DOCSLIB.ORG

Phase I Archaeological Survey Along

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Phase I Archaeological Survey Along PHASE I By: Dona R. Daugherty ARCHAEOLOGICAL Submitted by: SURVEY FOR PROPOSED CDM Smith 1648 McGrathiana Pkwy IMPROVEMENTS ALONG Suite 340 KY 7 AND KY 1161, Lexington, KY 40511 Prepared for: MORGAN COUNTY, KY Transportation Cabinet Division of Environmental KENTUCKY (KYTC ITEM # Analysis Transportation Cabinet 10-160.00) 200 Mero Street, 5th Floor Frankfort, Kentucky 40622 Kentucky Office of State Archaeology Project Number: FY14-8152 Phase I Archaeological Survey for the Proposed Improvements along KY 7 and KY 1161, Morgan County, Kentucky (KYTC Item # 10-160.00) Authored by Dona R. Daugherty Submitted by CDM Smith 1648 McGrathiana Pkwy, Suite 340 Lexington, KY 40511 Prepared for Client: Kentucky Transportation Cabinet (KYTC) Division of Environmental Analysis Transportation Cabinet 200 Mero Street, 5th Floor Frankfort, Kentucky 40622 ________________________________________ J. Howard Beverly, MA, RPA, GISP Principal Investigator: CDM Smith Contact: (859) 254-5759 Ext. 106 or [email protected] Lead Federal Agency: Federal Highways Administration Kentucky Office of State Archaeology Archaeological Project Number: FY14-8152 Archaeology Report Revised October 2014 August 2014 PRINTED ON ACID-FREE PAPER Abstract At the request of the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet (KYTC), archaeologists from CDM Smith conducted a Phase I archaeological survey for the proposed improvements along KY 7 and KY 1161 in Morgan County, Kentucky (Item Number 10-106.00). The area of potential effect (APE) consisted of 23 acres (9.3 ha) along a portion of KY 7, both north and south of KY 1161, and along a portion of KY 1161, approximately three miles north of West Liberty, Kentucky. The APE was visited by a CDM Smith archaeology crew on July 16th through July 18th, 2014. The archaeological survey involved systematic shovel probe excavation, systematic surface collection, and visual inspection over the entire APE. Three previously unrecorded archaeological sites, 15MO163-15MO165, were identified within the project bounds. None of the sites were deemed potentially eligible for recommendation to the National Register of Historical Places (NRHP) under Criterion D, and no further work was recommended. i Document Code Table of Contents Abstract ...................................................................................................................................................................................... i Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................................................. ii List of Figures.......................................................................................................................................................................... v List of Tables ......................................................................................................................................................................... vi Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................................................... vii Section 1 - Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.1 Project Sponsor and Regulatory Authority ........................................................................................................ 1-1 1.2 Purpose and Scope of Work ...................................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.3 Project Location and Description ........................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.4 Area of Potential Effect (APE) .................................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.5 OSA Records Research ................................................................................................................................................ 1-1 1.6 Principal Investigator .................................................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.7 Field and Laboratory Crew ....................................................................................................................................... 1-5 1.7.1 Field Effort ........................................................................................................................................................... 1-5 1.7.2 Laboratory Effort .............................................................................................................................................. 1-5 1.8 Maps and Figures ........................................................................................................................................................... 1-5 1.9 Curation ............................................................................................................................................................................. 1-5 1.10 Summary of Investigations ..................................................................................................................................... 1-5 Section 2 - Environmental ............................................................................................................................................. 2-1 2.1 Physiography and Topography ............................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Geology ............................................................................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.3 Hydrology ......................................................................................................................................................................... 2-4 2.4 Soils ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 2-6 2.5 Cherts .................................................................................................................................................................................. 2-9 2.6 Prehistoric Climate Conditions................................................................................................................................ 2-9 2.7 Current Climate Conditions ................................................................................................................................... 