DOCSLIB.ORG

Preserving Fields of Conflict: Papers from the 2014 Fields of Conflict Conference and Preservation Workshop Steven D

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Preserving Fields of Conflict: Papers from the 2014 Fields of Conflict Conference and Preservation Workshop Steven D University of South Carolina Scholar Commons Faculty Publications Anthropology, Department of 2016 Preserving Fields of Conflict: Papers from the 2014 Fields of Conflict Conference and Preservation Workshop Steven D. Smith University of South Carolina - Columbia, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/anth_facpub Part of the Anthropology Commons Publication Info Published in 2016. Smith, Steven D., ed. Preserving Fields of Conflict: Papers from the 2014 Fields of Conflict Conference and Preservation Workshop. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina--South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology, 2016. http://artsandsciences.sc.edu/sciaa/ © 2016 by University of South Carolina--South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology This Book is brought to you by the Anthropology, Department of at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PRESERVING FIELDS OF CONFLICT: PAPERS FROM THE 2014 FIELDS OF CONFLICT CONFERENCE AND PRESERVATION WORKSHOP STEVEN D. SMITH, EDITOR South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology College of Arts and Sciences University of South Carolina Columbia, South Carolina 1321 Pendleton St. Columbia, SC 29208 PRESERVING FIELDS OF CONFLICT: PAPERS FROM THE 2014 FIELDS OF CONFLICT CONFERENCE AND PRESERVATION WORKSHOP STEVEN D. SMITH, EDITOR South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology Columbia, South Carolina 1321 Pendleton St. Columbia, SC 29208 Funded by: Grant GA2287-13-023 American Battlefield Protection Program Heritage Preservation Services Division National Park Service Washington, DC Southeast Archeological Center, National Park Service Tallahassee, Florida Department of Anthropology University of Nebraska-Lincoln Lincoln, Nebraska South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology College of Arts and Sciences University of South Carolina Columbia, SC 2016 This material is based upon work assisted by a grant from the Department of Interior, National Park Service, American Battlefield Protection Program. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of Interior. Photo Credits: Unless otherwise noted, all photos and images are owned by the respective authors. ii MANAGEMENT SUMMARY From 12 through 15 March 2014 conflict archeologists and preservationists met in Columbia, South Carolina, to present 54 papers and 14 posters at the 8th Biennial Fields of Conflict Conference. In conjunction with the conference, a workshop was held on the preservation of battlefields across the globe entitled “Call to Action: National Park Service American Battlefield Protection Program Battlefield Preservation Workshop.” The 33 papers in this volume are extended abstracts of those papers presented in a popular format. The goal of this volume is to make conflict archeology assessable to the public and raise the awareness of the critical importance of battlefield preservation. iii iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword ............................................................................................................................................................. Kristen McMasters ................................................................................................................................. ix Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................................. xi Introduction to the Volume Steven D. Smith ...................................................................................................................................... 1 From Metal Detecting to a New Museum at Monmouth Battlefield Park: The Story of BRAVO Daniel Silivich ................................................................................................................................... 7 Better Training = Better Battlefield Interpretation: The AMDA and APP Classes Christopher T. Espenshade and Patrick Severts .....................................................................................11 Conservation Through Recognition: Material Culture Research as a Heritage Management Tool for Conflict Sites Natasha Ferguson ..................................................................................................................................17 The Extensive Battlefield of Kalkriese (Varus Battle 9 AD): A Challenge for Archeological Research and Monument Preservation Achim Rost and Susanne Wilbers-Rost ..................................................................................................25 Preserving the Dacian Landscape: Documenting Roman and Dacian Military Fortifications in Romania .............. Jeremy C. Miller ...................................................................................................................................31 Landscape of Conflict in 12th-Century Gwynedd ................................................................................................. Jacqueline Veninger ...............................................................................................................................39 Guns on the Battlefields of Late Medieval Europe: Archeological Evidence for the Origins of Firepower Glenn Foard ...................................................................................................................................47 The Slingstones and Arrows of Unfortunate Outrage: Vazquez De Coronado in the Rio Grande Valley, 