Specifically, Beehr looked at the relative proportions of two isotopes, or varieties, of the element strontium that had been incorporated into the structure of the teeth of these people over the course of their lives. The relative proportions of these isotopes vary from place to place allowing scientists to determine whether individuals buried in an Ohio mound might actually have come from some
other part of the country. Beehr's results provide a wealth of information regarding the lives of these individuals as well as insights into the broader patterns of population movement during this remarkable period of Ohio’s past.Among her results is the observation that the Hopewell Mound Group in Ohio was “experiencing higher levels of immigration than the two Illinois sites.” Based on their differing ratios of the two strontium isotopes she identified five “potential immigrants” at the Hopewell Mound Group. Beehr reports that these five people appear to match the isotopic signature of Minnesota populations, but she cautions that these data do not prove that this was their actual homeland. There might be other areas that will prove to have similar strontium isotope signatures once samples from these areas are tested.
Four of the potential immigrants were females suggesting that the Hopewell practiced what is known as patrilocal residence – meaning males remained in their home communities and females left home to live with their husband’s families. Two of these female potential immigrants, however, were represented by either an isolated skull or mandible. Often, these detached skulls and mandibles are interpreted as trophies of war, but since these were older females and not males, who are more likely to have been warriors, Beehr argues that this interpretation is unlikely. Perhaps they are the remains of venerated women -- equivalent to Christian saints whose bones were cherished as relics because they were believed to possess spiritual power.
Beehr concludes that the Hopewell Mound Group not only had the largest number of potential immigrants of the three sites she studied, but
that it had the most variability in strontium isotope ratios, “suggesting that its population came from a wider variety of potential homelands than the other sites.Moreover, Beehr notes that her study may be underestimating the amount of migration in these Hopewell groups, since immigrants may have been coming from other regions that happened to have similar strontium isotopic signatures.
Regardless, these results affirm the importance of the Hopewell Mound Group as a particularly important center of the Hopewell culture, which attracted large numbers of people from different regions. The idea that the monumental Hopewell earthwork complexes were pilgrimage destinations for a wide area of eastern North America is consistent with these data.
Beehr’s research, undertaken with teeth from 25 ancient human remains curated by the Ohio Historical Society (the other 13 Hopewell individuals are curated by the Field Museum in Chicago), hints at how much we still can learn from these traces of ancient human lives and reminds us of the value of the respectful curation of these few actual witnesses of the amazing achievements of the Hopewell culture. Their testimony is helping to fill in the blank pages of Ohio’s history.
Here is a link to Beehr's dissertation:
Posts
4 comments:
What is the approximate date of the samples?
The Hopewell culture dates, in general, from about 100 BC to as late as AD 400.
Hi Brad
I read over the dissertation very quickly. I must commend the author for her thorough research and great control of the theory and methodology of strontium analysis. Her work deserves being read. I am particularly interested in her conclusion because, of course, I am quite interested in the Hopewellian phenomenon and the nature of the long distance interaction that it maps. I would agree with your comments that her work has demonstrated that the Hopewell site served as a major focus of attention and interaction in the Midwest. However, I would make one slight suggestion. The author has assumed that the distribution of human bones can serve to map immigration-emigration patterns. She is right, of course, but only if it is assumed that the person whose bones are being studied died in the proximal place where his/her bones were excavated. What if that person lived and died in the central Illinois valley but her/his bones were found in Mound 25 on the North Fork of the Paint Creek in Ohio? Of course, one might immediately respond and say - impossible. However, don't be too hasty. We know that historically the traditional Native American peoples carried the bones of companions and kin for sometimes several years and where they were finally deposited might be many miles from where their boon companions or close kin had died. Add to this possibility the argument that I have made that many of the deceased whose mortuary remains were excavated in the Hopewell Mound 25 likely died many miles distant from the site. I have argued that one of the most important forms of symbolic capital for Ohio Hopewellian groups was the bones of the dead since these served as postmortem sacrificial offerings in complex world renewal rituals. Furthermore, tied into the mortuary practices were sacred games for which sodalities travelled many miles to play and at the same time, they carried the bundles of the sacred bones of their deceased companions in order to participate. It is quite possible, then, that bones of persons who were born, raised and died in Illinois could end up in Ohio as part of Hopewellian interregional interaction -- or vice cersa, of course. A great deal more research is required to see if this hypothesis can be confirmed. but I see the type of research underwriting this dissertation as having great potential for this purpose.
All the best
Martin Byers
Isotopic analysis has been used at many Classic era Maya sites (AD 250-900) where post-mortem movement of bones and secondary burials also occurred. That's why it's very important to provide detailed descriptions of the burial contexts in biogeochmical studies. Isotopes are just numbers, and we can't make sense of ancient migration without 1) nuanced analysis of the burials themselves, and 2) a theoretical framework that addresses how migration might have been structured. I only read the dissertation quickly (my research reconstructs population movement in the eastern Maya lowlands), but am really happy to have more cross-cultural comparisons to use. Thanks for posting this.
Post a Comment