NAMES OF POWER: AN ANALYSIS OF NAMES FROM THE ACUERA CHIEFDOMOF THE OCKLAWAHA RIVER VALLEY

Abstract: An understanding of the worldview of historic and archaeological cultures can be gained from an understanding of the languages spoken by such cultures and the significanceof personal and place names within such languages. The historic Timucuan chiefdom of Acuera had an identity during the mission period which was recognized as distinct from other Timucuan-speaking cultures by the Spanish, by other Timucuan chiefdoms, and by the Acuera themselves. A comparison and analysis of known names from the region of Acuera and other Timucuan chiefdoms is presented, and conclusions and avenues for future research drawn therefrom.

In his classic A Study of Archaeology, Walter Taylor was one

of the first archaeologists to recognize that, since

“culture” consisted of “all those mental constructs or ideas

which have been learned or created after birth by an

individual” (Taylor 1948: 109), a study of the

“objectifications of culture”, including artifacts and other

“material and non-material results of [cultural] behavior”,

would provide the archaeologist with an understanding of the

ideas within the minds of their creators (Taylor 1948:111).

Thus, the goal of the study of the archaeological record

should be to gain a deeper understanding of the worldviews of

the people who created it.

In the case of historic archaeology, such

“objectifications of culture” include both written texts –

and, where records exist, within language itself. Language is

itself an “artifact”, a human construct created for the

purposes of communication, and a study of both language

itself and of words and names can provide the modern

researcher with clues to understanding peoples of the past.

Such a study is particularly valuable when the peoples we

study have disappeared as cultures, leaving no direct

cultural descendents behind.

This paper will examine the Timucuan-speaking chiefdom

of Acuera, the culture which occupied what today is the

Ocklawaha River valley and the Ocala National Forest in the

colonial period and, quite likely, prior to European contact

as well (Boyer 2006; Worth 1998a and b). Specifically, this

paper will examine what is known of the names of both places

and individuals within the Acuera region within the context

of contact and missionization of Acuera during the 17th

century. The meaning of such names in the Timucuan language

will be examined and compared with such names from other

regions in the Timucuan-speaking cultural area.

It will be argued here that, when compared with known

names from the other Timucuan-speaking cultures, the names

used by the Acuera evidence a distinctive and unique

perception of Acuera culture both by the Acuera themselves

and by other Timucuan peoples. This linguistic evidence will

be examined in the light of what is known of the archaeology

of the Acuera region to hypothesize reasons for such

uniqueness and to suggest avenues for future study and

research.

Our primary sources for names unique to Acuera

individuals and locations are the records of the 1678 murder

trial of the Acuera Calesa, and documents concerning Acuera

from prior to the 1656 Timucuan Rebellion. Accordingly, a

brief history of Acuera during the 17th century will be

presented to provide a context for these documents.

Acuera in the Seventeenth Century: Ibiniuti Province and a Chiefdom Before and

After Missionization

While the first contact between the Spanish and the

Acuera took place during 1539, during the de Soto entrada

(Milanich and Hudson 1993; Boyer 2006), the actual

missionization of Acuera province began on July 6, 1597,

prior to the Guale rebellion, when the cacica of Acuera came

with her husband, her mandador, and “13 other Indians” to

render obedience to Spanish governor Gonzalo Méndez de Canço

(Worth 1998a:51). Subsequently, during the early seventeenth

century, three missions were founded by the Spanish in Acuera

territory: San Blas de Avino, founded prior to 1612 and

existing through at least the mid-1620’s (Worth 1998b:189);

and, thereafter, San Luis de Eloquale and Santa Lucia de

Acuera, founded in the 1620’s and appearing to have existed

until the Timucuan Rebellion in 1656 (Worth 1998b:189-190).

Santa Lucia de Acuera appears to have been founded within the

principal town of the Acuera chiefdom (Worth 1998b:190).

Records from the time of the latter two missions’

existence suggest that the Acuera maintained a greater degree

of cultural autonomy and their traditional lifeways than did

the other missionized Timucuan chiefdoms, and that Acuera

province – also known in the Spanish records from that era as

Ibiniuti, meaning “water land” or “river land” – was a focus

and haven for refugees throughout the mission period.

Documents referring to the Acuera and Ibiniuti province from

the period prior to the Timucuan Rebellion indicate that

the Acuera had unconverted Native American groups from

outside La Florida living in Acuera territory, including entire

towns of the “Chiscas”, believed on current evidence to have

come from what today is the region of southwestern Virginia

(Boyer 2006; Worth 1998b:33-35). Additionally, refugees from

the mission of San Diego de Helaca, serving as the main ferry

crossing of the St. Johns River between 1624 and 1657 (Worth

1998b:165-166), fled en masse to Acuera province in the late

1640’s, including San Diego’s chief, necessitating an order

for their return (Worth, unpublished translation; Boyer

2006).