1540-1542 Matthew F. Schmader............................................................................................................................51 Rough People in a Rough Situation: Mixton War (1541-1542) and Caxcanes ....................................................... Angélica María Medrano Enríquez .........................................................................................................59 Contemporary Military Concepts as Interpretive Frameworks for Understanding the Conduct of Historical Warfare Nathan H. Ledbetter ..............................................................................................................................65 v Battlefield Protection in Germany and the Lützen Project André Schürger ...................................................................................................................................69 Historical and Archeological Investigations of 1812-1813 Cantonment Saranac, Plattsburgh, New York Timothy Abel ...................................................................................................................................75 Archeology and the Second Battle of Sackets Harbor: Why the Militia Deserves its Due ..................................... Matthew Kirk and Corey D. McQuinn ....................................................................................................79 “I Tremble for the Fate of the Greenbrier People”: Border Conflict in Revolutionary Era West Virginia W. Stephen McBride and Kim A. McBride ..............................................................................................85 Modeling Small Arms Projectile Distribution on 18th and 19th Century Battlefields Garrett W. Silliman and Brandon Batt ...................................................................................................91 A Mnemonic Artifact: A 1777 Cheval De Frise from the Delaware River Battlefield Nicole Wittig and Lawrence Babits ..................................................................................................... 101 Stirring the Hornet’s Nest: Recent Conflict Archeology in Wilkes County, Georgia Daniel T. Elliott ................................................................................................................................ 107 Locating the Lost American Revolutionary Battle of Brier Creek, Georgia Daniel Battle ................................................................................................................................ 113 Revolutionary Savannah or Just Another Ghost Tour? ......................................................................................... Rita Folse Elliott ................................................................................................................................ 119 The Search for Williamson’s Plantation Battlefield Michael C. Scoggins and Steven D. Smith ............................................................................................ 125 A Closer Look at the Battle of Palo Alto: Historic Background Rolando L. Garza ................................................................................................................................ 129 The Archeology of the 1846 Mexican American War Battle of Palo Alto .............................................................. John E. Cornelison, Jr., Rolando L. Garza, Guy L. Prentice, and Michael A. Seibert .............................. 135 Determining Battle Lines: A pXRF Study of the Lead Shot from the Battle of Palo Alto Michael Seibert, John Cornelison, Rolando Garza, Sarah Kovalaskas, and Bruce Kaiser ...................... 143 Skeletal Analysis of Mexican Soldiers from the Battle of Resaca De La Palma Daniel J. Wescott ...............................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • How Strong Was Strong Mountain? Preliminary Remarks on the Possible Location of the Mamluk Siege Position at Montfort Castle
    CHAPTER 26 How Strong was Strong Mountain? Preliminary Remarks on the Possible Location of the Mamluk Siege Position at Montfort Castle Rafael Lewis During a topographic and landscape archaeology sur- logical site to the broader landscape, including every vey, thoughts on Montfort Castle’s topographical infe- archaeological feature in it. The field methods used riority led to some preliminary1 ideas on the manner in Landscape Archaeology and the Archaeology of in which the Teutonic Order dealt with this crucial Conflicts includes the equal examination of all man- weakness, and what would have been the best loca- made features, not excluding modern elements which tion for the Mamluks to position their siege machinery are documented and studied. The underlying concept and camps during the two assaults of the castle in May of this approach is that in order to understand the 1266 and June 1271.2 meaning of a single find or feature, we need to under- Montfort Castle is isolated from main roads, com- stand the environment in which they were found and mercial centres and major settlements. The problem how they relate to it. The manner in which objects of its isolated location has been raised in the past.3 In are scattered in the landscape is examined strati- order to better understand the castle in its setting, I graphically, but also according to their focal, discrete or decided to go beyond the well-secured boundaries of expanded nature. A path, for example, can usually be the castle’s walls, to raise my head (methodologically) described as a discrete or expanded feature, but a road from the trenches, bulks and archaeological artefacts, junction where a few such features meet, is usually of and look at this specific topic of inquiry from a wide a focal nature.
