Case Studies in Paleoethnobotany

Understanding Ancient Lifeways

through the Study of Phytoliths Starch
Macroremains and Pollen 1st Edition
Deborah M. Pearsall
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/case-studies-in-paleoethnobotany-understanding-anci
ent-lifeways-through-the-study-of-phytoliths-starch-macroremains-and-pollen-1st-editi
on-deborah-m-pearsall/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Case Studies in Couple and Family Therapy Through the

Lens of Early Career Professionals 1st Edition Connie
Cornwell

https://textbookfull.com/product/case-studies-in-couple-and-
family-therapy-through-the-lens-of-early-career-
professionals-1st-edition-connie-cornwell/

Case Studies in Clinical Cardiac Electrophysiology 1st

Edition John M. Miller

https://textbookfull.com/product/case-studies-in-clinical-
cardiac-electrophysiology-1st-edition-john-m-miller/

Engineering Innovation From idea to market through

concepts and case studies De Gruyter Textbook 1st
Edition Benjamin M. Legum

https://textbookfull.com/product/engineering-innovation-from-
idea-to-market-through-concepts-and-case-studies-de-gruyter-
textbook-1st-edition-benjamin-m-legum/

Exploring Mathematical Modeling in Biology Through Case

Studies and Experimental Activities 1st Edition Rebecca
Sanft

https://textbookfull.com/product/exploring-mathematical-modeling-
in-biology-through-case-studies-and-experimental-activities-1st-
edition-rebecca-sanft/
Case Studies in Forensic Anthropology: Bonified
Skeletons 1st Edition Heather M. Garvin (Editor)

https://textbookfull.com/product/case-studies-in-forensic-
anthropology-bonified-skeletons-1st-edition-heather-m-garvin-
editor/

Zooarchaeology in Practice: Case Studies in Methodology

and Interpretation in Archaeofaunal Analysis 1st
Edition Christina M. Giovas

https://textbookfull.com/product/zooarchaeology-in-practice-case-
studies-in-methodology-and-interpretation-in-archaeofaunal-
analysis-1st-edition-christina-m-giovas/

Case Studies of Building Pathology in Cultural Heritage

1st Edition João M. P. Q. Delgado (Ed)

https://textbookfull.com/product/case-studies-of-building-
pathology-in-cultural-heritage-1st-edition-joao-m-p-q-delgado-ed/

Understanding Religious Violence: Radicalism and

Terrorism in Religion Explored via Six Case Studies
James Dingley

https://textbookfull.com/product/understanding-religious-
violence-radicalism-and-terrorism-in-religion-explored-via-six-
case-studies-james-dingley/

Understanding Computers in a Changing Society 6th

Edition Deborah Morley

https://textbookfull.com/product/understanding-computers-in-a-
changing-society-6th-edition-deborah-morley/
CASE STUDIES IN PALEOETHNOBOTANY

Case Studies in Paleoethnobotany focuses on interpretation in paleoethnobotany. In it the reader

is guided through the process of analyzing archaeobotanical data and of using that data to
address research questions. Part I introduces archaeobotanical remains and how they are
deposited, preserved, sampled, recovered, and analyzed. Five issue-oriented case studies make
up Part II and illustrate paleoethnobotanical inference and applications. A recurrent theme is
the strength of using multiple lines of evidence to address issues of significance.
This book is unique in its explicit focus on interpretation for “consumers” of
paleoethnobotanical knowledge. Paleoethnobotanical inference is increasingly sophisticated
and contributes to our understanding of the past in ways that may not be apparent outside the
field or to all practitioners. The case study format allows in-depth exploration of the process
of interpretation in the context of significant issues that will engage readers. No other work
introduces paleoethnobotany and illustrates its application in this way.
This book will appeal to students interested in ancient plant–people interrelationships,
as well as archaeologists, paleoethnobotanists, and paleoecologists. The short methods
chapters and topical case studies are ideal for instructors of classes in archaeological methods,
environmental archaeology, and ethnobiology.

Deborah M. Pearsall is Professor Emeritus at the University of Missouri, having retired in

2013 after 35 years. She holds a BA from the University of Michigan and an MA and PhD
from the University of Illinois, all of which are in the subject of Anthropology. Her interests
within this discipline center on South American archaeology and paleoethnobotany: the
study of plant–people interrelationships through the archaeological record. She has conducted
paleoethnobotanical research in numerous locations in the Americas. Her research has two
broad themes: the origins and spread of agriculture in the lowland Neotropics, and methods
and approaches in paleoethnobotany. She is the author of three books: Paleoethnobotany:
A Handbook of Procedures; Plants and People in Ancient Ecuador: The Ethnobotany of the Jama River
Valley; and, with D. R. Piperno, The Origins of Agriculture in the Lowland Neotropics. She was
also the general editor of Academic Press’s 2008 Encyclopedia of Archaeology and has published
in numerous professional journals and edited collections.
CASE STUDIES IN
PALEOETHNOBOTANY
Understanding Ancient Lifeways
Through the Study of Phytoliths,
Starch, Macroremains, and Pollen

Deborah M. Pearsall
First published 2019
by Routledge
711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017
and by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, OX14 4RN
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
© 2019 Taylor & Francis
The right of Deborah M. Pearsall to be identified as author of this work has been
asserted by her in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and
Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in
any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter
invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or
retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered
trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to
infringe.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
A catalog record for this title has been requested
ISBN: 978-1-138-54471-0 (hbk)
ISBN: 978-1-611-32296-5 (pbk)
ISBN: 978-1-351-00968-3 (ebk)
Typeset in Bembo
by Apex CoVantage, LLC
For my students, lab assistants, and the visitors who passed through the
MU lab, 1979–2013: thanks for making my work possible and fun;
For archaeology students curious about ancient plant remains;
For my husband, Mike, for your loving support.
CONTENTS

List of figures xi
List of tables xiii
Prefacexv
Acknowledgmentsxvii

PART I
The Nature and Study of Paleoethnobotanical Remains 1

1 Paleoethnobotanical Remains 3
Introduction: The Paleoethnobotanical Approach 3
Paleoethnobotanical Data and Their Study 5
Macroremains 5
Pollen 13
Phytoliths 15
Starch 20
Studying Archaeobotanical Remains 20
The Comparative Collection 23

2 Deposition and Preservation of Paleoethnobotanical Remains 27

Introduction 27
Macroremain Deposition and Preservation 31
Summary 31
Grinding Stone Example 32
Phytolith Deposition and Preservation 33
Summary 33
Grinding Stone Example 34
viii Contents

Starch Deposition and Preservation 34

Summary 34
Grinding Stone Example 35
Pollen Deposition and Preservation 36
Summary 36
Grinding Stone Example 37
Conclusion: Deposition and Preservation of Paleoethnobotanical Remains 38

3 Field Sampling and Recovery 41

Introduction 41
Strategies and Techniques for Sampling 41
Flotation and Fine-Sieving 48
Flotation Example: Using a SMAP-Style System 50
Collecting Artifacts and Residues for Starch (and Other Microfossil) Analysis 54
Guidelines for Selecting Artifacts 54
Field-Sampling of Residues for Microfossil Study 55

4 Approaches to Paleoethnobotanical Interpretation 58

Introduction 58
Qualitative Analysis 59
Quantitative Analysis 61
Common Measures Used to Interpret Archaeobotanical Data 61
Raw Data Tabulation 61
Ubiquity/Percentage Presence 66
Ratios 68
Diversity 70
Application of Multivariate Techniques 71
Reading a Stratigraphic Diagram 71

PART II
Interpreting Paleoethnobotanical Data: Case Studies 77

5 Investigating Neanderthal Lifeways Through Paleoethnobotany 79

Introduction 79
Background to the Case Study 80
Neanderthal Diet(s): The Contribution of Plant and Animal Foods 82
Neanderthals as Top Predators: Faunal and Isotope Evidence 82
Neanderthals as Foragers: Botanical Evidence 84
Foraging Practices of Early Modern Humans 92
Discussion: Plant Foods in the Neanderthal Diet 98
Neanderthal–Plant Interrelationships Beyond Diet 99
Medicinal Plant Use 99
Fuel Selection 99
Ecosystem Management 103
 Contents ix

Spatial Organization of Sites as a Reflection of Modern Behavior 103

Early Modern Human Example: Sibudu Cave, South Africa 105
Summary and Discussion: Neanderthals and Modern Behaviors
Beyond Diet 106
Conclusion: Investigating Neanderthal Lifeways Through Paleoethnobotany 107

