DOCSLIB.ORG

The O.C. Voss Site: Reassessing What We Know About the Fort Ancient Occupation of the Central Scioto Drainage and Its Tributaries

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The O.C. Voss Site: Reassessing What We Know About the Fort Ancient Occupation of the Central Scioto Drainage and Its Tributaries THE O.C. VOSS SITE: REASSESSING WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT THE FORT ANCIENT OCCUPATION OF THE CENTRAL SCIOTO DRAINAGE AND ITS TRIBUTARIES DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Kathleen Brady-Rawlins, M.A. ***** The Ohio State University 2007 Dissertation Committee: Dr. William S. Dancey, Advisor Approved by Dr. Kristen J. Gremillion ________________________ Advisor Dr. Paul Sciulli Graduate Program in Anthropology Copyright by Kathleen Brady-Rawlins 2007 ABSTRACT In this dissertation I present newly acquired data concerning the prehistoric occupation of the O.C. Voss site in Franklin County, Ohio, and provide a contemporary analysis of the results of archaeological investigation conducted at the site more than forty years ago by the Ohio Historical Society. Results of the research suggest Fort Ancient occupation of the central Scioto River drainage and its tributaries was not confined to the early period ca. A.D. 1000-1200 nor is a depopulation of the sub-region ca. A.D. 1350 supported. The Voss site is located on a second terrace above Big Darby Creek in the Battelle-Darby Metro Park. After excavation of the Voss Mound in 1963, the original investigators placed the Voss site within the Late Woodland Cole Complex, a newly defined taxonomic unit. Within a few years of discovery of the village site associated with the mound, other archaeologists began to question the classification of the Voss site as Late Woodland and suggested attributes of the artifact assemblage indicated a Late Prehistoric Fort Ancient affiliation. Because details of the artifact assemblage, feature type, and village organization existed mostly in the gray literature, the Voss site has retained an incipient Late Prehistoric status in the minds of many researchers in the forty- plus years since discovery of the site. The 1966 village excavations uncovered numerous ii pit features and two structural patterns in a configuration that suggested a circular settlement. Yet, questions remained concerning the size of the village, its internal structure, subsistence patterns, and timing of occupation. Recent investigation of the site utilized geophysical survey in the form of magnetic survey as the paramount method of data recovery. Additional data recovery techniques included magnetic anomaly testing through removal of the plowzone, anomaly coring, limited feature excavation, and shovel testing to determine patterns of artifact density within the village site. An analysis of ceramic and lithic attributes on previously and recently excavated materials is presented and discussed in relation to established temporal indicators. Because little information has been compiled on characteristics of mound construction within the Fort Ancient community, a review and analysis of excavated and reasonably well-documented Fort Ancient mounds was undertaken to assess characteristics of the Voss Mound. The location of the Voss site is unique as it lies at the northern margin of the Fort Ancient Culture area and is located more than 60 km north of any excavated Fort Ancient site within the Scioto River drainage. Despite its location on the northern boundary and within the dissected valleys of the Big Darby Creek, it will be argued that occupation of the site occurred during the Late Prehistoric period by Fort Ancient populations who adhered to a well-established intra-site settlement pattern of a circular village organized around a central, community-oriented plaza. The Voss site does not represent an incipient stage of the Fort Ancient Tradition of the Late Prehistoric period but rather a site utilized by Fort Ancient populations into the early 15th century. iii To all those who encouraged me to see it through my husband, my family, friends, and mentors iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to thank my advisor, William Dancey, for his guidance in organizing and articulating the results of my fieldwork and research, and for his patience. I wish to thank Tim Taylor and the maintenance crew of the Battelle-Darby Metro Park for their interest and help in making recent archaeological investigation of the site possible. I also wish to thank Bob Voss for providing information about the historic use of the site and surrounding area. I would like to thank Larry Wickliff for his unlimited enthusiasm for archaeological fieldwork through it all, poison ivy, limited supplies, and having to be satisfied with recovering lithics manufactured from “gunky” local chert. I am very grateful for his many hours of volunteer labor and support. I also wish to thank Dan Rawlins and Karen Royce for their help in conducting fieldwork at the site. I wish to thank Martha Otto of the Ohio Historical Society, one of the original investigators of the site, for providing access to the Voss Collections whenever requested and for a welcomed visit to the site during recent excavations. I would like to thank the Ohio Archaeological Council for providing grant money through the Patricia Essenpreis Grant, allowing AMS dating of nutshell samples v recovered during recent excavations. I also wish to thank Rob Cook and William Dancey for their guidance in