2000 Florida Anthropological Society Inc.
The Florida Anthropological Society Inc. holds
source text of the Florida Anthropologist
considered the copyright holder for the text
all rights to the
and shall be
and images of
The Florida Anthropological Society has made this publication
available to the University of Florida, for purposes of
digitization and Internet distribution.
The Florida Anthropological Society reserves all rights to this
publication. All uses, excluding those made under "fair use"
provisions of U.S. Code, Title 17, Section 107 are restricted.
Contact the Florida Anthropological Society for additional
information and permissions.
3' 23 4fR ,j59 ^
FLORIDA ANTHROPOLOGICAL SOCIETY
THE FLORIDA ANTHROPOLOGIST
Membership is open to all interested in the aims of the
Society. The Florida Anthropoloist is published by the Florida
Anthropological Society during the months of March, June, Sept-
ember, and December. Subscription is by membership; annual dues
are $3.00 ($1.50 for students),of which $1.25 is for subscription
to The Florida Anthropologist and other publications as issued.
The Florida Anthropologist is published at The Department of An-
thropology, The Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida.
Second-olass mail privileges authorized at Tallahassee, Florida.
Applications and orders for back issues should be sent to
the Treasurer (each single number to members, $.50; each double
number, $1.00; to non-members, $.75, and $1.50 respectively;
Newsletters Nos. 1-35, $.15 each). General inquiries should be
sent to the Secretary, manuscripts to the Editor, and Newsletter
items to the President.
No. 1. "Two Archaeological Sites in Breward County, Florida,"
by Hale G. Smith. 32 pages, 4 plates.............. 0.50
No. 2. "The Safety Harbor Site, Pinellas County, Florida,"
by John W. Griffin and Ripley P. Bullen.
43 pages, 4 plates ................................. 0.50
No. 3. "The Terra Ceia Site, Manatee County, Florida,"
by Ripley P. Bullen, 48 pages, 7 plates............ 0.50
No. 4. "The European and the Indian,* by Hale G. Smith,
150 pages, frontispiece, 6 maps.................... 2.00
No. 5. "Florida Anthropology," C. Fairanks, ed......... 1.25
President: William H. Sears, Fla. State
Museum, Gainesrille, Florida
let Vice President: John M. Goggin, 312 Peabody Hall
Univ. of Fla., Gainesville, Fla.
2nd Vice President: Marvin J. Brooks, .805 N.M. 15th Ct.
Miami 33, Florida
Secretary D. C. Laxson, 231 W. 41st Street,
Treasurer: Hale G. Smith, Box 3051, Florida
State University, Tallahassee, Fla.
Editor: Charles H.. Fairbanks, Box 3051,
Fla.State Univ.,Tallahassee, Fia.
Executive Coaitteeman: Irving Rouse, Tale Univ.
W. Armistead, Tampa
The Florida Anthropologist, Vol. XII, No. 1, 1959
EXCAVATIONS IN DADE COUNTY DURING 1957
D. D. Laxson
Three sites, all shallow, black dirt middens typical of the
region, were excavated in Dade County during 1957. From the
total of twenty-one test pits, came 3,153 pieces of animal bone,
513 whole or fragmentary shell%, 85 artifacts of various types,
4,205 potsherds, approximately ten percent of which were incised.
Examination of the bone fragments revealed that turtles were
the most frequent prey of the inhabitants. However, there were
also deer, raccoon, and fox remains as well as fish vertabrae and
bones of large birds, some of them long-legged waders. Bones of
the gopher tortoise suggested nearby dry, sandy areas. Sea tur-
tle bones and shark vertabrae were evidence that foraging reached
the coastal aaea as well as the fresh water swamps.
Fresh water clams, the conches Strombus and Busycon the
snails Planorbis and Ampularia, Pecten, Macrocallista, the Winged
Tree, and Virginia Crested Oyster cover the classification of
shell material in all the sites.
Vegetation, with the possible exception of mulberry and wild
yam on the Medley site, basswood and snake plant on the Red Road
site and heavy growths of giant bracken covering the Lehigh site,
was typical of other hammocks in the vicinity where ficus and
hackberry predominate along with wild citrus, pap-paw, willow ,
bay trema, groundsel, and wild coffee.
The first site is located in the NW 1/4 of
Section 10, Range 40 East, Township 53 South, or approximately
one mile southeast of commercial rockpit operations on the south
side of the Miami River at Medley, Florida. The midden, extend-
ing some fifty feet across, is in the center of a wooded area
several feet above the surrounding muck land which is four feet
above Mean Sea Level.Only two large trees, a mulberry and a ficus,
grow on the midden proper.
Soil consisted of approximately a foot of black dirt and a
foot of grey sand. A few inches below the surface was a stratum
of orange colored soil. Its analysis showed charcoal, a consider-
able amount of aluminum, and quartz with iron salts in amounts
sufficient to stain the soil. Tubers of the wild yam vine and
minute pieces of bone and shell were also in the sample.
Three pits, five feet square and spaced fifteen feet apart,
were excavated in the northeast quadrant.
The second or Lehigh site is in the central
portion of lot 3, Section 3, Range 39 East, Township 53 South
within a few hundred yards of a cement plant under construction.
A new bridge across the Tamiami canal at its intersection with a
traverse canal three miles west of Sweetwater makes this site
easily accessible. The midden is located in the center of a rec-
tangular wooded area, which, at its highest point, is five feet
above the surrounding terrain. A cleared space sixty feet N-S
and one hundred feet E-W, ringed with ficus and paw-paw and cover-
ed with bracken, contains the midden.
The Southeast and Southwest sides drop off abruptly into a
low area. Old swamp buggy trails enter the hammock from the
Six pits, arranged in a semi-circle, were excavated over a
The third or Red Road site is in the NW 1/4
of SE 1/4 of Section 13, Range 40 East, Township 52 South, or a-
bout 1/2 mile west of the confluence of the Red Road and Biscayne
canals near the extreme northwest corner of the Opa Locka airbase.
Midden material is centered in the northeast quadrant of a badly
eroded hammock, several hundred feet in diameter, situated in
Early in 1936 test explorations were made here under the di-
reaction of Mr. D. Lloyd Reichard and the results published by
Willey (1949, pp, 89-90) under a site designation of Opa Locka #3.
The small collection of material was divided between the U. S.
National Museum and the State of Florida.
The immense root system of young hackberry trees made excava-
ting difficult at the Red Road site. However, twelve pits, cover-
ing an area of 325 square feet, were dug in the northern and
eastern parts of the hammock.
Despite the shallow depth of the tests, stratigraphic results
seemed to be satisfactory. Pottery types of the Glades III
period were concentrated in the first 6 inches. Glades II period
types were concentrated in the next lower 6 inches. Detailed re-
sults by sites will be found in the pottery tabulation.
In the Medley midden, with the exception of St. Johns Check
Stamped (Fig. 1, lower) and a single Surfside Incised sherd, the
only incised pottery uncovered was Key Largo Incised (Fig. 1, top
row) which differed somewhat from the usual range. As for plain
pottery, several fragments were limestone-tempered, some had ex-
tremely smooth surfaces, others were rather gritty, thin and
easily broken. Much of the pottery was discolored by the reddish
soil in which it was found.