6 The Paleoethnobotany of Maize: Understanding Domestication

and Agriculture 112
Introduction 113
Is It Maize? Identifying and Characterizing Maize Remains 113
Introduction 113
Macroremains 114
Pollen 118
Phytoliths 121
Starch 124
Summary and Discussion: Identifying Maize 129
Assessing the Importance of Maize in Prehistoric Foodways 130
Introduction 130
Assessing the Abundance of Maize 131
Assessing the Impact of Maize on the Landscape 135
Summary and Discussion: Identifying the Importance and Impact of Maize 138
Conclusion: Contributions of Paleoethnobotany to Studying Domestication
and Agriculture 140

7 Archaeobotany and Insights Into Social Relationships at Cahokia 146

Introduction 146
Overview of Cahokia: The Site, Chiefdom, and Subsistence Base 147
Cahokia: Site and Cultural Sequence 147
Subsistence and Land Use 151
Changing Social Relationships and Foodways: An Overview 152
Maize, Elites, and Ritual at Cahokia 154
Insights From Macroremains, Cooking Pots, and Residues 156
Stable Isotope and Skeletal Studies of Human Remains 163
Summary: Maize and Social Status at Cahokia 165
Food, Status, and Social Relationships: Beyond Maize 167
Animals in Ritual and Diet of Elites and Nonelites at Cahokia 167
Black Drink and Cacao 168
Conclusion: Contributions of Paleoethnobotany to Understanding Social
Relationships at Cahokia 169

8 An Individual’s Relationship to the Natural World: Ötzi,

the Tyrolean Iceman 174
Introduction 174
Discovery and Excavation 176
x Contents

The Iceman’s Equipment and Clothing 178

Studies of the Iceman’s Body 181
Health and Cause of Death 181
Clues to Ötzi’s Diet and Travels 182
Environmental and Archaeological Studies of the Iceman Site and Region 185
Conclusion: Insights from Paleoethnobotany Into the Life and
Times of Ötzi 192

9 Plants and Healing/Health 198

Introduction 198
Interpretation Based on Medicinal Properties of Plants 199
Eastern North America 202
Europe and Southwest Asia 203
Africa 205
Medicinal Plants in Compelling Archaeological Contexts 207
Central and South America 207
Europe 209
East Asia 212
Coprolites and Latrines: Evidence From the Ingestion of Medicinal Plants 213
North America 213
South America 214
Southwest Asia and Europe 217
Analyzing Medicinal Preparations/Residues 220
North America 220
Europe and Africa 221
Identifying Active Plant Agents in Human Remains 222
Conclusion: Investigating Plants and Healing/Health Through
Paleoethnobotany 223

10 Conclusion: Investigating Ancient Lifeways Through Paleoethnobotany 228

Introduction 228
Methodological Aspects of Making Convincing Interpretations 228
Approaching Interpretation at Different Scales of Analysis 231
Final Thoughts 233

Index 237
FIGURES

1.1 Examples of angiosperm seeds, illustrating characteristics that aid

identification6
1.2 Examples of common fruit types, illustrating characteristics that aid
identification8
1.3 Transverse, tangential, and radial sections of a typical hardwood, showing
vessels (large, small) and their arrangement into annual rings and rays
(uniseriate, multiseriate) 9
1.4 Some common arrangements of parenchyma tissue in wood 10
1.5 True root and underground stem 11
1.6 Various types of underground stems 12
1.7 Micrographs illustrating some of the range of variation in pollen grains 14
1.8 Cells of the grass epidermis that become silicified 16
1.9 Distinctive phytoliths from some nongrasses 17
1.10 Examples of distinctive starch grains of some economic plants 21
2.1 Two pathways for charred preservation: deliberate burning and chance or
accidental burning 28
2.2 Model for the deposition and preservation of macroremains 30
2.3 Model for the deposition and preservation of phytoliths 31
3.1 Excavation of hypothetical Neolithic house floor, composite sampling 43
3.2 Excavation of hypothetical Neolithic house floor, column sampling 44
3.3 Excavation of hypothetical Neolithic house floor, point sampling in
a 50-cm grid 45
3.4 Manual water flotation 49
3.5 SMAP-style flotation 51
4.1 Simplified pollen percentage diagram for core S3E2 from Lake Shelby,
Alabama72
5.1 Spatial distribution of analyzed artifacts by use-material, Abri du
Maras Cave, France 91
5.2 Study of combustion feature from archaeological Unit XI, Kebara Cave,
Israel100
xii Figures

5.3 Phytoliths from grasses, dicotyledonous leaves, and dicotyledonous wood/

bark obtained from sediments from the Mousterian levels E and F
of Hayonim Cave, Israel 102
5.4 Distribution of phytoliths across Floor II at Tor Faraj 104
6.1 The primary research materials of paleoethnobotany, as illustrated by maize 115
6.2 Essential measurements and characters of cobs for distinguishing maize races 116
6.3 Size–frequency diameters of Zea mays pollen grains from Chaco Canyon,
New Mexico 122
6.4 Percentage phytolith diagram from Piliwa Ridged Field 2, French Guiana 126
6.5 Comparison of maize ubiquity and mano area, Black Mesa data 131
6.6 Percentage occurrence of the most abundant fossil pollen taxa recovered
from the sediments of Lake Sauce, Peru 137
6.7 Summary diagram of Laguna Castilla sedimentary ∂13CTOC values, maize
pollen concentrations, and mineral influx variation 139
7.1 Mississippian centers in the northern American Bottom 149
7.2 Topographic map of the Cahokia Mounds site, with locations mentioned
in the text labeled 150
7.3 Pollen, sediment, and isotope records from Horseshoe Lake, Cahokia region 153
7.4 A summary of changes in food, dishes, and community patterns over
600 years in the American Bottom 155
7.5 The ratio of maize kernels to cob fragments at selected sites in the
American Bottom 156
7.6 Frequencies of selected plant types from the ICT-II Tract and sub-Mound
51 Pit, Cahokia 159
7.7 Plan maps showing the distributions of materials found on the floors of
catastrophically burned huts F536 and F656, East St. Louis 162
8.1 Location of the Iceman site and region, Italian-Austrian border, eastern Alps 177
8.2 Pollen and macrofossil remains from the Iceman’s intestines 184
8.3 Simplified relative pollen diagram from the “Am Soom,” Iceman study region 186
8.4 Summary of the evidence from four pollen cores for pasturing in the
Iceman study region 187
8.5 Lagaun mire pollen diagram, Iceman study region 188
8.6 Distribution of lime bast at the Iceman site 191
9.1 Absolute abundances of medicinal plant pollen in the Upper Paleolithic
layers of Cave Kotias Klde, Western Georgia 204
9.2 Structural remains, features, and associated refuse in Area D, Zone D and
Areas A-1 and B-1, Zone A, Monte Verde site, Chile 208
TABLES

1.1 Scientific names of plants mentioned in the text 5

2.1 Example of grinding stone in house floor: predictions about deposition
and preservation of macroremains and phytoliths 33
2.2 Example of grinding stone in house floor: predictions about deposition
and preservation of starch and pollen 35
4.1 Plants identified in hypothetical house floor 60
4.2 Macroremain counts from hypothetical house floor samples 62
4.3 Starch and phytolith counts and ubiquity, hypothetical house floor artifacts 64
4.4 Macroremains percentage and ubiquity, hypothetical house floor samples 67
4.5 Transformation of macroremain, starch, and phytolith data from the
hypothetical house floor samples and artifacts 69
5.1 Scientific names of plants mentioned in the text 81
5.2 Mousterian plant remains from Kebara Cave, Israel 85
5.3 Counts and descriptions of plant microfossils recovered from the dental
calculus from Shanidar III, Iraq 87
5.4 Populations included in comparative study of plant residues from dental
calculus and stone tools of Neanderthals and early modern humans 93
5.5 Starch morphometrics and estimated plant parts and families present in the
archaeological sample from Mikuyu, Mozambique 96
6.1 Scientific names of plant taxa mentioned in the text 114
6.2 Characteristics of Early Agricultural Period maize cob fragments from
southern Arizona 119
6.3 Recovery of Zea mays pollen and phytoliths, Core 4, Lake San Pablo, Ecuador 125
6.4 Comparison of maize starch and macroremains recovered from Los Mangos
del Parguaza, Venezuela 128
6.5 Microfossil indicators for maize and other crops during the Valdivia 3
period, Real Alto site, Ecuador 133
7.1 Scientific names of plants mentioned in the text 148
7.2 Cultural sequence and dating of Cahokia 150
xiv Tables

