DOCSLIB.ORG

Module 3: Guidelines for Use by Historic Preservation Professionals

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Module 3: Guidelines for Use by Historic Preservation Professionals Cultural Resource Management Standards & Operational Manual i Module Three Guidelines for Use by Historic Preservation Professionals MODULE THREE TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT SURVEYS (PHASE I) 3 2.1 INTRODUCTION 3 2.1.1 Other Survey Types 4 2.1.2 Defining the Area of Potential Effect (APE) 5 2.2 BACKGROUND RESEARCH 7 2.2.1 Florida Master Site File (FMSF) 7 2.2.2 Survey and Registration Section 9 2.2.3 Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) 9 2.2.4 Other State, Regional, and Local Sources 9 2.3 RESEARCH DESIGN 10 2.3.1 Predictive Model Formulation for Archaeological Sites 11 2.3.2 Historic Structures Considerations 12 2.3.3 Methodology and Site Evaluation Criteria 13 2.4 ARCHAEOLOGICAL FIELD SURVEY 14 2.4.1 Introduction 14 2.4.2 Survey Methods 15 2.4.3 Unanticipated Discoveries of Human Remains 20 2.5 HISTORIC STRUCTURES SURVEY 21 2.5.1 Introduction 21 2.5.2 Survey Methods 21 2.6 ARTIFACT PROCESSING AND ANALYSIS/CURATION 24 2.6.1 Introduction 24 2.6.2 Processing 24 2.6.3 Artifact Analyses 24 2.6.4 Curation 26 2.7 CRAS REPORTS 26 2.7.1 Introduction 26 2.7.2 Completeness and Sufficiency Criteria 27 2.7.3 Report Contents 30 2.8 ACCOMPANYING DELIVERABLES 37 2.9 TECHNICAL MEMORANDA AND OTHER REPORTING FORMATS 38 2.10 SUBMISSION FOR REVIEW 39 2.11 SPECIAL PROJECT TYPES 39 2.11.1 Reconnaissance Assessments 39 2.11.2 Cellular Tower Projects 40 2.11.3 Submerged Cultural Resources and Remote Sensing Surveys 42 Cultural Resource Management Standards & Operational Manual ii Module Three Guidelines for Use by Historic Preservation Professionals MODULE THREE TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.) Page 3.0 ARCHAEOLOGICAL TEST EXCAVATION (PHASE II) 46 3.1 INTRODUCTION 46 3.2 BACKGROUND RESEARCH 46 3.3 RESEARCH DESIGN 47 3.4 FIELD METHODS 47 3.5 ARTIFACT PROCESSING AND ANALYSIS/CURATION 48 3.6 DOCUMENTATION 48 4.0 ARCHAEOLOGICAL MITIGATION, INCLUDING MITIGATIVE EXCAVATION (PHASE III) 50 4.1 INTRODUCTION 50 4.2 MITIGATION ALTERNATIVES 50 4.3 TYPES OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES 52 4.3.1 Artifact Scatters 52 4.3.2 Black Earth Middens 53 4.3.3 Shell Middens 54 4.3.4 Sand Mounds and Earthworks 54 4.3.5 Mortuary/Cemetery Sites 55 4.3.6 Historic Archaeological Sites 55 4.3.7 Underwater Sites 56 4.4 MITIGATIVE EXCAVATION 56 4.4.1 Principles 57 4.4.2 Recommended Approach 58 4.5 RESEARCH DESIGN 60 4.5.1 Elements of a Research Design 61 4.5.2 Submittal of a Research Design 66 4.6 EXCAVATION PROCEDURES 66 4.6.1 Topographic Mapping 67 4.6.2 Grid Systems 67 4.6.3 Broad Scale Testing 68 4.6.4 Data Recovery Through Controlled Excavation 69 4.6.5 Recording 72 4.7 ARTIFACT AND DATA ANALYSIS/CURATION 74 4.7.1 Preliminary Processing and Cataloging 74 4.7.2 Artifact and Data Analysis 75 4.7.3 Curation 79 4.8 DOCUMENTATION 80 Cultural Resource Management Standards & Operational Manual iii Module Three Guidelines for Use by Historic Preservation Professionals MODULE THREE TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.) Page 5.0 THE NRHP AND EVALUATING SITE SIGNIFICANCE 82 5.1 INTRODUCTION 82 5.1.1 NRHP Program Description 82 5.1.2 Nomination Procedures 83 5.2 THE NRHP CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION 84 5.3 STATE SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA 85 5.4 NRHP CRITERIA CONSIDERATIONS 85 5.5 INTEGRITY 86 5.6 WHAT IS A SIGNIFICANT CULTURAL RESOURCE? 