DOCSLIB.ORG

Archaeological Survey of Three Tracts in Edgecombe, Nash, and Vance Counties, North Carolina

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF THREE TRACTS IN EDGECOMBE, NASH, AND VANCE COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA -. ~ 1 i ~-~!}4~$~ ~· ... ·~t :·~~%.t.(L~• • • ' .... ·~ :\\~:sr./ c~µt ~~!~'>·~ ':~.""¥ ! . ?ffl'l,',fi~';JP<~t~!I" :·.. ·:· I .. - '. ., ~i ' ' - . '. ; . - ' ... f l ' ' CHICORA RESEARCH CONTRIBUTION 277 @ 2001 by Chicora Foundation, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted, or transcribed in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherWfse without prtor permission of Chicora Foundation, Inc. except for brtef quotations used In reviews. Full a-edit must be given to !he authors, publisher, and project sponsor. ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF THREE TRACTS IN EDGECOMBE, NASH, AND VANCE COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA Prepared for: Mr. Bob Froneberger ARCADIS Geraghty c~ Miller, Inc. 420 Park Avenue Greenville, South Carolina 29601 Prepared by: Rachel Campo, RPA and Michael Trinkley, Ph.D., RPA CHICORA RESEARCH CONTRIBUTION 276 doj.lllb ~ : ,....,,......, Chicora Foundation, Inc. ~~wV.I!rr ~.o. Box s664 • ~61 Arbutus Drive ___. 11~ / Columbia,. South LaroUna 2Q202 11 . / 803/787-b910 1 · r Email: [email protected] July 2b,l q99 ABSTRACT Tb study reports on an intensive addition, no National Register properlies were archaeological survey of three tracts of land in identified in the immediate project areas. A. a result of Edgecon1be1 Nash, and Vance Counties in North -this study, a total of 12 sites, a cemetery, and three Carolina. Each tract represents approximately 200 historic resou-rces were located.. At the Long tract, acres. The study was conducted at the request of these sites include3lED345, 31ED346, 3lED347", ARCADIS Geraghty and Miller, Incorporated. and a standing historic resource, none of which are potentially eligible for the National Register, although Our field investigations found that conditions more documentation is recommended for the historic at each tract varied greatly. At the Long tract, located resource. At the Hickory tract, seven sites and a in Edgecombe County, approximately 30% of the tract standing historic resource were located and included coruisted of cultivated and fallow fields, while the 31NS90, 31NS91, 31NS92, 31NS93.. , 31NS94", remainder was wooded. At the Hickory tract located in 31NS95, and 31NS96. Of these sites, 31NS90 iE Nash County, the entire project area consisted of recommended as potentially eligible for the National cultivated fields. At the Wesvanco tract in Vance Register of HistorilJ Places. Prior to any construction County, the project area consisted mainly of wooded activities on the Hickory tract, we recommend that areas accessed by dirt roads. testing be undertaken al this site. At the Wesvanco tract, sites 31VN258 and 31VN260" were located, in The archaeological survey consisted of shovel addition to 31VN259", a cemetery, and a group of testing al 100-foot intervals. Shovel tests were not historic structures in various states of clilapidation. The excavated in areas of standing water, in areas of cemetery, site 31 VN259+\ is the only site extensive disturbance, or in areas with more than 75o/o recommended as potentially eligible from thiE tract. ground visibility. These areas were walked and Prior to any ground diEturbing activities, we subjected to a pedestrian survey. recommend that further work be undertaken aHhiE site lo determine the possibility of unmarked graves and the Prior lo this study no archaeological sites had true extent of the cemetery. been identified in the imnu·diate project areas. In TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures iv List of Tables v Acknowledgments vi Introduction 1 Natural Environment 7 P/1ysiograp/1y 7 Geology ond Soils 8 Clitnatc 10 Flon'stics 11 Prehistoric and Historic Ovenriew 13 Previous RrJsearcli 13 Prehistoric Overview 13 Historic Research 23 Methods 29 Field Met/wds 29 Site Evaluation 30 Laboratory Analysis 31 33 Introduction 33 Identi/;ed Sites 33 Summary and Recommendations 59 References Cited 61 iii LIST OF FIGURES 1. Location of Long, Hickory, and Wesvanco tracts in North Carolina 2 2. Long tract in Edgecombe County 3 3. Hickory tract in Nash County 4 4. Wesvanco tract in Vance County 5 5. Open pine forests and mixed hardwoods in Wesvanco tract 10 6. Second growth forest covered in kudzu in Wesvanco tract 11 7. Cultivated fields in Hickory tract 11 8. c,Jtivated fields in Long tract 11 9. Pines with dense hardwood understory in Long tract 12 10. Cultural. periods of North Carolina coast and piedmont 14 11. Collet' s A Comp/eat Map of Nort/1 Car,;/;na showing tracts 25 12. 1865 US Coast Survey Map showing three tracts 26 13. 