DOCSLIB.ORG

North Carolina Archaeology

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
North Carolina Archaeology North Carolina Archaeology Volume 65 2016 North Carolina Archaeology Volume 65 October 2016 CONTENTS Don’t Let Ethics Get in the Way of Doing What’s Right: Three Decades of Working with Collectors in North Carolina I. Randolph Daniel, Jr. ......................................................................................... 1 Mariners’ Maladies: Examining Medical Equipage from the Queen Anne’s Revenge Shipwreck Linda F. Carnes-McNaughton ........................................................................... 28 Archival Excavations from Dusty File Cabinets, Part I: Unpublished Artifact Pattern Data of Colonial Period Households, Dependency Buildings, and Public Structures from Colonial Brunswick Town Thomas E. Beaman, Jr. ...................................................................................... 53 Preface: Identifying and Defining North Carolina’s Archaeological Heritage through Remote Sensing and Geophysics John J. Mintz and Shawn M. Patch .................................................................... 90 The Role of GPR in Archaeology: A Beginning Not an End Charles R. Ewen ................................................................................................. 92 Three-dimensional Remote Sensing at House in the Horseshoe State Historic Site (31MR20), Moore County, North Carolina Stacy Curry and Doug Gallaway ..................................................................... 100 An Overview of Geophysical Surveys and Ground-truthing Excavations at House in the Horseshoe (31MR20), Moore County, North Carolina Jacob R. Turner and Ari Lukas ........................................................................ 108 Cemeteries and Geophysics: A Discussion Sara Lowry ....................................................................................................... 117 Metal Detecting: The Down-to-Earth Tool of Remote Sensing Linda France Stine ........................................................................................... 128 Geophysical Survey of Large Mississippian Villages in the South Appalachian Region Shawn M. Patch ............................................................................................... 140 Remote Sensing and Geophysics in North Carolina Archaeology: A Brief History, Discussion of the Papers, and Ideas about the Future Roy Stine .......................................................................................................... 153 About the Authors ........................................................................................ 162 North Carolina Archaeology (formerly Southern Indian Studies) Published jointly by The North Carolina Archaeological Society, Inc. and The Research Laboratories of Archaeology University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3120 R. P. Stephen Davis, Jr., Editor Officers of the North Carolina Archaeological Society President: Tom Beaman, 5210 Carr Road, Wilson, NC 27893. Vice President: Hannah Smith, 9 Kings Mount Ct., Durham, NC 27713. Secretary: Linda Carnes-McNaughton, Directorate of Public Works (IMBG-PWE-DR CARNES), 2175 Reilly Road Stop A, Fort Bragg, NC 28310-5000. Treasurer: E. William Conen, 804 Kingswood Dr., Cary, NC 27513. Editor: R. P. Stephen Davis, Jr., Research Laboratories of Archaeology, CB 3120, Alumni Building, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3120. Associate Editor (Newsletter): Lisa-Jean Michienzi, Research Laboratories of Archaeology, CB 3120, Alumni Building, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3120. At-Large Members: January Costa, 1323 Gaston Day School Road, Gastonia, NC 28056. David Cranford, Department of Anthropology, University of North Carolina, CB #3115, Chapel Hill NC 27599-3115. Jim Daniel, 3037 Riverside Drive, Lexington, NC 27292. J. Eric Deetz, Research Laboratories of Archaeology, CB 3120, Alumni Building, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3120. Shane C. Peterson, Archaeology Group, Human Environment Section, North Carolina Department of Transportation, 1598 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27610-1598. Jon Schleier, 80 Sandy Bend Road, Rocky Point, NC 28457. Alice Wright, Department of Anthropology, Appalachian State University, 322 Anne Belk Hall, Boone, NC 28608. Information for Subscribers North Carolina Archaeology is published once a year in October. Subscription is by membership in the North Carolina Archaeological Society, Inc. Annual dues are $15.00 for regular members, $25.00 for sustaining members, $10.00 for students, $20.00 for families, $250.00 for life members, $250.00 for corporate members, and $25.00 for institutional subscribers. Members also receive two issues of the North Carolina Archaeological Society Newsletter. Membership requests, dues, subscriptions, changes of address, and back issue orders should be directed to: Lisa-Jean Michienzi, Research Laboratories of Archaeology, CB 3120, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3120. Information for Authors North Carolina Archaeology publishes articles on the archaeology of North Carolina and neighboring states. One copy of each manuscript, with accompanying tables, figures, and bibliography, should be submitted to the Editor. Manuscripts should be double spaced with ample margins throughout. Style should conform to guidelines American Antiquity (see http://www.saa.org/AbouttheSociety/Publications/ StyleGuide/tabid/984/Default.aspx). The Editor can assist those wishing to submit a manuscript but who are unfamiliar with American Antiquity style. DON’T LET ETHICS GET IN THE WAY OF DOING WHAT’S RIGHT: THREE DECADES OF WORKING WITH COLLECTORS IN NORTH CAROLINA by I. Randolph Daniel, Jr. Abstract In North Carolina, collaboration between professional and avocational