8.1 Scientific names of plants mentioned in the text 175

8.2 Cultural chronology for the Iceman region 178
9.1 Scientific names of plants mentioned in the chapter 200
9.2 Comparison of modern pollen samples taken inside and outside caves
occupied during the Upper Paleolithic, Western Georgia 203
9.3 Spices and other imports found at Quseir al-Qadim and Berenike, two
ancient ports on the Red Sea 206
9.4 Macrofossil samples from Ottoman contexts at Kaman-Kalehöyük, Turkey,
containing Hyoscyamus seeds 211
9.5 Major pollen frequencies from coprolites from Caldwell Cave, Texas 215
9.6 Summary of conclusions concerning the potential that taxa represent
prehistoric medicinal use at Boqueirão da Pedra Furada, Brazil 216
9.7 Pollen results of Locus 12/H/75, Tel Megiddo, Israel 218
PREFACE

I wrote the original version of Paleoethnobotany: A Handbook of Procedures (1989, Academic

Press) following the outline of a class I taught every other year or so at the University of
Missouri. The class was not just aimed at aspiring paleoethnobotanists, but at a more general
audience of students interested in learning about ancient plant use. In time the class became
one of the methods offerings for majors, and I added readings from the literature that illus-
trated how macroremains, pollen, phytoliths, and, eventually, starch could be used to address
interesting research questions. Those readings were often challenging, but it became clear to
me that students who put the effort into reading the graphs and tables and who thought about
whether the conclusions made sense from those data not only learned something about past
plant–people interrelationships, but about the process of drawing robust inferences as well.
My goal in this book, Case Studies in Paleoethnobotany: Understanding Ancient Lifeways
Through the Study of Phytoliths, Starch, Macroremains, and Pollen, is to focus explicitly on the pro-
cess of interpretation in paleoethnobotany—in essence, guiding students, practicing archae-
ologists, and paleoethnobotanists alike through the process of reading those graphs and tables
and evaluating those research results. Paleoethnobotanical inference is increasingly sophisti-
cated and contributes to our understanding of the past in ways that may not be apparent out-
side the field or to all practitioners. I will illustrate some of these contributions through five
issue-oriented case studies that feature robust and innovative approaches to interpreting past
plant–people interrelationships. A theme that runs through all the case studies is the strength
of using multiple lines of evidence to address issues of significance.
To set the stage for the case studies, the book begins in Part I with an introduction to
paleoethnobotany, the study of plant–people interrelationships through the archaeological
record. In Chapter 1 the reader is introduced to the paleoethnobotanical approach and to the
major kinds of archaeobotanical remains—macroremains (seeds, fruits, underground storage
organs, wood), pollen, phytoliths, and starch grains—and how they are studied. Chapter 2
discusses how these plant remains become deposited and preserved in archaeological sites and
environmental contexts like lake sediments. Chapter 3 covers the basics of taking samples in
the field, discusses sampling strategies, and describes flotation, a common method for recover-
ing macroremains often carried out by field archaeologists. Chapter 4 describes the ways in
xvi Preface

which paleoethnobotanists examine and draw inferences from the results of their studies of
macroremains, pollen, phytoliths, and starch. The reader is also guided through how to read a
standard stratigraphic diagram, a common format for presenting pollen and phytolith results
from environmental cores.
Part II focuses on how archaeobotanical data are interpreted and used to address research
questions of interest to archaeologists, paleoethnobotanists, and other researchers. Five case
studies illustrate how paleoethnobotanical data are interpreted and integrated:

Chapter 5: Investigating Neanderthal Lifeways Through Paleoethnobotany

Chapter 6: The Paleoethnobotany of Maize: Understanding Domestication and Agriculture
Chapter 7: Archaeobotany and Insights Into Social Relationships at Cahokia
Chapter 8: An Individual’s Relationship to the Natural World: Ötzi, the Tyrolean Iceman
Chapter 9: Plants and Healing/Health

I selected these case studies to illustrate the diversity of issues and questions that can be illumi-
nated through an understanding of plant–people interrelationships. The cases range widely in
time, geography, and the types of data used to investigate the issues. In each case the reader will
be introduced to the issues and questions, provided necessary background information, and
then presented the key findings and a sample of actual data relevant to the case. Chapter 10
presents some final thoughts on investigating ancient lifeways through paleoethnobotany.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Special thanks to retired professional photographer Howard Wilson, who reproduced the
figures from Paleoethnobotany: A Handbook of Procedures used in Part I and prepared all the
tables and figures reproduced from published works for inclusion in this book. Howard also
composed Figures 1.7, 1.9, 1.10, 2.2, 2.3, and 6.1.
I thank the following for creating original art that first appeared in Paleoethnobotany:
A Handbook of Procedures: Elizabeth Dinan, Figures 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3 and Lisa Harrison, Fig-
ures 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, and 1.6.
The author photo was taken by Gina Beckley.
Sources of tables and figures reproduced from published works are listed in the captions
of the images; I thank the publishers and authors for granting permission to use these works.
PART I

The Nature and Study of

Paleoethnobotanical Remains
1
PALEOETHNOBOTANICAL REMAINS

Glossary
dichotomous key a tool that helps the user identify an unknown organism or other entity,
such as a pollen grain or wood specimen. A dichotomous key is composed of a series of
statements consisting of two choices (different characteristics of the entity) that lead the
user to the correct identification.

Introduction: The Paleoethnobotanical Approach

Paleoethnobotany is the study of the interrelationships between humans and plants through
the archaeological record. In this chapter I describe the paleoethnobotanical approach and
introduce the major kinds of archaeobotanical remains—macroremains (seeds, fruits, under-
ground storage organs, wood), pollen, phytoliths, and starch grains—and discuss how they are
studied.
Paleoethnobotany is essentially an archaeological approach, and many paleoethnobotanists
are trained as archaeologists. Plant remains, the primary research materials of paleoethnobot-
any, must be recovered from sites and identified. Human interactions with the plant world—
for example, cultivation and consumption of domesticated plants—result in the deposition
and preservation of four primary kinds of plant remains. Macroremains are larger plant tis-
sues that are visible to the naked eye. Often, plant tissues preserve by becoming charred, for
instance, in a cooking accident. Food preparation may also result in the deposition of starch
on grinding stones and in cooking pots, where it may be preserved in crevices or food crusts.
Decay or burning of plant tissues such as leaves, stems, and fruits releases phytoliths (plant
opal silica bodies) into site sediments. Certain kinds of cooking techniques may also result in
phytolith deposition in vessels or ovens. In the process of creating gardens, people cut down
and weed out some plants and cultivate and encourage others. This changes the mixture of
pollen that is deposited over the landscape. Pollen deposited and preserved in lake sediments
records the history of human–plant interrelationships on local and regional scales; phytoliths
that wash into lakes with eroding soil also reflect past vegetation. Pollen may also be ingested,
4 Nature and Study of Plant Remains

for example, in a tea made from flowers, and preserved in human fecal remains (coprolites)
with other plant and animal tissues. It is not uncommon for plants to be represented in the
archaeological record in multiple ways.
The nature of these diverse archaeobotanical materials also demands expertise in botany.
Archaeologically trained paleoethnobotanists must learn plant taxonomy, anatomy, and labo-
ratory skills necessary to recover and identify plant remains. Even paleoethnobotanists whose
primary training is in botany must adapt their skills to deal with fragmentary materials and
the incomplete archaeological record.
As a field, paleoethnobotany has its roots in the early to mid-nineteenth century, when well-
preserved plant remains from Egyptian tombs, lakeside Swiss villages, and Peruvian mummy
bundles were studied by botanists. Study of macroremains continued in the late nineteenth
and first half of the twentieth centuries in Europe, the Mediterranean region, and coastal Peru.
Pollen and phytoliths also began to be studied systematically at that time. The real potential
of fossil pollen studies was realized in 1916 when Lennart von Post presented the first mod-
ern percentage pollen analysis. This approach permitted direct quantitative description of past
vegetation composition. Another early application of pollen analysis was determining relative
dating of archaeological sites by comparing pollen assemblages from sites to a sequence of
vegetation changes during the late Pleistocene and Holocene epochs established from stud-
ies of peat bog and lake deposits. Early twentieth-century applications of phytolith analysis
focused on identifying cultivated grasses of the Near East.
In spite of early studies of well-preserved plant remains from Peru by European and Latin
American scholars, American archaeologists and botanists did not show much interest in
archaeological plant remains until after 1930. A similar situation existed for pollen analysis,
with early research largely limited to the arid southwestern United States. In North America
phytoliths were mostly of interest to botanists and soil scientists, and starch to food scientists.
Analyses by Gilmore (1931) and Jones (1936) of desiccated plant remains from rock shelters
in the United States helped fuel interest in paleoethnobotany in North America, and publica-
tion of Excavations at Star Carr by British archaeologist J.G.D. Clark (1954) convinced many of
the importance of biological remains for archaeological interpretation. With increased inter-
est in American archaeology on reconstructing subsistence and paleoenvironment, greater
emphasis was put during the late 1950s and 1960s on recovering and analyzing macroremains
and pollen. After Struever (1968) described flotation, archaeologists began to recover mac-
roremains from a diversity of sites, not just those in which dry or waterlogged conditions
preserved quantities of material. By the 1970s, pollen analysis was incorporated into archaeo-
logical investigations in many regions of the United States, Canada, and Latin America.
The development of phytolith analysis in archaeology was tied to two research foci of
the 1970s and 1980s: the origins and intensification of agriculture, and reconstructing past
environments. The potential of starch analysis was first recognized through study of organic
residues on stone tools, which began in the late 1970s and early 1980s in Oceania and North
America. These studies revealed that organic residues, including identifiable starch, survived
more often than expected (i.e., not just in arid sites). By 2006, when Ancient Starch Research
(Torrence and Barton, eds.) was published, it had become apparent that starch was surprisingly
common in the archaeological record.
Paleoethnobotanical research has diversified and grown exponentially in the last three
decades. Among the research topics that have been addressed through the study of archaeo-
botanical remains: identification of domesticated plants, agricultural practices, and agricultural
 Paleoethnobotanical Remains 5

