DOCSLIB.ORG

Reassessing the Chronology of the Mississippian Central Illinois River Valley Using Bayesian Analysis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Reassessing the Chronology of the Mississippian Central Illinois River Valley Using Bayesian Analysis Southeastern Archaeology ISSN: 0734-578X (Print) 2168-4723 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ysea20 Reassessing the chronology of the Mississippian Central Illinois River Valley using Bayesian analysis Gregory D. Wilson, Mallory A. Melton & Amber M. VanDerwarker To cite this article: Gregory D. Wilson, Mallory A. Melton & Amber M. VanDerwarker (2017): Reassessing the chronology of the Mississippian Central Illinois River Valley using Bayesian analysis, Southeastern Archaeology, DOI: 10.1080/0734578X.2017.1377510 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0734578X.2017.1377510 View supplementary material Published online: 24 Sep 2017. Submit your article to this journal View related articles View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ysea20 Download by: [UC Santa Barbara Library] Date: 26 September 2017, At: 14:02 SOUTHEASTERN ARCHAEOLOGY, 2017 https://doi.org/10.1080/0734578X.2017.1377510 Reassessing the chronology of the Mississippian Central Illinois River Valley using Bayesian analysis Gregory D. Wilson , Mallory A. Melton and Amber M. VanDerwarker Department of Anthropology, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA, USA ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY Chronology building has long served as a major focus of archaeological interest in the Central Received 19 September 2016 Illinois River valley (CIRV) of west-central Illinois. Previous methods have relied primarily upon Accepted 6 September 2017 relative dating techniques (e.g., ceramic seriation) as a means of sorting out temporal KEYWORDS relationships between sites. This study represents the first investigation into the utility of Mississippian; Bayesian Bayesian techniques (which consider radiocarbon dates in context with archaeological analysis; ceramics; seriation; information) in the CIRV. We present the results of a detailed ceramic seriation of the region, Illinois data that we use as a priori information in our Bayesian models. We then offer contiguous, overlapping, and sequential models of site occupations in the Mississippian CIRV, review the output and appropriateness of each model, and consider their implications for the pace of sociopolitical change in the region. Issues of temporal control have long been of concern to The Central Illinois River valley Mississippian archaeologists. However, the nuts and The Central Illinois River valley is a 209-km segment of bolts of regional chronologies often go unquestioned the Illinois River running from the modern town of Mer- and unmodified for long periods of time. With edosia in Morgan County, Illinois, northeastward to advances in conceptual approaches to analyzing radio- Hennepin in Putnam County (Figure 1). Within the carbon dates and the introduction of a new generation Midwestern Taxonomic System, the Mississippian of modified accelerator mass spectrometers (AMS) that period occupation of the region is classified as the produce dates with low levels of analytical error, it is Spoon River focus based on a complex of traits including pertinent that archaeologists reevaluate existing time rectangular wall-trench houses, cord-marked shell-tem- and space constructs. In this study, we begin the pro- pered pottery, and bluff-top mortuary mounds (Cole cess of revising the Mississippian period chronology and Deuel 1937:220; Deuel 1935). Archaeologists have for the Central Illinois River valley (CIRV) of west-cen- long observed strong stylistic similarities between tral Illinois. Previous chronological systems for the Spoon River focus pottery and Mississippian assem- region relied primarily on qualitative assessments of blages from the greater Cahokia region to the south. ceramic assemblages and the analysis of a relatively Indeed, Cahokia archaeology often has been used to small number of legacy dates calculated using a conven- inform and supplement an understanding of the culture Downloaded by [UC Santa Barbara Library] at 14:02 26 September 2017 tional radiometric (beta count) dating method. Our history of the Illinois Valley (Conrad and Harn 1972; study advances these efforts by