Furthermore, during the period the Acuera missions were

active, traditional systems of belief, with traditional

religious leaders, continued to be actively practiced among

the Acuera. At least one surviving order concerning Acuera

province calls for Ensign Juan Dominguez to arrest “a

sorcerer Indian”, i.e., a traditional shaman, for causing

“some disquiet” within the territory (Boyer 2006; Ruiz de

Salazar Valecilla to Dominguez 1648, Worth, unpublished

translation). The order, dated April 18th, 1648, is

remarkable in that it indicates that, after roughly three

decades of missionization, the Acuera continued to actively

practice their traditional systems of belief, and that

followers of traditional belief systems were sufficient in

number to cause such “disquiet” in this region.

For unknown reasons, the Acuera were not displaced and

moved in the wake of the Timucuan rebellion in 1656, and

remained in their traditional territory throughout the

remainder of the seventeenth century. Their adherence to

their traditional belief system and political structure

continued, with the events taking place during the 1678

murder trial of the Acuera hunter Calesa providing a

remarkable picture of a culture continuing to defy the

stresses of colonial rule.

Briefly summarizing the events of the trial, Calesa was

the nephew of Jabahica, chief of the Acuera residing at the

village of Alisa in Acuera province (Hann 1992:452). He and

María Jacoba, a woman of the Potano, were tried for four

killings which took place in 1677 (Ibid).

Testimony taken at the trial from both María Jacoba and

Calesa indicated that the people of Acuera at this time,

including Calesa, his brother Pequata Nalis, and Jabajica,

were “heathen”, suggesting that no Catholics remained among

the Acuera population by this time (Hann 1992:462-463).

Furthermore, at least three towns existed in Acuera province

at this time: Alisa, Biro Zebano, and “Piriaco”, which

appears to be a variation on the name Piliaco or Piliuco,

referred to in earlier documents from the time of the

missions in Acuera (Boyer 2006).

The testimony provided by Calesa indicated that “Calesa”

was his childhood name but “now that he is a man”, his name

was “Yazah” (Hann 1992: 463). His defense to the charges of

murder were that he had been commanded by his uncle to kill

(Ibid.) This point was elaborated upon Captain Juan de

Peyo, the defender of both Calesa and María Jacoba, who

pointed out that his client was “a heathen who does not

recognize any other authority or superior in his land than

his uncle the chief, Jabahica” (Hann 1992: 466).

Furthermore, Captain Peyo pointed out that

…among the Indians, both heathen and Christian, [that] their greatest exploit (valentia) and trophy is to kill theirenemies to obtain the name of noroco, he [Calesa] and therest killed those whom they were able to in virtue of the said order both for the said [status] and to serve their chief (Hann 1992: 466-467).

Noroco, a warrior status common to both the Timucua and

the Apalachee, refers to a distinction gained from killing a

certain number of enemies in warfare. Thus, Calesa’s defense

rested on the grounds of his adherence to the systems of

cultural and social status traditional among the Timucua.

The defense was at least somewhat effective; while Governor

Pablo de Hita Salazar initially condemned Calesa to death, he

commuted the sentence to exile and forced labor (Hann 1992:

468, 473).

The limited Spanish records directly concerning Acuera

province thus suggest that there was a continuing adherence

to traditional lifeways and systems of belief throughout the

seventeenth century among Acuera, both during and after

missionization. However, the Spanish records alone cannot

tell us either 1) what the Acuera themselves thought about

their own culture in relationship to the Spanish, or to the

other Timucuan chiefdoms, or 2) whether, in the eyes of the

Acuera, the other Timucua, or the Spanish, there was some

recognizable distinction between Acuera and the other

missionized Timucuan chiefdoms. More importantly, the

historic records alone cannot tell us the source of any such

distinction, assuming that one could be shown to exist.

The only source which may provide such clues are the

names from Acuera province, as well as such names from other

Timucuan chiefdoms, provided by the historic records. Names

in Timucua, based on the linguistic evidence, appear to have

been composites of words within the language (Granberry

1993), rather than discrete “sound clusters”. If these word

composites provide descriptive information of the person or

place which they represent, they allow a modern researcher a

glimpse into the patterns of thought and worldview of the

people who created and used them.

Thus, translating names from the historic records, since

such names represent choices made by the Acuera (and other

Timucua) themselves, can provide us with an understanding of

how the Acuera saw themselves in relationship to the world

and other people. Accordingly, following is a detailed

analysis of Timucuan names both of people and places from

Acuera, as well as from other Timucuan chiefdoms.