intensification; reconstructing diet and subsistence; prehistory of beer and wine making; use
of wild foods by agriculturalists; wood acquisition, use, and environmental impact; plants and
political complexity, social status, and social change; plants as indicators of ethnicity; iden-
tification of fiber and wooden artifacts; prehistory of spices; plants in ritual and medicine;
plants in economic systems; human environmental impacts, management, and land use; study
of living conditions of prehistoric populations; tracing the settlement by humans of remote
regions, such as Polynesia; investigating diet and health through study of coprolites; study of
agricultural fields and gardens; plants in human evolution; spatial and activity analysis; and diet
of living and extinct primates.

Paleoethnobotanical Data and Their Study

Macroremains
Macroremains are larger plant tissues visible to the naked eye. They include seeds, fruits, nuts
(all plant reproductive structures), wood, roots and tubers, and other vegetative materials. The
last named will not be covered here. Table 1.1 lists the scientific names of plants mentioned
in the text.

Seeds
A seed is a reproductive structure composed of a protected embryonic plant (Shackley 1981).
In the major group of seed-bearing plants, the angiosperms, seeds develop in the ovary,
the basal portion of the female part of the flower. The ovary and seeds develop into the
fruit. Angiosperm seeds have three major parts: embryo, endosperm, and seed coat (testa)
(Figure 1.1). The embryo is composed of the first “true” leaves, the primary root, and the

TABLE 1.1 Scientific names of plants mentioned in text

arrowroot family Marantaceae

banana family Musaceae
bird-of-paradise family Heliconiaceae
canna family Cannaceae
carrot Daucus carota
cotton Gossypium
daisy family Asteraceae
grass family Poaceae or Gramineae
ginger family Zingiberaceae
gourd Lagenaria siceraria
hickory family Juglandaceae
legume or bean family Fabaceae or Leguminosae
maize Zea mays
palm family Arecaceae or Palmae
peach Prunus persica
sedge family Cyperaceae
Squash Cucurbita
sweet potato Ipomoea batatas
FIGURE 1.1 
Examples of angiosperm seeds, illustrating characteristics that aid identification:
(a) Asteraceae (daisy family); seeds are often oblong and sometimes ridged; a pappus
(ring of hairs or scales) may be present; an attachment stalk (remains of funiculus)
is often prominent; (b) Poaceae (grass family) seeds have a lateral or basal-lateral
embryo; endosperm tends to be abundant; some grasses have elongated, grooved seeds
(e.g., ryegrass); others have seeds that are flattened and lightly ridged (e.g., crabgrass);
(c) Fabaceae (bean family); many legumes are beanlike, with a notched attachment
area or hilum; the seed coat is usually smooth; seed interior consists mostly of two
broad, thick cotyledons, with little or no endosperm. Not to scale.
 Paleoethnobotanical Remains 7

cotyledon or “seed” leaf (Evert 2006). Dicotyledons have two “seed” leaves, monocotyledons
one. In some plants, such as legumes, cotyledons are large and contain stored nutrients to
nourish the seedling. Seeds of other plants contain specialized tissue, the endosperm, which
provides these nutrients. The amount of endosperm and its position in the seed relative to
the embryo differ among plant groups and are important traits in seed identification. Embryo
and endosperm, if present, are protected by the seed coat, a one- or two-layer outer covering.
Seeds coats may have distinctive coloration, texture, or surface features that can be impor-
tant distinguishing characteristics. The point where the seed was attached to the ovary is the
hilum, or attachment scar.
Not all distinguishing characteristics may be preserved in archaeological seeds. Size and
shape may be distorted by charring, for instance, or seeds may be broken. The seed coat is an
important source of diagnostic characteristics, including color for uncharred seeds, texture
(whether the testa is smooth or has a raised pattern), attachments, and scars like the hilum.
If the seed coat is lost during charring or badly eroded in desiccated materials, identifi-
ability decreases markedly. Waterlogged seeds may also lose their outer layers and suffer cell
distortion.
Accurate identification of archaeological seeds to botanical taxon is largely a matter of
practice, and is grounded in comparing archaeological specimens to known kinds of seeds.
Photographs and line drawings are helpful visual aids, but are no substitute for identified
examples. Study of comparative seed specimens helps the novice learn the diagnostic features
of each kind of seed, how it appears when broken or charred, and how it can be distinguished
from similar seeds.

Fruits and Nuts

A fruit is a ripened ovary and its adhering parts—the seed-bearing organ of the plant. The
ovary wall, or pericarp, can be soft and fleshy, leathery, hard, or thin and paperlike, depending
on the form of the fruit (Figure 1.2). Internal arrangement of seeds in the fruit is also vari-
able. Some fruits have only one seed, which is fused to the ovary wall; other fruits have several
seeds. Although whole fruits are sometimes found archaeologically, it is more common to find
fragments of inedible fruit parts. Very large seeds, such as palm and other tropical fruit seeds,
often produce macroremains that are more similar in size and appearance to fruit fragments
than to small seeds.
Nuts are indehiscent (not splitting open to release seeds when ripe), usually one-seeded,
hard and bony fruits. Some nuts, such as those in the hickory family, are covered with a
leathery husk. Fragments of husk, nut shell (hard pericarp), and nut meats (embryo) may all
be found archaeologically. There are two major types of succulent fruits: drupes and berries.
Drupes are fleshy fruits with one or more seeds enclosed in a hard, stony portion of endocarp,
such as the peach pit illustrated in Figure 1.2. Berries are similar to drupes, but their seeds are
surrounded only by a hardened seed coat. Legumes are dry fruits that open along two sutures,
releasing the mature seeds. The cotton fruit shown in Figure 1.2 is an example of a capsule, a
multichambered fruit that opens along one or more sutures.
Identifying fragmented fruit and nut remains presents the analyst with a set of prob-
lems somewhat different from those encountered in seed identification. Published manuals
or drawings are less useful as identification aids, because fragmented remains do not resemble
illustrated whole specimens. Photographs or drawings often do not illustrate internal portions
FIGURE 1.2 
Examples of common fruit types, illustrating characteristics that aid identification.
Not to scale.
 Paleoethnobotanical Remains 9

of fruit, the nature of tissues, or details of attachment areas. A comparative collection thus
becomes of primary importance for correct identification of such remains. Large seeds pre-
sent similar difficulties, because they are often recovered in fragmented form. For identifying
charred specimens, comparative materials should be charred and broken up into pieces like
the archaeological materials, and distinctive features of the various tissues described. It may
be useful to compile this information into a desktop identification aid (card file), database, or
formal dichotomous key.

