Casas Grandes: A Fallen Trading Center of the Gran Chichimeca, Volume 8, Stone and Metal Bone, Perishables, Commerce, Subsistence, and Burials
Creators: name: Di Peso, Charles C.
name: Rinaldo, John B.
name: Fenner, Gloria J.
Publisher: name: Northland Press
Year: 1974
Subjects: subject: Hohokam
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/culture-keyword/21/hohokam
subject: Casas Grandes
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/site-name/279/casas-grandes
subject: Funerary and Burial Structures or Features
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/site-type/301/funerary-and-burial-structures-or-features
subject: Burial Pit
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/site-type/307/burial-pit
subject: Archaeological Feature
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/site-type/339/archaeological-feature
subject: Artifact Scatter
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/site-type/340/artifact-scatter
subject: Hearth
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/site-type/343/hearth
subject: Commercial or Industrial Structures
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/site-type/280/commercial-or-industrial-structures
subject: Domestic Structure or Architectural Complex
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/site-type/251/domestic-structure-or-architectural-complex
subject: Midden
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/site-type/347/midden
subject: Settlements
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/site-type/252/settlements
subject: Town / City
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/site-type/255/town-city
subject: Domestic Structures
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/site-type/256/domestic-structures
subject: House
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/site-type/259/house
subject: Post Hole / Post Mold
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/site-type/359/post-hole-post-mold
subject: Rock Alignment
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/site-type/360/rock-alignment
subject: Rock Shelter
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/site-type/265/rock-shelter
subject: Platform Mound
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/site-type/268/platform-mound
subject: Shell
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/material-type/14/shell
subject: Wood
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/material-type/15/wood
subject: Textile
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/material-type/16/textile
subject: Ceramic
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/material-type/1/ceramic
subject: Basketry
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/material-type/17/basketry
subject: Chipped Stone
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/material-type/2/chipped-stone
subject: Fauna
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/material-type/4/fauna
subject: Glass
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/material-type/6/glass
subject: Ground Stone
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/material-type/7/ground-stone
subject: Building Materials
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/material-type/8/building-materials
subject: Human Remains
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/material-type/9/human-remains
subject: Ethnographic Research
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/investigation-type/14/ethnographic-research
subject: Architectural Documentation
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/investigation-type/16/architectural-documentation
subject: Archaeological Overview
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/investigation-type/1/archaeological-overview
subject: Architectural Survey
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/investigation-type/2/architectural-survey
subject: Collections Research
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/investigation-type/3/collections-research
subject: Data Recovery / Excavation
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/investigation-type/5/data-recovery-excavation
subject: Methodology, Theory, or Synthesis
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/investigation-type/6/methodology-theory-or-synthesis
subject: Heritage Management
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/investigation-type/24/heritage-management
subject: Site Evaluation / Testing
valueUri: https://core.tdar.org/browse/investigation-type/10/site-evaluation-testing

description: During the course of excavations a total of 885 bone artifacts was recovered. Four (0.5%) of these were in Viejo Period association, 877 (99.1%) belonged to the Medio Period, and four (0.5%) to the San Antonio Phase of the Espafioles Period. All of the Viejo Period specimens were utilitarian implements and included a plaiting tool, a coarse coil basketry awl, and two other awls with broken tips. These were simply made, undecorated items- three were splinter tools and one was a split grooved tool. Two of them were made of the bones of the popular Mule Deer (Odocoileus hemionus), which presently inhabits the local mountains. As was true for other artifact categories, the vast majority and greatest variety of bone artifacts belonged to the Medio Period. There were some 25 classes of artifacts including utilitarian stone-working tools and weaving implements; nonutilitarian items of personal adornment, like hair ornaments, beads, and a finger ring; socioreligious paraphernalia ranging from the simple sucking tube of the shaman to such esoteric priestly goods as human trophy skulls, wands, and a trove of over a hundred long bones; and finally, the remnants of various bones in the process of manufacture into finished objects. Both bird and mammal bones were used, and bone identifications included two classes, two orders, one subfamily, three genera, 14 species, and five subspecies. Among the more interesting materials were 20 artifacts of human bone and 132 of carnivores, including Black Bear (Ursus americanus), Grizzly Bear (Ursus nelson,), and Mountain Lion ( Felis concolor). The sources for the raw material ranged from the mountain habitat of the Mule Deer and bears to the open plains of the Pronghorn Antelope (Antilocapra americana) and American Bison(Bison bison). Of some interest, too, was the presence of Beaver ( Castor canadensis), for its present-day occurrence in northern Mexico represents the "extreme fringe» of its range (Leopold, 1959, p. 381). With the diversity of artifact forms represented, it was not surprising that the techniques of manufacture were so much more varied. Still present, though very few in number, were splinter tools, while other artifacts were highly and cleverly worked (see Figs. 8-10- 8) and polished to a high gloss. In addition, not a few were decorated by incising, carving, painting, or the addition of pseudo-cloisonne or turquoise mosaic work.