1903 15' topographic map showing Long tract 27 14. View of modem trash in Wesvanco tract 30 15. Sites located in Long tract 34 16. Sites located in Hickory tract 35 17. Sites located in Wesvanco tract 3b 18. Map of 3lED345 37 19. Map of 3lED346 38 20. Map of 3lED347.. 39 21. View of Historic Resou:rce 1 house on Long tracl 40 2? ~· View of Historic Resource 1 storage building on Long tract 40 23. View of Historic Resource 1 storage building on Long tract 40 24. Map of 31NS90 42 25. Map of 31NS91 45 26. Map of 31NS92 46 27. Map of 31NS93" 48 28. Map of 31NS94" 49 29. Map of 31NS<l5 50 30. Map of 31NS96 51 31. View of Historic Resource 1 on Hickory tract 52 32. Map of 31VN258 53 33. View of 31VN'.359" 54 34. Map of 31VN260" 55 35. View of HiBtoric Resource 1, W esvanco 56 36. View of Historic Resource 2, Wesvanco 57 37. \Tiew of Historic Resource 3, W esvanco 58 LIST OF TABLES ,.,1. Soils on the Long tract 8 ~· Soils on the Hickory tract 9 3. Soils on the Wesvanco_ tract 9 4. Arnfacts recovered from 31NS90 43 5. Artifacts reaovered from 31NS93" 47 6. Artifacts recovered from 31NS94" 51 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We would like to thank Mr. Bob Froneberger of State Archaeology for his tremendous help in of ARCADIS Geraghty and Miller, lncorpo,.ted for locating information on previous surveys and identified his continuing confidence and support of Chicora resources. Foundation. Finally, here at Chicora, we would like to We ako appreciate the efforts of Site FJe thank Ms. Debi Hacker for the maps and graphics she Registrar Ms Dolores Hall of the North Carolina · produced for this report. Office vi INTRODUCTION The intensive archaeological investigation of The Wesvanco tract is located east of Highway the three tracts in Edgecombe, Nash, and Vance 1 Bypass, west of State Highway 39, and norlh of Counties was conducted by Rachel Campo and Van Martin Creek (Figure 4). The majority of the tract was Steen of Chicora Foundation, Inc. for Mr. Bob heavily wooded, with very few areas of high elevation. Froneberger of ARCADIS Geraghty and Miller, Inc. The tract was accessed by a number of small, overgrown The Long tract is located west of the town of Rocky dirl roads. Three sites (31VN258, 31VN259~, and Mounty in Edgecombe County (Figure 1). The 31 VN2b0.. ), including a cemetery, and three historic Hickory tract i. located north of Rocky Mount in Nash resources in various stages of dilapidation were County (Figure 1). The Wesvanco tract is located identified in the Wesvanco tract. Of these, only the southeast of the town of Henderson in Vance County cemetery ill recommended as potentially eligible. No (Figure 1). Tb work was underlaken. in order to further n1ana.gement wo* is recomm.ended for the record archaeological sites and historic resources other sites in this tract. present on these tracts. The proposed work on these sites has the The Long tract ill situated between NC State potential -l:o damage or even destroy archaeological sites Highways 64 and b4A, to the west of SSR 1225 in the immediate vicinity. For this reason, we (Kingsboro Road) and south of Tar River (Figure 2). recommend that further work be done at two of the The eastern porlion of the tract, adjacent to SSR tracts prior to any ground dilltw:bing activities. 1225, consisted of cultivated and fallow fields, while the remainder of the tract, accessed by dirt roads, consisted We were requested by Mr. Bob Froneberger of of mfaed hardwoods and pines. Thill tract was relatively ARCADIS Geraghty and Miller, Inc. to suhmit a cost flat, with no areas of high elevation. A total of three proposal for intensive level surveys of the project areas sites (3lED345, 3lED34b, and 3lED347") and a on June lb, 1999. Thill proposal, submitted on June standing historic resource were identified in Long tract. 21, 1999, was approved on June 23, 1999. These Furlher documentation is recommended for the investigations incorporated a review of the site files at historic resource. No further work is recommended for the N orlh Carolina Office of State Archaeology by the other three sites. Rachel Campo on June 24, 1999. No previously recorded sites were identified in the project areas. The Hickory tract is located east of Interstate 95, north of state highway 44/33, south of Fishing The survey, which was designed to identify Creel,, and west of Beaverdam Swamp (Figure 3). Tb prehistoric or historic resources within the project areas, tract consisted entirely of cultivated fields. The entire was conducted July 6-13 and required a total of 150 tract had at least 75% surface mibility. A few small person hours to complete the survey. streams ran through the tract. The tract had a few small hills and rises, one of which produced a large prehistoric site. This site, 31NS90, is recommended as potentially eligible. Six other sites, (31NS91, 31NS92, 31NS93", 31NS94", 31NS95, and 31NS96) and one standing historic resource were identili.ed, with no further management work recommended for these sites.
Recommended publications
  • Cherokee Ethnogenesis in Southwestern North Carolina