    [Show full text]
  • Inside... DIRECTOR’S NOTE VOL
    Inside... DIRECTOR’S NOTE VOL. 24, NO. 2, DECEMBER 2020 Battlefield Archaeology Book––Francis Marion and the Snow’s Island Community RESEARCH Small Arms Evidence from Star Fort Numismatic History of Charlesfort/Santa Elena: Plantation Era New Mound at Mulberry Archaeology in South Carolina Book MARITIME RESEARCH MRD Features in National Geographic TV Channel Drain the Oceans Season 3 A Mystery Object from Mississippi SAVANNAH RIVER By Chester B. DePratter, Director of Research ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH In 1976, I first became interested in colleagues, Charles Hudson and Marvin PROGRAM Hernando de Soto and the expedition he Smith, and I have published papers on Public Outreach in Time of Covid led through the Southeast when I was the 1539-1543 route that Soto and his men SCIAA ANNUAL REPORT just beginning work on my Ph.D. at the took from their landing in Tampa Bay, A New Feature in Legacy University of Georgia. In the 44 years that Florida, to the departure of the expedition have passed since then, my friends and survivors down the Mississippi River HISTORIC ARCHAEOLOGY A New Feature in Legacy MYSTERY ARTIFACT, See Page 4 ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH TRUST (ART) AND SCIAA DONORS ENDOWMENT OPPORTUNITIES Stanley South Student Archaeological Research Endowment Fund Thank you for your generous support of the Archaeological Research Trust (ART) Endowment Fund and the printing of Legacy. Please send donations in the enclosed envelope to Nena Powell Rice USC/SCIAA, 1321 Pendleton Street, Columbia, SC 29208, indicating whether you want to continue receiving Legacy and include your email address. All contributions are appreciated. Please visit our website at: http://www.
    [Show full text]
  • Indiana Archaeology
    INDIANA ARCHAEOLOGY Volume 6 Number 1 2011 Indiana Department of Natural Resources Division of Historic Preservation and Archaeology (DHPA) ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Indiana Department of Natural Resources Robert E. Carter, Jr., Director and State Historic Preservation Officer Division of Historic Preservation and Archaeology (DHPA) James A. Glass, Ph.D., Director and Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer DHPA Archaeology Staff James R. Jones III, Ph.D., State Archaeologist Amy L. Johnson, Senior Archaeologist and Archaeology Outreach Coordinator Cathy L. Draeger-Williams, Archaeologist Wade T. Tharp, Archaeologist Rachel A. Sharkey, Records Check Coordinator Editors James R. Jones III, Ph.D. Amy L. Johnson Cathy A. Carson Editorial Assistance: Cathy Draeger-Williams Publication Layout: Amy L. Johnson Additional acknowledgments: The editors wish to thank the authors of the submitted articles, as well as all of those who participated in, and contributed to, the archaeological projects which are highlighted. The U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service is gratefully acknow- ledged for their support of Indiana archaeological research as well as this volume. Cover design: The images which are featured on the cover are from several of the individual articles included in this journal. This publication has been funded in part by a grant from the U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service‘s Historic Preservation Fund administered by the Indiana Department of Natural Resources, Division of Historic Preservation and Archaeology. In addition, the projects discussed in several of the articles received federal financial assistance from the Historic Preservation Fund Program for the identification, protection, and/or rehabilitation of historic properties and cultural resources in the State of Indiana.
    [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]
  • An Historical Archaeological Examination of a Battlefield Landscape: an Example from the American Civil War Battle of Wilson's Wharf, Charles City County, Virginia
    W&M ScholarWorks Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects 2003 An historical archaeological examination of a battlefield landscape: An Example from the American Civil War Battle of Wilson's Wharf, Charles City County, Virginia Jameson Michael Harwood College of William & Mary - Arts & Sciences Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/etd Part of the History of Art, Architecture, and Archaeology Commons, Military History Commons, and the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Harwood, Jameson Michael, "An historical archaeological examination of a battlefield landscape: An Example from the American Civil War Battle of Wilson's Wharf, Charles City County, Virginia" (2003). Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects. Paper 1539626393. https://dx.doi.org/doi:10.21220/s2-bkaa-yg82 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects at W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. AN HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL EXAMINATION OF A BATTLEFIELD LANDSCAPE: An Example From The American Civil War Battle Of Wilson’s Wharf, Charles City County, Virginia A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of the Department of Anthropology The College of William and Mary in Virginia In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts by Jameson Michael Harwood 2003 APPROVAL SHEET This thesis is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Jameson MichaefHarwood Approved, May 2003 t Norman Barka Dennis Blanton MarleyBrown, III DEDICATION To the soldiers who fought and died the Wilson’s Wharf battlefield landscape TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Acknowledgements v List of Tables vi List of Figures vii Abstract ix Introduction 2 Chapter I.