archaeologists remains informal, particularly with respect to those that participate in artifact collecting. Given that some private collections do have scientific value, increased collaboration between both groups is warranted. Moreover, this work can engage collectors in a way that is consistent with our discipline’s ethical principles. But such work is not without its challenges. During three decades of working with collectors I’ve struggled with three concerns: verifying artifact proveniences, avoiding fakes, and commercialism. Nevertheless, these issues are not insurmountable, and I provide my perspective as a point of reference. “Sounds like you don’t want ethics to get in the way of doing what’s right.” My friend’s comment, some 25 years ago, aptly summarized our conversation as I expressed ambivalence regarding the nature of my interaction with artifact collectors. In particular, I was discussing the potential ethical dilemma I sometimes felt with respect to the statewide fluted point survey I had recently begun. While I had been looking at private collections for years, my examination was done informally to satisfy my curiosity regarding what these collections might hold. Based upon what I saw and my conversations with the collectors themselves, over time I became convinced that some collections were more than groups of curios—some collections held data of scientific value. Now I was attempting to demonstrate that value by explicitly recording and publishing information on fluted points. While there was some precedent around the region (e.g., Charles 1979; McCary 1984) for what I was doing, I still felt some uneasiness as to the nature of my collaboration. On the one hand, I was excited about potentially making a contribution to our understanding of the little-known Paleoindian period in North Carolina. On the other hand, virtually all of the points I needed to examine were in the hands of private collectors. Collaborating with artifact collectors was an activity that some colleagues viewed as troublesome if not unethical. In their minds such collaboration gave tacit 1 NORTH CAROLINA ARCHAEOLOGY [Vol. 65, 2016] approval to an activity that contributed to the destruction of the archaeological record. But many of the collections I saw were collections that were reasonably documented and the collector was willing to share that information with me. Was it preferable, then, to ignore all amateurs’ collections because they were not recovered by a professional archaeologist? Or was it possible to engage collectors on a case-by-case basis to determine if some middle ground could be reached such that some scientific information could be gleaned from their work? The latter instance, I thought, was acting akin to the “spirit of the law” rather than the “letter of the law” with regard to archaeological ethics— which at that time only existed informally in the profession—and thus I was doing what was right by the discipline. And so my recording of fluted point collections began. Today, I remain convinced that fruitful collaborations can exist between professionals and members of the artifact-collecting community. Even so, it is hard to deny that a certain stigma often clouds that association and affects professionals and collectors alike. Fortunately, there now appears to be a rapprochement of sorts that is beginning to emerge in the discipline with regard to collaborating with private collectors. Indeed, some in the profession argue that the Society for American Archaeology’s (SAA) Principles of Archaeological Ethics (discussed below) obligate professionals to collaborate with responsible collectors (Pitblado and Shott 2015; Shott and Pitblado 2015). This is not to imply there is a consensus on the issue, as a level of opposition to working with collectors still exists (e.g.,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Nadia CV 09:17:19
    Nadia C. Neff, PhD Student Department of Anthropology [email protected] University of New Mexico (970) 488 – 9932 Anthropology Annex B06E Albuquerque, New Mexico EDUCATION AND TRAINING University of New Mexico Albuquerque, NM PhD Student 2019 – present Department of Anthropology Archaeology Subfield Fort Lewis College Durango, CO Visiting Instructor of Anthropology 2017 – 2019 Department of Anthropology University of York York, United Kingdom Master of Science, Bioarchaeology 2014 – 2016 Department of Archaeology Graduated with Merit Fort Lewis College Durango, CO Bachelor of Art, Anthropology 2009 – 2013 Department of Anthropology Graduated with Honors RESEARCH EXPERIENCE PhD Student 2019 - present University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM Advisors: Dr. Osbjorn Pearson, Dr Keith Prufer Rodents! Using stable isotopes to model dietary and environmental change from the Paleoindian period to the Mayan Collapse in modern Belize. – Currently studying the utility of using stable isotopes in rodent remains as a proxy for studying human dietary and environmental activity. Masters Student 2014 – 2016 University of York, York, United Kingdom Advisor: Dr. Matthew Collins Identifying potential sites of conflict through the analysis of possible human bone fragments via ZooMS (Zooarchaeology by Mass Spectrometry). – Studied the applications of using ZooMS for the identification of human bone fragments in archaeological and forensic contexts. Nadia C. Neff | [email protected] | (970) 488 – 9932 1 – Combined traditional field survey and documentation methods with biomolecular protein analysis to create human bone scatter maps to identify possible sites of conflict. – Research based on a case study involving the Battle of Towton (1461) site. Collagen extraction method testing in highly degraded bone fragments – Tested collagen extraction methods (HCl demineralization versus AmBiC surface washing) on highly degraded bone fragments found in surface and top soil finds.