presenting a Bayesian Emerson 1991:230–231; Fowler and Hall 1975; Hall analysis of previously available radiocarbon data in 1966). For example, salvage excavations at the Cahokia combination with a new suite of 24 AMS dates from site’s (11MS2) Powell Mound led to the identification the region. In each of the three resulting models (con- of an early Mississippian period occupation dubbed the tiguous, overlapping, and sequential), radiocarbon dates “pure village site culture” associated with thin polished are quantitatively constrained by a detailed ceramic ser- pottery that contrasted with a later “Bean pot-duck effigy iation from five sequentially occupied sites in the culture” with thicker and more coarsely made pottery region. We present the results of these models and (Kelly 1933; Titterington 1938). Griffin (1941), Griffin then assess the suitability of each as a chronological (1949), Griffin (1952) later reclassified these as the Old system for the region. Village and Trappist foci. Old Village pottery was CONTACT Gregory D. Wilson [email protected] Supplemental data for this article can be accessed at https://doi.org/10.1080/0734578X.2017.1377510 © Southeastern Archaeological Conference 2017 2 G. D. WILSON ET AL. Figure 1. Map of the CIRV with study sites labeled. observed as being present at Cahokia, the Lower and a provisional Marbletown complex (AD 1300–1400). Central Illinois River valleys, the Aztalan site (47JE1) The Mississippian occupation of the LaMoine River in southern Wisconsin, the Cambria focus in the Missis- area was divided into the Gillette phase (AD 1050– sippi River valley, and the Mill Creek aspect of northwes- 1150), a combined Orendorf and Larson horizon (AD tern Iowa (Griffin 1949:48). Moreover, the subsequent 1150–1300), the Crabtree phase (AD 1300–1375), and Trappist ceramic complex was described as closely the Crable phase (AD 1375–1450). related to that of the Spoon River focus. Esarey and Conrad (1998) later revised Conrad’s sys- Downloaded by [UC Santa Barbara Library] at 14:02 26 September 2017 In a 1972 paper, Conrad and Harn further subdivided tem by calibrating the existing radiocarbon dates (Stuiver the Mississippian occupation of the CIRV into three and Reimer 1993) and constructing a four-phase sequential phases (Eveland, Larson, and Crable) based sequence for the entire region consisting of the Eveland on the qualitative analysis of ceramic assemblages from (AD 1100–1200), Orendorf (AD 1200–1250), Larson the Cooper (11F5), Crable (11F249), Dickson Mounds (AD 1250–1300), and Crable/Bold Counselor (AD (11F10), Eveland (11F353), Larson (11F3), and Sleeth 1300–1425) phases. They defined phase boundaries by (11F48) sites. The subsequent generation of a suite of comparing calibrated intercepts, and they attempted to radiocarbon dates from the region (Bender et al. 1975) integrate the various broadly defined ceramic series in allowed Conrad (1991) to revise further the existing the region. There was also an explicit attempt to synchro- chronology. Conrad created taxonomic distinctions nize the Early Mississippian Eveland phase with the Stir- between the northern (Spoon River) and southern ling phase from the greater Cahokia region, as both (LaMoine River) portions of the valley. For the Spoon phases share strong ceramic stylistic characteristics River area, he devised a three-phase sequence consisting (Conrad 1991:124–130). of the Eveland (AD 1050–1150), Orendorf (AD 1150– This long history of chronological research has 1250), and Larson phases (AD 1250–1300), followed by allowed archaeologists to identify a series of important SOUTHEASTERN ARCHAEOLOGY 3 historical developments in the region. The transition to a document the rapidly changing political, social, and Mississippian way of life appears to have begun in the economic relationships in the region. In this study, we eleventh century. This was directly associated with the present an examination of the Mississippian period political consolidation of the Cahokia polity located 77 occupation of the CIRV that relates temporal trends in river km to the south (see Conrad [1989]; Conrad ceramic design to radiocarbon dates. While such an [1991]; Harn [1991]). Bioarchaeological research has approach is not new to the region, earlier chronological revealed little evidence of intergroup violence in the systems relied primarily on qualitative assessments