Peopling the Mesolithic in a Nothern Environment

8/2/2019 Peopling the Mesolithic in a Nothern Environment

1/8

Peopling the Mesolithic in aN orthem Environment

Edited byLynne Bevan and Jenny Moore

BAR International Series 11572003


2/8

t. >,I } ! ' '

This title published byArchaeopressPublishers of British Archaeological ReportsGordon House276 Banbury RoadOxford OX2 [email protected]

BAR 51157

Peopling the Mesolithic in a Northern Environment

the individual authors 2003ISBN 1 84171 527 1Printed in England by The Basingstoke PressTechnical editing, design and compilation by Jenny MooreCover: Illustrations by Phil Marter and Mark Breedon

All BAR titles are available from:Hadrian Books Ltd122 Banbury [email protected] current BAR catalogue with details of all titles in print, prices and means of payment is availablefree from Hadrian Books or may be downloaded from www.archaeopress.com


3/8

3STAG NIGHTS AND HORNY MEN:

ANTLER SYMBOLISM AND INTERACTION WITH THEANIMAL WORLD DURING THE MESOLITHIC

Lynne Bevan'Moose hunting used to take two guys " They'd go out this time ofyear, hang around a lake. One of the guyswouldfake afemale moose call on an old birchbark horn. Then when they were sure the bull was interested theother guy would get out a little dipper and start pouring water into the lake ... That was to simulate the sound ofafemale urinating. Apparently that was what really got the bulls going. Then when he came charging from thewoods they'd drive him into the shallow water and spear him there. Pretty smart, eh? '.

From the novel Hunting Down Home by Jean McNeil (1996, 51)IntroductionD uring later European prehistory, one of theearliest representations of the Iron Age homedgod Cernunnos is believed to occur in the rock art ofValcamonica in northern Italy (Green 1999). Theearly church attempted to suppress the widespreadworship of this potent figure, which involvedworshippers dressing up using animal horns andantlers, apparently to encourage and celebrateconcepts offertility (Bord and Bord 1982, 214-215).Worship of the homed god was punishable by deathduring the genocide of the European witch trialswhen the deity was re-styled as the devil, but he waseventually reborn and repackaged in the iconographyof 20 th .century paganism (e.g. Murray 1931).Images of homed gods and men proliferate in recentand modem popular culture, recurring in diversespatial and chronological contexts. Their underlyingmeanings can be many and varied, resulting fromvery different and culture-specific magico-religiousconcepts and beliefs. In a general sense this paperexplores potential reasons for human interest in homand antler symbolism. More specifically, by drawingupon ethnographic studies of the spiritual lives ofsome past and recent northern hunting groups, itexplores possible reasons for the curation andcontextual placement of certain animal body partsduring the British Mesolithic and what this mightreveal about relationships between Mesolithic peopleand animals. It is also concerned with gender issuesand with the symbiotic relationship, both in practicalterms and also symbolically and ideologically,between Mesolithic communities and animals,principally deer. Study will concentrate uponcontextual evidence for the use of perforated antlerfrontlets at Star Carr, North Yorkshire.

35

Star CarrThat the antlers from Star Carr were still attached tothe skulls, indicating that they were taken betweenNovember and April, was one of the main reasonsthat the site was originally interpreted by Clark as awinter base camp (1972). It was later reinterpreted asa spring/summer camp, and Richard Carter's recentresearch on mandibular tooth development amongred deer suggests that many of the animals hadactually been killed during the winter months,lending support to the original hypothesis (Carter1997). The results of the recent excavations reportedon by Paul Mellars and Petra Dark (1998) suggestthat the use of the site and the immediate area wasmuch more complex than previously supposed, andmight have involved visits throughout the year ratherthan only during a certain season. The main reasonfor this is that the period of occupation has beenextended from the 25 years originally proposed byClark to 250-300 years, according to Mellars andDark (1998), which implies that the site was used 'asa central aggregation point for early Mesolithicgroups from several adjacent areas of north-eastEngland' (ibid), perhaps even on a permanent basis(Schadla-Hall pers. Comm. quoted by Spikins 1999,48).The presence of 21 perforated antler frontlets at StarCarr has always seemed to me to be one of the mostinteresting aspects of the site and one that has neverbeen researched in any depth. In contrast with thePalaeolithic, with its cave art and cult objects, andwith later prehistory, with monuments and structureddeposition, Mesolithic research has always focusedupon the economic basis of sites, seasonality andflint typologies. While these are both important andinterlinked, they do not tell us a great deal aboutsocial organisation and, more importantly for the


