|
|
From: Archaeology, Ethnicity, and Oral Tradition.
(C) 1994 John P. Staeck, Revised Version (C) 1998 John P. Staeck
Dissertation, Rutgers University-New Brunswick, Anthropology Program, 1994
*Note, the term Winnebago is used here because of its academic history. No disrespect or slander is intended to the Ho-Chunk, who possess and maintain a vibrant tradition worthy of respect.
Chapter 7
New Directions and Interpretations
Introduction
Drawing on previous discussions, this chapter presents a model for the emergence of Winnebago social structure and ethnic identity, as well as suggestions for identifying prehistoric and protohistoric Winnebago-affiliated archaeological sites. As discussed in chapter 2, ethnicity is a dynamic system of boundary-marking behaviors that derives from social structure. Consequently, it is not possible to discuss ways in which to identify late prehistoric Winnebago archaeological sites unless we also account for the dynamic nature of culture and the symbolic expressions of identity. Given the interpretations of Winnebago oral traditions presented in the previous chapter, it is essential that archaeologists attempt to address the adaptive nature of boundary-marking and symbolic expression. Failure to account for such factors ignores previously presented ethnographic evidence (e.g., chapters 3 and 6) and extant anthropological interpretations of culture, social structure, and identity (chapter 2).
The model presented below for interpreting prehistoric and early historic Winnebago archaeology derives its overarching theory from cultural evolutionary principles and is designed to account for the archaeological record of the Western Great Lakes region in light of the preceding chapters. In turn, the interpretation of the archaeological record is contextualized within cultural inferences derived from the analysis of Winnebago oral traditions. Archaeological research will be proposed to test the model presented here. This testing program will utilize concepts of style as defined in chapter 2.
As can be seen from the preceding chapter, Winnebago oral traditions seem to reflect a pattern of change. Based on the suggestions of Radin (1945, 1948) and Lurie (1960, 1974, 1978) as well as the discussions in chapter 6 of this volume, we can hypothesize about the general direction of such change, the shifts in social structure that these represent, and the salient identities that may have developed from these events. We may then build a program designed to test the accuracy of our construction archaeologically.
At the early end of the proposed pattern of social change, we find tales that seem to emphasize localized village life and emphasize cosmological heroes such as Sun and Morning Star. A higher social status for women than is ethnographically recorded is also indicated. Likewise, based on the movement of characters in the tales, either a matrilocal or uxorilocal residence pattern may also be inferred from the tales. Combined, the increased status afforded women and the inferred postmarital residence patterns may also be indicative of some form of matrilineality. These behaviors have been labeled matricentric.
As discussed in chapter 6, however, it is important to recognize that the traditions examined for this project might just as well be indicative of patricentric behaviors. However, for purposes of constructing the model and testing suggestions presented here, patricentric behavior is not considered. In part, this is because patricentric social organization if inherent in the null hypotheses (if matrilineality is rejected then we are left with either ambilineal or patrilineal descent possibilities; similar patterns also exist in discussing residence patterns). Significantly, over 50 years of archaeological investigation into identifying prehistoric Winnebago archaeological sites based on ethnographically derived models (i.e., searching for the material remains of a patrilineal and more or less egalitarian society) have failed. Given that a different social organization may be proposed for the late prehistoric and early historic Winnebago and their antecedents, it behooves archaeologists to consider testing such alternatives in an effort to break the current logjam.
Returning to the proposed pattern of change, later tales stress hierarchical social and political organization as well as the concentration of social power within three or four clans. This coincides with accounts of population aggregation and intergroup conflict. Figures such as Red Horn, Thunderbirds, and Water Spirits replace earlier figures such as Sun and Morning Star.
In the final segment of this inferred sequence, emphasis seems to shift toward patricentric behaviors (patrilineality, patrilocality or virilocality) and an increased reinforcement of population aggregation. Thunderbirds and Water Spirits remain in the myth complex but the former become symbols of Winnebago ideals while the latter begin to be associated with villainy or treachery. It is also during this last segment that Winnebago oral traditions record rapid depopulation through warfare and disease.
Based on the proposed seriation and extant archaeological data, a model for Winnebago ethnogenesis is presented and discussed in light of its archaeological testability. Discussions focus on the types of data archaeologists should seek to recover, the implementation of style as an analytical tool in place of normative typologies, and the implementation of intra- and inter-component analysis. A series of sites and regions are also identified as likely areas for such testing to take place.
Finally, prioritized tests are suggested as a method of testing the viability of the model discussed in the first portion of this chapter. Archaeological testing is required to assess whether or not the hypothesized sequence of traditions is generally correct.
A Model for Winnebago Ethnogenesis
The following model is a hypothetical construct. The discussion presented here is followed by consideration of archaeological testing programs that are designed to evaluate the model. The purpose of this presentation is to stimulate explorations of new avenues of research into understanding human lifeways in the past, that is, doing anthropology through archaeological techniques and strategies.
The sequence of events hypothesized for the development of Winnebago ethnic identity may be narrated as follows (figure 29):
1. Prior to ca. 900 A.D., the Western Great Lakes Region were populated by people residing in dispersed homesteads around weakly-defined or seasonal central villages or similar low-order central places. The dispersed residential units were probably based on kinship principles and, at least in the case of the Chiwere/Winnebago-speakers, may have been organized matrilocally or uxorilocally. Descent may have been calculated matrilineally. Subsistence centered around hunting and gathering, although some horticulture appears to have been present (see discussions later in this chapter). Aggregation at or around central loci was likely based on afinal relationships and social alliances rather on an broadly-defined ethnic identity (e.g. Barth 1969a)
2. Beginning about 900 A.D., stockaded villages and behaviors that suggest increasing territorial control developed (see discussions of Dragoo 1976 and Gramley 1988 below). Among some populations, those dependent upon access to resource-rich and environmentally diverse ecological zones (e.g., those areas utilized by people employing Oneota and, to a lesser extent, Effigy Mound material culture), villages probably reflect an aggregation of kinship-based units. These units reflect extended families which previously resided in neighboring residential units that aggregated together to effect increased subsistence efficiency. Allied kinship groups, those groups that habitually exchanged mates and perhaps pooled resources for economic and ritual purposes, formed networks of villages that probably tended to cluster spatially. Such clusterings may have adopted the process of more extensive identity marking and territorial control. Aggrandizing behavior (Hayden 1995, for example) is very likely present.
3. By ca. 1000 A.D., these clustered villages began to interact with one another with increasing frequency, to the exclusion of some other villages. Such interaction probably reflects increased pressure to maintain control over desired territories and may also reflect the increasing localization of allied networks of exchange, particularly of marriage partners. Mississippian technology begins to appear in increasing amounts at about this time throughout the Western Great Lakes region and this may reflect the migration of peoples or ideas from the south. Given the arguments discussed in chapter 5, the latter seems more likely, although some population movement may also have occurred. It is important to recall here that the diffusion of ideas does not necessarily change the social structure of people, only the material means through which they survive (see discussions in chapter 2). Consequently, the spread of Mississippian technology, especially from the Apple River region of Illinois into central Wisconsin, may have occurred through previously established lines of marriage and group interaction rather through total population migration. Given the discussion in chapter 6, it is likely that some of the people who eventually became the Winnebago were a part of these village networks and perhaps involved with the diffusion of Mississippian ideas.
4. By 1300 A.D., environmentally rich areas of the Western Great Lakes region have come under the control of closely allied networks of villages. Such alliances and the increasing cooperation between these villages probably resulted in the increasing social and political integration of the allied villages. Interchange between different clusters of allied villages may have occurred regularly, especially between clusters that traditionally spoke the same dialects and exchanged marriage partners. With the increased competition for resources in the Western Great Lakes region, however, some groups were already in the process of moving westward and perhaps southward. The Chiwere-Winnebago split is likely to have arisen from some elements of the language group electing to move further onto the Prairie Peninsula and eastern Plains while other elements opted to remain in their environmentally productive areas in the Western Great Lakes region. Contact between the groups undoubtedly continued, however, (Hall 1962; Springer and Witkowski 1982; see also chapters 3 and 5) but the increased geographic separation of the various elements resulted in increasing linguistic and ethnic distancing through time. This process marks the establishment of the bulk of the population that eventually developed Winnebago ethnic identity.
5. By ca. 1500 A.D., intense pressure existed between various aggregations of villages and other allied populations migrating into the region for resource-rich environments capable of supporting increasing population levels. The aggregation of villages had by this time responded, or were in the process of responding, to pressure through still increased integration and geographic isolation. The marking of territorial control and group identity presumably became key elements in survival and control strategies and is the mechanism through which strongly bounded ethnic identities developed in the region. It is at about this time that Winnebago, as well as perhaps Fox, Kaskaskia, Shawnee, and other ethnic identities became well-defined.
6. By 1670, the aggregated group representing the Winnebago had lost its hold on its environmental base and was forced to adopt radically new subsistence strategies. This loss of territory was accompanied by drastic population loss through both warfare and epidemic disease. The matter was further complicated by the distance that now separated the Winnebago from their Chiwere-speaking relatives, making it difficult for the Winnebago to replace lost population through intermarriage or to be reassimilated into the Chiwere-speaking populations. As a consequence of these events, Winnebago subsistence and its associated material culture, were adapted to survival in less desirable environments and for supporting more dispersed and lower populations. The social structure that defines current ethnic identity also began to adapt to the new survival strategies although such cultural elements remained resilient whenever possible. It is at this point that the culture of the Winnebago became frozen in the ethnographic present of the region.
Integration of Archaeological Theory with Oral Traditions
Chapter 2 discussed cultural evolutionary models for the development of social and political complexity. Price's (1981) arguments concerning the evolution of complexity among non-intensive food producers, populations using mixed horticultural and hunting-and-gathering subsistence strategies, was singled out as being particularly appropriate to the archaeological record of the Western Great Lakes region. This model identified eleven behaviors that Price predicted should be archaeologically visible given the mixed subsistence strategies noted above. To review from chapter 2, these behaviors are:
1. Overall population growth.
2. Larger co-resident populations in settlements (i.e., larger populations in villages as well as across the territory inhabited by the population).
