PUBLISHED BY

THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETY ARCHAEOLOGIST OF OHIO VOLUME 49 WINTER 1999 The Archaeological Society of Ohio MEMBERSHIP AND DUES Annual dues to the Archaeological Society of Ohio are payable on the first of January as follows: Regular membership $17.50; husband and wife (one TERM copy of publication) $18.50; Individual Life Membership $300. Husband and EXPIRES A.S.O. OFFICERS wife Life Membership $500. Subscription to the Ohio Archaeologist, pub­ 2000 President Jeb Bowen, 1982 Velma Avenue, Columbus, OH lished quarterly, is included in the membership dues. The Archaeological 43224, (419)-585-2571. Society of Ohio is an incorporated non-profit organization. 2000 Vice-President William Pickard, 1003 Carlisle Ave., BACK ISSUES Columbus, OH 43224, (614)-262-9516. Publications and back issues of the Ohio Archaeologist: 2000 Executive Secretary Charles Fulk, 2122 Cottage Street, Ash­ Ohio Flint Types, by Robert N. Converse $40.00 add $4.50 P-H land, OH 44805, (419)-289-8313. Ohio Stone Tools, by Robert N. Converse $ 8.00 add $1.50 P-H 2000 Recording Secretary Laurie Pahdopony, 4667 Refugee Rd., Ohio Slate Types, by Robert N. Converse $15.00 add $1.50 P-H Columbus, OH 43232. (614)-759-6344. The Glacial Kame Indians, by Robert N. Converse.$20.00 add $1.50 P-H 2000 Treasurer Gary Kapusta, 3294 Herriff Rd., Ravenna, OH 44266, 1980's & 1990's $ 6.00 add $1.50 P-H 1970's $ 8.00 add $1.50 P-H (330) 296-2287. 1960's $10.00 add $1.50 P-H 2006 Editor Robert N. Converse, 199 Converse Drive, Plain City, Back issues of the Ohio Archaeologist printed prior to 1964 are gen­ OH 43064, (614)-873-5471. erally out of print but copies are available from time to time. Write to 2000 Immediate Past President Carmel "Bud" Tackett. 906 business office for prices and availability. Charleston Pike, Chillicothe, OH 45601, (614)-772-5431. ASO CHAPTERS Aboriginal Explorers Club BUSINESS MANAGER President: Jeff Bendie, 1127 Esther Ave., Wellsville, OH Don Casto, 138 Ann Court, Lancaster, OH 43130 Alum Creek Chapter Business phone: 1-800-736-7815 - Home phone: 1-740-653-9477. President: Craig Alward, 62 Belle Ave., Delaware, OH Beau Fleuve Chapter TRUSTEES President: Richard Sojka, 11253 Broadway, Alden, NY 2000 James G. Hovan, 16979 South Meadow Circle, Strongsville, Black Swamp Chapter OH 44136, (216)-238-1799. President: Marie Plummer Minniear, c/o Dr. David Strothers, Anthropology Dept., University of Toledo, 2801 Bancroft St., Toledo, OH 2000 Steven Kish, 3014 Clark Mill Road, Norton, OH 44203 Blue Jacket Chapter (216)-753-7081. President: Greq Johns, 301 Chillicothe St., Bellefontaine, OH 2000 Walt Sperry, 6910 Range Line Road, Mt. Vernon, OH 43050, Chippewa Valley Chapter (614)-393-2314. President: Skeeter Kish, 3014 Clarkmill Rd., Norton, OH 2000 Russell Strunk, 1608 Clough Pike, Batavia, OH 45103, Cuyahoga Valley Chapter (513)-732-1400. President: Bill Mitchell, 244 Chestnut Blvd., Cuyahoga Falls, OH 2002 Martha Otto, 2200 East Powell Road, Westerville, OH 43801, Dividing Ridges Chapter (614)-297-2641. President: John Mocic, Box 170, RD#1, Valley Drive, 2002 Carl Szafranski, 6106 Ryan Road, Medina, OH 44256, Dilles Bottom, OH (330)-723-7122. Flint Ridge Chapter 2002 Elaine Holzapfel, 415 Memorial Drive, Greenville, OH 45331, President: Joel D. Embry, 7503 Columbus-Lancaster Rd. NW, Carrol, OH (937)-548-0325. Fort Salem Chapter President: Lamont Baudendistle, 310 Water St., Bethel, OH 2002 John Mocic, Box 170, R.D. #1, Dilles Bottom, OH 43947 (740)-676-1077. Fulton Creek Chapter President: Don Mathys, 23000 St. Rt. 47, West Mansfield, OH Johnny Appleseed Chapter President: Jeff Zemrock, 903 Twp. Rd. 2850, Perrysville, OH REGIONAL COLLABORATORS King Beaver Chapter David W. Kuhn, 2103 Grandview Ave., Portsmouth, OH 45662 President: Richard McConnell, 836 Cleland Mill Rd., New Castle, PA Mark W. Long, Box 627, Jackson, OH 45640 Miamiville Archaeological Conservation Chapter Steven Kelley, Seaman, OH President: Bill Egbers, 969 Riverside Dr., Milford, OH William Tiell, 13435 Lake Ave., Lakewood, OH Mound City Chapter James L. Murphy, University Libraries, 1858 Neil Avenue Mall, President: Gary Argabright, 92 N. Courtland Ave., Chillicothe, OH Sandusky Bay Chapter Columbus, OH 