Timucuan Names: A Linguistic Analysis

To perform an analysis of Acuera placenames vis-à-vis other

Timucuan cultures, all of the known names from Acuera were

drawn from the historic records, primarily from orders issued

by the Spanish governors of Florida during the early 17th

century, and from the documentary record of the Calesa murder

trial. Then, a sampling of names both of people and

individuals from other Timucuan chiefdoms were taken from

documents of the contact and colonial period, to provide a

basis for comparison with the names used by the Acuera.

The names as used within European records from the

colonial period – primarily Spanish, though names were taken

from French documents concerning the 1564 settlement at Fort

Caroline as well – were tabulated and broken down into the

discrete words each name represented, using Granberry’s A

Grammar and Dictionary of the Timucua Language (1993). These words

were then translated into English, with alternative possible

translations noted where single words could represent

alternative meanings.

Wherever possible, the composite translated words were then

rendered into the best colloquial meaning.

The results of this analysis of Acuera and other

Timucuan names have been summarized in the table which

follows.

TABLE 1: ACUERA AND OTHER TIMUCUAN NAME TRANSLATIONS

Acuera Names:

Name Timucuan Words Meaning

Jabajica yaba-hica “spell/curse/shaman-

town/village”; i.e., “town of spells”, “town of shamans”,

“town of magic”, “town of sorcerers/wizards”

Calesa ca-le-sa “here-now-handsome”;

“this-now-handsome”;also “here-now-

agreeable”, “this-now agreeable”; i.e., “the

handsome one”, “the agreeable one”

Pequata Nalis pequata nalis “golden servant”; “golden

vassal”Piliaco/Piliuco pili-aco/pili-uco

“drag/draw-most”; “drag/draw-drink”; i.e. “to draw to

drink”(?)Biro Zebano biro-si-banehe “men-same-wolves”; i.e. “man-wolves”, “wolf-men”,

“men like wolves”Yazah ya-sa “not handsome”; “not

agreeable”Alisa a-li-sa “Ah-now-handsome”(?)

Source: Hann 1992

Tucuru tucu-ura “live oak-accompanying”;

“together with the live oak”Utiaca uti-aca; utiti-aca “earth-wind”; “country-wind”

“world-wind”; i.e. “country of the wind”, “wind (air?) of the

world” (OR)”Utiti” “reverence of the world”

Avino abi-no “dress-now”; “hour/time-now”;

“apart-now”; “walk-now”; i.e.“the time is now”; “we are

apart now” (?)

Source: Worth 1998:b

Acuera acu-ero“moon/month+year/season”;

“calendar”; “timekeeper”;

Implies “ancient”, “old”

Source: Julian Granberry, unpublished translation 2008

Other Timucuan Names:

Name Timucuan Words Meaning

Paracoxi paracusi “prince”; “war-prince”Acela a-se-la “ah-close-now”Tocaste toca-s-te “more-happening-now”;“more -caused-now”Ocale, Cale oca-le “this-now”Itara ita-tara “sole-embrace”; “stumble-

embrace”; “increased/multiplied-

embrace”Potano po-ta-no “that-happening-now”Utinama utina-ma “region-his”; “power-his”;

“region-the”; “power-the”;

“region-their”; “power-their”;

“the region”, “the power”, etc.Cholupaha chola-paha “drop-house”; i.e. “fallen

dwelling” (?)Caliquen cala-quene “cut-because”; “freeze to death-because”; “fruit-

because”; “cut-like”; “freeze to death-like”; “fruit-like”; “cut-

who”; “freeze to death-who”; “fruit-who”

Napetuca na-pataqui “if-tired”; “same-tired”; “this-

tired”

Source: Elvas, De Soto Chronicles (1993)

Paracousi paracusi “prince”, “war-prince”Satourina sa-tori-ba “handsome-burning-we”;

“handsome burning chiefs”Atore a-tori “Ah-burn”Thimagona timu-quana “Extinguish-like”;

“Extinguish-for”; “extinguish-self”

Olata Ouae Outina holata-aya(aye)-utina“chief-forest-region”; i.e.

“chief of the wooded region”Emola emo-la “before-now”; “to-now”;

“against-now”; “concerning-now”

Astina asa-ti-na “beautiful-not-our”; “beautiful- not-

now”; i.e. “not beautiful now”, “not our beautiful”

Source: Laudonniere, Three Voyages

Enacape ane-ca-peqe “be able to-(plural)-hang up”; i.e., “we are able to hang up”Machava machaba “marsh”; “swamp”Chuaquin chua-quene “hole/pit-because”; “hole/pit-

like”; “hole/pit-which”Arapaja ara-paha “many-houses”; “bear-house”; “help-house”; i.e., “many

houses”, “house of bear”, “house of help”

Cachpile cachi-pile “bitter-huts”; “bitter-fields”;