4/8

PEOPLING THE MESOLITHIC

purposes of this paper, about belief systems.Recently the 21 Star Carr frontlets have beendescribed as 'ritual' paraphernalia (Working Partyfor the Palaeolithic and Mesolithic Annual DayMeeting and the Council of the Prehistoric Society1999). This is something of a departure fromprevious interpretations which, although presentingthe possibility of a ritual usage, favoured a morepractical role in deer hunting. According to J G DClark, the frontlets were used 'either for stalking oreven decoying deer to bring them into the hunters'range or they may have been worn in some ritualdance or mime connected with ensuring the fertilityof deer (and possibly man) and with seeking toenhance the confidence or solidarity of thehunters' (1956, 18, my italics). He concluded that'the general character of the site suggests that thefirst alternative is more likely to be correct butwhether directly functional or whether magical inintent, the masks reflect the overriding preoccupationof the Star Carr people with hunting and in particularwith red deer' (ibid 18-19).This 'either/or' argument effectively closed ratherthan opened up any discussion of the head-dressesand what they might actually have been used orintended for. It also provides a good example of thewestern division between what is perceived as'spiritual' and what is perceived as 'secular', acultural construction which effectively precludes anyunderstanding of non-western or prehistoric beliefsystems. This, combined with a strictly functionalistapproach to items of material culture and aninterpretative conservatism characteristic of the mid20 th century, which still occurs today, has precludedany attempts to explore the potential religious/ritualbeliefs of the Star Carr people. The consternationwith which this and two other papers based upon thefrontlets was received during the TAG 99 sessionwhich formed the basis of his volume (see papers byChatterton and Zvelebil) illustrated the fact thatmany archaeologists are still reluctant to take thediscussion any further, especially when furtherresearch involves studying the belief systems ofrecent hunting cultures such as the Saami (formerlycalled the Lapps) of north-western Scandinavia.Obviously, in the same way that antler symbolism isnot universal, ethnographic research cannot providea universal 'answer'. However, it does raise someinteresting possibilities, which I make no apologiesfor including here.Antler as a materialAntlers are instruments of transformation. Theygrow, are shed, and then almost miraculously regrowfor their most potent manifestation during the

36

autumn rut. As such, they might have beenconsidered a metaphor for death and rebirth byMesolithic peoples.In addition to those at Star Carr, perforated frontletshave been found on some German Mesolithic sites(see Chatterton, this volume). It is known that thefrontlets were deliberately hollowed-out to reducebone weight and that they were then through-drilled(for details of further reduction see Conneller, thisvolume). From a practical point of view the frontletscould easily have been adapted with this slightmodification into a head-dress, secured with strips ofleather or other binding material. As leather was notpreserved at Star Carr, it cannot be known whetherthe head-dresses were worn in conjunction with amask (logically made from the skin of a deer's face),or a deerskin cloak, or whether they were wornalone. An important factor is whether the antlerswere all in use at the same time. The excavationreport does not make it clear, although in a sectiondrawing of Cutting II four deer frontlets appear tohave been found in a context above a recumbentbirch trunk which suggests some degree ofcontemporaneity (Clark 1956, Fig. 2,3)We know that barbed points, interpreted asspearheads, were made from red deer 'stag' antler atStar Carr (Fraser and King 1954, 123). Why was thisthe most appropriate material? By comparison, elkantlers were used for making two different types ofmattock head (Fraser and King 1954, 157), dependingupon whether or not the antlers had been shed (Clark1956, 12). Shed red deer antler was also worked,certainly in the most recent Star Carr assemblagediscussed by Peter Rowley-Conwy (1998), but didthe raw material used for spearheads have to comefrom dead stags? The frontlet head-dresses certainlydid. Perhaps the significance of the antler asspearhead material went beyond practicalconsiderations. Was it important that the antlerscame from dead animals, incorporating part of theskull? Was it also important that the antler was takensoon after the animal died, while perhaps stillretaining the essence of the deer?Curation of body partsIt is known that the antlers came from red deer killedand butchered elsewhere, and this would explain thelack of vertebrae and pelvic bones, as opposed tomandibles and scapulae, in the original faunalassemblage. This curation of the antlers, whichmight have been in circulation for a long time, isinteresting, as it indicates special treatment of acertain material beyond simple resource exploitation.The relative absence of red deer bones and the lack

of evidence for their utilisation (as opposed to antl.er)is less-easily explained. A possible explanatIOnmight be the commonly-held taboo among northernhunting cultures against breaking the bones .of t ~ e reindeer (or caribou) to extract marrow, WhICh, mcommon with using the brain, would be regarded asan insult to the animal's soul (Edsman 196?). Such ataboo at Star Carr might only be envIsaged asapplying to deer, since the . metacarpals andmetatarsals of elks were cut mto sphnters forspearhead manufacture.Another common taboo among northern huntingcultures precludes women from coming into c o ~ t a c t with the bones of certain animals, like the C ~ b o ~ , and breaking them, and also against them working mthe vicinity of a caribou hunt (Edsman 196?). Thepresence of skin-scraping tools made of flmt andbone at Star Carr has been taken to indicate thepresence of women (Clark 1954), based upon t.hehigh frequency of female rather. than ~ a l e skinworkers observed in ethnographIc studieS (Clark1954, Hayden 1992). The assoc iation . betweenEskimo women and the 'ulu', a c r e s c e n ~ l c - b l ~ d e d scraper which they used for cleaning hIdes IS aclassic example (Boas 1964, Leroux et alI994). Thatred deer bones were under-represented at Star Carrmight imply that they had been deliberately left atthe kill site or curated elsewhere, away from apotentially female-dominated skin processing andcraft area. Such a scenario is supported by. a recentdetailed study of the sub-artic Dene (Chlpewyan)communities (Brumbach and Jarvenpa 1997).