43210 President: George DeMuth, 4303 Nash Rd., Wakeman, OH Gordon Hart, 760 N. Main St., Bluffton, Indiana 46714 Sandusky Valley Chapter David J. Snyder, P.O. Box 388, Luckey, OH 43443 President: Dale Stansberry, 13825 OH. 64, Upper Sandusky, OH Dr. Phillip R. Shriver, Miami University, Oxford, OH 45056 Seneca Arrow Hunters Chapter Jeff Carskadden, 960 Eastward Circle, Colony North, President: Don Weller, 3232 S. State Rt. 53, Tiffin, OH Zanesville, OH 43701 Six River Valley Chapter Elaine Holzapfel, 415 Memorial Drive, Greenville, OH 45331 President: Brian G. Foltz, 6566 Charles Rd., Westerville, OH Standing Stone Chapter All articles, reviews, and comments regarding the Ohio Archaeologist President: Bill Pickard, 1003 Carlisle Ave., Columbus, OH should be sent to the Editor. Memberships, requests for back issues, Sugarcreek Valley Chapter changes of address, and other inquiries should be sent to the Busi­ President: Larry L. Morris, 901 Evening Star Ave., East Canton, OH ness Manager. Their Fires Are Cold Chapter President: Kevin Boos, 5710 Old Railroad, Sandusky, OH PLEASE NOTIFY THE BUSINESS MANAGER OF ADDRESS CHANGES IMMEDIATELY SINCE, BY POSTAL REGULATIONS, SOCIETY MAIL CANNOT BE FORWARDED.

NEW BUSINESS OFFICE PHONE NUMBER 1-800-736-7815 TOLL FREE TABLE OF CONTENTS PRESIDENT'S PAGE President's Page by Jeb Bowen 3 Thank you for electing me to serve as president of the Archaeo­ logical Society of Ohio for the 1998-2000 term. I am both deeply A Radiocarbon-Dated Refuse Dump of the Dalton Era touched and profoundly humbled by the confidence which you Olive Branch Site, Alexander County, Illinois have placed in me. I am a professional archaeologist, earning my by Dr. Michael Gramly 4 Ph.D. from The Ohio State University in 1992.1 have participated in A Darke County Adena Site by Jim Bartlett 8 archaeological research in most of Ohio's 88 counties. Sugar Quartz Point From Northern Ohio by The Edwards Family...10 I am a member of 29 state and provincial archaeological soci­ Friends of America's Past 11 eties, as well as the Society for American Archaeology and the Tolu by Elaine Holzapfel 12 American Society for Amateur Archaeology. It has been my priv­ ilege to be active in the Eastern States Archaeological Federa­ The Evolution of Tubular Pipes as Ritualistic Smoking Devices tion, the Midwest Archaeological Conference, and the byD.R. Gehlbach 19 Southeastern Archaeological Conference. The Shady Bend Site by Wayne A. Mortine & Doug Randies 20 It has been 28 years since I Joined the Archaeological Society A Shell Artifact From Muskingum County, Ohio by John Mocic ....24 of Ohio. In 1990, along with Martha Otto, I received the Merito­ rious Service Award. In 1997, I was deeply honored to have the Ohio Eccentrics by George Armann 24 Robert N. Converse Award conferred upon me. Involvement The Adena Pipe by Steven Carpenter 25 with local chapters of the Archaeological Society of Ohio has A Porphyry Birdstone From Hancock County, Ohio long been a priority of mine. I try to attend the meetings of 12 byStodRowe 25 chapters each month. Damage Repair by Robert Haag 26 I have been a member of the Ohio Archaeological Council for 20 Notice to All A.S.O. Chapter Presidents years, and have been elected to serve on various committees. My longtime active participation in the Ohio Archaeological Council and Other Interested Parties by William H. Pickard 27 has been a source of great satisfaction and benefit for me. Missing Bird by Mike Kiel 27 In 1986, I was nominated for, and subsequently received, the Expanded Center Adena Gorgets by Richard Sisson 28 Ohio Historic Preservation Office's Public Education and Aware­ ACrooksville Flint Fluted Point by Robert N. Converse 29 ness Award. This award was presented to me for my role in orga­ nizing amateur archaeologists to conduct archaeological surveys. Cache Blades From Ashland County by Jeff Zemrock 30 Over the years, often through the cooperation of members of the My Nephew's First Find by Dan Kramer 30 Archaeological Society of Ohio, it has been my privilege to enter An Historic Pipe Tomahawk by Lloyd Hamishfeger 31 more than 1000 sites into the Ohio Archaeological Inventory, A Birdstone From Miami County by Rich Millhoff 31 which is maintained by the