“bitter-ties”Chamile cha-mi-le “Where/what/ah-ours-now”; i.e., “where are we now?” (?)Urihica uri-hica “sweep-town”; “sweepers’ town”Niahica nia-hica “female-town”; “town of women”Tarihica tari-hica “work-town”; “town of

laborers”Asile asileco(?) “withered leaf”Tolapatafi tola-patafi “up in the air-below”; “paddle-

below”; “laurel-below”; i.e., “below the paddle”, “below the

laurel”, “up and down”

Source: Worth 1998:b

Discussion

Rendering Timucuan names into modern English is a matter

of probability, since “the Spanish renditions of most Timucua

names are ‘fractured Timucua’ and more than likely

phonologically inaccurate” (Julian Granberry, linguist,

personal communication 2008). However, even allowing for

this possibility, there are remarkable and significant

differences between the names used by the Acuera during the

contact and mission periods, and those names used by the

other Timucuan chiefdoms. Specifically, the names examined

here suggest the following:

a) The names used by most Timucuan cultures signify physical

descriptions of people or locations, or descriptions of

political status. Of the names used by the Acuera, on the

other hand, nearly all have supernatural or ritual

significance, suggesting a fundamental difference in Acuera

culture as seen both by themselves and other Timucuan-

speakers.

b) This difference appears to have persisted and grown

stronger throughout the mission period and thereafter, and

suggests the possibility that the Acuera helped to serve as a

focus for resistance to colonization and missionization among

the Timucuan cultures.

c) While the names examined date primarily to the 17th

century, the Acuera of the colonial era may have drawn on

much older traditions and beliefs to emphasize and strengthen

their own culture in the face of Spanish efforts to change

it.

Natural versus Supernatural: The Significance of Acuera Names

When examining the translated names listed in Table 1,

it is clear that the names listed in the historic records for

most Timucuan places and individuals are purely descriptive

of physical traits, locations, or, at most, political status.

For example, the “Machava” of Santa Elena de Machava (Worth

1998b:180) is clearly the Timucuan machaba, “swamp”.

Tarihica, of Santa Cruz de Tarihica (Worth 1998b;173), is the

Timucuan words tari hica, literally “worker’s town”. The

“Asile” of San Miguel de Asile (Worth 1998b:180), which also

gives its name to the modern Aucilla, is clearly the Timucuan

name asileco, “withered leaf”. The place names rendered here

for most Timucuan chiefdoms, then, clearly appear to signify

physical descriptions of the places themselves, or of natural

features nearby.

The same holds true for names of individuals from

outside the Acuera region. For example, Saturiba, the chief

of the Timucuan chiefdom near Fort Caroline in 1564

(Laudonniere), is clearly a combination of the words sa tori

ba, or, literally, “handsome burning chief” (Granberry 1993).

Saturiba’s rival “Olata Ouae Outina”, believed to occupy the

territory near what is today Grandin in Putnam County

(Milanich 1995), is a rendering by the French of the Timucuan

holata aya(aye) utina, or “chief of the forested region”

(Granberry 1993). Thus, of the names appearing in the

Spanish and French records from the Timucuan cultural region

outside Acuera, both places and people appear to have names

which are either physical descriptions of the place or

person, or descriptions of that person’s political or social

status.

Within Acuera territory however, names were clearly

different. Closely examining Acuera names, in the light of

what we know of Timucuan beliefs, nearly all such names from

the historic records appear to have either supernatural or

ritual significance.

This difference is first evident in the name “Acuera”

itself. The Timucuan words acu ero, literally translated,

mean “moon/month” and “year/season”. Taken as a word

composite, “Acuera” can be translated as “calendar” or

“timekeeper”; it can also imply “ancient” or “old” (Julian

Granberry, linguist, personal communication 2008). This

choice of name suggests that the Acuera may have seen

themselves, and been seen by other Timucuan-speakers, as

“timekeepers”, as the keepers of times of importance. It may

also imply that the Acuera saw themselves as somehow “older”

or more ancient than the cultures which surrounded them, or

that they were seen by the other Timucuan-speakers as such.

In a record of the earliest known Acuera mission, San

Blas de Avino, dated 1627 (Worth 1998b:189, Boyer 2006), the

mission is described as being near two towns whose names were

“Utiaca” and “Tucuru”. The name “Utiaca” can be a

combination of either the Timucuan words uti aca, or utiti aca.

The first combination can mean “earth”, “land”, “country”,

“world”, plus “wind”; colloquially, it can mean “country of

the wind”, “wind of the world” – or, with utiti meaning

“reverence”, “reverence of the wind”. “Tucuru” is clearly a

combination of the words tucu ura, meaning “accompanying” or

“together with” “the live oak”. This combination is not a

physical description of nearness, as the term “near” in

Timucua was usually rendered with the words eqete, cabichi, qela,

nahe, or naheba (Granberry 1993:214). Rather, it suggests an

erasing of barriers between the town itself, and the live oak.