No points or celts were unearthed here. There were, however,
two nice examples of Busycon dippers.
The wild tubers found here were interesting as Skinner,(1913)
noted Florida Indians eating wild potatoes that grew in the black
At the Lehigh site the predominate incised pottery was Miami
Incised. Only a single sherd of Matecumbe Incised (Fig. 2, top
row right) was found. Other basic types, such as Glades Tooled,
Key Largo Incised, Opa Locka Incised, and Ft. Drum Incised, were
found at their usual depths representing Glades III and Glades II
times. (See pottery table). A single sherd each of noded and of
pinched rims were found. One "fishbone" design sherd (Fig. 2,
lower row right) was the first of its kind found in the area.Two
other unique sherds (Fig. 2, top row middle and bottom row left)
were also found. These last two were in the lower half of the
There were no bone points, but Strombus celts were located
in both the 0-6" and 6"-12" levels.
A good number of human bones, representing at least one
child and one adult, were found in the four to eight inch level
of Pit #2. Considering the depth, it is possible someone dug up
the burials and scattered the bones. Since blue, faceted glass
beads hinted at late Seminole occupation, it is also possible the
bones were remnants of a disturbed Seminole internment.
A number of bone points were found, including bi-pointed,
fluted, and socketed types. Some had tar (Ditch) adhering to the
base (Fig. 3, last two). Several appeared to be the tips of awls
or pins. Others were projectile points. From their shape and
the location of lashing marks, still others appeared to be parts
of composite fish hooks (Fig. 3, last point). The fluted points
seem to have been made from the cannon bone of deer. A rare
spatulate point was found in the 0-6" level. One small, tri-
angular quartz arrowhead was uncovered in the 6"-12" layer.
Celts were common in both levels. A grooved, unfinished,
columnella plummet was located at a depth of six inches.
Several European objects (Fig. 3, middle row) were found as
well as faceted, blue glass beads, and a brass thimble. The
beads are evidence of Seminole occupation.
From the six inch level was screened out two blue venetian
glass ear bangles (Fig. 3). They are like ones reported by Fair-
banks (1956) for the Macon trading post, dated 1685 to 1716.
They also resembled those found by Sleight (1949) in a central
Florida historic site, and those illustrated by Willey for Par-
rish Mound in Hillsborough County (Willey 1949, P1. 58, f). These
and a piece of Spanish majolica (Fig. 4, middle row center) sug-
gest the use of the site during Spanish times, circa 1700.
Pottery distribution ran true to form, there were however
six examples of odd types, four of which were Surfside Incised
and two Key Largo Incised. Again Matecumbe Incised, other than
as a variant, was missing. Fort Drum Incised was found in both
levels, the punctated version only in the bottom layer.
SUMMARY AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT
In summation, all middens showed occupation in both Glades
III and II times. The Red Road site was also used during
Spanish times and it and the Lehigh site were, at least, visited
Appreciation is expressed for the help of the following
people: Mr. S. C. Allen of the Ideal Crushed Stone Inc., Mr. Ben-
jamin Avick, owner of the land adjoining Lehigh, Mr. P. A. Groll
and Mr. W. J. Klein of Lehigh Portland and Mr. Ernest Graham of
Gratitude is also expressed to Dr. Virgil Sleight and Dr.
Malcolm Birdsey of the University of Miami, for geological and
botanical information, Dr. W. T. Neill of Silver Springs for
identification of skeletal material, Ripley P. Bullen and Dr.
William H. Sears of the Florida State Museum for help with typ-
ology, photographs, and the identification of artifacts.
Appreciation is also expressed to Bob Masters, Noel Herr-
mann and John Hackett for their advice and help with the digging
Fairbanks, Charles H.
1956. "Archeology of the Funeral Mound Ocmulgee National
Monument, Georgia." Archeological Research Series
Number Three, National Park Service. Washington.
Goggin, John M., and Frank H. Sommer, III
1949. "Excavations on Upper Matecumbe Key, Florida." Yale
University Publications in Anthropology, Number 41.
1913. Notes on the Florida Seminole." American Anthropolo-
gist, n. s., Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 63-77.
Sleight, Frederick W.
1949. "Notes Concerning an Historic Site in Central Flo-
rida." The Florida Anthropologist, Vol. 2, pp. 26-
Swanton, John R.
1946. "Indians of the Southeastern United States." Bureau
of American Ethnology Bulletin 137, Washington.
Willey, Gordon R.
1949 a. "Archeology of The Florida Gulf Coast." Smithsonian
Miscellaneous Collections, Vol. 113. Washington.
1949 b. "Excavations in Southeastern Florida." Yale Univer-
sity Publications in Anthropology, Number 42. New
Busycon tool, broken.
Strombus tools, broken
Fasciolaria tool, broken
Bone hair pin.
Brass keyhole plate.
Blue Venetian glass
Blue faceted glass beads.
MEDLEY LEHIGH RED ROAD
0-6" 6"-12" 0-6" 6"-12" 0-6 6"-12"
2 2 1
3 2 2 6
1 2 1
8__ _6 1
'8 '~6 _
0-6" 6-12" 0-6" 6-12"
St. Johns Check Stamped.
St. Johns Plain.
Glades Plain body sherds.
Glades Plain rims.
Glades Tooled variant.
Glades Tooled with an
unusual treatment of rim.
Surf side var. line on
inside of rim.
Surfside var. four line.
Key Largo Incised.
Key Largo var.
Key Largo-Opa Locka
Fishbone design rim.
Opa Locka Incised.
Ft. Drum Incised.
Ft. Drum Punctated.
Surfside-like with unusual
treatment of rim.
3 97 26
0 ~ 3
Figure 1. Key Largo Incised,
Glades Plain, and St. Johns
Check Stamped sherds from the
6 to 12 inch zone at the Medley
Figure 2. Surfside Incised,
Matecumbe variant, Matecumbe
Incised, Carrabelle-like in-
cised, Glades Tooled, and in-
cised "fishbone design" sherds
from the Lehigh site.
Figure 3. Surfside Incised,
Key Largo Incised, two Opa
Locka Incised sherds; two blue
glass pendants; Spanish Majo-
lica sherd; brass keyhole plate;
and bone points from the Red
2 I ,' .
The Florida Anthropologist, Vol. XII, No. 1, 1959
CHOCTAW SUBSISTENCE: ETHNOGRAPHIC NOTES FROM THE
T. N. Campbell
From various early sources, and to a certain extent from
modern field work, Swanton (1931, 1946) has compiled an impress-
ive body of data on aboriginal Choctaw culture. Nevertheless,
some phases of this Choctaw culture are still rather poorly known,
and one of these is subsistence. Early European observers paid
little attention to Choctaw modes of subsistence, and later ob-
servers as well as modern field investigators have been hampered
by the effects of rapid cultural change that followed French and
English colonizations. This paper presents data from a manuscript
source that is surprisingly rich in references to Choctaw food-
stuffs and how these were acquired, preserved, stored, and cooked.