Ohio Historic Preservation Office. The Ohio Archaeological Inventory is a powerful tool for anyone con­ A Rebuttal to the Archaeoastronomers: ducting archaeological research within the state. Science Begins With The Facts by James A. Marshall 32 In conclusion, I would like to emphasize that your president Letter From Alan Tonetti to A.S.O. Officers 50 strongly supports both the Archaeological Society of Ohio and Reply to Alan Tonetti From Robert N. Converse 51 the Ohio Archaeological Council, and that he is an active partici­ Does the Purchase and Sale of Artifacts pant in both organizations. Your president is also a strong advo­ Benefit the Study of Archaeology? by David w. Kuhn 53 cate of the Ohio Historic Preservation Office, whose programs An Open Letter to the Archaeological Society of Ohio have greatly facilitated his research throughout the years. We by Bradley T. Lepper 54 Ohioans are indeed fortunate to have these three fine organiza­ The Power of Kiowa Song 54 tions to help us in our archaeological endeavors. Archaeology, History and The Fallen Timbers Campaign of 1794 Dr. Jonathan E. "Jeb" Bowen byG. Michael Pratt 55 President, Archaeological Society of Ohio Necrology 55

Front Cover: Five Birdstones From the Collection of Richard Sisson, Columbus, Ohio. Top to bottom: Found near Toledo, Lucas County, Ohio; Collected by Frank Picket in Mercer County, Ohio; Collected by Walter Shilts in Whitley County, Indiana; Collected by Archie Diller of Ml. Coiy, Ohio, from Mr. DeLong who found it near Benton Ridge, Hancock County, Ohio; Found by Jake Stall on his farm in 1934 three miles south of Muhlenberg, New York ATTENTION ALL ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETY MEMBERS IN OUR 57 YEAR HISTORY WE HAVE NEVER BEEN MORE THREATENED! THE COLLECTING OF ARTIFACTS HAS BEEN JEOPARDIZED BY A NEW LAW! As Chairman of the Legislative Committee we are requesting all members, chapter presidents and officers to begin a campaign to either rescind or change - to the satisfaction of our Society - the recently passed HB-429 better known as the "cemetery bill". We were not informed of this law. The amendments to this bill were passed without our knowledge. Although HB-429 can affect our rights to legally collect artifacts, we had no opportunity to testify against it. Private prop­ erty rights have again been eroded by the Ohio Legislature. In the near future we will be contacting members and chapters and asking them to write to their legislators and protest in the strongest language this poorly defined and poorly written law. This is a law which must be changed as soon as pos­ sible or collecting and surface hunting may become illegal. If you want to help contact your Editor. Robert N. Converse. PO Box 61, Plain City, Ohio 43064

3 A RADIOCARBON-DATED REFUSE DUMP OF THE DALTON ERA OLIVE BRANCH SITE, ALEXANDER COUNTY, ILLINOIS by Dr. Michael Gramly Great Lakes Artifact Repository 74 Perry St Buffalo, NY 14203 In August, 1998, the authors directed a dump was given until we reached a depth cemetery, Arkansas (Morse 1998), which brief episode of excavations at the Early of 80 cm below surface. To be sure, the has been assigned an age of 10,000- Archaic Olive Branch site, Alexander flake counts for overlying excavation spits 10,500 years. As we shall argue below, at County, southern Illinois. Fieldwork at this (0-20, 20-40, 40-60 and 60-80) in 2-m Olive Branch this form of point is consider­ monumental encampment on the bank of square S30E10 were strangely uniform — ably less ancient and falls at the end of the the Mississippi River began in 1986 and suggesting an aberration in cultural stratig­ Dalton cultural sequence (9,100-9,500 will continue until the end of 1999. Sev­ raphy. Usually, the counts decrease uni­ radiocarbon years before present). eral publications have emanated from our formly with depth with most stone waste project (Gramly and Funk 1991; Gramly lying in the plow zone or just beneath it. Inventory of Specimens 1994, 1995; Gramly et al. in press; Knight At 80 cm the silts, which normally we We excavated slightly less than 1.2 1998), and the site has been figured in the expect to be colored tan or light brown, cubic meters of fill in the ancient slough. work of other researchers (e.g., Walthall began to take on a darker cast. Also, we Most of the fill was passed through stan­ and Koldehoff 1998). noted an unusual number of small, dard meshes (6 mm and 3 mm). The The importance of the Olive Branch site is smeared lumps of red ochre, minute char­ clinging, muddy residue captured on these what it has to say about the economy of coal granules and white particles. The latter sieves was, in turn, washed and inspected early riverine peoples and the Dalton tool-kit. appeared to be traces of calcined bone — again. Ten 5-gallon pails of fill were also Since it was a base-camp for centuries, it is likely food remains. At the same time there sieved on very fine mesh with the aid of no surprise that thousands of artifacts and a was a sharp increase in the quantity of water. Minute flakes and bone fragments vast quantity of flaked stone waste, fire- flaked stone waste. Some pieces showed were saved as well as larger items. Much cracked rock, and other stony debris have the traces of fire or heating. charcoal was found in this manner, as well, come to rest there. Cooking pits, hearths, Removing the dark soil and abundant but the lumps reserved for dating were postholes and other archaeological features, artifacts as an unit, we observed that the hand-picked by R.M. Gramly from the fills however, are rare. Their small number is deposit rested upon a sloping surface with during their excavation. puzzling in light of the abundant evidence of an irregular margin (Figure 2). We interpret Approximately 6.16 kg (13 lbs., 9 oz.) of day-to-day living. We are forced to conclude this hollow to be the western "toe-end" of a debitage were recovered from the slough that some food preparation methods in this buried slough deepening towards the east. fills. However, there were only a few small ancient era differed from methods used by In the eastern face of 2-m square S30E10 pieces of fire-cracked rock amounting to a later Archaic populations. the slough bottom is 1.1 - 1.4 m below scant 90 grams (3 oz.). We gleaned nearly Such is the quantity of debris that was ground surface, and we predict that future 30 grams (roughly an ounce) of red ochre generated by the Dalton inhabitants of explorations in adjacent grid units will show lumps; some appear to have been rubbed Olive Branch, specific areas of the site it to be considerably deeper. and may have broken off crayons. Other were allocated for its disposal. One such The ancient Dalton inhabitants of Olive non-artifactual materials were two small area lies off the edge of a limestone Branch used the slough as a depository for pebbles of "floatstone." Floatstone is a light bedrock platform fronting the Mississippi flaking debris, damaged completed projec­ frothy rock resembling pumice that origi­ River (Figure 1, "A"). There debris accumu­ tile points, uncompleted points or speci­ nates in the former lignite fields along the lated to a depth of 2 m (over six feet) It, in mens broken during manufacture, Missouri River of North/South Dakota. It turn, is capped by 20-30 cm of more fire-cracked rock, and waste-pieces of red continues to wash into the Mississippi and recent soils having Woodland ceramics. ochre. All these objects, together with char­ be deposited along its banks when flood- The other area revealed by our fieldwork coal and bone fragments, appear to be waters recede. Dalton tool-makers lies on the eastern margin of the site sweepings either of hearths or work-sta­ employed large masses of floatstone as (Figure 1, "B"). It was here in August, 1998, tions surrounding them. Interesting to note, abraders, but our two, under-sized lumps where the authors recovered wood char­ we have have discovered very few hearths were undoubtedly natural inclusions within coal for radiocarbon dating. and associated activity areas in our explo­ the slough fills. The dump in Area B occupies a buried rations to date at Olive Branch. We may Of potential importance to our study of slough or muddy channel that undoubt­ believe that its Dalton inhabitants occasion­ the diet and lifeways of ancient Dalton edly once connected with an ancient ally tidied up and disposed of their trash. people of the Mississippi River valley stream bordering the Olive Branch