DOCSLIB.ORG

Using Faunal Analysis to Explain Social Stratification at an Upper Mississippian Site in Laporte County, Indiana

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Using Faunal Analysis to Explain Social Stratification at an Upper Mississippian Site in Laporte County, Indiana USING FAUNAL ANALYSIS TO EXPLAIN SOCIAL STRATIFICATION AT AN UPPER MISSISSIPPIAN SITE IN LAPORTE COUNTY, INDIANA A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE MASTER OF ARTS BY CAITLIN EILEEN NICHOLS DR. S. HOMES HOGUE – ADVISOR BALL STATE UNIVERSITY MUNCIE, INDIANA DECEMBER 2016 1 Table of Contents ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS............................................................................................................ 6 INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................... 8 A SUMMARY OF SITE 12LE377.............................................................................................. 12 LITERATURE REVIEW............................................................................................................. 21 METHODS .................................................................................................................................. 41 RESULTS..................................................................................................................................... 49 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS........................................................................................ 69 REFERENCES CITED................................................................................................................. 74 APPENDIX I................................................................................................................................ 79 APPENDIX II............................................................................................................................... 84 APPENDIX III............................................................................................................................ 126 2 List of Figures Figure 1- LaPorte County, Indiana............................................................................................... 13 Figure 2- 12LE377 and 12LE378 on the 7.5’ Springfield, Indiana, USGS Quadrangle map................... 13 Figure 3- Site 12LE377 and trench locations............................................................................................ 17 Figure 4- Map of the Mississippian World................................................................................... 22 Figure 5- Map for the locations of the Fifield and Griesmer sites............................................................ 33 Figure 6- Bison scapula, previously identified as a scapula hoe, posterior view, Feature 13...... 53 Figure 7- Possible split rib awls, Feature 6................................................................................... 54 Figure 8- Antler tine, Feature 19................................................................................................... 55 Figure 9- Black bear distal metacarpal volar view, Feature 10.................................................... 56 Figure 10- Bobcat right calcaneus dorsal view, Feature 2........................................................................ 57 Figure 11- Bobcat distal right humerus ventral view, Feature 25............................................................. 58 Figure 12- Log Difference Scale for 12LE377.......................................................................................... 61 Figure 13- NISP for each of the comparative sites and 12LE377............................................................. 65 Figure 14- NISP percentage for each of the comparative sites and 12LE377.......................................... 65 Figure 15- MNI for each of the comparative sites and 12LE377.............................................................. 67 Figure 16- MNI percentage for each of the comparative sites and 12LE377........................................... 67 Figure 17- Aw values for site 12LE377 and comparative sites..................................................... 68 3 List of Tables Table 1- Cultural feature summaries for features 1-16 in 12LE377.......................................................... 15 Table 2- Cultural feature summaries for features 17-33 in 12LE377........................................... 16 Table 3- MNI, NISP, and Weight data for remains identified by species in site 12LE377....................... 50 Table 4- A summary of remains identified by class in site 12LE377........................................................ 59 Table 5- Sample sizes of deer bones in features used in the log difference scales.................................... 62 Table 6- Features from 12LE377 with faunal remains and decorated Oneota pottery (DP) sherds.......... 62 Table 7- Faunal Data from Feature 2............................................................................................ 79 Table 8- Faunal Data from Feature 3............................................................................................ 79 Table 9- Faunal Data from Feature 4............................................................................................ 79 Table 10- Faunal Data from Feature 6.......................................................................................... 80 Table 11- Faunal Data from Feature 8.......................................................................................... 80 Table 12- Faunal Data from Feature 9.......................................................................................... 80 Table 13- Faunal Data from Feature 10........................................................................................ 80 Table 14- Faunal Data from Feature 13........................................................................................ 