    [Show full text]
  • Parasites and Skeletal Indicators of Anemia in the Eastern United States
    Parasites and skeletal indicators of anemia in the eastern United States Item Type Thesis Authors Dinneen, Erin Download date 06/10/2021 02:28:21 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/11122/4801 ii PARASITES AND SKELETAL INDICATORS OF ANEMIA IN THE EASTERN UNITED STATES A THESIS Presented to the Faculty of the University of Alaska Fairbanks in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS By Erin E. Dinneen, B.S. Fairbanks, Alaska Title Page December 2014 iii Abstract The goal of this research is to examine the influence of parasitic infection and diet in the etiology of anemia in prehistoric human populations of the eastern United States. Prehistorically, anemia is often attributed to a nutrient-deficient diet, while parasite infection is discussed as a secondary cause if at all. However, parasite infection is a leading cause of anemia in the developing world today. Modern epidemiological studies have demonstrated that parasites thrive or perish under particular environmental conditions, and risk for parasite infection can be predicted based on environment using GIS. Here I apply this method to see whether environmental conditions, acting as a proxy for parasite infection risk, can predict prehistoric skeletal lesion rates for porotic hyperostosis and cribra orbitalia, lesions thought to reflect acquired anemia. Rates of porotic hyperostosis and cribra orbitalia in the skeletal remains of children and adults were collected from published data for 22 sites in the eastern United States. GIS was used to gather comparable environmental data. Soil drainage, elevation, precipitation, temperature and the surface area of bodies of water were recorded within a 15 km radius of each site.
    [Show full text]
  • COLIN RENFREW PAUL BAHN Theories, Methods, and Practice
    COLIN RENFREW PAUL BAHN Theories, Methods, and Practice COLLEGE EDITION SEVENTH EDITION REVISED & UPDATED ~ Thames & Hudson CONTENTS Preface to the College Edition 9 BOX FEATURES Experimental Archaeology 53 Introduction Wet Preservation: The Ozette Site 60 The Nature and Aims of Archaeology 12 Dry Preservation: The Tomb of Tutankhamun 64 Cold Preservation 1: Mountain "Mummies" 67 Cold Preservation 2: Snow Patch Archaeology 68 PART I Cold Preservation 3: The Iceman 70 The Framework of Archaeology 19 3 Where? 1 The Searchers Survey and Excavation of Sites and Features 73 The History of Archaeology 21 Discovering Archaeological s.ites The Speculative Phase 22 and Features 74 The Beginnings of Modern Archaeology 26 Assessing the Layout of Sites and Features 98 Classification and Consolidation 32 Excavation 110 A Turning Point in Archaeology 40 Summary 130 World Archaeology 41 Further Reading 130 Summary 48 BOX FEATURES Further Reading 48 The Sydney Cyprus Survey Project 76 Sampling Strategies 79 BOX FEATURES Identifying Archaeological Features from Above 82 Digging Pompeii: Past and Present 24 Interpretation and Mapping From Aerial Images 86 Evolution: Darwin's Great Idea 27 Lasers in the Jungle 89 North American Archaeological Pioneers 30 GIS and the Giza Plateau 96 The Development of Field Techniques 33 Tell Ha lula: Multi-period Surface Investigations JOO Pioneering Women in Archaeology 38 Geophysical Survey at Roman Wroxeter 106 Processual Archaeology 41 Measuring Magnetism 108 Interpretive or Postprocessual Archaeologies 44 Underwater
    [Show full text]
  • Battlefield Archaeology: a Guide to the Archaeology of Conflict