The Lincecum manuscript is a very long and detailed version
of the Choctaw origin and migration legend, nine other versions
of which are on record, all either highly compressed or fragment-
ary (Swanton, 1931: 5-57). This manuscript resulted from the
special interest of Gideon Lincecum (1793-1874), a nineteenth
century physician and naturalist, in the earthen mounds that he
observed in the Choctaw country of eastern Mississippi. Linoecum
made persistent inquiries among the Choctaw as to how they ex-
plained these mounds. Eventually he learned of an aged male,
Chahta immatahah, who claimed to know why and how they were built
and who also claimed that he was the last man who knew the full
traditional history of the Choctaw people. Chahta immatahah
seems to have been one of the old men who, in earlier times, pass-
ed on the tribal legends to the young. During the years 1823-
1825, as time would permit, Lincecum met with his informant, who
dictated to him in Choctaw the data contained in the present Lin-
cecum manuscript. In 1861, after he had moved from Mississippi
to Texas, Lincecum translated the original document into English.
The original seems not to have survived. In 1889 a daughter of
Lincecum sent the translation to the Bureau of American Ethnology
in Washington, and it was examined by Pilling, who described it
in his bibliography of Muskhogean languages (Pilling, 1889: 53).
A lengthy excerpt from the latter part of the translation was pub-
lished in Mississippi in 1904 (Lincecum, 1904b) and was reprinted
in the Choctaw source book of Swanton (1931: 12-26), who regards
it as an authentic native document. Eventually Lincecum's heirs
placed the manuscript in the University of Texas Library in
Austin, where it is now deposited in the Archives Collection.
The manuscript source of the following notes is classifiable
as folklore. However, the latter part of the document covers the
period of French colonization and in general is verifiable by
European records. The main narrative is also broken by a consid-
erable number of parenthetical sections that report answers to
questions Lincecum put to his informant or else give information
volunteered by the informant. As most of the notes here present-
ed come from the narrative or strictly folklore section, they
have value only to the extent that they can be verified by compar-
ison with other documents describing early Choctaw culture. As
will be pointed out in the concluding section, most of the cul-
ture traits reflected in the Lincecum manuscript are validated by
other sources. In a few instances the notes are at variance with
other sources. Some traits, however, are entirely new for the
Choctaw, and a few of these are also new for the Southeast as a
In these notes direct quotations from the manuscript are pre-
sented whenever feasible. However, some of the data are so wide-
ly scattered in the manuscript and are so verbosely stated that
they have been brought together and rephrased more concisely.
All Choctaw words used in the Lincecum manuscript are included
without change. These have been checked against Byington's (1915)
Choctaw dictionary and are essentially the same as rendered by
Economic Cycle. The Lincecum manuscript indicates that the
Choctaw had an annual economic cycle that involved hunting, fish-
ing, food collecting, and horticulture. In midwinter the fields
were prepared for spring planting. After the crops had been
planted in the spring and were growing well, the Choctaw dispers-
ed to various streams and lakes, living on "fish, turtles, and
fruits" until time for the Green Corn Dance in early summer.
This ceremony over, they returned to the streams and lakes and re-
mained until time for harvesting corn in the fall. When the corn
had been harvested and stored, the men went off on their regular
fall and early winter hunt, and the women, children, and old peo-
ple searched the woods for nuts and autumnal fruits. By mid-
winter all had returned and the cycle was begun again with pre-
paration of the fields for spring planting.
Division of Labor. Here and there economic activities are
described in such a way that light is thrown on the division of
labor. Men hunted the major game animals and boys hunted the
smaller animals (turtles and alligators are specifically mention-
ed). Men hunted with the bow and arrow, but boys used the blow-
gun in addition to the bow and arrow. Fishing was done by both
men and boys, and boys collected mussels. Sometimes girls assist-
ed boys in hunting small game, fishing, and collecting mussels.
Women, old people, and smaller children did most of the food
gathering (fruits, nuts, etc.). Honey, however, was collected by
men. Men, women, and children all participated in horticultural
work. Cooking was woman's work, as well as preserving and stor-
ing foods derived from plants.
Hunting. A number of animals are mentioned as encountered
and hunted along the migration route, but before the Southeastern
area is reached. Among these are an "anteater," mountain goat
(mentioned while the Choctaw are traveling through ruggedly moun-
tainous terrain), a large lizard, and bison. The remainder of
the animals are mentioned as being hunted all along the entire
migration route from the west, including the final area of occu-
pation east of the Mississippi River. These include bear, deer,
elk, rabbit, alligator, "terrapin," and turtle.
Bison were hunted with bow and arrow by large groups of men
on foot. Two bison hunts are described in rough country far to
the west or southwest of the Miqsissippi River. In one case the
bison herd was grazing in a valley with narrow passes at each end.
Two parties of men stationed themselves above and below the herd,
killing as many animals as they could before the herd broke
through one of the lines of men. In the other a bison herd was
grazing on top of a mesa-like elevation that had only two routes
of escape. The men made a great noise and shot as many animals
as they could. Many bison stampeded over the cliffs onto rocks
below, and their carcasses were later retrieved by the hunters.
There is also mention of hunters "surrounding and slaughtering
large herds of bufalo," apparently without benefit of special ter-
rain, as in the two cases cited above.
The Choctaw ate the liver, gall, marrow, and "other rich of-
fal" of a freshly killed bison. On bison hunts the hunters were
instructed by leaders to track down wounded animals and disembowel
them immediately in order to prevent spoilage--"souring in the
guts (isofka)." When bison meat was available in quantity, it
was preserved by drying in the sun or over a fire. The fattest
bison meat was dried and stored for winter use. During the Choc-
taw migration skins of bison were "made into tents to protect
them from the rain and wind." Once, when crossing an arid stretch
of country, a water carrier was made by encasing a bison bladder
"in any kind of skin strong enough to protect it."
There are numerous references to deer hunting but no descrip-
tions of hunting methods. Although the time of year is not speci-
fied, it is said that there was a "venison season," a time when
deer were killed in quantity. One kind of deer, the king deer
(isi minko), is mentioned by name when the Choctaw were living
near the Mississippi River.
The bear (nita) was killed with bow and arrow or with guns
after guns were obtained from the French at Mobile. Bear hunting
was done mainly during the winter, and the favored hunting locali-
ties were in the canebrakes, through which bear hunters cut paths.
They did not eat much of the bear meat in the winter
time, except what was on the bones and the lean scrap.
The large fat pieces were carefully smoked-dried and
preserved for summer use.
Evidently various kinds of rabbit were eaten, including one
referred to as the long-eared rabbit (chukfi baksobish falaia).
Also eaten were the alligator (hachunchuba) and "terrapins"
(luksi) and turtles, both hard-shell (hachtakni) anti soft-shell
Reference to birds as food are not common, and only a few
birds are mentioned, such as quail (kofi), prairie chicken (shun-
lolo chito), and wild turkey. Turkey eggs were also eaten.
