Home Region:  Mississippi Basin (North America)

Oneota

EQ 2020  us_oneota / USOneot

’Oneota’ is the modern name given to a group of late prehistoric or protohistoric cultures, known solely from their material remains and centred on modern-day Iowa, Minnesota and Wisconsin in the Midwestern United States. [1] Oneota migrations can be traced archaeologically: for instance, some groups using Oneota-style material culture began appearing alongside Mississippian populations in the American Bottom region (modern southwestern Illinois) during the Sand Prairie phase (c. 1275-1400 CE). [2] We are concerned here with the period of Oneota activity between c. 1400 and 1650 CE, but it should be noted that the roots of the tradition are to be found before 1400. Small quantities of European trade goods appear in the Illinois archaeological record around the beginning of the 17th century CE, marking the beginning of the ’protohistoric’ period in this region. [3]
Population and political organization
Oneota society was relatively egalitarian, more so than the preceding Mississippian cultures: there is a lack of evidence from Oneota settlements or funerary contexts for inherited status or class distinctions. [4] It has been suggested that political leadership was provided by ’big men’, who relied on informal support from village populations and could not pass on their positions to their children. [4]
Reliable estimates for the size of the Oneota population between 1400 and 1650 CE are lacking. [5]

[1]: (Hall 1997, 142) Hall, Robert L. 1997. An Archaeology of the Soul: North American Indian Belief and Ritual. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/8KH357GV.

[2]: (Pauketat 1994, 47) Pauketat, Timothy R. 1994. The Ascent of Chiefs: Cahokia and Mississippian Politics in Native North America. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/NJHPTUJ8.

[3]: (Emerson and Brown 1992, 102) Emerson, Thomas E., and James A. Brown. 1992. "The Late Prehistory and Protohistory of Illinois." In Calumet and Fleur-De-Lys: French and Indian Interaction in the Midcontinent, edited by J. Walthall and T. Emerson, 77-125. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/C877T4HD.

[4]: (Gibbon 2001, 390-91) Gibbon, Guy E. 2001. "Oneota." In Encyclopedia of Prehistory, Volume 6: North America, edited by Peter N. Peregrine and Melvin Ember, 389-407. New York: Springer Science+Business Media. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/QU7PNRMC.

[5]: (Hart 1990, 570-71) Hart, John P. 1990. "Modeling Oneota Agricultural Production: A Cross-Cultural Evaluation." Current Anthropology 31 (5): 569-77. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/MJKQA3W5.