of region during this era (Hatch 2015). This lack of violence ceramic assemblages and the analysis of a relatively is an important observation in that the preceding Term- small number of legacy dates calculated using conven- inal Late Woodland period was characterized by a tional radiometric dating methods. Our new models decrease in interregional exchange networks and intensi- integrate and supplement these systems using Bayesian fied intergroup hostilities (Milner 1999:122). This era of analysis and prior information (e.g., ceramic seriation) relative peace ended by the beginning of the thirteenth to constrain quantitatively the probability distributions century as warfare engulfed large portions of the Mid- of calibrated radiocarbon dates from Mississippian west and Midsouth (Dye and King 2007:162; Emerson settlements in the CIRV. 2007:135–137; Krus 2016; Milner et al. 1991; Steadman As an initial step in the current analysis, Wilson con- 2008; VanDerwarker and Wilson 2016).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • SEAC Bulletin 58.Pdf
    SOUTHEASTERN ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS OF THE 72ND ANNUAL MEETING NOVEMBER 18-21, 2015 NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE BULLETIN 58 SOUTHEASTERN ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONFERENCE BULLETIN 58 PROCEEDINGS OF THE 72ND ANNUAL MEETING NOVEMBER 18-21, 2015 DOUBLETREE BY HILTON DOWNTOWN NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE Organized by: Kevin E. Smith, Aaron Deter-Wolf, Phillip Hodge, Shannon Hodge, Sarah Levithol, Michael C. Moore, and Tanya M. Peres Hosted by: Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Middle Tennessee State University Division of Archaeology, Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation Office of Social and Cultural Resources, Tennessee Department of Transportation iii Cover: Sellars Mississippian Ancestral Pair. Left: McClung Museum of Natural History and Culture; Right: John C. Waggoner, Jr. Photographs by David H. Dye Printing of the Southeastern Archaeological Conference Bulletin 58 – 2015 Funded by Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Authorization No. 327420, 750 copies. This public document was promulgated at a cost of $4.08 per copy. October 2015. Pursuant to the State of Tennessee’s Policy of non-discrimination, the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation does not discriminate on the basis of race, sex, religion, color, national or ethnic origin, age, disability, or military service in its policies, or in the admission or access to, or treatment or employment in its programs, services or activities. Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action inquiries or complaints should be directed to the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, EEO/AA Coordinator, Office of General Counsel, 312 Rosa L. Parks Avenue, 2nd floor, William R. Snodgrass Tennessee Tower, Nashville, TN 37243, 1-888-867-7455. ADA inquiries or complaints should be directed to the ADA Coordinator, Human Resources Division, 312 Rosa L.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 1: Introduction
    SEGMENTED AND ASCENDANT CHIEFDOM POLITY AS VIEWED FROM THE DIVERS SITE BY GLEN ALOIS FREIMUTH DISSERTATION Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Anthropology in the Graduate College of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2010 Urbana, Illinois Doctoral Committee: Professor Emeritus R. Barry Lewis, Chair Professor Timothy R. Pauketat Adjunct Professor Thomas E. Emerson Associate Professor Mark W. Mehrer, Northern Illinois University ABSTRACT This study contributes to our understanding of the nature of political control exerted by the Mississippian Cahokia polity over small rural villages in the southern American Bottom. Currently two models, which I call the Segmented and Ascendant Chiefdoms, respectively, provide contrasting explanations of the nature and amount of Cahokia control over rural villages. I examine the fit of these models against archaeological data from the Divers and other regional sites. The analyses range over several main topics, including populations, labor requirements, nonlocal artifacts, provisioning, and rituals. I find that the archaeological patterns expressed at the Divers site best fit a Segmented Chiefdom model wherein political control is decentralized and