site It was possible even to fit together were 100 fragments of calcined food on the east. In the modern day at times fragments of the same projectile point bone that we gleaned from sieved of unusually high water level, backwater (see Figure 3); nowhere at Olive Branch residues. These small pieces weighed a from the River enters the topographically have we duplicated this act of refitting — total of only 4.1 grams. Bird and mammal low eastern margin of the site and despite many attempts with thousands of long bone may be distinguished, but spreads across it — perhaps following fragments. This restored artifact indicates identification as to species seems impos­ ancient channels. It is possible that that refuse may have accumulated here sible for this sample. We may hope for during the Dalton era the stream and its over a short period. Too, the homo­ other larger, more recognizable frag­ tributary sloughs had enough water for geneity of the completed projectile ments in future excavations. In general, floating canoes. Now these channels are points, representing the same deeply- we have had very little luck in recovering choked with silt and artifacts of the ter­ indented form with fluting (basal-thinning) identifiable animal bone fragments at minal Dalton and post-Dalton eras. on both faces, reinforces our notion that Olive Branch. As well, human remains the dump was laid down quickly. have been absolutely scarce; a Dalton- Discoveries in Square S30E10 Deeply indented Dalton projectile points era, partial human cremation was discov­ No hint of a buried slough and Dalton of this form were a feature of the Sloan ered in 1997 (Bruwelheide and Owsley

4 n.d.) but awaits fuller recognition. It is radiocarbon age and calendric age is References arguably the oldest human interment severe for this early period. Bruwelheide, Karin L. and Douglas W. Owsley thus far discovered in the state of Illinois. The age of 9,180 radiocarbon years is n.d. Cremated human bone from the Olive As for flaked stone tools, the following in harmony with another date for the top Branch site, Alexander County, Illinois. Ms. in possession of the Department of were picked from the fills (and measured in of the Dalton deposit, which was also Anthropology, Smithsonian Institution place) or from sieves: provided by Beta Analytic in 1990. This and Great Lakes Artifact Repository, determination on nut charcoal collected Buffalo, N.Y. A. Complete (or nearly so), finished Dalton from a crevice in the limestone bedrock projectile points (Figure 3a) 3 (Gramly and Funk 1991: 32) gave 9,115 Gramly, Richard M. B. Fragments of finished projectile points, +/- 100 years before present (Beta- 1994 Olive Branch: An important Initial Archaic some showing the effects of fire (Figure 3a) ..4 32366, ETH-5671). Since Hardin projec­ site in southern Illinois. Indian Artifact C. Unfinished (rejected) Dalton points, tile points lie at the top of the Dalton Magazine 13-2: 4-7. Turbotville, Pennsyl­ vania. (Figure 3b) 2 deposit and above it, these two determi­ 1995 The Olive Branch site: The Initial Archaic D. Drill fragments (Figure 3c) 3 nations also provide a "floor date" for the Hardin archaeological culture. This esti­ Period in southern Illinois. The Amateur E. Unidentified bifaces or biface fragments Archaeologist 2(1): 40-74. (Figure 3d) 9 mate for the onset of the Hardin culture F. Sidescrapers (Figure 4e) 3 in southern Illinois is in keeping with ear­ Gramly, Richard M. and Robert E. Funk G. Endscrapers (Figure 4/) 2 lier speculations by typologists (e.g., 1991 Olive Branch site: A large Dalton and H. Utilized flakes (Figure Ag) 5 Perino 1985). pre-Dalton encampment at Thebes Gap, I. Tool fragments 1 The beginning of Dalton culture at Olive Alexander County, Illinois. Pp. 23-34 in TOTAL 32 Branch is dated by a small charcoal sample Charles H. McNutt (ed.) The Archaic that was collected in 1989 by Dr. Vance Period in the Mid-South. Occasional Papers, Anthropological Research Haynes near grid-point S22E2 (hardly 10 m To this number, impressive for such a Center, Memphis State University 16. small volume of soil, we may wish to add distant from our August, 1998, excava­ 4 small fragments of sandstone abraders tions). This sample (AA-4805) yielded