Alternatively, the under-representation ?f deer ?onesat Star Carr might be explained by an m t e r ~ s t m theselective disposal of animal b o ~ y p.arts m waterregularly attested in ethnographIC h t e r a ~ e . (e.g.Vitebsky 1995, 107). Previously the deposItlOn ofantler in water at Star Carr has been interpreted fr?ma purely functionalist viewpoint, that such processmgmakes the antler easier to work (Rowley-Conwy1998). However, there are many a c c o u ~ t s of. bonesbeing deliberately deposited in . w a t ~ r , m c l ~ d m g anaccount by Lundius (1905, 35, CIted m Mebms 1965,358) describing how the Saami t h r e ~ deer bodyparts, particularly defleshed ~ o o t bones, mto ~ . a t e r oron to wet land, in order to shmulate deer fertlhty andto appease their spirits. The link between. ~ o n e andwater recurs in a Saami legend descnbmg howpeople first acquired reindeer herds; a. m a ~ andwoman were instructed by God to depOSIt remdeerbones in a cold spring, and after they had done so areindeer herd appeared (Mebius 1965, 359). For amore detailed discussion of the deposition of antlersand bones in water see Chatterton (this volume).

BEVAN

Of particular relevance to the interpretation of thedeer frontlets are etJmographic accounts of thecollection and special treatment of the skulls andantlerslhorns of hunted animals. For example, somelate 1 h_ to early 18th-century accounts cited by H ~ n s Mebius describe a ritual procedure connected Wlthreindeer hunting among hunting and herding groupsin Norway, in which the quarry's ~ t l e r s , as well asthe skin of its head, were left behmd on the spotwhere the animal had been killed (1965). ~ o t h e r account describes sacrificed reindeer bones bem? ~ e f t unbroken at the sacrificial site where the recelvl.ngdeity would create a new reindeer .from t ~ e remams(1965). Such sites, often featunng s e l ~ e . stoneslaced upon a bed of twigs inside a semICIrcle of~ e i n d e e r antlers (Manker 1962, Fig. 57, 1 2 ~ . 1 ~ 7 , Vorren 1965, 519-521), were common vlSltm.gpoints in the ritual landscape (see Chatterton, thISvolume).The ritualistic treatment of skulls is by no meansrestricted to the northern hunting cultures. Forexample the home d skulls of wild mountain sheep,which ~ e r e hunted from Palaeo-Indian ti.mes in theRocky Mountains of North Amenca, weredeliberately placed in trees during the 19th and 20 thcenturies (and possibly prior. to t h ~ t ) ~ ~ e n ethnographic accounts support theIr u ~ e as medlcmetrees' where offerings of beads and tnnkets were left(Frison et al 1990, 232-234). Large skulls frommature rams were selected for this special, andpotentially widespread, treatment which h a ~ beeninterpreted as possibly h a v i n ~ 'some. kind ofritualistic significance assocIated Wlth gameprocurement' (Frison et al 1990, 238). The. authorsmentioned that the brain cases had been dehberatelyopened, a factor which, they c O , n c l u ~ e d , strengthenedthe case for 'ritual treatment (Fnson et al 1 9 ~ 0 , 234), implying, at least to this author, .that. the bramsmight have been consumed as a specIal .ntual . m ~ a l , perhaps by the successful h u n t ~ r , or, If a slllulartaboo against using the bram or m ~ o w as

documented by Edsman (1965) was m. place,carefully disposed of elsewhere. In any ~ a s e , m t ~ r e s t in animal body parts and their s e l e c t l v e / r e ~ t n c t e d consumption/disposal is well attested m. theethnographic literature. Whether or not the ntualinvolved the consumption or other treatment of t ~ e animals' brains, it is entirely p o s s i b l ~ t ~ a ~ , as Wlththe Saami, replacement of the a n i m a l ~ mdlvldually orcollectively, was the aim of the exerCIse.

37

Hunting techniquesOf course it is possible that the Star Carr a n t l ~ r frontlets were used in hunting. Some e t h n o g r a p ~ l c studies provide interesting information on huntmg


5/8


techniques, particularly among the Saami who setpitfall traps in autumn and spring and corralledreindeer, using wooden fences and stone walling(Vorren 1965). Watercourses and lakes near elk andreindeer runs were the most popular locations forpitfall traps which, covered with twigs andbrushwood with reindeer lichen laid on top as bait,were often equipped with sharp stakes to pierce theanimals as they fell. The places where reindeergenerally pass, cited by Saami informants, were'tongues of and between watercourses, dry parts of amarsh, along rivers and lakes and overwatersheds' (Vorren 1965,518).Reindeer are particularly vulnerable in the water andthe Saami often hunted them when they wereswimming across rivers. Vorren mentions aninformant who describes how reindeer would bedriven out into a lake, where a canoe would beconcealed near an island ready for the water-bornehunters to intercept the prey (1965, 531). As OttoBlehr pointed out in his discussion of communalcaribou hunting, many aspects of which can be morewidely applied, the possession of a 'boat technology'enabled hunters to kill animals in water which actedas a very efficient 'enclosure' (Blehr 1990, 313).This scenario would fit rather well with the Star Carrenvironment where there is the possibility that lakeedge sites were visited by boat and a paddle wasfound during Clark's excavation. In a sense antlermight have been regarded as a particularly aptmaterial for spearhead manufacture both in practicaland symbolic terms. Conceptually, the prey,certainly in the case of red deer, might have beenviewed as virtually 'killing itself. The spearheadwould also have been a suitable tool for killing largeanimals, such as red deer and elk, at close hand whenthey were at their most vulnerable, in the water.There is evidence that deer return to favoured matinggrounds, and it is possible that Star Carr was locatedat a strategic point on their journey, perhaps wherethey swam across the river and could be trapped in

the shallows (Mellars and Dark 1998, 228).Moreover, the potential use of the lake for killinganimals makes it a particularly appropriatedepositional venue and potential medium oftransformation for the antler frontlets and other bodyparts discussed by Chatterton (this volume).The Saami also used tame female reindeer as decoysto attract the male wild reindeer (Vorren 1965,514).A 17th-century account describes how during theautumn rut the hunters went into the woods wherethey knew the wild reindeer were, bound their tamedoes there and waited for the stags to come, in orderto shoot them (Samuel Rheen cited by Collinder1949, 211). From the faunal remains we know that