General Variables
Identity and Location
Utm Zone:
15 S  
Original Name:
Oneota  
Capital:
none  
Alternative Name:
Oneota Classic Horizon  
Fisher Phase  
Huber Phase  
Bold Counselor Phase  
Temporal Bounds
Duration:
[1,400 CE ➜ 1,650 CE]  
Political and Cultural Relations
Succeeding Entity:
Early Illinois Confederation  
Relationship to Preceding Entity:
population migration  
Preceding Entity:
Cahokia - Sand Prairie  
Degree of Centralization:
quasi-polity  
Language
Linguistic Family:
NO_VALUE_ON_WIKI  
Religion
Social Complexity Variables
Social Scale
Population of the Largest Settlement:
200 people  
Polity Territory:
6,000 km2  
Hierarchical Complexity
Settlement Hierarchy:
[2 to 3]  
Religious Level:
1  
Military Level:
[1 to 2]  
Administrative Level:
1  
Professions
Professional Priesthood:
absent  
Bureaucracy Characteristics
Specialized Government Building:
unknown  
Examination System:
absent  
Law
Professional Lawyer:
absent  
Judge:
absent  
Formal Legal Code:
absent  
Court:
absent  
Specialized Buildings: polity owned
Market:
inferred absent  
Irrigation System:
inferred absent  
Food Storage Site:
present  
Transport Infrastructure
Road:
inferred absent  
Port:
inferred absent  
Canal:
absent  
Bridge:
absent  
Special-purpose Sites
Mines or Quarry:
inferred present  
Information / Writing System
Written Record:
absent  
Script:
absent  
Phonetic Alphabetic Writing:
absent  
Information / Kinds of Written Documents
Scientific Literature:
absent  
Sacred Text:
absent  
Religious Literature:
absent  
Practical Literature:
absent  
Philosophy:
absent  
Lists Tables and Classification:
absent  
History:
absent  
Fiction:
absent  
Calendar:
absent  
Information / Money
Token:
unknown  
Paper Currency:
absent  
Indigenous Coin:
absent  
Foreign Coin:
absent  
Article:
unknown  
Information / Postal System
Information / Measurement System
Warfare Variables (Military Technologies)
Fortifications
  Wooden Palisade:
inferred present  
  Stone Walls Non Mortared:
unknown  
  Stone Walls Mortared:
unknown  
  Settlements in a Defensive Position:
present  
  Modern Fortification:
absent  
  Moat:
unknown  
  Fortified Camp:
unknown  
  Earth Rampart:
unknown  
  Ditch:
unknown  
  Complex Fortification:
unknown  
  Long Wall:
absent  
Military use of Metals
  Steel:
absent  
  Iron:
absent  
  Copper:
absent  
  Bronze:
absent  
Projectiles
  Tension Siege Engine:
absent  
  Sling Siege Engine:
absent  
  Sling:
absent  
  Self Bow:
present  
  Javelin:
absent  
  Handheld Firearm:
absent 1400 CE 1500 CE
present 1500 CE 1640 CE
  Gunpowder Siege Artillery:
absent  
  Crossbow:
absent  
  Composite Bow:
absent  
  Atlatl:
absent  
Handheld weapons
  War Club:
inferred present  
  Sword:
absent  
  Spear:
present  
  Polearm:
absent  
  Dagger:
unknown  
  Battle Axe:
inferred present  
Animals used in warfare
  Horse:
absent  
  Elephant:
absent  
  Donkey:
absent  
  Dog:
unknown  
  Camel:
absent  
Armor
  Wood Bark Etc:
unknown  
  Shield:
inferred absent  
  Limb Protection:
inferred absent  
  Leather Cloth:
unknown  
  Helmet:
inferred absent  
  Breastplate:
inferred absent  
Naval technology
  Specialized Military Vessel:
unknown  
  Small Vessels Canoes Etc:
unknown  
  Merchant Ships Pressed Into Service:
unknown  
Religion Tolerance Nothing coded yet.
Human Sacrifice Nothing coded yet.
Crisis Consequences Nothing coded yet.
Power Transitions Nothing coded yet.

NGA Settlements:

Year Range Oneota (us_oneota) was in:
 (1400 CE 1639 CE)   Cahokia
Home NGA: Cahokia

General Variables
Identity and Location


Quasi-Polity [1] .

[1]: G. Gibbon, Oneota, in P. Peregrine, M. Ember and Human Relations Area Files, Inc. (eds.) Encyclopedia of Prehistory: Volume 6: North America (2001), pp. 389-407


Alternative Name:
Oneota Classic Horizon

Pauketat and Emerson [1] use "Fisher Phase" to describe the first phase of Oneota occupation of the region, up until the 1400s, and "Huber Phase" to describe its latter phase. Gibbon [2] uses the name "Bold Counselor Phase" for the Oneota occupation of the region between 1250 and 1450 CE, while the "Oneota Classic Horizon" roughly corresponds to the time-span between 1350 and 1450.

[1]: T. Pauketat and J. Brown, The late prehistory and protohistory of Illinois, in J.A. Walthall and T.E. Emerson (eds.) Calumet & fleur-de-lys: archaeology of Indian and French contact in the midcontinent (1992), pp. 77-128

[2]: G. Gibbon, Oneota, in P. Peregrine, M. Ember and Human Relations Area Files, Inc. (eds.) Encyclopedia of Prehistory: Volume 6: North America (2001), pp. 389-407

Alternative Name:
Fisher Phase

Pauketat and Emerson [1] use "Fisher Phase" to describe the first phase of Oneota occupation of the region, up until the 1400s, and "Huber Phase" to describe its latter phase. Gibbon [2] uses the name "Bold Counselor Phase" for the Oneota occupation of the region between 1250 and 1450 CE, while the "Oneota Classic Horizon" roughly corresponds to the time-span between 1350 and 1450.