The absence of barriers between human beings and the natural

world is a characteristic of many cultures practicing

animism, or shamanism (Jordan 2001:88-90).

Finally, the very name of the mission, “Avino”, itself

may have ritual significance. The Timucuan words abi no can

mean “dress/now”, “hour/time/now”, “apart/now”, or

“walk/now”. The most likely rendering of this combination is

“the time is now”, or “we are apart now” – suggesting an

emphasis on either time, or separation from others. I will

return to this point at the close of the discussion.

The 1648 order from Governor Benito Ruiz de Salazar, to

Juan Dominguez, ordering the arrest of the “sorcerer Indian”

causing “disquiet” in Acuera province and ordering the

gathering and return of the refugees from San Diego de

Helaca, specifically notes that this “sorcerer Indian” was

“in the town of Piliuco”, which is also rendered in the same

order as “Piliaco” (Boyer 2006; Ruiz de Salazar Valecilla to

Dominguez 1648, Worth, unpublished translation). Pili aco, in

Timucua, means literally “drag/draw-most”; pili uco,

“drag/draw-drink”. The best rendering of this name, then,

appears to be “to draw most [of them] to drink”. It is very

likely that this name refers to the ceremony of the black

drink, which has long been known to have ritual and

supernatural significance both among the Timucuan cultures

and most Southeastern Native American groups (Merrill 1979,

Milanich 1979, Milanich 1994, 1995, 1999). It is also

significant that the order notes that the “sorcerer” at issue

was living within the town of Piliaco/Piliuco at this time.

This suggests that the town may have served as a meeting

place for those of the Acuera who continued to practice the

traditional systems of belief, the place where most “were

drawn to drink”.

The documents dating from the early and middle

seventeenth century thus indicate the growth of a

consciousness by the Acuera of differences between themselves

and the other missionized Timucua, differences which seem to

have been grounded in ritual and the supernatural. However,

these differences seem to have become more pronounced and

obvious in the later seventeenth century, after the Timucuan

Rebellion and the withdrawal of the Spanish from the Acuera

missions. The Acuera continued to reside in their

traditional territory, and to have been a focus for runaways

and fugitives from the repartimiento, or labor draft (Worth

1998b:100). The records of the Calesa murder trial, dating

to 1678, are fully explicable only in light of the ritual and

supernatural significance of the names of the participants

and the places referred to.

The testimony of María Jacoba, the Potano woman accused

with Calesa of the four killings, indicated that Calesa had

been ordered to kill by his uncle “Jabajica”, who was said to

live in a little town called Biro Zebano near to “Piriaco”

(Hann 1992:462-463). “Piriaco” is clearly a variation of the

name “Piliaco” or “Piliuco”, the same town mentioned in the

1648 order discussed earlier. The name “Jabajica” is clearly

a combination of the Timucuan words yaba hica, which literally

mean “sorcerer’s town”, “wizard’s town”, or “shaman’s town”.

The “little place” of Biro Zebano, where “Jabajica” was said

to be, is a combination of the words biro si bano(banehe), which

means “men like wolves” (Granberry 1993; Julian Granberry,

personal communication 2008).

Thus, at the very beginning of the testimony, we have

the “wizard’s town”, residing in the place of “men like

wolves”, near the town where most are “drawn to drink”.

Clearly, there is a conscious attempt on the part of the

Acuera to emphasize a difference between themselves and the

still-missionized Timucua at this time. The supernatural and

ritual references of the Acuera names are obvious;

furthermore, it is striking that an individual, even a chief,

would be given a name that should refer to a place – “the

sorcerer’s town”. While a single instance of such an

individual name might be considered an error in the text, the

trial documents refer on several occasions to “the cacique

Jabajica” (Hann 1992; Pablo de Hita Salazar 1678, Boyer,

unpublished translation), suggesting that there is an

essential identity between Jabahica the individual leader and

the “wizard’s town”.

Also significant in this context is the name of Calesa’s

brother, Pequata Nalis. Pequata nalis is “the golden servant”

or “the golden vassal”. The color gold is associated with the

sun, which had a strong place in traditional Timucuan

religious practice (Laudonnière in Bennet 2001:13; Hulton

1977). The name “golden servant” thus appears to be an

invocation of spiritual power, suggesting that the role of

Pequata Nalis in the killings may have had supernatural

importance.

The testimony provided by Calesa himself, that “Calesa”

was his childhood name but “now that he is a man”, his name

was “Yazah” (Hann 1992: 463), is likewise inexplicable except

in terms of Timucuan and other Native American ritual. Ca le

sa, as noted in Table 1, means literally “here” or “this”

“now handsome”, or “now agreeable”. The best translation of

this name would be “The handsome one” or “The agreeable one”.

