184 THE FLORIDA ANTHROPOLOGIST

BIGRICKE! We
gules rae BE

2006 VOL. 59(3-4)

 

Figure 4. The shark Gatnihoas sp.) interment (Feature 234) fron the Miami Circle at Brickell Point (8DA12).

context. Atlantic bottlenose dolphin bones also were found at
the Garden Patch site in Dixie County (Kohler 1975:77) and at
Jupiter Inlet 1 (8PB34) (Wheeler et al. 2002). Wheeler and
colleagues (2002:181-182) report that bottlenose dolphin and
baleen whale auditory bullae were found within midden
material at Jupiter Inlet 1. Occupation of the site dates between
A.D. 750 and A.D. 1200, which is transitional between Glades
II and III periods.

There are only two other sites in the southeastern U.S.
where dolphin cranial remains may have been found, but these
cannot be verified. The first was at the Marineland site, located
near St. Augustine, which was excavated by State Archaeologist
Vernon Lamme. Ina letter to Smithsonian Institution archaeol-
ogist Matthew Stirling, Lamme (1940) states, “both turtle and
the skull of a porpoise [read: dolphin] have been unearthed
buried as the humans with oyster shell around the body and
clam shells around the skulls.” Unfortunately, this is the only
reference to a “porpoise skull” in Lamme’s writings on Marine-
land. In his other writings on Marineland, his only mention of
“porpoise” bones was within a midden context (Lamme 1939,
1940, 1941a:7, 1941b, 1973). The second mention of remains
of a dolphin skull comes from Florida artist Hermann
Trappman (Ryan Wheeler, personal communication, December,
2003), who stated that pieces of the upper and lower jaws of a
dolphin were found at the Tierra Verde burial mound near St.
Petersburg. At the Granada site (8DA11), located on the north
bank of the Miami River directly across from the Miami Circle,
two bottlenose dolphin elements, a tooth and an atlas, were
found (Wing and Loucks 1982:310).

Although dolphin meat was likely consumed by the
Tequesta, the completeness ofthe dolphin cranium suggests that
it was not from a discarded carcass, but rather was intentionally

buried. In addition, it is doubtful that the dolphin head was a
source of meat, which indicates that it served some other
purpose. It may have been kept in part for its valuable teeth,
and one dolphin tooth pendant was recovered from the Miami
Circle site (Wheeler 2004a:149). Ethnographic evidence from
Tequesta sites and material evidence from Calusa sites suggests
that dolphins were revered in Tequesta culture.

Dolphins in Tequesta culture. Unfortunately, few ethnographic
accounts exist on the Tequesta. Although the burial of animals
was not witnessed during the European Contact Period, some
historical accounts do mention the ceremonial use of animals.
In 1743, the Jesuits Joseph Maria Monaco and Joseph Xavier
de Alafia proposed Christianizing the “Indians of the south
Florida Keys,” and a small earthen fort was constructed in
Miami for their protection (Childers 2003; Sturtevant 1978).
Describing the belief system of the Tequesta, the Jesuits related
that the dead were feared and were placed some distance from
the village, and “so that they do not do them evil, they place the
skulls of stags, turtles, barracuda, and other animals around (the
cemetery)” (Childers 2003:77). A known prehistoric mortuary
area, Brickell Park, lies approximately 500 ft south of Brickell
Point, and a burial mound, Miami Sand Mound #4 (8DA13)
was located about 200 ft south of the park (Elgart and Carr, in
this issue). Prehistoric burials have been recovered in the park,
which were assigned the time frame “Glades Period” (Carr et al.
2001).

It is possible that the dolphin skull was used for the purpose
of warding off evil spirits from the nearby cemetery and then
later ritually interred as trash at the Miami Circle. Both Robert
Carr and Randolph Widmer (Randolph Widmer, personal
communication, April, 2003) suggest that after A.D. 500, the