making the best use of the grant funds. I wish to thank John Hart for entertaining a request from a stranger to date a bean fragment from a reportedly early site. He graciously agreed to analyze and date a bean recovered from Voss according to protocols established during creation of the database of bean dates from sites in the northern Eastern Woodlands. I also wish to thank Kristen Gremillion for her time in initially identifying the bean fragments and David Asch for his analysis, at the request of John Hart, of the bean fragment submitted for dating. I am grateful to Steve Howard and Kristen Gremillion for time spent analyzing the Voss paleoethnobotanical remains recovered during recent excavations. I also wish to thank Anne Lee for her analysis of the faunal material at such short notice. I wish to thank Bill Kennedy, Rob Cook, Jennifer Pederson, Karen Royce, Jarrod Burks, Jeb Bowen, and Ted Sunderhaus for their insights into aspects of the dissertation and fieldwork. I am grateful to Paul Sciulli and Kristen Gremillion for their review of the dissertation document and content. Lastly, I wish to thank my husband, my parents, my brothers and sisters, as well as my extended family for their love and encouragement. vi VITA December 26, 1970………………………Born – Fairview Park, Ohio 1993………………………………………B.S. Economics, The Ohio State University 1999………………………………………M.A. Anthropology, The Ohio State University 1998-2001………………………………..Teaching Associate, The Ohio State University 2002-2006………………………………..Archaeologist Hopewell Culture National Historical Park 2006-present………………………………Curator Hopewell Culture National Historical Park FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: Anthropology North American Archaeology - Eastern Woodlands Prehistory vii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Abstract............................................................................................................................... ii Dedication……………………...…………………………………………………………iv Acknowledgments............................................................................................................... v Vita ............................................................................................................................... vii List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... xi List of Figures..................................................................................................................xiii Chapters: 1. Introduction............................................................................................................. 1 The Fort Ancient Tradition ..................................................................................... 1 The Voss Site .......................................................................................................... 6 Research Questions................................................................................................. 9 2. Baum Phase and Affiliated Sites: A Discussion of their Spatial and Temporal Extent .................................................................................................................... 12 Origins of Fort Ancient......................................................................................... 13 Models of Fort Ancient in the Scioto, Hocking, and Brush Creek Drainages...... 17 Spatial and Temporal Extent of Baum Series Ceramics....................................... 21 Percentage of Shell-Tempered Sherds as a Temporal Indicator........................... 24 Radiocarbon Dates................................................................................................ 28 3. The Darby Creek Drainage and Past Archaeological Investigation of the Area .. 33 Environmental Setting .......................................................................................... 33 Glacial Geology and Bedrock .......................................................................... 34 viii Physiography.................................................................................................... 35 Soils ................................................................................................................ 36 Flora and Fauna...............................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Burial Mounds in Europe and Japan Comparative and Contextual Perspectives
    Comparative and Global Perspectives on Japanese Archaeology Burial Mounds in Europe and Japan Comparative and Contextual Perspectives edited by Access Thomas Knopf, Werner Steinhaus and Shin’ya FUKUNAGAOpen Archaeopress Archaeopress Archaeology © Archaeopress and the authors, 2018. Archaeopress Publishing Ltd Summertown Pavilion 18-24 Middle Way Summertown Oxford OX2 7LG www.archaeopress.com ISBN 978 1 78969 007 1 ISBN 978 1 78969 008 8 (e-Pdf) © Archaeopress and the authors 2018 © All image rights are secured by the authors (Figures edited by Werner Steinhaus) Access Cover illustrations: Mori-shōgunzuka mounded tomb located in Chikuma-shi in Nagano prefecture, Japan, by Werner Steinhaus (above) Magdalenenberg burial mound at Villingen-Schwenningen, Germany,Open by Thomas Knopf (below) The printing of this book wasArchaeopress financed by the Sainsbury Institute for the Study of Japanese Arts and Cultures All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the copyright owners. Printed in England by Oxuniprint, Oxford This book is available direct from Archaeopress or from our website www.archaeopress.com © Archaeopress and the authors, 2018. Contents List of Figures .................................................................................................................................................................................... iii List of authors .................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1 03089500 Mill Creek Near Berlin Center, Ohio 19.13 40.9638 80.9476 10.86 9.13 0.6880 58.17 0.77 0.41 2.10 03092000 Kale C