87 5.6.1 Archaeological Sites 87 5.6.2 Historic Resources 90 5.7 NOMINATING SITES TO THE NRHP 92 5.7.1 Preliminary Steps 92 5.7.2 Suggestions for Background Research 93 5.7.3 Instructions for Completing the NRHP Registration Form 94 5.7.4 Additional Documentation 97 5.8 PREPARING MULTIPLE PROPERTY SUBMISSIONS 98 5.8.1 Introduction 98 5.8.2 Completing the Multiple Property Documentation Form 99 5.9 REQUESTS FOR DETERMINATION OF ELIGIBILITY 101 6.0 EFFECTS DETERMINATIONS AND CASE REPORTS 102 6.1 OVERVIEW 102 6.2 SECTION 106 CONSULTATION CASE REPORT 102 6.2.1 Introduction 102 6.2.2 Components of the Case Report 103 6.3 DETERMINING EFFECTS 104 6.3.1 Applying the Criteria of Adverse Effect 104 6.3.2 No Historic Properties Affected 105 6.3.3 Historic Properties Affected 106 6.3.4 No Historic Properties Adversely Affected 106 6.3.5 Historic Properties are Adversely Affected 107 6.4 RESOLVING ADVERSE EFFECTS 108 7.0 PREPARING AGREEMENT DOCUMENTS 111 7.1 INTRODUCTION 111 7.2 AGREEMENT-BASED DETERMINATIONS OF NO ADVERSE EFFECT 111 Cultural Resource Management Standards & Operational Manual iv Module Three Guidelines for Use by Historic Preservation Professionals MODULE THREE TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.) Page 7.3 MEMORANDA OF AGREEMENT 112 7.4 PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENTS 115 Exhibit 1: Check List for a Good Agreement Document Under 36 CFR Part 800 116 Exhibit 2: Example No Adverse Effect Determination 122 Exhibit 3: Example Three-Party MOA 124 Exhibit 4: Example Two-Party MOA 128 Exhibit 5: Example Programmatic Agreement 132 8.0 MITIGATION MEASURES FOR HISTORIC RESOURCES 135 8.1 INTRODUCTION 135 8.2 DOCUMENTATION 136 8.3 REHABILITATION AND RESTORATION 140 8.4 PRESERVATION AND MAINTENANCE 142 8.5 SALVAGE 144 8.6 OFF-SITE MITIGATION 144 Exhibit 6: Architectural History and Historical Narrative Form 146 Cultural Resource Management Standards & Operational Manual 1 Module Three Guidelines for Use by Historic Preservation Professionals 1.0 INTRODUCTION Module Three of the Manual contains guidelines for the identification, evaluation, recordation, and treatment of cultural resources for use by historic preservation professionals conducting work in compliance with federal, state, and local laws, rules, and regulations. The primary legal authorities on the federal and state levels are Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, as implemented by 36 CFR Part 800, Chapter 267, Florida Statutes (F.S.), and Rule 1A-46, F.A.C. The intent is to foster quality assurance through the standardization of work and reporting requirements. Exclusive of the Introduction (Section 1), Module Three is divided into seven major sections, which address the following: • Section 2 provides a detailed look at the site assessment survey (Phase I) process for both archaeological and historic resources. • Section 3 focuses on archaeological test excavation (Phase II). • Section 4 describes the mitigation alternatives for archaeological sites, including excavation and data recovery (Phase III). • Section 5 explains how identified cultural resources are evaluated as per their eligibility for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). It includes a “how to” for nominating individual properties, districts and multiple properties to the NRHP. • Section 6 explains the effects determination process, and includes information on the preparation of Section 106 Consultation Case Study Reports. • Section 7 provides guidance on the preparation of agreement documents, including agreement-based determinations of no adverse effect, memoranda of agreement, and programmatic agreements. • Section 8 examines the ways in which adverse effects to significant historic resources may be avoided, minimized, or mitigated. Module Three incorporates the guidance contained in a number of existing documents. Hyperlinks are provided for easy navigation to the primary source documents, which include some of the following: • The Historic Preservation Compliance Review Program of the Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources (November 1990, final draft) • Florida Rule Chapter 1A-46 (2002) (Archaeological and Historical Report Standards and Guidelines) • The Florida Department of Transportation’s Cultural Resource Management Handbook (1995, revised 2001) • 36 CFR Part 800 (Protection of Historic Properties) • 36 CFR Part 60 (National Register of Historic Places) • 36 CFR Part 63 (Determinations of eligibility for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places) Cultural