Ya sa,by contrast, means literally “not handsome” or “not

agreeable”. The implication of such a change in names is

that, as an unblooded child, “Calesa” was, literally, an

“agreeable one”; the implication here would suggest a better

term might be “peaceful”. However, now that “Calesa” has

become a blooded warrior, he is “not agreeable”, suggesting

an implication of “warlike”. Thus, the change in names

suggests a symbolic passage from the innocence and peace of a

child to the experience and violence of an adult warrior.

This change of names is closely paralleled in the

Apalachee myth of Nicoguadca, god of thunder, and the

creation of the Apalachee ball game. In the account of the

Apalachee myth as recorded by Fray Juan de Paiva, the

principal character, grandson of a chief Ytononslac

“identified with another of the Apalachee’s gods”, when a

child, was named simply “Chita” (Hann and McEwan 1998:130).

At the age of twelve, Chita became “Oclafi”, meaning “lord of

water”; then, at age twenty, he was given the name

“Eslafiayupi” (Ibid). The “lafi” portion of this name meant

“lord of”, but the Apalachee informants upon which Paiva

based his account refused to give the meaning, suggesting an

esoteric significance (Hann and McEwan 1998: 130). At the

close of the myth, Eslafayupi “was recognized to be Nicoguadca,

the lightning-flash born of the sun whose name is Nico, and

of Nicotaijulo or woman of the sun” (Hann and McEwan 1998:

131).

The Apalachee account clearly shows that the change of

names, in Apalachee culture, had both ritual and supernatural

significance; in the Apalachee myth, the principal character

proceeds from childhood innocence through growth and trial to

the status of a deity. If such ritual and supernatural

significance in changing names also applied to Timucuan

culture, including the practices of the Acuera, the killings

perpetrated by Calesa and ordered by Jabahica may be better

understood not simply as an attempt by Calesa to gain

“warrior status” and social significance, but as an attempt

by Calesa, Jabahica, and the Acuera as a whole to gain

esoteric power and supernatural strength, both against the

Spanish and against other Timucua. It is worthy of note that

the people killed by Calesa were specifically said to be

“four Christians and one heathen” (Hann 1992:464) from the

Potano chiefdom. This suggests that, if the killings were

perpetrated for supernatural and ritual purposes, the Acuera

may have focused on missionized Timucua from another chiefdom

as a means of symbolically rejecting both the Spanish and

those Native Americans who had acculturated with them.

Thus, by the seventeenth century, the names used by the

Acuera, when compared to the names used by other Timucuan-

speaking groups, suggest an extraordinary degree of ritual

and supernatural significance both in the names of places and

individuals, and a high consciousness on the part of the

Acuera of the symbolic and the spiritual in their

relationships with both the Spanish and other Native

Americans. Furthermore, this emphasis on ritual and the

supernatural appears to have served as a means to separate

Acuera as a region and a culture from the other Timucuan

chiefdoms.

Social and Cultural Memory and the Making of Traditions

The territory of the historic Acuera, on current

evidence, was what today is the Ocklawaha River Valley and

the Ocala National Forest (Worth 1998b; Boyer 2006).

Accordingly, it is helpful at this point to briefly consider

what is known of archaeological patterning in this region in

attempting to understand the culture of the Acuera during the

contact and mission periods.

Geologically, the Ocklawaha River is one of the oldest,

if not the oldest, flowing river within Florida (Boyer 2007;

Brooks 1970.) Radiocarbon dating of core samples of the

peats, mucks and marls from different locations on the river

indicated that the current cycle of flow for the Ocklawha

River began roughly 17,000 years b.p. (Brooks 1970). Thus,

the presence of a permanent fresh water source and riverine

resources for food and shelter would have made this area

attractive for human settlement far earlier than most other

regions of Florida that are not currently inundated.

Surface survey of sites in this region during the 2006

field season of the Ocklawaha Survey Project revealed that

mound sites throughout this region are built to a common

pattern. With only one observed exception, mounds in this

region are constructed as oblong ovals. On the western side

of the Ocklawaha River, such mounds are constructed with

their long axes parallel to the axis of flow of the river at

that location; mounds on the eastern side of the river are

constructed with their long axes placed at a 90° angle

perpendicular to the axis of flow of the river at that

location (see Figure 1) (Boyer 2007). The sole observed

exception to this pattern is the Coffee Pot Mound site,

8MR141, which is a ring of shell with an open side facing the

southeast (see Figure 2) (Boyer 2007). While the meanining

of these patterns are unknown at this point, the presence of

a common pattern to mound construction throughout this region

suggests a common cultural tradition for the people who

constructed them.

