship networks andallowed French traders, Native wives, and theirmetis offspringto operatewithin both Europeanand Native society (Sleeper

Smith 2001). Thesocial setting ofFort St Joseph wasone thatrequired European tradersto becomeincorporated into Nativesociety. Throughintermarriages,

Godparents,and mitis populations, thedemographic make-up of thefort was one that must have meantoccupation by a substantialnumber ofNative peoplesor people of mixed ancestry(Sleeper-Smith 2001 ). Marriagesat Fort St Joseph, such as theone between Louis Chevalier (a French trader fromMichilimackinac) and Marie

Madeleleine Reaume(the daughter of anlliini woman and French trader) expanded kinshipnetworks, both through blood andreligion, from Canada to the American

Bottom. Tue large L'archeveque-Chevalier kinshipnetwork that resulted from this marriage could betraced from Montreal to French Cahokia(Sleeper-Smith 2001).

Traditionalaccounts teil of the success ofFrench fürtraders, however the accomplishments of these men oftencame only when supportedthrough the kinship building effortsof Native and mitis women. While men wereout plying their trade, these women at Fort St Joseph maintainedfavorable relations with trade partners 28 throughhouseholds constructed at the fort, withthe Potawatomi, or both(Sleeper

Smith2001).

Environmental,Historical, and Social Context at theother Four Sites

Tuesites utili7.edfor comparison in thisstudy exhibit differentsocial conditions. Some, like FortMichilimackinac and Fort St. Joseph, bad periods of

Frenchand then Britishoccupations, however the distinction of concem hereis with the Frenchoccupation of thesedifferent sites as opposed to culturaldifferences betweenthe Frenchand British occupants at the samelocation. Fort St. Joseph, Fort Ouiatenon, FrenchCahokia, Fort de ChartresI, and Fortde Chartresm all experiencedFrench occupation during the eighteenthcentwy and have beenselected forcomparison in thisstudy due to theirrelatively similar environmental settingsin the Carolinian biotic province and along rivers.

Although Fort Michilimackinacwould seem to be a likely candidate for inclusion in this discussion,the environmentalconditions in which colonists livedat this locationvaries greatlyfrom that experienced at FortSt. Joseph andthe otherfour sitesto the south. FortMichilimackinac's - position on theStraits ofMackinac betweenLakes Hurcm and Michigan provides an ideal opportunityfor the exploitation of fishresources from the GreatLakes (Scott 1985). Thisabundant resource would have ensureda consistent and plentiful source of aquaticanima]s which was significantlydifferent from the kinds of speciesthat wereavailable from the St.

Joseph, Wabash, andMississippi rivers. Also, these sites were located in two differentand distinct biotic provinces. TueCanadian biotic province, which extends 29 fromsouthem Canadato theupper portion of Michigan's Lower Peninsula, including the Straitsof Mackinac, is markedby a mixtureof plant and animal species foundin boththe Hudsonianbiotic provinceto the north andthe Carolinianbiotic provinceto the south (Dice 1943). Fort St. Joseph, Fort Ouiatenon, French Cahokia, Fort de Chartresi andFort de Chartresm were alllocated within the moresoutherly Carolinianbiotic province which extendsfrom the middle ofMichigan' s Lower

Peninsula acrossmost ofwbat is todayconsidered the mid-westem UnitedStates

(Dice 1943).

Tuecharacteristics of the Canadianbiotic province are cool summers, cold winters, andthe presence of distinctive animal species. Some of the morecommon game mammalsinclude moose, white-tailed deer, fo� wolf, black bear,beaver, porcupine, and bobcat(Dice 1943). Whilean array of conifers is typicalofthe northemprovince, some large forests of deciduous trees not are uncommonin the area(Dice 1943, Fittingand Cleland 1969).

Alsocalled the Oalc-Deer-MapleBiome, the.Carolinianbiotic province is typifiedby broad-leafdeciduous trees like oak, hickory, maple, beech, elm, and cottonwood(Dice 1943). A wide varietyof animals are present andalthough white tailed deer were the most prevalentgame animal, wapiti, black bear,eastem cottontail,opossum, and other medium to smallmammals thrive.Tue occasional bison also inhabitedopen areas and the climate ofthis province is more moderatethan thatof the Canadian,with shorterwinters, less snowfall,and longer, hottersummers. 30 Soils were also deeper and rich in comparison to the more northerlyCanadian biotic province(Dice 1943).

Thisdifference in environmentalconditions between the more southerlysites andFort Michilimackinac also marksa difference in the relativeproportions of plants and animalsthat would havebeen available for consuniption. Fort St Joseph,Fort Ouiatenon, French Cahok:ia,Fort de ChartresI, and Fort de Chartresm were located alongrivers in contrastedto the shorelineenvironment of Fort Michilimackinac.The differentialbiotic environs in which these fortswere located exaggeratesinevitable differencesexpressed in the faunalassemblages recovered from Fort

Michilimackinac. While comparison with Fort Michilimackinacmay stillproduce usefulinformation, those sites locatedacross what was knownas the IllinoisCountry, in addition to FortSt. Joseph, may proveto be more similar in terms environmental setting(Dice 1943).

For the purposesof this study, FortSt. Joseph will be contrasted to Fort

Ouiatenon,French Cahok:ia, Fort de Chartres1, andFort de Chartresm in aneffort to minimize differentialenvironmental factorsthat affect game species populations. By holdiogenvironment constant, geographical distributions of speciesavailable at each site will be more comparable. Thus,variation in animal exploitatioopatterns is probablynot due to environmentalfactors and this helps isolatedifferent social conditions at each location so thatdistinctions in subsisteoce patternsmay bemore closelyassociated with socio-cultural factors as opposedto environmental constraints.

Althoughthese sites arespread acrossthe Carolinianbiotic province and there may 31 have beensubtle differencesin geographicaldistribution of available species,they can generally be usedto examine inter-site animaJ exploitation patternsfor French colonists in NorthAmerica during the eighteenth century.

While environmental factorsare being controlled in this research,social conditions at each location arevariables of much interest. Tordoff(1983) has provideda hierarchicalsystem forranking French colonial sites in North America basedon theirfunctional role in the fürtrade. She distinguishes sites thatserved as a:

(1) Port of Entcy, (2) Government/EconomicCenter, (3) Regional DistributionCenter,

(4) LocalDistribution Center, or (5) AboriginalPopulation Center (Tordo:ff1983).

Thishierarchical ranking system reflectsa decreasein the internalfunctional complexity of eachlocation from more complex to less as one moves fromthe Portof

Entcyto Aboriginal Population Centers. In addition,this system is a representationof the branching out ofFrench colonialexploration that tracksthe supply lines andflow of goodsboth in towardsand out from the Americaninterior (Tordo:ff1983: 39).

Thefive sites selectedfor this studyinclude two locationsthat functionedas regional distributioncenters, those being Fort de ChartresI and m, two locations that functionedlocal as distribution centers, which areFort St. Josephand Fort Ouiatenon, and.. the agricultural communityofFrench Cahokia (Tordo:ff 1983). Fortde ChartresI and m were designatedas regional distribution centers fromtheir inceptionand the socialenvironment of theseforts exhibit somemeasure of internalstratification. Fort de ChartresI was reportedto garrison60 men with a surroundingvillage of thirty nine habitants,forty-two white laborers,twenty-eight married women, andseventeen 32 children by 1724 (Jelks et al. 1989). This numberincreased over timeas the French presence in the area grewstronger and a morepermanent stone fort,Fort de Chartres

IlI,was built in the mid eighteenth centwy. Militarypersonnel, hitants, civilians, and trappersare just a few of the peoplewho came to live at or near these fortsand the French maintaineda militarygarrison at these locationsthroughout their occupation. Fort St. Joseph andFort Ouiatenon did not have a strong military presenceand governmental control at these remote locations wasweak: in comparison. to regional distribution centers (Tordoff1983). Fort Ouiatenon was known to intermittently garrison about 12 French Marines during its occupation (Martin 1986) and Fort St. Joseph did not even boast this small number of m.ilitarypersonnel for any substantialperiod oftime (ldle 2003).

French Cahok:iawas anagricultural community establishedas amission in

1699 to supply the Louisiana Colony andIllinois Country with crops such as wheat, corn, tobacco, cotton, flax,hemp, andsalt (Gums 1988). Thissite is somewhat unique when comparedto the others in thatit doesnot directly function as part of the fürtrade. However, NativeAmerican groups were known to participatein lim.ited tradingwith this community, and it certainlyplayed a rolein supportingother communitiessuch as Fortde Chartresand FortOuiatenon withagricultural goods

(Jelks et al. 1989). Militarypersonnel were never garrisonedat this locationand the functionof thiscommunity was for the production of agricultural goods. Tue site was inhabitedby those Europeanfarmers and their familiesthat worked theland (Gums

1988). lt will be interestingto see how issues of culturalidentity are played out at this 33 primarilyagricultural location that was situatedapproximately 20 miles fromthe larger supply depots ofFort de ChartresI andill. Access to goodsand services from a regionaldistribution center may have influencedEuropean andNative interactions atthe nearbyagricultural community.

Differencesin social conditions, such as varyingfrequency of intennarriages, ateach of these locations may have affectedthe types of relationscolonists bad with neighboringNative American tribes. As social identity(i.e. class, gender, race, and ethnicity)also affects the expression of culturalidentity (Nassaney 2001; Shennan

1994), sites with a greaterdegree of intemal complexityand more social stratification may bave resultedin moreformal relations with Nativeallies. High status govemment officialsand militaryofficers would have interactedwith Native peoples asrepresentatives ofthe French govemment. Thisrequires an air offormality that reflects a meeting of two nations (White1991 ). However, civilians such as blacksmithsand traders would have bad a much moreinformal set of interactions withNative peoplesthat allowedthem to conduct business on a personallevel (Wise

2001), even to the pointof manyingone another(Sleeper-Smith 2001 ). Locations such as FortSt. Josephand Fort Ouiatenon, with theirlower levels of intemal social stratificationand increased daily supportfrom Native American allies, experienced greaterdegrees of integration and sharedvalues than at sites withmore social stratificationbrought about by a stronggovernmental and military presence (White

1991; Wise 2001). Marriagebetween European traders and Native women would have beena crucialaspect of everydaylife in remote,frontier settings as this benefited 34 bothsides by creatingkinship relations that facilitated trade and strengthened alliancesin case of attack (Sleeper-Smith 2001).

Thischapter basexplored the range of available animal species at FortSt.

Joseph througharchaeological and historical evidence. White-taileddeer, raccoon, beaver,black bear,lake stwgeon, passenger pigeon,wild turkeys,and manyduck specieswould have beenavailable forconsumption in the areaof southwestem

Michiganduring the eighteenthcentury. Fromhistorical and archaeological evidence, it is knownthat residents of the forthad somedomesticated animals by atleast 1762 andso the possibilityexists for cattle, swine, sheep, chicken, andhorse to havemade dietarycontributions as weil (Nassaneyet al. 2003). Basedon the rangeof available speciespresented in this chapter,this studyseeks to identifyanimal exploitation pattemsat FortSt. Joseph anddetermine the proportionsofwild gameand domestic speciesthat were being consumed at this location. Thena comparisoncan madebe withanimal exploitation pattems from other French colonial sites. Two ofthesesites,

Fortde ChartresI andIII, functionedas regional distribution centers according to

Tordoff's (1983) hierarchicalnetwork ofthe Frenchcolonial furtrade. Fort St.

Joseph andFort Ouiatenonwere on theother end ofthepolitical and social spectrum.