Resource Management Standards & Operational Manual 2 Module Three Guidelines for Use by Historic Preservation Professionals • 36 CFR Part 68 (Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties) • 36 CFR Part 79 (Curation of Federally-Owned and Administered Archaeological Collections) • 43 CFR Part 10 (NAGPRA Regulations) • Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation (48 FR 44716) • Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archaeological Documentation • Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Architectural and Engineering Documentation • Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Preservation Planning • Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation • Various “How To” Bulletins published by the U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service (NPS) • Preparing Agreement Documents (Advisory Council on Historic Preservation [ACHP], 1988) • Recommended Approach for Consultation on Recovery of Significant Information from Archaeological Sites (64 FR 27085-87, ACHP 1999) • National Register Handbook (1996) prepared by the staff of the Survey and Registration Section of the DHR • Guidelines for Section 106 Review of Proposed Cellular Tower Locations (DHR) • Florida’s Cultural Heritage: A View of the Past (DHR) • More Than Orange Marmalade: A Statewide Comprehensive Historic Preservation Plan (DHR) • Documentation Requirements for Buildings Proposed for Demolition and Standards for Architectural Documentation (DHR) • Performance Standards for Submerged Remote Sensing Surveys • Minimum Documentation for State and Local Reviews Cultural Resource Management Standards & Operational Manual 3 Module Three Guidelines for Use by Historic Preservation Professionals 2.0 CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT SURVEYS (PHASE I) 2.1 INTRODUCTION The Cultural Resource Assessment Survey (CRAS), also known as a Phase I survey, is the only type of survey which satisfies the historic preservation requirements of federal and state laws and regulations (e.g., Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and 36 CFR Part 800; Chapter 267, F.S.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • View / Open Gregory Oregon 0171N 12796.Pdf
    CHUNKEY, CAHOKIA, AND INDIGENOUS CONFLICT RESOLUTION by ANNE GREGORY A THESIS Presented to the Conflict and Dispute Resolution Program and the Graduate School of the University of Oregon in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science June 2020 THESIS APPROVAL PAGE Student: Anne Gregory Title: Chunkey, Cahokia, and Indigenous Conflict Resolution This thesis has been accepted and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Science degree in the Conflict and Dispute Resolution Program by: Kirby Brown Chair Eric Girvan Member and Kate Mondloch Interim Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School Original approval signatures are on file with the University of Oregon Graduate School. Degree awarded June 2020. ii © 2020 Anne Gregory This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs (United States) License. iii THESIS ABSTRACT Anne Gregory Master of Science Conflict and Dispute Resolution June 2020 Title: Chunkey, Cahokia, and Indigenous Conflicts Resolution Chunkey, a traditional Native American sport, was a form of conflict resolution. The popular game was one of several played for millennia throughout Native North America. Indigenous communities played ball games not only for the important culture- making of sport and recreation, but also as an act of peace-building. The densely populated urban center of Cahokia, as well as its agricultural suburbs and distant trade partners, were dedicated to chunkey. Chunkey is associated with the milieu surrounding the Pax Cahokiana (1050 AD-1200 AD), an era of reduced armed conflict during the height of Mississippian civilization (1000-1500 AD). The relational framework utilized in archaeology, combined with dynamics of conflict resolution, provides a basis to explain chunkey’s cultural impact.