2-10 2.8 Prehistoric and Present Flora and Fauna ........................................................................................................ 2-10 2.9 Current Land Use ........................................................................................................................................................ 2-11 Section 3 - Cultural Context, Previous Investigation, and Summary of Known Sites .............................. 3-1 3.1 Prehistoric Period ......................................................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1.1 Paleoindian Period ........................................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1.1.1 The Early Paleoindian: Pre-Clovis................................................................................................. 3-2 3.1.1.2 The Early Paleoindian: Clovis ......................................................................................................... 3-3 3.1.1.3 The Middle Paleoindian ..................................................................................................................... 3-4 3.1.1.4 The Late Paleoindian .......................................................................................................................... 3-4 3.1.2 Archaic Period .................................................................................................................................................... 3-5 3.1.2.1 The Early Archaic Period .................................................................................................................. 3-6 3.1.2.2 The Middle Archaic Period ............................................................................................................... 3-6 3.1.2.3 The Late Archaic Period .................................................................................................................... 3-8 3.1.3 Woodland Period .............................................................................................................................................. 3-9 3.1.3.1 Early Woodland .................................................................................................................................. 3-10 3.1.3.2 Middle Woodland .............................................................................................................................. 3-11 3.1.3.3 Late Woodland .................................................................................................................................... 3-13 3.1.4 Late Prehistoric Period ...............................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • Native Sons and Daughters Program Manual
    NATIVE SONS AND DAUGHTERS PROGRAMS® PROGRAM MANUAL National Longhouse, Ltd. National Longhouse, Ltd. 4141 Rockside Road Suite 150 Independence, OH 44131-2594 Copyright © 2007, 2014 National Longhouse, Ltd. All rights reserved. International copyright secured. No part of this manual may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, now known or hereafter invented, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, xerography, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written consent of National Longhouse, Ltd. Printed in the United States of America EDITORS: Edition 1 - Barry Yamaji National Longhouse, Native Sons And Daughters Programs, Native Dads And Sons, Native Moms And Sons, Native Moms And Daughters are registered trademarks of National Longhouse, Ltd. Native Dads And Daughters, Native Sons And Daughters, NS&D Pathfinders are servicemarks of National Longhouse TABLE of CONTENTS FOREWORD xi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS xiii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1 Why NATIVE SONS AND DAUGHTERS® Programs? 2 What Are NATIVE SONS AND DAUGHTERS® Programs? 4 Program Format History 4 Program Overview 10 CHAPTER 2: ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURES 15 Organizational Levels 16 Administrative Levels 17 National Longhouse, Ltd. 18 Regional Advisory Lodge 21 Local Longhouse 22 Nations 24 Tribes 25 CHAPTER 3: THE TRIBE 29 Preparing for a Tribe Meeting 30 Tribe Meetings 32 iii Table of Contents A Sample Tribe Meeting Procedure 34 Sample Closing Prayers 36 Tips for a Successful Meeting 37 The Parents' Meeting 38 CHAPTER 4: AWARDS, PATCHES, PROGRAM
    [Show full text]
  • The Ronald Watson Gravel Site (15Be249): an Examination of the Late Woodland/ Fort Ancient Transition in Boone County, Kentucky
    The Ronald Watson Gravel Site (15Be249): An examination of the Late Woodland/ Fort Ancient transition in Boone County, Kentucky A thesis submitted to the Division of Research and Advanced Studies Of the University of Cincinnati In partial fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS In the Department of Anthropology Of the McMicken College of Arts and Sciences 2006 by Karl Raymond Huebchen B.A., University of Cincinnati, 1992 Committee Chair: Dr. Alan P. Sullivan, III ABSTRACT The Ronald Watson Gravel site (15Be249) is located on a terrace of the Ohio River, in Boone County, Kentucky, just downstream from Cincinnati. Excavated during the early 1990s, initial research suggested inconclusively that a transitional Late Woodland/Fort Ancient occupation may be present. This thesis re-examines a portion of the ceramic collection from the site, and re-evaluates this conclusion. Results of the analysis from feature and surface contexts, in addition to the acquisition of six radiocarbon dates, suggest that the site was occupied during the Late Archaic, Middle Woodland, Late Woodland, and Middle Fort Ancient periods, without conclusive evidence of any transitional occupations. The data were then compared to a southwestern Ohio ceramic chronology, in order to further tighten the periods of occupation at 15Be249. I conclude that sufficient variation exists between the two areas that additional research is needed to develop a detailed ceramic chronology for northern Kentucky. i ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to extend thanks and appreciation to those individuals without whom this thesis would not have been possible. Firstly, I need to recognize the now-defunct University of Cincinnati Center for Cultural Resources Management (UCCCRM) for giving me the opportunity to work at the Watson Gravel site as an undergraduate student in the early 1990s.