38

stags, as opposed to does, were also the preferredprey at Star Carr (Clark 1936, 170). Stags are morenumerous than does, and unsuccessful stags(seriously wounded, poor fighters or those past theirprime) are surplus to requirements compared to thesmaller, impregnated does wh o then give birth thefollowing summer. The deer population could havewithstood the selective culling of surplus males, whowould also have provided greater meat weight andhide volume than female deer. Another tactic inattracting game during the mating season is the useof birch bark whistles of the kind employed bynative Americans such as the Cree (Fig 9). Thismight explain the numerous rolls of birch bark foundat Star Carr, some of which, measuring '8 incheswide and 30 inches long' (Clark 1954, 16), wouldhave been ideal for manufacturing a simple whistle.

;/,i i

Figure 9 Drawing of Cree moose caller by MarkBreedon, from a photograph by Howard S Curtis(1998,669)The mechanics of deer reproduction would havebeen understood by the Star Carr people and the deerwould certainly be at their most vulnerable duringthe autumn rut which takes place during lateSeptember and early October. The stags are also inpeak condition at this time and roar while engaged infighting, a loud, unearthly sound that would havealerted the hunters to their presence. While it is justpossible that some kind of incipient deer husbandrywas being practised at Star Carr, although thisremains to be demonstrated, it is logical that thefrontlets were being used as decoys instead of thetame does mentioned by Samuel Rheen. However,the frontlets were all from stags. In this case, werethey being used as male decoys to att.act other stags

to fight? Surely the deer would have been able todifferentiate between male and female antlers, even

at a distance, and presumably scent would h a v ~ alsoplayed a part in locating females. The large SIze ofthe stag antlers suggests, on a symbolic level at least,that like was designed to attract like, as in t h ~ case. ofthe two ethnographic studies cited by Clark II I WhIChhunters carried or wore male deer heads to attractother stags (1936, 170). Perhaps the best illustrationof this practice is provided by a copperplateengraving entitled Methods of Hunting Deer byJacques Le Moyne from T de Bry's 'America', d a ~ e d to 1591 (Fig 10). Here, hunters are shown weanngalmost complete deerskins (although deer masksmight be used instead) in order to increase theirchances of making a kill by coming as close aspossible to their prey (Kasprycki 2000, 163).

Figure 10 Methods of hunting deer by Jacques LeMoyne from T de Bry's 'America' 1591

Was the sex of the hunters masquerading as stagssignificant? Was killing a large, potent andpotentially dangerous deer a rite of passage foryoung male hunters, as it is among the Inuit today?Was this viewed as a means of achieving hunterstatus and maturity before being considered fit tomate with one's own kind? The connection betweenmales and hunting is well-attested in theethnographic record, and it is generally true t ~ a t males are more likely to hunt large game WIthprojectiles, a narrow definition of 'hunting' whichhas been criticised (Brumbach and Jarvenpa 1997),than are women who tend to kill smaller game in thecourse of gathering plant produce, but there are somenotable exceptions. For example, despite theprincipally male role in hunting in many arcticcultures, the first kill of an animal or bird byadolescents of both sexes is marked socially andritually by the successful hunter cutting up the killand giving the first and best piece of the carcass tothe woman who served as midwife at hislher birth.The midwife then completes the distribution, whilesimultaneously praising the 'person she hasmade' (d'Anglure 1984, quoted in Bonvillain 1995,26).

39

BEVAN

Among the Agta Negritos of north-eastern Luzon inthe Philippines, certain groups of women hunt wildpigs with dogs, using machetes or the bow and arrow(Estioko-Griffin and Bion Griffin 1997). Whereassome Agta groups practice communal hunting,usually in family groups, other groups favoursexually-differentiated hunting bands, particularlyamong female archers who learn their hunting skillsas young girls and continue hunting for as long asthey are physically able, with the only hiatusoccurring during late pregnancy and early lactation(ibid).It is also noteworthy that the earliest accounts of theSaami people mention that the women went huntingwith the men (Tacitus and Procopius cited byCollinder 1949, 206-207). In his 'History of thePeoples of the North' Olaus Magnus (1555) wrotethat the women hunted with the men, but that themen distributed the kill and decided which partsshould be broiled (Magnus cited in Collinder 1949,215). An engraving from Magnus's book shows bothSaami male and female hunters (Fig 11), latermisinterpreted as 'Lapps out hunting, accompaniedby a woman' (V0rren 1962, Fig. 6, 14).A recent study of the sub-artic Dene (Chipewyan)communities has revealed an even greater femaleinvolvement in hunting, from all-female huntingbands to mixed-sex groups consisting of wife andhusband and daughter and father and evengrandfather and granddaughter (Brumbach andJarvenpa 1997). All-male bands tend to travel furtherafield and their hunting trips are more protracted andtend to leave less impact on the archaeologicalrecord than mixed-sex processing camps where agreater range of artefactual and faunal debris will beleft (Brumbach and Jarvenpa 1997). Based upon theChipewyan model (Brumbach and Jarvenpa 1997),the rich antler and bone industries recovered at StarCarr were more likely to have resulted fromintensive processing activities carried out by bothsexes, but principally women, rather than reflectingBinford's 'boredom reduction strategies' proposedby Rowley-Conwy for a handful of male hunters at alook-out stand (1998, 107). Otherwise, the sheervolume of material at Star Carr suggests thatboredom was terminal during the Mesolithic.Instead, I suggest that a large labour force, composedof both mature and young males and females, wasrequired for efficient hunting at Star Carr, certainlyduring the initial stages when driving of the gamewas carried out and deer and elk might have beenkilled in the water and along the shore. Co-operationwould also have continued in processing theresulting carcasses, logically to accumulate sufficient