rural villages retain a high degree of political autonomy. Cahokia, as the American Bottom’s main Mississippian town, has the largest population, physical size, elite status items, and monumental construction which I describe as material domination and political dominance. Political dominance requires manipulation of local leaders and their followers for political and social control and this manipulation was expressed through ritual materials and rituals performed at Cahokia and other mound towns. The Cahokia elite created new rituals and associated material expressions through collective action and attempted to gain control of existing commoner ritual performances and symbols but these and political autonomy largely remained with the commoners who occupied small villages like Divers.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Complexity at Cahokia
    Social Complexity at Cahokia Peter N. Peregrine Scott Ortman Eric Rupley SFI WORKING PAPER: 2014-03-004 SFI Working Papers contain accounts of scientiic work of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the views of the Santa Fe Institute. We accept papers intended for publication in peer-reviewed journals or proceedings volumes, but not papers that have already appeared in print. Except for papers by our external faculty, papers must be based on work done at SFI, inspired by an invited visit to or collaboration at SFI, or funded by an SFI grant. ©NOTICE: This working paper is included by permission of the contributing author(s) as a means to ensure timely distribution of the scholarly and technical work on a non-commercial basis. Copyright and all rights therein are maintained by the author(s). It is understood that all persons copying this information will adhere to the terms and constraints invoked by each author's copyright. These works may be reposted only with the explicit permission of the copyright holder. www.santafe.edu SANTA FE INSTITUTE Social Complexity at Cahokia Summary of a Working Group Held at the Santa Fe Institute, May 28-30, 2013. organized by Peter N. Peregrine, Lawrence University and Santa Fe Institute Scott Ortman, University of Colorado, Boulder and Santa Fe Institute. Eric Rupley, Santa Fe Institute Abstract A working group held at the Santa Fe Institute May 28-30, 2013, produced a set of consensus answers to questions about Cahokia, an urban place dating to the 12 th and 13 th centuries and located in what is today the greater Saint Louis region of Missouri and Illinois.
    [Show full text]
  • Households and Changing Use of Space at the Transitional Early Mississippian Austin Site
    University of Mississippi eGrove Electronic Theses and Dissertations Graduate School 2019 Households and Changing Use of Space at the Transitional Early Mississippian Austin Site Benjamin Garrett Davis University of Mississippi Follow this and additional works at: https://egrove.olemiss.edu/etd Part of the Anthropology Commons Recommended Citation Davis, Benjamin Garrett, "Households and Changing Use of Space at the Transitional Early Mississippian Austin Site" (2019). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 1570. https://egrove.olemiss.edu/etd/1570 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at eGrove. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of eGrove. For more information, please contact [email protected]. HOUSEHOLDS AND CHANGING USE OF SPACE AT THE TRANSITIONAL EARLY MISSISSIPPIAN AUSTIN SITE A Thesis presented in partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree of Masters of Arts in the Department of Sociology and Anthropology University of Mississippi by BENJAMIN GARRETT DAVIS May 2019 ABSTRACT The Austin Site (22TU549) is a village site located in Tunica County, Mississippi dating to approximately A.D. 1150-1350, along the transition from the Terminal Late Woodland to the Mississippian period. While Elizabeth Hunt’s (2017) masters thesis concluded that the ceramics at Austin emphasized a Late Woodland persistence, the architecture and use of space at the site had yet to be analyzed. This study examines this architecture and use of space over time at Austin to determine if they display evidence of increasing institutionalized inequality. This included creating a map of Austin based on John Connaway’s original excavation notes, and then analyzing this map within the temporal context of the upper Yazoo Basin.