    [Show full text]
  • George Rogers Clark ~ Archaeology of a Frontier Hero
    George Rogers Clark ~ Archaeology of a Frontier Hero As often happens, when we learn about many important figures in American history it becomes apparent that they were multi-talented individuals, and multi-faceted. General George Rogers Clark, that great figure in the history of our state and nation, was just such a man. Well known are his heroic military skills and accomplishments, and how those dramatic accomplishments helped form our nation at a critical point in its early development. We might also be aware of his surveying, diplomatic, and inventing skills. But, perhaps not everyone knows that this man also had interests in archaeology, paleontology, geology, and natural history (Thomas and Conner 1967). Archaeology by, and related to, George Rogers Clark in Indiana can be separated into several locations to highlight. The first of these is Fort Sackville, the British outpost described as one “of several forts built by the French, British or Americans from 1732 to 1813 in this important frontier settlement [Vincennes, Indiana]” (National Park Service 2004). Lt. Col. Clark and his brave men in 1779 captured the fort from the British. In recognition of the importance of this military feat, and its significance in our country’s history, the country erected the impressive Beaux Arts monument which stands today in Vincennes. The monument and grounds are now part of the George Rogers Clark National Historical Park, administered by the National Park Service. Sadly, no professional archaeological investigations appear to have been conducted prior to when the site for the monument was cleared of other existing structures, and the excavation preparations for the monument were conducted in the 1930s.
    [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]
  • 2018 Indiana Archaeology Journal Vol. 13. No. 1
    INDIANA ARCHAEOLOGY Volume 13 Number 1 2018 Indiana Department of Natural Resources Division of Historic Preservation and Archaeology (DHPA) ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Indiana Department of Natural Resources Cameron F. Clark, Director and State Historic Preservation Officer Division of Historic Preservation and Archaeology (DHPA) Beth K. McCord, Director and Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer DHPA Archaeology Staff Amy L. Johnson, State Archaeologist, Archaeology Outreach Coordinator, and Team Leader for Archaeology Cathy L. Draeger-Williams, Archaeologist Rachel A. Sharkey, Archaeologist Wade T. Tharp, Archaeologist Editor: Amy L. Johnson Guest Editor: James R. Jones III, Ph.D. Editorial Assistance: Cathy Draeger-Williams, Wade T. Tharp Additional acknowledgments: The editors wish to thank the authors of the submitted articles and report/feature, as well as all of those who participated in, and contributed to, the archaeological projects which are highlighted. The U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service is gratefully acknowledged for their support of Indiana archaeological research as well as this volume. Cover design: The images which are featured on the cover are from the articles included in this journal. This publication has been funded in part by a grant from the U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service’s Historic Preservation Fund administered by the Indiana Department of Natural Resources, Division of Historic Preservation and Archaeology. Projects discussed in several of the articles also received federal financial assistance for the identification, protection, and/or rehabilitation of historic properties and cultural resources in the State of Indiana. However, the contents and opinions contained in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Legacy- December 2018
    University of South Carolina Scholar Commons Archaeology and Anthropology, South Carolina SCIAA Newsletter - Legacy & PastWatch Institute of 12-2018 Legacy- December 2018 South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology--University of South Carolina Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/leg Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons Inside... DIRECTOR’S NOTE Susan Davis New Business Manager New Sergeant York Battlefield Archaeology Book Please Welcome Stacey Young––Applied Research Division VOL. 22, NO. 2, DECEMBER 2018 RESEARCH Broad River Trenching Project APPLIED RESEARCH Deer, Turtles, and Eagles and More: Animals Used at Spanish Mount MARITIME RESEARCH Submerged: Hands-On Interaction with 8th Graders RECENT SCIAA PUBLICATIONS Archaeology in South Carolina: Exploring the Hidden Heritage of the A Tribute to Elizabeth “Betty” Palmetto State Early Human Life on the Southeastern Hamilton Stringfellow (November 14, Coastal Plain and Prehistoric Chipped Stone Tools of South 1921-May 18, 2017) Carolina By Tommy Charles, Albert Goodyear, George Bell, Laura Stringfellow Wilson, and Nena Powell Rice ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH In July 2018, The University of South Stringfellow. This gift is truly appreciated, TRUST (ART) and the research staff at the SCIAA SCIAA Donors Carolina Educational Foundation Archaeological Research Trust (ART) are indebted to the family of Elizabeth EVENTS Endowment at the SC Institute of Stringfellow, fondly known as “Betty,” for 6th Annual Arkhaios Cultural Heritage and Archaeology and Anthropology (SCIAA) years to come. This is a legacy that stems Archaeology Film Festival––Columbia–– received a generous gift of $145,000 from from many years of true friendship–– October 12-14, 2018 the Estate of Mrs.