    Table 2-1. Basin characteristics determined for selected streamgages in Ohio and adjacent States. [Characteristics listed in this table are described in detail in the text portion of appendix 2; column headings used in this table are shown in parentheses adjacent to the bolded long variable names] Station number Station name DASS Latc Longc SL10-85 LFPath SVI Agric Imperv OpenWater W 03089500 Mill Creek near Berlin Center, Ohio 19.13 40.9638 80.9476 10.86 9.13 0.6880 58.17 0.77 0.41 2.10 03092000 Kale Creek near Pricetown, Ohio 21.68 41.0908 81.0409 14.09 12.88 0.8076 40.46 1.08 0.48 2.31 03092090 West Branch Mahoning River near Ravenna, Ohio 21.81 41.2084 81.1983 20.23 11.19 0.5068 38.65 2.35 1.01 2.51 03102950 Pymatuning Creek at Kinsman, Ohio 96.62 41.4985 80.6401 5.46 21.10 0.6267 52.26 0.82 1.18 5.60 03109500 Little Beaver Creek near East Liverpool, Ohio 495.57 40.8103 80.6732 7.89 55.27 0.4812 38.05 1.98 0.79 1.41 03110000 Yellow Creek near Hammondsville, Ohio 147.22 40.5091 80.8855 9.37 33.62 0.5439 19.84 0.34 0.33 0.36 03111500 Short Creek near Dillonvale, Ohio 122.95 40.2454 80.8859 15.25 27.26 0.3795 30.19 1.08 0.93 1.16 03111548 Wheeling Creek below Blaine, Ohio 97.60 40.1274 80.9477 13.43 27.46 0.3280 40.92 0.97 0.56 0.64 03114000 Captina Creek at Armstrongs Mills, Ohio 133.69 39.9307 81.0696 13.56 26.99 0.6797 32.76 0.54 0.64 0.66 03115400 Little Muskingum River at Bloomfield, Ohio 209.94 39.6699 81.1370 5.50 44.84 0.7516 10.00 0.25 0.12 0.12 03115500 Little Muskingum River at Fay, Ohio 258.25 39.6406 81.1531 4.32 60.10 0.7834
    [Show full text]
  • Ohio History Lesson 1
    http://www.touring-ohio.com/ohio-history.html http://www.ohiohistorycentral.org/category.php?c=PH http://www.oplin.org/famousohioans/indians/links.html Benchmark • Describe the cultural patterns that are visible in North America today as a result of exploration, colonization & conflict Grade Level Indicator • Describe, the earliest settlements in Ohio including those of prehistoric peoples The students will be able to recognize and describe characteristics of the earliest settlers Assessment Lesson 2 Choose 2 of the 6 prehistoric groups (Paleo-indians, Archaic, Adena, Hopewell, Fort Ancients, Whittlesey). Give two examples of how these groups were similar and two examples of how these groups were different. Provide evidence from the text to support your answer. Bering Strait Stone Age Shawnee Paleo-Indian People Catfish •Pre-Clovis Culture Cave Art •Clovis Culture •Plano Culture Paleo-Indian People • First to come to North America • “Paleo” means “Ancient” • Paleo-Indians • Hunted huge wild animals for food • Gathered seeds, nuts and roots. • Used bone needles to sew animal hides • Used flint to make tools and weapons • Left after the Ice Age-disappeared from Ohio Archaic People Archaic People • Early/Middle Archaic Period • Late Archaic Period • Glacial Kame/Red Ocher Cultures Archaic People • Archaic means very old (2nd Ohio group) • Stone tools to chop down trees • Canoes from dugout trees • Archaic Indians were hunters: deer, wild turkeys, bears, ducks and geese • Antlers to hunt • All parts of the animal were used • Nets to fish
    [Show full text]
  • I. a Consideration of Tine and Labor Expenditurein the Constrijction Process at the Teotihuacan Pyramid of the Sun and the Pover
    I. A CONSIDERATION OF TINE AND LABOR EXPENDITURE IN THE CONSTRIJCTION PROCESS AT THE TEOTIHUACAN PYRAMID OF THE SUN AND THE POVERTY POINT MOUND Stephen Aaberg and Jay Bonsignore 40 II. A CONSIDERATION OF TIME AND LABOR EXPENDITURE IN THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS AT THE TEOTIHUACAN PYRAMID OF THE SUN AND THE POVERTY POINT 14)UND Stephen Aaberg and Jay Bonsignore INTRODUCT ION In considering the subject of prehistoric earthmoving and the construction of monuments associated with it, there are many variables for which some sort of control must be achieved before any feasible demographic features related to the labor involved in such construction can be derived. Many of the variables that must be considered can be given support only through certain fundamental assumptions based upon observations of related extant phenomena. Many of these observations are contained in the ethnographic record of aboriginal cultures of the world whose activities and subsistence patterns are more closely related to the prehistoric cultures of a particular area. In other instances, support can be gathered from observations of current manual labor related to earth moving since the prehistoric constructions were accomplished manually by a human labor force. The material herein will present alternative ways of arriving at the represented phenomena. What is inherently important in considering these data is the element of cultural organization involved in such activities. One need only look at sites such as the Valley of the Kings and the great pyramids of Egypt, Teotihuacan, La Venta and Chichen Itza in Mexico, the Cahokia mound group in Illinois, and other such sites to realize that considerable time, effort and organization were required.