Thesesites functionedas local distributioncenters, exhibited less governmentaland militarycontrol, and were locatedin remoteparts of theAmerican :frontier. French

Cahokia occupies a unique positionas a rural agricultural communityin close proximity to the regionaldistribution center ofFort de Chartresand I later Fortde Chartresm (Gums 1988). Social distinctionssuch as class, gender, andethnicity 35 wereexpressed differently through material cultureat each of these locations depending on thesite's intemalsocial stratification (Wise 2001). So, too, mighthave the interactionsbetween Europeans and Natives taken on differentmeanings at each locationdue to differentsocial conditions, intermarriage,and increasedmts populations(Sleeper-Smith 2001 ). Thesedifferences may be retlected through foodways,and so this study seeks to identify expressions of culturalidentity through selective consumptionof animal speciesby comparingthe faunalassemblage from

Fort St. Josephto thoserecovered from each of theother fourlocations. Tuenext chapterwill detail the methodology employedin thecollection and identification of thefaunal remains fromFort St. Joseph andthe comparative analysisof this assemblage with other French colonial sites. CHAPTERN

METIIOOOLOGY

Inthe previous chapter, the rangeof availableanimal species availablefor consumptionwas identifiedfor the areaof southwesternMichigan in the eighteenth century. Based on historical documents andarchaeological evidence,both wild speciesand domesticates were known to have beenavailahle during thefort's occupation. Analysis ofthe animal honesfrom the fort may revealanimal exploitationpatterns at the site, permittingidentification of relative proportions of wild gameand domesticatedanimals that were being consumedat Fort St. Joseph.

This chapter will detail the methodologyfor recovery, identification, and analysisof a sample ofthefaunal remains fromthe Fort St. Joseph site.

Tue modern,systematic archaeological investigations ofFort St. Josephbegan in 1998 by WesternMichigan University archaeologist Dr. Michael Nassaney.

Througha seriesof shovel test excavations,the Fort St. Josepharchaeological project was able to positivelyidentify a depositofFrench and English artifactsdating to the eighteenthcentury on a narrowstrip of landbetween the St. Joseph River anda · twentieth centurylandfill in Niles, Michigan(Nassaney 1999; Nassaney et al. 2004)

In2002, the WesternMichigan University archaeological field school directed by Drs. Nassaneyand William Cremin retumed to this location in Niles in order to determine ifthis wasindeed the site ofFort St. Joseph. A füllscale archaeological excavation ofthe site was plannedwith the goals of establishing site stratigraphy,

36 37 collectingartifacts, documentingsubsurface features, anddetermining site integrity.

However, when the archaeologistsarrived in mid-May, the St. Joseph River was in tloodstage and the site wasunder a meter ofwater. In the followingtwo weeks,the water receded and an engineering firm was hired to drainthe site (Nassaney et al.

2004). On May31 st of2002, excavation finally began on a site thatbad beenmissing forapproximately two centuries.

Duringthe followingthree-week period, 20 squaremeters were excavated at the site representing 12 excavationunits (Figure 1). Tuefirst six lxl meter units wereplaced near the river' s bank:while a geophysicalgrid was set in the interior of the dewateredarea. Cesium-vapor magnetome1ry, groundpenetrating radar, electrical resistivity, andelectromagnetic inductionhelped to gu.idearchaeological excavations andseveral anomalies were identified (Lynch 2004). Special samples were collected belowthe plow zonefrom each excavation unit. Fromthe southwestcomer ofthe majorityof levels below,a 6,250 cubic cm sample(25 cm x 25 cm x 10 cm) of sedimentwas tak.enfor wet screeningthrough 118 th-inch mesh anda larger sample(50 cm x 50 cm x 10 cm) was tak.enfrom select levels in certain excavationunits. A

1,000cubic cm sample(10 cm x 10 cm x 10 cm) wastaken from the northeastcomer of each level forwet-screening through a finer1116 th-inch mesh. Tuemacro recoveredelements werecollected using ¼-inch mesh dry screening. Allwet-screen samples werefurther sorted by handin thelaboratory. 38 Fort St. Joseph (20BE23)

N 0 5 t

r,)=Pum 11198 ..:...:..:.Oewaterlng = array • = Excavation unlt + Not: cntou itea „ 3 c

1999 2.2 25 28

Figue 1- For St. Joseph Site Map

These excavations led to the recovery of over 7,000 faunalremains. Tue samplefor this analysis includes animal remains recovered fromeight of nine features identifiedand excavated to date. Feature 8 has, so far, failed to yield faunalmaterial and has been omitted from this study. Faunal remains recovered fromthe other eight featureshave been selected forthis analysis as a means of sampling the assemblage.

This method of sampling is representative of the assemblage as a whole as it includes over 2,000 specimens of approximately 7,000 total specimens that were collected 39 fromthe site. Additionally,nearly 1,400 specimensfrom non-feature contexts were analyzed andthese results closelyreflect those patternsobserved in the data fromthe features. By usinga samplingmethod that incorporates nearly 30"/4 of the assemblage and throughcomparable resultswith a 1,400 sampleof specimensnot included in the analysis,the samplingmethod employed in thisanalysis · providesdata that is representativeof theentire assemblage. As such, the animal remains collected from featurecontexts and used in this studyare presumed to be anaccurate representation of thewhole.

The faunalremains have made severaltrips from Kalmnazoo, Michigan to

Springfield,Illinois whereuse of thecomparative osteology collection housed at the

Illinois StateMuseum' s Researchand Collections Center andthe expertise of Dr.

TerranceJ. Martin,Curator of Anthropologyat the IllinoisState Museum, could benefitthe identificationprocess. For eachidentified specimen, an IBM-compatible computer andMicrosoft Access softwarewere used to log the count, weight in grams, provenience,class of animal,taxon to the finest level possible,anatomical element, side, portion,completeness, condition of the epiphyses, modifications( e.g., knife marks, chopping,carnivore- and/orrodent-gnawing, and burning) for each specimen.

Zoologicalnomenclature followsthe IntegratedTaxonomie Information System

(ITIS)website.

Numberofldentified Specimens (NISP) data is reportedas bothcount and weightin grams. Eachspecimen from feature context has beenexamined using the criteria listedabove and the totals forcount and weight have beencalculated foreach 40 dass andtaxon. Specimens thatcould berefitted in the laboratoryreceived a countof one andthe weight ofall fragments wascombined. Percentagesof dass andtaxa for

NISP data reveal the relative proportions of species thatmak:e up the composition of the assemblage. lt providesan assessment of the available empirical data(that is, the animaJbones themselves) anddoes not reflectdietary contributions (Olsen 1971 ).

OnceNISP databas been calculated for dass and taxa at the FortSt Joseph site, these

results canbe contrastedwith similardata obtainedthrough the same process of quantificationfrom faunal assemblages at the otherfour French colonial sites in this

study.

MinimumNumber of lndividuals (MNI)was calculatedby comparingthe

anatomicalelements of each speciesfor each feature (Parmelee1985). MNis were

calculatedusing the most frequentlyencountered element whiletak:ing into account

portion,side, size, and age. This analysisfollows the maximumdistinction approach

forestimating MNis (Grayson 1978), which considersremains from each feature to be

depositedseparately, so that the total MNI is the sum ofthe MNIcalculated from each

feature. Thisapproach allows fora closercorrelation betweenMNI analysis of faunal

remainsand artifacts recovered from the samecontext. MNIresults reflectan

estimateof the number of animals ofeach species that the fauoalassemblage

represents(O'Conoor 2000). Theseresults can then becon1rasted as a percentage of

eachclass or taxa against thetotal number of MNis. Ooce MNIpercentages have

beencalculated for class andtaxa at the Fort St. Joseph site, theseresults canbe 41 contrastedwith similardata obtained through the sameprocess of quantificationfrom faunalassemblages at the other fourFrench colonial sites in thisstudy.

Biomass calculationswere conducted using allometricscaling fonnulae(Reitz andScarry 1985). Thismethod estimates the amountof meatassociated with each specimen based on an exponential linear equationthat accounts forthe class of animal andweight of the specimen(Reitz et al. 1987). Totalswere obtained by using NISP weights foreach biomass calculation based on theclass or taxa thatwas being utilized. Biomassestimates the contribution to diet in termsof meat weight in kilogramsfor each specimen,species, and class identifiedin the assemblage.

Bivalves andamphibians wereexcluded from this methodof analysis. Once biomass percentages have been calculatedfor class and taxa at the Fort St. Joseph site, these resultscan contrastedbe with similardata obtained through the same processof quantificationfrom faunal assemblages at the other fourFrench colonial sites in this study. Tue methods of analysis chosen forthis studyinclude numberof identified specimens,mioimum numberof iodividuals,and biomass estimates calculated by allometricfonnulae. Thesethree methods of analysishave beenchosen so that relativeproportions of speciespresent in the assemblagemay be established. This studywill compare the relative proportionsof anima1 speciesbeing exploited at

French colonial sites as an indicatorof differencesin selectiveconsumption at each location. 42 Tuetypes of species of most concem herewill relative be proportions of wild vs. domesticated largemarnmal species. Domesticatedspecies include cattle,swine, horse, and ovicaprids. Wild garnespecies utilized for animal exploitatiooare best represent.edin theassemblages by white-taileddeer. While otherwild animaJs, such asraccoon and beaver,were certainlyavailable for consumption, white-taileddeer presents themost prevalent locallyavailable speciesutilized for consumption. Also, largeaoimaJs such as white-taileddeer, pigs, cattle, andsheep may beapproached as a foodsource in much the sarnemanner and display siQillar patterns for butchering practicesand meat cuts. Limitingthis analysis to white-taileddeer as representative of wild speciesalso reduces complicationswith the presenceof animalbones in the assemblage that may not have beenused for dietary consumption. Foot bonesthat remain attachedto hides but do not bave a high subsistence utility, suchas pbalanges fromblack bear hides, complicate theissue of consumption. Thismay also be the

casefor raccoons, beavers, and white-tailed deer as the hides of theseaoimals bad

value in thefür trade. lf a specieswas generallytaken forhides andnot usedfor

consumption, thencomparison of thisspecies with domesticates will not addressthe

issue of selectiveconsumption as anexpression of culturalidentity. Analysis of the

portions and elements of each large mammalspecies hasdetermined that the use

patterns associat.edwith white-tailed deer represent elements fromall portions of the

carcass. This result indicates thatwhite-tailed deer were used for consumption

purposesas weil as hide exchange (see AppendixA). Additionally,white-tailed deer

remains are found in abundance at each of the five locations selected for comparison 43 in this study andthis species represents the best sample of wild game animals foreach assemblage. Also, the exclusion of all wild game species except forwhite-tailed

Tue results ofthefaunal analysis from Fort St. Joseph will be compared to similar studies fromFort Ouiatenon, French Cahokia, Fort de Chartres I, andFort de

Chartres III in order to identifyvariation or similarities in the proportions of domesticated species as opposed to white-tailed deer specimens present at each location. Differencesin the relative proportions of domesticated vs. wild game species used foranimal exploitation are examined in order to identifymarkers of selective conswnption at each location which may indicate differencesin the expression of cultural identity.

Tue methods of recovery utilizedduring the 2002 WesternMichigan

Universityarchaeological fieldschool resulted in a faunalassemblage with over 7,000 well preservedspecimens of anima1bone. Tue processes for the sampling, identification,and quantificationof these specimensused in this study have been detailed in this chapter. NISP, MNI, and biomass calculations, were selected in order to identifypattems of animal exploitation through an ordinal rankingof species at the

Fort St. Joseph site. These results can then be compared to the results of similar methods of analysis fromFort Ouiatenon, French Cahokia, Fortde Chartres I, and

Fortde Chartres IIIto explore patternsof animal exploitation at French colonial sites 44 more generally. Results ofthefaunal analysis from Fort St. Josep� including NISP,

MNI,and biomass data, are detailedin the followingchapter. CHAPTERV

ANALYSIS

Tue previous chapter detailed the methodology employedin this analysis of the animal bonescollected from the Fort St. Josephsite (20BE23) by the 2002

WesternMichigan University archaeological fieldschool. In this chapter, the analysis and results are presented.