    [Show full text]
  • Treasury's Emergency Rental Assistance
    FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS: TREASURY’SHEADING EMERGENCY1 HERE RENTAL ASSISTANCEHEADING (ERA)1 HERE PROGRAM AUGUST 2021 ongress established an Emergency Rental Assistance (ERA) program administered by the U.S. Department of the Treasury to distribute critically needed emergency rent and utility assistance to Cmillions of households at risk of losing their homes. Congress provided more than $46 billion for emergency rental assistance through the Consolidated Appropriations Act enacted in December 2020 and the American Rescue Plan Act enacted in March 2021. Based on NLIHC’s ongoing tracking and analysis of state and local ERA programs, including nearly 500 programs funded through Treasury’s ERA program, NLIHC has continued to identify needed policy changes to ensure ERA is distributed efficiently, effectively, and equitably. The ability of states and localities to distribute ERA was hindered early on by harmful guidance released by the Trump administration on its last day in office. Immediately after President Biden was sworn into office, the administration rescinded the harmful FAQ and released improved guidance to ensure ERA reaches households with the greatest needs, as recommended by NLIHC. The Biden administration issued revised ERA guidance in February, March, May, June, and August that directly addressed many of NLIHC’s concerns about troubling roadblocks in ERA programs. Treasury’s latest guidance provides further clarity and recommendations to encourage state and local governments to expedite assistance. Most notably, the FAQ provides even more explicit permission for ERA grantees to rely on self-attestations without further documentation. WHO IS ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE EMERGENCY RENTAL ASSISTANCE? Households are eligible for ERA funds if one or more individuals: 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic History of the Earth 1 the Precambrian
    Geologic History of the Earth 1 algae = very simple plants that Geologists are scientists who study the structure grow in or near the water of rocks and the history of the Earth. By looking at first = in the beginning at and examining layers of rocks and the fossils basic = main, important they contain they are able to tell us what the beginning = start Earth looked like at a certain time in history and billion = a thousand million what kind of plants and animals lived at that breathe = to take air into your lungs and push it out again time. carbon dioxide = gas that is produced when you breathe Scientists think that the Earth was probably formed at the same time as the rest out of our solar system, about 4.6 billion years ago. The solar system may have be- certain = special gun as a cloud of dust, from which the sun and the planets evolved. Small par- complex = something that has ticles crashed into each other to create bigger objects, which then turned into many different parts smaller or larger planets. Our Earth is made up of three basic layers. The cen- consist of = to be made up of tre has a core made of iron and nickel. Around it is a thick layer of rock called contain = have in them the mantle and around that is a thin layer of rock called the crust. core = the hard centre of an object Over 4 billion years ago the Earth was totally different from the planet we live create = make on today.
    [Show full text]
  • Critical Analysis of Article "21 Reasons to Believe the Earth Is Young" by Jeff Miller
    1 Critical analysis of article "21 Reasons to Believe the Earth is Young" by Jeff Miller Lorence G. Collins [email protected] Ken Woglemuth [email protected] January 7, 2019 Introduction The article by Dr. Jeff Miller can be accessed at the following link: http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=9&article=5641 and is an article published by Apologetic Press, v. 39, n.1, 2018. The problems start with the Article In Brief in the boxed paragraph, and with the very first sentence. The Bible does not give an age of the Earth of 6,000 to 10,000 years, or even imply − this is added to Scripture by Dr. Miller and other young-Earth creationists. R. C. Sproul was one of evangelicalism's outstanding theologians, and he stated point blank at the Legionier Conference panel discussion that he does not know how old the Earth is, and the Bible does not inform us. When there has been some apparent conflict, either the theologians or the scientists are wrong, because God is the Author of the Bible and His handiwork is in general revelation. In the days of Copernicus and Galileo, the theologians were wrong. Today we do not know of anyone who believes that the Earth is the center of the universe. 2 The last sentence of this "Article In Brief" is boldly false. There is almost no credible evidence from paleontology, geology, astrophysics, or geophysics that refutes deep time. Dr. Miller states: "The age of the Earth, according to naturalists and old- Earth advocates, is 4.5 billion years.
    [Show full text]
  • The Geologic Time Scale Is the Eon
    Exploring Geologic Time Poster Illustrated Teacher's Guide #35-1145 Paper #35-1146 Laminated Background Geologic Time Scale Basics The history of the Earth covers a vast expanse of time, so scientists divide it into smaller sections that are associ- ated with particular events that have occurred in the past.The approximate time range of each time span is shown on the poster.The largest time span of the geologic time scale is the eon. It is an indefinitely long period of time that contains at least two eras. Geologic time is divided into two eons.The more ancient eon is called the Precambrian, and the more recent is the Phanerozoic. Each eon is subdivided into smaller spans called eras.The Precambrian eon is divided from most ancient into the Hadean era, Archean era, and Proterozoic era. See Figure 1. Precambrian Eon Proterozoic Era 2500 - 550 million years ago Archaean Era 3800 - 2500 million years ago Hadean Era 4600 - 3800 million years ago Figure 1. Eras of the Precambrian Eon Single-celled and simple multicelled organisms first developed during the Precambrian eon. There are many fos- sils from this time because the sea-dwelling creatures were trapped in sediments and preserved. The Phanerozoic eon is subdivided into three eras – the Paleozoic era, Mesozoic era, and Cenozoic era. An era is often divided into several smaller time spans called periods. For example, the Paleozoic era is divided into the Cambrian, Ordovician, Silurian, Devonian, Carboniferous,and Permian periods. Paleozoic Era Permian Period 300 - 250 million years ago Carboniferous Period 350 - 300 million years ago Devonian Period 400 - 350 million years ago Silurian Period 450 - 400 million years ago Ordovician Period 500 - 450 million years ago Cambrian Period 550 - 500 million years ago Figure 2.
