200 THE FLORIDA ANTHROPOLOGIST

2006 VOL. 59(3-4)

 

Table 6. Pumice distribution for Excavation Areas 1, 2 and 3.

      
 

  
  

where hundreds of examples of finely carved, incised and
painted wooden artifacts were found (Cushing 1897; Gilliland
1975). Wooden artifact forms range from utilitarian objects
like bowls, pestles, and canoe paddles to ritual and decorative
pieces like animal and human effigies, masks, and ceremonial
tablets (Gilliland 1975; also see Fewkes 1928; Willey 1949:53-
59; Wheeler 1996:148-211). Bone and shell tools with
evidence of use in woodworking date back to at least the
Middle to Lake Archaic Mount Taylor culture (Wheeler and
McGee 1994). Analogy with European and American
woodworking traditions indicate that materials like pumice and
rottenstone (degraded limestone) are used in the finer polishing
and finishing of wood.

Pumice clasts with shallow grooves were likely used as
hones or abraders in forming and polishing bone artifacts,
especially those manufactured from the long bones of the deer.
Goggin (1951:61) notes the occurrence of limestone and sherd
hones at some sites as well. These have the same distinctive
shallow grooves likely produced from shaping and polishing
bone tools. Five-hundred and fifty-four bone artifacts were
recovered from the Miami Circle site, and many of these were
long bone implements (Wheeler 2004a). Debitage from bone
tool making helps confirm that many of these items might have
been made on site. Considering the importance of wood and
bone working among the native peoples of southern Florida, it
seems likely that pumice may have been a rare and valuable
item.

A short experiment with a hand-sized pumice clast and a
replica of a deer metapodial tool demonstrated that within ten
minutes a broad, shallow groove would be worn in the surface
of the pumice if used to polish the bone tool. The pumice
proved to be very durable and most of the residual dust ap-
peared to be from the bone implement. Polishing with the
pumice clast produced an even, moderate luster on the bone
tool. The pumice tended to obliterate other traces of manufac-
ture, like striations from a shark tooth knife. Wear patterns,
beyond the distinctive groove, were difficult to discern on the
pumice with a hand lens, largely because of the numerous air
cavities and vesicles characteristic of the volcanic glass,

Pumice in Regional Exchange

Pumice from Florida sites has received little consideration

  

Area Count Excavated Pumice clasts per
Volume (cubic cubic foot
feet
[NE “Circle [1023450 002
SW %Circle LIS 8S 600 0.03
[Exc.Area2 0 {8 SSO OT
[TOTALS OO 8h 37 0.03

 

 
  
  

 

    

as a raw material for tool making, let alone as an item with
potential social and economic significance. Prior to the
discovery of a large number of pumice clasts and fragments at
the Miami Circle site, it would have been logical to assume that
pumice was occasionally found on coastal beaches and retained
for use by the finders. In general, most sites that have produced
pumice are located along the southeastern Florida coast,
between the Indian River region and the Florida Keys (Figure
11). This distribution is consistent with recent “drifter” or drift
buoy experiments, which indicate that floating materials subject
to the Caribbean and Gulf Stream currents will come close to
shore or strand in southeastern Florida (see Leaman 1998).
Drift buoys generally do not strand on the southwestern Florida
Gulf Coast. There are, however, a number of interior sites that
also have produced pumice. Many of these are Everglades tree
island sites in Dade and Broward counties whose inhabitants
may have frequented the sea coast. There also are a number of
sites with pumice farther from the coast (e.g., Belle Glade, Fort
Center) or on the southwestern Gulf Coast (e.g., Wightman).
This suggests that pumice may have been involved in the
regional exchange system, along with other coastal products
like shark teeth and marine shells (see Kozuch 1993:32-34;
Luer 1989:112-114, 116-121). Admittedly, pumice was an
unpredictable commodity, but was likely collected when
available. It is possible that much of the pumice found in
Florida archaeological sites has origins in one or two major
volcanic events. If large rafts of pumice drifted ashore near the
Miami Circle the material could have been readily collected and
introduced into the regional exchange system. Whitebelt 1,
Belle Glade, and Fort Center, the three sites located around
Lake Okeechobee that have pumice, also have other items
indicating participation in regional and long-distance exchange,
including shark teeth and marine shells; groundstone axes and
other objects; chipped stone artifacts; galena; ceramic platform
pipes; and ceramics from neighboring areas (Sears 1982;
Wheeler 2000b; Willey 1949). Interestingly, these items are
characteristic of the Miami Circle site as well.

Excavators working at the Miami Circle at Brickell Point
were initially impressed by the diverse exotic artifacts recov-
ered from the site (Carr and Ricisak 2000). One small copper
bead, a galena bead and another small piece of galena suggested
long-distance exchange networks involving other parts of the
Southeast and Midwest. A sourcing study of basaltic stone axes