[1]: T. Pauketat and J. Brown, The late prehistory and protohistory of Illinois, in J.A. Walthall and T.E. Emerson (eds.) Calumet & fleur-de-lys: archaeology of Indian and French contact in the midcontinent (1992), pp. 77-128

[2]: G. Gibbon, Oneota, in P. Peregrine, M. Ember and Human Relations Area Files, Inc. (eds.) Encyclopedia of Prehistory: Volume 6: North America (2001), pp. 389-407

Alternative Name:
Huber Phase

Pauketat and Emerson [1] use "Fisher Phase" to describe the first phase of Oneota occupation of the region, up until the 1400s, and "Huber Phase" to describe its latter phase. Gibbon [2] uses the name "Bold Counselor Phase" for the Oneota occupation of the region between 1250 and 1450 CE, while the "Oneota Classic Horizon" roughly corresponds to the time-span between 1350 and 1450.

[1]: T. Pauketat and J. Brown, The late prehistory and protohistory of Illinois, in J.A. Walthall and T.E. Emerson (eds.) Calumet & fleur-de-lys: archaeology of Indian and French contact in the midcontinent (1992), pp. 77-128

[2]: G. Gibbon, Oneota, in P. Peregrine, M. Ember and Human Relations Area Files, Inc. (eds.) Encyclopedia of Prehistory: Volume 6: North America (2001), pp. 389-407

Alternative Name:
Bold Counselor Phase

Pauketat and Emerson [1] use "Fisher Phase" to describe the first phase of Oneota occupation of the region, up until the 1400s, and "Huber Phase" to describe its latter phase. Gibbon [2] uses the name "Bold Counselor Phase" for the Oneota occupation of the region between 1250 and 1450 CE, while the "Oneota Classic Horizon" roughly corresponds to the time-span between 1350 and 1450.

[1]: T. Pauketat and J. Brown, The late prehistory and protohistory of Illinois, in J.A. Walthall and T.E. Emerson (eds.) Calumet & fleur-de-lys: archaeology of Indian and French contact in the midcontinent (1992), pp. 77-128

[2]: G. Gibbon, Oneota, in P. Peregrine, M. Ember and Human Relations Area Files, Inc. (eds.) Encyclopedia of Prehistory: Volume 6: North America (2001), pp. 389-407


Temporal Bounds
Duration:
[1,400 CE ➜ 1,650 CE]

[1]
from 1400 Iseminger 2010EXTERNAL_INLINE_LINK: http://seshat.info/File:Iseminger2010.21.jpg

[1]: G. Gibbon, Oneota, in P. Peregrine, M. Ember and Human Relations Area Files, Inc. (eds.) Encyclopedia of Prehistory: Volume 6: North America (2001), pp. 389-407


Political and Cultural Relations
Succeeding Entity:
Early Illinois Confederation

Relationship to Preceding Entity:
population migration

"People archaeologists call Oneota arrived in the central Illinois River valley seven hundred years ago. They may have come from Iowa or farther up the Mississippi River" [1] .

[1]: Illinois State Museum, Late Prehistoric, Identity (2000), http://www.museum.state.il.us/muslink/nat_amer/pre/htmls/lp_id.html


Preceding Entity:
Cahokia - Sand Prairie

Degree of Centralization:
quasi-polity

[1]

[1]: G. Gibbon, Oneota, in P. Peregrine, M. Ember and Human Relations Area Files, Inc. (eds.) Encyclopedia of Prehistory: Volume 6: North America (2001), pp. 389-407


Language

Religion

Social Complexity Variables
Social Scale
Population of the Largest Settlement:
200 people

Inhabitants. Morton Village was the largest Oneota settlement in the region [1] , and it may have been occupied by 200 people [2] . However, it was eventually abandoned in favour of smaller sites [1] .

[1]: G. Gibbon, Oneota, in P. Peregrine, M. Ember and Human Relations Area Files, Inc. (eds.) Encyclopedia of Prehistory: Volume 6: North America (2001), pp. 389-407

[2]: Illinois State Museum, Late Prehistoric, Economy: Settlement (2000), http://www.museum.state.il.us/muslink/nat_amer/pre/htmls/lp_settle.html


Polity Territory:
6,000 km2

in squared kilometers. Oneota was around 60km long by 100km wide. [1]

[1]: (Pollack 2006: 312) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/6FUV3LXY.