    [Show full text]
  • Archaic and Early Woodland Research in the Ohio Country
    Otto FM:Layout 1 9/21/08 2:24 PM Page vii PREFACE Archaeology in the Ohio area, especially relating to societies who were re- sponsible for constructing earthen mounds, holds a significant place in the history of U.S. archaeology. Archaeological inquiry began with the study of those sacred earthen mounds initially built by indigenous societies some three thousand years ago. The American myth of an unknown, imaginary race of nonindigenous peoples responsible for building these dispersed conical mounds, particularly abundant in the middle Ohio Valley, spread with western expan- sion. It was not until Cyrus Thomas’s excavations of many of these mounds in the late nineteenth century that this myth was eventually dispelled, with credit rightfully given to indigenous peoples. A central question posed by the emergent profession of archaeology then became, who were these people? Excavation of the large conical Adena mound in Chillicothe, Ohio, by William Mills in 1901 yielded a richness of funerary ar- tifacts that initiated Adena studies. Continued excavations of earthen conical mounds over the next five decades added to the inventory of material traits that defined the Adena culture, presumed at the time to represent a single, unified tribe analogous to contemporary Native American tribes. These trait lists continued to grow as archaeology refined its chronological placement of cultures, establishing the “Early Woodland” culture as distinct from that of the “Late Archaic” period, which roughly subsumed the transition from no- madic to sedentary archaeological cultures. By the 1960s, archaeologists ac- cepted the Adena as a specific kind of Early Woodland society: a shamanistic, kin-based culture centered along the middle Ohio Valley but with influence— evidenced by their iconic burial mounds—elsewhere in the eastern portion of the continent.
    [Show full text]
  • AANDERSON FERRY. the Anderson
    Encyclopedia of Northern Kentucky in partnership with NKY.com Introduction | A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | Y | Z | Index The Enquirer/Patrick Reddy ANDERSON FERRY. The Anderson Ferry, lo cated on the Ohio River in north- eastern Boone Co between Constance, Ky., and the western part of between Constance, Ky., and the western part of Cincinnati, has been in continuous operation since 1817. George Anderson, born in Maryland in 1765, lived near the the mouth... A (cont’d on pg. 26) The Encyclopedia of Northern Kentucky Contents Introduction, Foreword, Acknowledgments and Guide for Readers Chapters: A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, Y, Z Index, Bibliography, Illustration Credits Edited by Paul A. Tenkotte and James C. Claypool THE UNIVERSITY PRESS OF KENTUCKY Republished for the World Wide Web by NKY.com and Enquirer Media A Project of the Thomas D. Clark Foundation, Inc. Mark A. Neikirk, President Dave Adkisson, Treasurer Sherry Jelsma, Vice President Melanie J. Kilpatrick, Secretary Thomas R. Brumley, Immediate Past President Michael J. Hammons, Past President Board of Directors Dave Adkisson, Frankfort Michael J. Hammons, Park Hills Robert Ted Steinbock, Louisville Jane Beshear, Frankfort Sherry Jelsma, Shelbyville Mrya Leigh Tobin, New York City Thomas R. Brumley, Lexington Martha C. Johnson, Melbourne James M. Wiseman, Erlanger John S. Carroll, Lexington Mark A. Neikirk, Highland Heights Sara W. Combs, Stanton Alice Stevens Sparks, Crescent Springs Editorial Staff Editors in Chief: Paul A.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix C: Environmental Overview
    Appendix C: Environmental Overview Environmental Overview Turkeyfoot Road (KY 1303) From Barnwood Drive to Eastbound I-275 Ramps Kenton County, Kentucky prepared for: Kentucky Transportation Cabinet District 6 May 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................ 1 2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION .............................................................................................. 2 2.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ....................................................................................................................................... 2 2.2 PURPOSE AND NEED STATEMENT ......................................................................................................................... 4 2.3 PROJECT CORRIDOR ........................................................................................................................................... 4 2.4 PROJECT HISTORY ............................................................................................................................................. 5 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PROJECT AREA ....................................... 6 3.1 AIR QUALITY .................................................................................................................................................... 6 3.2 NOISE ............................................................................................................................................................. 6 3.3
    [Show full text]
  • DEC 2 4 2013 Dr
    Department of Energy Portsmouth/Paducah Project Office 1017 Majestic Drive, Suite 200 Lexington, Kentucky 40513 (859) 219-4000 DEC 2 4 2013 Dr. David Snyder PPPO-03-2088012-14 Archaeology Reviews Manager Ohio Historic Preservation Office 1982 Velma Avenue Columbus, Ohio 43211 Dear Dr. Snyder: TRANSMITTAL OF A REPORT ON PREHISTORIC ARCHAEOLOGICAL COMPONENTS IDENTIFIED AT HISTORIC-ERA SITES AT THE PORTSMOUTH GASEOUS DIFFUSION PLANT Enclosed for your information is the report titled "Pre-Historic Archaeological Components Identified at Six Historic-Era Farmstead Sites (33Pk185, 33Pk203, 33Pk206, 33Pk 211, 33Pk217 and 33Pk218) Within the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Pike County Ohio" (RSIIPORTS247). This report summarizes the prehistoric-era archaeological components found while conducting Phase II archaeological investigations on six historic-era farmstead sites (33Pk185, 33Pk203, 33Pk206, 33Pk211, 33Pk217, and 33Pk218) at the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant (PORTS), in Pike County, Ohio and presents the results for your information. The co-location of these temporally separate features is merely coincidental though it does show that some settings, such as those with proximity to water or with broad viewsheds, are desirable over time. Archaeological survey reports of the individual farmsteads and the prehistoric sites discussed in this report have been submitted to the Ohio Historic Preservation Office. Each of the individual reports is referenced in the reference section of the enclosed report. A copy of the subject report is enclosed and an electronic copy can be obtained at the Environmental Information Center by contacting 740-289-8898 or at [email protected]. Additionally, an electronic copy can be found at http://www.pppo.energy.gov/nhpa.html.