The ceramic evidence from those few sites in this area

where controlled excavations have taken place seems to bear

this out. Excavations at the Davenport Landing Mound (8PU50)

(Cerrato 1994), the Sunday Bluff (8MR13) and Colby Landing

(8MR57) sites (Bullen 1969), and the McKenzie Mound (8MR64)

(Sears 1959) uncovered primarily St. Johns ceramics including

St. Johns plain and check-stamped, and Dunn’s Creek Red

ceramics, thus placing this region within the St. Johns

archaeological tradition (Boyer 2008). However, at all four

sites, there was a small but consistent presence of ceramics

more typically associated with Florida’s Gulf Coast cultures,

including Deptford ceramics, Pasco (limestone-tempered)

ceramics, Swift Creek complicated stamped, Weeden Island

ceramics, and – at the McKenzie Mound – Safety Harbor

ceramics (Boyer 2008). Thus, while the people of the

Ocklawaha River Valley fell within the St. Johns tradition,

there appears to have been long-term cultural interchange

with and influence from the cultures of the Gulf Coast, from

the late Archaic and early Woodland periods through at least

the early St. Johns II era (Boyer 2008; Milanich 1994;

Anderson and Mainfort 2002).

Obviously, it cannot be asserted without substantial

further data that the Acuera of the historic period were the

descendents of the people who constructed the mounds in this

pattern, or that they continued to practice the same cultural

traditions. However, mounds, as with any visible monument,

are continuing makers of social memory. Simply by continuing

to be physically present, such monuments can assist any

cultural group in maintaining social cohesion and in marking

group identity, and they would have been able to serve as

such markers for the Acuera during the colonial period and

the mission era.

Furthermore, in at least one case, we do have direct

archaeological evidence that people in this region during the

colonial period made use of an older mound site for ritual

purposes. At the McKenzie Mound site (8MR64), dug by William

Sears, the bulk of the ceramics recovered archaeologically

were St. Johns series, including St. Johns plain and check-

stamped ceramics and Weeden Island ceramics (Sears 1959;

Boyer 2008). However, one burial in the upper levels of the

McKenzie Mound was found with Safety Harbor ceramics, and a

Spanish trade bead, in close association (Ibid). Thus, the

people of this region appear to have known of and, in this

case, used a mound site for ritual purposes after contact.

Furthermore, since burial mounds appear to have been used by

individual chiefly lineages in the contact era (Hulton

1977:132), such a use of an older mound site may have been an

attempt by the Acuera of the colonial period to visibly tie

their own culture to the peoples who built such sites in the

past through claims of kinship, whether such kinship was real

or fictive.

Given the ritual and supernatural significance of the

names used by the Acuera during the seventeenth century, the

archaeological evidence of re-use of at least one ritual site

within the older pattern of mound sites in this region, and

the historic evidence of continuing traditional ritual

practice and traditional social and political structure

within the Acuera chiefdom, it seems quite likely that what

was taking place in this area was a deliberate attempt on the

part of the Acuera to emphasize their traditional systems of

belief as a means of maintaining their cultural identity in

the face of the stresses of colonization and missionization.

Since Acuera province was a focus for runaways, unconverted

Native American refugees, and others fleeing Spanish control,

such an emphasis on traditional systems of belief would have

provided the Acuera a means to differentiate themselves from

both the Spanish and from Native Americans who had

assimilated into the mission system, and would have allowed

them to clearly mark themselves both in their own view and in

the view of the other Timucuan-speakers as abi no – “we are

apart now”.

Furthermore, the patterning observed at mound sites in

this region, together with the ceramic evidence suggesting

the persistence of this pattern through time from at least

the Deptford period through the St. Johns II era, may have

made such differentiation easier. Pueblo cultures of the

Southwest were able to provide a Native American alternative

to Spanish missionization by adopting a “pure Pubelo” system

of belief, discarding syncretized elements from other Native

American groups and from Catholicism and emphasizing “true”,

“pure” Puebloan beliefs (Ware and Blinman 2000). If the

Acuera were attempting to maintain their cultural identity in

the same way, the presence of many permanent monuments, built

to a common pattern, would likely have assisted the process,

as visible markers of separation and cultural identity –

particularly if older sites were deliberately re-used in the

colonial period for ritual purposes, as seems to be the case

at the McKenzie Mound. The dual significance of the name

“Acuera”, both as “calendar/timekeeper” and “ancient”, would

then have served to reinforce the idea of separation and

maintenance of much older traditions of belief in the face of

the new ways offered by Europeans through missionization.