During times of famine on the migration route a number of
animals and insects were eaten, among them snakes, lizards, frogs,
snails, crickets, and grasshoppers. Occasionally there is men-
tion of mussels (oka folush) as food.
It is possible that dogs were used in hunting, for a state-
ment is made that three Choctaw iksas (clans) had "more and bet-
ter trained dogs than any of the clans."
While the Choctaw were migrating, hunters often went ahead,
killing game, and hung the meat up on trees and poles, particular-
ly near water. Meat is sometimes referred to as sun-dried and
sometimes as smoke- or fire-dried.
Fishing. It is evident from the Lincecum manuscript that
the Choctaw were very fond of fish. for there are numerous refer-
ences to fishing and eating fish. However, only one kind of
fish, the catfish (nakishtalali), is identified by name. At
least five different methods of taking fish are indicated, and
two of these are described in some detail.
One method described is communal and is perhaps best charac-
terized as a kind of fish drive, although the account does not
specifically state that fish were actually driven.
The weather was hot, and the people, male and fe-
male old and young, went into the water. The shoal
was full of large fish, and by forming a line at the
upper and lower terminations of the shallow water,
and by standing jammed foot to foot, from shore to
shore, they could prevent the fish escaping into deep
water. The shoal was two or three thousand steps of
shallow water, and as soon as the lines of feet and
legs were securely set at the two ends of it, the
whole nation plunged into the river amongst the pen-
ned-up great fish, and wallowing and tumbling in the
pleasant water, their gleeful shouts, while cap-
turing countless numbers of fish were heard to
ring from one end of the shoal to the other. It was
a great time with them the like of which had never
been seen by the Chahta tribe before. In a short
time they had taken sufficient for a big feast
Placing the fish on little scaffolds of poles
with fire beneath they were soon ready, and
they feasted and danced through the next night.
A second method of fishing involves a special kind of cylin-
By several ingenious contrivances they made shift
to take a great many fish from the river. The riv-
er was full of very large, fat fish, and the people
esteemed them so highly as the most delicious food,
that the temptation to try to capture them was very
great. One contrivance, and it was a most successful
one was to sew a fresh buffalo skin around a frame-
work made of a series of hoops, which were fastened to
small rods, so as to keep them in position. When the
skin was fastened to the hoops, it formed a large hol-
low tube, nearly as long as a man. One end of it was
laced up in a kind of open work with strips of raw-
hide. The hide at the other end extended far enough
beyond the framework to close up the aperture when it
was folded inwards to the center. Then all around the
edge of it they made small holes through which they
ran one end of a strong rawhide string. Then just in-
side the mouth they placed a loose hoop which was
barely strong enough to hold it open. It was now
complete. And placing it in the water when the bot-
tom was visible, with the mouth down stream, the pat-
ient fisherman, holding the drawstring in his hand,set-
ed himself on the bank, sedulously watching his trap as
it lay in the deep clear water, until the big catfish
(nakishtalali) would enter, when he would suddenly and
forcibly draw the string and close up the mouth of the
trap. And now raising the trap to the surface, the wa-
ter would run out through the open work at the hinder
end, when the trap would be dragged out on the shore;
and taking out his fish place his trap in the water a-
gain. In this manner they supplied themselves with con-
siderable quantities of fish. It was the odor of the
blood from the fresh buffalo hide that attracted the
fish; and when it had been used so long that it ceased
to taint the water, they would tie pieces of fresh meat
A third and much more briefly described method of fishing is
...and they pitched their scattered encampment along the
shores of the little river which was now dried into
pools. These pools were full of big fish; and by muddy-
ing the water they took plenty of them to supply the
camps with food the next day.
Brief mention is also made of catching fish by shooting with
arrows from a boat and by using metal hooks obtained from Euro-
Although in the Lincecum manuscript it is said that fish
were preserved by drying, the precise method is never described.
As for cooking fish, in one place it is stated that fish were
"roasted" and in another (cited above) that fish were broiled on
"little scaffolds of poles" with a fire underneath.
Food Gathering. Fruits are frequently mentioned as being
gathered and stored for winter use. But relatively few fruits
are named. Berries, some black in color, some red, are mentioned
as being eaten. Mulberries were collected in great quantities
and either eaten fresh or dried by old women and stored in "sacks
and cane baskets." The Choctaw also collected a large sweet,
black grape (panhki) that "matured toward the close of hot wea-
ther." Some of these grapes were placed in cane baskets and sub-
merged in water, presumably in streams and lakes. It is stated
that grapes preserved in this way kept well through most of the
Acorns, hickory nutq, chestnuts, and pecans were the princi-
pal nuts collected. Acorns and pecans (oksak fula) were gathered
from the ground by women, old people, and children and stored in
baskets made from "tall strong grass" that grew on the banks of
the water courses. There is one reference to men going to the
forest during a famine to rob bears and squirrels of stored
acorns and other nuts. The only variety of oak whose acorn is
specified is the post oak (chisha). There is no mention of the
preparation and use of acorn oil, but acorn mush (okshush) was an
important food in years when the corn crop was poor.
Various kinds of hickory nuts, identified as kavko, kamun
shagbarkk), and oksak, were collected by women and children. One
prepared dish that involved hickory nuts was oksak b o hickory
nut meats and parched corn beaten together in a mortar. When a
supply of unground corn was not available for oksak bahpo, cold
flour was sometimes used instead of parched corn.
Acorns, chestnuts, and hickory nuts were
...secured from the worms by the smoke-drying process
and then, in small quantities, encased in airtight mud
cells in the same manner that the mud daubers (lukchuk
chanuschik) preserved their spiders.
Seeds are mentioned as being stored for winter use, but none
is identified. There are several references to the use of roots
for food, but only one plant is identified. Small roots of young
pine trees were boiled until the "bark" was very soft. Apparent-
ly after being dried the roots were pounded in a mortar to yield
meal that was made into a bread.
Honey (fou bila) is referred to as something which the Choc-
taw encountered for the first time after they had reached the
Southeastern United States. Initially it was rare and each indi-
vidual kept some in a stoppered half-joint of cane. A few drops
from this receptacle were placed on the tongue "to sweeten the
mouth after eating meat."
Horticulture. Several references are made to clearing land
for "little corn and bean fields." No additional aboriginal do-
mesticated plants are named, but others are indicated by a state-
ment that "they planted corn and beans, and some other seeds of
food-producing plants." A number of new plants are said to have
been obtained foom the French at Mobile--beans (tobi), peas (tobi
hullo), pumpkins (isitol, and watermelson (shukshi). A statement
about the watermelon attests to the general popularity of this
fruit among Southeastern Indians:
They were so much delighted with the watermelon that
they saved every seed and cleared large plots of
ground for the next year.
The fields were prepared for planting in midwinter. Land
not previously cultivated was cleared by "cutting way the small
growth, and by peeling and burning the roots of the large trees."
