Conchlers,

A note from another archaeomalacologist (stress the archaeologist more
than the malacologist). Jackson's work is extremely rare and difficult
to get a hold of. He was a curator at the Manchester Museum (Manchester
England I assume). All of his works seem to be published through them.
The 1917 book is exceedingly rare- only one library in the US has a
copy. There are books available elsewhere in the world, but only about
10 copies. The Manchester Memoirs are more available, but not at any of
my local libraries. I will order a copy of the two articles, but it may
be a while before I get them.

It is clear that Jackson was both a malacologist (or conchologist if you
prefer) and well versed in archaeology. However, archaeology in 1917 is
not the same as it is now. We know so much more.

One of the main problems with this discussion seems to be that the
Ojibwe (Ojibwa) were a historical Native American group. The problem
with connecting a historic group (identified as such by historical
documents) to an archaeological group (identified by material remains)
is often difficult. The two sources often, though not always, record
different parts of life. The Ojibwe as a people may have originate in
the distant past (I wish I knew the 'correct' date, but haven't been
able to find one) and 'lasted' until historic/modern times. The question
then becomes what are the contexts for these cowry shells? I am always
suspect of archaeological datings prior to the advent of radiocarbon
dating. Sometimes they are correct, but more often they are off. So, how
are these cowries dated? They may date back as far as 1492 (or soon
thereafter) and still be historic.

In otherwords, we need an archaeologist who has excavated Ojibwe sites
to confirm that cowries are in fact prehistoric. If they are not, then
we know that all sorts of shells (along with glass beads) were being
traded by Europeans. These things can move fast, the artifacts actually
arriving in some areas via local trade before the people have even come
in contact with Europeans.

The fact that cowries are not much discusses as prehistoric trade
objects in the U.S. indicates that it was probably historic.

Ben

mienis wrote:
> Dear Conchlers,
>
> J.Wilfrid Jackson wrote two important articles dealing with the use of
> Cowry-shells:
> 1916: The Money Cowry (Cypraea moneta, L.) as a Sacred object among North
> American Indians. Manchester Memoirs, 60 (4): 1-10; and
> 1916: The use of Cowry-shells for the Purposes of Currency, Amulets, and
> Charms. Manchester Memoirs, 60 (13): 1-72.
> Another important paper was:
> 1917: Shells as Evidence of the Migrations of Early Culture. Menchester
> Memoirs, no page references available at home.
> At least one of them (the second reference) is in the library in
> Jerusalem,
> which I can check tomorrow.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Henk K. Mienis
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> [log in to unmask] - a forum for informal discussions on molluscs
> To leave this list, click on the following web link:
> http://listserv.uga.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=conch-l&A=1
> Type your email address and name in the appropriate box and
> click leave the list.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[log in to unmask] - a forum for informal discussions on molluscs
To leave this list, click on the following web link:
http://listserv.uga.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=conch-l&A=1
Type your email address and name in the appropriate box and
click leave the list.
----------------------------------------------------------------------