3. Reduction in residential mobility.
4. Increased structuring of space.
5. Increased intergroup exchange.
6. Exploitation of previously unused floral and faunal species.
7. Technical innovations to increase productivity.
8. Increased ritual activity designed to unify and identify individual populations.
9. Formalization of lineages and sodalities to increase the efficiency of social and political integration.
10. Increased status differentiation as the result of the development of a managerial/privileged class.
11. Increased identity signaling between and within co-resident populations.
With these in mind, we can now return to the oral traditions reviewed and discussed in chapter 6. These tales can be compared to Price's list of archaeologically visible behaviors in order to assess what types of activities archaeologists might seek to concentrate on to identify past Winnebago and Chiwere-Winnebago social complexity and social structure. Here we need to establish what evidence exists in oral traditions that contradict or support Price's model and what ethnographically identified behaviors may be uncovered archaeologically. By linking the two lines of evidence, archaeological and ethnographic, archaeologists can better contextualize their research programs and focus on specific forms of behavior.
In the case of the model being prepared here, population growth is implied both in specific traditions and in a general trend within the traditions as a whole. Specific traditions, such as those accounting for the establishment of a Winnebago homeland at Red Banks, the siege of the large Winnebago village there at the hands of Algonquian-speaking foes, and the so-called "big village" tradition (Lurie 1960, 1972; Radin 1923; see also chapters 3 and 4), all make reference to large populations. Reference to a large Winnebago (or at least allied Siouan-speaking) population is also found in the accounts of Nicolet's 1634 visit to Wisconsin (Relations 1640; Lurie 1952; 1960; see also chapter 4). Further, as discussed in chapter 4, the Winnebago, or a group of which they were part (see Hall 1962), were sufficiently numerous to stall Ottawa trading expansion into the Western Great Lakes region and to stimulate Nicolet's journey to the area.
Specific references to large villages are made in the Red Horn tales and Blue Horn's Nephews. In these tales the characters function within large, multi-family villages. Red Horn and his companions, for instance, each marry into a village and become embroiled in large-scale conflicts with giants from the east (see Radin n.d., 1948). Similarly, Blue Horn arranges marriages for his adopted sisters with a prestigious and powerful warrior. In arranging the marriages, however, Blue Horn persuades the warrior to return all of his previous wives to their families; this suggests that multiple families were resident within or in the immediate vicinity of the village since this task was accomplished quickly. Similar depictions occur in The woman who loved her half-brother, The woman who married a snake, and The chief's daughter and the orphan.
The overall trend of tales, however, suggests that the presence of relatively large, multi-lineage villages represents a late adaptation among the people possessing the oral traditions examined here. Table 11 presents a seriation of traditions and, as discussed in chapter 6, those traditions representing large populations and villages occur near the inferred most recent end of the continuum. According to this proposed model, prior to this era, settlements are portrayed as smaller and as being organized around members of a single lineage. For example, in the tales The man who visited the Thunderbirds and The Morning Star, settlements include only the members of a single lineage and are small. In both tales the residential structures of the characters are separated from other, similarly-sized residential units.
In terms of cultural evolutionary theory, the tales suggest a transition from dispersed family residences to aggregated settlements consisting of multiple lineage groups. The trend from dispersed settlements toward population aggregation tends to coincide with other trends discussed below. In particular, these link with trends toward intensified use of land, the advent of horticultural fields, and to increasingly large-scale conflicts. These changes would plausibly also link to increased social and political pressure, factors envisioned as likely to have led to increased identity signaling and boundary-marking in the region (cf. Hodder 1982a; Nagata 1981; Nassanay 1992; Scarry 1992; Schortman 1989; Smith and Hally 1992; see also chapter 2 for further discussion of this topic).
This same trend addresses issues of larger co-resident populations within settlements, the reduction of residential mobility, and increased structuring of space (points 2 through 4 in Price's (1981) predictions; see above). As noted above, the transition from dispersed homesteads to villages is accompanied by increasing numbers of people residing within the confines of a single settlement. Although this does not necessarily reflect finite population growth throughout the region, it does reflect localized population aggregation and, in terms of archaeological visibility, such settlements are more easily identified than isolated homesteads.
Keeley (1988) has argued that localized population growth is as important a mechanism to increased population pressure as is population growth over a large area. In terms of the carrying capacity of a given area (the region surrounding the village that is logistically accessible to the village population), population growth reduces access to essential resources as population exceeds natural productivity. The factor that makes localized growth so important is a reduction in settlement mobility and access to other potential village sites capable of supporting the existing population. Hence, people are forced to address their needs within the confines imposed by a restricted territory and its finite carrying capacity.
Dragoo (1976) and Gramly (1988) have argued that it is this sort of mechanism that is responsible for the development of fortified villages throughout much of eastern North America during the Late Prehistoric era. According to this argument, fortified villages were constructed and periodically moved within a defined territory. The movement of villages served as a mechanism for marking and maintaining control over a territory sufficiently large to support the population resident in the village. In effect, village mobility within a circumscribed territory becomes a strategy designed both to allow horticultural fields to replenish following use and to exclude other populations from infringing upon the minimum amount of land required to support a village's residents.
Dragoo (1976), Gramly (1988), and Keeley (1988) (among others, e.g., Boserup 1965, 1981; Hastorf 1990) each argue that the effect of a system of territorial control and mobility within a restricted territory limits the range of responses a population has to increased stress. In a situation where territory is at a premium, especially those areas capable of supporting a substantial localized population, any increased strain, such as food shortages or warfare, upon a population must be addressed through means other than non-violent expansion (e.g., conquest of new areas or increased efficiency within existing territories). Hence, although villages and their populations may be mobile within a limited range, overall residential mobility decreases. As access to more territory is restricted through the actions of other populations, total mobility is decreased.
These arguments articulate with Price's (1981) fourth point, the increased structuring of space. The construction of palisaded villages and earthworks are two manners in which space is demarcated both for both members of a population and to outsiders (Charles and Buikstra 1983; Dragoo 1976; Gramly 1988). On one hand, such large and visible structures serve as outward representations of control and, in the case of palisades, military potential. Foreign groups moving into an area and encountering such structures would be served notice that other people live in the region and that any utilization of the demarcated territory might be contested.
On the other hand, the construction of palisades, earthworks, and other forms of distinctive architecture has been argued to serve as a structuring element within the population of builders (see, for example, Levi-Strauss 1953; Leach 1976; Harré 1978; Donley 1982; Donley Reid 1990). In North America, Mallam (1976) has argued that the construction of effigy mounds served as a unifying activity that bound elements of a population together. According to Mallam's arguments, Effigy Mound population dispersed across a large range during the winter and aggregated during the spring, summer, and fall. Mounds were constructed in the spring as a symbolic rebirth of the population and in order to bury those members that may have died during the winter.
Knight (1981) has argued that Mississippian pyramidal platforms were constructed in part for similar integrating purposes. Platforms were periodically abandoned or the structures which surmounted them relocated. When such earthworks were reused, the exposed surface from the old occupation was ritually buried under clay. New soil was then brought to the site and a new level was added to the structure. Beyond the symbolic burial and rebirth involved in this process, Knight argues that the construction activity served as a unifying force for the entire population, a symbolic unification of ideals and identity.
While it is unknown if the constructions of palisades may have served similar symbolic functions, researchers interested in community patterns have argued that the bounding of a community serves to structure both community and personal space (see, for example, Kent 1990). The fact that an exterior wall surrounds a settlement requires that those living within the settlement arrange their residential structures according to the bounded space (Eco 1980; Kent 1990a, 1990b). Further, such organization extends both to the patterns of residential structures and to the symbolic representation of power, identity, and/or cosmology through architecture (e.g., Ashmore 1990; Kus 1981, 1983; Lipe and Hegmon 1989; Kent 1990).
To return to Winnebago oral traditions, specific traditions reflect precisely this sort of symbolic structuring of space. In the Red Horn tales (Radin n.d., 1948), the daughter of a village chief is allowed to watch a foot race from a raised platform. This privilege is not afforded to other members of the population and the construction of the platform for this purpose suggests that space was allocated to socially or politically important individuals at community gatherings.
Of greater significance are the different accounts of the structure of a Winnebago village obtained by Radin (1923; see also chapters 3 and 6). As has been discussed previously, members of the above-earth moiety consistently provided Radin with one description of traditional village layout (figure 12), while members of the beneath-sky moiety provided Radin with a second, different account (figure 13). This volume has argued that the differences between the two accounts reflects different perceptions of power, authority, and access to social prestige (Levi-Strauss 1967a; see also chapter 6). At the same time, the distribution of symbolically important clans (see chapter 6) in both accounts reflects a shared vision of Winnebago social structure.
Intergroup exchange is one area where the Winnebago traditions do not strongly bear on the kinds of customs suggested by Price's model. Under such exchange, Price (1981) refers to the transfer of rare or desired goods between distinct populations. The traditions examined and discussed in chapter six mention only the exchange of marriage partners between groups. As noted in chapter 5, archaeological research in the Western Great Lakes region has produced numerous sites and site components that contain material remains from different archaeological traditions. Certainly it would be desirable for the traditions to recount some form of trading behavior or strategy. It has become common-place for archaeologists in the region to suggest that the appearance of non-local or foreign artifactual remains reflects trade (e.g., Stoltman 1991) or the presence of visiting groups (e.g., Hall 1962, n.d.; C. Mason 1976b).
Such a position, however, ignores the potential for archaeologists to uncover data about other meaningful exchange patterns, particularly those involving marriage partners (e.g., Levi-Strauss 1969:233-55; Radcliffe-Brown 1950; Fox 1967; see also Gero and Conkey 1991). Tales such as The woman who married a snake, The Red Horn, The man who married a Thunderbird, and The woman who loved her half-brother, to name but a few, provide information on marriage customs and the exchange of mates between settlements. Given that this type of behavior is recorded in the oral traditions and that trade is not featured prominently, archaeologists need to evaluate the implications that exchange of marriage partners might hold for the archaeological record.