    [Show full text]
  • Roy Staab Four Seasons / Four Corners
    ROY STAAB FOUR SEASONS / CORNERS ROY STAAB FOUR SEASONS / CORNERS Institute of Visual Arts University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee July 10-September 27, 2009 with contributions by Suzaan Boettger Nicholas Frank John K. Grande Amy Lipton Institute of Visual Arts University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee July 10-September 27, 2009 Inova is grateful for the support of the Greater Milwaukee Foundation’s Mary L. Nohl Fund. Published by the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Peck School of the Arts on the occasion of the exhibition ROY STAAB: FOUR SEASONS/FOUR CORNERS Organized by the Institute of Visual Arts (Inova) P.O. Box 413 Milwaukee, WI 53201 Phone: (414) 229-4762 Fax: (414) 229-6154 arts.uwm.edu © 2009 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved. No part of the contents of this book may be produced without the written permission of the publisher. ISBN: 9780981930114 Printed in the United States of America All photographs of installations by Roy Staab except: Michel Goday, figs. 2, 9 Gregg Schmidts, fig. 17 Leonard Freed, fig. 23 Nicholas Frank, fig. 33 Alan Magayne-Roshak, fig. 34 Additional credits: cover: Pyramid Space 7 - August 24, 1988 fig. 16: Digital Image © The Museum of Modern Art/Licensed by SCALA/Art Resource, NY fig. 18: Collection of the Gemeente Museum Den Haag. 1 (opposite) Fluke, 2008, Marbaek Beach near Esbjerg, Denmark 2 Port-Vendres, France, 1979 5 X MARKS THE STAAB Anyone who knows Roy Staab has experienced the discrepancy between 3 Dennis Oppenheim his personality and his artwork. His temporary environmental site installations Cancelled Crop, 1969 are the embodiment of calm, humility and silence.
    [Show full text]
  • Archaeological Modeling Study
    Draft Report Archaeological Modeling for Segment II/III of the Eastern Corridor Multimodal Projects (HAM-SR32-0.00, PID 22970; FHWA-OH-EIS-04-02) G R AY & PA P E , I N C. ARCHAEOLOGY HISTORY HISTORIC PRESERVATION January 14, 2009 Submitted for: ENTRAN 1848 Summit Road Cincinnati, Ohio 45237 Submitted by: Gray & Pape, Inc. 1318 Main Street Cincinnati, Ohio 45202 Gray & Pape Project No. 08-11401 Project No. 08-11401 Archaeological Modeling for Segment II/III of the Eastern Corridor Multimodal Projects (HAM-SR32-0.00, PID 22970; FHWA-OH-EIS-04-02) Submitted to: ENTRAN 1848 Summit Road Cincinnati, Ohio 45237 (513) 761-1700 Contact: Deb Osborne Submitted by: Michael Striker, M.A., RPA Gray & Pape, Inc. 1318 Main Street Cincinnati, Ohio 45202 Tel: (513) 287-7700 __________________________ W. Kevin Pape Project Manager January 14, 2009 ABSTRACT Under contract to ENTRAN, Gray & Pape, Inc. has prepared recommendations concerning the archaeological potential of Segment II/III of the Eastern Corridor Multimodal Projects (HAM-SR32-0.00, PID 22970; FHWA-OH-EIS-04-02), located in Hamilton and Clermont Counties, Ohio. The recommendations are based on a model developed by Gray & Pape, Inc. using the results of previous work conducted for the project (Weed 2002), documentary research, interviews with landowners and other knowledgeable parties, and an informal reconnaissance of the project area. Gray & Pape, Inc. divided the project area into three zones: Zone 1 is the undeveloped floodplains and terraces of the Little Miami River. Zone 2 includes floodplains and terraces that have been developed in historical times, and Zone 3 includes the valley and uplands east of the Village of Newtown.