One reference indicates that there was dancing on field plots ei-
ther before these were cleared of vegetation or before the soil
was turned with digging sticks. Men, women, and children all
participated in field work. Attempts were made to keep animals
away from the corn, particularly crows and squirrels. In some
places along the migration route the soil was very fertile, for
corn "grew higher than the length of two men, bearing three to
four, and sometimes five ears."
The principal agricultural tool was the digging stick, which
is described as
...a short heavy pole or limb of some kind of hard
wood which had been rendered still harder at one
end by frequent burning and rubbing off the char-
red portions, until it was reduced to a sharp
point. And when by digging with it, it became
blunted, the process of burning and rubbing was
again repeated, and the tool grows harder and bet-
ter every time it is thus sharpened.
After European metal axes were obtained by the Choctaw, it is
said that the manufacture of digging sticks was made easier. The
axes were used to cut and sharpen the digging sticks, but char-
ring and abrasion of the point continued, both initially and after
blunting from heavy usage. The digging stick was used by "men,
women, and children."
Among the domesticated plants known to have been used by the
Choctaw for food, only corn receives much attention. Green corn
was roasted on the cob (tanch hiloha), and this form of corn is
repeatedly, mentioned in connection with the annual Green Corn
There are several references to bread made from corn meal,
but only one form of bread is described. Women
hunted up the hardest ears of corn in their fields,
beat it to a meal in their mortars, and were able to
hang on the necks of their hunters a string of hard-
baked cakes, sufficient to last them three or four
days in the woods.
Scouts ("spies") also carried this portable form of bread.
At least two kinds of pulverized parched corn or cold flour
are indicated. One of these is bota lanschpa," the ordinary kind,"
which was made by pounding parched corn in a mortar. The other,
bota kapussa, was considered to be better because it tasted sweet-
er. It was made by boiling corn in pottery vessels until the
grains were swollen, partially drying them in the sun, then parch-
ing until slightly brown, and finally pulverizing in a mortar.
In the Lincecum manuscript bota kapussa is mentioned as a later
and easier process than bota lanschpa. Another term for cold
flour, tanchi bota, is occasionally used, and this refers to
dried, parched, and pulverized corn. It may be a third variety
of cold flour, but the descriptive details are so scanty that it
is difficult to distinguish from the other two forms. Cold
flour of all kinds was stored and transported in "sacks made of
dressed animal skin.
Tan fula or hominy was prepared in the following manner.
Dry shelled corn was pounded in a wooden mortar to crack the
grains and divest them of their husks. A quantity of processed
corn was placed in a pottery vessel and water added, the ratio of
water to corn being about three or four to one. The pot was set
four or five inches deep in a bed of cold, dry ashes, and fire
was applied around the sides of the vessel above the ashes. The
fire was so regulated as to keep the temperature "just up to the
boiling point and no more." From time to time small quantities
of "strong lye" were added, until the small bits of husk adhering
to the corn had assumed "a decidedly deep straw color." Water
was also added frequently to keep the liquid up to the original
level in the pot. This slow boiling continued from twelve to
eighteen hours, or until all the grains of corn were swollen,
turned inside out, and quite soft. By this time the tan fula had
acquired the consistency of a "thick soup." Then it was allowed
to cool. Some Choctaw ate tan fula when it had cooled down to
"about blood heat," but most preferred to eat it after it had
stood long enough to become quite sour. The "water or milk of
tan fula" was served to individuals who were ill and had fever.
Tan fula was a hospitality food in Choctaw communities. A
bowl of tan fula and a horn spoon rested on a small wooden plat-
form, and it was considered impolite if a visitor failed to take
at least a spoonful or two when he arrived.
For tan hlabo, kernels were cut from ears of green corn and
placed in a pot of water with meat, preferably fat meat, from any
animal considered edible. This was boiled slowly and lye was add-
ed from time to time, enough to give it "a very slight soapy flav-
or." Cooking continued until the meat dropped from the bone and
was "almost reduced to shreds." This dish, which was eaten warm,
was a popular food during the time of the year when green corn
was available. It was eaten during the annual Green Corn Dance.
Some people "kiln-dried" a part of their green corn and thus man-
aged to have tan hlabo during the winter.
Corn was preserved by encasing ears in dried clay, apparent-
ly the same method that was used for preserving certain kinds of
nuts described above. The Choctaw would
...gather corn dry it in the sun thoroughly then
lay it in small lots in a dry place, cover it with
a. coat of dry grass, then a thick coat of good clay
mortar well mixed with grass. When it was completed,
the numerous little piles of two or three baskets of
corn, each covered and arranged side by side, looked
like a big mud dauber's nest. In this manner they
could keep their corn sound and sweet from year to
Trade with French at Mobile. In the Lincecum manuscript
this trade is described in some detail. Trade items mentioned
include hides, antler and horn, nuts (chestnuts, hickory nuts,
and pecans), and beeswax, which the Choctaw exchanged for metal
arrowpoints, knives, axes and hatchets, fish hooks, guns and am-
munition (powder and lead), cloth, blankets, handkerchiefs, need-
les and thread, red paint, and glass beads. The effect of the
gun on Choctaw hunting patterns is shown in the following passage:
In the course of two or three winters, all the
hunters had guns and it changed the nature of the
hunt entirely. In place of the large companies and
laborious running surrounding and driving, men now
would sneak out alone and coldA accomplish more than
twenty men could with the bow and arrow, and never go
out of a walk. Besides it did not frighten off the
game like the old way of yelling and driving.
Summary and Conclusions. This paper has presented previous-
ly unpublished data on Choctaw subsistence that is derived from a
single Choctaw informant in eastern Mississippi during the years
1823-1825. As the informant was very old when interviewed, and
his material is primarily a version of the Choctaw origin and mi-
gration legend, it is assumed that the cultural data are attribu-
table to a period no later than the latter part of the eighteenth
century. Most of the truly informative accounts of early Choctaw
culture date from this same century.
The ethnographic detail in the Lincecum manuscript appears
to be accurate in general, for it can be verified in most cases
by comparison with the various descriptions of early Choctaw cul-
ture, most of which have been brought together by Swanton (1931,
1946). In many instances the Lincecum manuscript is much richer
in ethnographic detail than any other early source. This is es-
pecially true for foodstuffs, food processing, and methods of
Swanton (1946: 293-295) has compiled a list of plants and
animals early reported as being used by the Choctaw for food. He
lists 22 plants, seven of which are mentioned in the Lincecum
manuscript. But the manuscript refers to six additional plants
not on the Swanton list. The list of animals given by Swanton is
small, only seven, six of which are mentioned in the Lincecum
manuscript. In the manuscript, however, 16 additional animal
forms are mentioned. In general, the Lincecum manuscript agrees
with Swanton's data, and it also extensively supplements them. It
is of interest to note that almost all of the plants and animals
mentioned in the Lincecum manuscript also occur on Swanton's list
for the Southeast as a whole.
One discrepancy between the Lincecum manuscript and other
sources has to do with agricultural tools. In the Lincecum manu-
script the digging stick is the only agricultural tool mentioned.