    Cherokee Ethnogenesis in Southwestern North Carolina

    The following chapter is from: The Archaeology of North Carolina: Three Archaeological Symposia Charles R. Ewen – Co-Editor Thomas R. Whyte – Co-Editor R. P. Stephen Davis, Jr. – Co-Editor North Carolina Archaeological Council Publication Number 30 2011 Available online at: http://www.rla.unc.edu/NCAC/Publications/NCAC30/index.html CHEROKEE ETHNOGENESIS IN SOUTHWESTERN NORTH CAROLINA Christopher B. Rodning Dozens of Cherokee towns dotted the river valleys of the Appalachian Summit province in southwestern North Carolina during the eighteenth century (Figure 16-1; Dickens 1967, 1978, 1979; Perdue 1998; Persico 1979; Shumate et al. 2005; Smith 1979). What developments led to the formation of these Cherokee towns? Of course, native people had been living in the Appalachian Summit for thousands of years, through the Paleoindian, Archaic, Woodland, and Mississippi periods (Dickens 1976; Keel 1976; Purrington 1983; Ward and Davis 1999). What are the archaeological correlates of Cherokee culture, when are they visible archaeologically, and what can archaeology contribute to knowledge of the origins and development of Cherokee culture in southwestern North Carolina? Archaeologists, myself included, have often focused on the characteristics of pottery and other artifacts as clues about the development of Cherokee culture, which is a valid approach, but not the only approach (Dickens 1978, 1979, 1986; Hally 1986; Riggs and Rodning 2002; Rodning 2008; Schroedl 1986a; Wilson and Rodning 2002). In this paper (see also Rodning 2009a, 2010a, 2011b), I focus on the development of Cherokee towns and townhouses. Given the significance of towns and town affiliations to Cherokee identity and landscape during the 1700s (Boulware 2011; Chambers 2010; Smith 1979), I suggest that tracing the development of towns and townhouses helps us understand Cherokee ethnogenesis, more generally.
  • Presentation of Early Indian Cultures and Migration Patterns Is Given on A