    [Show full text]
  • Copyrighted Material
    Index Page numbers for illustrations are in italics; those for tables are in bold. 1st Michigan Cavalry, 214 Adams, John Quincy, 203–204, 206 1st Ohio Volunteer Infantry, 223 Adelphia, 114 2nd Ohio Volunteer Infantry, 223 Adena, 21, 30–36, 39–42, 45–46, 488 4th Ohio Volunteer Infantry, 230 Adrian, Michigan, 182 7th Cavalry, 245 Afghanistan, 480 8th Ohio Infantry, 214, 216, 230 African Americans: in the arts, 374–376; and 9th Ohio Infantry, 214, 216 civil rights, 426–436, 447, 450, 452, 37th Infantry Division, 350, 393 455–456; and the Civil War, 216, 220–221, 54th Massachusetts Infantry, 215, 216 223, 226, 227, 229, 232; in contemporary 55th Massachusetts Infantry, 215, 216, 232, society, 458, 459, 468, 471, 473, 476, 478, 374 482, 484; in early Ohio, 122, 134, 137, 147, 127th Ohio Volunteer Infantry (5th U.S. 148, 152, 190, 198; in early 20th-century Colored Infantry), 215, 216 political reform, 333, 335, 336; in the era of 372nd Infantry Division, 350 industrialization, 302–307, 310, 321, 333, 335; and the Great Depression, 378, Abenaki Indians, 57 386–387; and the “Great Migration,” 353; abolition, 142–143,COPYRIGHTED 145, 147–148, 155–158, and MATERIAL late 19th-century politics, 266, 275, 278; 226, 236, 239–240, 245; abolitionists, 125, and post-World War II society, 404–410, 139, 149, 208–210, 215–221, 231, 333, 414, 417; in sports, 321, 323, 399; and 335 Reconstruction, 240–241, 244, 246; and abortion, 437, 439–440, 468, 471, 477–478, World War II, 392–393 482 African Methodist Episcopal Church, 149, acid rain, 17, 470 335 Adams County, 13 Agricultural Adjustment Act (AAA), 381 Adams, John, 121, 194 agricultural tile, 15 Ohio: A History of the Buckeye State, First Edition.
    [Show full text]
  • Results of the Phase III Data Recovery of 33PK347, Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Pike
    Department of Energy Portsmouth/Paducah Project Office 1017 Majestic Drive, Suite 200 Lexington, Kentucky 40513 (859) 219-4000 JUL 2 1 2017 Dr. David Snyder PPP0-03-4334897-17 Archaeology Reviews Manager Ohio History Connection State Historic Preservation Office 800 East 17th A venue Columbus, Ohio 43211 Dear Dr. Snyder: TRANSMITTAL OF THE REPORT OF THE PHASE III DATA RECOVERY OF 33PK347 AT THE PORTSMOUTH GASEOUS DIFFUSION PLANT Enclosed for your information is the report, Results ofthe Phase III Data Recovery at Site 33PK347, Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Pike County, Ohio. Site 33PK347 was recommended to be considered a historic property following Phase I and Phase II surveys that took place in 2011 and 2012. Recovery of the site and preparation of a technical report fulfill a commitment made by the Department of Energy (DOE) in the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation Liability Act (CERCLA) Record of Decision for the Site-Wide Waste Disposition Evaluation Project. Adverse impacts to Site 33PK347 occurred as a result of the selection of the location for siting the On-Site Waste Disposal Facility (OSWDF). Mitigation for the adverse effects included the recovery of the archaeological site prior to the construction of the OSWDF and preparation of a technical report to document the data recovery processes and results. The site recovery took place in August 2015, prior to initiation of OSWDF construction, in the area of the archaeological site and was preceded by coordination with the Tribal Nations and with the State Historic Preservation Office. In addition to documenting the results and findings of the recovery, the report also provides a comprehensive summary of the results from the Phase I and Phase II surveys.