Over 2,000 specimenshave been selected forthis analysis. These were recoveredfrom feature contexts while theentire assemblage consisted of more than

7,000 specimens (Table 1). Number ofldentifiedSpecimens (NISP), Minimum

Numberof lndividuals (MNI), andbiomass calculations for the assemblage will each

be detailedin turnfollowed by a summaryof the analysis. Inall threemethods of

analysis, mammals represented themajoritycontribution, followed by birds, reptiles,

fish,bivalves, andamphibians (Figure 2).

■ •fo NISP 100 ----::=------1■ %MNI Do/.Biomass 80

0 Mammal Binl Fish Reptile Bivalve Amphibian

Figure2-Graph: ofClassPercent RepresentationContexts fiomFeature at Fort SL Joseph

45 46

Table 1

Class Composition fromAll Feature Contexts at Fort St. Joseph: Combined Macro and Wet Screen Recovery

3 NISP NISP NISP MNI Biomass Biomass 1 2 Taxon NISP % Wt.(g) Wt.% MNI % (Kg) %

Mammals 1733 63.7 3549.8 96.1 57 74.6 48.575 97.9 Identified 326 2425.1 57 31.844 Unidentified 1407 1124.7 16.731

Birds 120 4.4 50.1 1.4 19 20.0 0.830 1.7 ldentified 35 28.9 19 0.501 Unidentified 85 21.2 0.329

Fish 4 0.1 0.4 0.1 1 1.2 0.016 0.1 Identified 1 0.1 1 0.005 Unidentified 3 0.3 0.011

Reptiles 8 0.3 6.7 0.2 1 1.2 0.155 0.3 Identified 2 3.9 1 0.079 Unidentified 6 2.8 0.076

Amphibians 1 >0.1 0.1 0.1 1 1.2 Identified Unidentified 1 0.1 1

Vertebrata Unidentified 842 30.9 69.4 1.8

Bivalves 11 0.4 12.8 0.3 2 2.4 Identified 2 6.3 2 Unidentified 9 6.5

1 NISP, number of identifed specimens 2 MNI, minimum number of individuals, maximum distinction method, calculated as sum of individual fatures 3 Biomass calculated by use of allometric scaling frmulae (see Reitz and Scarr 1985 :67). Calculations achieved by summing individual fatures 47 Numberof Identified Specimens

MammaJsaccounted for 96.1% (n=3549.8 g) ofthe assemblageaccording to

NISP weight (fable 1). This class ofanimaJsrepresents 63.7% (n=l733) ofthe assemblageby NISP count .and this discrepancyis due to the moreeasily identifiable s�imens being largerin sizeand weight receivinga count of one while manyof the smaJl, highlyfragmented, mammaJ bones could not beidentified. Eleven speciesof rnammaJsbave been identifiedin theassemblage including raccoon,beaver, porcupine,black bear,and swine; however the most abundantspecies waswhite taileddeer (fable 2). This speciesaccounts for 80. 7% (n=263) of aJl identified mammaJ specimensby count and83.6% (n=2027.1g) by weight. In fact,specimens from white-tailed deerwere certainlythe most abundant single speciesin the entire assemblage fromfeature contexts accountingfor 71. 9% (n=263)of aJl identified

specimensby count (N=366) and82.3% (n=2027 .1 g) ofthe totaJ NISP weight

(N=2464.3 g). In comparison, domesticated mammaJ species(ca.ttle, swine, and

horse) make up only 2.1% (n=7) ofthe NISP count foridentified mammal specimens

(Figure 3). A single specimenfrom domestic cattle wasrecovered from feature

contexts andthe weight of this specimenaJone (126 g) should benoted as theheaviest

single specimen recoveredfrom feature contexts. DomesticatedmammaJs accounted

for5% (n=l 78.4 g) ofthe NISP weight formammaJs and 4.8% forthe whole

assemblage. There were five individual bird species(Canada goose, domestic

chicken, ruffedgrouse, wild turkey,and passenger pigeon)identified in this

assemblage andtwo groups,Anatinae, or duck species,and Galliformes, 48 Table 2

Species Composition fromFeature Contexts at Fort St. Joseph: Combined Macro and Wet Screen Recovery

3 NISP Biomass Biomass 1 Taxon NISP Wt.(g) M2 (Kg) %

Mammals Eastem Cottontail, 1 0.2 1 0.005 0.01 Sylvilagusfloridanus Beaver, Castor Canadensis 7 53.5 3 0.945 1.91 Porcupine, 6 10.7 3 0.222 0.45 Erethizon dorsatum cf. Porcupine, 3 2.5 0.059 0.12 Erethizon dorsatum Dog/Coyote/Wolf, 1 1.5 1 0.038 0.08 Cants spp. Black Bear, 8 94.7 5 1.580 3.19 Ursus americanus Raccoon, Procyonlotor 27 40.6 10 0.737 1.49 Horse sp., Equus sp. 1 18.1 1 0.356 0.72 Domestic Pig, Sus scrofa 5 34.3 3 0.634 1.28 cf. Domestic Pig, Sus scrofa 1 1.2 0.031 0.06 cf. Wapiti or Elk, 2 14.7 0.295 0.58 Cervus elaphus White-tailed Deer, 263 2027.1 29 24.899 50.23 Odocoileus virginianus Domestic Cattle, Bos taurus 1 126.0 1 2.043 4.12 Unidentified Mammal 1407 1124.7 16.731 33.74

Sub Total 1733 3549.8 57 48.575 98.00

1 NISP, number ofidentifed specimens 2 MNI, minimum number of individuals, maimum distinction method, calculated as sum ofindividual fatures 3 Biomass calculated by use ofallometric scaling frmulae (see Reitz and Scarry 1985:67). Calculations achieved by summing individual fatures 49 Table 2- Continued

NISP Biomass3 Biomass 1 Taxon NISP Wt{g) M2 (Kg) % Birds CanadaGoose, 2 5.3 2 0.093 0.19 Brantacanadensis Maalk Duck, 1 0.6 1 0.013 0.02 Anasplatyrnynchos / rubripies Duck species,Anatinae 7 3.2 4 0.059 0.12 Domestic Chicken, 2 1.5 2 0.029 0.06 Gallusgallus RuffedGrouse, 1 0.9 1 0.018 0.04 Bonasaumbellus Wild Turkey, 4 14.8 3 0.237 0.49 Meleagrisgallapavo Grouse/chicken/turkey, 2 0.3 0.007 0.01 Galliformes Passenger Pigeon, 15 2.2 6 0.042 0.08 Ectopistesmigratorius cf. Passenger Pigeon, 1 0.1 0.003 0.01 Ectopistes migratorius UnidentifiedBird 85 21.2 0.329 0.66

Sub Total 120 50.1 19 0.830 1.68

Fish LakeSturgeon, 1 0.1 1 0.005 0.01 Acipencer fulvescens UnidentifiedFish 3 0.3 0.011 0.02

Sub Total 4 0.4 1 0.016 0.01

Reptile Blanding's Turtle, 2 3.9 1 0.079 0.16 Emydoidea blandingii Semiaquaticpond turtles, 4 2.2 0.054 0.11 Emydidae UnidentifiedTurtle 2 0.6 0.022 0.04

Sub Total 8 6.7 1 0.155 0.31 50

Table2- Continued

NISP Biomass3 Biomass 1 Taxon NISP Wt.(g) M2 (Kg) % Amphibians Frog/toadsp., Anura 1 0.1 1

Sub Total 1 0.1 1

UnidentifiedVertebrata 842 69.4

Bivalves Spike, Elliptiodilatata 2 6.3 2 UnidentifiedBivalve 9 6.5

Sub Total 11 12.8 2

GrandTotal 2720 3691.7 81 49.576 100.00 51 consisting of grouse, chickens, and turkeys. Passenger pigeon provided the highest number of identifiedbird specimens with 15 and this accounts for42.9% of the bird

NISP count (Table 2). However, the larger birds such as Canada goose and especially wild turkey boast much higher percentages ofNISP weight than does the small bodied passenger pigeon.

Surprisingly, only fourfish specimens were recovered fromfeature contexts in the2002 excavations, and ofthese, only one could be identifiedto the species level

(Table 2). Tue paucity offishin the assemblage is unexpected considering the fort's

proximity to theSt. Joseph River, the knownseasonal abundance oflake sturgeon in the river frompre-contact sites, and the general pattem ofFrench subsistence at colonial sites where fishwas generally a substantial portion ofthe diet especially duringlate spring and earlyfall spawning runs (Bettarel and Smith 1973; Cleland

1966; Martin 1986, 1991a; Martin andRichmond 2001; Scott 1985). Blanding's

turtle specimens combined with four specimens ofunidentified semi-aquatic pond

turtles (Emydidae)comprise the identifiedspecimens representing reptiles inthe

assemblage. One honefrom a frogor toad species (Anura)was identified,and

bivalves consisted of two specimens of spike (Elliptio dilatata) and nineunidentified

:freshwater mussel shell fragments.

/ 52

■ White-tailed Deer 100 □ Domesticates (Cattle, 90 Swine, Horse) 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10

0 % NISPCount % NISP Weight

Figure3- Graph: Total NISP % forWhite-Tailed Deer vs. Domesticates at Fort St. Joseph

Minimum Number ofIndividuals

In total, eighty-one individuals were identifiedfrom feature contexts (Table 1).

Ofthese, nearly75% (n= 57) were identifiedas mammalian,20% as bird (n= 19), 3% as bivalve (n= 2), >1% as fish(n =l), >1% as reptile (n=l), and >1% as amphibian

(n=l) (Figure 2). This method accounts foronly the 367 specimens that have been identifiedto the species level. Specimens that could not be identifiedmore specificallythan dass were not given MNIconsideration.

Tue highest proportion ofindividuals frommammal species was again white tailed deer. These specimensrepresent 29 individuals ofthe total 57 mammal individuals. 52% ofthe mammal individuals are represented by white-tailed

Nineteen individuals were identifiedas bird specimens and of these, six are passenger pigeons. Tue only domesticated species of bird in the assemblage, domestic chicken, is represented by two individuals. Öther birds include: fourducks, threewild turkeys, two Canada geese, andone ruffedgrouse. For the other classes of vertebrates, fishindividuals are represented by one lakesturgeon, reptiles are represented by one Blanding'sturtle, amphibiansare represented by one frogor toad, andtwo individualsof spike make up the bivalves.

A breakdown of total MNis that compareswhite-tailed deer to all domesticate mammalspecies (including horse, pig, and cattle) shows 38% (n= 29) white-tailed deer and 8% (n= 4) domesticates (Figure 4). Here again white-tailed deer prove to be themajor contributor to the assemblage fromfeature contexts.

■ Wbite-tailed Deer 100 90 □ Domesticates (Cattle, Swine, 80 Horse) 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 %MNI

Figure 4- Graph: Total MNI %for White-Tailed Deer vs. Domesticates at Fort St. Joseph 54 Biomass Estimates

Biomass estimates show a total meat contributionof 49.576 kilogramsfor the identified specimens represented by feature contexts (Table 1). Tue biomass was calculated formammals, birds, fish and reptiles while amphibians, bivalves and the unidentifiedvertebrata classes were excluded fromthis inethod. Mammals represented the majority ofbiomass contributionwith 97.9% (n=48.575 kg), followed by birds with 1.7% (n= 0.830 kg), reptiles with 0.3% (n=0.155 kg), andfish with

0.1% (n=0.016 kg) (Figure2).

Tue biomass results show a drastic differencein the contributionof wild vs. domesticated mammal species. White-taileddeer contributed50.2% ofthe total biomass while domesticates (horse, swine, andcattle) combined for6.2% (Figure5).

■ White-tailed Deer 100 □ Domesticates (Cattle, Swine, 90 Horse) 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10

0 % Biomass

Figure5- Graph: Total Biomass % for White-Tailed Deer vs. Domesticates at Fort St. Joseph 55 Summary

White-tailed deer consistently provided themajor contribution to the assemblage for all three methods employed (Figures 3, 4, and 5). Percentages oftotal contributionfor white-tailed deer are 71.9% NISP count, 38% MNI, and50.2% of the biomass. Domestic species provided a combined result of6.6% NISP count, 6%

MNI, and 6.2% of the biomass (Figure 6). These results consistently place wild game species, represented here by white-tailed deer, as significantlymore important than all domesticates in terms of dietarycontribution.