    [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]
  • Florida Historical Quarterly (ISSN 0015-4113) Is Published Quarterly by the Flor- Ida Historical Society, University of South Florida, 4202 E
    COVER The railway depot at Tallahassee. Sketch by Francis de Castelnau, in Vues et Souvenirs: de l'Amerique du Nord (1842). Illustration courtesy Florida Photographic Collection, Florida State Archives. The Volume LXXIII, Number 4 April 1995 The Florida Historical Quarterly (ISSN 0015-4113) is published quarterly by the Flor- ida Historical Society, University of South Florida, 4202 E. Fowler Avenue, Tampa, FL 33620, and is printed by E.O. Painter Printing Co., DeLeon Springs, FL. Second- class postage paid at Tampa, FL, and at additional mailing office. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to the Florida Historical Quarterly, P.O. Box 290197, Tampa, FL 33687-0197 Copyright 1995 by the Florida Historical Society, Tampa, Florida. THE FLORIDA HISTORICAL QUARTERLY Samuel Proctor, Acting Editor Mark I. Greenberg, Assistant Editor EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD Raymond O. Arsenault, University of South Florida, St. Petersburg William S. Coker, University of West Florida David R. Colburn, University of Florida James B. Crooks, University of North Florida Kathleen Deagan, University of Florida Wayne Flynt, Auburn University Michael V. Gannon, University of Florida Maxine D. Jones, Florida State University Harry A. Kersey, Jr., Florida Atlantic University Jane Landers, Vanderbilt University Eugene Lyon, Flagler College John K. Mahon, University of Florida Raymond A. Mohl, Florida Atlantic University Gary R. Mormino, University of South Florida Theda Perdue, University of Kentucky Gerald E. Poyo, St. Mary’s University Joe M. Richardson, Florida State University William W. Rogers, Florida State University Daniel L. Schafer, University of North Florida Correspondence concerning contribution, books for review, and all editorial matters should be addressed to the Editor, Florida Historical Quarterly, Box 14045, University Station, Gainesville, FL 32604-2045.
    [Show full text]
  • One of the Most Striking Aspects of the Clovis Period Is the Enigmatic Caches That Occur Throughout the Western United States
    J. David Kilby Candidate Anthropology Department This dissertation is approved, and it is acceptable in quality and form for publication on microfilm: Approved by the Dissertation Committee: , Chairperson Accepted: Dean, Graduate School Date AN INVESTIGATION OF CLOVIS CACHES: CONTENT, FUNCTION, AND TECHNOLOGICAL ORGANIZATION BY J. DAVID KILBY B.A., Anthropology, Appalachian State University, 1992 M.A., Anthropology, Eastern New Mexico University, 1998 DISSERTATION Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Anthropology The University of New Mexico Albuquerque, New Mexico July, 2008 ©2008, David Kilby iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Dr. Bruce Huckell, who provided focus, support, and guidance throughout the pursuit of my doctorate, along with dissertation co-chair, Dr. Lawrence Straus, and committee members Drs. Chip Wills and David Meltzer (Southern Methodist University). This research would not have been possible without the access to collections, sites, and information provided by both archaeological professionals and non- archaeologists. I wish to thank Michael Collins (University of Texas) for access to the Keven Davis and de Graffenried collections, as well information and guidance along the way; Joanne Dickenson and John Montgomery (Eastern New Mexico University) for access to assemblages from Blackwater Draw; Dan Busse (Bird City, Kansas) and Jack Hofman (University of Kansas) for access to the Busse assemblage; Dennis Stanford and Peggi Jodry
