2015
DOI: 10.1017/s0959774314000699
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Ritualized Deposition and Feasting Pits: Bundling of Animal Remains in Mississippi Period Florida

Abstract: Interactions with the bodies of hunted animals often follow prescriptions pertaining to social relationships among human and non-human persons. Despite this, deposits of archaeological food remains are seldom considered in terms of deliberate placement, instead serving primarily as reflections of preparation and consumption activities. The residues of feasts, in particular, are often highlighted as indexes of special consumption events, although such salient occasions might also be expected to highlight ritual… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The material demands attending sociocosmic obligations can be substantial and impact activities over months or years. For instance, it is not unusual for ritual events involving ancestors or otherworldly forces to require provisions of extraordinary scale and substance (e.g., Claassen 2010; DeBoer 2001; Gamble 2017; Kassabaum 2014; Luby and Gruber 1999; Wallis and Blessing 2015). Likewise, feasts in which “guests from the spirit world also had a seat at the feasting table” involved the production of material surpluses to meet cosmic debt (Cobb and Stephenson 2017:147).…”
Section: Ritual Economymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The material demands attending sociocosmic obligations can be substantial and impact activities over months or years. For instance, it is not unusual for ritual events involving ancestors or otherworldly forces to require provisions of extraordinary scale and substance (e.g., Claassen 2010; DeBoer 2001; Gamble 2017; Kassabaum 2014; Luby and Gruber 1999; Wallis and Blessing 2015). Likewise, feasts in which “guests from the spirit world also had a seat at the feasting table” involved the production of material surpluses to meet cosmic debt (Cobb and Stephenson 2017:147).…”
Section: Ritual Economymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recent zooarchaeological research demonstrates the value of faunal data for answering questions about people's worldviews and perspectives on human-animal relations in the past. For example, in the Americas, scholars have argued that the deposition of symbolic or bundled taxa in pits associated with feasting events (Kelly 2000;Kelly and Kelly 2007;Pauketat et al 2002) and ceremonial offerings (Alaica 2018;Wallis and Blessing 2015) provides unique insights into people's social and spiritual relationships with different animal communities. Zooarchaeologists working in Eurasia have also cited evidence of intentional non-human burials and cremations to argue that people afforded personhood and/or symbolic meaning to certain animals in the past (Crabtree 1995;Losey et al 2011;Reshef et al 2019).…”
Section: Theoretical and Interpretive Frameworkmentioning
confidence: 99%