Wood
Fragments of charred wood are often the most abundant macroremains recovered archaeo-
logically. Wood is xylem tissue (tissue that conducts water and nutrients) of the secondarily
thickened plant. The term “wood” is used broadly here to include all plant tissues found in
secondarily thickened stems. A number of texts describe the structure of wood in detail; the
basic reference used here was Panshin and de Zeeuw (1980).
Features of wood commonly used for identification are illustrated in Figure 1.3 and Fig-
ure 1.4 and include vessels and their arrangement; size and arrangement of rays; and abun-
dance and nature of parenchyma. Physical characteristics, such as color, texture, and hardness,
and certain microanatomical features can also be useful. Features of wood can be viewed from
three different planes or sections: the transverse or cross-section (plane across the stem), the
radial longitudinal section (plane paralleling a radius of the stem), and the tangential longitu-
dinal section (plane at a right angle to a radius of the stem).
The nature and arrangement of vessels—linear arrangements of specialized cells that con-
duct water and dissolved salts—as viewed in transverse section are key features for distinguish-
ing woods. Presence or absence of vessels, for example, can be used to distinguish softwoods

FIGURE 1.3 Transverse, tangential, and radial sections of a typical hardwood, showing vessels (large,
small) and their arrangement into annual rings and rays (uniseriate, multiseriate).
10 Nature and Study of Plant Remains

FIGURE 1.4 Some common arrangements of parenchyma tissue. Paratracheal parenchyma is depicted

by black dots; aggregated apotracheal and banded are depicted by thin lines.

(conifers) from most hardwoods (angiosperms). One of the easiest features to recognize is
the annual growth ring: if vessels formed during spring growth of the tree (early wood) are
larger than those formed during the summer growth period (late wood), the wood is called
ring porous; if vessels formed during growth of early and late wood are the same size, wood is
classified as diffuse porous. Vessels may occur singly, in groups, or in chains and may be sparse
or quite numerous in relation to other tissues.
Size and arrangement of rays, which are composed of parenchyma tissue (storage cells with
undifferentiated walls) and tracheids (a type of water-conducting cell) are additional features
useful for wood identification. Viewed from the transverse section, rays appear like spokes of
a wheel, radiating out from the center of the stem. Using this section, size and arrangement
of rays can be described as they appear when “sliced” through one horizontal plane: in some
taxa all rays are very narrow (uniseriate); in others rays appear variable in width (multiseriate).
Rays also differ in height and overall spacing and abundance.
Abundance and nature of parenchyma tissue are the third set of features commonly used
for wood identification. As mentioned earlier, parenchyma cells make up much of the tissue of
rays. Parenchyma also occurs in strands running longitudinally through wood. The arrange-
ment of this kind of parenchyma, illustrated in Figure 1.4, can be useful in identification.
Identifying charred wood is a task undertaken by many paleoethnobotanists. Charring
eliminates a number of features useful for identifying fresh wood, such as color and odor,
and alters others. Charred wood is usually examined by snapping the specimen or cutting it
with a sharp razor blade to create a fresh transverse surface. Viewed under low magnification
(15–30 ×) with a dissecting microscope and obliquely angled top lighting, characteristics
such as arrangement, abundance, and size of vessels and spacing and abundance of rays can be
observed. Parenchyma characteristics and ray widths typically require higher magnification.
Snapping or cutting radial longitudinal and tangential longitudinal sections gives additional
views of rays. Dried or waterlogged wood may be too fragile to examine this way and require
embedding and sectioning (see Pearsall 2015 for details).
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 And who will sit in Nóvgorod?”
There stepped forward Diví Murza, son of Ulán:
“Listen, our lord, Crimea’s tsar!
You, our lord, shall sit in stone-built Moscow,
And your son in Vladímir,
And your nephew in Súzdal,
And your relative in Zvenígorod,
And let the equerry hold old Ryazán,
But to me, O lord, grant Nóvgorod:
There, in Nóvgorod, lies my luck.”
The voice of the Lord called out from heaven:
“Listen, you dog, Crimea’s tsar!
Know you not the tsarate of Muscovy?
There are in Moscow seventy Apostles,[117]
Besides the three Sanctified;
And there is in Moscow still an orthodox Tsar.”
And you fled, you dog, Crimea’s tsar,
Not over the highways, nor the main road,
Nor following the black standard.

THE SONG OF THE PRINCESS KSÉNIYA BORÍSOVNA [118]

There weepeth a little bird,

A little white quail:
“Alas, that I so young must grieve!
They wish to burn the green oak,
To destroy my little nest,
To kill my little ones,
To catch me, quail.”
In Moscow the Princess weepeth:
“Alas that I so young must grieve!
For there comes to Moscow the traitor,
Gríshka Otrépev Rozstríga,[119]
Who wants to take me captive,
And having captured make me a nun,
To send me into the monastery.
But I do not wish to become a nun,
To go into a monastery:
I shall keep my dark cell open,
To look at the fine fellows.
O our beautiful corridors!
Who will walk over you
After our tsarian life
And after Borís Godunóv?
O our beautiful palace halls!
Who will be sitting in you
After our tsarian life
And after Borís Godunóv?”
And in Moscow the Princess weepeth,
The daughter of Borís Godunóv:
“O God, our merciful Saviour!
Wherefore is our tsardom perished,—
Is it for father’s sinning,
Or for mother’s not praying?
And you beloved palace halls!
Who will rule in you,
After our tsarian life?
Fine stuffs of drawn lace!—
Shall we wind you around the birches?
Fine gold-worked towels!
Shall we throw you into the woods?
Fine earrings of hyacinth
Shall we hang you on branches,
After our tsarian life,
After the reign of our father,
Glorious Borís Godunóv?
Wherefore comes to Moscow Rozstríga,
And wants to break down the palaces,
And to take me, princess, captive,
And to send me to Ustyúzhna Zheléznaya,
To make me, princess, a nun,
To place me behind a walled garden?
 Why must I grieve,
As they take me to the dark cell,
And the abbess gives me her blessing?”

THE RETURN OF PATRIARCH FILARÉT TO MOSCOW[120]

The tsarate of Muscovy was happy

And all the holy Russian land.
Happy was the sovereign, the orthodox Tsar,
The Grand Duke Mikhaíl Fedórovich,
For he was told that his father had arrived,
His father Filarét Nikítich,
From the land of the infidel, from Lithuania.
He had brought back with him many princes and boyárs,
He had also brought the boyár of the Tsar,
Prince Mikhaíl Borísovich Sheyn.
There had come together many princes, boyárs, and dignitaries,
In the mighty tsarate of Muscovy:
They wished to meet Filarét Nikítich
Outside the famous stone-built Moscow.
’Tis not the red sun in its course,—
’Tis the orthodox Tsar that has gone out,
To meet his father dear,
Lord Filarét Nikítich.
With the Tsar went his uncle,
Iván Nikítich the boyár.—
“The Lord grant my father be well,
My father, lord Filarét Nikítich.”
They went not into the palace of the Tsar,
They went into the cathedral of the Most Holy Virgin,
To sing an honourable mass.
And he blessed his beloved child:
“God grant the orthodox Tsar be well,
Grand Duke Mikhaíl Fedórovich!
And for him to rule the tsarate of Muscovy
And the holy Russian land.

FOOTNOTES:

[116] Having destroyed almost the whole of Moscow by fire in

1572, Devlét-Giréy made again an incursion the next year. He
was so sure of an easy victory, that the streets of Moscow, so
Kúrbski tells, were alotted in advance to the Murzas. He came
with an army of 120,000 men, and left on the field of battle
100,000.
[117] Either churches or images of the apostles; a similar
interpretation holds for the next line.
[118] She was shorn a nun by order of the False Demetrius,
and was sent to a distant monastery.
[119] Rozstríga means “he who has abandoned his tonsure.”
[120] Filarét Nikítich, the father of Mikhaíl Fedórovich, returned
from his Lithuanian captivity in 1619 and was at once proclaimed
Patriarch.
 Yúri Krizhánich. (1617-about 1677.)
Krizhánich was a Croatian who had studied at the Croatian
Seminary at Vienna, at the university of Bologna, and at the
Greek College of St. Athanasius at Rome, where he came in
contact with some Russians. He early dreamed of a union of
all the Slavic nations under the rule of Russia, and in 1657 he
went to Southern Russia, where he began a propaganda
among the Cossacks in favour of a union with that country.
Two years later he appeared in Moscow, where his Catholic
religion and his efforts at introducing a Western culture
brought him into disrepute, and he was at once banished to
Siberia, where he lived until the year 1676. He composed a
large number of works on an Universal Slavic language, on
the Russian empire in the seventeenth century, and on the
union of the Churches, writing not in Russian, but in a strange
mixture of several Slavic languages, of his own invention. In
these he developed a strong Panslavism, full of hatred of
everything foreign, except foreign culture, and expressed high
hopes for Russia’s future greatness. His works are said to
have been used by Peter the Great, but they were not
published until 1860.