    Presentation of Early Indian Cultures and Migration Patterns Is Given on A

    DOCUMENTRESUME ED 028 871 RC 003 367 Indians of the Eastern Seaboard. Bureau of Indian Affairs (Dept. of Interior), Washington, D.C. Pub Date 67 Note-32p. Available from-Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,Washington, D.C. 20402 (0-276-039, $0.15). EDRS Price MF-$0.25 HC Not Available from EDRS. Descriptors-*American History, American Indian Culture, *AmericanIndians,Anthropology, Archaeology, *Conflict, *Cultural Interrelationships, Culture, *Demography, GeographicDistribution, Migration Patterns, Rural Population Identifiers-Algonquins, Iroquois, Muskhogees, Sioux, Timucuans A brief history is presented of Indian tribes living alongthe eastern seaboard of the United States from the time ofcontact of these tribes with the first European settlers to the present day. Early Indian-white relationshipsare discussed, as well as relationships established between thevarioustribesthemselves. An historical presentation of earlyIndiancultures and migration patternsisgiven on a state-by-state basis for each of .12 stateson the Atlantic seaboard. These early histories are then contrasted with modern seaboardtribes. The presentation is concluded with a list of historical and cultural Indiansites. (DA) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION & WELFARE OFFICE OF EDUCATION THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRODUCED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED FROMTHE PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ORIGINATING IT,POINTS Of VIEW OR OPINIONS STATED DO NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENT OFFICIAL OFFICE Of EDUCATION 1?:.7.14 POSITION OR POLICY. \ 4 944.41-44. PliP -11 5 S idctat /all Sme4'1.iV 'gr'sfiew CHAlt1.1:5 ST-1,Joki)s; Bay , ! 1. "111 A statue of Massasoit, who celebrated the first Plymouth Thanksgiving with the Pilgrims, overlooks Plymouth Rock. PHOTO: MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF COM- MERCE AND DEVELOPMENT Ak.
  • Chapter 2 CULTURE HISTORICAL CONTEXT the 2010 Investigations at the Ashe Ferry Site Focused on Archaeological Components That Date to the Late Woodland (Ca

    Chapter 2 CULTURE HISTORICAL CONTEXT the 2010 Investigations at the Ashe Ferry Site Focused on Archaeological Components That Date to the Late Woodland (Ca

    Chapter 2 CULTURE HISTORICAL CONTEXT The 2010 investigations at the Ashe Ferry site focused on archaeological components that date to the Late Woodland (ca. A.D. 800–1150) and Mississippian (ca. A.D. 1150–1540) periods, and the vast majority of contexts and assemblages documented at Ashe Ferry are attributable to these components, with the exceptions of one Middle Woodland period feature (a single cached vessel) and two Late Archaic period caches. Radiocarbon assays of samples from discrete contexts at Ashe Ferry indicate a primary span of occupation ca. A.D. 950–1150, with continued or sporadic lower intensity occupation through ca. A.D. 1325. Test units and extensive mechanical stripping of flood overburden and plowzone from the site also yielded collections that included small numbers of Early, Middle, and Late Archaic projectile points, as well as a few diagnostic Middle Woodland period pottery sherds. The following discussion specifically contextualizes the investigations of Late Woodland period and Mississippian period components at the Ashe Ferry site with an overview of the current state of knowledge concerning these archaeological periods in the central Carolina piedmont, with broader reference to this span in the surrounding region. Early Woodland Period The inception of the Woodland period (ca. 3000–1000 B.P.) in the Carolina piedmont is defined by the widespread, ubiquitous use of pottery by human populations who pursued transhumant or semi-transhumant hunter-gatherer strategies refined throughout the preceding Archaic period. This threshold is clearly arbitrary inasmuch as pottery production was commonplace among Late Archaic period societies in the South Carolina coastal plain and along the fall line after 4500 B.P.
  • 2016 Athens, Georgia