    BATTLEFIELD ARCHAEOLOGY: A GUIDE TO THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF CONFLICT Guide 8 BAJR Practical Guide Series Prepared By Tim Sutherland Department of Archaeological Sciences University of Bradford With Contributions On Human Remains By Malin Holst York Osteoarchaeology Ltd © held by authors TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTENTS Page Acknowledgements v 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 WHAT IS BATTLEFIELD ARCHAEOLOGY? 1 3.0 WHY IS THE ANALYSIS OF SITES OF CONFLICT IMPORTANT? 3 3.1 THE USE OF CONFLICTS FOR PROPAGANDA AND MISINFORMATION 4 3.2 BATTLEFIELDS AS MEMORIALS 5 3.3 BATTLEFIELD TOURISM 7 3.4 RE-ENACTMENT 8 3.5 FOCI FOR SOCIAL ACTIVITIES 8 3.6 VIEWS OF THE NATIONAL BODIES 9 3.6.1 The Battlefield Trust 9 3.6.2 English Heritage 9 3.7 BATTLEFIELDS AND THE MEDIA 10 4.0 A BRIEF BATTLEFIELD HISTORY 11 4.1 INTRODUCTION 11 4.2 CASE STUDIES 13 4.2.1 Pre-Twentieth Century Archaeological Investigations 13 5.0 WHY MIGHT A SITE OF CONFLICT BE DISTURBED 14 5.1 WHAT LEGISLATION IS THERE IN PLACE TO PROTECT HISTORIC 15 BATTLEFIELDS? 5.1.1 English Legislation 15 5.1.2 Scotland 18 5.1.3 Wales 18 5.1.4 Northern Ireland 18 6.0 IDENTIFICATION OF SITES OF CONFLICT 18 6.1 EVIDENCE FOR CONFLICT 18 6.2 HOW LARGE MIGHT A BATTLEFIELD BE 19 6.3 DIFFERENT TYPES OF BATTLEFIELD SITES 19 7.0 METHODS OF EVALUATION 20 7.1 EARTHWORK SURVEYS 21 7.2 GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY 21 7.2.1 Metal Detector Survey 21 7.2.2 Fluxgate Gradiometer or Magnetometer 22 7.2.3 Electrical Earth Resistance Meter 23 7.2.4 Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) 23 7.3 FIELD WALKING 23 7.4 DESK TOP ASSESSMENTS 23 8.0 ARTEFACT IDENTIFICATION
    [Show full text]
  • How to Build a Mississippian House: a Study of Domestic Architecture in West – Central Alabama
    HOW TO BUILD A MISSISSIPPIAN HOUSE: A STUDY OF DOMESTIC ARCHITECTURE IN WEST – CENTRAL ALABAMA by CAMERON HAWKINS LACQUEMENT A THESIS Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in the Department of Anthropology in the Graduate School of the University of Alabama TUSCALOOSA, ALABAMA 2004 Submitted by Cameron H. Lacquement in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts specializing in Anthropology. Accepted on behalf of the Faculty of the Graduate School by the thesis committee: _________________________________ Keith P. Jacobi, Ph.D. ____________________________ Richard A. Krause, Ph.D. ____________________________ Kathryn S. Oths, Ph.D. ____________________________ Richard R. Polhemus, Ph.D. ____________________________ Vernon J. Knight, Jr., Ph.D. Chairperson ________________________ Date ____________________________ Michael D. Murphy, Ph.D. Department Chairperson ________________________ Date ____________________________ Ronald W. Rogers, Ph.D. Dean of the Graduate School ii Acknowledgments I am indebted to a number of individuals for their assistance in completing this thesis project. I would like to extend special gratitude to Vernon J. Knight Jr. for his support and guidance throughout this project. Without him, it would not have been possible. I also would like to thank the members of my thesis committee, Keith P. Jacobi, Richard A. Krause, Kathryn S. Oths, and Richard R. Polhemus for their encouragement and direction during my project. I am also indebted to Kenneth J. Fridley, Professor and Chair of the University of Alabama’s Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, who was not an official member of my committee, yet treated me as one of his own students.