For example, as discussed in chapter 2, Longacre (1964a, 1964b, 1966, 1968, 1970) and Hill (1965, 1966, 1968, 1970) have discussed the implications of post-marital residence patterns for archaeological patterning in the American Southwest. The work at Broken K Pueblo by Hill and Carter Ranch by Longacre originally suggested that ceramic style could be used to predict and map residence patterns (cf. Hodder 1978; Stanislawski and Stanislawski 1978; Plog 1983). The assumption underlying this particular work is that women produced pots prehistorically and that they were trained by family members. As a consequence of this training, potters from the same lineage are assumed to produce stylistically similar wares. Therefore, if post-marital residence patterns were matrilocal or uxorilocal, ceramics of similar style should tend to cluster together spatially since women remained in or around the homes of those people who trained them. If archaeological patterning reflected a more heterogeneous distribution of ceramics, then some other form of residence system would be indicated, probably patrilocality or virilocality. As noted previously, ceramics tended to cluster according to similar stylistic elements and therefore Hill and Longacre predicted that a matrilocal or uxorilocal residence pattern was employed in the past.
More recently Hodder (1978) has questioned the results of such studies on the basis of ethnographic accounts, most notably those which cite men as being the potters. More recent work into ceramic stylistic variability (Stanislawski and Stanislawski 1978; Longacre 1991; van der Leeuw 1991; Washburn 1989; London 1991; Graves 1991) has revealed that variables other than family training impact stylistic variability and need to be accounted for. In spite of these problems, however, the basic premise of Hill's and Longacre's work remains fundamentally acceptable. Increased concern toward factors such as contextual data for the gender of potters, resource availability, and changes in market or cultural preference must be undertaken in studies employing ceramic patterning in order to predict residence patterns.
In spite of the potential difficulties associated with predictions regarding the exchange and residence patterns of marriage partners, this sort of research has significant potential for identifying social structure and ethnic identity. As discussed in chapter 2, ethnic groups tend to be biologically self-perpetuating (Barth 1969a). The identification of marriage networks, therefore, may be one avenue into identifying and mapping elements of prehistoric and protohistoric ethnic identity. As noted previously, ethnographic evidence from eastern North America generally suggests females were the primary potters among native populations. Therefore, stylistic attributes might be used to map the distribution of ceramics across the Western Great Lakes region given increased attention to other limiting factors (cf. Washburn and Crowe 1988; Washburn 1977, 1978, 1983, 1989; Plog 1983; see also chapter 2).
The sixth point listed at the outset of this discussion deals with the exploitation of new resources. Like the situation with intergroup exchange, the Winnebago tales discussed in chapter 6 do not directly address the exploitation of new resources. There is a general trend, however, that suggests an increased emphasis on horticulture as time progressed. As noted on table 11, earlier tales such as The Morning Star and The man who married a Thunderbird depict a low-density residence pattern with a hunting-and-gathering economy. In these tales the residential structures of families are spread across the landscape and specific reference is made to males hunting. No mention is made of female economic activities in these tales. In later tales and traditions, reference is made to extensive horticultural fields. The "big village" tradition, for example, specifically mentions garden beds that were several arrow shots in length and width.
It is noteworthy, however, that, unlike the oral traditions of the American Southeast, where intensive horticulture was an important subsistence form (Swanton 1946; Hudson 1976, 1984; Underhill 1965), among the Winnebago there appear to be no prominent traditions reflecting the importance of maize, beans, or squash (at least in the data set used analyzed for this study), the crops principally associated with indigenous American food production. This may have particular relevance to archaeologists since Arzigian (1987) has demonstrated that the emergence of horticulture in the Western Great Lakes region extends back to at the latest ca. 200 A.D. Likewise, excavation of sites in the region suggest significant amounts of the food eaten on Mississippian and Oneota sites was cultivated (Sullivan 1990; Arzigian 1989; Tiffany 1988). On the other hand, the various Late Woodland traditions, including Effigy Mound, have yielded little or limited evidence of food production (Mason 1981; see also chapters 2 and 5). The questions that arise here are: (1) why there are so few references to food production in Winnebago tales and, (2) whether the absence of such references suggests a link to Late Woodland traditions, specifically Effigy Mound. This matter is addressed below.
As with exploitation of new resources, technical innovations do not play prominent roles in the traditions examined for this volume. With the exception of the trend toward village settlements and the potential for the development of stockade walls and earthworks for signaling identity and defense, there are no references to technical innovation in the traditions. This may indicate that no significant alterations in technical capacities occurred during the Late Prehistoric and Protohistoric eras for the Winnebago and their predecessors or it may simply reflect that any such innovations failed to be included in the oral traditions.
The absence of such references may, however, prove significant when the oral traditions are compared to the archaeological record. During the Late Prehistoric era, some Oneota sites began using ridged field systems apparently in an effort to maximize their crop production. The production of ridged fields is a labor-intensive undertaking and, if such investment did in fact increase crop yields, this may reflect an important technological innovation. Given the previous discussion regarding the lack of traditions for Winnebago food production and the absence of references to technical innovations related to food production, the importance of such undertakings to the Winnebago is questioned. While it is possible that food production was a part of the subsistence base for the Winnebago or their predecessors, it seems unlikely that it was perceived as a significant endeavor and therefore failed to find expression in the social organization and ideology of these people. Had this been the case, as it was in the American Southeast, references to planting ceremonies, preparation of fields, or the presence of symbolic representations of produced foods should be present in oral traditions. As noted at the outset of this discussion, such elements are poorly represented in the traditions examined for this volume. Unfortunately, the nature of the information we have available to us (i.e., Radin's notes) prevents us from knowing whether this absence is truly culturally significant or an anomaly resulting from Radin's strategies for collecting data.
The final four points on Price's list (increased ritual activity, formalization of lineages and sodalities, status differentiation, and increased identity signaling) are strongly represented in Winnebago oral tradition. To begin with those points discussed at greatest length in chapter 6, the traditions examined for this volume included numerous, repeated, and consistent references to status differentiation, clan identity, and the use of material symbols to represent these identities. Differentiation occurs both horizontally, that is between different clans and moieties, and vertically, that is between elite or privileged clans and non-privileged clans. The symbolic placement of the lodges of important clans as well as the symbolic association of these clans with particular ideological and cosmological concepts reflects the interrelatedness of the formalization of lineages, the advent of status differentiation, and the increased signaling of ethnic identity.
Increased ritual activity is most clearly represented in Radin's (1945) discussion of the origin of the Medicine Rite. Radin argues that the Medicine Rite was borrowed by the Winnebago from neighboring Algonquian-speaking peoples. The ceremony and its corresponding suite of beliefs and lore, however, were not simply adopted in completed form by the Winnebago but rather represented a reinterpretation of existing ceremonialism. In particular, Radin cites the Night-spirit society and the Snake clan feast as being identified by some Winnebago as the precursors to the Medicine Rite.
It is only superficially that its organization is really unique, for both in the snake clan feast and the Night-spirit ritual society there are four positions just as in the Medicine Rite. The resemblance between the latter two are, in fact, so marked that we can well understand why some Winnebago regarded the Night-spirit society as the model for the Medicine Rite. (Radin 1945:70)
As Radin notes later in that same discussion, the Winnebago internalized the Medicine Rite and adapted it to their particular views and beliefs rather than vice versa. This is significant because, as argued previously in this volume, such adaptation is one mechanism for the definition and perpetuation of ethnic identity. Thus, in this sense, the sequence of ritual performances and the intensification of belief systems through the shift from one ritual complex to the next reflects the sort of intensification Price (1981) predicts.
Also of significance are the emphases placed on war bundles and the Victory Dance, Hok'ixe're (Radin 1923; Lurie 1978). Although the war bundles and Victory Dance are distinct elements of Winnebago identity they both reflect an emphasis on warfare and conflict. As Lurie (1978) notes, war bundles and the powers associated with them are among the most important possessions of the Winnebago. The creation of new bundles involves a series of ritual offerings to supernatural forces associated with warfare and can be undertaken only as a consequence of direction from the supernatural. Hence, the creation of war bundles is a symbol of Winnebago interaction with the supernatural and, as such, becomes an important point of identity marking.
Similarly, the performance of the Victory Dance is a celebration of Winnebago triumph. On the most symbolic level, such celebrations can be seen as the vindication of Winnebago ideals and belief systems. It is interesting to note that the host of the ceremony allows his sisters, aunts, and nieces to select the trophies (scalps) that are always bestowed upon them as gifts. These women then dance with the trophies tied around their necks. At the same time, however, the members of the entire community participate in the celebration and the dance serves as a unifying activity for the community as a whole (Radin 1923).
In overview, phenomena such as population increase, increased definition of space, and the reduction of residential mobility should be examined archaeologically since these events are inferred from Winnebago traditions. This suite of traits may be reflected in the process of intensifying land use around Lake Winnebago and Lake Koshkonong during the later prehistoric era. Similarly, they may also be reflected in changes within more westerly archaeological manifestations, such as the origin and spread of village- and mound-building traditions in and around the Red Wing, Minnesota area, the Apple River, Illinois area, and the area around Effigy Mounds National Monument in northeastern Iowa. Interestingly, all the areas contain substantial Oneota occupations and both the Red Wing and Apple River areas are associated with Mississippian archaeological manifestations prior to Oneota florescence. The implications of this are discussed below.
A second suite of behaviors reflected in oral traditions is less archaeologically visible but potentially more important. Behaviors surrounding the formalization of lineages, increased ritual activity, the emergence of status differentiation, and increased identity signaling are all key elements in the establishment of salient identities. Unfortunately, without data pertaining to the organization of archaeological sites, differentiation within households, and the identification of structures associated with rituals, it is impossible to undertake an investigation of such behaviors. It is here that archaeologists in the Western Great Lakes region have a significant shortfall of data with which to work, the recent excavations at the Gottschall site being a notable exception. Consequently, it is in this area that we must begin to concentrate more of our efforts.
For the model presented above, the lack of such data is critical. The model must remain a hypothetical construction until data is collected that can be used to evaluate it. For now, the model is constructed solely upon the limited archaeological information we have, most of which pertains to the first data set outlined above, and upon data derived from analysis of the oral traditions. Consequently, what is presented here represents the first step in a large-scale program that requires comprehensive testing on multiple sites. There is likely to be no easy solution to the problems of identifying social structure and ethnic identity in the past, or to uncovering the social forces that led to the generation of such phenomena. Nonetheless, in order for researchers to better understand the past and to undertake anthropological interpretations of past behaviors, such issues need to be confronted. The alternative is to continue to pursue complicated customs and developments through less complex and integrative research programs, a practice that can only yield results commensurate with the level of our inquiries rather than shedding new light on the complexities of past human beings and communities.