    2016 Athens, Georgia

    SOUTHEASTERN ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS & ABSTRACTS OF THE 73RD ANNUAL MEETING OCTOBER 26-29, 2016 ATHENS, GEORGIA BULLETIN 59 2016 BULLETIN 59 2016 PROCEEDINGS & ABSTRACTS OF THE 73RD ANNUAL MEETING OCTOBER 26-29, 2016 THE CLASSIC CENTER ATHENS, GEORGIA Meeting Organizer: Edited by: Hosted by: Cover: © Southeastern Archaeological Conference 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS THE CLASSIC CENTER FLOOR PLAN……………………………………………………...……………………..…... PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS…………………………………………………………………….…..……. LIST OF DONORS……………………………………………………………………………………………….…..……. SPECIAL THANKS………………………………………………………………………………………….….....……….. SEAC AT A GLANCE……………………………………………………………………………………….……….....…. GENERAL INFORMATION & SPECIAL EVENTS SCHEDULE…………………….……………………..…………... PROGRAM WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 26…………………………………………………………………………..……. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 27……………………………………………………………………………...…...13 FRIDAY, OCTOBER 28TH……………………………………………………………….……………....…..21 SATURDAY, OCTOBER 29TH…………………………………………………………….…………....…...28 STUDENT PAPER COMPETITION ENTRIES…………………………………………………………………..………. ABSTRACTS OF SYMPOSIA AND PANELS……………………………………………………………..…………….. ABSTRACTS OF WORKSHOPS…………………………………………………………………………...…………….. ABSTRACTS OF SEAC STUDENT AFFAIRS LUNCHEON……………………………………………..…..……….. SEAC LIFETIME ACHIEVEMENT AWARDS FOR 2016…………………….……………….…….…………………. Southeastern Archaeological Conference Bulletin 59, 2016 ConferenceRooms CLASSIC CENTERFLOOR PLAN 6 73rd Annual Meeting, Athens, Georgia EVENT LOCATIONS Baldwin Hall Baldwin Hall 7 Southeastern Archaeological Conference Bulletin
  • Mississippian Architecture: Temporal, Technological, and Spatial Patterning of Structures at the Toqua Site (40M R6) Richard R

    Mississippian Architecture: Temporal, Technological, and Spatial Patterning of Structures at the Toqua Site (40M R6) Richard R

    University of Tennessee, Knoxville Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Masters Theses Graduate School 12-1985 Mississippian Architecture: Temporal, Technological, and Spatial Patterning of Structures at the Toqua Site (40M R6) Richard R. Polhemus University of Tennessee - Knoxville Recommended Citation Polhemus, Richard R., "Mississippian Architecture: Temporal, Technological, and Spatial Patterning of Structures at the Toqua Site (40M R6). " Master's Thesis, University of Tennessee, 1985. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/3320 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 Richard R. Polhemus entitled "Mississippian Architecture: Temporal, Technological, and Spatial Patterning of Structures at the Toqua Site (40M R6)." 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 requirements 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: Gerald F. Schroedl, Jefferson Chapman Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official student records.) To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Richard R. Polhemus entitled 11Mississippian Architecture: Temporal , Technolog ical, and Spatial Patterning of Structures at the Toqua Site ( 40MR6) •11 I have examined the final copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts , with a major in Anthropology.
  • A Spatial and Elemental Analyses of the Ceramic Assemblage at Mialoquo (40Mr3), an Overhill Cherokee Town in Monroe County, Tennessee

    A Spatial and Elemental Analyses of the Ceramic Assemblage at Mialoquo (40Mr3), an Overhill Cherokee Town in Monroe County, Tennessee

    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Masters Theses Graduate School 12-2019 COALESCED CHEROKEE COMMUNITIES IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY: A SPATIAL AND ELEMENTAL ANALYSES OF THE CERAMIC ASSEMBLAGE AT MIALOQUO (40MR3), AN OVERHILL CHEROKEE TOWN IN MONROE COUNTY, TENNESSEE Christian Allen University of Tennessee, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes Recommended Citation Allen, Christian, "COALESCED CHEROKEE COMMUNITIES IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY: A SPATIAL AND ELEMENTAL ANALYSES OF THE CERAMIC ASSEMBLAGE AT MIALOQUO (40MR3), AN OVERHILL CHEROKEE TOWN IN MONROE COUNTY, TENNESSEE. " Master's Thesis, University of Tennessee, 2019. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/5572 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 Christian Allen entitled "COALESCED CHEROKEE COMMUNITIES IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY: A SPATIAL AND ELEMENTAL ANALYSES OF THE CERAMIC ASSEMBLAGE AT MIALOQUO (40MR3), AN OVERHILL CHEROKEE TOWN IN MONROE COUNTY, 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. Kandace Hollenbach, Major Professor We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: Gerald Schroedl, Julie Reed Accepted for the Council: Dixie L.
  • Town Creek Indian Mound State Historic Site