Hierarchical Complexity
Settlement Hierarchy:
[2 to 3]

levels. [1]
1. Larger sitesMorton, Sleeth, C.W. Cooper, and Crable.
2. Small family homesteads
Note: these impermanent sites are not part of the settlement hierarchy
3. Short-stay activity campsFor hunting and gathering.

[1]: G. Gibbon, Oneota, in P. Peregrine, M. Ember and Human Relations Area Files, Inc. (eds.) Encyclopedia of Prehistory: Volume 6: North America (2001), pp. 389-407


Religious Level:
1

levels.
1. Part-time shamans [1] .

[1]: G. Gibbon, Oneota, in P. Peregrine, M. Ember and Human Relations Area Files, Inc. (eds.) Encyclopedia of Prehistory: Volume 6: North America (2001), pp. 389-407


Military Level:
[1 to 2]

levels. AD: coded as range to allow for the presence of war chiefs.
1. War chiefs?
2. Individual warriors.


Administrative Level:
1

levels.
1. Big man"Villages, which were most likely pulled together by a single individual (a "big man"), would wax or wane, depending on the success of that individual" [1] .

[1]: G. Gibbon, Oneota, in P. Peregrine, M. Ember and Human Relations Area Files, Inc. (eds.) Encyclopedia of Prehistory: Volume 6: North America (2001), pp. 389-407


Professions
Professional Priesthood:
absent

"Like other tribal-level horticulturalists, the Oneota probably had part-time shamans rather than full-time priests" [1] .

[1]: G. Gibbon, Oneota, in P. Peregrine, M. Ember and Human Relations Area Files, Inc. (eds.) Encyclopedia of Prehistory: Volume 6: North America (2001), pp. 389-407


Bureaucracy Characteristics
Specialized Government Building:
unknown

Might have had administrative center at Slack Farm, which was centrally located. [1]

[1]: (Pollack 2006: 317) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/6FUV3LXY.


Examination System:
absent

no known writing system.


Law
Professional Lawyer:
absent

Following polity: "The statute-book, the judiciary, and courts of law with their prisons and instruments of punishment, were unknown" [1] .

[1]: J. Monette, History of the discovery and settlement of the valley of the Mississippi, by the three great European powers, Spain, France, and Great Britain (1971 [c. 1846]), p. 191


Following polity: "The statute-book, the judiciary, and courts of law with their prisons and instruments of punishment, were unknown" [1] .

[1]: J. Monette, History of the discovery and settlement of the valley of the Mississippi, by the three great European powers, Spain, France, and Great Britain (1971 [c. 1846]), p. 191


Formal Legal Code:
absent

Following polity: "The statute-book, the judiciary, and courts of law with their prisons and instruments of punishment, were unknown" [1] .

[1]: J. Monette, History of the discovery and settlement of the valley of the Mississippi, by the three great European powers, Spain, France, and Great Britain (1971 [c. 1846]), p. 191


Following polity: "The statute-book, the judiciary, and courts of law with their prisons and instruments of punishment, were unknown" [1] .

[1]: J. Monette, History of the discovery and settlement of the valley of the Mississippi, by the three great European powers, Spain, France, and Great Britain (1971 [c. 1846]), p. 191


Specialized Buildings: polity owned
Market:
absent

Scholars such as Porter or Fowler have theorised that after 1400 CE, the Cahokia region saw a return from a market-based system to a redistributive system. [1] However, this literature dates from the 1960s/1970s or earlier, and does not necessarily reflect current thinking.

[1]: (Hall 1991, 18)


Irrigation System:
absent

Not mentioned in the literature, probably not necessary in this geographic region. Inference approved by Peter Peregrine.


Food Storage Site:
present

Villages characterised by large storage pits [1] .

[1]: T. Pauketat and J. Brown, The late prehistory and protohistory of Illinois, in J.A. Walthall and T.E. Emerson (eds.) Calumet & fleur-de-lys: archaeology of Indian and French contact in the midcontinent (1992), pp. 77-128


Transport Infrastructure

not directly mentioned in the literature but cannot be excluded: "Although there were important highways (often called "warpaths") across over- land areas in Historie times, water transportation appears to have been at least as important. Large canoes are documented in historical times, and archaeological finds elsewhere in the Southeast have shown that prehistoric Mississippian people made similar vessels." [1] " There was an extensive network of footpaths that crisscrossed Eastern North America as one of your quotes suggests. I wouldn’t really call them roads, though. Most of them paralleled rivers and were unimproved or informal—they simply represented the best route between locations and so were used over and over. They were not part of a formally planned transportation system." [2]

[1]: (Muller 1997, 366)

[2]: (Peter Peregrine 2016, personal communication)


"There were no formal “ports”, although rivers were major transportation routes." [1]

[1]: (Peter Peregrine 2016, personal communication)


Approved by Peter Peregrine.