POLITICAL REASONS FOR THE UNION OF THE CHURCHES

The sixth reason for my contention is of a political nature, and

refers to the nation’s weal. For this discord of the Churches is even
now the cause of Doroshénko’s rebellion and the Turkish invasion,
and continuation of the present war, and has from the beginning
been the cause of much evil. The Poles have an ancient adage: Aut
Moscovia Polonizat, aut Polonia Moscovizat, i. e., Either Moscow
shall become Polish, or Poland shall be a part of the Russian
empire. It is written in the histories of other nations, and the advisers
of the Tsar know it, that in the days of Feódor Ivánovich and later
there have been many congresses held and embassies sent for the
purpose of securing a Russian ruler for Poland and Lithuania. There
is no doubt but that Poland and Lithuania would have become
possessions of the Russian Tsars, if it were not for the division of the
Churches. And there would not have been many old and new wars,
nor bloodshed, in which so many hundreds of thousands of innocent
people have perished by the sword, and have been led into
Mussulman captivity. And the Russian nation would have long ago
been far advanced in profane and political sciences that are so
necessary for all well-educated persons, and would not be scorned
and ridiculed and hated by the European nations for its barbarism.
Nor would it suffer such unbearable disgrace and losses in war and
commerce from the Germans and Crimeans, as it is suffering now.
Book knowledge and political wisdom is a leaven of the mind, and a
fast friendship with the Poles and Lithuanians would have made the
Russian nation more renowned and more feared by the surrounding
peoples, and richer in all earthly possessions.

ON KNOWLEDGE

Kings must instruct their subjects, parents their children, how to

obtain knowledge. The time has come for our nation to be instructed
in various branches, for God has in His mercy and kindness uplifted
through Russia a Slavic kingdom to glory, power and majesty, such
as for splendour has never existed before among us. We observe
with other nations that as soon as a kingdom rises to higher
importance, the sciences and arts at once begin to flourish among
them. We, too, must learn, for under the honoured rule of the
Righteous Tsar and Great King Alexis Mikháylovich we have an
opportunity to wipe off the mould of our ancient barbarism, to acquire
various sciences, to adopt a better organisation of society, and to
reach a higher well-being.

ON FOREIGNERS

We are not possessed of an innate vivacity, nor praiseworthy

national characteristics, nor sincerity of heart. For people who have
such pride do not allow foreigners to command them, except by
force, whereas our nation of its own free will invites foreigners to
come to its country. Not one people under the sun has since the
beginning of the world been so abused and disgraced by foreigners
as we Slavs have been by the Germans. Our whole Slavic nation
has been subject to this kind of treatment; everywhere we have upon
our shoulders Germans, Jews, Scotchmen, Gypsies, Armenians,
Greeks and merchants of other nationalities, who suck our blood. In
Russia you will see nowhere any wealth, except in the Tsar’s
treasury; everywhere there is dire, bare poverty.
 Grigóri Kotoshíkhin. (1630-1667.)
Grigóri Kotoshíkhin was a clerk, and later a scribe
(podyáchi) in the Department of Legations, a kind of Foreign
Office. He had been frequently employed as an ambassador
in connection with various treaties between Russia and
Sweden and Poland. While at Moscow, he had been guilty of
some dishonesty to his own country by giving certain secrets
of State to the Swedish ambassador; but that was an offence
not uncommon at Moscow, where patriotism was seldom of a
disinterested character. In 1664 he was sent out with the
Russian army that was then operating against Poland. Shortly
after, its two generals, Cherkásski and Prozoróvski, were
recalled, and Dolgorúki was sent in their place. The latter tried
to get Kotoshíkhin’s aid in denouncing his two predecessors
for traitorous actions, but Kotoshíkhin refused. Fearing the
wrath of Dolgorúki, he fled, first to Poland, and then, through
Prussia and Lubeck, to Sweden. He settled in Stockholm,
where he was employed in a semi-official capacity in the
Foreign Office. In a fit of intoxication he killed his host, who
was the official Russian translator of Sweden, and for this
crime he was beheaded.
Kotoshíkhin had evidently formed the plan of writing about
Russian customs before his arrival in Stockholm, but he was
also encouraged by distinguished Swedish statesmen, who
hoped to find important information about Russia in his work.
In his capacity of Legation scribe Kotoshíkhin had an
excellent opportunity to become intimately acquainted with
the immediate surroundings of the Tsar; but he supplemented
his knowledge by a clear insight, which he had gained in his
intercourse with other nations. There is no other work of Old
Russia that gives so detailed an account of contemporary
society. Kotoshíkhin’s work was first discovered in 1840,
though several manuscript translations in Swedish were
known to be extant in various libraries.
 THE EDUCATION OF THE PRINCES

FROM CHAP. 1.

For the bringing up of the Tsarévich or Tsarévna they select from

among the women of all ranks a good, pure, sweet-tempered and
healthy woman, and that woman resides for a year in the Upper
Palace, in the apartments of the Tsarítsa. At the expiration of the
year, the husband of that woman, if she be of noble origin, is made
governor of a city, or receives some lands in perpetuity; if she be a
scribe’s, or some other serving-man’s wife, he is promoted and
granted a goodly salary; if he be a countryman, he is given a good
sum, and both are freed from the taxes and other imposts of the Tsar
during their whole lives. The Tsarévich and Tsarévna have also a
chief-nurse to look after them, a distinguished boyár’s wife,—an old
widow, and a nurse and other servants. When the Tsarévich reaches
the age of five, he is put in the keeping of a renowned boyár, a quiet
and wise man, and the latter has for a companion a man from the
lower ranks; they also choose from among the children of the boyárs
a few of the same age as the Tsarévich, to be his servants and
butlers. When the time arrives to teach the Tsarévich to read and
write, they select teachers from the instructed people, who are of a
quiet disposition and not given to drinking; the teacher of writing is
chosen from among the Legation scribes; they receive instruction in
Russia in no other language, neither Latin, Greek, German nor any
other, except Russian.
The Tsaréviches and Tsarévnas have each separate apartments
and servants to look after them. No one is permitted to see the
Tsarévich before his fifteenth year, except those people who serve
him, and the boyárs and Near People[121]; but after fifteen years he
is shown to all people, as his father goes with him to church or to
entertainments. When the people find out that he has been
presented, they come on purpose from many cities to get a look at
him. As the Tsaréviches, when they are young, and the elder and
younger Tsarévnas go to church, there are borne cloth screens all
around them, so that they cannot be seen; likewise, they cannot be
seen when they stand in church, except by the clergy, for they are
surrounded in church with taffeta, and there are few people in church
during that time but boyárs and Near People. Similarly, when they
travel to the monasteries to pray, their carriages are covered with
taffeta. For their winter rides, the Tsarítsa and Tsarévnas use
kaptánas, that is, sleighs in the shape of small huts that are covered
with velvet or red cloth, with doors at both sides, with mica windows
and taffeta curtains; for their summer rides they use kolymágas that
are also covered with cloth; these are entered by steps and are
made like simple carts on wheels, and not like carriages that hang
down on leather straps. These kolymágas and kaptánas have two
shafts, and are without an axle; only one horse is hitched in them,
with other horses in tandem.

PRIVATE LIFE OF THE BOYÁRS AND OF OTHER RANKS (CHAP. 13)

