Prehistoric Diet in Southwest Texas: The Coprolite Evidence | American Antiquity | Cambridge Core (original) (raw)

Abstract

This report discusses the various kinds of data that are recoverable from the analysis of human coprolites and demonstrates how these techniques are applied to the specific analysis of prehistoric human coprolites recovered from site 41 VV 162 in southwest Texas. The data from these 43 coprolite samples are used to: (1) reconstruct aboriginal diet patterns in southwest Texas between 800 B.C. and A.D. 500; (2) predict specific periods of seasonal site occupancy; (3) distinguish between pollen resulting from the eating of certain plant foods and background pollen resulting from the normal pollen rain; and (4) make limited generalizations concerning the regional paleoenvironment between 800 B.C. and A.D. 500.

References

Barrows, D. P. 1900 The ethnobotany of the Coahuilla Indians of southern California. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Chicago Library.Google Scholar

Bohrer, Vorsila L. 1972 Paleoecology of the Hay Hollow Site, Arizona. Fieldiana, Anthropology 63(1):1–30.Google Scholar

Bryant, Vaughn M. Jr., 1969 Late full-glacial and post-glacial pollen analysis of Texas sediments. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Texas at Austin Library.Google Scholar

Bryant, Vaughn M. Jr., 1974 Pollen analysis of prehistoric human feces from Mammoth Cave, Kentucky. In: Archeology of the Mammoth Cave area, pp. 203–209. Academic Press.Google Scholar

Callen, Eric O. 1967 Analysis of the Tehuacan Coprolites. The prehistory of the Tehuacan Valley: Vol. I. Environment and subsistence, pp. 261–289. University of Texas Press, Austin.Google Scholar

Callen, Eric O., and Cameron, T. W. M. 1960 A prehistoric diet revealed in coprolites. The New Scientist 8(190):3540.Google Scholar

Castetter, E. F., and Bell, W. H. 1942 Pima and Papago Indian agriculture. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.Google Scholar

Collins, Michael B. 1969 Test excavations at Amistad International Reservoir, fall, 1967. Papers of the Texas Archeological Salvage Project 16.Google Scholar

Curtin, L. S. M. 1949 By the prophet of the earth. San Vicente Foundation, Santa Fe, NM.Google Scholar

Cutler, Hugh C, and Meyer, Winton 1965 Corn and cucurbits from Wetherill Mesa. American Antiquity Memoir 19:136–152.Google Scholar

Faegri, Knut, and Iversen, Johs 1966 Textbook of pollen analysis. Hafner, New York.Google Scholar

Flannery, Kent V. 1967 Vertebrate fauna and hunting patterns. The prehistory of the Tehuacan Valley: Vol. I. Environment and subsistence, pp. 132–177. University of Texas Press. Austin.Google Scholar

Flyr, David 1966 A preliminary check list of plants in the Amistad Reservoir area. In: A preliminary study of the paleoecology of the Amistad Reservoir Area, pp. 33–60. Final report of research sent to the National Science Foundation.Google Scholar

Fry, Gary F. 1970 Prehistoric human ecology in Utah: based on the analysis of coprolites. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Utah Library.Google Scholar

Hevly, Richard. H. 1964 Pollen analysis of quaternary archeological and lacustrine sediments from the Colorado Plateau. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Arizona Library.Google Scholar

Hevly, R. H., Mehringer, P. J. Jr., and Yocum, H. G. 1965 Studies of the modern pollen rain in the Sonoran Desert. Journal ofthe Arizona Academy of Science 3(3):123–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hill, James N., and Hevly, Richard H. 1968 Pollen at Broken K Pueblo: some new interpretations. A merican Antiquity 33(2):200–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lumley, Henri de 1966 A new pinyon variety from Texas. Wrightia 3(8): 181–187.Google Scholar

Little, Elbert L. 1969 A paleolithic camp at Nice. Scientific American 220(5):42–50.Google Scholar

Mangelsdorf, Paul C, MacNeish, Richard S., and Galinat, Walton C. 1967 Prehistoric wild and cultivated maize. The prehistory of the Tehuacan Valley: Vol. I. Environment and subsistence, pp. 178–200. University of Texas Press, Austin.Google Scholar

Martin, Paul S., and Sharrock, F. W. 1964 Pollen analysis of prehistoric human feces: a new approach to ethnobotany. American Antiquity 30(2):168–180.Google Scholar

Napton, Lewis K., and Kelso, G. 1969 Preliminary palynological analysis of Lovelock Cave coprolites. Archeological and paleobiological investigations in Lovelock Cave, Nevada. Kroeber Anthropological Society Special Publications 2:19–27.Google Scholar

Newberry, J. S. 1887 Food and fiber plants of the North American Indians. Popular Science Monthly 32:31–46.Google Scholar

Palmer, E. 1878 Plants used by the Indians of the United States. American Naturalist 12:593–606.Google Scholar

Potter, Loren D. 1967 Differential pollen accumulation in water-tank sediments and adjacent soils. Ecology 48(6): 1041–1043.Google Scholar

Riskind, David H. 1970 Pollen analysis of human coprolites from Parida Cave. Papers of Texas Archeological Salvage Project 19:89–101.Google Scholar

Schoenwetter, James 1962 Pollen analysis of eighteen archeological sites in Arizona and New Mexico. Chapters in the Prehistory of Eastern Arizona, I. Fieldiana: Anthropology 35:168–209.Google Scholar

Smith, C. Earle Jr., 1967 Plant remains. The prehistory of the Tehuacan Valley: Vol. I. Environment and subsistence, pp. 220–255. University of Texas Press, Austin.Google Scholar

Smith, C. E., Callen, E. O., Cutler, H. C., Galinat, W. C., Kaplan, L., Whitaker, T. W., and Yarnell, R. A. 1966 Bibliography of American archeological plant remains. Economic Botany 20(4):446–460.Google Scholar

Story, Dee Ann, and Bryant, V. M. Jr., 1966 A preliminary study of the paleoecology of the Amistad Reservoir area, pp. 1–255. Final report of research sent to the National Science Foundation.Google Scholar