Inference approved by Peter Peregrine.


Special-purpose Sites
Mines or Quarry:
present

Mill Creek waning after 1300 CE. "It would be an extraordinary coincidence if these developments were unrelated in some manner to the disappearance of the Cambria, Silvernale, and Mill Creek complexes in the region by A.D. 1300, and, more broadly, to the major cultural transitions that were occurring from the Plains to the Atlantic seaboard in the northeastern United States during the A.D. 1200-1300 period." [1] "There were still quarries being used; indeed Blood Run has a lot of material from the Pipestone National Monument in Minnesota as I recall, so that was certainly a “mine” of sorts." [2]

[1]: (Schlesier 1994, 138)

[2]: (Peregrine 2016, personal communication)


Information / Writing System
Written Record:
absent

Certainly absent.


Certainly absent.


Phonetic Alphabetic Writing:
absent

Certainly absent.


Information / Kinds of Written Documents
Scientific Literature:
absent

Certainly absent.


Sacred Text:
absent

Certainly absent.


Religious Literature:
absent

Certainly absent.


Practical Literature:
absent

Certainly absent.


Philosophy:
absent

Certainly absent.


Lists Tables and Classification:
absent

Certainly absent.


History:
absent

Certainly absent.


Fiction:
absent

Certainly absent.


Calendar:
absent

Certainly absent.


Information / Money





Information / Postal System
Information / Measurement System

Warfare Variables (Military Technologies)
Fortifications
Wooden Palisade:
present

The sites of Sleeth and C.W. Cooper were fortified [1] . Fortification type is not specified, but, given that Cahokia and East St Louis had been fortified with wooden palisades [2] , it seems reasonable to infer that this same type of fortification was used for Oneota sites as well.

[1]: T. Pauketat and J. Brown, The late prehistory and protohistory of Illinois, in J.A. Walthall and T.E. Emerson (eds.) Calumet & fleur-de-lys: archaeology of Indian and French contact in the midcontinent (1992), pp. 77-128

[2]: J. Galloy, The East St. Louis Mound Center: America’s Original “Second City” (2011), in The Cahokian Fall 2011: 11-15




Settlements in a Defensive Position:
present

The sites of Sleeth and C.W. Cooper were located on "steep, defensible bluff crests" [1] .

[1]: T. Pauketat and J. Brown, The late prehistory and protohistory of Illinois, in J.A. Walthall and T.E. Emerson (eds.) Calumet & fleur-de-lys: archaeology of Indian and French contact in the midcontinent (1992), pp. 77-128



Apparently the sites of Sleeth and C.W. Cooper were "fortified" [1] , but fortification type is not specified. Given that Cahokia and East St Louis had been fortified with wooden palisades [2] , it seems reasonable to infer that this same type of fortification was used for Oneota sites as well. However, it is entirely possible that fortifications, here, did include moats, do it does not seem correct to code this variable as absent. And it is not unknown, as someone out there must know what these fortifications consisted of.

[1]: T. Pauketat and J. Brown, The late prehistory and protohistory of Illinois, in J.A. Walthall and T.E. Emerson (eds.) Calumet & fleur-de-lys: archaeology of Indian and French contact in the midcontinent (1992), pp. 77-128

[2]: J. Galloy, The East St. Louis Mound Center: America’s Original “Second City” (2011), in The Cahokian Fall 2011: 11-15



Earth Rampart:
unknown

Apparently the sites of Sleeth and C.W. Cooper were "fortified" [1] , but fortification type is not specified. Given that Cahokia and East St Louis had been fortified with wooden palisades [2] , it seems reasonable to infer that this same type of fortification was used for Oneota sites as well. However, it is entirely possible that fortifications, here, did include earth ramparts, do it does not seem correct to code this variable as absent. And it is not unknown, as someone out there must know what these fortifications consisted of.