6/8


Figure 11 Saami hunters (Vorren 1962, Fig 6,14)dried meat to last throughout the winter. However,this in no way detracts from the possibility of anideological relationship between stags, antlers andthe construction of Mesolithic masculinity _concepts which might have been further played outwithin a ritual arena.Rituals and shamanismThe strong possibility that Star Carr was a 'centralaggregation point' would help to place the antlerfrontlets in a ritual and ceremonial context. But whatpart would they have played? What kinds of ritualsand ceremonies could have been conducted at StarCarr? The much-reproduced image of the Tungusshaman equipped with a full antler head-dress takenfrom an engraving made in 1705 was used in Clark'ssite report (Clark 1954, Fig. 75, 171). While it showsa similar head-dress being used in a ritual, it does notexplain what shamanism is and how it might havebeen organised at Star Carr. The strictest use of theterm 'shaman' was applied by anthropologists to theclassic neo-Siberian masters of the late 19 th to early20th century who, wearing a certain type of gowndecorated with amulets and animal body parts,performed to their own beating of a sacred drum,going into trances, either when their souls departedon visionary journeys or when spirits tookpossession of their bodies or spoke through them asoracles (Campbell 1988). However, shamanism,

40

characterised by trance, drumming and intercessionwith the spirit world is also known from many othercultures, particularly, but not exclusively, among thenorthern hunting cultures.Shamans were ritual leaders in their societies andwere equally capable of cursing and healing, oftenusing animal body parts o r substances. For example,among the Even of Siberia, antler blood isconsidered to be an especially potent tonic (Vitebsky1995, 101). Eye-witness accounts and culturalmythology suggest that neighbouring shamans werecompetitive rather than cooperative. Shamans couldalso be female, such as the exclusively femaleshamans among the Mapuche Indians of Chile(Campbell 1988, 159) who are responsible formarriage-broking and overseeing large ceremonies,and there is also a great deal of evidence for femaleshamans and medicine women among the coastalAlgonquin tribes and several other native Americangroups (Grumet 1980). 'Shamans are central figuresin their societies, yet they are also marginal, marked

off from others by their extraordinary experiences .. 'and 'even if shamans are ordinary hunters,housewives or farmers when off-duty, they retain theconstant potential to enter other worlds and becomeother beings' (Vitebsky 1995, 91).The earliest known evidence for shamanism isbelieved to date to the Palaeolithic. The so-called

dancing sorcerer, a bison figure with a bow, from thecave of 'Les Trois Freres' in central France isbelieved to be a shaman figure connected withhunting magic (Halifax 1982, 54-56, Clottes andLewis-Williams 1996, 108-110). There is a commonconnection between hunting and shamanism amonghunting cultures whose myths often tell how animalspirits first approached people, suggested that theymight like to eat them, and instructed them in theproper etiquette of doing so (e.g. Vorren and Manker1962, Mebius 1965,). If the souls of killed animalsdo not give themselves up willingly, then bad luckand famine will follow. The shaman has the power tointercede with animal souls and carry out certainnecessary rituals to ensure that the spirits of killedanimals, often protected by a master spirit, areproperly placated, that body parts are treatedcorrectly and that killed animals are thus replaced.The belief that animals have souls (that have to beappeased when the animals are killed), isfundamentally different from western thought,influenced by the early church, that animals are subspecies at the mercy of human beings, to usehowever they wish. Even if kindness is advocated,animals are still regarded as radically different andinherently inferior. Conversely, viewed from a nonwestern perspective, animals are a different kind ofpeople rather than a different species. In this context,spiritual contact, transformation, and shape-shiftingare entirely possible.At Star Carr, a site originally interpreted as a huntingcamp, the connection with shamanism is an easy oneto make. Presumably rituals could have featureddancing, drumming, singing and chanting, activitiesdifficult to recognise in the archaeological recordwithout evidence of material survival. Dancing anddrumming to a state of exhaustion is a recognisedmethod of achieving a trance-like shamanistic stateand the hallucinogenic mushroom, fly-agaric, which'became common in the birch and pine forests asthese spread over the Siberian plains in pursuit of heretreating ice cap of the last glacial age, c 10,000BC' could also have been available (Wasson 1971,208 cited in Rudley 1993, 14). A ceremonial drum ofthe kind used by the Saami (e.g. Manker 1962, Fig.44, 98-99) would easily have deteriorated in theground at Star Carr, where leather was not preserved.The wooden band would simply have sprung offonce the leather had rotted, and while perhapsrecognisable as worked wood, it would otherwise beunrecognisable as a musical instrument. Percussioncould have been achieved with the hand or anunworked fragment of antler, wood or bone. Boneflute-type instruments, if used, would have beenpreserved among the waterlogged material, so it isunlikely they were used unless they were discarded