81 Table 15- Faunal Data from Feature 18........................................................................................ 81 Table 16- Faunal Data from Feature 19........................................................................................ 81 4 Table 17- Faunal Data from Feature 22........................................................................................ 82 Table 18- Faunal Data from Feature 23........................................................................................ 82 Table 19- Faunal Data from Feature 24........................................................................................ 82 Table 20- Faunal Data from Feature 25........................................................................................ 82 Table 21- Faunal Data from Feature 32a...................................................................................... 83 Table 22- Faunal Data from Bag 221........................................................................................... 83 5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS None of this research would have happened without the love and support from my friends and family. My mother, Eileen, was instrumental in providing encouragement and constantly reminding me to “turn for home.” Jessica, my Murray friend, was responsible for reminding me that it could be done and to keep going. Brent, Zach, Eric, and Barry were unconsciously supportive by keeping the “state of my head” always positive and strong willed. I would not have been able to complete this project without any of you. I have been extremely fortunate to have an incredibly helpful committee: Homes Hogue, Kevin Nolan, and Mark Hill. Aside from agreeing to read and review my thesis, they have helped by providing access to Ball State’s Applied Anthropology Laboratory after hours so I could complete my analysis while holding down a full time job. They also lent me incredibly helpful reading material which became useful references. Mitch Zoll, the Principle Investigator for the Phase II investigation of site 12LE377, also played a part in helping my research. He personally hand delivered the Site Assessment to me which included the ceramic and initial faunal analyses; I constantly referred back to it at multiple points of the project, so I am incredibly grateful he let me have a copy to keep. Special thanks to the archaeologists from my undergrad who have kept in touch and reminded me every step of the way that they’re proud of me. Dr. Anthony Ortmann, Dr. Lara Homsey-Messer, and Dr. Lori Roe in particular helped me get here and I can’t thank them enough. 6 In loving memory of Dr. Kit Wesler, without whose mentorship none of this would have been possible. Graduate school was your idea first. I hope I’ve made you proud. 7 INTRODUCTION The Mississippian period is characterized by the first complex societies in prehistoric North America (Emerson 1999; Kelly 2001; Pauketat 2004; Welch 1991). Middle Mississippian component sites, such as Cahokia near present day St. Louis, or Moundville in Alabama, have a well-defined hierarchy consisting of elite and commoner groups (Kelly 2001; Pauketat 2004). Other sites, such as the Yarborough site in Mississippi, are less stratified farmsteads, consisting of single families or kinship groups (Jackson and Scott 1995; Pauketat 2004). Upper Mississippian sites in the Upper Midwest demonstrate a similar range between fortified villages (Jackson and Emerson 2014) and small seasonal summer camps where particular resources were exploited (Faulkner 1972). A site recently investigated in Laporte County, Indiana with an Upper Mississippian cultural component is site 12LE377. It was originally found during a Phase I survey (Bubb 2011). The site was within the proposed location for an expansion of the city of LaPorte’s East Water Treatment facility. This initial survey
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Geospatial Considerations Involving Historic General Land Office Maps and Late Prehistoric Bison Remains Near La Crosse, Wisconsin
    Field Notes: A Journal of Collegiate Anthropology Volume 10 Article 11 2019 Geospatial Considerations Involving Historic General Land Office Maps and Late Prehistoric Bison Remains Near La Crosse, Wisconsin Andrew M. Saleh University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Follow this and additional works at: https://dc.uwm.edu/fieldnotes Recommended Citation Saleh, Andrew M. (2019) "Geospatial Considerations Involving Historic General Land Office Maps and Late Prehistoric Bison Remains Near La Crosse, Wisconsin," Field Notes: A Journal of Collegiate Anthropology: Vol. 10 , Article 11. Available at: https://dc.uwm.edu/fieldnotes/vol10/iss1/11 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by UWM Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Field Notes: A Journal of Collegiate Anthropology by an authorized administrator of UWM Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Analyzing Late Prehistoric Bison bison Remains near La Crosse, Wisconsin using Historic General Land Office Maps Andrew M. Saleh University of Wisconsin—Milwaukee, USA Abstract: This study used geographic information systems, pre- historic archaeological contexts, and historic General Land Of- fice (GLO) maps to conduct a pilot inter-site analysis involving La Crosse, Wisconsin area Oneota sites with reported Bison bi- son remains as of 2014. Scholars in and around Wisconsin con- tinually discuss the potential reasons why bison remains appear in late prehistoric contexts. This analysis continued that discus- sion with updated methods and vegetation data and provides a case study showing the strength of using historic GLO maps in conjunction with archaeological studies. This research suggests that creating your own maps in coordination with the GLO’s publicly available original surveyor data is more accurate than using the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources’ (DNR) vegetation polygon that cites the same data.
