Abstract
There are only three factors which account for the presence or the absence of fauna in any archaeological site: Ecology of the area, Economics of any associated predator population (including hominids), and Ethos of any associated hominid population. When these are incorporated into a binary equation with a presence or absence outcome, and then correlated with a locus type, a focus is provided for a more far reaching analysis of faunal richness and diversity as they relate to preference and activity patterns. Taphonomic and recovery biases, of course, enter into the analysis and are a given. The equations number 16 with 8 being equalities and 8 being inequalities. Seven of the equalities result in an absence marker. Seven of the inequalities result in a presence marker. The equations force us to think more about how and why fauna were used and the role of competing species. I have found this approach useful to better understand why goats are virtually non-existent in the early seventeenth-century Chesapeake sites, seemingly disputing the extant documentation for that time. Greater cultural understanding may unfold by incorporating this methodology into our faunal interpretation.