41

BEVAN

elsewhere or transported off-site. There is noevidence for any recognisable wooden effigiesassociated with ritual but antlers and deer skullsmight have been hung-up over hut entranceways ormounted on posts nearby, outside the area ofexcavation, perhaps in the manner of the deer skullwith antlers mounted on a stake at the lake edge at asite dated to 10,000 BP at Stellmoor, North Germany(Bratlund 1991, Chatterton, this volume, Figure 26).DanceDance is arguably the 'earliest art form' (Wosien1974, 8), and is common in most societies. Antleredand homed masks are popular with agriculturalists(Cawte 1978), as well as with hunting groups,especially in Africa and South America. Therelationship observed between agrarian communitiesand homed animals such as deer is different to thatbetween hunting communities and their prey. Amongsuch groups, hunting is often still important, antlers/horns are still a focus of interest, but meat is nolonger the main basis of diet, and many rituals anddances are designed to stimulate fertility of soil andcrops, although there is often still a magical role forthe hunted animal to fulfill.Several hunting dances, including the Buffalo Dance,conducted before the major annual buffalo hunt(Lommel 1981, 143-144), are recorded amongnative Americans, particularly the Plains tribes (FIg12). The Buffalo dance is performed exclusively bymale hunters (Lommel 1981, 143), but antlered andhomed animals are not always associated withmaleness, and female buffalo dancers have beenrecorded among other tribes such as the Cheyenne(Fig 13). Among the Oglala of South Dakota, where

Figure 12 Buffalo dance (LommeI1981, 143)


7/8


11i \\ I:'".. )v !

" ,, ' \-

Figure 13 Cheyenne buffalo dancers, drawnbyMark Breedon, after a photograph byEdward S Curtis (1998, 711)

the buffalo was the main prey and provider of meat,skins and fuel, female initiation into youngwomanhood after the first menstrual seclusion wascalled the Buffalo Ceremony. Here, the buffalo spiritwas invoked to secure the traditional virtues mostdesired by Oglala women for the initiate - chastity,fecundity, industry and hospitality (Powers 1986,66-73). The ceremony involved the Medicine Mandressed in a buffalo head-dress simulating matingwith the initiate. Although both sexes wereassociated with the buffalo, females were linked withthem to a greater degree, in view of their perceivedfertility. The mythological shape-shifting seductress,the Deer Woman, who visited people in dreams wasexclusively associated with women, and youngwomen had their own sodality dedicated to her, butthey could also participate in rituals associated withmale fraternities such as the Elk Society (Powers1986, 73-74).In his study of masks, Andreus Lommel posed thequestion 'why should a dance performed in the guiseof the animal to be hunted, enhance the hunters'luck?' and concluded that there was no explanationfor this, but that 'the symbolism of the mask and theritual in all ceremonies is always centred upon theobject to be achieved' (ibid 144).Clark also mentioned the Abbot's Bromley HomDance in relation to Star Carr (1954). This dance isstill performed every autumn at Abbot's Bromley,Staffordshire by a group of six men wearingElizabethan costume and carrying reindeer antlers(Fig 14). This folk practice is believed to have

42

Figure 14 The Abbot's Bromley Horn Dance(Toulson 1981, 113)started during, or even before, the Middle Ages andhas been interpreted as a 'simulated deer hunt', theroots of which have a supposed prehistoric origin(Whitlock 1979, quoted by Toulson 1981, 115).Perhaps the recurring connection between dance andhunting can be better explained by the commonlinking of animal and human fertility observedamong most hunting peoples and manifest in ritualdances simulating rutting (Vitebsky 1995, 106). Suchdances were performed in parts of Siberia 'where thereproduction of game animals was encouragedthrough dances and mimes representing their ruttingand mating' (Vitebsky 1995, 106). The dances wereexplicit, ribald and probably enjoyable for theparticipants but, despite the carnival atmosphere,they were of the utmost seriousness. Some danceswere performed by males alone, others by both sexeswith a shaman keeping time on a drum and slappingthe legs of any caught slacking with hisdrumstick' (ibid 107). The ritual was called the'renewal of life' and the animals imitated werereindeer and elk, the object being to 'gladden thespirits animating these species and induce them toplay the same kind of games' (ibid 107).If a similar ritual dance had been performed at StarCarr in the Mesolithic period, who could have beeninvolved? Taking the interpretation a stage further, itis tempting to envisage the dancers as young maleinitiates on the threshold of manhood, especiallywhen the importance of antlers in the annual rut, asweapons used by competing stags, is considered. Ifthe 21 antler frontlets at Star Carr were usedtogether, the dancers might have performed in pairs,simulating fighting or rutting with perhaps a'shaman' or other ritual leader, who was probablysimilarly-attired in an antler head-dress, presidingover the dancers. Hunting might have been regardedas an essential part of the construction ofmasculinity, and the life cycle of the deer as it grew,