    [Show full text]
  • Further Investigations Into the King George
    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Master's Theses Graduate School 2010 Further investigations into the King George Island Mounds site (16LV22) Harry Gene Brignac Jr Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses Part of the Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Brignac Jr, Harry Gene, "Further investigations into the King George Island Mounds site (16LV22)" (2010). LSU Master's Theses. 2720. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses/2720 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Master's Theses by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FURTHER INVESTIGATIONS INTO THE KING GEORGE ISLAND MOUNDS SITE (16LV22) A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in The Department of Geography and Anthropology By Harry Gene Brignac Jr. B.A. Louisiana State University, 2003 May, 2010 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS First and foremost, I would like to give thanks to God for surrounding me with the people in my life who have guided and supported me in this and all of my endeavors. I have to express my greatest appreciation to Dr. Rebecca Saunders for her professional guidance during this entire process, and for her inspiration and constant motivation for me to become the best archaeologist I can be.
    [Show full text]
  • MCJA Book Reviews Volume 39, 2014
    OPEN ACCESS: MCJA Book Reviews Volume 39, 2014 Copyright © 2014 Midwest Archaeological Conference, Inc. All rights reserved. The Hoxie Farm Site Fortified Village: Late Fisher Phase Occupation and Fortification in South Chicago edited by Douglas K. Jackson and Thomas E. Emerson with contributions by Douglas K. Jackson. Thomas E. Emerson, Madeleine Evans, Ian Fricker, Kathryn C. Egan-Bruhy, Michael L. Hargrave, Terrance J. Martin, Kjersti E. Emerson, Eve A. Hargrave, Kris Hedman, Stephanie Daniels, Brenda Beck, Amanda Butler, Jennifer Howe, and Jean Nelson Research Report No. 27 Thomas E. Emerson, Ph.D. Principal Investigator and Survey Director Illinois State Archaeological Survey A Division of the Prairie Research Institute University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign Investigations Conducted by: Illinois State Archaeological Survey University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign Investigations Conducted Under the Auspices of: The State of Illinois Department of Transportation Brad H. Koldehoff Chief Archaeologist 2013 Contents List of Figures ...............................................................................................................................ix List of Tables ............................................................................................................................... xv Acknowledgements ..................................................................................................................... xix 1 Introduction Douglas K. Jackson ..................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • 2004 Midwest Archaeological Conference Program
    Southeastern Archaeological Conference Bulletin 47 2004 Program and Abstracts of the Fiftieth Midwest Archaeological Conference and the Sixty-First Southeastern Archaeological Conference October 20 – 23, 2004 St. Louis Marriott Pavilion Downtown St. Louis, Missouri Edited by Timothy E. Baumann, Lucretia S. Kelly, and John E. Kelly Hosted by Department of Anthropology, Washington University Department of Anthropology, University of Missouri-St. Louis Timothy E. Baumann, Program Chair John E. Kelly and Timothy E. Baumann, Co-Organizers ISSN-0584-410X Floor Plan of the Marriott Hotel First Floor Second Floor ii Preface WELCOME TO ST. LOUIS! This joint conference of the Midwest Archaeological Conference and the Southeastern Archaeological Conference marks the second time that these two prestigious organizations have joined together. The first was ten years ago in Lexington, Kentucky and from all accounts a tremendous success. Having the two groups meet in St. Louis is a first for both groups in the 50 years that the Midwest Conference has been in existence and the 61 years that the Southeastern Archaeological Conference has met since its inaugural meeting in 1938. St. Louis hosted the first Midwestern Conference on Archaeology sponsored by the National Research Council’s Committee on State Archaeological Survey 75 years ago. Parts of the conference were broadcast across the airwaves of KMOX radio, thus reaching a larger audience. Since then St. Louis has been host to two Society for American Archaeology conferences in 1976 and 1993 as well as the Society for Historical Archaeology’s conference in 2004. When we proposed this joint conference three years ago we felt it would serve to again bring people together throughout most of the mid-continent.