    [Show full text]
  • CONFERENCE PROGRAMME Tuesday, July 7 Panel Session 2: 09.30-11:00 / Panel Session 3: 11:30-13:00
    15th International Conference of the European Association of Southeast Asian Archaeologists 6 -10 July 2015, Université Paris Ouest Nanterre la Défense Organisers and acknowledgements Map of Campus EurASEAA15 Conference main organiser: Bérénice Bellina-Pryce (Centre National de la Recherche Scientifi que, UMR 7055 “Préhistoire et Technologie”) EurASEAA15 Scientifi c Committee: Bérénice Bellina-Pryce (Chair – CNRS, UMR 7055 “PréTech”), Véronique Degroot (EFEO), Jean- MAE Christophe Galipaud (Paloc, MNHN/IRD), Agustijanto Indrajaya (Pusat Arkeologi Nasional, Indonesian EurASEAA15 National Archaeology Center), Nam Kim (University Wisconsin-Madison), Helen Anne Lewis (University College Dublin), Thomas Oliver Pryce (CNRS, UMR7055 “PréTech”), François Sémah P (MNHN), Rasmi Shoocongdej (Silpakorn University) EurASEAA15 Organising Committee: EurASEAA15 Bérénice Bellina-Pryce (CNRS, UMR 7055 “Préhistoire et Technologie”), Thomas Oliver Pryce (CNRS, Bâtiment B t t UMR7055 “PréTech”), Pierre Baty (Inrap), Claudine Bautze-Picron (CNRS, UMR7528 “Mondes iranien e e n n n n i i et indien”),Vincenzo Celiberti (Centre Européen de Recherche Préhistorique de Tautavel),Véronique s s Degroot (EFEO), Aude Favereau (MNHM), Jean-Christophe Galipaud (Paloc, MNHN/IRD), Laurence Library de Quinty (USR 3225, MAE), Isabelle Rivoal (CNRS, LESC, USR 3225), François Sémah (MNHN), Isabelle Sidéra (CNRS, UMR 7055 “Prétech”) Restaurant Conference administrators: CROUS NomadIT: Eli Bugler, Darren Edale, James Howard, Rohan Jackson, Triinu Mets, Elaine Morley Exhibitors and
    [Show full text]
  • Volume 3 – FOC 2018
    Page 1 of 112 Editors and Authors Page 2 of 112 Table of Contents Battlefield Studies Archaeology of Modern Conflict: The War after the War in Lithuania and Battle of Užpelkiai Forest, 1949 Gediminas Petrauskas, Aistė Petrauskienė, Vykintas Vaitkevičius………………......................................................................4 The Methodology Used to Identify the Battle Site of Fulford Chas Jones………………………………………………………………………..19 The Battle of Alcalá La Vieja. Location and Understanding of a Medieval Battle. Mario Ramírez Galán, Rafael Montalvo Laguna and María Benítez Galán………………………………………………………...26 Initial Discussions on Military Archaeology Zhao Congcang…………………………………………………………………..44 The Battle of Cheriton: The Archaeology of an English Civil War Battlefield Kevin M. Claxton………………………………………………………………...50 American Revolutionary War “Running the Gauntlet: Locating the Battle of Parker’s Ferry, South Carolina” Steven D. Smith, James B. Legg, Brian C. Mabelitini…………………………..64 “In the Morning We Began to Strip and Bury the Dead:” A Context for Burial Practices During the American War for Independence Robert A. Selig &Wade P. Catts………………………………………………...78 Historical Narrative and Cultural Landscape Analysis: Revealing the American War of Independence Battle of Chelsea Creek Victor T. Mastone, Craig J. Brown, Christopher V. Maio.............................................................................................93 Page 3 of 112 Battlefield Studies Archaeology of Modern Conflict: The War after the War in Lithuania and Battle of Užpelkiai Forest, 1949 Gediminas Petrauskas1, Aistė Petrauskienė2, Vykintas Vaitkevičius3 1. National Museum of Lithuania, Department of Archaeology, Arsenalo St. 1, LT-01143 Vilnius, Lithuania. E-mail: [email protected] 2. National Museum of Lithuania, Department of Modern History, Arsenalo St. 1, LT-01143 Vilnius, Lithuania. E-mail: [email protected] 3. Vilnius University, Faculty of Communication, Saulėtekio Av.