100 ■ Wbite-tailed Deer 90 D Domesticates (Cattle, 80 Swine, Horse) 70 60 50 40 30 20 10

0 % NSPCount %M % Biomass

Fige 6 Grph: Total NSP Count, M, ad Biomass % fr White-Tailed Deer vs. Domesticates at For St. Joseph The strong dependence on local wild animal species exhibited in the Fort St.

Joseph faunalassemblage closely resembles contemporaryNative American pattems ofanimal exploitation. These findingsindicates that selective consumptionwas not 56 being utilized to create and maintain social distance, and thereby express European cultural identity, at this site. An explanation forthis occurrence includes thenecessity foroccupants of FortSt. Joseph to establish close relations with local Native populations, possibly through inter-marriages (Sleeper-Smith 2001). Considering their remote position, small numbers, and limited access·to imported goods, colonists at the fortwould have foundstrong relations, personal and otherwise, very favorable for both economic and social reasons. These unions not only strengthenalliances between tradersand Natives in the present, but also assure continued prosperity through the metissons and daughters that result fromthese marriages. Through these typesof informal relationships, shared meaning and new cultural practices come about through mutual accommodation between Europeanand Native American peoples at Fort St. Joseph (White1991). The physical presence ofNative peoples at

Fort St. Joseph can be recognized through the examination of animal exploitation patternswhich provide a strong indicator forNative influencesin everyday life.

This chapter has presented the results of the analysis of the faunalremains from the Fort St. Joseph site. This location shows a dependency on white-tailed deer over domesticates which is consistent across all three methods of analysis (Figure 6) and clearly represents a pattem of animal exploitation at Fort St. Joseph that relied heavily upon local wild animal resources. The next chapter will provide a comparison of the results fromthis site to faunalassemblages from other French colonial sites that have beensubjected to the samemethods of analysis. CHAPTERVI

INTER-SITECOMP ARISON OF RESUL TS

Tue results ofthe analysis of faunalremains from the Fort St. Joseph site were detailed in the last chapter. This analysis shows a strongdependency on local wild game as the staple for animal exploitation at the site and does not indicate that selective consumption ofanimal resources was utilized as a marker ofcultural identity at this site. In this chapter, I will compare these results with faunal assemblages fromFort Ouiatenon, French Cahokia, Fort de Chartres I, andFort de Chartresm using the same methods ofanalysis in order to establish a general pattem of animalexploitation from all fiveof these sites.

Tue sites used inthis comparison have been selected due to their similar

environmental settings, though theyexhibit differencesin social conditions.

Variationin subsistence patternsbetween these sites may provide information as to

the different ways Europeanpioneers interacted with Native Americans and their

environment in day-to-day activities at each location (Cleland 1970; Jelks et al. 1989;

Martin 1986, 1988; Scott 1985).

Fort Ouiatenon

Fort Ouiatenon, located in Indiana's WabashValley, served as a trading post

forthe French during the eighteenth century. Tue scale ofthis outpost was similar in

bothsize andfunction to Fort St. Joseph and they occupied very similar

57 58 environmental settings. In addition, both locations functionedas local distribution centers according to Tordoff's (1983) model ofthe French colonial fur tradenetwork.

Established in 1717 in present day Tippecanoe County, Fort Ouiatenon housed a small detachment of French marines and between twelve and twentyfamilies at any one time (Martin1986). Native Americanpopulations in the area included Kickapoo,

Wea, Piank:ashaw,and Mascouten and these groupsinhabited five villages in the surroundingarea. A strongNative American presence and remote location also creates favorable conditions for the formationof kinship ties through intermarriage which would strengthentrade and securityin the area (Sleeper-Smith 2001 ). Like

Fort St. Joseph, Fort Ouiatenon was commandeered by the British in 1761 and taken by Native Americansin 1763 during Pontiac's Rebellion. Tue British never re garrisoned Fort Ouiatenon followingthe 1763 attacks and theoutpost was mannedby resident French für tradersand their families until its destructionin 1791 by American forces(Martin 1991b).

Tue near parallel history ofthe two fortscombined with their location in very similar social and environmental settingsprovides the opportunity fora strong comparison to be made between Fort Ouiatenon andFort St. Joseph. Mammal species contributedthe major portion ofNISP to the Fort Ouiatenon assemblage representing 86% ofall remains (n=86,479) while birds (n=l0,143), mussels

(n=l,042), fish(n=926) and reptiles/amphibians (n=252) were also represented in the total assemblage (N= 100,655) (Martin 1986). Though a wide variety of species are represented, the NISP results consist ofmainly mammalian species while all other 59 classes combined (including specimens not identifiable to a greater degreethan

Vertebrata) contributed 14% ofthe total. Bird specimens account for 10% of the

NISP and was the second most abundant class in the assemblage (Martin 1986).

Twenty-eight species of mammals are represented in the Fort Ouiatenon assemblage, though white-tailed deer, domestic pig, black bear, cattle, bison, raccoon, and beaver account for 94.4 % ofthe total mammalian specimens forNISP (Martin

1986). These same species represent 78.6% ofthemammal MNIand 96.7% ofthe calculated biomass totals for mammals. Tue 5,072 elements that were identified as white-tailed

NISP, 6.1% MNI,and 35.6% ofthebiomass while white-tailed deer alone accounts for43.6% NISP, 52.8% MNI,and 51.1% ofthe biomass in the assemblage (Figures 7,

8, and9). 60

100 White-tailed Deer 90 80 ------t□ Domesticates (Cattle, Swine, 70 Horse, Ovicaprids) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Fort St. Fort French Fort de Fort de Joseph Ouiatenon Cahokia Chartres I Chartres m

Figure 7- Graph: NISP Count% for White-Tailed Deer vs. Domesticates at All Five Sites

100 White-tailed Deer 90 80 1,1------1 □ Domesticates (Cattle, 70 Swine, Horse, Ovicaprids) 60 50 40 30 20 10

Fort St. Fort French Fort de Fort de Joseph Ouiatenon Cahokia Chartres I Chartres IU

Figure 8- Graph: MN! % for White-Tailed Deer vs. Domesticates at All Five Sites 61

White-tailed Deer 100

90 □ Domesticates (Cattle, Swine, I.A------1 80 Horse, Ovicaprids) 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Fort St. Fort French Fort de Fort de Joseph Ouiatenon Cahokia Chartres I Chartres III

Figure 9- Graph: Biomass % for White-Tailed Deer vs. Domesticates at All Five Sites

Bird specimens account for10% NISP ofthe total assemblage and consist of forty-six speciesincluding wild turkey, ducks, Canada goose, swan, and passenger pigeon (Martin 1986). Wild turkey is the most abundant single species exploited in

terms of MN1 and is second only to the combined total ofall duck species. However,

the greater amount ofmeat yielded per individual makes wild turkey the most

significantavian species exploited at Fort Ouiatenon. Waterfowl, grouped as ducks,

Canada goose, and swan, approach the totals forwild turkey in terms ofdietary

importance while additional contributions were made by passenger pigeon and prairie

chicken (Martin 1986). Domestic chickens total 17 individuals that are represented

by 300 specimens and the importanceofthis species may be seen in terms ofboth

meat yield and the production ofeggs for consumption.

Fish remains may be underrepresented in this assemblage due to the lack of a

systematic approach to small-scale recovery during excavations (Martin 1986). The 62 representationoffish in the assemblage collected from Fort Ouiatenon may in partbe influencedby a bias in the fieldrccovery techniques thatselected forlarger skeletal elements (Martin 1986; 1991b). Fish species identified in the assemblage include catfish,redhorse, shovelnose sturgeon, and black hass. All fishspecies combined account for 0.9% NISP and 0.7% ofthe biomass ofthe assemblage as a whole.

Though over 1,000 freshwatermussel shells were collected, they account for only

0.1% ofthe total biomass at Fort Ouiatenon. However, the presence of this high number of shell fragmentsis more similar to patternsof contemporaneous Native

American subsistence strategiesand may in factprovide strong evidence for a close relationship betweennatives and colonists at this fort (Martin 1991b).

Tue Fort Ouiatenon site (12T9) in Indianaand Fort St. Joseph sharemany similarities in terms ofhistory, social conditions, and environmental setting.

Additionally, thefaunal assemblages at thesesites demonstrate strong dependencies on wild game species as opposed to domesticates. This closely resembles Native

American animal exploitation patterns andindicates low levels ofsocial distancing and high instances ofmutual accommodation. These similarities provide a strong indicator fora native presence at both locations, perhaps in the formof Native

American wives and metis populations,which are expressed in the subsistence pattems. Tue animal exploitation pattems at Fort Ouiatenon, like Fort St. Joseph, fail to provide evidence forthe use of selective consumption ofanimal resources as a markerofEuropean cultural identity. 63 French Cahokia

A pattem ofreliance on wild species at locations thatare not major governmentand military centers is also supported by the faunal assemblage recovered fromFrench Colonial Cahokia. Animalexploitation patternsat the Cahokia Wedge site (11S743) in St. Clair County, Illinois, generally reflectthose found at Fort

Ouiatenon and Fort St. Joseph in terms of species diversity,but with a marked increase in dependence on domesticated species anddecrease in freshwater mussel shell fragments(Martin 1988). This French village located along theMississippi

River shows a reliance on wild game species although the inhabitantsraised both domesticated crops and animalsfor income as well as subsistence. Mammal species make up 86% of the assemblage withwhite-tailed deer being the most numerous.

White-tailed deer bones accounted for45.9% ofthe total NISP, 31.1% MNIand

41.8% ofthebiomass forall identifiedtaxa (Martin 1988) (Figures 7, 8, and 9).

Additional mammalsinclude swine, beaver, black bear, bison, and canid species with waterfowl, marsh birds, turtles, andlarge blue catfishsupplementing the diet as well.

Domesticated mammal species comprised 13.2% NISP, 28.9% MNI, and 44.5% of thebiomass calculated forthe assemblage with proportions similar to white-tailed deer in bothNISP and biomass calculations. These results show a significantincrease

in domesticates when compared with the white-tailed

ratios at Fort Ouiatenon and Fort St. Joseph. This observation tends to support

Cahokia' s role as an agricultural center with access to theregional distribution center

(Tordoff1983) ofFort de Chartresto the south. Conversely, less cooperation with 64 local native groupsfor subsistence purposesthan at more rural outpostsis suggested forthis settlement. Tue greater dependence on domesticates may be a functionof

Cahokia'saccess to local domestic animals and may simultaneously be an expression of cultural identity andthe desire to maintain social distance. Tue patternsof animal exploitation at French Cahokia have elements ofboth European andNative American influences, and so does not seem to indicate that subsistence at this site can be viewed as a marker of cultural identity.

Fort de ChartresI

Initially constructedin the years1719-1720, Fort de Chartreswas intended from its inception to function as a regional distributioncenter forthe Illinois Country and the Louisiana Colony. Tue Laurens site (11R125) represents the original Fort de

Chartres(Fort de Chartres1) and was thefirst ofthree incarnationsofthe fort. Tue firsttwo were constructedwith wooden palisades and the third (Fort de ChartresIII) was made with walls of stone (Jelks et al. 1989). Fort de ChartresI is located approximately 1 kmto the southofthe Fort de ChartresState HistorieSite which is the location ofthe stone structure built in 1753 (Keene 1988). Fort de ChartresIl was constructed in the late 1720s near the firstfort and while it was slightly smaller in size, thedouble palisade and fourbastions made for a more secure defenseagainst persistent attacks fromthe MesquakieIndians (Keene 1988).