Discussion of Social Structure and Dates Used in the Model
As advanced in the preceding model, prior to ca. 900 A.D. the Western Great Lakes region was populated principally by small groups of people organized along kinship lines. For the Siouan-speaking populations, in particular the Chiwere- and Winnebago-speakers, descent may have been calculated matrilineally. Post-marital residence patterns may have been matrilocal or uxorilocal with males moving to the lodges or to the areas around the lodges of their wives' family. Evidence suggesting this type of culture is discussed in chapter 6.
The date of 900 A.D. is identified here because it reflects the approximate beginning of identifiable Oneota subsistence strategies in the region and the commensurate changes in lifeways these brought (Dobbs 1982). The presence of fortified villages as well as the intensive exploitation of, and control over, rich ecotones marks the advent of pressure resulting from restricted access to resources in the region. Further, given arguments for the participation of Algonquian-speakers in Oneota lifeways (see chapter 5), the emergence of Oneota in the Western Great Lakes region could also represent the advent of population pressure due to the migration of more easterly Native American populations toward the west. This may also mark the advent of hostilities between Siouan-speakers, particularly those which were later identified as the Winnebago, and those Algonquian-speakers later identified as the Fox, Illini, and Ottawa. Testing such possibilities, however, requires that archaeologists develop ways to establish ethnic identity through material cultural remains.
At approximately 900 A.D., however, some forms of pressure resulted in the development of Oneota life ways. The specific types of pressures that may have been manifested are discussed at length below. It is likely that Rindos' (1984) coevolutionary sequence of pressures may be the most powerful and accurate explanatory model applicable to the Western Great Lakes region. O'Brien (1987) has adapted the model to discuss Middle Woodland developments in central and western Illinois and, although his efforts have met with varying degrees of success, many researchers agree that the Rindos' model as applied by O'Brien has the potential to yield valuable insights into the rise of social complexity in the region because it seeks to account for a wide range of factors that ultimately influence the development of social complexity (see, for example, the reviews in Current Anthropology 28:189-94).
According to the coevolutionary approach, a series of pressures, including reduction in land available for subsistence, competition for natural resources, and population growth, are exerted upon or perceived by a people. This population responds to the pressures on multiple levels, in effect entering into a complex feedback circuit similar to those commonly constructed in human ecology (e.g., Steward 1955; Vayda and Rappaport 1968). This system of actions and reactions results in populations either (1) adopting progressively more complex levels of social organization and integration in order to continue to respond to their changing environment, or (2) undergoing dissolution, in which case the group disappears from the archaeological record. The feedback is that, as the population increases its efficiency in obtaining and managing food, it also tends to modify the natural and social environments in increasingly dramatic fashions. Thus, an upward spiral of economic and social complexity is produced.
Braun and Plog (1982) have argued that populations initially develop responses to pressures that are minimally disruptive to social structure. Such responses tend to be specific, inexpensive, rapid, and easily activated. If these initial responses do not bring about the desired change, which Braun and Plog imply is a return to the extant status quo, then more detailed and expensive responses are developed. Such responses may ultimately serve to alter noticeably not only those aspects of culture designed to cope with the perceived pressures, but all those areas of culture that interrelate with the affected pressure-response mechanisms. In effect, as noted in chapter 2, elaborate alterations to any one aspect of culture tend to effect change via a rippling through all related aspects.
For our purposes here, the development of Oneota lifeways represents such a radical alteration to a cultural system. As discussed in chapter 5, Oneota differs significantly in many ways from generalized Late Woodland, Effigy Mound, and Mississippian material cultures. Since no evidence exists for Oneota material culture to have been imported or diffused into the Western Great Lakes region, archaeologists are left to infer that Oneota reflects the development of an indigenous lifeway in the region (e.g., Gibbon 1969, 1972).
By about this same time (900 A.D.), Effigy Mound material culture was florescing in the Western Great Lakes Region while Mississippian material culture was developing in central and southern Illinois. These systems also represent distinct ways of life that should correspond to subsistence systems and how people have to meet their basic needs. It is here that archaeologists tend to continue to extend their functionalist paradigms to the different material cultures and extend immutable cultural identity to those populations involved in the different material cultures (see chapter 5).
It is also here that we need to employ concepts of ethnic identity (developed in chapter 2) in place of normative cultural typologies as represented by the Midwest Taxonomic System and similar constructions. Rather than entrench the identities associated with the different archaeological manifestations, we need to view them as the functional constructions they are, that is as systematic responses designed cope with meeting the basic needs of people. As discussed in chapter 2, such responses can function only as gross indicators of ethnic identity and are not specific indicators of ethnic and cultural genesis.
As pressure increased in the Western Great Lakes region at about 900 A.D., the localized populations began to coalesce in order to address more effectively these pressures. These coalescences are hypothesized to have taken place along established lines of interaction, that is between discrete kinship groups that had previously established exchange networks (cf. Gibbon 1969). The Winnebago myths analyzed in chapter 6 suggest that alliances established along affinal lines were particularly important as opposed to any that may have been related to the acquisition of rare or exotic materials. As Braun and Plog (1982) argue, exchange between closely allied groups tends to reflect the exchange of utilitarian materials rather than more elaborate display items. Hodder's (1982a) ethnographic work supports precisely this type of exchange; ethnic identity is mobilized between groups that maintain a large social distance while groups allied through marriage and sharing similar salient identities tend to integrate their material cultures more thoroughly.
For our purposes then, the initial strides toward formalizing an ethnic and political identity for the Winnebago are postulated to have developed as groups related through marriage increased cooperation. This is argued to have led to the aggregation of the different kinship groups into close proximity and eventually into villages. Borrowing from models developed for Iroquoian aggregation (Niemczycki 1984; Whallon 1968), villages were established in close proximity to one another. Each village may have originally consisted of single kinship groups but as pressures increased, larger villages consisting of multiple kinship groups formed.
In order for such population aggregation to be successful, the system of villages needed to be located in relatively rich environmental zones that could produce sufficient amounts of food for multiple villages over relatively long periods of time. Archaeologically, we know villages were occupied for a number of successive years and then abandoned, only to be reoccupied at a later date. Dragoo (1976) and Gramly (1988) have characterized this pattern as leading to territorial control and increasing intergroup conflict. This may account, in part, for the emergence of stockaded villages in the Western Great Lakes region, and may have increased pressure on extant populations to control territory by further limiting mobility.
Given the work of Haaland (1969) and Nagata (1981) on identity, it is unlikely that the initial formation of village structures resulted from the formalization of ethnic identity. Rather, the villages would have served to concentrate resources and populations in specific areas. In order for the village residents to survive, cooperation between kinship groups and neighboring villages became essential. Since access to productive environmental zones implicitly became an important element in village location, and competition for these zones is suggested archaeologically, control over these zones became increasingly important (Dragoo 1976; Gramly 1988). Likewise, as argued above (see chapter 2 on ethnic identity, cultural evolutionism [e.g., Sahlins 1960; Sahlins and Service 1968; Service 1962, 1971], and social integration [e.g., Adams 1989; Longacre 1966, 1968; Whallon 1968]), these neighboring villages are argued to reflect populations related by marriage and thus likely to cooperate. As this cooperation became intensified, in the forms of increased access to basic resources, exclusion of competing groups from these resources, and the frequent exchange of mates, the residents of the villages increasingly began to share social organization and identity (e.g., Barth 1969a; Whallon 1968; Longacre 1966). Importantly, this should be reflected in intensified identity signaling and the development of parallel stylistic expressions in material culture.
In the case of the Winnebago, this posited trend would have culminated in the formation of a series of allied villages. This step reflects the formation of an ethnic heartland (perhaps as reflected by the legend of the village at Red Banks, the village being a symbolic representation of a homeland), as well as the emergence of a unified Winnebago social structure and its concomitant salient identities. Even in the situation discussed above, the allied villages could easily maintain local autonomy, probably through kinship lines. As more kinship groups were forced to aggregate and cooperate, however, some form of intercommunity social structure needed to evolve in order to assure mutual survival. In this process, the autonomy of kinship groups needed to be sacrificed in order to assure the survival of all of the allied kinship groups. Longacre (1966) argued that the development of such structures reflect the development of social and political identity in the American Southwest (cf. Adams 1989). Service (1971) has included a similar process in the development of non-state societies as they develop toward state societies. Significantly, Salzer (1992) has suggested this may be one of the functions of the reported shrine at the Gottschall site.
According to their oral traditions, the Winnebago represent a coalescence of existing ethnic groups. That is, each clan recorded by Radin (1923) maintains its own origin legends that recount the aggregation of these units at Red Banks. It is this coalescence tradition that suggests the Winnebago, per se, formed relatively late and adopted the system of allied villages described above.
Given the lack of entrenched ethnic identity at this point in prehistory and the limited abilities of archaeologists to identify ethnic groups in the prehistoric past, the specific identities of the groups that coalesced to form the Winnebago are unknown. However, the oral traditions reviewed for this volume provide some clues as to the material cultural affiliations of at least some of these groups. The presence of Mississippian iconography and symbolism suggests that at least some of the people who originally coalesced were influenced by these Mississippian ideas. The specific oral traditions note that these people were part of the avian clan or clans and most probably are represented ethnographically by the Thunderer clan. Their prestige derives from contact with people who had themselves been contacted by Thunderbird spirits and taught special rites, such as the keeping of a sacred flame.
This knowledge passed from the west toward the east according to the traditions. It is unclear whether this is a reference to a historical event, or instead a metaphorical allusion to knowledge deriving in the west, the land of the sacred, the place where Earthmaker lives, and therefore being sacred. It is possible that the reference functions on both levels. In this case, the diffusion of knowledge and ideas, and perhaps people as well, from the west to the east may reflect the importance of the Mississippi River. As noted in chapters 5, strong Mississippian influence has been noted in northwestern Illinois adjacent to the Mississippi River and on both sides of the Mississippi River in southeastern Minnesota and southwestern Wisconsin.