    [Show full text]
  • A Historical Atlas of Cahokia Archaeology
    The Cahokia Atlas A Historical Atlas of Cahokia Archaeology Mclvin f bwler '„ -^<P»P<> o o fa ^cP g) Q « ^ r,H.mt.,ltm /V»»J.—rf : / ^ Studies in Illinois Archaeology No. 6 Illinois Historic I*reservation Agency SURVEY. lamOlS HISTORlCAt ^<o-^^ THE CAHOKIA ATLAS STUDIES IN ILLINOIS ARCHAEOLOGY NUMBER 6 Thomas E. Emerson, Series Editor Michael D. Conner, Center for American Archeology, Volume Editor THE CAHOKIA ATLAS A Historical Atlas of Cahokia Archaeology Melvin L. Fowler 111 Illinios Historic Preservation Agency Springfield, Illinois ISBN 0-942579-06-2 Illinois Historic Preservation Agency Printed by Authority of the State of Illinois November 1989 This publication was financed in part with federal funds provided by the U.S. Department of the Interior and administered by the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency. However, the contents and opinions do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the U.S. Department of the Interior or the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency. TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures ix List of Tables xiv Acknowledgments xv Foreward xvi CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1 Introduction to Cahokia Archaeology 12 CHAPTER 2: HISTORY OF INVESTIGATIONS OF THE CAHOKIA SITE 15 CHAPTER 3: THE MAPS OF CAHOKIA 44 CHAPTER 4: DESCRIPTIONS OF MOUNDS 1-37 62 Mound 1 62 Mound 2 62 Mound 3 64 Mound 4 64 Mound 5 64 Mound 6 68 Mound 7 68 Mound 8 70 Mound 9 70 Mounds 10 and 11 70 Mound 12 72 Mounds 13, 14, 15, and 16 72 Mound 17 75 Mound 18 77 Mound 19 79 Mound 20 79 Mound 21 80 Mound 22 80 Mound 23 80 Mound 24 80 Mound 25 82 Mound
    [Show full text]
  • Morphological Variability in Clovis Hafted Bifaces
    MORPHOLOGICAL VARIABILITY IN CLOVIS HAFTED BIFACES ACROSS NORTH AMERICA By JUSTIN PATRICK WILLIAMS A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Anthropology MAY 2016 ©Copyright by JUSTIN PATRICK WILLIAMS, 2016 All Rights Reserved ©Copyright by JUSTIN PATRICK WILLIAMS, 2016 All Rights Reserved To the Faculty of Washington State University: The members of the Committee appointed to examine the dissertation of JUSTIN PATRICK WILLIAMS find it satisfactory and recommend that it be accepted. _____________________________________ William Andrefsky, Jr., Ph.D., Chair _____________________________________ Colin Grier, Ph.D. _____________________________________ Luke Premo, Ph.D. _____________________________________ David Anderson, Ph.D. ii Acknowledgements There are so many people who helped with this and somehow I have to thank them on a couple pages. First off I have to thank all of the museums, individuals, and organizations, each with their own wonderful staff, who allowed me to work with their artifacts. This long list includes: The Milwaukee Public Museum, The Gilcrease Museum, The Iowa Office of the State Archaeologist, The brave souls who work on the PIDBA, The Washington State Museum of Anthropology, The Gault Archeological Project, University of Oregon Museum of Natural and Cultural History, The Alabama Archaeological Society, The Office of Archaeological Research at The University of Alabama, the Grave Creek Mound Archaeological Complex, Idaho Museum of Natural History, Wyoming State Museum, the Amerind Museum and Research Center, the Montana Historical Society, David Thulman, and Ashley Smallwood. I really fear I left folks out and if so I am sorry! To Mike Mucio who taught me how to find a feature.