Swanton (1931: 46) states, without citing specific sources, that
the Choctaw "aboriginal implement was a crude hoe made out of the
shoulder blade of a bison, a stone, or on the coast a large shell"'
He also adds that a stick was used to make holes for planting
seeds. In the Lincecum manuscript a bison scapula (apparently un-
hafted) is mentioned as being used as a digging tool for burial
mound construction, but there is no indication that it was used
for horticultural purposes. The clear description of the form,
method of manufacture, and usage of the digging stick in the manu-
script suggests that this tool, rather than the hoe, may have
been the "aboriginal agricultural implement" of the Choctaw.
A number of items mentioned in the Lincecum manuscript are
either new for the Choctaw or for the Southeast as a whole. None
of the methods of fishing has previously been recorded for the
Choctaw, and the "fish drive" and skin-covered fish trap with
drawstring are new for the Southeast. However, Swanton (1946:
343-344) reports that the Creek caught fish by muddying pools in
stream beds, and he also cites a reference to the same practice
in the records of the De Soto expedition.
The use of young pine roots for food appears to be unique in
the Southeast, and the same is true of underwater storage of
grapes. The unusual method of storing corn and nuts in dried
clay also has not been previously recorded for any of the South-
eastern Indians. It will be noted that removal of moisture pre-
ceded the application of clay, corn being sun-dried and nuts
smoke-dried. The addition of grass to the clay would help pre-
vent formation of cracks when it dried. This plausible technique
should be of interest to archeologists working in the Southeast,
for it might be possible to find evidence of this practice in ex-
cavations. These new traits must of course be accepted provision-
ally, pending verification in new and more reliable sources as
these come to light.
This study has shown that analysis of some folklore mater-
ials can yield reliable information on cultures that are no long-
er functioning, provided that a substantial portion of the data
can be validated by comparison with conventional documentary rec-
Biographical information on Lincecum may be found in Camp-
bell (1951: 285-286), Geiser (1948: 199-214), and Lincecum (1904a).
Witthoft (1949: 70) comments on the paucity and somewhat
contradictory nature of the evidence for the existence of a green
corn ceremony among the Choctaw. In the Lincecum manuscript the
Green Corn Dance is referred to scores of times, and it is clear
that it was a focal point in their ceremonial life. However, the
manuscript contains very little descriptive data on behavior
associated with this ceremony.
Edwards (1932: 406) states that among the Choctaw of Indian
Territory fish were "almost universally eschewed," and Bushnell
(1909: 9, 19) says that in 1909 the Choctaw of Bayou Lacomb, Lou-
isiana, seldom fished or ate fish. Swanton (1946: 343-344), how-
ever, found that the modern Choctaw of eastern Mississippi have
retained the earlier interest in fish and fishing that is reflec-
ted in the Lincecum manuscript.
No details on the preparation of acorn mush are given, and
there is no indication that pulverized acorns were leached before
being used for food, as is described in an early French source
(Swanton, 1918: 58) and by Bushnell (1909: 8) for the modern Choc-
taw of southern Louisiana. Another late source (Edwards, 1932:
407) reports that meat was sometimes included in acorn mush, but
the Lincecum manuscript is also silent on this point.
Bahar, reported by Crossett (1926: 107-108) among the Choc-
taw of Indian Territory, seems to be a modified form of oksak bah
po. Bahar consist- of hickory nuts and walnuts, parched corn,
and sugar. Byington (1915: 83) defines bahpo as a pudding made
of corn and peanuts, both parched before being pulverized to-
gether. He also states that meats of hickory nuts were sometimes
used instead of peanuts. Christian (1931: 164) describes a "hic-
kory-nut hominy" that is probably not greatly different from
oksak bahpo of the Lincecum manuscript. The Choctaw of southern
Louisiana make a broth of pounded-hickory nut meats only (Bush-
nell, 1909: 8).
This is verified by Swanton (1931: 46), who states that
"before the cornfields were cleared there was a dance."
For the method of green corn roasting among Oklahoma Choc-
taw, see Christian (1931: 164) and Hudson (1939: 335).
In his Choctaw dictionary Byington (1915) lists bota lashpa
and bota kapassa, but not tanchi bota. In Byington the nearest
thing to tanchi bota is bota tanshpa, "corn flour made of corn
parched without being boiled," which seems to be the same as bota
lanshpa in the Lincecum manuscript. The status of tanchi bota
remains in doubt. Bota kapussa, as prepared in Oklahoma (Hudson,
1939: 334-335), seems to be the same as Lincecum's bota lanschpa,
for the corn was not boiled and dried before parching.
Tan fula continued to be a. common Choctaw dish in Oklahoma
during the nineteenth century (Christian, 1931: 163-164; Crossett,
1926: 106; Edwards, 1932: 406-407; Hudson, 1939: 333), but it was
cooked in iron vessels for a much shorter period of time (four
hours, according to Crossett). A frontier Anglicization of Choc-
taw tan fula is Tom Fuller.
Byington (1915) gives tan hlabo as tanlubo and translates
it as "hominy," but from the data in the Lincecum manuscript it
appears to ba a kind of stew. Hudson (1939: 333), referring to
Choctaw preparation of this dish in Oklahoma, indicates that it
was made from mature shelled corn, not green corn. Christian
(1931: 164-165) mentions dried kernels of roasted green corn cook-
ed with chicken, but the Choctaw name for this is not given.
Bushnell, David I., Jr.
1909. The Choctaw of Bayou Lacomb, St. Tammany Parish, Lou-
isiana. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 48.
1915. A Dictionary of the Choctaw Language (edited by John
R. Swanton and Henry S. Halbert). Bureau of American
Ethnology Bulletin 46.
Campbell, T. N.
1951. Medicinal Plants Used by Choctaw, Chickasaw, and
Creek Indians in the Early Nineteenth Century. Jour-
nal of the Washington Academy of Sciences, Vol. 41,
No. 9, pp. 285-290.
Christian, Emma Ervin
1931. Memories of My Childhood Days in the Choctaw Nation,
Chronicles of Oklahoma, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 115-165.
Crossett, G. A.
1926. A Vanishing Pace. Chronicles of Oklahoma, Vol. 4,No.
2, pp. 100-115.
1932. The Choctaw Indians in the Middle of the Nineteenth
Century (edited by John R. Swanton). Chronicles of
Oklahoma, Vol. 10, No. 3, pp. 392-425.
Geiser, Samuel Wood
1948. Naturalists of the Frontier. Dallas.
Hudson, Peter J.
1939. Choctaw Indian Dishes. Chronicles of Oklahoma, Vol.
17, No. 3, pp. 333-335
1940a. Autobiography of Gideon Lincecum. Publications of
the Mississippi Historical Society, Vol.8,pp. 443-519
1904b. Choctaw Traditions About Their Settlement in Missis-
sippi and the Origin of the Mounds. Publications of
the Mississippi Historical Society, Vol. 8, pp. 521-
Pilling, James Constantine
1889. Bibliography of the Muskhogean Language. Bureau of
American Ethnology Bulletin 9.