    [Show full text]
  • The Archaeology of the Camden Battlefield: History, Private Collections, and Field Investigations Steven D
    University of South Carolina Scholar Commons Faculty Publications Anthropology, Department of 1-2009 The Archaeology of the Camden Battlefield: History, Private Collections, and Field Investigations Steven D. Smith University of South Carolina - Columbia, [email protected] James B. Legg University of South Carolina - Columbia, [email protected] Tamara S. Wilson University of South Carolina - Columbia, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/anth_facpub Part of the Anthropology Commons Publication Info Published in 2009. Smith, Steven D., James B. Legg, and Tamara S. Wilson. The Archaeology of the Camden Battlefield: History, Private Collections, and Field Investigations. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina--South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology, 2009. http://www.cas.sc.edu/sciaa/ © 2009 by University of South Carolina--South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology This Book is brought to you by the Anthropology, Department of at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Archaeology of the Camden Battlefield: History, Private Collections, and Field Investigations By Steven D. Smith, James B. Legg, and Tamara S. Wilson South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology, Columbia, South Carolina 1321 Pendleton St. Columbia, SC 29208 Presented to: Palmetto Conservation Foundation 1314 Lincoln St., Suite 305 Columbia, South Carolina 29201 and Save America’s Treasures National Park Service Washington, D.C. 20036 1201 Eye St., NW Washington, D.C. 20005 January 2009 The Archaeology of the Camden Battlefield: History, Private Collections, and Field Investigations By Steven D.
    [Show full text]
  • Archaeologists, Treasure Hunters and Collectors: Heritage in the Spotlight
    heritage Article Archaeologists, Treasure Hunters and Collectors: Heritage in the Spotlight Virginia M. Salerno 1,† , Natalia Mazzia 2,*,† , María Isabel González 3,† and Cecilia Pérez de Micou 4,† 1 CONICET, Instituto de Arqueología, Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Universidad de Buenos Aires. 25 de Mayo 221 3◦ piso, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires C1002ABE, Argentina; [email protected] 2 CONICET Área Arqueología y Antropología, Área de Museos, Municipalidad de Necochea, Av. 10 y calle 93, Necochea, Buenos Aires 7630, Argentina 3 Instituto de Arqueología, Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Universidad de Buenos Aires. 25 de Mayo 221 3◦ piso Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires C1002ABE, Argentina; igonzale@filo.uba.ar 4 CONICET, Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Universidad de Buenos Aires. 3 de Febrero 1378, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires C1426BJN, Argentina; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +54-11-6664-9682 † These authors contributed equally to this work. Received: 6 November 2018; Accepted: 3 January 2019; Published: 9 January 2019 Abstract: This paper inquiries into different aspects involved in gathering archaeological materials practices in the contemporary world. Archaeological objects comprise an intricate network of interests such as social, academic, scientific, touristic, historical, territorial, and economic, among others. It is based on those interests that the objects are appropriated and re-signified depending on specific contexts. We introduce two Argentinean cases in order to look into the relations between people and collected objects, and how those relations intertwine with social and political issues. Founded on these cases, we assess the need to create a broad-encompassing framework to study the collecting practices and the great diversity of actors involved.
    [Show full text]