Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-jbqgn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-22T14:38:02.106Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Freshwater Mussels as a Prehistoric Food Resource

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Paul W. Parmalee  and
Walter E. Klippel
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The explication of prehistoric subsistence economies has been of increasing interest to archaeologists. This emphasis is reflected, in part, by the considerable attention afforded faunal analyses in the recent archaeological literature. However, little effort has been made toward developing methods that permit meaningful comparisons of food resources at the interspecies level. Data pertinent to the calculation of both quantitative and qualitative food potential of many of the vertebrate animals represented in archaeological contexts are extant. These data are lacking for freshwater mussels, frequently found in archaeological sites in eastern North America. Information relevant to determining the food energy provided by freshwater mussels common to much of the Mississippi River drainage is presented. Results are applicable to more credible interpretations of prehistoric subsistence as related to animal food resources.

Type
Articles
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 39 , Issue 3 , July 1974 , pp. 421 - 434
Copyright
Copyright © Society for American Archaeology 1974

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baker, Frank Collins 1923 The use of Molluscan shells by the Cahokia mound builders. Transactions of the Illinois State Academy of Science 16:328–334.Google Scholar
Baker, Frank Collins 1930 The use of animal life by the mound-building Indians of Illnois. Transactions of the Illinois State Academy of Science 22:41–64.Google Scholar
Baker, Frank Collins 1936 Remains of animal life from the Kingston kitchen midden site near Peoria, Illinois. Transactions of the Illinois State Academy of Science 29:243–246.Google Scholar
Baker, Frank Collins 1941 A study in ethnozoology of the prehistoric Indians of Illnois. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 32(1).Google Scholar
Birdsell, Joseph B. 1968 Some predictions for the Pleistocene based on equiUbrium systems among recent hunter-gatherers. In Man the hunter, edited by Lee, R. B. and Devore, I., pp. 229–240. Aldine, Chicago.Google Scholar
Brose, David S. 1972 The mollusc fauna. In The Schultz site at Green Point, a stratified occupation area in the Saginaw valley of Michigan, edited by Fitting, James E.. University of Michigan, Memoirs of the Museum of A nthropology 4:117–130.Google Scholar
Cook, S. F. 1946 A reconsideration of shell mounds with respect to population and nutrition. American Antiquity 12:50–53.Google Scholar
Faulkner, Charles H. 1972 The late prehistoric occupation of Northwestern Indiana: a study of the Upper Mississippi Culture of the Kankakee valley. Indiana Historical Society, Prehistory Research Series 5(1).Google Scholar
Fitzhugh, Willam W. 1972 Environmental archaeology and cultural systems in Hamilton Inlet, Labrador. Smithsonian Contributions to Anthropology 16.Google Scholar
Flannery, Kent V. 1968 Archaeological systems theory and early Mesoamerica. In Anthropological archaeology in the Americas, edited by Meggers, Betty J., pp. 67–87. The Anthropological Society of Washington, Washington, D.C. Google Scholar
Harrison, G. A., Weiner, J. S., Tanner, J. M., and Barnicot, N. A. 1964 Human biology: an introduction to human evolution, variation and growth. Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Higgs, E. S., and Vita-Finzi, C. 1972 Prehistoric economies, a territorial approach. In Papers in economic prehistory, edited by Higgs, E. S., pp. 27–36. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Hough, Walter 1926 Fire as an agent in human culture. Smithsonian Institution, United States National Museum, Bulletin 139.Google Scholar
Howells, W. W. 1960 Estimating population numbers through archaeological and skeletal remains. In The application of quantitative methods in archaeology, edited by Heizer, Robert F. and Cook, Sherburne F.. Viking Fund Publication in Anthropology 28:158–176.Google Scholar
Matteson, Max R. 1958 Analysis of an environment as suggested by shells of fresh-water mussels discarded by Indians of Illinois. Transactions of the Illinois State Academy of Science 51(3 and 4):8–13.Google Scholar
Matteson, Max R. 1960 Reconstruction of prehistoric environments through analysis of molluscan collections from shell middens. American Antiquity 26:117–120.Google Scholar
Meighan, Clement E. 1969 Molluscs as food remains in archaeological sites. In Science in archaeology (2nd edition), edited by Brothwell, Don and Higgs, Eric, pp. 415–422. Praeger, New York.Google Scholar
Morrison, J. P. E. 1942 Preliminary report in the Tennessee River valley. In An archaeological survey of Pickwick Basin in the adjacent portions of the states of Alabama, Mississippi, and Tennessee, by Webb, William S. and DeJarnette, David J.. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 129:337–392.Google Scholar
Munson, Patrick J., Parmalee, Paul W., and Yarnell, Richard A. 1971 Subsistence ecology of Scovil, a terminal Middle Woodland village. American Antiquity 36:410–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nie, Norman, Bent, Dale H., and Hadlai Hull, C. 1970 Statistical package for the social sciences. McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
Nie, Norman H., and Hadlai Hull, C. 1971 Statistical package for the social sciences: update manual. National Opinion Research Center, Chicago.Google Scholar
Parmalee, Paul W. 1969 Animal remains from the Archaic Riverton, Swan Island, and Robeson Hills sites, Illinois, Appendix I. In The Riverton Culture, a second millennium occupation in the central Wabash valley, by Winters, Howard. Illinois State Museum Reports of Investigations 13, and Illinois Archaeological Survey Monograph 1:139–144.Google Scholar
Parmalee, Paul W., Paloumpis, Andreas A., and Wilson, Nancy 1972 Animals utilized by Woodland peoples occupying the Apple Creek site, Illinois. Illinois State Museum Reports of Investigations 23 and Illinois Valley Archaeological Program Research Papers Vol. 5.Google Scholar
Plog, Fred, and Hill, James N. 1971 Explaining variability in the distribution of sites. In The distribution of prehistoric population aggregates, edited by Gumerman, George J.. Prescott College Anthropological Reports 1:7–36.Google Scholar
Stoltman, James B. 1972 The Late Archaic in the Savannah River region. The Florida Anthropologist 25(2, pt 2):37–72.Google Scholar
Struever, Stuart 1968 Woodland subsistence-settlement systems in the lower Illinois valley. In New perspectives in archaeology, edited by Binford, Sally R. and Binford, Lewis R., pp. 285–312. Aldine, Chicago.Google Scholar
van der Schalie, Henry, and van der Schalie, Annette 1950 The mussels of the Mississippi River. The American Midland Naturalist 44:448–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watt, Dernice K., and Merrill, Annabel L. 1963 Composition of foods; raw, processed, prepared. United States Department of Agriculture, Agriculture Handbook 8.Google Scholar
Webb, William S. 1950 The Read shell midden, site 10, Butler county, Kentucky. The University of Kentucky Reports in Anthropology 7(5).Google Scholar
White, Theodore 1953 A method of calculating the dietary percentage of various food animals utilized by aboriginal peoples. American Antiquity 18:396–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willey, Lorraine M., and Ruskin, Paul T. 1968 Mollusc analysis and distribution at Sheep Rock Shelter. In Archaeological investigations of Sheep Rock Shelter, Huntington county, Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania State University Occasional Papers in Anthropology 5:141–164.Google Scholar
Winters, Howard D. 1969 The Riverton Culture: a second millennium occupation in the central Wabash valley. Illinois State Museum Reports of Investigations 13 and Illinois Archaeological Survey Monograph 1.Google Scholar