Tue faunal assemblage collected at the Laurens site is similar to that ofFrench

Cahokia in thatmammals contribute the majority ofspecimens, 70% of the NISP 65 total, though bird species represent a much higher percentage (25%) of the NISP than at the previous three sites (Jelks et al. 1989). Tueassemblage displays a wide range of species exploitation with fiftyvertebrate taxa being represented in the 6,137 specimens collected. Tue residents ofFort de Chartres I were utilizing the

Mississippi River channelfor subsistence as nearly 75% ofthe identified fishremains are accounted for by large blue catfish (Jelks et al. 1989). This, however must be contrasted with the 3.6% that fishas a class represent in the total NISP forthe entire assemblage. At this regional distributioncenter, the contrastbetween white-tailed deer specimens and those representing domesticated speciesis apparent. White-tailed deer account foronly 23.1% NISP, 9.1% MNI,and 24.3% ofthe total biomass while domesticates make up 30.9% NISP,20.6% MNI, and 65.1% ofthe biomass (Figures

7, 8, and 9). Tue anima1exploitation strategiesat a commercial location such as Fort

de ChartresI reflectEuropean origins to a much higher degreethan the outlying areas

of the Illinois Countryand Great Lakesregion. Thisis not only a reflectionof

increased availability of domesticated species at largercommerce centers, but also

depicts a more segregatedway of lifefor colonists where interaction with native allies

may not have been essential forday-to-day activities which is in turnreflected in the

foodways. In fact,the veryexistence ofthreeFort de Chartres,each ofwhich built

stronger and more resilient that the one before,suggests that European andNative

American relations at this location were oftenrealized in the formof warfare.

Violence in the fürtrade broke down alliances and impeded trade relations which

inhibited intermarriage and promotedweak kinship networks at this location. 66 Subsistence pattems for colonists at Fort de ChartresI do display a marked difference from native patternsand this site provides evidence forthe use ofselective consumption of animal resources as a meansof maintaining social distance and expressing cultural identity.

Fort de Chartres m

Tue faunal assemblage fromFort de Chartresm (11R127) shows this trendof domesticated over wild game representation to an even greaterdegree. Established some 25 to 30 years afterFort de ChartresI and occupied until the end ofthe eighteenth century(Keene 1988), excavations fromthe stone fortreveal animal exploitation patternsfor domesticates at 38.7% NISP, 16.7% MNI, and 68.2% ofthe biomass in comparison to 18.1% NISP, 5 .3% MNI,and 21.2% of the total biomass being comprised ofwhite-tailed deer remains (Keene 1988). This is the highest proportion of domesticates ofthe fivesites discussed in this section (Figures 7, 8, and

9). The pattem of animal exploitation at this site provides a strong indicator for manipulation ofsubsistence patterns as a means ofmaintaining social distance and markingcultural identity. However,• it should be noted that thelarge population and continuous occupation of this site may also havehad an adverse affecton local wild

animal species,such as white-tailed deer, due to huntingpractices. Game species

populations may have diminishedover time and this explains the exploitation of

domesticated resources out ofnecessity, ratherthan selective consumption. At this 67 point, it is unclear if this is indeed a plausible explanation for the higher proportions of domesticated species.

By comparing the faunalassemblages from French colonial sites located in the

Illinois Country, a pattem of animalexploitation begins to emerge. For each site, mammalian species dominated the assemblage with supplemental exploitation of bird, fish, and some reptile/amphibian and freshwater mussel species. White-tailed deer remains are oftenthe best represented single species in the analysis, however there is clear evidence fora correlation between an .increase in military presence and political control,which increases internalsocial stratification, at a site and the site's dependence on domesticates as seen in the faunalassemblage. Locations that are ranked higher in Tordoff's(1983) hierarchy, which reflectsan increase in intemal complexity, exhibit increased dependence on swine, cattle, sheep, and goats while sites in the hinterland of the Illinois Countryand GreatLakes Region tend to show a heavy dependence on wild game species as a staple of the diet. Tue specific strategies forsubsistence away from regional centers reflectthose of local Native American groupsmore so than at the larger sites.

This pattemis not assumed to be solely due to differencesin the availability of domesticated species. Colonists at rural forts could have obtained domestic species and maintained a herd of animals and colonists at larger forts could have hunted wild gamespecies instead of purchasing domestic products. An economic and optimal foragingexplanation forthe pattems of subsistence detailed above does not take into account the drastic differencesin demographics at each location and failsto 68 acknowledgethe kinds of people who inhabited each location. To illustratethis point, ask yourself"IftheGovemor ofNew Francelived at Fort St. Joseph, would the animal exploitation pattems be different?" Tue traders and civiliansliving in remote areas such as Fort St. Joseph and Fort Ouiatenon were not oftenfrom the upper echelons. ofFrench society (Cleland 1970). Many, if not most, had never been to France and so would have been accustomed to thelocal animal resources available in these locations. Tue high proportionsof domestic species recovered fromFort de ChartresI and m has as much to do with the status ofthese site's occupants as does the general availabilityof domesticated animals.

Local native groups interacted with the European tradersin order to obtainthe goods they desired fromOld World markets while traderswere interested in the hides and fürsthat Native Americans bad to offer. Natives possessedknowledge about the

landand local animal resources while colonists brought items such as beads, knives,

andgun parts formusket repair. This interactionis one ofcooperation where each

side has something to offer the other,however, tradersbad to becomepart ofthe

extensiveNative American kinship network in order to access this market (Sleeper

Smith 2001; White 1991). Through intermarriagesbetween European traders and

native women, outsiders are brought into the local system of exchange. Kinshipties

were essential to the way Native Americans related to one another in the Great Lakes

region and incorporating Europeans into a community through marriage provides a

basis for native peoples to understand a trader'sposition withintheir own worldview.

"This was a face-to-faceworld in which people were identifiedby their relatives and 69 where the individual was suspect ... .lt was the reputation and prominence ofkin networks that definedsocial acceptance and prominence" (Sleeper-Smith2001 :43).

Tue new kinship network established throughthe marriage ofFrench fürtraders to native women not only facilitatedthe expansion and success ofthe für trade in this region, but servedas a means of bringing twodifferent and diverse peoples together through the process ofWhite's (1991) mutual accommodation.

Another factorat work in the Great Lakesfür trade was the conversion of

Native Americansto Catholicism. Baptismal records show how the work ofJesuit missionaries bad an effectnot only on the religion ofnative peoples, but also on how they incorporated Europeansand • religion into their kin-based system ofunderstanding the world (Sleeper-Smith 2001 ). Tue naming of Godparents at the time ofa child' s baptism provides another way to establish a kinship tie where marriageand "blood" relations are not possible. Oftentimes, a commandantwould serveas the Godfather to several metis children while a prominent womanof native or mixed ancestrywould be named the Godmother (Sleeper-Smith2001). 1bispractice ensured the child, and theextended family, access through kin relations to both worlds ofEuropean

colonialism and Native American tradition.

Tue flexibilityofkin networks established throughinter-marriage and the

"Catholic" kin system creates the opportunityfor shared meaning and a blending of

distinct cultural identities (White 1991 ). 1bisblending ofcultural traditions with a

French trader, native wife, and metis children all incorporated into one household

(Sleeper-Smith2001) should bereflected in the material culture and is argued, in this 70 study, to be reflectedin thefoodways. Locations where trade was the primary functionof a communityand wherethese mixed households comprised a large portion oftheresidents produce subsistence patternsthat reflect integration and mutual accommodation. FortSt. Joseph and Fort Ouiatenon represent these types of communities where kin relations, as opposedto strict colonial rule, dictated people's actions. Tue animalexploitation patternsat these sites do indeed reflectthis sort of integration. Alternatively,the demographicsat sites like Fort de Chartres I and m were composed of more high rankingmilitary and governmentalofficials who were less likely to be concemed withnative kinship ties. Mixed households, while certainlypresent, would not have comprised the majorityand so subsistence pattems are more similarto a Europeanagricultural way of life.

Customsthat manifestthemselves in the New World, but were not foundin

France ofthe time, canbe said to represent a shift in the way Europeans viewed themselves and so representsa shiftin culturalidentity as weil. In turn,Native

Americanswere experiencing the same sort ofeffects through the incorporation of

Catholicism into their kin-based understandingof the world. While the colonist and traders probably did not perceive of themselves as Native American, so too did they not see themselves simply as frontierversions ofeighteenth centuryParisians. Native

American converts to this new Catholic religion foundthemselves in a unique positionwhere they could access bothEuropean and Native traditions. White (1991) makes the argument that this shift,on both sides, results in a new situationwhich is neither Europeannor Native American but contains elements ofbothcultures. Tue 71 middle groundrepresents a mutual accommodation where by values andcustoms sharedby colonists and Natives takeon new meanings unique to the setting ofthe fur trade(White 1991). Archaeological representationof this shiftin identity may be manifeston colonial sites through manyaspects of material culture. Locally produced brass and copper tinlding cones craftedfrom kettles, modifiedanimal bones resembling native tools, clothing, ceramic,beads, and may other aspects of daily life, in addition to subsistence practices, may reflect theblending ofEuropeanand Native traditionswhich White (1991) calls the middle ground.

In this study, animal exploitation that closely resembles Native American.

patternswas identifiedat sites withlower internal social stratification, such as Fort St.

Joseph and Fort Ouiatenon, where European integrationinto native kin networks

would have beenessential. At largergovernmental sites where people ofhigher

social status were more common, the need to rely on native allies fortrade and

everyday activities was less pronounced. Thishas beenreflected in the faunal assemblages recovered at Fort de ChartresI and m. French Cahokia occupied a positionbetween these otherlocations as it was a rural, agriculturalcommunity with

access to the larger center ofFort de Chartres. Tue faunalassemblage fromthis site

also reflectsa middle position where clearexpressions of European or Native patterns

are not identified.

This study hasused the animalexploitation patternsfrom several French

colonial sites across New France and Upper Louisiana(Walthall 1991) to examinethe

issue of cultural identity as realized through foodways forcolonists who facedsimilar 72 environmental settings with different social conditions. Those sites that were under stronger influencefrom the colonial governmentexhibit animal exploitation pattems which are primarily dependent on domesticated species such as those found in

Europe. Cattle, pigs, horse, sheep, and goats comprised the staple dietary contributions at Fort de Chartres I andFort de Chartres m. Moving away from centers ofthe colonial government to Fort Ouiatenon andFort St. Joseph, the animal exploitation patternsmore closely resemble those oflocal Native peoples with an increase in the dependency on wild game species. The faunalassemblage from

French Cahokia, a ruralagricultural community, shows elements ofboth European and Native patterns. As interactions with local Native Americanpopulations took place on a much more personal levelat remote locations, European colonists were takingon more ofthe habits associated with Native Americans and this is reflectedin the animal exploitation patterns. The transitionfrom formal interaction to personal interdependencies in akin-based network ofexchange (Sleeper-Smith 2001) results in greaterdegrees of shared values and meanings(White 1991) which arethen reflected inthe material culture (Wise 2001), and inthis case animal exploitation patterns,of people living on the eighteenthcentury frontier. CHAPTER VII CONCLUSION

Cultural identitycan be expressed in a myriad number ofways. lt is often created and maintainedthrough mundane activities ofdaily practice. In order to serve as markersof cultural identity, thesepractices must be contrasted to those of neighboring groups. Althoughidentity is oftencontext dependent, prolonged interaction between those ofdifferent cultures creates the opportunityfor shiftsin the way people perceive themselves. Intermarriage between French tradersand Native

American women, and the resulting metispopulation, is an example ofhow informal interaction can be manifest. Material culture may reflectthis blending of cultures and by identifying patternsthat display differentfrequencies of certainobjects it becomes possibleto explore issues of cultural identity across multiple sites (Nassaney2001;

Shennan 1994). One such pattem becomes apparent when comparing interactions between French andNative Americans at fivedifferent sites across the Great Lakes region and theIllinois Country. Animal exploitation patternsat each ofthese locations varied depending on the social conditions, demographicmake-up, andin turn,the types ofinteractions taking place between thetwo groups.