Swanton, John R.
1918. An Early Account of the Choctaw Indians. Memoirs of
the American Anthropological Association, Vol. 5, No.
2, pp. 53-72.
1931. Source Material for the Social and Ceremonial Life of
the Choctaw Indians. Bureau of American Ethnology
1946. The Indians of the Southeastern United States. Bureau
of American Ethnology Bulletin 137.
1949. Green Corn Ceremonialism in the Eastern Woodlands. Oc-
casional Contributions from the Museum of Anthropolog
of the University of Michigan, No. 13.
The Florida Anthropologist, Vol. XII, No. 1, 1959
A-296--A SEMINOLE SITE IN ALACHUA COUNTY
William H. Sears
This brief report is intended to make available the data
from the smallest archaeological site I have ever excavated. It
was located approximately three miles east of the center of
Gainesville and three-quartess of a mile west of Newnans Lake, on
the upper edge of a sandy slope which drops down to a small inter-
mittent stream. Sherds and other traces of Indian occupancy were
found in a small area about thirty feet in diameter.
The site was discovered by Wayne Lasnik, a Gainesville High
School student, who knew of our interest in the Seminole occupa-
tion of this area. His location of the few surface sherds under
a heavy growth of grass and brush, speaks highly of his persever-
ance. Excavation, supervised by the writer, was done by Lasnik
and two of his friends, Jerry Evans and Bobby Lynn. All three of
the boys were volunteers. Dr. John M. Goggin and several of his
students assisted us on the first day. Two hired laborers were
used for a few hours to complete the project. Our thanks are ex-
tended to all of these persons.
The maximum depth of material in the soft sandy soil was one
foot. Figure 1 outlines the relevant portion of the excavation
and gives the position of some post-holes and the dark soil area
from which most of the specimens came. Presumably the oddly-
shaped post-holes represent some sort of flimsy structure related
to the Seminole potsherds and the dark stain. Some rough trench-
ing indicates that post-holes and dark soil below the plow zone
are limited in their association to each other and the sherds.
The odd shape of the post-holes seems to have been produced by
their having all been pushed over in the same direction. Their
vertical cross sections are V-shaped along the long axis and U-
shaped across the shorter axis.
I Post Holes
---Encloses Midden Stain
Edge of Relevant Excavation
Six hundred and seventy-nine herds, one projectile point,
two fragments of a trade pipestem, and a few unidentifiable
flakes of thin rusty iron were excavated.
Type and Variety Distribution
Chattahoochee Brushed---545 plus 2 rims--547--80.6% total
Plain rough------------- 68 plus 41 rims-109--16.1i total
Plain smooth------------ 18 plus 2 rims- 20-- 2.95 total
Red filmed-------------- 1
St. Johns Plain--------- 2
Chattahoochee Brushed (Variant): These sherds (P1. I) have the
brushed exterior finish which is typical of Creek, Seminole, and
certain other southeastern pottery (Goggin, 1958). The interiors
are quite well smoothed. Surface color runs from buff to dark
gray, core color from light to dark gray. Most sherds are hard
and sand-tempered with slight to profuse quantities of fine to
coarse sand, plus a few small shaley pebbles. A few sherds are
soft, crumbly, and have a lot of pebbles and only a little sand.
The two extremes grade into one another, indicating that they are
variations in the same tradition.
The rims which were found are listed and described below.
Only two rims which were definitely from brushed jars were found,
but one neck sherd does lose the brushing at the point of maximum
constriction. I suspect that most of the coarse plain rims are
from brushed jars. Another feature of some interest is that in-
terior of the flared rims in all instances is not well smoothed,
but looks as if they had been finished by impression against a
somewhat irregular surface. Indicated vessel form is a round-
bottomed jar with a slightly constricted neck and rim flared ab-
ruptly to a nearly vertical lip.
This brushed ware might almost as well have been classified
as a variant of Stokes Brushed (Goggin, 1952: 112-113) as Chatta-
hoochee Brushed (Bullen, 1950: 103) but is not precisely either
one as they have been defined. The sherds in this A-296 collect-
ion share characteristics with both types. I used the Chattahoo-
chee term because I am more familiar with this type. The collect-
ion of pottery described as Chattahoochee Brushed in the Kasita
site report (Willey and Sears, 1952: 5-6) included body sherds
similar to those in this Florida collection as well as (in most
cases) specimens fitting the emphasis on light color and interior
"wash" of the original type description. I suggest then that
such collections as mine be described in their own terms under
such a general label as "Chattahoochee Brushed." Variants would
not then be given type status until it was certain that the varia-
tion had specific historical significance, that it was not a nor-
mal variation within a rather elastic tradition. This procedure
is in line with that suggested by Goggin in his recent survey of
Seminole and related ceramics (Goggin, 1958).
Plain Rough: These sherds differ from the brushed ware only in
that they lack the brushing.
Plain Smooth: These specimens have well smoothed interior and ex-
terior surfaces. They tend to have lighter surface and core
colors and to use finer sand in sparser amounts than the above
Red Filmed: One plain smooth sherd has traces of red paint on
its exterior surface. Classification as Kasita Fed Filmed is un-
Two fragments fror the stems of kaolin trade pipes were
found. Holes in both are almost exactly 1/16th of an inch in dia-
A few fragments of thin, badly rusted iron sheet turned up
in the dark earth around the postholes.
This small area with its postholes, midden stain and arti-
facts probably represent, the remains of a small temporary struc-
ture occupied by a few people for a short period of time. A tem-
porary shelter near a farm area is a possibility.
Neither precise dating, nor ethnic identification, other
than a general label as Serinole (the only Florida residents
known to have made brushed pottery), iS possible at this time.
The lack of trade goods may be relevant in consideration, of time
In regards to ethnic identification, there is some reason to
suspect that modes of lip and rim treatment will ultimately be of
greater value as ceramic indicators of various Creek and Seminole
groups in specific, definable time periods than pottery types as
such, unless, of course, pottery types are to be defined on
single mode variation. Thiq scarcely seems desirable. For ex-
ample, this sample, overlapping heavily with Chattahoochee Brush-
ed in paste and interior finish, identical to it in surface
treatment, contains none of the luted rim strips which character-
ized the Kasita collection (Sears and Willey, 1952:8). The only
consistently distinctive feature then is rim-lip treatment, so
readily distinguishable as to indicate considerable potential
utility, but not a basis for establishment of separate types, in
Bullen, Ripley P.
1950. An Archeological Survey of the Chattahoochee River
Valley in Florida. Jour. of the Wash. Acad. of Sci-
Goggin, John M.
1952. Space and Time Perspective in Northern St. Johns Arch-
eology, Florida. Yale University Publications in Anth-
ropology. No. 47.
1958. Seminole Pottery Statement, 1-9-53; Seminole Pottery
Conclusions, 1-9-53; Seminole Pottery Appendix,1-4-58.
Prehistoric Pottery, E. U. S., Ann Arbor.