    [Show full text]
  • A Late Archaic Maple Creek Phase Site in Southern Ohio
    The Yellowbush Creek Camp Site (33Ms29), A Late Archaic Maple Creek phase site in Southern Ohio By: Craig S. Keener, Kevin Nye, and Joshua Niedermier Professional Archaeological Services Team Introduction The purpose of this presentation is to summarize some of the recent findings at the Yellowbush Creek Camp site (33Ms29) located on a terrace beside the Ohio River near the Village of Racine in Meigs County, Ohio (Figure 1). The dominant component at the site is a significant late Late Archaic deposit associated with the Maple Creek phase that has a two-sigma calibrated date range between 1916 B.C. and 1267 B.C. A secondary Late Woodland to Late Prehistoric component is also present. Before turning to the findings at 33Ms29 a historical perspective of Maple Creek phase is provided below. Figure 1. Location of 33Ms29 on the USGS 1968 (PR 1987) New Haven Quadrangle, W.Va.-OH, 7.5 Minute Series (Topographic) map. The Maple Creek Phase The Maple Creek phase, centered in southwest Ohio, was first defined by Vickery (1976, 1980) as a regional manifestation of Winters’s (1969) Riverton Culture. Winters’s model is based on Late Archaic settlement patterns along the Wabash Valley of east central Illinois that date between 1590 B.C. and 1160 B.C. Using radiocarbon dates from the Maple Creek site (33Ct52) and temporally diagnostic artifacts such as Merom-Trimble points Vickery placed the date range of the Maple Creek phase between 1700 B.C. and 1000 B.C. In addition to the Merom-Trimble point styles, McWhinney points were also common.
    [Show full text]
  • Prehistoric Survey Reports for Survey Areas 1-6, As Well As One Phase II Prehistoric Survey Report on Survey Areas 2 and 6B
    Department of Energy Portsmouth/Paducah Project Office 101 7 Majestic Dri ve, Suite 200 Lexington, Kentucky 40513 (859) 219-4000 JUL 3 1 2014 DISTRIBUTION LIST PPPO-03-2392594-14 Dear Madams/Sirs: TRANS MITT AL OF THE PHASE II ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY REPORTS ON SELECTED AREAS RESULTING IN IDENTIFICATION OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES AT THE PORTSMOUTH GASEOUS DIFFUSION PLANT,PIKE COUNTY, OHIO One archaeological report is enclosed for your information: Phase 11 Archaeological Investigations of 33PK347, 33PK348, 33PK349, 33PK37I, and 33PK372 within the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffilsion Plant (PORTS), Pike County, Ohio. Beginning in 1996, the U.S. Depaltment of Energy (DOE) has conducted a number of cultural resource surveys at PORTS. The surveys were conducted for purposes of identifying historic propelties, pursuant to Section 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act. In 20 II, DOE initiated additional archaeological surveys with the intention of completing a uniform identification process for the PORTS reservation. The field work was completed in late 2012. For survey management purposes, PORTS was divided into six areas (areas 1-6) with fUlther subdivision of areas 4,5 and 6 into areas 4A, 4B, SA, 5B, 6A, and 6B. The survey work resulted in preparation of six Phase I prehistoric survey reports for survey areas 1-6, as well as one Phase II prehistoric survey report on survey areas 2 and 6B. The Phase II summary report for Area 2 and Area 6B is attached. As indicated above, historic properties were identified in the areas surveyed and documented in the enclosed summary report which exclude sensitive archaeological site location information.
    [Show full text]
  • Evolutionary Perspectives for the Analysis of Prehistoric Lithic Artifacts: an Example from the Western Highland Rim of Tennessee
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Masters Theses Graduate School 5-1994 Evolutionary Perspectives for the Analysis of Prehistoric Lithic Artifacts: An Example from the Western Highland Rim of Tennessee Andrew P. Bradbury University of Tennessee, Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes Part of the Anthropology Commons Recommended Citation Bradbury, Andrew P., "Evolutionary Perspectives for the Analysis of Prehistoric Lithic Artifacts: An Example from the Western Highland Rim of Tennessee. " Master's Thesis, University of Tennessee, 1994. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/4117 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Andrew P. Bradbury entitled "Evolutionary Perspectives for the Analysis of Prehistoric Lithic Artifacts: An Example from the Western Highland Rim of Tennessee." I have examined the final electronic copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Master of Arts, with a major in Anthropology. Charles H. Faulkner, Major Professor We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: Jan F. Simek, Walter E. Klippel Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Andrew P.
    [Show full text]