Hence, it is possible that the presence of hierarchical organization and imagery may represent ideas derived from Mississippian culture. On a more functional level, hierarchical organization may also represent the formation of controlling mechanisms designed to integrate the different kinship groups now encompassed under the Winnebago identity. Such elite or proto-elite salient identities represented the core of the culture group and appear to have been central to the organization of all constituent parts of the population. Precisely how hierarchical division developed is unclear, although the use of symbols to reinforce power is evidenced in the oral traditions discussed previously (e.g., the link between supernatural beings and power in the forms of Thunderbirds and Water Spirits and the power vested in the corresponding Thunderer and Water Spirit clans). Radin's (1945) argument for the emergence of a priestly elite class suggests that control over religious functions was the primary avenue of control for the empowered groups. Alternatively, given the evidence that a single avian clan may once have existed and eventually fissioned into four distinct clans, numeric superiority of one or more of the kinship groups forming the culture group may also account for the establishment of a hierarchy. More likely, a combination of the various avenues of power development was involved in the formation of hierarchically ranked clans.
Noteworthy is the fact that glottochronological data discussed in chapters 3 and 4 suggests a close connection between the Winnebago and the Chiwere-speakers through the period between 1000 A.D. and 1500 A.D. The postulated formation of a distinct ethnic identity on the part of the Winnebago through the means outlined above articulates well with Ioway, Oto, and Winnebago traditions for the fissioning of the combined Winnebago-Chiwere population. According to these traditions, the Winnebago elected to remain in the area that is now Wisconsin while the Chiwere-speakers elected to move westward. That a choice may have been required at all suggests that some pressure or incentive existed which required movement or entrenchment. The formal fissioning between the two groups, then, may reflect the choice of the Winnebago to remain in a system of fortified villages, controlling access to a limited but rich environment, while the Chiwere-speakers elected to leave the region. As demonstrated by later Winnebago-Chiwere relations (Hall 1962, n.d.), this split did not result in the complete dissolution of contact and relations between the now separated groups. At this time it is unclear as to what this contact means archaeologically. This matter and its permutations are discussed at length below.
Following this initial formation of an identity, the precursors to the ethnographically identified Winnebago underwent a series of events and military defeats that profoundly affected the way in which researchers commonly conceive of these people today. As discussed in chapters 3 and 6, the Winnebago describe a tradition of intensive warfare with Algonquian-speaking peoples. This warfare resulted in their ultimate defeat and large-scale decimation. This defeat is coupled with evidence of epidemic disease that is represented in both written (Tanner 1987; Dobyns 1983; Ramenofsky 1987) and oral traditions (Radin 1923, n.d.; Lurie 1952, 1960, 1978). The combination of warfare and disease appears to have radically realigned Winnebago social structure and, as a consequence, their ethnic identity as well.
The model presented here argues that the Winnebago, or their immediate antecedents, attempted to maintain control over the resources necessary to perpetuate their lifeways but were ultimately unable to do so. As a consequence, the Winnebago were forced to withdraw from the environment and subsistence pattern they had sought to retain. Given the massive disruptions associated with the catastrophic war and epidemic disease, the Winnebago adapted by returning to settlement and subsistence patterns based more thoroughly on kinship principles. Populations became mobile hunter-gatherers and sought to employ a variety of environments that were relatively uncontested, including those in northern Wisconsin. During this process, intermarriage took place between Winnebago and various Algonquian-speaking populations (Lurie 1978) and patrilineality became the preferred method for reckoning descent.
Such dramatic reorganization can be attributed in part to the collapse of the subsistence and settlement base around which the Winnebago had organized themselves. A second factor that probably contributed substantially to this reorganization was the inability of the depopulated Winnebago to meet all of the necessary social obligations required to maintain their social structure according to their traditional methods. In this case, the adoption of patrilocal and patrilineal social organization may have helped to integrate the surviving Winnebago with their Algonquian-speaking affinal kin groups.(1) Lurie (1978) has suggested that such an amalgamation of systems may be at least partially responsible for the development and changes within the Winnebago clan system as recorded historically (Lurie 1978; see also chapters 3 and 6).
In terms of the archaeological record of the Western Great Lakes region, the reorganization of the Winnebago after their initial florescence may help to account for many of the problems researchers have had in identifying prehistoric Winnebago populations. The model for reorganization proposed above is postulated to represent a relatively recent event (see chapters 3 and 6) and, as a consequence, the social structure associated with this reorganization does not have great time depth. Instead of developing research strategies designed to unearth a primarily hierarchical, matrilocal/uxorilocal, and, perhaps, matrilineal archaeological pattern representing the Winnebago, archaeologists have been looking for some form of primarily egalitarian, patrilineal, patrilocal/virilocal pattern. In this sense the direct historical approach has led archaeologists astray in their attempts to unearth evidence of the Winnebago past.
This situation has been further exacerbated by the assumption that material cultures define the extent and identity of culture groups. As discussed in chapter 2, Haaland (1969) and Nagata (1981) have demonstrated that ethnic identity based on economic principles can be malleable. In the case of Haaland, Fur agriculturists readily adopted the material trappings of Baggara nomads when it was economically advantageous for them to do so. Although these nomadized Fur lived in Baggara-like camps and used Baggara technology, their stylistic preferences remained Fur. Likewise, they still interacted with their Fur kinsfolk who retained their Fur ethnic identity (Haaland 1969). For various reasons, including economic failure, Fur who have adopted Baggara ethnicity can reassume their original ethnic identity and return to their village lifestyles. In this sense, their visible signs of ethnic identity are not reflective of their professed cultural identity and their belief systems. In effect, macroscale patterns of material culture such as subsistence are shallow indicators of ethnic identity.
Given that archaeological cultures as constructed in the Western Great Lakes region, and throughout much of the world, are more representative of subsistence and economic ways of life than of ethnic identity (see chapter 2), assumptions of direct correlations between macroscale patterns of material culture and ethnic identity are unwarranted. It is possible, perhaps even probable, that the Late Prehistoric lifeways of the Western Great Lakes region represent a similar situation to that discussed by Haaland for the Fur and Baggara. People may have been able to shift between, for example, Oneota and Effigy Mound material patterning depending upon their perceived needs and situations. Similarly, the adoption of Mississippian behaviors by Woodland populations in northern Illinois as postulated by Hall (1986, 1991) may reflect a similar transition. At a later date, when their needs had changed substantially, this Mississippianized population might easily revert back to another method of social organization and identity marking, probably making such a transition along kinship lines since these tend to be important principles for organization and alliance (Murdock 1949; Radcliffe-Brown 1940, 1950; Evans-Pritchard 1940).
An understanding of the distinction between archaeological culture and ethnic group is essential to archaeologists concerned with practicing anthropology in the past. While we are limited to the material remains of the past with the occasional presence of rich ethnographic material, as is the case in this volume, we must remind ourselves that artifacts do not interact, people do. Hence, we need to move past artificial typologies and constructions of cultural and ethnic identity based solely upon the relatively malleable evidence from macroscale or gross morphological assessments of material remains and seek to explore more meaningful avenues of research. In particular, the application of microscale elements of style may prove especially useful for such purposes. For our purposes here, and as will be discussed later in this chapter, these microscale applications of style include the internal organization of domestic structures, the means and tools for applying decoration to material remains, and the distribution of such elements within and between archaeological sites.
Multiple Trajectory versus Single Trajectory Models of Cultural Evolution
The next element of the model that needs to be dealt with here is that of multiple trajectory and multiethnic evolution, that is, that the Winnebago represent an aggregation of preexisting populations that united in response to perceived needs for survival. As noted in the previous section, this concept contradicts existing ideas that seek to trace a single ethnic unit, the Winnebago, into the past via direct historical methodologies. The Winnebago oral traditions suggest that such a method would not yield good results because there was no single identity to trace until the Late Prehistoric or Protohistoric eras.
Rather than rely on the notion of a single developmental trajectory for the evolution of ethnic groups, it is probably more profitable to envision the emergence of a single identity as the result of two factors: (1) the coalescence of existing populations that were already cooperating in some form of networked exchange system into a single unit in response to increasing pressures for survival, and (2) the labeling of that group in written records, thus creating an ethnographic present. Hence, if we accept Lurie's (1978) proposition that the Winnebago were in a critical state of social reorganization when described historically and ethnographically, we can reject the notion that the behaviors they manifest were necessarily of great antiquity. By so doing we also eliminate the tendency to search for a single archaeological signature that matches the ethnographically recorded system of the Winnebago; such a system simply will not be present.
The problem becomes one of accounting for why dispersed populations, each probably maintaining its own identity, should coalesce into a larger population and through what mechanisms this occurred. Here we must turn our attention to the first point made above and the framework of cultural evolutionism.
Evolutionary Pressures
As discussed in the theoretical underpinnings chapter, Sahlins and Service have argued strongly for pre-state socio-political organizations to have functioned through kinship lines. In such a system each kinship group provides for the physical and spiritual needs of its members. Interaction occurs between these kinship units through the exchange of mates and occasional economic or military cooperation.
According to these cultural evolutionary models, in situations where pressure, whether environmental, political, military, population, or a combination of each, exerts itself on these dispersed kin groups, these populations have a limited range of options open to them by way of response. They may either become increasingly efficient to meet the increased pressure, move away from the pressure, integrate with other groups in order to increase effective manpower to address the pressure, or disintegrate. We will return to this discussion shortly. For now, though, given the socially organizing nature of kinship as discussed by Murdock (1949), Evans-Pritchard (1940), and Radcliffe-Brown (1940, 1950), the option of voluntary disintegration of kin groups may be rejected as unlikely.
In the case of the Winnebago, we know pressure existed during the Late Prehistoric and Protohistoric eras through oral traditions of warfare and disease. Earlier tales suggest conflict was also present in the region prior to the massive depopulation episodes noted above. As documented in the preceding chapter, several Winnebago tales mention conflict between villages or, failing direct village conflict, the presence of raiding parties of warriors.
Archaeological evidence suggests similar conflicts existed in and around the Western Great Lakes region prior to these late dates and that some form of pressure was exerted on populations in the region as early as 1000 A.D. In western Illinois, Milner and his colleagues (1991a, 1991b) have documented frequent events of violent death evident in Oneota skeletal remains dating to about 1300 A.D. Throughout the region, the palisades surrounding Oneota and Mississippian villages argue for the existence of some forms of pressure that resulted in the perceived need for defensive mechanisms prior to Milner's evidence from Illinois. The fact that palisades did indeed function in defensive roles is attested to by the apparent burning of the stockade at Aztalan (see chapter 5).