the Gramly, Richard M., William Pickard and (two are shown in Figure 4/). We feel that result 9,975 +/- 125 years before present. Richard Lively abraders were used by flintknappers to Thus, we conclude that the Dalton archae­ in press Circumstances of the discovery of a dull the edges of bifaces during manufac­ ological culture spanned most of the tenth Sloan Dalton feature at the Olive Branch ture, but some may also have been millennium before present. The beginnings site, Illinois. Central States Archaeolog­ employed in the manufacture of bone, of Dalton are separated from the end of the ical Journal. antler and wooden objects, for which Fluted Point Tradition by several hundred purpose their tough, gritty stone would years. They bear no close relationship to Knight, Robert L. prove of value. one another; furthermore, fluting as seen 1998 Summer vacation at Olive Branch, Illi­ nois. Indian Artifact Magazine 17(1); 28- on Dalton points did not develop directly 29. Radiocarbon Dating Results from the Palaeo-lndian tradition of fluting. The Olive Branch excavations have Rather, it was a re-discovery or re-innova­ Morse, Dan F. provided the first absolute dates for the tion that likely occurred towards the of the 1997 Sloan. A Paleo-indian Dalton Cemetery in Dalton culture from an open-air archaeo­ Dalton Tradition. Arkansas. Smithsonian Institution Press. logical site. Their importance cannot be Many researchers have argued for a Washington, D.C. exaggerated. direct, lineal relationship between Dalton Perino, Greg and the Fluted Point Tradition (Clovis- Three small lumps of solid wood char­ 1985 Selected Preforms, Points and Knives of coal collected by the authors directly Cumberland/Barnes-Folsom/Crowfield). the North American Indians. from slough fills were air-dried and The testimony of spadework at the Olive Idabel, Oklahoma. shipped to Beta Analytic laboratories in Branch site on the banks of the Missis­ Coral Gables, Florida. According to tech­ sippi River, however, shows this notion to Walthall, John A. and Brad Koldehoff nicians the lumps provided plenty of be erroneous. 1998 Hunter-gatherer interaction and alliance carbon for accelerator mass spec­ formation: Dalton and the Cult of the troscopy analysis, and all analytical steps Acknowledgements Long Blade. Plains Anthropologist went normally. The charcoal was pre- The writers wish to thank the Archaeo­ 43(165): 257-273. treated with acid/alkali/acid, and the C- logical Society of Ohio for partially funding RICHARD MICHAEL GRAMLY and 13/C-12 ratio was calculated as a the radiocarbon determination Beta- WILLIAM PICKARD refinement for accuracy. The results were 124214. Assistance with dating and exca­ February 4, 1998 9,180 +/- 50 years before present (Beta- vations was also furnished by the National 124214). In calendar years — not radio­ Geographic Society, the Buffalo Museum carbon years — the sample is 10,080 of Science, and the L.S.B. Leakey Founda­ years old (8,130 B.C.). The divergence of tion of Pasadena, California.

5 •4 Figure 1 (Gramly) Map of a section of the Olive Branch site, Alexander County, southern Illinois, showing ancient refuse dumps ("A" and "B") used by Dalton inhabitants. Separating these dumps is a late nineteenth century railroad bed, which appears to have cut through a Dalton cemetery — leaving only a few features (filled circles) for modern investigators.

Figure 2 (Gramly) August, 1998, excava­ tions in 2-m square S30E1 Oat the Olive Branch site (see area "B," Figure 1). Below the hashed line are deposits filling an ancient slough, whose irregular margin is shown in the fore­ ground. Abundant Dalton artifacts, calcined refuse bone and charcoal for radiocarbon dating were collected here.

6 Figure 3 (Gramly) Flaked stone artifacts from deposits in the slough, 2-m square S30E10. a, finished Dalton projectile points, fragmentary and complete — some specimens show pot-lid fractures and other heat damage; b, rebased tip of Dalton point that broke during recycling and uncompleted projectile point — abandoned because of narrowness; c, fragments of drills; d, various biface fragments (most are likely projectile point preforms). Length of specimen in top row, far right = 8.8 cm (approx. 3'/? inches).