    [Show full text]
  • ALLEEN BETZENHAUSER, Phd, RPA Education Professional
    ALLEEN BETZENHAUSER, PhD, RPA Education 2011 PhD Anthropology, University of Illinois Urbana–Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801 Thesis: Creating the Cahokian Community: The Power of Place in Early Mississippian Sociopolitical Dynamics. 2006 MA Anthropology, University of Illinois Urbana–Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801 Thesis: Greater Cahokian Farmsteads: A Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Diversity. 2002 BA Magna Cum Laude, Boston University Archaeology Major, Anthropology Minor Professional Appointments Field Station Coordinator January 2018–present Illinois State Archaeological Survey, American Bottom Field Station Senior Research Archaeologist Aug 2013–Jan 2018 Illinois State Archaeological Survey, American Bottom Field Station Research Archaeologist May 2011–Aug 2013 Illinois State Archaeological Survey, American Bottom Field Station Archaeological Assistant May 2003–Aug 2011 Illinois State Archaeological Survey (formerly Illinois Transportation Archaeological Research Program), American Bottom Field Station Teaching Assistant Aug 2004–Aug 2006, Jan–May 2010 Department of Anthropology, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign Research Assistant Aug 2002–May 2004 Department of Anthropology, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign Teaching Appointments Alleen Betzenhauser October 2018 Independent Instructor (with Susan Bostwick and Christina MacMorran), Native Clays and Ancient Technologies. March 2018 Invited Lecturer, Experimental Archaeology, Washington University Department of Anthropology. Spring 2010 Teaching Assistant, World Archaeology, Professor: Dr. Astrid Runggaldier. UIUC Anthropology. 2004, 2006 Teaching Assistant, Archaeological Field School and Lab Analysis in Archaeology, UIUC Anthropology. Professor: Dr. Timothy Pauketat. Spring 2006 Teaching Assistant, The Archaeology of Illinois, UIUC Anthropology. Professor: Dr. Timothy Pauketat. Fall 2005 Teaching Assistant, Biological Bases of Human Behavior, UIUC Anthropology. Professor: Dr. Charles Roseman. Test composition and grading. Spring 2005 Teaching Assistant, Aztec Archaeology, UIUC Anthropology.
    [Show full text]
  • Recent Discussion in Late Prehistoric Southeastern Archaeology
    NOTES 1. The. exception to this statement is Southern archaeology, which has been and contmues to be at the forefront ofAmerican archaeology. 2. Catherine Dhavernas, Le Destinataire avenir: culture et plamHte a!'ere de refus (Montreal: XYZ Press, 2005), 120. Recent Discussions in Late . 3· Walter Benj~min, "Philosophie," in Essais: 1936-1940, Bibliotheque Media­ tions 241 (Paris: Editions Denoel, 1983), 198. Prehistoric Southern Archaeology ~. Charles Hudson, "Introduction;' in The Transformation ofthe Southeastern I~dlans, 1540- 1760, ed. Robbie Ethridge and Charles Hudson (Jackson: Univer­ PATRICK LIVINGOOD SIty Press ofMississippi, 2002), xxxviii-xxxxix .5. Walter Johnson, Soul by Soul: Life inside the Antebellum Slave Market (Cam­ bndge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999), 21. Fer~a.nd 6. Braudel, The Mediterranean and the Mediterranean World in the One of the goals of this new journal, Native South, is to facilitate com­ Age ofPhtllp II, trans. Sian Reynolds (New York: Harper & Row 19 ). ' 72 ,1.23. munication among scholars from different disciplines interested in the :'. Gmllermo. Bonfil Batalla, Mexico Profunda: Reclaiming a Civilization, trans. history of the original inhabitants of the South. This article hopes to PhIlIp A. Denms (Austin: University ofTexas Press, 1996); see also Steven C H' , onn, further that goal by orienting nonarchaeologists to some of the recent Istory s Shadow: Native Americans and Historical Consciousness in the Nine- discussions in the literature ofSouthern archaeology, particularly during t~enth Ce~~ury (Chicago:. University of Chicago Press, 2004), 228; and Jeffrey Slssons, FlISt Peoples: IndIgenous Cultures and Their Futures (London: Reaktion the time period archaeologists are most consulted onbycolleagues inhis­ Books, 2005), 153-54.