    [Show full text]
  • An Archaeological Model of the Construction of Monks Mound And
    Washington University in St. Louis Washington University Open Scholarship All Theses and Dissertations (ETDs) January 2010 An Archaeological Model of the Construction of Monks Mound and Implications for the Development of the Cahokian Society (800 - 1400 A.D.) Timothy Schilling Washington University in St. Louis Follow this and additional works at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/etd Recommended Citation Schilling, Timothy, "An Archaeological Model of the Construction of Monks Mound and Implications for the Development of the Cahokian Society (800 - 1400 A.D.)" (2010). All Theses and Dissertations (ETDs). 313. https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/etd/313 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by Washington University Open Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Theses and Dissertations (ETDs) by an authorized administrator of Washington University Open Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY IN ST. LOUIS Department of Anthropology Dissertation Examination Committee: Tristram R. Kidder, Chair David L. Browman Michael D. Frachetti Gayle J. Fritz John E. Kelly Jennifer R. Smtih Gregory Vogel AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL MODEL OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF MONKS MOUND AND IMPLICATIONS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CAHOKIAN SOCIETY (800 – 1400 A.D.) by Timothy Michael Schilling A Dissertation presented to the Graduate School of Arts and Science of Washington University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy December 2010 Saint Louis, Missouri Copyright by Timothy Michael Schilling December 2010 Abstract This dissertation presents a model for the development of Cahokian society through the lens of monumental construction. Previous models of Cahokian society have emphasized the accumulation of individual power and domination of the many by a few.
    [Show full text]
  • Cahokia Finding
    Cahokia Cataloging and Rehousing PRojeCt Finding Aids This project will assist ISAS in organizing our large collection from the World Heritage Cahokia site that includes materials from some of the earliest work at this mound center under U of I researchers A.R. Kelly and W. Moorehead in the 1930s as well as major excavations by long- time University of Illinois professor Charles J. Bareis. This project is supported by a grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities, 1 Grants to Preserve and Create Access § Contents Principal Investigators for the Cahokia Collection ............................................................................... 1 11MS2/4 Bareis 11MS2/4 Bareis 1965 .................................................................................................................. 2 11MS2/4 Bareis 1973-74 ............................................................................................................ 3 11S34/5 by Bareis 1962 ......................................................................................................................... 4 American Zinc Company property 1965 ............................................................................................... 6 Black Lane 1985 .................................................................................................................................... 7 Cahokia Cahokia north half, unknown ...................................................................................................... 8 Cahokia, General Documents ....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Vacant Quarter Revisited: Late Mississippian Abandonment of the Lower Ohio Valley Author(S): Charles R
    The Vacant Quarter Revisited: Late Mississippian Abandonment of the Lower Ohio Valley Author(s): Charles R. Cobb and Brian M. Butler Source: American Antiquity, Vol. 67, No. 4 (Oct., 2002), pp. 625-641 Published by: Cambridge University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1593795 Accessed: 18-09-2017 03:13 UTC REFERENCES Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1593795?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://about.jstor.org/terms Cambridge University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to American Antiquity This content downloaded from 132.174.250.143 on Mon, 18 Sep 2017 03:13:35 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms THE VACANT QUARTER REVISITED: LATE MISSISSIPPIAN ABANDONMENT OF THE LOWER OHIO VALLEY Charles R. Cobb and Brian M. Butler The idea that a substantial portion of the North American midcontinent centered on the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers conflu- ence was largely depopulated around A.D. 1450-1550-Stephen Williams's "Vacant Quarter" hypothesis-has been generally accepted by archaeologists.
    [Show full text]
  • Thornhill Lake: Hunter-Gatherers, Monuments, and Memory
    THORNHILL LAKE: HUNTER-GATHERERS, MONUMENTS, AND MEMORY By JON C. ENDONINO A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2010 1 © 2010 Jon C. Endonino 2 To Heather 3 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Many individuals have contributed in innumerable ways to the successful completion of this dissertation. First, my committee chair Ken Sassaman deserves credit for guiding me throughout graduate school and believing in me and my abilities as an archaeologist, that confidence is the highest of compliments. My committee members Peter Schmidt, Mike Heckenberger, and Julianna Barr have my sincerest thanks for their willingness to serve and contributions great and small. Access to the Thornhill Lake Site and the Lake Monroe Conservation Area was provided by the St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) through a Special Use Authorization. Archaeological research on SJRWMD lands was carried out under a 1A-32 permit allowing archaeological research on State lands by the Bureau of Archaeological Research, Florida Division of Historical Resources. Many thanks are owed to State Archaeologist Ryan Wheeler and Bureau employees Brenda Swann, Andrea White, and Briana Delano and Sharyn Heiland for all their assistance. Funding for field work was provided by a Lewis and Clark Travel and Research Grant from the American Philosophical Society and a Survey and Planning grant from the Florida Division of Historical Resources (Grant No. SO758). A John W. Griffin Award from the Florida Archaeological Council with matching funds from Southeastern Archaeological Research (SEARCH) and Jerald Milanich was used to conduct collections research at the Smithsonian curation facility in Suitland, Maryland.