    Town Creek Indian Mound State Historic Site

    2009 ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS AT TOWN CREEK INDIAN MOUND STATE HISTORIC SITE by Edmond A. Boudreaux III (East Carolina University), R. P. Stephen Davis, Jr. (University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill) Brett H. Riggs (University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill) Research Report No. 30 Research Laboratories of Archaeology University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill October 2009 ABSTRACT Archaeological fieldwork took place at Town Creek Indian Mound State Historic Site during June 2009 to achieve goals of public education and archaeological research. Dozens of volunteers participated in the fieldwork, and numerous visitors to Town Creek were able to observe the excavations. The excavations consisted of seven 10-×-10-ft units. This work documented segments of several palisade lines that run along the periphery of the Mississippian community at Town Creek. The June 2009 excavations also demonstrated that a structure is not present in an area previously thought to contain the remains of a Mississippian building. Additionally, the unexpected recovery of a Clovis point represents the first diagnostic, Paleoindian artifact ever recovered from Town Creek. i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The June 2009 fieldwork at Town Creek Indian Mound State Historic Site was a successful endeavor because of the efforts of many people and institutions. Archie Smith has been a proponent of additional fieldwork at Town Creek for some time, and he spearheaded much of the effort that set this project in motion. Funding was provided by the generous efforts of the Friends of Town Creek. The staff of Town Creek Indian Mound State Historic Site supported the project in numerous ways both before and during the fieldwork.
  • Reference # Resource Name Address County City Listed Date Multiple

    Reference # Resource Name Address County City Listed Date Multiple

    Reference # Resource Name Address County City Listed Date Multiple Name 76001760 Arnwine Cabin TN 61 Anderson Norris 19760316 92000411 Bear Creek Road Checking Station Jct. of S. Illinois Ave. and Bear Creek Rd. Anderson Oak Ridge 19920506 Oak Ridge MPS 92000410 Bethel Valley Road Checking Station Jct. of Bethel Valley and Scarboro Rds. Anderson Oak Ridge 19920506 Oak Ridge MPS 91001108 Brannon, Luther, House 151 Oak Ridge Tpk. Anderson Oak Ridge 19910905 Oak Ridge MPS 03000697 Briceville Community Church and Cemetery TN 116 Anderson Briceville 20030724 06000134 Cross Mountain Miners' Circle Circle Cemetery Ln. Anderson Briceville 20060315 10000936 Daugherty Furniture Building 307 N Main St Anderson Clinton 20101129 Rocky Top (formerly Lake 75001726 Edwards‐‐Fowler House 3.5 mi. S of Lake City on Dutch Valley Rd. Anderson 19750529 City) Rocky Top (formerly Lake 11000830 Fort Anderson on Militia Hill Vowell Mountain Rd. Anderson 20111121 City) Rocky Top (formerly Lake 04001459 Fraterville Miners' Circle Cemetery Leach Cemetery Ln. Anderson 20050105 City) 92000407 Freels Cabin Freels Bend Rd. Anderson Oak Ridge 19920506 Oak Ridge MPS Old Edgemoor Rd. between Bethel Valley Rd. and Melton Hill 91001107 Jones, J. B., House Anderson Oak Ridge 19910905 Oak Ridge MPS Lake 05001218 McAdoo, Green, School 101 School St. Anderson Clinton 20051108 Rocky Top (formerly Lake 14000446 Norris Dam State Park Rustic Cabins Historic District 125 Village Green Cir. Anderson 20140725 City) 75001727 Norris District Town of Norris on U.S. 441 Anderson Norris 19750710 Tennessee Valley Authority Hydroelectric 16000165 Norris Hydrolectric Project 300 Powerhouse Way Anderson Norris 20160412 System, 1933‐1979 MPS Roughly bounded by East Dr., W.
  • Class G Tables of Geographic Cutter Numbers: Maps -- by Region Or

