Mussel Remains from Prehistoric Salt Works, Clarke County, Alabama

The “cultural filter,” human transport of mussel shell, and the applied potential of zooarchaeological data

“…We do not contend that natural scientists have ignored data on archaeological mussel shell; indeed, a number of publications in the biological literature would belie such an assertion (e.g., Ortmann 1909, Parmalee 1956, Stansbery 1966, Murphy 1971, Murray 1981, Barber 1982, Taylor and Spurlock 1982, Call and Robinson 1983, Gordon 1983, Robison 1983, Neves et al 1997:51-52, Hughes and Parmalee 1999, Williams and Fradkin 1999, Lyons et al 2007, Haag 2009a. There also exists a body of work reflecting cross-disciplinary collaborations between archaeologists and natural scientists (e.g., Hughes and Parmalee 1999, Peacock et al 2005, McGregor and Dumas 2010. We do contend, however, that archaeological faunal data in general remain underused.…”

“…The shells of locally available shellfish also presumably accumulated via a series of short-term depositional events, but more frequent use of an abundant, near-athand resource would have led to more constant incorporation into general midden deposits. An example is provided by Rangia cuneata (marsh clam) shells found in unionid mussel middens at a number of prehistoric sites on the Lower Tombigbee River in southern Alabama (e.g., McGregor and Dumas 2010). Archaeological specimens are found significantly north of where this brackish-water species occurs today (E. Peacock, S. W. McGregor, and A.…”

“…For the Tombigbee River drainage in Mississippi and Alabama, we have data on 71 984 mussel valves identifiable at least to genus (with a minimum of 43 species represented) from 23 sites in nine counties in Mississippi and Alabama (see Peacock 2009, McGregor and Dumas 2010, Peacock et al 2011; and E. Peacock, S. W. McGregor, and A. A. Dumas, unpublished manuscript, for original data tables), that allow us to look at sample characteristics throughout the drainage basin.…”