The migrations of Algonquian-speaking populations from the east (Michigan, Indiana, and Ohio) may also have played a significant role in increasing pressures on populations residing in the Western Great Lakes region. As discussed in chapter 5, the timing and location of Algonquian migrations into the region have been debated for over half a century. It is clear that Early Historic era Iroquois aggression elsewhere in the Great Lakes region caused massive population movements into the Western Great Lakes region (Tanner 1987; Lurie 1960; Bauxer 1978; Stone and Chaput 1978). McKern (1929, 1945), however, has suggested that Algonquian-speaking populations began to enter the region much earlier, during the Late Prehistoric era and coincident with the development of Effigy Mound material culture. In northern Illinois, there has been a strong tendency to associate Upper Mississippian remains, particularly Huber and Fisher Phase ceramics, with Algonquian-speaking populations such as the Shawnee (Orr 1949; Griffin 1943; but see also Brown 1990) or Miami/Kaskaskia (Faulkner 1972; M. Brown 1975; Brown 1961). More recently Brown (1990) has criticized the specific attributions of ethnic identities (i.e., Kaskaskia, Miami, and Shawnee) to the archaeological record in the region but he does not question the association of the remains with Algonquian-speaking populations.
It appears likely that Algonquian-speaking populations were in the Western Great Lakes region during the Late Prehistoric and Protohistoric eras in sufficient numbers to produce substantial archaeological sites and site complexes. The defensive nature of Oneota sites and the evidence for large-scale violence in Illinois discussed above suggest that the presence of these groups in the region contributed to population pressure. Specifically, the association of Oneota remains with sedentary villages, horticultural fields and, later, raised fields, as well as a mixed hunting and foraging economy, may have exerted stress both in terms of the total numbers of people that contacted one another regularly and in terms of access to finite resource bases. As noted in chapter 5, Oneota settlements tend to be located in environmentally diverse areas that afford access to fertile land for food production as well as hunting and foraging resources. Competition for control of areas of this nature may also have exerted increased pressure on populations in the region. Further archaeological testing is required to demonstrate this on the scale of the Western Great Lakes region as a whole, however.
The specific forms that pressure took in the Western Great Lakes region are less clear than evidence suggesting their presence. As discussed in chapters 4 and 5, however, some events seem to be likely reflections of increasing social, political, religious, and economic pressure on populations living in the region during the Late Prehistoric and Protohistoric eras. Such events include continued westward migration of Algonquian-speaking populations into the region, the florescence of Mississippian culture to the south and its subsequent spread into the region, the development of Oneota lifeways, and the rise and fall of the Neo-Atlantic climatic episode. Given the overlapping timing of these events and the interrelatedness of horticulture and agriculture with climate, it is likely that these events combined to varying degrees to provoke localized responses to new and dynamic pressures. In this sense, the pressures postulated here may be subsumed within the rubric of coevolutionary pressures as described by O'Brien (1987) for the Middle and early Late Woodland periods in central Illinois and eastern Missouri. To a lesser extent, Hart (1990) has suggested a similar approach in modeling the origins of Oneota agriculture. Hart, however, employs what he calls "neo-Malthusian" arguments, emphasizing the role localized population growth plays in increasing the need for increased food production.
Specific Suggestions for Testing
It is useful to begin this discussion by briefly reviewing some of the basic tenets of this volume. First, the standard typological concepts used to define archaeological cultures are incapable of addressing questions of salient identity in the archaeological record. Although existing typologies are useful for heuristic purposes, they have also been interpreted to correspond directly to ethnographically-known culture and ethnic groups and therefore have become the basis for archaeological interpretations of identity. Based on ethnographic work focusing on social structure and the roles such structure plays in defining ethnic identity, it has been argued that archaeologists need to focus their attention on smaller-scale material patterns, especially upon stylistic variability in artifact patterns. By stylistic variability, I mean both the execution of mechanical tasks (e.g., Hill 1977, 1978) and culturally defined selections of materials and decorative motifs involved in material construction (e.g., Brainerd 1942; Conkey 1978, 1980; Conkey and Hastorf 1990; Washburn 1977, 1978, 1983, 1989; Sackett 1973, 1092; Wiessner 1983, 1984; Plog 1978, 1980, 1990; see also chapter 2).
The purpose of shifting the emphasis from using generalized, descriptive typologies to examinations of more detailed patterning in defining ethnic identity is to more accurately identify the distribution of materials made by a specific group of people or perhaps even a single individual. By identifying the movement of material produced by a single group of people, or at the largest level, the materials produced by a group of people involved in close interaction, archaeologists can identify prehistoric and protohistoric patterns of interaction. Since these patterns are identified at the sub-typological level or across typological boundaries, researchers are freed from the bounding influence placed upon them by the implicit assumption that each material culture, identified primarily on the basis of normative ceramic typologies, represents a discrete ethnic or culture group. Ethnographic evidence suggests people may change material cultures (thus appearing to have changed ethnic affiliation) but maintain their social structure and continue to function in the economic and social networks into which they were born. Such shifts in identity are usually related to subsistence and other economic strategies, behaviors that can change according to real and perceived pressures exerted by the natural and social environments (Haaland 1969; see also chapter 2 and the preceding section of this chapter). The presence of such shifts and the inability of current archaeological paradigms to account for such behaviors is argued to account for the inability of researchers to document the presence of historically defined ethnic groups in the archaeological record. At a more abstracted but equally significant level, such paradigmatic shortfalls are obstacles blocking archaeologists from applying more sophisticated concepts drawn from cultural anthropology designed to interpret human behavior in the Late Prehistoric and Protohistoric eras.
A more comprehensive approach needs to be adopted in order for archaeologists to address the issues raised above and to test the model for Winnebago ethnic origins presented above. The specific elements of such an approach include:
1. The use of stylistic analysis to identify the execution of design elements on material remains as well as the cultural preferences for the materials used in the construction of material culture (e.g., Conkey 1978, 1980; Conkey and Hastorf 1990; Sackett 1973, 1977, 1982, 1990; Washburn 1977, 1978, 1983, 1989; Washburn and Crowe 1988; Wiessner 1983, 1984, 1988).
2. The identification of intrasite and intracomponent distributions of stylistic elements, including the organization of space within sites and components by past peoples, in order to define social or spatial differentiation within a community (e.g., Flannery and Winter 1976; Kus 1981, 1983, Kent 1984, 1990a; Arnold 1975, 1978; Longacre 1991).
3. The identification of intersite and intercomponent distributions of stylistic elements in order to define social or spatial differentiation between communities (e.g., Brainerd 1942; Flannery 1976; Hodder and Orton 1981; Kent 1990b; Arnold 1983, 1984; Washburn 1977, 1978; Graves 1991).
4. The formation and testing of hypotheses designed to explain customs that account for the observed patterning within and between components and sites in light of available anthropological theory and ethnographic material; in the present case this refers to the predictions of prehistoric and protohistoric customs as constructed by cultural evolutionists and through the analysis of Winnebago oral traditions (e.g., Arnold 1983, 1984, 1985; Adams 1989; Awe 1974; Braun and Plog 1982; Lathr1p 1983; see also Allen and Richardson 1971).
5. The assessment and reformulation of archaeological techniques and concepts as dictated by the successes and failures of items 1 through 4 listed above in order to continue to identify and interpret past humans behaviors.
These elements are combined into the following discussion of archaeological patterns that may prove useful in addressing the current issues. Since the list presented above integrates several types of data across and between sites, it is necessary to conceive of this approach as comprehensive but highly generalized. Thus, the following discussion is sometimes speculative and future-oriented. As may be inferred from chapter 2, this reflects elements of Taylor's conjunctive approach but differs in both the scale of the research and the types of questions being asked. Given that the present work suggests means for beginning to decipher a broad and lengthy process, rather than interpreting a single site as Taylor initially advocated, the scale and magnitude of the issues addressed here are correspondingly magnified.
Synthesis of Data Types Pertaining to Ethnic and Salient Identity
For our purposes here, seven types of data can be identified archaeologically in the Western Great Lakes region that may be used to predict and test for social structure, group composition, and, salient identity. These are: (1) stylistic analysis of ceramics (2) patterns of resources exploited, (3) skeletal and mitochondrial DNA analysis,(4) mortuary practices, (5) household archaeology, (6) village and component synthesis, and (7) intersite comparisons. These types of data can also be used in the application of Price's (1981) model for the development of social complexity. As may be inferred from the model for the development of Winnebago ethnic identity, ethnic signaling as evidenced by stylistic preferences and the development of social complexity at even low levels, that is, the generation of pan-kinship identities (e.g., Longacre 1966; Service 1971; see also chapter 2) are intertwined and reflect the interaction of different aspects of a social structure.
Stylistic Analysis of Ceramics
We begin this discussion of stylistic variation and its significance with ceramics. This is particularly appropriate in the Western Great Lakes region since distinctions made between the major archaeological cultures and their various phases are recognized principally on the basis of ceramic variations. As discussed previously (chapter 5), the presence of Mississippian influences or the determination of Oneota phases are based almost exclusively on the presence or absence of certain types of ceramics. Oneota especially has sometimes been referred to as a pottery culture, with archaeologists essentially unable to distinguish between the non-ceramic remains of Oneota and non-Oneota sites.
Ceramics in the Western Great Lakes region, and throughout much of the world, tend to be classified according to normative typologies. All ceramics meeting the criteria of a given typological classification are lumped together in a single category while remains that meet the criteria of other typological classifications are categorized appropriately. While such sorting has the benefit of neatly ordering archaeological data, the categories we define, as discussed previously, do not necessarily have any meaning beyond what we assign to them. Rather than focusing on the categories themselves, we need to look at the variation within and between the categories (Plog 1983; see also Brainerd 1942; Washburn 1983, 1989; Washburn and Crowe 1988; Plog 1976, 1978, 1980, 1990; see chapter 2 for an overview).
For example, decorated Oneota ceramics tend to have geometric patterns incised into their shoulders and bodies (figures 24 and 26). Currently, archaeologists pay little or no attention to the variation in the manner in which these decorations are applied. Instead we concentrate on how the presence and placement of such decoration relates a given sherd to the typologies we have designed for Oneota remains. As noted above, this process has some benefits but it provides us with no information as to how ceramics from a given component relate to one another. Only in those instances when the time is available to reconstruct ceramics can attention paid to how various sherds may be related to one another. Even in this case, however, the location on the vessels from whence the sherds derive, an attribute related as much if not more to breakage and taphonomic patterns than to human behavior, plays a greater role in analysis then does the variation within the typological category.