    [Show full text]
  • Indian Place-Names in Mississippi. Lea Leslie Seale Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College
    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses Graduate School 1939 Indian Place-Names in Mississippi. Lea Leslie Seale Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses Part of the English Language and Literature Commons Recommended Citation Seale, Lea Leslie, "Indian Place-Names in Mississippi." (1939). LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses. 7812. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses/7812 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. MANUSCRIPT THESES Unpublished theses submitted for the master^ and doctorfs degrees and deposited in the Louisiana State University Library are available for inspection* Use of any thesis is limited by the rights of the author* Bibliographical references may be noted3 but passages may not be copied unless the author has given permission# Credit must be given in subsequent written or published work# A library which borrows this thesis for vise by its clientele is expected to make sure that the borrower is aware of the above restrictions, LOUISIANA. STATE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY 119-a INDIAN PLACE-NAMES IN MISSISSIPPI A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisian© State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy In The Department of English By Lea L # Seale M* A*, Louisiana State University* 1933 1 9 3 9 UMi Number: DP69190 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
    [Show full text]
  • Current Position: Education: Field Exper
    VITA _______________________________________________________________________ NAME: Douglas K. Jackson OFFICE ADDRESS: Illinois Transportation Archaeological Research Program, 209 Nuclear Physics Lab, 23 East Stadium Dr., Champaign, Illinois, 6l820 Phone: 217-244-7487 Fax: 217-244-7458 e-mail: [email protected] CURRENT POSITION: Special Projects Assistant Coordinator, Illinois Transportation Archaeological Research Program, Department of Anthropology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign EDUCATION: l980 Non-degree Graduate Student, Department of Anthropology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign l974-l978 BA Anthropology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign FIELD EXPERIENCE: l977 Student, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Archaeological Field School at the Powell Tract area of the Cahokia site, Charles J. Bareis, Director. Crew Member, FAI-270 Archaeological Mitigation Project, Department of Anthropology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. l978 Archaeological Field Technician, FAI-270 Archaeological Mitigation Project, Department of Anthropology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. l979 Field Director, Pedestrian Survey of the Wood River Basin, Madison County, Illinois. Department of Anthropology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Field Director, Archaeological Test Excavations at the Johanings Site, Chalfin Bridge, Monroe County, Illinois. Department of Anthropology, University of Illinois at Urbana- Champaign. l979-82 Field Supervisor, FAI-270 Archaeological Mitigation Project, Department
    [Show full text]
  • Discover Illinois Archaeology
    Discover Illinois Archaeology ILLINOIS ASSOCIATION FOR ADVANCEMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY ILLINOIS ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY Discover Illinois Archaeology Illinois’ rich cultural heritage began more collaborative effort by 18 archaeologists from than 12,000 years ago with the arrival of the across the state, with a major contribution by ancestors of today’s Native Americans. We learn Design Editor Kelvin Sampson. Along with sum- about them through investigations of the remains maries of each cultural period and highlights of they left behind, which range from monumental regional archaeological research, we include a earthworks with large river-valley settlements to short list of internet and print resources. A more a fragment of an ancient stone tool. After the extensive reading list can be found at the Illinois arrival of European explorers in the late 1600s, a Association for Advancement of Archaeology succession of diverse settlers added to our cul- web site www.museum.state.il.us/iaaa/DIA.pdf. tural heritage, leading to our modern urban com- We hope that by reading this summary of munities and the landscape we see today. Ar- Illinois archaeology, visiting a nearby archaeo- chaeological studies allow us to reconstruct past logical site or museum exhibit, and participating environments and ways of life, study the rela- in Illinois Archaeology Awareness Month pro- tionship between people of various cultures, and grams each September, you will become actively investigate how and why cultures rise and fall. engaged in Illinois’ diverse past and DISCOVER DISCOVER ILLINOIS ARCHAEOLOGY, ILLINOIS ARCHAEOLOGY. summarizing Illinois culture history, is truly a Alice Berkson Michael D. Wiant IIILLINOIS AAASSOCIATION FOR CONTENTS AAADVANCEMENT OF INTRODUCTION.