    [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]
  • University of Michigan Radiocarbon Dates Xii H
    [Ru)Ioc!RBo1, Vol.. 10, 1968, P. 61-114] UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN RADIOCARBON DATES XII H. R. CRANE and JAMES B. GRIFFIN The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan The following is a list of dates obtained since the compilation of List XI in December 1965. The method is essentially the same as de- scribed in that list. Two C02-CS2 Geiger counter systems were used. Equipment and counting techniques have been described elsewhere (Crane, 1961). Dates and estimates of error in this list follow the practice recommended by the International Radiocarbon Dating Conferences of 1962 and 1965, in that (a) dates are computed on the basis of the Libby half-life, 5570 yr, (b) A.D. 1950 is used as the zero of the age scale, and (c) the errors quoted are the standard deviations obtained from the numbers of counts only. In previous Michigan date lists up to and in- cluding VII, we have quoted errors at least twice as great as the statisti- cal errors of counting, to take account of other errors in the over-all process. If the reader wishes to obtain a standard deviation figure which will allow ample room for the many sources of error in the dating process, we suggest doubling the figures that are given in this list. We wish to acknowledge the help of Patricia Dahlstrom in pre- paring chemical samples and David M. Griffin and Linda B. Halsey in preparing the descriptions. I. GEOLOGIC SAMPLES 9240 ± 1000 M-1291. Hosterman's Pit, Pennsylvania 7290 B.C. Charcoal from Hosterman's Pit (40° 53' 34" N Lat, 77° 26' 22" W Long), Centre Co., Pennsylvania.
    [Show full text]
  • Antidegradation Classifications Assigned to State and National Scenic Rivers in Ohio Under Proposed Rules, March 25, 2002
    State of Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Antidegradation Classifications Assigned to State and National Scenic Rivers in Ohio under Proposed Rules, March 25, 2002 March 25, 2002 prepared by Division of Surface Water Division of Surface Water, 122 South Front St., PO Box 1049, Columbus, Ohio 43215 (614) 644-2001 Introduction Federal Water Quality Standard (WQS) program regulations require that States adopt and use an antidegradation policy. The policy has two distinct purposes. First, an antidegradation policy must provide a systematic and reasoned decision making process to evaluate the need to lower water quality. Regulated activities should not lower water quality unless the need to do so is demonstrated based on technical, social and economic criteria. The second purpose of an antidegradation policy is to ensure that the State’s highest quality streams, rivers and lakes are preserved. This document deals with the latter aspect of the antidegradation policy. Section 6111.12(A)(2) of the Ohio Revised Code specifically requires that the Ohio EPA establish provisions “ensuring that waters of exceptional recreational and ecological value are maintained as high quality resources for future generations.” Table 1 explains the proposed classification system to accomplish this directive. The shaded categories denote the special higher resource quality categories. The proposed rule contains 157 stream segments classified as either State Resource Waters (SRW) or Superior High Quality Waters (SHQW). The approximate mileage in each classification is shown in Table 1. The total mileage in both classifications represents less than four percent of Ohio’s streams. Refer to “Methods and Documentation Used to Propose State Resource Water and Superior High Quality Water Classifications for Ohio’s Water Quality Standards” (Ohio EPA, 2002) for further information about the process used to develop the list of streams.