[1]: T. Pauketat and J. Brown, The late prehistory and protohistory of Illinois, in J.A. Walthall and T.E. Emerson (eds.) Calumet & fleur-de-lys: archaeology of Indian and French contact in the midcontinent (1992), pp. 77-128

[2]: J. Galloy, The East St. Louis Mound Center: America’s Original “Second City” (2011), in The Cahokian Fall 2011: 11-15


Apparently the sites of Sleeth and C.W. Cooper were "fortified" [1] , but fortification type is not specified. Given that Cahokia and East St Louis had been fortified with wooden palisades [2] , it seems reasonable to infer that this same type of fortification was used for Oneota sites as well. However, it is entirely possible that fortifications, here, did include ditches, do it does not seem correct to code this variable as absent. And it is not unknown, as someone out there must know what these fortifications consisted of.

[1]: T. Pauketat and J. Brown, The late prehistory and protohistory of Illinois, in J.A. Walthall and T.E. Emerson (eds.) Calumet & fleur-de-lys: archaeology of Indian and French contact in the midcontinent (1992), pp. 77-128

[2]: J. Galloy, The East St. Louis Mound Center: America’s Original “Second City” (2011), in The Cahokian Fall 2011: 11-15


Complex Fortification:
unknown

Not mentioned by sources.



Military use of Metals

Not mentioned by sources; it seems most Oneota technology derived from wood and stone [1] .

[1]: Illinois State Museum, Late Prehistoric, Technology: Weapons (2000), http://www.museum.state.il.us/muslink/nat_amer/pre/htmls/lp_weapons.html


Not mentioned by sources; it seems most Oneota technology derived from wood and stone [1] .

[1]: Illinois State Museum, Late Prehistoric, Technology: Weapons (2000), http://www.museum.state.il.us/muslink/nat_amer/pre/htmls/lp_weapons.html


Not mentioned by sources; it seems most Oneota technology derived from wood and stone [1] .

[1]: Illinois State Museum, Late Prehistoric, Technology: Weapons (2000), http://www.museum.state.il.us/muslink/nat_amer/pre/htmls/lp_weapons.html


Not mentioned by sources; it seems most Oneota technology derived from wood and stone [1] .

[1]: Illinois State Museum, Late Prehistoric, Technology: Weapons (2000), http://www.museum.state.il.us/muslink/nat_amer/pre/htmls/lp_weapons.html


Projectiles


Code checked by Peter Peregrine. Previous notes: Archaeological evidence for warfare appears to "only" include "[d]efensive structures around villages, violent injuries on human remains, "trophy heads," the abandonment of regions, and the positioning of sites in ever more defensive positions" [1] , though a few weapon types can be cautiously inferred, such as bow and arrows and spears [2] , and, at a later date, firearms [3] .

[1]: G. Gibbon, Oneota, in P. Peregrine, M. Ember and Human Relations Area Files, Inc. (eds.) Encyclopedia of Prehistory: Volume 6: North America (2001), p. 391

[2]: P.S. Martin, G.I. Quimby and D.Collier, Indians Before Columbus (1947), p. 316

[3]: Illinois State Museum, Late Prehistoric, Technology: Weapons (2000), http://www.museum.state.il.us/muslink/nat_amer/pre/htmls/lp_weapons.html


Self Bow:
present

The bow and arrow was the principal weapon, but bow type is not specified by the sources [1] .

[1]: P.S. Martin, G.I. Quimby and D.Collier, Indians Before Columbus (1947), p. 316


Javelin:
absent

Code checked by Peter Peregrine. Previous notes: Archaeological evidence for warfare appears to "only" include "[d]efensive structures around villages, violent injuries on human remains, "trophy heads," the abandonment of regions, and the positioning of sites in ever more defensive positions" [1] , though a few weapon types can be cautiously inferred, such as bow and arrows and spears [2] , and, at a later date, firearms [3] .

