Plains Indian Studies - Smithsonian Institution Libraries

NUMBER 30 153
fig. 12r). Objects of possible resemblance are indicated
at the Guthrey site in Missouri (Henning,
1970:83-84) and at the Blood Run and Dixon
sites in northwestern Iowa (Harvey, 1979:91,
156). Finally, two cut and worn specimens that
Mildred Wedel (1959:62) mentions from the
Burke and O'Regan sites in northeastern Iowa
may possibly be comparable forms. The point of
the above fleeting summary is not to provide a
detailed distributional inventory but rather to
invite a re-thinking of this worked freshwater
mussel shell form and its probable use in the
shelling of green corn.
Conclusions
The data presented in this paper indicate that
mussel shells are used today by some Native
Americans in shelling green corn, that they have
been used for such purposes by many Prairie and
Plains Indian groups throughout a 300-year period
of Euro-American observations, and that,
within the strictures of archeological evidence
and legitimate sociocultural reconstructions, they
were used by prehistoric North Americans for at
least six centuries before the European settlement
of New England. If that interpretation is correct,
this case provides a controlled ethnographic parallel
or analogy for use in the reconstruction of
past behavior patterns. The function of an individual
prehistoric shell artifact can perhaps be
inferred. The data presented here suggest that
shells, or even metal spoons, are preferred over
knives, because the former implements detach the
corn without cutting through the bases of the
kernels, thus preserving all the constituents of
each grain. If Jones is correct that corn is considered
sacred and each grain mortal, then the shelling
of corn in this manner may have spiritual
connotations as well.
The contemporary and the archeological data
demonstrate that several different species of shell
could be utilized. In the archeological sample, a
distinct preference for Ligumia recta latissima is
apparent, while three of the six contemporary
Mesquakie specimens are Lampsilis ventricosa.
Skinner's (1925:137) reference to the Sauk stated
that left valves were preferred. Neither the archeological
specimens nor the contemporary samples
bear out this observation. Among the contemporary
Mesquakie, some families apparently prepare
the clam shells by sharpening the valve
margins with whetstones, while other families use
the mussel shells without prior modification. It
also appears that two different motor functions
are employed. Frank and Adeline Wanatee hold
the valves with the concave interior surface away
from their bodies and they detach the kernels
away from themselves. Other Mesquakie seemingly
hold the valves with the concave interior
surface toward their bodies and pull the kernels
off toward themselves. Thus in archeological inventories
one might expect to find some different
expressions of characteristics reflecting the different
manufacturing techniques and motor habits
involved in using the clam shells as corn shellers.
Given favorable deposition and preservation conditions,
however, some evidence of use should be
observable especially along the ventral posterior
margins of the shells. These data, along with the
more familiar and generally accepted evidence
for horticulture—corn cobs and kernels, storage
pits, scapula hoes, antler rakes, etc.—imply the
harvesting and processing of green corn.
Beyond that rather basic inference, with the
addition of other contextual data, there are further
possibilities for inferring prehistoric economic
activities, harvesting schedules and procedures,
and food preparation and storage techniques.
Potentially even ritual practices, such as
those described as "green corn ceremonies,"
might be inferred.
Ultimately, in my opinion, the significance of
these data is of more than pedantic archeological
interest. A specific technological and perhaps ideological
continuity of nearly one thousand years
should be of consequencee to those concerned
with the study of the processes of contemporary
culture change and the definitions of present
group and individual identities. The retention of
such elemental practices should not be taken as
simple, for their real and symbolic ramifactions
may be many. They are, I would argue, important
reminders that, in the face of what some