achieved sexual maturity, and fought to achievereproductive and territorial prominence might havebeen seen to reflect the lives of men. It is alsopossible that some d ~ g r e e of ~ o m p e t i t i o n wasencouraged in the selechon of mamage partners, thatthe 'deer dance' was designed to display theavailable young men to the young women fromneighbouring groups. Thus the dynamics ofattraction would be played out within a social/ritualcontext involving the whole community and unitinga number of otherwise scattered groups, especially ifthe central aggregation point theory is correct.ConclusionsBased upon the sheer volume of ethnographicinformation regarding the use of animal masks andhead-dresses in dances and rituals, especially thoseconnected with hunting, it is more than likely that theantler frontlets from Star Carr attest to some kind ofritual expression at the site, the exact nature of whichwill always remain enigmatic. In non-westernsocieties, hunting is neither a straightforwardeconomic activity nor a sport. It is inextricablylinked with both human and animal fertility, as in thecase of the Oglala identification with the buffalo(Powers 1986), and it is as much concerned with thereplacement of life as with the taking of it. Taboosmust be observed and guardian spirits appeased, oreven encouraged, in order to achieve a 'renewal oflife', the object of the Siberian ritual dancesdescribed by Vitebsky (1995).While the Star Carr antlers might have been used inhunting and in initiation rites, possibly, but notcertainly, restricted to young males, I feel that a'Deer Dance' was the most logical medium for thefrontlets' use. Such a dance might have beenconducted before the hunt in order to encouragesuccess, or perhaps afterwards to celebrate theculmination of a successful enterprise, creatingsufficient surplus to ensure human survivalthroughout the winter months, while metaphoricallyensuring renewed deerlhuman fertility in the comingyear when new animals would be born. A furtherparallel between human and deer fertility might havebeen expressed in the forming of new alliancesbetween young males and females from outlyinggroups coming together for the annual deer hunt.To conclude, in prehistoric studies there is a growingrecognition, best exemplified by the work of JohnChapman (2000), that the manipulation of thefragment, whether in a domestic, ritual or mortuarycontext was often in the past a metaphor forengage:nent with the whole. Processes of selectionand curation of the fragment can be identified in the

BEVAN

h 10 ical record and are most usually thoughtarc aeo g di . tt ongto be represented by stmct pa e ~ s am. . II artefactual and human remams. Ratherpnnclpa y . 1 I ' 11than Star Carr being an exclUSive. y eco oglca y-. d location for a huntmg and food-determme It base it would seem to represent a paceprocuremen , I d dtaphor and necessity over appe, anwhere me . ' h frwhere curation and m ~ m p u 1 a h o n of t e agmentary. f certain ammal body parts suggests thatremams 0 . ththey possessed an e ~ o t l O n a l c u r r e n ~ y atd d their prachcal value. Whlle thistranscen eidentification with species such as d e ~ r was not

43

t d here through permanent art, It may haverepresen e t d through the transient, but n o less,been enac e h. ful medium of dance. I argue that t emeamng , . f h fr tl t. II most interestmg aspect 0 t e on e spotenhaYd' ( trwas not their eventual watery eposlt1on con aChatterton, this volume), but what happened to t ~ e m

C h d l'ncorporating processes of selectlOn,belore an , . b h1 modification, curahon and use, y umanremova , . h 't 1 d. . dynamic senes of unts, n ua s anbemgs m a . . . hThe study of Mesolithic Bntam per apsdances. 1 t' Jd t o not only 'beyond haze nu s ,a s ennynee s 0 g . , 1 btlMoore argues elsewhere m thiS vo ume, u a so'beyond bones'.Referencesd'Anglure, B S 1984. Inuit ofQuebec. Arctic, Vol. 5 of

1 D V A ~ 4 7 6 - 5 0 7 . '01990. Communal Hunting ofCanbou (WlidBleh r,. d ) In L B Davis and B 0 K Reeves (eds)Rem eer ..tthe Recent Past One World Archaeology,Hunters OJ L ndon U nwin Hayman, 304-3 26OF 196'4 The Central Eskimo. LincolnILondon,Boas, .University of Nebraska Press,'11' N 1995 Women and Men. Cultural ConstructsBonvi am , . 11of Gender. New Jersey, USA, p r e n t ~ e ~ : P .Bord, J and Bord, C 1982. Earth Rites. ferCthl ltyh raLctldcesin Pre-Industrial Britain. Mackays 0 at am t ,

Great Britain .'d B 1991. A Study of Hunting LeSions ContammgBrat1un , . d B t St 11Flint Fragments on Rem eer ones a e moor,S hleswig Holstein, Germany. In N Barton, A J

R ~ b e r t s and D A Roe (eds) The Late Glacial In NorthWest Europe: Human Adaptation and ~ h a n g e ~ . t h e End of he Pleistocene. London, CounCil for BntIshArchaeology, 193-207

b h H J and Jarvenpa, R 1997. EthnoarchaeologyBrum ac , A S b . Dof Subsistence, Space and Gender: u -arctIc eneCase. American Antiquity 62 (3), 414-436

b 11 J 1988. Historical Atlas of World MythologyCamp e , . I P P t 2Vol. 1: The Way of he Amma owers, ar .Mythologies of he Great Hunt. New York,Harper and RowCarter R J 1997. Age Estimation of he Roe Deer . .( c ~ p r e o l u s capreo1us) Mandibles from t h ~ MesolIthiCSite of Star Carr, Yorkshire ba sed on RadIOgraphs ofMandibular Tooth Development. Journal of heZoological Society of London 241, 495-502


8/8


Cawte, E C 1978. Ritual Animal Disguise. Cambridge,England, D S Brewer LtdChapman, J 2000. Fragmentation in ArchaeologyRoutledge,LondonClark, J G D 1936. The Mesolithic Settlement ofNorthernEurope. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press