    [Show full text]
  • A Late Archaic and Woodland Site in Northeastern Illinois Peter John Geraci University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
    University of Wisconsin Milwaukee UWM Digital Commons Theses and Dissertations May 2016 The rP ehistoric Economics of the Kautz Site: a Late Archaic and Woodland Site in Northeastern Illinois Peter John Geraci University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Follow this and additional works at: https://dc.uwm.edu/etd Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons, Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons, and the Economics Commons Recommended Citation Geraci, Peter John, "The rP ehistoric Economics of the Kautz Site: a Late Archaic and Woodland Site in Northeastern Illinois" (2016). Theses and Dissertations. 1141. https://dc.uwm.edu/etd/1141 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by UWM Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of UWM Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE PREHISTORIC ECONOMICS OF THE KAUTZ SITE: A LATE ARCHAIC AND WOODLAND SITE IN NORTHEASTERN ILLINOIS by Peter J. Geraci A Thesis Submitted In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for Degree of Masters of Science in Anthropology at The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee May 2016 ABSTRACT THE PREHISTORIC ECONOMICS OF THE KAUTZ SITE: A LATE ARCHAIC AND WOODLAND SITE IN NORTHEASTERN ILLINOIS by Peter J. Geraci The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, 2016 Under The Supervision of Robert J. Jeske, Ph.D. The Kautz Site (11DU1) is a multi-component archaeological site located in the DuPage River Valley in northeastern Illinois. It was inhabited at least six different times between the Late Archaic and Late Woodland periods ca. 6000-1000 B.P. The site was excavated over the course of three field seasons between 1958 and 1961, but the results were never made public.
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparative Study of Oneota and Langford Traditions
    A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF ONEOTA AND LANGFORD TRADITIONS by Chrisie L. Hunter A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Anthropology at The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee May 2002 A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF ONEOTA AND LANGFORD TRADITIONS by Chrisie L. Hunter A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Anthropology at The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee May 2002 ________________________________________________________________________ Major Professor Date ________________________________________________________________________ Graduate School Approval Date ii ABSTRACT A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF ONEOTA AND LANGFORD TRADITIONS by Chrisie L. Hunter The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, 2002 Under the Supervision of Dr. Robert J. Jeske This study is a comparative analysis of two contemporaneous sites from two related cultural systems, Oneota and Langford. Similarities and differences between the sites were examined through analysis of technology, faunal and floral remains, and environmental variables. A catchment analysis was completed to understand environmental factors affecting agricultural practices and resource utilization between the two sites. The issue of agricultural production and the extent this subsistence strategy was utilized at two sites was examined. The Crescent Bay Hunt Club site (Oneota) and Washington Irving site (Langford) are shown to be similar in lithic technology but significantly different in ceramic technology, and subsistence strategies. The Oneota Crescent Bay Hunt Club site occupants were more dependant upon wetland resources than were the Langford occupants of the Washington Irving site. _______________________________________________________________________ Major Professor Date iii © Copyright by Chrisie L. Hunter, 2002 All Rights Reserved iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Heritage Preservation Plan ______
    Loudoun County Heritage Preservation Plan ____________________ Adopted by the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors December 15, 2003 CPAM 2008-0001 Approved by the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors February 9, 2009 Addendum: 2008 Review Process and Current Plan Implementation 2008 Process In February, 2008, the Board of Supervisors resolved to re-affirm the Heritage Preservation Plan and directed the Planning Commission to review the Plan, solicit stakeholder input and recommend to the Board minor updates and edits to the Plan. As part of the Planning Commission’s review, the concep t of adding a chapter on Civil War Battlefields was to be considered by the Commission. Between its adoption in 2003 and the 2008 re-affirmation of the Plan, strides were made by the County on several policy issues outlined in the Plan. These are listed briefly below: Historic Districts The County’s Historic District Interactive Website (www.loudoun.gov/historic) was launched in 2007. Funded in part by Certified Local Government grant money, the website is used to educate residents and the general public on the historic districts and associated benefits and regulations. Historic District Review Committee members and Planning Department staff have conducted realtor training programs on the County’s historic districts so that realtors can educate prospective buyers on the benefits and regulations of purchasing property in a locally administrated historic district. The County’s 2008 tax assessments highlight historic district designation to make property owners aware that their property falls within a locally administered historic district. The Historic District Guidelines adopted in 1987 were updated for the first time in 2008.