    [Show full text]
  • Archaeobotanical Analyses of the Winterville Mounds Site (22Ws500) and Other Southeastern Ceremonial Complexes
    The University of Southern Mississippi The Aquila Digital Community Master's Theses Fall 2019 Archaeobotanical Analyses of the Winterville Mounds Site (22ws500) and Other Southeastern Ceremonial Complexes Dana Hauffe University of Southern Mississippi Follow this and additional works at: https://aquila.usm.edu/masters_theses Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons Recommended Citation Hauffe, Dana, "Archaeobotanical Analyses of the Winterville Mounds Site (22ws500) and Other Southeastern Ceremonial Complexes" (2019). Master's Theses. 689. https://aquila.usm.edu/masters_theses/689 This Masters Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by The Aquila Digital Community. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of The Aquila Digital Community. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ARCHAEOBOTANICAL ANALYSES OF THE WINTERVILLE MOUNDS SITE (22WS500) AND OTHER SOUTHEASTERN CEREMONIAL COMPLEXES by Dana Hauffe A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate School, the College of Education and Human Sciences and the School of Social Science and Global Studies at The University of Southern Mississippi in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts Approved by: Dr. Marie Danforth, Committee Chair Dr. Bridget Hayden Dr. Homer Edwin Jackson Dr. Daniel Ladu ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ Dr. Marie Danforth Dr. Edward Sayre Dr. Karen S. Coats Committee Chair Director of School Dean of the Graduate School December 2019 COPYRIGHT BY Dana Hauffe 2019 Published by the Graduate School ABSTRACT The prehistoric Southeast region of the United States has had very limited archaeobotanical research focused on botanicals’ medicinal or ritualistic characteristics. An analysis of reported botanical remains recovered from Winterville Mounds (22WS500) and seventy- two other Late Woodland and Mississippian sites, from seven states, was conducted to identify their potential medicinal and ritual use of seventy-five botanicals based on reported ethnobotanical evidence.
    [Show full text]
  • The Organic Clovis: a Single Continent-Wide Cultural Adaptation
    THE ORGANIC CLOVIS: A SINGLE CONTINENT-WIDE CULTURAL ADAPTATION By CHRISTOPHER ANDREW HEMMINGS A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2004 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS A list of individuals who have made it possible to complete this document would be as large again as the bibliography. To all of my fellow archaeologists, anthropologists, bike racers, friends and family I extend my most heartfelt gratitude for engaging in or suffering through endless Clovis, Paleoindian, and “Do you know why this bone is important” discussions. It is quite humbling to realize how many people have buoyed my spirits, aided materially, and even provided shelter during this process. If this work has any merit, and I have become fit to create more, it is due in large part to the opportunity provided by those who helped me get this far. If I am able to create similar opportunity for others the opportunities provided for me shall not have been wasted. Beyond a shadow of a doubt S. David Webb stands alone as mentor, supporter, and friend. The debt of gratitude I owe William O. Gifford is as equally profound. Lacking the assistance of these two individuals, pursuit of the endless dissertation would have ended. Unable to articulate my thanks adequately I simply continue to forge ahead, as they have helped me do for so long. 11 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ii LIST OF TABLES v LIST OF FIGURES vii ABSTRACT x CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION,
    [Show full text]