This study examined animal exploitation as a possible meansof identifying a pattem of consumption that reflectsdiscrete cultural identities in thetypes of interactions between Europeancolonists andNative peoples that were dependent upon thesocial setting and demographicsof the site. In some contexts, foodcould be

73 74 identifiedas a markerthat helps create and maintain social boundaries, though not in others. As one moves away from governmental centers, animal exploitation strategies ofcolonists more closely resemble those oflocal Native peoples. This is seen in the high proportion of wild game species and very few domesticated animals in the assemblagesat Fort Ouiatenon andFort St. Joseph. In comparison, a higher dependency on domesticated animals was expressed at Fort de ChartresI and m. French Cahokia occupies a position in between these two extremes. Whilethis

agriculturalcommunity was not a major governmentcenter nor militarybastion, its close proximity to Fortde Chartres allowed residents ofthe community to benefit fromthe inflow of goods at the regional distributioncenter. Exporting locally grown

crops anddomestic animals was also importantto the economy at French Cahokia and

the American Bottom area has been called the breadbasket ofthe New World forthe

French colonies (Jelks et al. 1989; Walthall 1991). As such, the faunalassemblage

recovered from theCahokia Wedge site at French Cahokia displays a greater dependency on wild gamespecies than Fort de ChartresI andm but is less pronounced than was observed at Fort Ouiatenon and Fort St. Joseph. NISP, MNI,

and biomass data recovered fromthese fivesites consistently shows greater

dependency on local wild game species foranimal exploitation as one moves away

from large centers ofEuropean occupation.

French colonists at larger governmentalcenters were maintaininga tradition

of animal exploitation thatreflects their European roots. Maintainingdomestic

anima1 species in the New World would have generally been atgreater expense in 75 comparison to the readily available local wild animal species, though pigs were often allowed to run feraland thenhunted like wild game. Domestic animalsmust be purchased, fed, and in most cases monitored to assure that they can be harvested at a later time. Currently,there is no indication that the wild game species were less plentiful at the larger forts,however the patterns of animal exploitation demonstrated through a comparison ofFort de Chartres m, Fort de ChartresI, French Cahokia, Fort Ouiatenon, and Fort St. Joseph shows that those colonists at thelarger forts were maintainingconsumption patterns that express their desire to eat domesticated species. This display ofselective consumption indicated that exploitation of animal resources may have acted to maintain social distance and mark cultural identity for

Europeans at these locations.

Smaller fortslocated on the edge ofthe frontier, such as Fort Ouiatenon and

Fort St. Joseph, would have required colonists to work very closely with native groups as part of daily activities (Sleeper-Smith 2001). These interactions often included intermarriage and as such the subsistence patternsfound at smaller outposts more closely resemble those ofthe Native Americansdue to their mixed demographics. Additionally, colonists inremote locations may have had limited access to domestic species andso were forced to live offof the land to a greater extent, though obtaining domestic species would still have been possible. However, it is the opportunityfor colonists at these locations to consume domesticated animal species over wild game that creates aninteresting situation. Tue faunalassemblages recovered fromgovernmental centers, like Fort de Chartres I andm, reflect 76 established traditionsof European animal exploitation which created the opportunity forsocial distancing and expression of cultural identity through foodways. Sites like

Fort St. Joseph andFort Ouiatenon displayed animal exploitation pattems that rely on local wild game and this shows less concem with maintaining social distance. Tue importance ofk:inship relations through intermarriageand metis populations in these communities helps to explain the extent of informal relations.. and emphasizes the disadvantages associated with maintaining social distance (Sleeper-Smith 2001 ).

While this study has focusedon the use of animal exploitation as an indicator ofcultural identity in New France, it has not addressed other important factorsthat could furtheradd to our understanding oflifeat these locations. Tue use ofFood

UtilityIndices would allow foran examination ofbutchering practices at the site and perhaps information conceming dietary consumption fromthe various species could be determined from this method ofanalysis ( Gust 1993 ). With the information provided by Food Utility Indices it may be possible to explore issues ofbutchering practices between Native Americans and Europeans which would test the idea that colonists were adapting to new environments through interaction withnative peoples.

Also, an analysis of contemporary Native American communities that were in close proximity to these sites may provide interesting data conceming the Nativ� adaptation to European expansion into the Americaninterior. By exploring the expression of cultural identitythrough foodways for Europeans in the eighteenth century, this studyhas failed to detail similar issues forNative Americans who were

living near these sites during thistime period. A comparativeanalysis ofNative 77 occupations associated with colonial communities, such as the largePotawatomi settlement across the river fromFort St. Joseph and the known native villages in proximity to Fort Ouiatenon, would better informour understanding ofthis middle groundand give a more complete picture of lifein the Great Lakesfür trade

Tue ideas presented in this study open up a range ofpossibilities forfurther research. As excavations ofthe Fort St. Joseph site (20BE23) proceed, it will be possible to continue the sort of analysis laid out throughthis study with a more complete understanding ofthe site's stratigraphy, arrangement, and provenience.

Artifactanalyses ofthe features may allow forthe association of specificfe atures with

French or British occupations representing a change over time. These differencescan then be used to examine different subsistence strategies adopted by theEuropean colonial powers as has been explored at Fort Michilimackinac (Cleland 1970).

Based on the analysisof animal remains recovered fromFort Ouiatenon and other French colonial sites (Jelks et al. 1988; Martin 1986), it was expected that there would be an abundance offish remains in the assemblage. Tue St. Joseph Riverwas known to support large seasonal populations of lak:esturgeon which were exploited by Native peoples at the nearby Moccasin Bluffand Wymer West Knoll sites

(Bettarel and Smith 1973; Martin and Richmond 2000). However, the analysisof animal remains fromfeatures at Fort St. Joseph has revealed only a single fish specimenidentifiable to the specieslevel. Three other specimens were identifiedto

the dass level andthese, together with the single lak:esturgeon specimen, account for

the total fish count. At this earlystage ofexcavation, it is premature to assume that 78 the French were not taking advantageof thisreadily available foodresource as there seems to be no indication fora drastic decline in the presence offish in the St. Joseph

River during the colonial period. Also, the excellent level ofpreservation forall anima1 honespecimens recovered fromthis site, in addition to the nearneutral results of soil acidity tests conducted on the sediments at the Fort St. Joseph site (Lynch

2003), indicate that taphonomyis not responsible for the absence offish remains. lt is suggested that as excavations proceed on the site, a greatersample of fish remainsare likely to be recovered. Tue lack offish at this stage ofthe excavations is most likely due to samplingerror and seasonality in that less than 1 % of the site deposits have been examined. Should fishcontinue to remain absent as excavations continue, the question of fishexploitation patternsat Fort St. Joseph will beof major interest.

This inter-site comparisonof the faunalassemblages fromFrench colonial sites is in the initialstages. A pattem ofanima1 exploitation has been shown to exist forthe fivesites identifiedin this study, however manymore French colonial forts, outposts, andcommunities are knownto exist and the methods ofthis analysiscan be extended to other geographic and socially diverse areas. This studyhas sought to controlfor environmental factors,to a certain degree, andfocus on differing social conditions and so the scopehas been limitedto thefive sites examined above. Tue addition ofFrench colonial sites fromacross Canadaand the AmericanSouth may add to the growingbody ofknowledge concerningFrench andNative interactions in theNew World as expressed through subsistence. 79 In swn, this study has sought to explore the issue of culturalidentity through foodways by examiningdifferential conswnption patterns fromfive French colonial sites in North America. Fort de Chartresm, Fort de ChartresI, French Cahokia,Fort Ouiatenon, and Fort St. Joseph all occupy relatively similar environmental., situations though the social conditions at each location vary. By attempting to control for environmental factors, issues related to European and Native interactions at each site are examined throughanimal exploitation patterns. Selectiveconswnption at the larger governmentalcenters favored domestic specieswhile remote outpostsmore closely reflectthe subsistence patternsof local native groups. Thisresult is seen to indicate that differenttypes of interactions were taking place at these locations.

Kinship networks established through intermarriage, metisoffspring, and Catholic ritual were essential to the fürtrade, and life in general, at smaller outpostswhere

Native peoplesand Europeansoften occupied the same household. However, larger locations that were prominent in the colonialgovernment do not display subsistence patternsthat reflect localnative groups. Instead these sites show a strongdependence on domestic animals, suchas cattle, swine, horse, sheep, and goats. This type of selective conswnptioncreates social distance betweenEuropean colonists and Native

Americans by the active establishment of culturalidentity through animal exploitation. Kinship ties to Native peoples were not as essential forEuropeans of higher social status and intermarriage may have been less common in locations with higher degrees of social stratification. 80 Tue types of interactions that were takingplace on the American frontier in

the eighteenth centuryvaried depending on the occupant's social identities,

demographic composition ofthe site, and the activities taking place at each location.

For European residents ofFort St. Joseph, daily lifedemanded close interaction with

local Miami and Potawatomi allies which in turnbegins to blur the lines that

. distinguish each group (White 1991). Also, cultural identities beginto merge as

Europeanstake on Native wives whose children may adopt behavioral traitsofboth

cultures to varying degrees (Sleeper-Smith 2001). What peopleeat is oftenan

importantmarker of who they are. Throughthe study ofanimal exploitation patterns

at these French colonial sites, it may be argued that issues of cultural identity at rural

outpostswere much more flexibleand less rigidly definedthan at those locations with

a stronggovernrnental and military presence. APPENDIXA

Skeletal Portions ofWhite-tailedDeer fromFeature Contexts at Fort St. Joseph Element Number ofElements %

Antler 1 0.4 Cranium (not including Maxilla) 6 2.2 Mandible 1 0.4 Maxilla 3 l.l Axis l 0.4 Hyoid 1 0.4 Teeth 32 11.8 Total Numberof Cranial Elements 45 16.6

Vertebra(Cervical 3 -Lumbar) 33 12.2 Ribs 49 18.1 Cartilage 1 0.4 Total Number ofRib-VertebralElements 83 30.6

Scapula 13 4.8 Humerus (proximal) 6 2.2 Humerus ( distal) 8 2.9 Humerus (shaftfragments) 6 2.2 Radius (whole) I 0.4 Radius (proximal) 2 0.7 Radius (distal) 1 0.4 Radius (shaftfragments) 6 2.2 Ulna 12 4.4 Total Number of Proximal ForequarterElements 55 20.3

Innominate 5 1.8 Femur (proximal) 9 3.3 Femur (distal) 8 2.9 Femur (shaftfragments) 13 4.8 Patella I 0.4 Tibia (proximal) 11 4.0 Tibia ( distal) 9 3.3 Tibia (shaftfragments) 18 6.6 Total Number of Proximal Hindquarter Elements 74 27.3

Carpal 3 l.l Astragalus 1 0.4 Calcaneus 1 0.4 Lateral Malleolus 1 0.4 Metatarsal 4 1.4 Metapodial 1 0.4 Phalanx 3 l.l Total Number ofLower Legsand Feet 14 5.2

Grand Total 271 100.0

81 APPENDIXB

Elements Utilized to Calculate Minimum Number of Individuals forLarge Mammals fromEach Feature atFort St. Joseph

Feature 1 Element Portion MNl Pig, Sus scrofa LeftMetatarsal Whole 1 White-tailed Deer, Odocoileus virginianus Right Ulna Proximal 2

Feature 2 Black Bear, Ursus americanus Right Humerus Mid Shaft 1 White-tailed Deer, Odocoileus virginianus RightFemur Mid Shaft 5 to Distal Feature 3 White-tailed Deer, Odocoileus virginianus RightFemur Distal 1

Feature 4 White-tailed Deer, Odocoileus virginianus Right Scapula Distal 1

Feature 5 Black Bear, Ursus americanus LeftRadius Proximal 1 Horse sp., Equus sp. LeftMetatarsal Whole 1 Pig, Sus scrofa LeftRadius Proximal 1 White-tailed Deer, Odocoileus virginianus LeftFemur Proximal to 6 Mid Shaft Feature6 Black Bear, Ursus americanus Right Metacarpal Whole 1 White-tailedDeer, Odocoileus virginianus LeftTibia Mid Shaft 4