    [Show full text]
  • Archaeology of the Contemporary Past
    Originally published as González‐Ruibal, A. 2014. Contemporary Past, Archaeology of the. In Claire Smith (Ed.): Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology, New York: Springer, pp 1683-1694. Archaeology of the contemporary past Alfredo González-Ruibal Introduction The archaeology of the contemporary past is a new and interdisciplinary field of research that intersects with heritage studies, art, ethnography and modern history. This kind of archaeology, as it is practised today, was born in the late 1990s. However, its intellectual roots go further back (Harrison 2011: 144-149). While “archaeology” literally means the study of ancient things, archaeologists have always been concerned with the present, although in very different ways. During the nineteenth century, there was no clear-cut division between present and past, archaeology and anthropology, and prehistory books regularly included living societies (but always non-industrial). This perspective soon fell into disrepute, due to its inherent racism and simplistic evolutionism. From the late 1950s onwards, archaeologists renewed their interest in the contemporary world through a new method—ethnoarchaeology—and a new theory— processualism. As in the previous century, it was traditional groups that were targeted: other societies were not studied. This is because ethnoarchaeology was conducted for the sake of developing analogies to understand the past, not as an end in itself to understand the present. Historical Background Despite their lack of concern for contemporary communities, processual archaeologists, like Lewis Binford, paved the way for an archaeological study of the present. On the one hand, unlike culture-historical archaeologists, processualists were not concerned with particular periods and cultures, but with understanding human behavior and social processes in general—and this could include the present.
    [Show full text]
  • The Archaeology, Bioarchaeology, Ethnography, Ethnohistory, and History Bibliography of the Caddo Indian Peoples of Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas
    Volume 2021 Article 1 2021 The Archaeology, Bioarchaeology, Ethnography, Ethnohistory, and History Bibliography of the Caddo Indian Peoples of Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas Timothy K. Perttula None Duncan McKinnon Scott Hammerstedt University of Oklahoma Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/ita Part of the American Material Culture Commons, Archaeological Anthropology Commons, Environmental Studies Commons, Other American Studies Commons, Other Arts and Humanities Commons, Other History of Art, Architecture, and Archaeology Commons, and the United States History Commons Tell us how this article helped you. Cite this Record Perttula, Timothy K.; McKinnon, Duncan; and Hammerstedt, Scott (2021) "The Archaeology, Bioarchaeology, Ethnography, Ethnohistory, and History Bibliography of the Caddo Indian Peoples of Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas," Index of Texas Archaeology: Open Access Gray Literature from the Lone Star State: Vol. 2021, Article 1. ISSN: 2475-9333 Available at: https://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/ita/vol2021/iss1/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Center for Regional Heritage Research at SFA ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Index of Texas Archaeology: Open Access Gray Literature from the Lone Star State by an authorized editor of SFA ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Archaeology, Bioarchaeology, Ethnography, Ethnohistory, and History Bibliography of the Caddo Indian Peoples of Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. This article is available in Index of Texas Archaeology: Open Access Gray Literature from the Lone Star State: https://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/ita/vol2021/iss1/1 1 The Archaeology, Bioarchaeology, Ethnography, Ethnohistory, and History Bibliography of the Caddo Indian Peoples of Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas Compiled by Timothy K.