    Class G Tables of Geographic Cutter Numbers: Maps -- by Region Or

    G3862 SOUTHERN STATES. REGIONS, NATURAL G3862 FEATURES, ETC. .C55 Clayton Aquifer .C6 Coasts .E8 Eutaw Aquifer .G8 Gulf Intracoastal Waterway .L6 Louisville and Nashville Railroad 525 G3867 SOUTHEASTERN STATES. REGIONS, NATURAL G3867 FEATURES, ETC. .C5 Chattahoochee River .C8 Cumberland Gap National Historical Park .C85 Cumberland Mountains .F55 Floridan Aquifer .G8 Gulf Islands National Seashore .H5 Hiwassee River .J4 Jefferson National Forest .L5 Little Tennessee River .O8 Overmountain Victory National Historic Trail 526 G3872 SOUTHEAST ATLANTIC STATES. REGIONS, G3872 NATURAL FEATURES, ETC. .B6 Blue Ridge Mountains .C5 Chattooga River .C52 Chattooga River [wild & scenic river] .C6 Coasts .E4 Ellicott Rock Wilderness Area .N4 New River .S3 Sandhills 527 G3882 VIRGINIA. REGIONS, NATURAL FEATURES, ETC. G3882 .A3 Accotink, Lake .A43 Alexanders Island .A44 Alexandria Canal .A46 Amelia Wildlife Management Area .A5 Anna, Lake .A62 Appomattox River .A64 Arlington Boulevard .A66 Arlington Estate .A68 Arlington House, the Robert E. Lee Memorial .A7 Arlington National Cemetery .A8 Ash-Lawn Highland .A85 Assawoman Island .A89 Asylum Creek .B3 Back Bay [VA & NC] .B33 Back Bay National Wildlife Refuge .B35 Baker Island .B37 Barbours Creek Wilderness .B38 Barboursville Basin [geologic basin] .B39 Barcroft, Lake .B395 Battery Cove .B4 Beach Creek .B43 Bear Creek Lake State Park .B44 Beech Forest .B454 Belle Isle [Lancaster County] .B455 Belle Isle [Richmond] .B458 Berkeley Island .B46 Berkeley Plantation .B53 Big Bethel Reservoir .B542 Big Island [Amherst County] .B543 Big Island [Bedford County] .B544 Big Island [Fluvanna County] .B545 Big Island [Gloucester County] .B547 Big Island [New Kent County] .B548 Big Island [Virginia Beach] .B55 Blackwater River .B56 Bluestone River [VA & WV] .B57 Bolling Island .B6 Booker T.
  • Table 4. Tennessee Radiocarbon Dates by County Site # Common

    Table 4. Tennessee Radiocarbon Dates by County Site # Common

    Table 4. Tennessee Radiocarbon Dates by County Site # Common Name(s) Lab # B.P. S.D. Reference # TNDATE Protected 1 1st Unnamed Cave AA-15810 260 50 161:57 0001 Protected 1 1st Unnamed Cave Beta-103531 380 50 162:52 0002 Protected 1 2nd Unnamed Cave AA-15811 970 60 162:52 0003 Protected 1 3rd Unnamed Cave SI-5067 4350 60 162:52; 163:669 0004 Protected 1 3rd Unnamed Cave SI-5064 3115 65 162:52; 163:669 0005 Protected 1 3rd Unnamed Cave Beta-96624 3060 50 162:52; 163:669 0006 Protected 1 3rd Unnamed Cave Beta-114172 2970 40 162:52; 163:669 0007 Protected 1 3rd Unnamed Cave Beta-114173 2970 40 162:52; 163:669 0008 Protected 1 3rd Unnamed Cave SI-5066 2950 65 162:52; 163:669 0009 Protected 1 3rd Unnamed Cave Beta-96623 2950 110 162:52; 163:669 0010 Protected 1 3rd Unnamed Cave SI-5063 2805 75 162:52; 163:669 0011 Protected 1 3rd Unnamed Cave SI-5065 2745 75 162:52; 163:669 0012 Protected 1 5th Unnamed Cave Beta-106695 2030 50 162:52 0013 Protected 1 6th Unnamed Cave Beta-109675 1890 50 162:52 0014 Protected 1 6th Unnamed Cave Beta-106697 630 50 162:52 0015 Protected 1 7th Unnamed Cave Beta-106698 1320 40 162:52 0016 Protected 1 11th Unnamed Cave Beta-13937 1030 90 160:149 0017 Protected 1 11th Unnamed Cave Beta-13938 620 150 160:149 0018 Protected 1 11th Unnamed Cave Beta-126032 750 60 160:149 0019 Protected 1 11th Unnamed Cave Beta-126033 680 60 160:149 0020 Protected 1 11th Unnamed Cave Beta-131221 560 60 160:149 0021 Protected 1 11th Unnamed Cave Beta 134981 780 40 160:149 0022 Protected 1 11th Unnamed Cave Beta-134982 890 60 160:149 0023
  • Print This Article