If, in addition to ordering sherds according to typologies for purposes of organization and perhaps cross dating, we quantified traits such as the width of incision, depth of incision, distance between lines, length of lines, and relation of lines to other decorative features (i.e., Hill 1977, 1978) we would then be able to compare the various sherds. In the process of making such comparisons, we may well find that we can identify household or lineage units in the archaeological record much as Hill (1965, 1966, 1968, 1970) and Longacre (1964a, 1964b, 1966, 1968, 1970) attempted to predict the presence of lineage patterns in the American Southwest. Although, and as discussed previously, Hill and Longacre's assessments of lineage patterns have been criticized (e.g., Stanislawski and Stanislawski 1978; Hodder 1978), their identification of clusters of stylistically similar ceramics still seems to be a fundamentally practicable first step toward identifying residential units.
One of the key differences here is that the application and layout of design elements and vessels as a whole are analyzed (e.g., Washburn and Crowe 1988 on plane pattern analysis) as opposed to comparisons based on different normative types, such as were used by Hill and Longacre. In the Western Great Lakes region, Hurley (1977) undertook an analysis similar to those undertaken by Hill and Longacre and achieved some limited success. An examination of Hurley's work suggests that a significant shortcoming of his analysis, and apparently an element he may have recognized at the time, was the breadth of typological categories for ceramics in the region. Unlike the American Southwest, where polychrome vessels are more common, vessels in the Western Great Lakes region tend not to be painted and, perhaps more significantly, are not associated with easily identifiable architectural units, such as the rooms or kivas of pueblos. Consequently, analysis of ceramics in the Western Great Lakes region has not been pursued as actively as it has been elsewhere; the perceived benefits of such research simply did not warrant the investment of time, energy, and resources.
In the case of the Winnebago or their immediate antecedents, we may be able to identify recurring ceramic patterns and motifs that reflect the ideology inferred for them based on the analysis of oral traditions presented in chapter 6. At one level, we might begin searching for matrilocal or uxorilocal residence patterns that do not seem to have been common among the Algonquian-speaking peoples of the Western Great Lakes region (Callender 1978a). Such approaches would be building off of the works of Deetz (1965, 1968), Hill (1965, 1966, 1968, 1970), and Longacre (1964a, 1966, 1968, 1970). As discussed previously, however, (see Hodder 1978; see also chapter 2), this sort of research would need to be articulated with additional studies pertaining to identity marking.
Here, archaeologists might seek to establish preferences for specific types of motifs and their placement on vessels. Perhaps significantly, images argued to represent Thunderbirds are present on some Oneota vessels (Benn 1989) and at least one such Thunderbird motif has been identified on a cord-impressed Late Woodland sherd from the Red House Landing site in northeastern Iowa.(2) Figures such as Thunderbirds, Water Spirits, and images of the Morning Star and Sun are all culturally important symbols to the Winnebago. Their use in oral traditions suggests they are also ethnically defining symbols that were used to emphasize group membership and cohesiveness (see chapter 6). Hence, based on the discussions of identity marking presented in chapter 2 (e.g., Barth 1969a; Hodder 1982; Schortman 1989), we should expect that such symbols may also have been recorded in visual media, such as ceramics, as well as in oral media, such as myths and legends. The spatial and temporal clustering of such defining symbols may help to define the presence of a particular identity group in the archaeological record.
Yet a third approach might be taken in an effort to determine whether or not the distribution of stylistic elements on pottery forms distinct spatial and temporal clusters within sites. Such clusters might be indicative of salient identities within an ethnically homogenous population, although alternative explanations exist, such as the diffusion of styles or the exchange of materials between different populations. By comparing the clusters to overall stylistic variability from throughout the region, however, archaeologists should be able to infer whether the former alternative is likely. If the clusters express stylistic elements found on other sites in the region, than the patterning may reflect a regional preference rather than a localized expression of identity. If, on the other hand, the clustering reflects stylistic preferences that are unique to the site or to a small series of sites, then researchers might begin to infer the presence of distinct identity groups on the site (or sites) in question.
The same sort of ceramic analysis can also be used to begin to identify prehistoric and protohistoric alliances and affiliations. Winnebago oral traditions identify mates as being among the principal resources exchanged between villages. Although we can provisionally infer that the potters remained in the villages of their mothers, we can also infer that some form of regular communication existed between the villages of the various brides and grooms. Such exchange is likely to have involved visitation and potentially the exchange of material remains through practices of bride price, dowry, reciprocity, or trade. Hence, ceramic variability between sites and components may reflect an avenue into measuring the amount of contact between different communities. Whallon (1968) has used precisely this sort of measure to predict the degrees to which various Iroquoian villages were in communication with one another. Whallon notes that the degree to which the various villages communicated is correlated to the physical distance separating the communities as well as the inferred cultural distances between the villagers as reflected by stylistic preferences.
Although Whallon does not discuss intravillage differences, the same principles should still apply. If villages reflect a single kinship group, then stylistic homogeneity within village assemblages should be universally high. That is, there should be little variation between ceramics recovered from throughout the village except as introduced by imported ceramics or by visiting populations. On the other hand, if villages were composed of multiple kinship groups, there should be a lower degree of ceramic homogeneity. More significantly, some areas within villages should reflect high localized ceramic homogeneity based on the assumption that potters of the same lineage group worked together. While this cannot be documented in the archaeological record, ethnographic research from throughout the world suggests that families who manufacture ceramics tend to work together in a single workshop or in neighboring workshops (Arnold 1978, 1981, 1983, 1984, 1985; Longacre 1991; Graves 1981, 1991; Kramer 1979, 1985; Peacock 1982; Rye and Evans 1976; Stanislawski and Stanislawski 1978). Archaeologically, we may expect the same to be true in the Late Prehistoric and Protohistoric eras of the Western Great Lakes region.
Patterns of Resources Exploited
Given that the oral traditions of different peoples reflect preferred subsistence patterns, we might expect that some identity groups preferred to exploit certain types of resources, especially for food, in differing degrees (e.g., Honorkamp 1982; Reitz 1986; Bellantoni et. al. 1982; Miller 1978/79; Pohl 1985a, 1985b). Winnebago oral traditions mention the presence of garden beds and in the case of the big village complex, it is specifically noted that these garden beds were extensive. Compared with the oral traditions of other populations in eastern North America, such as the various southeastern groups (e.g., Hudson 1976, 1984; Underhill 1965, 1971; Knight 1981), the Winnebago have relatively few traditions emphasizing the importance of agriculture or agricultural cycles. This may have to do with the latter people residing in northern latitudes where agriculture appeared relatively late in the development of the region or it may have to do with the comparatively short growing seasons afforded crops in the Western Great Lakes region. Nonetheless, the presence of ridged field systems in Wisconsin demonstrates that large amounts of energy were directed into preparing agricultural fields (Peske 1966; Moffat 1979; Riley et. al. 1981; Gallagher et. al. 1985; Boszhardt et. al. 1985). The infrequency of traditions reflecting such extensive investments of time and energy in Winnebago traditions is remarkable and suggests that either such activities were not practiced by or were not of great significance to the Winnebago or their antecedent populations.
Beyond recognizing the infrequent accounts of agriculture in oral traditions, the analysis of patterns of resource utilization potentially may contribute significant amounts of information to the study of ethnogenesis. Historic archaeologists such as Honerkamp (1982), Miller (1978/79), Drucker (1981), Reitz (1986), and Bellantoni et. al. (1982) have been able to distinguish between the food resources utilized by different ethnic groups. Honerkamp (1982), for example, has been able to distinguish between British military sites and nearby, contemporaneous non-military sites on the basis of the types of faunal remains exploited. Miller (1978/79), on the other hand, employed faunal analysis to distinguish social status and ethnic preferences between two contemporaneous 17th-century households in Virginia. Similarly, Reitz (1986) and Bellantoni et. al. (1982) were able to relate the use of food resources to ethnic identity, particularly as evidenced by socioeconomic class (in the case of Bellantoni et. al.) and urban versus rural identities in the case of Reitz. Although each of these studies benefited from documentary evidence, Drucker (1981) was able to reconstruct socioeconomic status and salient identity (slave) based on the patterning of faunal remains.
The primary concern in these aforementioned papers has been the identification of socioeconomic class and national affiliation. As discussed in chapter 2, both types of distinction are subsumed within ethnicity as defined in this volume. Socioeconomic class corresponds closely to vertical divisions (ranking of class identities) within a culture group, while nationality as used by the historic archaeologists refers to preferences for food and butchery techniques as typically found in a given culture group, in the case here, British. The distinction between British and, for example, Spanish or American Indian animal exploitation are used by the historic archaeologists to identify broadly defined ethnic identity; a distinction is made between people who are either British or are in close contact with British influences and those in contact with either Spanish or Native American influences. When distinctions regarding horizontal and vertical cleavages are overlapped, however, archaeologists are able to generate a clearer picture of social structure within the various ethnic groups they have identified than would otherwise have been possible.
Such principles have the potential to be adapted to precolumbian archaeology, especially in situations such as presented in this volume, where they may enable archaeologists to help generate models for social structure (e.g., Pohl 1976, 1985a, 1985b). Comparison of faunal remains recovered from within single components, especially in long-term residential zones such as are associated with villages, may reveal differential patterns of resource utilization. For example, some areas of the site may consistently reflect the utilization of animal parts that yield substantially higher quantities of meat than are found in other parts of the site, perhaps suggesting a dominant social group was monopolizing caloric intake. Similarly, ritually significant remains that can be correlated with social or religious identity might also be localized on a site (cf. O'Brien 1986, 1990). Such a pattern may reflect the presence of an elite or proto-elite group within the village that was entitled to greater access to desirable resources. As discussed by Sahlins (1968), Service (1962, 1971), Price (1981) and in chapter 2, unequal access to resources is one of the behaviors that are predicted to reflect the emergence of social hierarchies and increased cultural complexity.
