Castle Hill Archaeological Project

Figure 13.1. Examples of faunal elements with butchering marks from the Castle Hill workshop area.

Butchering marks were noted on 17 elements from the midden area. Fifteen of the 17 elements were from ungulates, and medium and large mammals. This was not a surprise, since larger animals require more processing than smaller animals. Ten of the 17 elements from the midden area with butchering marks were ribs. The other seven included two long bones and three vertebrae from mammals, one cod vertebra, and one duck coracoid. Only 13 bones from the midden area had been burned, and all were mammalian.

Outside Building 4: Unit N104/E133, three meters north of the midden area, exhibits very different characteristics. It is located to the west and outside of Building 4, which is dated as the most recent structure. This unit yielded 26 bones. (Unit N100/E133 yielded 594 bones and Unit N99/E133 yielded 261 bones.) All 26 fragments are mammalian. With the exception of one small incisor tooth fragment and a small fragment of a vertebral cap, none of the bones could be identified to element because they are in poor condition and not well preserved. Eleven of the 26 bones are calcined, only two stained green, and none modified by rodents or carnivores. It is possible that the construction of Building 4 disturbed this area, because this unit did not have a distinct organic layer.

Inside Building 2: One unit from Building 2 (N106/E136) was analyzed. Thirty-six bones were recovered. Twenty-three mammal bones were identified, 11 bird bones, one fish vertebra, and one unidentified long bone shaft fragment. A carnivore modified the distal end of a radius from a medium bird. Butcher marks were not identified on any bone from this unit, however, a cow radius had been broken when it was fresh. Burning was noted on 11 mammal bones. Further analysis of fauna from Building 2 is needed to determine if there is any distinct pattern.

Inside Building 4: One unit from inside Building 4 was also examined. Fifty-two bones were recovered. Thirty-three bones were from mammals, ten were bird and nine were fish. One rib from a large bird had rodent gnaw marks, one loon carpometacarpus was chewed on both ends, and a radius from a medium bird was chewed on the distal end. Cut marks were noted on the shafts of a humerus and a radius from large land mammals. Sixteen mammal bones were burned. No general pattern can be determined from this small assemblage.

An interesting element found below the fish bone concentration was a walrus maxilla with the tusk missing. Worked ivory artifacts were found within 20-50 cm of the maxilla. A polar bear (Figure 13.3, a) carved from walrus ivory was in the same unit in the level below the maxilla, and two carved ivory birds were in the same stratum in an adjacent unit. Another ivory artifact was 10-15 cm above the maxilla. Worked incomplete pieces of ivory were in other areas indicating that ivory may have been worked on the site. The walrus maxilla may have been traded, sold, or given to someone in the colony, possibly with the tusk intact. Carved ivory birds, similar to those found at Castle Hill, are a common and ancient Eskimo artifact and have been found all across the Arctic; they were strung together by holes drilled in the tail and may have been used as a game. The carved bear is also a common Eskimo artifact. Murdoch described similar carvings at Point Barrow in the late 1800’s (Murdoch 1988:365). In addition to the sea mammal bone bear described above, an ivory bear (Figure 13.3, b) was recovered approximately 6 m to the south.

Figure 13.2. A copper kettle, spout removed, with codfish head bones. The green staining is from copper salts within the soil matrix.

In addition to the ivory artifacts, two worked bones were recovered from the unit adjacent to and in the same stratum as the unit with the carved bear. One of the bones is a shaft fragment that was broken and then drilled from the inside of the bone. The other is a bird or mammal long bone shaft fragment that was hollowed, polished, and cut at one end. This artifact has not been positively identified.

The level above the fish concentration had primarily medium to large land mammals. Remains were mixed with brick rubble. The bones may have been dumped inside the building after it was abandoned. Deer elements dominated the assemblage, and many had butchering marks and evidence of having been broken when they were fresh. Most of the elements were long bones, although there were axial and cranial bones in smaller numbers. A deer metacarpal with articulated phalanges was recovered from the same level of one of the units. It is possible that the lower portion of the leg was cut off and discarded, because it does not provide much meat.

Figure 13.3. (a) Sea mammal bone polar bear (#98-1201); (b) ivory bear (#98-1207).

Conclusions

While Russians imported domestic animals from California, Hawaii, and Russia, their subsistence patterns were influenced by the Native inhabitants. Conditions in Sitka were unfavorable for raising crops and domestic animals, and ships sailing to the colony with provisions were irregular. As a result, the Russians bought large quantities of fish and game from the Tlingit. Indigenous fauna, therefore, became a large part of the diet for the colonists.

Cod dominate the archaeological fish assemblage from Castle Hill. Historic documents confirm that cod was popular in Sitka, and it was available almost year around (Gibson 1976:40, Khlebnikov 1994). Halibut also was popular because of its year around availability and was sold to the Russians by the Tlingit in large numbers. Halibut, however, represents only a small portion of the assemblage from Castle Hill.

Gibson (1987:93) writes that during the 1850s approximately 400 deer were brought to the colony annually. The abundance of deer remains found at the site supports statements that land mammals were an important source of fresh meat for the Russian colonists. Pigs and cows are the primary large domesticated animals present in the assemblage, but their numbers are small in comparison to the deer remains. Stockbreeding in the colony largely was unsuccessful due to a lack of suitable food for the animals. Although cows were imported to provide meat, milk, and butter, it was reported that they did not produce much milk and their flesh was greasy and watery tasting (Gibson 1976:102). Incessant rain at Sitka destroyed virtually all the hay grown for the livestock, and shipping hay to the colony was expensive. Pigs also were imported. They were fed fish remains, and Klebnikov (1994:179) states that they generally were not eaten because "they had a repulsive taste."

The analysis of bird remains from Castle Hill confirms statements in historic documents that waterfowl were sold to the Russians whole. There were domesticated ducks at Sitka (Wrangell 1980:6) which could account for the representation of all skeletal elements. Chickens also were raised in Sitka (Andrews 1965:37), but Holder-Blee (1986:320) writes that by 1860 chickens were only occasionally kept at the colony. Chickens also were fed fish remains and had a "bad flavor" (Golovin 1979:37). In addition, chickens were expensive to buy (Federova 1973: 236-237). These reasons could account for the fact that only one probable chicken humerus has been identified in the Castle Hill assemblage. Emmons (1991:150-151) writes that ravens, hawks, and small forest birds were not normally eaten by the Tlingit, and eagles were eaten only under dire circumstances. This would account for their low representation in the faunal assemblage.

The picture that emerges from this investigation is that local fauna appear to have provided the bulk of the food consumed at Sitka. The faunal assemblage analyzed confirms statements in the historic records of the Russians’ dependence on Native peoples and local foods for their survival at Castle Hill.

Report Contents

Ch. 14: Life in Sitka

Contact Information