Clark, J G D 1954. Excavations at Star Carr. Cambridge,Cambridge University Press,Clark, J G D 1956. Star Carr, A Mesolithic Site inYorkshire. In R L S Mitford (ed) RecentArchaeological Excavations in Britain. London,Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1-20Clark, J G D 1972. Star Carr: A Case Study inBioarchaeology. Reading, Addison-WesleyModular Publications No. 10Clottes, J and Lewis-Williams, D 1996. Les Chamanes dela Prehistoire. Paris, Editions du Seuil,Collinder, B 1949. The Lapps. New Jersey, USA,Princeton University Press,Curtis, E S 1998. Indiani D 'Americana I PorifolioCompleti. Kahn, TaschenEdsman, C M 1965. The Hunter, the Games, and theUnseen Powers. Lappish and Finnish Bear Rites. InH Hvarfner (ed) Hunting andFishing. Lule, Sweden,Norrbottens Museum, 159-188Estioko-Griffin, A and Bion Griffin, P 1997. Woman theHunter: The Agta. In C B Brettell and C F Sargent(eds) Gender in Cross-Cultural Perspective.Dallas, Texas, Southern Methodist University,219-229Feest, C F (ed) 2000. The Cultures ofNative NorthAmerica. Cologne, KonemannFraser, F C and King, J E 1954. Faunal Remains. In J G DClark Excavations a t Star Carr. Cambridge,Cambridge University Press, 70-95Frison, G C, Reher, C A, and Walker, D N 1990. In L BDavis and B 0 K Reeves (eds) Hunters of heRecent Past. One World Archaeology, London,Unwin Hayman, 208-240Green, M 1999. God in Man's Image: Thoughts on theGenesis and Affiliations of Some Romano-British CultImagery. Britannia XXX, 17-30Grumet, R S 1980. Sunksquaws, Shamans, andTradeswomen: Middle Algonkian Women during the17th and 18th Centuries. In M Etienne and E Leacock(eds) Women and Colonization: ArchaeologicalPerspectives. USA, Bergin Publishers Inc, 43-62Halifax, J 1982. Shaman: The Wounded Healer. London,Thames and HudsonHayden, B 1992. Observing Prehistoric Women. In CClaassen (ed) Exploring Gender ThroughArchaeology. Monographs in World Archaeology 11.Madison, WI, Prehistory Press, 33-47Kasprycki, S S 2000. Southeast in Feest, C F (ed), TheCultures ofNative North America. Konemann,Cologne, 148-183

Leroux, 0, Jackson, M E and Freeman, M A (eds) 1994.Inuit Women Artists. California, Chronicle BooksLommel, A 1981. Masks, Their Meaning andFunction.London, Ferndale EditionsLundius, N 1905. In K B Wiklund (ed) DescriptioLapponicae. Svenska Landsmal, Vol. XVII:5,Uppsala,35

44

McNeil, J 1996. Hunting Down Home. London, PhoenixHouseMagnus,Olaus 1555. Historia de GentibusSeptentrionalibus. RomeManker, E 1962. Intellectual Culture. In 0 Vorren and EManker Lapp Life and Customs: A Survey.London, Oxford University Press, 91-141Mebius, H 1965. Sacrificial Cult and Hunting Rites. SomeViews on Same Religion. In H Hvarfner (ed)Hunting andFishing. Lule, Sweden, NorrbottensMuseum,351-362Mellars, P and Dark, P (eds) 1998. Star Carr in Context:New Archaeological andPalaeoecologicalInvestigations at the Early Mesolithic Site o fStarCarr, North Yorkshire. Cambridge, MacDonaldInstitute for Archaeological ResearchMurray, M A 1931. The God of he Witches. SampsonLow, Marston and CoPowers, M N 1986. Oglala Women: Myth, Ritual andReality. Chicago and London, The University ofChicago PressRowley-Conwy, P 1998. Faunal Remains and AntlerArtefacts. In P Mellars and P Dark (eds) Star Carr inContext: New Archaeological andPalaeoecologicalInvestigations at the Early Mesolithic Site ofStar Carr,North Yorkshire. Cambridge, MacDonald InstituteMonographs, 99-107Rudley, R 1993. The Alchemy ofCulture: Intoxicants inSociety. London, British Museum Press

Spikins, P 1999. Mesolithic Northern EnglandEnvironment, Population andSettlement. BritishArchaeological Reports British Series 283, Oxford, BARToulson, S 1981. The Winter Solstice. London,Jill Norman and Hobhouse LtdVitebsky, P 1995. The Shaman. London, MacmillanVorren, 0 and Manker, E 1962 Lapp Life and Customs: ASurvey. London, Oxford University PressVorren,0 1965. Researches on Wild-Reindeer Catching inthe Norweigan Lapp Area. In H Hvarfner (ed)Hunting andFishing. Rhus, Denmark and 1-Tryck,Lule, Sweden, Clichs Buchtrups Klich andOffsetanstalt,513-536Wasson, R G 1971. Soma: Divine Mushroom ofImmortality. Ethno-Mycological Studies No.1,New York, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich IncWhitlock, R 1979. In Search ofLost Gods. London,PhaidonWorking Party for the Palaeolithic and Mesolithic AnnualDay Meeting and the Council of the PrehistoricSociety 1999. Research Frameworks fo r thePalaeolithic and Mesolithic ofBritain and Ireland.English HeritageWosien, M G 1974. Sacred Dance Encounter With theGods. London, Thames and Hudson

Documents

Peopling the Mesolithic in a Nothern Environment