A comparison of faunal exploitation between archaeological sites might also prove insightful. Differential patterns of resource exploitation, especially between sites that were occupied for substantial periods of time during similar seasons, may reflect the preferences of the residents of the various sites toward or away from certain resources (Speth 1983; Hamblin 1984; Pohl 1976, 1985a, 1985b). Until recently, most archaeologists in the Western Great Lakes region have tacitly assumed that prehistoric populations made use of all available resources to similar degrees, with some variations occurring as a result of the adoption of cultivation. This assumption has never been tested, however, save for comparisons between archaeological cultures (e.g., Sullivan 1990; Griffin 1946, 1952, 1960, 1967 for example; see also chapter 5). Comparison of the subsistence strategies of different archaeological cultures only serves to confirm our expected results, that is, that there are significant differences between how the people utilizing each set of subsistence-related tools made their livings. As argued previously, however, these archaeological manifestations reflect large-scale and relatively shallow adaptations to survival and do not necessarily reflect core ethnic values and ideals (Braun and Plog 1982, Haaland 1969; Nagata 1981). Consequently, since ethnic identity works beneath the level of large-scale subsistence strategies, archaeologists should consider comparing resource utilization between sites of the same archaeological cultures. As with arguments presented above for ceramic style, it may be possible to distinguish between patterns of utilization that demarcate significant behavioral differences at the level of families and kinship groups. Since it has been argued that such groups form the basis from which ethnic groups form, it is at this level that we need to focus our attention.
Skeletal and Mitochondrial DNA Analysis
With the advent of increased understanding of human genetic composition, a new avenue of research has opened through which researchers can begin to understand the social composition of prehistoric populations. Recent tests applied to mitochondrial DNA extracted from 69 skeletons from the Norris Farm 36 Oneota site in west-central Illinois, dating to ca. 1300 A.D., have produced important information concerning the genetic relatedness of the population buried at the site. Of the 69 samples, all but three individuals demonstrated some degree of biological relatedness. That is, 66 of the individuals were found to possess similar forms of mitochondrial DNA and were therefore probably related. Significantly, the unrelated individuals were all male and this has been interpreted as possibly reflecting matrilocal or uxorilocal residence patterns (Stone and Stoneking 1992).
Other skeletal analyses of Western Great Lakes region archaeological populations have also been undertaken. Such work has not been particularly valuable in interpreting the problems discussed in this volume. Nonetheless, since they do bear on the topic under discussion here, they need to briefly addressed.
As noted previously, Sullivan (1990) has analyzed the relative health of Oneota, Mississippian, and Late Woodland populations from Wisconsin. While Sullivan deals with issues of health, he uses these methods to trace the introduction of horticulture and, in particular, maize horticulture, to populations in the regions defined by material culture type. Consequently, while Sullivan addresses issues of identity, he links his identifications to material culture and, for our purposes, sheds no new light on ethnic affiliations.
More in the vein of ethnic and cultural affiliation, Glenn (1974) and Key (1983) have sought to correlate cranial variation with culture group. Such work was pioneered by Neumann (1952, 1960) and works from the assumption that there is a link between a comprehensive set of cranial measurements and heredity so that a statistical evaluation can be made of large-scale populations. Such populations are broadly defined as Lenid, Muskogid, Dakotid, and Illinid, referring respectively to Algonquian-speaking populations resembling the Lenape, Muskogean-speaking populations in general, Siouan-speaking populations in general, and Algonquian-speaking populations resembling those labeled Illini (see Neumann 1952, 1960; Glenn 1974). The focus of such analysis is to identify clusters of similar physical variation and to infer that these represent largely homogenous breeding pools.
As discussed by Gould (1981) and Brues (1977), however, population measurements of this type are problematic in that there is usually a significant overlap in the variation between samples. This is also the case with the work discussed here. The problem is further exacerbated by the relatively small sample sizes involved and the broad-scale implications that must be drawn from the relatively limited data. In essence, the inferences that can be made from such work function across populations while the samples such inferences are based on are relatively small. Statistically, this type of relationship is problematic (Thomas 1986). With this in mind, the results of the skeletal analysis are potentially suspect and therefore will not be considered further.
Mortuary Practices(3)
Little work has been done on interpreting the burials from the Western Great Lakes region in terms of symbolic expression. Although researchers such as Barrett (1933), Parmalee (1960), Sullivan (1990), Dirst and Kriesa (1982) have described or analyzed human remains, no attempt at a synthesis of the cultural dimensions of burial practices has been made in the region. This is unfortunate since archaeologists have argued repeatedly that mortuary practices and burials can provide significant information about people's values, social structure, and identity (Brown 1971a, 1971b; Binford 1971; Black 1979; Dethlefsen and Deetz 1966; Deetz and Dethlefsen 1971; Larson 1971; Peebles 1970, 1971; Saxe 1970, 1971). Larson (1971), for example, argued that burials in Mound C at Etowah provided evidence for social stratification in the community. Further, he suggested that certain symbols, especially those associated with the Southeastern Ceremonial Complex were used by elite individuals in order to demonstrate their social positions and to segregate themselves from non-elites. Similarly, Peebles (1970, 1971) argues that mortuary patterns at Moundville and surrounding sites in Alabama reflect social stratification throughout the region, with the elite peoples of Moundville enjoying a period of regional power during which these people represented the pinnacle of a social pyramid. In particular, the association of materials such as those associated with the Southeastern Ceremonial Complex and rare forms of ceramics with a discrete segment of the buried population has been argued to demonstrate the concentration of social and political control in the hands of a small segment of society.
Such analyses are significant for the purposes of this volume. Although these studies emphasize salient identity (i.e., ranking within a single culture group) they demonstrate how ethnic identity can be isolated and identified through mortuary studies. Since the analysis of Winnebago tales presented in this volume supports the contention that the Winnebago were once hierarchically organized, we might expect that materials associated with the Winnebago or their antecedents reflect such behaviors.
Of equal significance, the analysis of interred cultural materials may be correlated to the previously discussed analysis of style in ceramics. Since ceramics are sometimes included in interments in the Western Great Lakes region, archaeologists should be able to compare these remains with similar remains recovered from village sites. Stylistic similarities and differences in the mortuary materials may thus be linked to social networks and ethnic populations as constructed through ceramic analysis (Arnold 1975, 1978, 1981, 1983, 1984; Conkey 1978, 1980, 1990; Braun 1977, 1984; Kramer 1985; Plog 1976, 1978, 1980; 1983, 1990).
Differences in burial treatments, however, may also help researchers to further define social structure and ethnic identity. Although stylistic variation within ceramics can reveal some degrees of patterning, inclusion of data gathered from mortuary contexts may enhance our understanding of how different ethnic groups interacted. For example, among the Winnebago, oral traditions exist that recount reciprocal behavior in burial treatments between certain clans. Radin (1923) states that each clan of each moiety had a corresponding or closely allied clan in the opposite moiety. It was appropriate for these clans to cooperate closely. Upon the death of a member of one of these clans, Radin's informants told him that the members of the allied clan were responsible for burying the deceased individual. The purpose of this practice was to foster increased interaction and cohesion between the clans and moieties. Archaeologically, however, if burials include materials from both clans, it may be possible for researchers to begin to identify the forms of relations between the clans. The stylistic traits from the interred cultural materials may be compared to distribution maps of stylistic traits for materials recovered from a village or series of domestic residences. Matches in stylistic attributes, such as the shape of war clubs between the grave inclusions and other materials may demarcate the physical relations between allied clans. A significant problem exists, however, in that it may be difficult or even impossible to identify the specific clan affiliation of the individual in the burial. Since elements of two clans are present (assuming a stylistic pattern can be identified in the first place), it may be difficult to assess which set of symbols represents the deceased identity and which represents the identity of his/her allies from another clan.
There are numerous factors as well that may preclude such matches from being made, at least on a regular basis. The tradition of scaffold burials among some clans may simply mean the remains from these groups will not be well represented archaeologically. There are also problems with gathering sufficient amounts of appropriate data with which to undertake such analyses. Yet, as Taylor (1948) argued, the fact that a task is difficult does not make its undertaking invalid or less valuable. It simply means that archaeologists must sometimes seek to develop new and better perspectives on the problems they seek to interpret.
On a second level, the burials themselves may present significant data for the interpretation of identity. Taken as a package, a burial represents a completed performance. That is, each element incorporated into the burial, such as material inclusions, the treatment and positioning of remains, and the manner of interment (subsurface burial, interment in mounds, etc.), provides the burying population with an opportunity to express itself in a culturally appropriate fashion (Radin 1945; see also Binford 1971; Deetz and Dethlefsen 1971; Black 1979; Brose et. al. 1985; and Renfrew 1978 for examples of archaeological corollaries). In terms of the discussion of style as used here, funerary customs represent another avenue for the expression of ethnic and cultural messaging. Charles and Buikstra (1983), for example, have argued that Archaic era burial mounds in central Illinois served to express the status of the buried individuals to the members of the burying population (representing vertical cleavages within the culture group) and to express the identity of the culture group to foreigners (horizontal cleavages across culture groups). Thus, it is necessary for archaeologists to consider burial treatments as composite representations of stylistic behavior and, consequently, as means for transmitting messages about ethnic identity.
It must be stressed, however, that this is not a call for a new program of excavating burials. The treatment of human interments and associated material remains must be addressed on a case by case basis, for ethical as well as scientific reasons.
Household Archaeology
Perhaps the most promising line of investigation into our current problems involves the detailed investigation of domestic units, here referred to as household archaeology. As discussed in chapter 2 and as can be inferred from discussions regarding the importance of kinship, the excavation and analysis of materials associated with domestic structures can reveal significant information about how people organize their world. In particular, the patterning of material remains can be used to infer such ethnically-defining concepts as post-marital residence rules, forms of marriage (monogamous versus polygamous), lineality, and family size.
The research of Hill and Longacre in the American Southwest have been previously explored. Some additional and important aspects of household archaeology may be gleaned from elsewhere, however, and need to briefly reviewed here. In terms of semiotic theory, Eco (1980) has argued that architecture is a reflection of personal and ethnic identity. For Eco, structures symbolize the worldviews of those who construct, modify, and use the buildings. This means that buildings reflect ideas about what it is to be a member of the group that typically builds a given type of structure. In effect, the structures become a way of marking identity.
Levi-Strauss (1953) has argued along similar lines, observing that archaeologists should direct some of their attention to interpreting how people construct space and replicate the patterns of thought that underlie their behaviors. For Levi-Strauss, spatial patterning and the construction of space, including physical structures, reflects the mental template that emerges from the collective beliefs shared by members of identity groups.
Some archaeologists have undertaken this sort of research in an effort to reconstruct past social interactions.