Feature 7 Black Bear, Ursus americanus Phalanx andAtlas Whole 1 Pig, Sus scrofa LeftScapula Distal 1 White-tailed Deer, Odocoileus virginianus LeftTibia Proximal to 9 Mid Shaft Domestic Cattle, Bos taurus Right Scapula Distal 1

Feature 9 Black Bear, Ursus americanus Right Rib Proximal 1 White-tailed Deer� Odocoileus virginianus LeftRib Proximal 1

82 APPENDIXC Species Composition from Individual Features at Fort St. Joseph Combined Macro and Wet Screen recovery

NISP Biomass3 Biomass Taxon NJsp• Wt.(g) MNI2 (Kg) % Feature 1 Mammals Raccoon, Procyon lotor 1 0.2 1 0.006 0.42 Pig, Sus scrofa 1 11.9 1 0.244 17.09 White-tailed Deer, 9 58.6 2 1.025 71.83 Odocoileus virginianus UnidentifiedMamma! 10 6.8 0.147 10.30 Birds Passenger Pigeon, 1 0.2 1 0.005 0.36 Ectopistes migratorius Feature 1 Total 22 77.7 5 1.427 100.00

Feature 2 Mammals Beaver, Castorcanadensis 2 7.6 1 0.163 2.56 Raccoon, Procyon lotor 2 1.5 1 0.038 0.59 Black Bear, 1 35.1 1 0.647 10.18 Ursus americanus White-tailed Deer, 32 234.8 5 3.577 56.27 Odocoileus virginianus Unidentified Mamma! 186 100.9 1.673 26.32 Birds CanadaGoose, 1 2.5 1 0.047 0.74 Branta canadensis Domestic Chicken, 1 1.1 l 0.022 0.35 Gallus gallus Grouse/chicken/turkey, 2 0.3 0.007 0.11 Galliformes Passenger Pigeon, 8 1.1 2 0.022 0.35 Ectopistes migratorius

1 NISP, number ofidentifiedspecimens 2 MNI, mmimum number ofindividuals, maximum distinction method, calculated as sum of individual features 3 Biomass calculatedby use ofallometricscaling formulae(see Reitz andScarry 1985:67). Calculations achieved by summing individual features 83 84

Appendix C- continued NISP Biomass3 Biomass 1 Taxon NISP Wt.(g) MNI2 (Kg) % cf. Passenger Pigeon, 1 0.1 0.003 0.05. Ectopistes migratorius 54 UnidentifiedBird 8.8 0.148 2.33 Reptiles Unidentified Turtle 1 0.2 0.010 0.15 UnidentifiedVertebrata 115 5.3 Bivalves Spike, Elliptio dilatata 1 3.0 1 UnidentifiedBivalve 3 0.1 Feature 2 Total 410 402.4 13 6.357 100.00

Feature 3 Mammals White-tailed Deer, 5 54.9 1 0.967 83.22 Odocoileus virginianus UnidentifiedMamma! 92 8.5 0.180 15.49 Birds Passenger Pigeon, 2 0.2 1 0.005 0.43 Ectopistes migratorius Duck species, Anatinae . 1 0.3 0.007 0.60 UnidentifiedBird 1 0.1 0.003 0.26 Bivalves UnidentifiedBivalve 1 0.1 Feature 3 Total 102 64.1 2 1.162 100.00

Feature 4 Mammals Porcupine, 2 2.6 1 0.062 5.32 Erethizon dorsatum cf. Procupine, 1 0.5 0.014 1.20 Erethizon dorsatum White-tailed Deer, 10 43.5 1 0.784 67.24 Odocoileus virginianus UnidentifiedMammal 6 10.5 0.218 18.70 Birds Mallard/Black Duck, 1 0.6 1 0.013 1.11 Anas platyrnynchos/ rubripies Duck species, Anatinae 1 0.6 1 0.013 1.11 Wild Turkey, 1 2.4 1 0.045 3.86 Meleagris gallapavo 85

Appendix C- continued NISP Biomass3 Biomass 1 Taxon NISP Wt.(g) MNI2 (Kg) % Reptiles UnidentifiedTurtle 1 0.4 0.017 1.46 Unidentified Vertebrata 6 0.2 Feature 4 Total 29 61.3 5 1.166 100.00

Feature5 Mammals Beaver, Castor canadensis 3 3.5 1 0.081 0.56 Porcupine, 2 4.2 1 0.095 0.66 Erethizon dorsatum cf. Procupine, 1 1.4 0.035 0.24 Erethizon dorsatum Dog/Coyote/Wolf, 1 1.5 0.038 0.26 Canis spp. Black Bear, 3 18.5 1 0.363 2.50 Ursus americanus Raccoon, Procyonlotor 13 16.0 4 0.318 2.19 Horse sp., Equus sp. 1 18.1 1 0.356 2.46 Pig, Sus scrofa 3 17.2 1 0.340 2.35 cf. Wapiti or Elk, 1 10.1 0.211 1.46 Cervus elaphus White-tailed Deer, 68 510.9 6 7.203 49.70 Odocoileus virginianus UnidentifiedMammal 374 356.4 5.209 35.93 Birds Duck species, Anatinae 2 1.6 1 0.031 0.21 Wild Turkey, 2 7.2 1 0.123 0.85 Meleagris gallapavo UnidentifiedBird 7 3.8 0.069 0.48 Reptiles Semiaquatic pond turtles, 2 0.6 0.022 0.15 Emydidae UnidentifiedVertebrata 4 0.5 Bivalves Unidentified Bivalves 1 1.6 Feature 5 Total 488 973.1 17 14.494 100.00 86 Appendix C- continued NISP Biomass3 Biomass Taxon NISP1 Wt.(g) MNI2 (Kg) % Feature 6 Mammals Porcupine, 1 3.3 1 0.077 1.70 Erethizon dorsatum cf. Porcupine, 1 0.6 0.017 0.37 Erethizon dorsatum Black Bear, 1 5.2 1 0.116 2.56 Ursus americanus Raccoon, Procyonlotor 2 2.6 1 0.062 1.37 White-tailed Deer, 28 131.4 4 2.122 46.80 Odocoileus virginianus UnidentifiedMammal 258 125.6 2.037 44.93 Birds Domestic Chicken, 1 0.4 1 0.009 0.20 Gallus gallus Passenger Pigeon, 3 0.6 1 0.013 0.29 Ectopistes migratorius Duck species, Anatinae 1 0.3 1 0.007 0.15 UnidentifiedBird 15 4.1 0.074 1.63 Fish UnidentifiedFish 1 0.1 UnidentifiedVertebrata 1 0.1 Bivalves UnidentifiedBivalves 1 0.3 Feature 6 Total 314 274.6 10 4.534 100.00

Feature 7 Mammals Eastem Cottontail, 1 0.2 1 0.005 0.02 Sylvilagus floridanus Beaver, Castor canadensis 2 42.4 1 0.767 3.18 Porcupine, 1 0.6 1 0.017 0.07 Erethizon dorsatum Black Bear, 2 25.2 1 0.480 2.00 Ursus americanus Raccoon, Procyon lotor 9 20.3 3 0.395 1.64 Pig, Sus scrofa 1 1.2 1 0.031 0.13 cf. Wapiti or Elk, 1 4.6 0.104 0.43 Cervus elaphus White-tailed Deer, 108 948.8 9 12.574 52.20 Odocoileus virginianus 87 Appendix C- continued NISP Biomass3 Biomass 1 Taxon NISP Wt.(g) MNI2 (Kg) % Domestic Cattle, 1 126.0 1 2.043 8.48 Bos Taurus UnidentifiedMammal 481 516.0 7.267 30.17 Birds Canada Goose, 1 2.8 1 0.053 0.22 Branta Canadensis Duck species, Anatinae 2 0.4 1 0.009 0.03 Wild Turkey, 2 7.6 1 0.129 0.54 Meleagris gallapavo Passenger Pigeon, 1 0.1 1 0.003 0.01 Ectopistes migratorius UnidentifiedBird 8 4.4 0.079 0.33 Fish Lake Sturgeon, 1 0.1 1 0.005 0.02 Acipencerfulvescens UnidentifiedFish 2 0.2 Reptiles Blanding's Turtle, 2 3.9 1 0.079 0.33 Emydoidea blandingii Semiaquatic pond turtles, 4 1.8 0.047 0.20 Emydidae Arnphibians Frog/toad sp., Anura 1 0.1 1 UnidentifiedVertebrata 717 63.4 Bivalves Spike, Elliptio dilatata 1 3.3 1 UnidentifiedBivalves 3 4.4 Feature 7 Total 1362 1783.0 26 24.087 100.00

Feature 9 Mammals Black Bear, 1 10.7 1 0.222 21.43 Ursus americanus White-tailed Deer, 3 44.2 1 0.796 76.83 Odocoileus virginianus Birds RuffedGrouse, 1 0.9 1 0.018 1.74 Bonasa umbellus Feature 9 Total 5 55.8 3 1.036 100.00 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Arkush, B. S. 2000 lmproving Our Understanding of Native American Acculturation through the Archaeological Record In Interpretations ofNative North American Life: Material Contributions to Ethnohistory, edited by M. S. Nassaneyand E. S. Johnson, pp. 188-224. University Press ofFlorida, Gainesville, FL.

Baker, R. H. 1983 Michigan Mammals. MichiganState University Press, East Lansing. Beaudry, M. C., L. J. Cook, and S. A. Mrozowski 1991 Artifactsand Active Voices: Material Culture as Social Discourse. In TheArchaeology of Inequality, edited by R. H. McGuire and R. Paynter, pp. 150-191. Blackwell Publishers Inc., Maiden, MA.

Beoku-Betts, J. A. 1995 We Got Our Way of Cooking Things: Women, Food, and Preservation of CulturalIdentity amongthe Gullah. Genderand Society9(5):535-555. Bettarel, R. L. and H. G. Smith 1973 TheMoccasin BlujfSiteand the Woodland Cultures ofSouthwestern Michigan. AnthropologicalPapers No. 49. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Biesele, M. 1993 Women lilceMeat: The Folklore andForaging ldeology ofthe Kalahari Ju/'hoan. Witwatersrand University Press, Indianapolis,IN.

Bourdieu, P. 1977 Outline ofa Theoryof Practice. Translated by Richard Nice. CambridgeUniversity Press, New York, NY.

1984 Distinction: A social Critique ofthe Judgment ofTaste. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

Brumfiel,E. M. 1992 DistinguishedLecture in Archaeology. Breaking and Entering the Ecosystem- Gender, Class, and Faction Steal the Show. American Anthropologist 94: 551-567.

88 89 Cleland, C. E. 1966 ThePrehistoric Anima/ Ecologyand Ethnozoologyof the Upper Great LakesRegi.on. Anthropological Papers No. 29. Musewnof Anthropology University ofMichigan, Arm Arbor.

1970 Comparison of the Faunal Remains fromFrench andBritish Refuse Pits at Fort Michilimackinac: A Study in Changing Subsistence Patterns. Canadian Historie Sites Occasional Papers in Archaeologyand History 3:3-23.

1982 The InlandShore Fisheryofthe NorthernGreat Lakes:Its Development and Importancein Prehistory.American Antiquity4 7( 4):761- 784.

Conkey, M. W. andJ. M. Gero 1997 Programmeto Practice: Gender and Feminism in Archaeology. Annual Review ofAnthropology 26: 411-437. Conkey, M. W. and J. D. Spector 1984 Archaeology and the Study of Gender. Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory 7: 1-38. Cooper, E. 1986 Chinese Table Manners:Y ou are How Y ou Eat. Human Organization 45(2):179-184.

Counihan,C. 1992 Food Rules in the United States. Anthropological Quarterly 65(2):55- 66.

Craib, 1. 1992 Anthony Giddens. Routledge, London.