The names used by the 17th-century Acuera were truly

“names of power”, with ritual, spiritual, and supernatural

significance both for the names of individuals and of places

within Acuera territory. Taken in conjunction with the

archaeological evidence of long-standing cultural traditions

for the people of this region, the records of the Acuera

suggest a people maintaining their cultural identity through

an emphasis on traditional systems of belief and visible

separation between themselves and other missionized Native

American groups of Spanish La Florida.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I wish to thank Dr. Julian Granberry, author of A Grammar and Dictionary of the Timucua Language, for his patience and kindness with my many questions during the time this work was

in progress, as well as his generous assistance in reviewing my translations of Timucuan names. I wish also to thank my committee chair, Dr. John E. Worth, for his assistance in understanding what was taking place in Acuera province duringthe mission period.

WORKS CITED

Anderson, David G., and Robert C. Mainfort, Jr., editors.

2002. The Woodland Southeast. Tuscaloosa: University of

Alabama Press.

Boyer, III, Willet A.

2006. Missions to the Acuera: An Analysis of the Historic and Archaeological Evidence for European Interaction with a Timucuan Chiefdom. Paper presented at the 58th Annual Meeting of the Florida Anthropological Society, Stuart, Florida.

2007. Lifeways in the Ocklawaha River Valley: Patterns Through Time. Paper presented at the 59th Annual Meeting of the Florida Anthropological Society, Avon Park, Florida.

2008. Changes and Continuity from the Late Prehistoric to the Colonial Period at Sites in the Ocklawaha River Valley. Paper Accepted for Presentation at the 60th Annual Meeting of the Florida Anthropological Society, Ybor City, Florida.

Brooks, H.K.

1970. Geology and Physiography of the Oklawaha RegionalEcosystem. In Final Report on the Environmental Impact of the Proposed Cross-Florida Barge Canal. Prepared for the Canal Authority, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Bullen, Ripley P.

1969. Excavations at Sunday Bluff, Florida. Contributions of the Florida State Museum, Social Sciences. Number 15. Gainesville: University of Florida.

Cerrato, Cynthia L.

1994. Davenport: A Prehistoric Village and Mound Site in the Ocala National Forest. Thesis submitted in Partial Fulfillment ofthe Requirements for the degree of Master of Arts, Department of Anthropology, University of South Florida.

Granberry, Julian.

1993. A Grammar and Dictionary of the Timucua Language.Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.

Hann, John H.

1992. Heathen Acuera, Murder, and a Potano Cimarrona:The St. Johns River and the Alachua Prairie in the1670’s. Florida Historical Quarterly 70:451-474.

Hann, John H., and Bonnie G. McEwan.

1998. The Apalachee Indians and Mission San Luis. Gainesville: University Press of Florida.

Hulton, Paul.

1977. The Work of Jacques Le Moyne de Morgues. 2 volumes. London: British Museum Publications, Limited.

Jordan, Peter.

2001. The Materiality of Shamanism as a ‘World-View’: Praxis, Artefacts and Landscape. In The Archaeology of Shamanism, edited by Neil Price. Routledge: London.

Laudonnière, René.

2001. Three Voyages. Translated by Charles E. Bennett. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.

Merrill, William L.

1979. The Beloved Tree: Ilex Vomitoria among the Indians of the Southeast and Adjacent Regions. In Black Drink: A Native American Tea, edited by Charles M. Hudson. Athens: University of Georgia Press.

Milanich, Jerald T.

1979. Origins and Prehistoric Distributions of Black Drink and the Ceremonial Shell Drinking Cup. In Black Drink: A Native American Tea, edited by Charles M. Hudson. Athens: University of Georgia Press.

1994. The Archaeology of Precolumbian Florida. Gainesville: University Press of Florida.

1995. Florida Indians and the Invasion from Europe. Gainesville: University Press of Florida.

1999. Laboring in the Fields of the Lord: Spanish Missions and Southeastern Indians. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press.

Milanich, Jerald T., and Charles Hudson.

1993. Hernando de Soto and the Indians of Florida. Gainesville: University Press of Florida.

Ruiz de Salazar Valecilla, Sergeant Major Benito.

1648. Order to Juan Dominguez, April 18th, 1648. John E. Worth, unpublished translation, used by permission.

Sears, William H.

1959. Two Weeden Island Period Burial Mounds. Contributions of the Florida State Museum, Social Sciences. Number 5. Gainesville: University of Florida.

Taylor, Walter W.

1948. A Study of Archaeology. Carbondale: Board of Trustees, Southern Illinois University.

Ware, John A., and Eric Blinman.

2000. Cultural Collapse and Reorganization: The Origin and Spread of Pueblo Ritual Sodalities. In The Archaeology of Regional Interaction. Denver: University Press of Colorado.

Worth, John E.

1998a. Timucuan Chiefdoms of Spanish Florida, Volume 1: Assimilation. Gainesville: University Press of Florida.

1998b. Timucuan Chiefdoms of Spanish Florida, Volume 2: Resistance and Destruction. Gainesville: University Press of Florida.