Trends and Traditions in Southeastern Zooarchaeology

8. Behavioral, Environmental, and Applied Aspects of Molluscan Assemblages from the Lower Tombigbee River, Alabama

8 Behavioral, Environmental, and Applied Aspects of Molluscan Assemblages from the Lower Tombigbee River, Alabama Evan Peacock, Stuart W. McGregor, and Ashley A. Dumas In recent decades, shell-bearing archaeological sites have received serious attention from North American archaeologists. This is partly due to the high visibility of such sites, especially those like the Archaic-period shell rings that take geometric forms. The nonrandom distribution of shell at such sites is taken as an indication of cultural complexity, challenging normative assumptions of hunter-gatherer lifestyles. This welcome break from progressive cultural evolution is not without its own problems; in particular, there is a certain amount of circularity in arguments equating site geometry with cultural complexity (Saunders 2004: 147), and subjective interpretive scenarios have tended to dominate the discourse at the expense of more testable hypotheses related to site formation processes (Marquardt 2010). Still, one useful result of the focus on shell-bearing sites has been an increasing number of studies of the shell itself (e.g., Claassen 2005; Haag 2009; Hughes and Parmalee 1999; McGregor and Dumas 2010; Morey and Crothers 1998; Myers and Perkins 2000; Patch 2005; Peacock 2002; Peacock and Chapman 2001; Peacock and Mistak 2008; Peacock et· 186 · Molluscan Assemblages from the Lower Tombigbee River, Alabama · 187 al. 2005; Peacock and Jenkins 2010; Peacock and Seltzer 2008; Randklev and Lundeen 2012; Randklev et al. 2009; Warren 2000; Wolverton et al. 2010; Deter-Wolf and Peres, chapter 7, this volume), a process that should feed back into larger debates about the role(s) of shell-bearing sites in prehistoric societies. To date, most debate has focused on coastal sites, despite the fact that rings or C-shaped deposits of freshwater mussel (Mollusca: Unionidae) shell are a common phenomenon in the lower Mississippi Alluvial Valley (Lipo and Dunnell 2008; Peacock and Jenkins 2010; Peacock et al. 2011). It is widely recognized, however, that unionid shell is a common constituent of archaeological sites throughout North America, ranging from scattered shells within general site matrices to enormous mounds containing millions of valves (e.g., Parmalee 1994; Parmalee and Bogan 1986; Parmalee et al. 1980, 1982), and scholarly attention to these sites also is increasing (see references in Peacock 2012; Peacock et al. 2011). In this chapter, we discuss unionid shell from sites in the lower Tombigbee River and adjacent drainages in Alabama, combining data presented by McGregor and Dumas (2010), Peacock (2009), and other scholars to more fully consider archaeological, paleoenvironmental, and applied aspects of prehistoric molluscan assemblages from the area. Study Area The Mobile River basin drains about 43,683 square miles in central Alabama , northeastern Mississippi, northwestern Georgia, and southeastern Tennessee (figure 8.1) (Mettee et al. 1996). The Tombigbee River system, the westernmost drainage in the Mobile River basin, drains about 19,984 square miles of northeastern Mississippi and west-central Alabama. The Mobile River is formed by the confluence of the Tombigbee and Alabama Rivers and flows southward about 72 kilometers into Mobile Bay via the Mobile-Tensaw Delta. This delta is actually a drowned alluvial plain and valley, formed by the mixing of the Apalachee, Blakely, Middle, Mobile, Raft, Spanish, and Tensaw Rivers. Over an approximately 280-squaremile area they form a low-lying area of interveined wetlands extending from the southern tip of Clarke County, Alabama, to the head of Mobile Bay (Smith 1988). Figure 8.1. The Mobile River basin drains about 43,683 square miles in central Alabama , northeastern Mississippi, northwestern Georgia, and southeastern Tennessee. Molluscan Assemblages from the Lower Tombigbee River, Alabama · 189 Sites and Samples Although molluscan data are available from a number of archaeological sites in southern Alabama (table 8.1), there are few assemblages that can be considered sufficiently time- and space-averaged (sensu Peacock 2000) to be considered representative of past shellfish communities with confidence . Even small assemblages may inform on species ranges, however, with particular species having import for current conservation efforts or for paleoenvironmental modeling, as discussed below. Data discussed in this paper are derived from several sites (see table 8.1), most of which are Woodland period, primarily Late Woodland (e.g., Price 2009a; Shorter 1999), with some Mississippian shell deposits represented (such as Bottle Creek, 1BA2 [Brown 2003]). The number of contexts sampled, recovery methods, and analyst experience vary considerably among these cases and, as discussed further below, affect the extent to which the data can be used with confidence. Quarter-inch...