    [Show full text]
  • Newark Earthworks Center - Ohio State University and World Heritage - Ohio Executive Committee INDIANS and EARTHWORKS THROUGH the AGES “We Are All Related”
    Welcoming the Tribes Back to Their Ancestral Lands Marti L. Chaatsmith, Comanche/Choctaw Newark Earthworks Center - Ohio State University and World Heritage - Ohio Executive Committee INDIANS AND EARTHWORKS THROUGH THE AGES “We are all related” Mann 2009 “We are all related” Earthen architecture and mound building was evident throughout the eastern third of North America for millennia. Everyone who lived in the woodlands prior to Removal knew about earthworks, if they weren’t building them. The beautiful, enormous, geometric precision of the Hopewell earthworks were the culmination of the combined brilliance of cultures in the Eastern Woodlands across time and distance. Has this traditional indigenous knowledge persisted in the cultural traditions of contemporary American Indian cultures today? Mann 2009 Each dot represents Indigenous architecture and cultural sites, most built before 1491 Miamisburg Mound is the largest conical burial mound in the USA, built on top of a 100’ bluff, it had a circumference of 830’ People of the Adena Culture built it between 2,800 and 1,800 years ago. 6 Miamisburg, Ohio (Montgomery County) Picture: Copyright: Tom Law, Pangea-Productions. http://pangea-productions.net/ Items found in mounds and trade networks active 2,000 years ago. years 2,000 active networks trade and indicate vast travel Courtesy of CERHAS, Ancient Ohio Trail Inside the 50-acre Octagon at Sunrise 8 11/1/2018 Octagon Earthworks, Newark, OH Indigenous people planned, designed and built the Newark Earthworks (ca. 2000 BCE) to cover an area of 4 square miles (survey map created by Whittlesey, Squier, and Davis, 1837-47) Photo Courtesy of Dan Campbell 10 11/1/2018 Two professors recover tribal knowledge 2,000 years ago, Indigenous people developed specialized knowledge to construct the Octagon Earthworks to observe the complete moon cycle: 8 alignments over a period of 18 years and 219 days (18.6 years) “Geometry and Astronomy in Prehistoric Ohio” Ray Hively and Robert Horn, 1982 Archaeoastronomy (Supplement to Vol.
    [Show full text]
  • An Archaeological Inventory of Alamance County, North Carolina
    AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVENTORY OF ALAMANCE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA Alamance County Historic Properties Commission August, 2019 AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVENTORY OF ALAMANCE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA A SPECIAL PROJECT OF THE ALAMANCE COUNTY HISTORIC PROPERTIES COMMISSION August 5, 2019 This inventory is an update of the Alamance County Archaeological Survey Project, published by the Research Laboratories of Anthropology, UNC-Chapel Hill in 1986 (McManus and Long 1986). The survey project collected information on 65 archaeological sites. A total of 177 archaeological sites had been recorded prior to the 1986 project making a total of 242 sites on file at the end of the survey work. Since that time, other archaeological sites have been added to the North Carolina site files at the Office of State Archaeology, Department of Natural and Cultural Resources in Raleigh. The updated inventory presented here includes 410 sites across the county and serves to make the information current. Most of the information in this document is from the original survey and site forms on file at the Office of State Archaeology and may not reflect the current conditions of some of the sites. This updated inventory was undertaken as a Special Project by members of the Alamance County Historic Properties Commission (HPC) and published in-house by the Alamance County Planning Department. The goals of this project are three-fold and include: 1) to make the archaeological and cultural heritage of the county more accessible to its citizens; 2) to serve as a planning tool for the Alamance County Planning Department and provide aid in preservation and conservation efforts by the county planners; and 3) to serve as a research tool for scholars studying the prehistory and history of Alamance County.
    [Show full text]
  • Ohio Archaeological Inventory Form Instruction Manual
    Ohio Archaeological Inventory Form Instruction Manual With the support of the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Historic Preservation Fund and the Ohio Historic Preservation Office of the Ohio Historical Society Copyright © 2007 Ohio Historical Society, Inc. All rights reserved. The publication of these materials has been made possible in part by a grant from the U.S. Department of the Interior’s National Park Service, administered by the Ohio Historic Preservation Office. However, its contents do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Department of the Interior, nor does the mention of trade names or commercial products imply their endorsement. The Ohio Historic Preservation Office receives federal assistance from the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Historic Preservation Fund. U.S. Department of the Interior regulations prohibit unlawful discrimination in depart- mental federally assisted programs on the basis of race, color, national origin, age or disability. Any person who believes he or she has been discriminated against in any program, activity, or facility operated by a recipient of Federal assistance should write to: Office of Equal Opportunity, U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, 1849 C Street N.W., Washington D.C. 20240. Ohio Historic Preservation Office 567 East Hudson Street Columbus, Ohio 43211-1030 614/ 298-2000 Fax 614/ 298-2037 Visit us at www.ohiohistory.org OAl Rev. June 2003 Table of Contents Introduction and General Instructions 1 Definition of Archaeological Resource (Site) 1 Submitting an Ohio Archaeological Inventory Form 2 Itemized Instructions 3 A. Identification 3 1. Type of Form 3 2.
    [Show full text]