Boyárs and Near People live in their houses, both of stone and
wood, that are not well arranged; their wives and children live all in
separate rooms. Only a few of the greater boyárs have their own
churches in their courts; and those of the high and middle boyárs
who have no churches of their own, but who are permitted to have
priests at their houses, have the matins and vespers and other
prayers said in their own apartments, but they attend mass in any
church they may choose; they never have the mass in their own
houses. The boyárs and Near People pay their priests a yearly
salary, according to agreement; if the priests are married people,
they receive a monthly allowance of food and drink, but the widowed
priests eat at the same table with their boyárs.
On church holidays, and on other celebrations, such as name
days, birthdays and christenings, they frequently celebrate together.
It is their custom to prepare simple dishes, without seasoning,
without berries, or sugar, without pepper, ginger or other spices, and
they are little salted and without vinegar. They place on the table one
dish at a time; the other dishes are brought from the kitchen and are
held in the hands by the servants. The dishes that have little vinegar,
salt and pepper are seasoned at the table; there are in all fifty to one
hundred such dishes.
The table manners are as follows: before dinner the hosts order
their wives to come out and greet their guests. When the women
come, they place themselves in the hall, or room, where the guests
are dining, at the place of honour,[122] and the guests stand at the
door; the women greet the guests with the small salute,[123] but the
guests bow to the ground. Then the host makes a low obeisance to
his guests and bids them kiss his wife. At the request of his guests,
the host kisses his wife first; then the guests make individual bows
and, stepping forward, kiss his wife and, walking back again, bow to
her once more; she makes the small salute each time she kisses a
guest. Then the hostess brings each guest a glass of double-or
treble-spiced brandy, the size of the glass being a fourth, or a little
more, of a quart. The host makes as many low obeisances as there
are guests, asking each one in particular to partake of the brandy
which his wife is offering them. By the request of the guests, the host
bids his wife to drink first, then he drinks himself, and then the guests
are served; the guests make a low obeisance before drinking, and
also after they have drunk and as they return the glass. To those that
do not drink brandy, a cup of Rumney or Rhine wine, or some other
liquor, is offered.
After this drinking the hostess makes a bow to the guests and
retires to her apartments to meet her guests, the wives of the boyárs.
The hostess and the wives of the guests never dine with the men,
except at weddings; an exception is also made when the guests are
near relatives and there are no outsiders present at the dinner.
During the dinner, the host and guests drink after every course a cup
of brandy, or Rumney or Rhine wine, and spiced and pure beer, and
various kinds of meads. When they bring the round cakes to the
table, the host’s daughters-in-law, or married daughters, or the wives
of near relatives come into the room, and the guests rise and,
leaving the table, go to the door and salute the women; then the
husbands of the women salute them, and beg the guests to kiss their
wives and drink the wine they offer. The guests comply with their
request and return to the table, while the women go back to their
apartments. After dinner the host and guests drink more freely each
other’s healths, and drive home again. The boyárs’ wives dine and
drink in the same manner in their own apartments, where there are
no men present.
When a boyár or Near Man is about to marry off his son, or
himself, or a brother, or nephew, or daughter, or sister, or niece, he,
having found out where there is a marriageable girl, sends his
friends, men or women, to the father of that girl, to say that such and
such a one had sent them to inquire whether he would be willing to
give his daughter or relative to him or his relative, and what the girl’s
dowry would be in the trousseau, money, patrimony and serfs. If the
person addressed is willing to give him his daughter, or relative, he
replies to the inquiry that he intends to marry off the girl, only he has
to consider the matter with his wife and family, and that he will give a
definite answer on a certain day; but if he does not wish to give him
the girl, knowing that he is a drunkard, or fast, or has some other bad
habit, he will say at once that he will not give him the girl, or he will
find some excuse for refusing the request.
Having taken counsel with his wife and family, and having decided
to give him the girl, he makes a detailed list of her dowry, in money,
silver and other ware, dresses, patrimony and serfs, and sends it to
the people who had come to him from the prospective bridegroom,
and they, in their turn, take it to the bridegroom. Nothing is told of the
matter to the prospective bride, who remains in ignorance thereof.
The dowry of the bride appearing satisfactory, the groom sends his
people to the bride’s parents, to ask them to present the girl. The
bride’s parents reply that they are willing to show their daughter, only
not to the prospective groom, but to his father, mother, sister or near
female relative, in whom the groom may have special confidence.
On the appointed day the groom sends his mother or sister to
inspect the bride; the bride’s parents make preparations for that day,
attire their daughter in a fine garment, invite their relatives to dinner,
and seat their daughter at the table.
When the inspectress arrives, she is met with the honour due her,
and is placed at the table near the bride. Sitting at the table, the
inspectress converses with the girl on all kinds of subjects, in order
to try her mind and manner of speech, and closely watches her face,
eyes and special marks, in order to bring a correct report to the
bridegroom; having stayed a short time, she returns to the
bridegroom. If the inspectress takes no liking to the bride, having
discovered that she is silly, or homely, or has imperfect eyes, or is
lame, or a poor talker, and so reports to the groom, he gives her up,
and that is the last of it. But if the bride has found favour in the
inspectress’s eyes, and she tells the groom that the girl is good and
clever, and perfect in speech and all things, the groom sends his
former friends again to the girl’s parents, telling them that he likes
their daughter, and that he wishes to come to a parley to write the
marriage contract, in order to marry her on a certain date. The
bride’s parents send word to the groom through his trusted people
that he should come to the parley with a few of his friends in whom
he has most confidence on a certain day, in the forenoon or
afternoon.
On the appointed day the groom puts on his best clothes, and
drives with his father, or near relatives, or friends whom he loves
best to the bride’s parents. Upon arrival, the bride’s parents and her
near relatives meet them with due honour, after which they go into
the house and seat themselves according to rank. Having sat a
while, the groom’s father or other relative remarks that they have
come for the good work, as he has bid them; the host answers that
he is glad to see them, and that he is ready to take up the matter.
Then both sides begin to discuss all kinds of marriage articles and to
set the day for the wedding according to how soon they can get
ready for it, in a week, a month, half a year, a year, or even more.
Then they enter their names and the bride’s name and the names of
witnesses in the marriage contract, and it is agreed that he is to take
the girl on a certain date, without fail, and that the girl is to be turned
over to him on that date, without fail; and it is provided in that
contract that if the groom does not take the girl on the appointed day,
or the father will not give him his daughter on that day, the offending
party has to pay 1000, or 5000, or 10,000 roubles, as the agreement
may be. Having stayed a while, and having eaten and drunk, they
return home, without having seen the bride, and without the bride
having seen the groom; but the mother, or married sister, or wife of
some relative comes out to present the groom with some embroidery
from the bride.
If after that parley the groom finds out something prejudicial to the
bride, or someone interested in the groom tells him that she is deaf,
or mute, or maimed, or has some other bad characteristic, and the
groom does not want to take her,—and the parents of the bride
complain about it to the Patriarch that he has not taken the girl
according to the marriage articles, and does not want to take her,
and thus has dishonoured her; or the bride’s parents, having found
out about the groom that he is a drunkard, or diceplayer, or maimed,
or has done something bad, will not give him their daughter, and the
groom complains to the Patriarch,—the Patriarch institutes an
inquiry, and the fine is collected from the guilty party according to the
contract, and is given to the groom or bride, as the case may be; and
then both may marry whom they please.
But if both parties carry out their agreement, and get ready for the
wedding on the appointed day, then the groom invites to the wedding
his relatives and such other people as he likes, to be his ceremonial
guests, in the same manner as I described before about the Tsar’s
wedding[124]; on the part of the bride the guests are invited in the
same way. On the day of the wedding tables are set at the houses of
the groom and bride, and the word being given the groom that it is
time to fetch the bride, they all set out according to the ceremonial
rank: First the bread-men carry bread on a tray, then, if it be summer,
the priest with the cross rides on horseback, but in winter in a sleigh;
then follow the boyárs, the thousand-man, and the groom.
Having reached the court of the bride’s house, they enter the hall
in ceremonial order, and the bride’s father and his guests meet them
with due honour, and the order of the wedding is the same as
described in the Tsar’s wedding. When the time arrives to drive to
church to perform the marriage, the bride’smaids ask her parents to
give the groom and bride their blessing for the marriage. They bless
them with words, but before leaving bless them with a holy image,
and, taking their daughter’s hand, give her to the groom.
 Then the ceremonial guests, the priest, and the groom with his
bride, whose hand he is holding, go out of the hall, and her parents
and their guests accompany them to the court; the groom places the
bride in a kolymága or kaptána, mounts a horse, or seats himself in
a sleigh; the ceremonial guests do likewise, and all drive to the
church where they are to be married. The bride’s parents and their
guests return to the hall, where they eat and drink until news is
brought from the groom; the bride is accompanied only by her own
and the bridegroom’s go-betweens. The two having been united, the
whole troop drives to the groom’s house, and news is sent to the
bride’s father that they have been propitiously married. When they
arrive at the groom’s court, the groom’s parents and their guests
meet them, and the parents, or those who are in their stead, bless
them with the images, and offer them bread and salt, and then all
seat themselves at the table and begin to eat, according to the
