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.
Top Related