    [Show full text]
  • Journa I of World-Systems Research
    World Systems Theory, Core Periphery Interactions and Elite Economic Exchange in Mississippian Societies Robert J.Jcskc Department of Anthropology Indiana-Purdue University Fort Wayne, IN 46805 j [email protected] Copyright 1996 by Robert J.Jeskc. Please do not cite without permis sion of the author. V. 7/8/96 Abstract World Systems Theory has been one approach used to explain the rise of the Mississippian social and political phenomenon. In this paper it is argued that a hierarchical model of core- periphery interaction docs not explain the Cahokian phenomenon, because several crucial clements of such a model cannot be demonstrated to have existed within the Mississippian system. It is suggested that looking at Mississippian society as a differential core-peripheral system may have utility as a framework for including concepts such as gateway communities and interacti on spheres previously used to describe the economic interactions between Cahokia and its neighbors. Introduction Archaeologists have long sought an explanation for the rise of Mississippian society in the major river valleys of the American Midwest and Southeast between A.D. 1000 and 1500 (Smith 1978). Over the years, our explanations have changed with the changing fashions of then-current theories of cultural evolution. From diffusion to cultural ecology to economic models ofredistributivc exchange, we have attempted to put a finger on the causal variables involved in the production of certain ceramic wares, the construction of earthen platform mounds, and the large and highly organized residential and ritual sites of these people. [Page l] JournaI of World-SystemsResearch None of these models have proven completely satisfactory, failing at one level or another to account for the complexity of Mississippian intergroup interactions revealed by the archaeological record.
    [Show full text]
  • 2008 Midwest Archaeological Conference Program
    Midwest Archaeological Conference Mound 10 Nitschke Mounds (47DO27) Dodge County, Wisconsin October 15-19, 2008 Milwaukee, WI Midwest Archaeological Conference Annual Meeting Schedule October 15-19, 2008 Hyatt Regency Hotel 333 West Kilbourn Avenue Milwaukee, WI 53203 Wednesday October 15, 2008 7:00-9:00 PM Early Registration and Reception at the Hyatt Regency Cash Bar, with soft drinks available. Thursday October 16, 2008 Thursday Morning Enjoy the city. Milwaukee Public Museum, Art Museum, Discovery World are all nearby. Thursday Afternoon 1:15-4:30 PM Symposium: Human Bone as Cultural Object: A Midwestern Perspective Organizers: Eve Hargrave, Shirley J. Shermer, Kristin M. Hedman (ITARP) and Robin Lillie Room: Lakeshore A 1:15 Shermer, Shirley J. (Office of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa) Opening Remarks. 1:30 Johnston, Cheryl A. (Western Carolina University) More than Skulls and Mandibles: An Unusual Mortuary Practice from an Early Woodland Context in Central Ohio 1:45 Nawrocki, Stephen P. (University of Indianapolis) and Paul Emanovsky (Joint POW/MIA Command, Central Identification Laboratory) Modified Hopewellian Trophy Jaws 2:00 Cobb, Dawn E. (Illinois State Museum/Illinois Historic Preservation Agency) Interpretations of Modified Human Jaw Bones from Hopewellian Mound Sites in the Central Illinois River Valley 2:15 Lee, Anne B. (Hardlines Design Company) and Cheryl A. Johnston (Western Carolina University) Phallic Batons Made of Bone in the Collections of the Ohio Historical Society 2:30 Carr, Christopher (Arizona State University) and Anna Novotny (Arizona State University) Ritual Dramas in Ohio Hopewell Earthworks 2:45 Schermer, Shirley J. (Office of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa) and Robin M.
    [Show full text]