    [Show full text]
  • Program of the 79Th Annual Meeting
    Program of the 79th Annual Meeting April 23–27, 2014 Austin, Texas THE ANNUAL MEETING of the Society for American Archaeology provides a fo- rum for the dissemination of knowledge and discussion. The views expressed at the sessions are solely those of the speakers and the Society does not endorse, approve, or censor them. Descriptions of events and titles are those of the orga- nizers, not the Society. Program of the 79th Annual Meeting Published by the Society for American Archaeology 1111 14th Street NW, Suite 800 Washington DC 20005 5622 USA Tel: +1 202/789 8200 Fax: +1 202/789 0284 Email: [email protected] WWW: http://www.saa.org Copyright © 2014 Society for American Archaeology. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reprinted in any form or by any means without prior permission from the publisher. Contents 4 Awards Presentation & Annual Business Meeting Agenda 5 2014 Award Recipients 12 Maps 17 Meeting Organizers, SAA Board of Directors, & SAA Staff 19 General Information 21 Featured Sessions 23 Summary Schedule 27 A Word about the Sessions 28 Student Day 2014 29 Sessions At A Glance 37 Program 214 SAA Awards, Scholarships, & Fellowships 222 Presidents of SAA 222 Annual Meeting Sites 224 Exhibit Map 225 Exhibitor Directory 236 SAA Committees and Task Forces 241 Index of Participants 4 Program of the 79th Annual Meeting Awards Presentation & Annual Business Meeting April 25, 2014 5 PM Call to Order Call for Approval of Minutes of the 2013 Annual Business Meeting Remarks President Jeffrey H. Altschul Reports Treasurer Alex W. Barker Secretary Christina B.
    [Show full text]
  • SEAC Newsletter Fall 2010.Pub
    SOUTHEASTERN ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONFERENCE N E W S L E T T E R Volume 52, Number 2 October 2010 Edited by Phillip Hodge, Office of Social and Cultural Resources, TN-DOT 505 Deaderick Street, Suite 900, Nashville, TN 37243 ([email protected]) SEAC 2010, Lexington, Kentucky Inside This Issue: The 2010 SEAC meeting is almost upon us! The prelimi- nary program can be found in this issue starting on page four. A Letter from SEAC President A searchable PDF version is available on the SEAC website. David G. Anderson 2 The 2010 program will be one of the largest SEAC gatherings in recent memory. There are 368 scheduled papers and post- ers consisting of 17 symposia and 18 general sessions, includ- SEAC 2010 Meeting ing four poster sessions. Five symposia are all day affairs with Information 3 morning and afternoon sessions. In addition, there is an open panel discussion on the role of Tribal consultation in Ken- tucky archaeology, an open forum on public archaeology, and a student workshop on integrating subdisciplinary research. SEAC 2010 Preliminary Special events include a Student Affairs reception, a general Program 4 reception with hors d’oeuvres at Victorian Square, Great Spirits of SEAC, the SEAC business meeting, and the dance Friday night featuring the Sensations Dance Band. Saturday News and Current Research 14 afternoon there are three different tours to regional archaeo- logical and historical sites, including Adena mounds and earth- works, Shakertown and Camp Nelson, and the historic Bour- SEAC Public Outreach 2011 bon Trail. The tours will conclude with a catered dinner and Grant Cycle 16 reception at the Bodley-Bullock House in downtown Lexing- ton.
    [Show full text]
  • Old Marblehead Sea Captains and the Ships in Which They Sailed
    Old Marblehead Sea Captains and the Ships in Which They Sailed Compiled and Published for the Benefit of the MARBLEHEAD HISTORICAL SOCIETY By Benjamin J. LINDSEY, Treasurer 1915 Copyrighted by BENJAMIN J. LINDSEY, 1915 Marblehead, Mass. ABBREVIATIONS S P - Ship' Paper or Pass (see cut; page 23) C P - Clearance Paper (see Cut) page 52 and 98. M V S - Marblehead Vital Statistics G C. - Capt. George Cloutman's Letter Book G B - Glover Broughton INTRODUCTION The information contained in this volume has been obtained by careful and persistent research from widely distributed sources viz: the Marblehead and Salem and Beverly Custom House Records, original books of the Marble- head Marine Insurance Company, covering five thousand policies running from 1800 to 1840, list of Marblehead Soldiers and Sailors in the Revolutionary War (compiled in 1912-13 by the author), old log books, old letter books, old newspapers, list of Privateersmen of 1812 made up by Capt. Glover Broughton in a memorial to the 34th, 35th and 36th Congresses asking for grants of land for services rendered, and from the descendants of the men mentioned. This volume is intended to be a fairly accurate list of the Old Sea Captains of Marblehead, and the vessels in which they sailed, going to and from foreign ports. The list of the names of the men is very nearly complete, but the list of the vessels is not as satisfactory, it being at this late date practically impossible to obtain complete information. Of the five hundred men mentioned, but two are alive at this time, Captain John D.
    [Show full text]