    Print This Article

    RADIOCARBON Editors: RICHARD FOSTER FLINT-J GORDON ODGEN, Ill-IRVING ROUSE-MINZE STUIVER 1 Managing Editor: RENEE S KRA I Published by THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SCIENCE Editors: JOHN RODGERS, JOHN H OSTROM, AND PHILLIP M ORVILLE Published three times a year, in Winter, Spring, and Summer, at Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut. Subscription rate $45.00 (for institutions), $30.00 (for individuals), available only in whole volumes. All correspondence and manuscripts should be addressed to the Managing Editor, RADIOCARBON, Box 2161, Yale Station, New Haven, Connecticut 06520. INSTRUCTIONS TO CONTRIBUTORS Manuscripts of radiocarbon papers should follow the recommendations in Sugges- tions to Authors, 5th ed.* All copy (including the bibliography) must be typewritten in double space. Manuscripts for vol 16, no. 2 must be submitted in duplicate before I October 1, 1973; for vol 16, no. 3 before February 1, 1974. Descriptions of samples, in date lists, should follow as closely as possible the style shown in this volume. Each separate entry (date or series) in a date list should be considered an abstract, prepared in such a way that descriptive material is distinguished i from geologic or archaeologic interpretation, but description and interpretation must be both brief and informative, emphasis placed on significant comments. Date lists should therefore not be preceded by abstracts, but abstracts of the more usual form should accompany all papers (eg, geochemical contributions) that are directed to specific problems. Each description should include the following data, if possible in the order given: 1. Laboratory number, descriptive name (ordinarily that of the locality of collec- tion), and the date expressed in years BP (before present, ie, before AD 1950) and, for finite dates, in years AD/Bc.
  • Knoxville South Waterfront, Tennessee Public I Mprovements

    Knoxville South Waterfront, Tennessee Public I Mprovements

    KNOXVILLE SOUTH WATERFRONT, TENNESSEE PUBLIC I MPROVEMENTS Cultural Context, Archaeological Research Design, and Phase I Survey Results for Cherokee Trail Connector/Spring Water Center and Baker Creek Landing, Knoxville South Waterfront Project DRAFT SAN FRANCISCO CAMBRIDGE NEW YORK LONDON APRIL 29, 2008 Cultural Context, Archaeological Research Design, and PhaseISurveyResultsforCherokeeTrailConnector/Spring WaterCenterandBakerCreekLanding, Knoxville South Waterfront Project, City of Knoxville, Knox County, Tennessee Report submitted to: Hargreaves and Associates • 118 Magazine Street • Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139 Report prepared by: New South Associates • 6150 East Ponce de Leon Avenue • Stone Mountain, Georgia 30083 J. W. Joseph, PhD, RPA – Principal Investigator David Price – Historian and Co-Author R. Jeannine Windham, RPA – Archaeologist and Co-Author J. W. Joseph, PhD, RPA – Principal Investigator and Co-Author Hugh Matternes, PhD, RPA – Prehistoric Archaeologist and Co-Author Brad Botwick – Archaeologist and Co-Author April 29, 2008 • Draft Report New South Associates Technical Report #1591 ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE i KNOXVILLE SOUTH WATERFRONT PROJECT, KNOXVILLE, TENNESSEE MANAGEMENT SUMMARY The City of Knoxville, Knox County, Tennessee, has developed a plan for developing and enhancing areas south of the Tennessee River/Fort Loudon Lake. Known as the Knoxville South Waterfront Public Improvement Project, this plan represents a multi-year revitalization effort that will include 12 locations along the riverfront and adjacent uplands. The proposed undertakings require federal permitting from the Tennessee Valley Authority, which serves as the lead federal agency for the project, and US Army Corps of Engineers. As part of the permitting process, New South Associates, Inc., has developed cultural contexts for the Knoxville South Waterfront and compiled information on previously recorded cultural resources in the project vicinity.