ceremony; and then the bride is unveiled.
The next morning the groom drives out with the bride’s-maid to call
the guests, those of his and the bride’s, to dinner. When he comes to
the bride’s parents, he thanks them for their having well brought up
their daughter, and for having given her to him in perfect health; after
having made the round to all the guests, he returns home. When all
the guests have arrived, the bride offers gifts to all the ceremonial
guests. Before dinner the groom goes with all the company to the
palace to make his obeisance to the Tsar. Having arrived in the
presence of the Tsar, all make a low obeisance, and the Tsar, without
taking off his cap, asks the married couple’s health. The groom bows
to the ground, and then the Tsar congratulates those who are united
in legitimate wedlock, and blesses the married pair with images, and
he presents them with forty sables, and for their garments a bolt of
velvet, and atlas, and gold-coloured silk, and calamanco, and simple
taffeta, and a silver vessel, a pound and a half to two pounds in
weight, to each of them; but the bride is not present at the audience.
Then the Tsar offers the thousand-man, and bridegroom, and the
ceremonial guests a cup of Rumney wine, and then a pitcher of
cherry wine, and after they have emptied their wine the Tsar
dismisses them.
 After arriving home, they begin to eat and drink, and after the
dinner the parents and guests bless the married couple with images
and make them all kinds of presents, and after dinner the guests
drive home. On the third day, the bride and groom and the guests go
to dinner to the bride’s parents, with all their guests, and after the
dinner the bride’s parents and their guests make presents to the
married couple, and they drive home; and that is the end of the
festivity.
During the time that the groom is in the presence of the Tsar, the
bride sends in her name presents to the Tsarítsa and Tsarévnas,
tidies of taffeta, worked with gold and silver and pearls; the Tsarítsa
and Tsarévnas accept these gifts, and send to inquire about the
bride’s health.
During all the wedding festivities, no women are present, and
there is no music, except blowing of horns and beating of drums.
The proceeding is the same when a widowed daughter, or sister,
or niece is married off: the ceremonial and the festivity are the same.
In the beginning of the festivity, the priest who is to marry the pair
receives from the Patriarch and the authorities a permit, with the seal
attached to it, to marry them, having first ascertained that the bride
and groom are not related by sponsorship, nor by the ties of
consanguinity in the sixth and seventh generation, nor that he is the
husband of a fourth wife, nor she the wife of a fourth husband; but if
he discover that they are related by sponsorship, and so forth, he is
not allowed to marry them. Should the priest permit such an unlawful
marriage to take place, with his knowledge or without his knowledge,
he would be discharged from his priesthood and, if he was knowingly
guilty, he has to pay a big fine, and the authorities lock him up for a
year; but the married pair is divorced, without being fined, except the
sin which they have incurred, and if they have not been previously
married three times, they may marry again.
If a widower wants to marry a maiden, the ceremonial at the
wedding is the same, but during the wreathing in church the wreath
is placed on the groom’s right shoulder, whereas the bride wears her
wreath upon her head; if a widower for the third time marries a
maiden, the ceremonial is the same, but the wreath is placed on the
groom’s left shoulder, and the bride wears hers upon her head. The
same is done when a widow marries for the second or third time. But
when a widower marries for the second or third time a widow, then
there is no wreathing, and only a prayer is said instead of the
wreathing, and the wedding ceremonial is different from the one
mentioned above.
The manner of the parley, marriage and ceremonial wedding is the
same with the lower orders of the nobility as described above, and
the wedding is as sumptuous as they can afford to make it, but they
do not call upon the Tsar, except those of his retinue.
Among the merchants and peasants the parley and the ceremonial
are exactly the same, but they differ in their acts and dresses from
the nobility, each according to his means.
It sometimes happens that a father or mother has two or three
daughters, where the eldest daughter is maimed, being blind, or
lame, or deaf, or mute, while the other sisters are perfect in shape
and beauty and speech. When a man begins to sue for their
daughter, and he sends his mother, or sister, or someone else in
whom he has confidence to inspect her, the parents sometimes
substitute the second or third daughter for their maimed sister, giving
her the name of the latter, so that the inspectress, not knowing the
deceit, takes a liking to the girl and reports to the groom that she is a
proper person to marry. Then the groom, depending upon her words,
has a parley with the girl’s parents, that he is to marry her upon an
appointed day, and that the parents are to give her to him upon the
appointed day, and the fine is set so high that the guilty party is not
able to pay it. When the wedding takes place, the parents turn over
to him the maimed daughter, whose name is given in the articles of
marriage, but who is not the one the inspectresses had seen. But the
groom cannot discover on the wedding day that she is blind, or
disfigured, or has some other defect, or that she is deaf or mute, for
at the wedding she is veiled and does not say a word, nor can he
know whether she is lame, because her bride’smaids lead her under
her arms.
 But in that case the man who has been deceived complains to the
Patriarch and authorities, and these take the articles of marriage and
institute an inquiry among the neighbours and housefolk, each one
individually, whether the person he had married is the one indicated
by name in the marriage articles. If so, the articles are valid, and no
faith is to be put in his contention, on the ground that it was his
business to be sure whom he was going to marry. But if the
neighbours and housefolk depose that the bride is not the same as
mentioned by name in the articles, the married pair is divorced, and
the parents have to pay a large fine and damages to the groom, and
besides the father is beaten with the knout, or his punishment is
even more severe, according to the Tsar’s will.
The same punishment is meted out to the man who presents his
serving maid or a widow in place of his unmarried daughter, by
giving her another name and dressing her up so as to look like his
daughter, or when his daughter is of short stature and they place her
on a high chair in such a way that her defect is not noticeable.
When parents have maimed or old daughters, and no one wants
to marry them, they are sent to a monastery to be shorn nuns.
When a man wants to inspect the bride himself, and the parents
grant the request, knowing that she is fair and that they need not be
ashamed of her, but the groom, having taken no liking to her, decries
her with damaging and injurious words, and thus keeps other suitors
away from her,—and the bride’s parents complain to the Patriarch or
authorities: these institute an inquiry, and having found the man
guilty, marry him to the girl by force; but if he has married another girl
before the complaint has been entered, the girl’s disgrace is taken
from her by an ukase.
When a man marries off his daughter or sister, and gives her a
large dowry in serfs and patrimony, and that daughter or sister,
having borne no children, or having borne some who have all died,
dies herself,—the dowry is all taken from her husband and is turned
over to those who had married her off. But if she leaves a son or
daughter, the dowry is, for the sake of her child, not taken from her
husband.
 Gentle reader! Wonder not, it is nothing but the truth when I say
that nowhere in the whole world is there such deception practised
with marriageable girls as in the kingdom of Muscovy; there does not
exist there the custom, as in other countries, for the suitor to see and
sue for the bride himself.
The boyárs and Near People have in their houses 100, or 200, or
300, or 500, or 1000 servants, male and female, according to their
dignity and possessions. These servants receive a yearly salary, if
they are married, 2, 3, 5 or 10 roubles, according to their services,
and their wearing apparel, and a monthly allowance of bread and
victuals; they live in their own rooms in the court of the boyár’s
house. The best of these married servants are sent out by the
boyárs every year, by rotation, to their estates and villages, with the
order to collect from their peasants the taxes and rents. The
unmarried older servants receive some small wages, but the
younger ones receive nothing; all the unmarried servants get their
wearing apparel, hats, shirts and boots; the older of these servants
live in the farther lower apartments, and receive their food and drink
from the kitchen; on holidays they receive two cups of brandy each.
The female servants who are widows remain living in the houses of
their husbands, and they receive a yearly wage and a monthly
allowance of food; other widows and girls stay in the rooms of the
boyárs’ wives and daughters, and they receive their wearing apparel,
and their food from the boyár’s kitchen.
When these girls are grown up, the boyárs marry them, and also
the widows, to some one of their servants to whom they have taken
a liking, but sometimes by force. The wedding takes place in the
boyár’s hall, according to the rank of the marrying parties; the food
and festive dresses are furnished by the boyár. The girls are never
married to any person outside the boyár’s court, because both male
and female servants are his perpetual serfs. In the boyár’s house
there is an office for all domestic affairs, where an account is kept of
income and expenses, and all the affairs of the servants and
peasants are investigated and settled.
 FOOTNOTES:

[121] A division of nobility below the boyárs.

[122] In the front corner, under the holy images.
[123] Bending as far as the girdle.
[124] “The wedding ceremony is as follows: on the Tsar’s side
the first order is the father and mother, or those who are in place
of his parents; the second order, the travellers,—the chief priest
with the cross, the thousand-man, who is a great personage in
that procession, and then the Tsar: eight boyárs. The duties of the
travellers are as follows: they stay with the Tsar and Tsarítsa at
the crowning in church, and at the table occupy higher places
than the others; the friends (drúzhka), whose duty it is to call the
guests to the wedding, to make speeches at the wedding in the
name of the thousand-man and Tsar, and to carry presents; the
bride’s maids (svákha) whose duty it is to watch the Tsarítsa, to
dress her and undress her; the candleholder, who holds the
candle when they get the Tsarítsa ready for the crowning; the
breadholders, who carry the bread on litters to and from church
(these litters are covered with gold velvet and embroidered cloth
and sable furs); the equerry with his suite. The third order is the
sitting boyárs, twelve men and twelve women, who sit as guests
at the tables, with the Tsar’s parents, but do not go to church with
the Tsar. The fourth order is of the court, who attend to the food
and drink.”