Willey, Gordon R., and William H. Sears
1952. The Kasita Site. Southern Indian Studies, Vol. IV.
Florida State Museum
Seminole Pottery. A, B, C, E-Coarse Plain ware; A B-diagonally
notched flat lip; C-edge-notched rounded lip; E-Angled rim
rounded lip; F-sherd from neck, lower part brushed, upper part
plain; D, G. H-Chattahoochee Brushed variant body sherds.
Direct rounded lip flared
plain, notched lip--- 4
brushed, plain lip -- 1
Flat lip, flared
notched diagonally across lip---10
Rounded lip, angled
plain lip, brushed --1.
Rounded thickened lip-------------2
Smooth Plain Ware
Arrows on cross-sections point to location of notches.
-4 Figures give notch locations as seen on lip.
Southeastern Indians Life Portraits. Emma Lila Fundaburk,
ed. Luverne, Ala: Published by the author, 1958. 135 pp., 350
Reviewed by Charles H. Fairbanks
The publication of this volume, subtitled "A catalogue of
pictures 1564-1860", marks the second time the author has issued
a lavishly illustrated book on the southeastern Indians. Her
earlier "Sun Circles and Human Hands" was a major synthesis of
southeastern art and craft objects. The present volume will be
equally welcome to all southeastern anthropologists, both pro-
fessional and non-professional. This is a worthy successor to
the earlier book.
The book is printed on coated paper and the pictures are in
general rather small, sometimes as many as twelve to the page.
The page size of 10i by 7J inches, however, is quite adequate. In
some cases the pictures, especially of groups of Indians, are so
small that detail is generally lacking. These defects are not
serious, however, as the pictures are attractively arranged on
the pages and give a very excellent survey of the southeastern
Indian as pictured over 300 years. The coverage seems to be un-
usually complete for published pictures of the southeastern In-
dians during the years covered. In addition Miss Fundaburk has
published a number of unpublished pictures as well as many that
have been printed only in obscure places.
The arrangement is chronological with a further separation
by tribes. The book begins with the De Bry drawings from Le
Moyne of the Timucua, followed by De Bry's drawings after White
of the Virginia Indians. She also reproduces the lesser known
White originals from the British Museum. Some of these are quite
similar to the De Bry copies. Others are new or have differing
details. The 17th Century is represented only by the Smith iap
of Virginia., two Pocabontas portraits and a Virginia Indian paint-
ed by Hollar. The 18th century is somewhat more complete with il-
lustrations from Graffenried, Michel, Du Pratz, Verelst, De Batz,
Parsons, Bartram, Trumbal, etc. Some are well known, others
quite scarce. The 19th century is the most voluminous, as might
be expected. King, the McKenney and Hall portraits by King,
Stanley and others, Lesueur, Catlin, Vinton, Mollhausen, and
others are shown.
Following the plates there are nearly forty pages of "Notes
on the Illustrations". The notes consist of an identification of
the picture, the artist, and the original publication or archival
location. Often the original narrative which accompanied the
picture is quoted. The notes contain enough information to iden-
tify the picture and give something of the background pertaining
to it. Most of this is not new material, although in some cases
Miss Fundaburk has noted the results of recent scholarship. In-
cluded are biographical sketches, largely from the "Handbook of
American Indians" of the individuals in the McKenney and Hall and
This section is followed by "Bibliography and Index" of
three pages. The bibliography section is not the usual author
list but is a long quotation from Swanton's "Indians of the South-
eastern United States" (pp. 827-832) discussing the sources of
primary documents dealing with the southeastern Indians. The in-
dex is divided into owners of pictures; artists, engravers, auth-
ors, and other subjects. The last lists tribes and individuals.
It is quite comprehensive.
It seems to this reviewer that this is a highly useful book
for all interested in American Indians and the southeast. It
gathers in one place all the pictorial material on the area. The
small size of some of the reproductions will mean that the stud-
ent of costume or other detail will have to go to the original.
But the pictures are here in one place, in a modern edition, and
the grouping is logical, the coverage comprehensive. This is the
kind of book we have long needed. Miss Fundaburk's two books
truly ought to be very popular with all students of the Southern
The Florida State University
Caldwell, Joseph R.
1958. Trend and tradition in the prehistory of the eastern
United States. American Anthropological Assoc., Mem. No. 88(and
Scientific Papers, Vol. X., Illinois State Museum).Menasha, Wisc.
pp. xiv, 88, 14 figs. $1.50.
Caldwell proposes that the eastern United States was one
single diffusion sphere after Archaic times. He sees three major
treads in the area as: (1) the establishment of an efficient for-
est collecting efficiency based on nuts and acorns, (2) the dom-
inance of regional differentiation and stylistic change with
little evolunionary advance, (3) increasing influences from Mid-
dle America. He believes that the direction of eastern cultural
evolution was not toward an agricultural, sedentary pattern, but
remained based heavily on a forest collecting economy.
The author introduces a number of new periods or refine-
ments into the existing chronological framework of the southeast.
Some of these are based on his own unpublished work and thus are
not readily verifiable by others. He considers Florida only per-
ipherally, but many of his speculations are very important to the
area. Thus his ideas about the role of the Gulf Tradition are of
considerable interest. Many will differ with him on details of
interpretation. Most will agree that this is a valuable attempt
at a summary and interpretation of eastern prehistory.
Roberts, Frank H. H., Jr.
1958. River Basin Surveys Papers. Inter-Agency Arch-
eological Salvage Progrnm. Numbers 9-14. Bureau of American Eth-
nology, Bulletin 169. Washington, D. C. pp. ix, 392, 12 plates,
2 figs, 2 maps. $3.25.
The third volume of the River Basin Surveys Papers contains
two papers of special interest to Floridians. Mark F. Boyd's
paper on historic sites in the Jim Woodruff Reservoir (pp. 195-
314) and Ripley P.Bullcn's paper on six sites in the same reser-
voir (pp. 315-358). Both are valuable and interesting.
THE FLORIDA ANTHROPOLOGIST
VOL. XII MARCH, 1959 NO. 1
Excavations in Dade County during
1957 .............................D. D. Laxson 1
Choctaw subsistence: Ethnographic notes o
from the Lincecum Manucrip ...... T. N. Capebell 9
A-296--A Seminole site in Alachna
County...........................William H. Sears 25
Book Peview: Southeastern Indians Life
Portraits (Emma Lila Fundaburk)...Chap. H. Fairbanks 31 .
Book Notices.....................C. H. F.
Inside back cover
The Florida Anthropologist publishes manuscripts on any
subject pertaining to Florida or Southeastern anthropology.
Manuscripts should be typed on one side of the sheet only,
with 65 spaces to the line, 35 lines to the page. Tables 1
must be typed in final form with inked lines. Citations
should follow the style of The American Anthropologist. Foot-
notes and bibliography should be typed on separate pages.
Members must advise the editor of change of address.
Current postal regulations make it prohibitive for the Society
to provide forwarding service. If you do not advise us of your
new address, you will not receive the Florida Anthropologist.