1998 Experiencingldentity. Sage, London. Cremin, W. M. 1996 The Berrien Phase of SouthwestMichigan. In lnvestigating the Archaeological Record ofthe Great Lakes State: Essays in Honor ofElizabeth Baldwin Garland, edited by M. B. Holman, J. G. Brashler andK. E. Parker, pp. 385-413. New Issues Press, Kalamazoo,MI. 90 Cremin, W. M. and M. S. Nassaney 1999 BackgroundResearch. In An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey to Locate Remains ofFort St. Joseph (20BE23) in Niles, Michigan, edited by M. S. Nassaney, pp. 7-30. Archaeological Report No. 22, Departmentof Anthropology,Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo.

Dahlberg,K. 2001 Democratizing Society and Food Systems: Or How do We Transform Modem Structures of Power. Agriculture am/Huinan Values 18(2):151-235. Dice, L. R. 1943 The Biotic Provinces ofNorth America. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.

Douglas, M. 1966 Purityam/ Danger: An Analysis ofthe Concepts ofPollution and Taboo. Praeger, New York, NY. Evans-Pritchard, E. E. 1940 The Nuer. OxfordUniversity Press, Oxford, UK. Fantasia, R. 1995 Fast Food in France. Theoryand Society24(2):201-243. Ferguson, P. P. and S. Zukin 1995 What's Cooking. Theoryand Society24(2):193-199. Fine, G. A. 1995 Wittgenstein's Kitchen: SharedMeaning in Restaurant Work. Theory and Society24(2):245-269. Firth, R. 1936 We, the Tikopia:A Sociological Studyof Kinship in Primitive Polynesia. StanfordUniversity Press, Stanford, CA. Fitting, J. E. and C. E. Cleland 1969 Late Prehistoric Settlement Patternsin theUpper Great Lakes. Ethnohistory16(4): 289-302. Friedmann, H. 1982 Tue Political Economy ofFood: Tue Rise and Fall ofthe Postwar InternationalFood Order. TheAmerican Journal ofSociology 88:248-286. 91 Gibbs L. 1987 IdentifyingGender in theArchaeological Record: A Contextual Study. In TheArchaeology ofContextual Meanings, edited by I. Hodder, pp. 79-89. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,MA.

Grayson, D. K. 1978 Minimum Numbers and Sample Size in Vertebrate Fauna! Analysis. American Antiquity43(1):53-65.

1984 Quantitative Zooarchaeo/ogy: Topics in the Analysis of Archaeological Faunas. Academic Press, New York, NY. 2001 Tue ArchaeologicalRecord of Human Impacts on Animal Populations. Journal ofWorld Prehistory15(1):1-68. Gums, B. L. 1988 Introduction. In Archaeo/ogyat French Colonial Cahokia, edited by B. L. Gums, pp. 1-27. Studies in Illinois Archaeology No. 3. Illinois Historie Preservation Agency, Springfield.

Gust, S. M. 1993 Anima! Bones fromHistorie Urban Chinese Sites: A Comparison of Sacramento,W oodland, Tuscon, Ventura, and Lovelock. In Hidden Heritage: Historical Archaeologyof Overseas Chinese, edited by P. Wegars, pp. 177- 212. Baywood Publishing Co., Amityville, NY.

Hobsbawm, E. 1983 Introduction: Inventing Tradition In TheInvention ofTradition, edited by E. Hobsbawm and T. Ranger, pp. 1-14. CambridgeUniversity Press, Cambridge.

Holtzman, J. D. 2003 In a Cup of Tea: Commodities and HistoryAmong Samburu Pastora/istsin Northern Kenya. MS on file, Departmentof Anthropology, WesternMichigan University, Kalamazoo.

Hulse, C. A. 1981 An Archaeological Evaluation of Fort St. Joseph (20BE23) Berrien County, Michigan. TheMichigan Archaeologist27 (3-4):55-65. Hunt, G. T. 1960 TheWars of the Iroquois: A Studyin Intertribal Trade Relations. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, WI. 92 Idle, D. 2003 ThePost of the St. Joseph River During the French Regime. Fort St. Joseph Musewn, Niles, Michigan. (Originally completed in 1946, Ph.D. Dissertation, DepartmentofHistory, University ofßlinois, Urbana).

Jelks, E. B., C. J. Ekberg, and T. J. Martin 1989 Excavationsat the Laurens Site: Probable Location ofFort de Chartres/. Studies in ßlinois ArehaeologyNo. 5. Illinois Historie Preservation Agency, Springfield.

Kahn,M. 1986 AlwaysHungry, Never Greedy:Food and the Expression of Gender in a Melanesian Society. WavelandPress Inc., Prospect Heights, IL. Keene, D. 1988 Archaeological Excavations of Fort de Chartres: 1985-87. MS on file, Illinois Historie Preservation Ageney, Springfield.

Lynch, D. P. 2003 December. Personal Communication coneerningpH results fromFort St. Joseph soils research.

2004 A Geophysical Survey at Fort St. Joseph, Niles Michigan. Paper presented at the Conference on Historical and UnderwaterArchaeology, St. Louis, MO.

Mann,R. 1999 Tue Silenced Miami: Archaeological and Ethnohistorical Evidencefor Miami-BritishRelations, 1795-1812. Ethnohistory 46(3):399-427. Martin, T. J. 1976 A Fauna/ Analysis of Five Woodland Period Archaeological Sites in Southwestern Michigan. Master's Thesis, Departmentof Anthropology, WesternMichigan University, Kalarnazoo.

1986 A Fauna/ Analysis ofFort Ouiatenon, An Eighteenth CenturyTrading Post in the Wabash Valley of Indiana. Ph.D. Dissertation, Departmentof Anthropology, MichiganState University, East Lansing.

1988 Animal Remains fromthe Cahokia Wedge Site. In Archaeologyat French Colonial Cahokia, edited by B. L. Gums. Studies in Illinois Archaeology No. 3. Illinois Historie Preservation Agency, Springfield. 93 1991a Animal Exploitation Patternsin "lllinois Country":An Archaeological Perspective. In TheLiving Museum, pp. 38-40. vol. 53. 1991b ModifiedAnima1 Remains, Subsistence, and Cultural Interaction at French ColonialSites in the Midwestem United States. In Beamers, Bobwhites, and Blue-Points: Tributes to the Career of Paul W Parmalee, edited by J. R. Purdue, W. E. Klippel and B. W. Styles, pp. 409-419. vol. 23. lllinois State MuseumScientific Papers, Springfield.

Martin, T. J. andJ. C. Richmond 2001 Anima/ Remainsfrom Wymer West Knoll (20BE132), A Mississippian Habitation Site in Berrien County, Michigan. MS. on file. QuatemaryStudies ProgramTechnical Report, lllinois State Museum, Springfield.

Mason, R. J. 1986 Rock Island: Historical Indian Archaeologyin the Northern Lake Michigan Basin. MCJA Special Paper 6. Kent State University Press, Kent, OH.

McGuire, R. H. 1982 Tue Study ofEthnicityin Historical Archaeology. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology. 1: 159-178. Meigs, A. 1988 Food as Cultural Construction.Food and Foodways2:341-357. Meskell, L. 2002 Archaeologies ofldentity. InArchaeological TheoryToday, edited by 1. Hodder, pp. 187-213. Blackwell Publishers Inc., Malden, MA.

Messer, E. 1984 Anthropological Perspectives on Diet. Annual Review ofAnthropology 13:205-249.

Mintz, S. 1985 Sweetness and Power: ThePlace ofSugar in Modern History. Penguin, New York, NY.

Nassaney, M. S. 2001 Social Archaeology. M.S. on file,Department of Anthropology, WesternMichigan University, Kalamazoo. 94 2003 Proposal: National Endowment for the Humanities Collaborative Research. M.S. on file. Departmentof Anthropology, WesternMichigan University, Kalamazoo.

Nassaney,M. S., W. M. Crem.in,J. A. Brandao, D. Lynch, R. Becker, and B. Giordano 2004 Tue Archaeological Discovery ofFort St. Joseph (20BE23), A French Mission-Garrison-TradingPost Complex in Niles, Michigan. In New Perspectives on French Heritage: French Settlements and Culture in North America and the Caribbean, edited by E. Scott, University of Florida Press, Gainesville, FL. (in press)

Nassaney, M. S., W. M. Crem.in,R. Kurtzwell, and J. A. Brandao 2003 Tue Search forFort St. Joseph (1691-1781) in Niles, Michigan. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 28(2): 107-144. O'Connor, T. 2000 TheArchaeology of Anima! Bones. Texas A&M University Press, College Station, TX.

Olsen, S. J. 1971 Zooarchaeology. InA McCaleb Module in Anthropology.Florida State University, Gainesville.

Orlove, B. and E. Schmidt 1995 Swallowing their Pride: Indigenous and IndustrialBeer in Peru and Bolivia. Theoryand Society 24(2):271-298. Parmelee, P. W. 1985 Identificationand Intepretation of ArchaeologicallyDerived Animal Remains. In TheAnalysis of Prehistoric Diets. Academic Press Inc. Paynter, R. and R. H. McGuire 1991 Tue Archaeology of Inequality: Material Culture, Domination, and Resistance. In TheArchaeology of Inequality, edited by R. H. McGuire and R. Paynter, pp. 1-27. Blackwell Publishers Inc., Malden, MA.

Peyser, J. L. 1978 TheFort St. Joseph Manuscripts: Chronological lnventoryand Translations. Niles Public Library,Niles, MI.

Reitz, E. J., I. R. Quitmyer,H. S. Hale, S. J. Scudder and E. S. Wing 1987 Application of Allometryto Zooarchaeology.American Antiquity 52(2):304-317. 95 Reitz, E. J. andC. M. Scarry 1985 Reconstructing Historie Subsistence with an Examplefrom Sixteenth CenturySpanish Florida. Society forHistorical Archaeology Special Publication No. 3.

Scott, E. M. 1985 French Subsistence at Fort Michilimackinac: TheClergy and the Traders. Mackinac Island State Park Commission.

1991 A Feminist Approach to Historical Archaeology: Eighteenth-Century Fur Trade Societyat Michilimackinac Historical Archaeology25(4) 42-53.

Shanks,M. andC. Tilley 1982 Ideology, Symbolic Power andRitual Communication: A Reinterpretation of Neolithic MortuaryPractices. In TheArchaeology of Contextual Meanings, edited by 1. Hodder, pp. 129-154. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,MA.

Shennan, S. (editor) 1994 Archaeological Approaches to Cultural Identity. Routledge, London.

Sleeper-Smith, S. 2001 Indian Women and French Men: Rethinking Cultural Encounters in the Western Great Lakes. University ofMassachusetts Press, Amherst, MA.

Tordoff, J. D. 1983 An Archaeological Perspective on the Organization of the Fur Trade in Eighteenth CenturyNew France. Ph.D. Dissertation,Department of Anthropology, MichiganState University, East Lansing.

Ulin, R. 1995 Invention and Representation as CulturalCapital: Southwest France WinegrowingHistory. American Anthropologist 97(3):519-527.

1996 Vintages andTraditions: An EthnohistoryofSouthwest French Wine Cooperatives. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.

Walthall, J. A. (editor) 1991 French Colonial Archaeology: Thelllinois Country and Western Great Lakes. edited volume. University oflllinois Press, Urbana.

Welch, P. D. and C. M. Scarry 1995 Status-Related Variation in Foodways in theMoundville Chiefdom. American Antiquity60(3):397-419. 96 White, R. 1991 TheMiddle Ground: Indians, Empires, and Republics in the Great LakesRegion, 1650-1815. Cambridge UniversityPress, Cambridge, MA.

Wise, S. 2001 An ExaminationofSocial ldentityand Material Culture in French Colonia/ North America. Master's Thesis, Departmentof Anthropology, WesternMichigan University, Kalamazoo.

Wylie, A. 1991 Gender Theory and theArchaeological Record: Why is there no Archaeology of Gender. In Engendering Archaeology: Women and Prehistory, edited by J. M. Gero andM. W. Conkey, pp. 31-54. Blackwell Publishers Inc., Maiden, MA.