[1]: G. Gibbon, Oneota, in P. Peregrine, M. Ember and Human Relations Area Files, Inc. (eds.) Encyclopedia of Prehistory: Volume 6: North America (2001), p. 391

[2]: P.S. Martin, G.I. Quimby and D.Collier, Indians Before Columbus (1947), p. 316

[3]: Illinois State Museum, Late Prehistoric, Technology: Weapons (2000), http://www.museum.state.il.us/muslink/nat_amer/pre/htmls/lp_weapons.html


Handheld Firearm:
absent
1400 CE 1500 CE

The Oneota "probably acquired guns through trade with Native people already in contact with Europeans" [1] .

[1]: Illinois State Museum, Late Prehistoric, Technology: Weapons (2000), http://www.museum.state.il.us/muslink/nat_amer/pre/htmls/lp_weapons.html

Handheld Firearm:
present
1500 CE 1640 CE

The Oneota "probably acquired guns through trade with Native people already in contact with Europeans" [1] .

[1]: Illinois State Museum, Late Prehistoric, Technology: Weapons (2000), http://www.museum.state.il.us/muslink/nat_amer/pre/htmls/lp_weapons.html




Composite Bow:
absent

Code checked by Peter Peregrine. Previous notes: Archaeological evidence for warfare appears to "only" include "[d]efensive structures around villages, violent injuries on human remains, "trophy heads," the abandonment of regions, and the positioning of sites in ever more defensive positions" [1] , though a few weapon types can be cautiously inferred, such as bow and arrows and spears [2] , and, at a later date, firearms [3] .

[1]: G. Gibbon, Oneota, in P. Peregrine, M. Ember and Human Relations Area Files, Inc. (eds.) Encyclopedia of Prehistory: Volume 6: North America (2001), p. 391

[2]: P.S. Martin, G.I. Quimby and D.Collier, Indians Before Columbus (1947), p. 316

[3]: Illinois State Museum, Late Prehistoric, Technology: Weapons (2000), http://www.museum.state.il.us/muslink/nat_amer/pre/htmls/lp_weapons.html


Code checked by Peter Peregrine. Previous notes: Archaeological evidence for warfare appears to "only" include "[d]efensive structures around villages, violent injuries on human remains, "trophy heads," the abandonment of regions, and the positioning of sites in ever more defensive positions" [1] , though a few weapon types can be cautiously inferred, such as bow and arrows and spears [2] , and, at a later date, firearms [3] .

[1]: G. Gibbon, Oneota, in P. Peregrine, M. Ember and Human Relations Area Files, Inc. (eds.) Encyclopedia of Prehistory: Volume 6: North America (2001), p. 391

[2]: P.S. Martin, G.I. Quimby and D.Collier, Indians Before Columbus (1947), p. 316

[3]: Illinois State Museum, Late Prehistoric, Technology: Weapons (2000), http://www.museum.state.il.us/muslink/nat_amer/pre/htmls/lp_weapons.html


Handheld weapons
War Club:
present

Code checked by Peter Peregrine. Previous notes: Archaeological evidence for warfare appears to "only" include "[d]efensive structures around villages, violent injuries on human remains, "trophy heads," the abandonment of regions, and the positioning of sites in ever more defensive positions" [1] , though a few weapon types can be cautiously inferred, such as bow and arrows and spears [2] , and, at a later date, firearms [3] .

[1]: G. Gibbon, Oneota, in P. Peregrine, M. Ember and Human Relations Area Files, Inc. (eds.) Encyclopedia of Prehistory: Volume 6: North America (2001), p. 391

[2]: P.S. Martin, G.I. Quimby and D.Collier, Indians Before Columbus (1947), p. 316

[3]: Illinois State Museum, Late Prehistoric, Technology: Weapons (2000), http://www.museum.state.il.us/muslink/nat_amer/pre/htmls/lp_weapons.html


Code checked by Peter Peregrine. Previous notes: Archaeological evidence for warfare appears to "only" include "[d]efensive structures around villages, violent injuries on human remains, "trophy heads," the abandonment of regions, and the positioning of sites in ever more defensive positions" [1] , though a few weapon types can be cautiously inferred, such as bow and arrows and spears [2] , and, at a later date, firearms [3] .