    [Show full text]
  • It's About Time: Opportunities & Challenges for U.S
    I t’s About Time: Opportunities & Challenges for U.S. Geochronology About Time: Opportunities & Challenges for t’s It’s About Time: Opportunities & Challenges for U.S. Geochronology 222508_Cover_r1.indd 1 2/23/15 6:11 PM A view of the Bowen River valley, demonstrating the dramatic scenery and glacial imprint found in Fiordland National Park, New Zealand. Recent innovations in geochronology have quantified how such landscapes developed through time; Shuster et al., 2011. Photo taken Cover photo: The Grand Canyon, recording nearly two billion years of Earth history (photo courtesy of Dr. Scott Chandler) from near the summit of Sheerdown Peak (looking north); by J. Sanders. 222508_Cover.indd 2 2/21/15 8:41 AM DEEP TIME is what separates geology from all other sciences. This report presents recommendations for improving how we measure time (geochronometry) and use it to understand a broad range of Earth processes (geochronology). 222508_Text.indd 3 2/21/15 8:42 AM FRONT MATTER Written by: T. M. Harrison, S. L. Baldwin, M. Caffee, G. E. Gehrels, B. Schoene, D. L. Shuster, and B. S. Singer Reviews and other commentary provided by: S. A. Bowring, P. Copeland, R. L. Edwards, K. A. Farley, and K. V. Hodges This report is drawn from the presentations and discussions held at a workshop prior to the V.M. Goldschmidt in Sacramento, California (June 7, 2014), a discussion at the 14th International Thermochronology Conference in Chamonix, France (September 9, 2014), and a Town Hall meeting at the Geological Society of America Annual Meeting in Vancouver, Canada (October 21, 2014) This report was provided to representatives of the National Science Foundation, the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • EDB Postgres™ Advanced Server Release 13
    EDB Postgres™ Advanced Server Release 13 Database Compatibility for Oracle® Developers Reference Guide Oct 20, 2020 Contents 1 Introduction 1 2 The SQL Language2 2.1 SQL Syntax..........................................3 2.1.1 Lexical Structure...................................3 2.1.2 Identifiers and Key Words..............................3 2.1.3 Constants.......................................4 2.1.3.1 String Constants...............................4 2.1.3.2 Numeric Constants.............................5 2.1.3.3 Constants of Other Types..........................5 2.1.4 Comments.......................................7 2.2 Data Types...........................................8 2.2.1 Numeric Types....................................8 2.2.1.1 Integer Types................................9 2.2.1.2 Arbitrary Precision Numbers........................9 2.2.1.3 Floating-Point Types............................. 10 2.2.2 Character Types.................................... 11 2.2.3 Binary Data...................................... 12 2.2.4 Date/Time Types................................... 13 2.2.4.1 INTERVAL Types.............................. 14 2.2.4.2 Date/Time Input............................... 15 2.2.4.3 Date/Time Output.............................. 16 2.2.4.4 Internals................................... 17 2.2.5 Boolean Types.................................... 17 2.2.6 XML Type...................................... 17 2.3 Functions and Operators.................................... 18 2.3.1 Logical Operators..................................
    [Show full text]