[1]: G. Gibbon, Oneota, in P. Peregrine, M. Ember and Human Relations Area Files, Inc. (eds.) Encyclopedia of Prehistory: Volume 6: North America (2001), p. 391

[2]: P.S. Martin, G.I. Quimby and D.Collier, Indians Before Columbus (1947), p. 316

[3]: Illinois State Museum, Late Prehistoric, Technology: Weapons (2000), http://www.museum.state.il.us/muslink/nat_amer/pre/htmls/lp_weapons.html


Martin, Quimby and Collier [1] mention "[p]aired sandstone shaft-smoothers [...] used for making arrow- or spear-shafts".

[1]: P.S. Martin, G.I. Quimby and D.Collier, Indians Before Columbus (1947), p. 316


Polearm:
absent

Code checked by Peter Peregrine. Previous notes: Archaeological evidence for warfare appears to "only" include "[d]efensive structures around villages, violent injuries on human remains, "trophy heads," the abandonment of regions, and the positioning of sites in ever more defensive positions" [1] , though a few weapon types can be cautiously inferred, such as bow and arrows and spears [2] , and, at a later date, firearms [3] .

[1]: G. Gibbon, Oneota, in P. Peregrine, M. Ember and Human Relations Area Files, Inc. (eds.) Encyclopedia of Prehistory: Volume 6: North America (2001), p. 391

[2]: P.S. Martin, G.I. Quimby and D.Collier, Indians Before Columbus (1947), p. 316

[3]: Illinois State Museum, Late Prehistoric, Technology: Weapons (2000), http://www.museum.state.il.us/muslink/nat_amer/pre/htmls/lp_weapons.html


Dagger:
unknown

Archaeological evidence for warfare appears to "only" include "[d]efensive structures around villages, violent injuries on human remains, "trophy heads," the abandonment of regions, and the positioning of sites in ever more defensive positions" [1] , though a few weapon types can be cautiously inferred, such as bow and arrows and spears [2] , and, at a later date, firearms [3] .

[1]: G. Gibbon, Oneota, in P. Peregrine, M. Ember and Human Relations Area Files, Inc. (eds.) Encyclopedia of Prehistory: Volume 6: North America (2001), p. 391

[2]: P.S. Martin, G.I. Quimby and D.Collier, Indians Before Columbus (1947), p. 316

[3]: Illinois State Museum, Late Prehistoric, Technology: Weapons (2000), http://www.museum.state.il.us/muslink/nat_amer/pre/htmls/lp_weapons.html


Battle Axe:
present

Code checked by Peter Peregrine. Previous notes: Archaeological evidence for warfare appears to "only" include "[d]efensive structures around villages, violent injuries on human remains, "trophy heads," the abandonment of regions, and the positioning of sites in ever more defensive positions" [1] , though a few weapon types can be cautiously inferred, such as bow and arrows and spears [2] , and, at a later date, firearms [3] .

[1]: G. Gibbon, Oneota, in P. Peregrine, M. Ember and Human Relations Area Files, Inc. (eds.) Encyclopedia of Prehistory: Volume 6: North America (2001), p. 391

[2]: P.S. Martin, G.I. Quimby and D.Collier, Indians Before Columbus (1947), p. 316

[3]: Illinois State Museum, Late Prehistoric, Technology: Weapons (2000), http://www.museum.state.il.us/muslink/nat_amer/pre/htmls/lp_weapons.html


Armor
Wood Bark Etc:
unknown

The Oneota are known solely from their material remains [1] , and things made out of wood do not tend to survive in the archaeological record.

[1]: (Hall 1997, 142) Hall, Robert L. 1997. An Archaeology of the Soul: North American Indian Belief and Ritual. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/8KH357GV.


Shield:
absent

Inferred from lack of shields in previous and later polities.


Limb Protection:
absent

Inferred from lack of limb protection in previous and later polities.


Leather Cloth:
unknown

The Oneota are known solely from their material remains [1] , and leather and cloth do not tend to survive in the archaeological record.

[1]: (Hall 1997, 142) Hall, Robert L. 1997. An Archaeology of the Soul: North American Indian Belief and Ritual. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/8KH357GV.


Helmet:
absent

Inferred from lack of helmets in previous and later polities.


Breastplate:
absent

Inferred from lack of breastplates in previous and later polities.



Human Sacrifice Data
Human Sacrifice is the deliberate and ritualized killing of a person to please or placate supernatural entities (including gods, spirits, and ancestors) or gain other supernatural benefits.
- Nothing coded yet.
- Nothing coded yet.
- Nothing coded yet.