Figure 4 (Gramly) Stone artifacts and geofacts from deposits in the slough, 2-m square S30E10, discovered August, 1998. e, three sidescrapers; f, two endscrapers (one has its proximal end missing); g, three utilized flakes or flake- blades; h, small pebble of Dakota floatstone; i, fragments of sandstone abraders — perhaps used by Dalton flintknappers. Length of endscraper in top row, left = 8.2 cm (approx. 2% inches)

7 A DARKE COUNTY ADENA SITE by Jim Bartlett Cable, Ohio

Most sites that a surface collector Projectile Points pieces were found three years apart. The hunts will have a mix of point types from The projectile points shown in Figure 2 break is fresh, possibly occurring when a the different cultures that once inhabited are classified as early Adena points (Con­ tractor tire struck the pendant. Very little the area. The majority of points found in verse, 1994). The large broken point in damage is shown except for the western Ohio are lumped into the Archaic the upper left of Figure 2 measures 3" scratches incurred by carrying the period which includes many thousands of long with over half the length being the broken bottom of the piece with a pocket years of occupation. What I found inter­ stem. The blade is 2" wide. It is possible full of flint chips. The measurements of esting about this site in northwestern that the unbroken piece could have been the pendant are 4!V' long, 1%" wide at Darke County, Ohio, near the northern over 7" long. The well formed point in the the bottom, W wide at the top and %" limit of the Adena occupation area, is the lower left corner is 2%" long and made of thick at the thickest point. The edges are fact that a 2-3 acre area of the farm fields Coshocton flint with a combination of not distinctly rounded giving the piece a has yielded very few artifacts that were black, gray and tan colors. Several other crisp look. Very little wear is exhibited at not from the Adena culture. While the points show extensive resharpening or the hole which is drilled from both sides. farm along Gray's Branch in Jackson use as hafted scrapers. An expanded center gorget preform was Township had been hunted periodically also found at the site. Both of these by local collectors, and artifacts had Flint Tools forms have been attributed to the Adena been found by the farmer's family while Five hafted scrapers were collected culture. (Converse, 1978; Dragoo, 1963) clearing rocks from the fields, my son from the site. Two finely chipped scrapers Dan and I have spent the most time are pictured in the bottom row of Figure Summary hunting the site in the last ten years. Our 2, and two larger scrapers are pictured on While many of us have found Adena luck has recently run out because of the the bottom row of Figure 3. Both of these points when surface collecting, I feel for­ farmer's switch to no-till cropping. We larger scrapers have massive bases and tunate to have come upon a site which now have to be satisfied with the occa­ wide cutting surfaces, possibly indicating has several diagnostic characteristics of sional chisel plowing that might bring up heavy woodworking usage. The scraper the Adena people. On hindsight, I wish I something new. There are several things on the lower left of Figure 3 is made of had worked the site a little harder, of note about the site that I want espe­ Sonora flint and the scraper on the lower including the area where the broken cially to mention including the quantity of right is made of an unidentified black blades were found. Further investigation, fire altered broken blades found over the chert with white streaks. Also pictured in including excavation will be considered in years and the heavy use of Indiana horn- Figure 3 are three cache blades, possibly the future if more blade sections are stone and Sonora flint in the chipped made of local Four Mile Creek chert. A tri­ brought up by the chisel plowing. It is stone tool assemblage. The size of some angular hornstone scraper and a circular interesting to contemplate the use of of these tools is also impressive. scraper made from a cortex flake of several chert types that outcrop up to Sonora flint both exhibit fine pressure 150 miles from their point of discovery as retouch chipping. artifacts. This discovery may add to Blade Cache someone's research on the procurement Broken blade sections were collected and trade of raw materials during the over the years from one part of the site, Stone Tools Woodland Period. covering about 1,000 square feet, and Two hardstone celts were collected indicating the possible presence of a from the periphery of the site. They are cache. (Figure 1.) These pieces show pictured in Figure 4. Neither show a great References signs of having been in a fire from the deal of workmanship, but their bits were 1994 Converse, R.N. Ohio Flint Types, The pot-lidding and semi-circular breakage. adequate to get the job done. Several Archaeological Society of Ohio We were fortunate to find all three pieces hammerstones and one potsherd have of one blade that measures 4'A" when re­ also been found on the surface of the site. 1978 Converse, R.N. Ohio Slate Types, The assembled. (Fig. 1, right) The material Archaeological Society of Ohio used in the cache is blue to gray nodular Slate Objects 1998 DeRegnaucourt, T. and Georgiady, J. flint of the type found in southern Indiana The highlight of the site for me was the A., Chert Types of the Midwest and parts of Kentucky. (DeRegnaucourt discovery of the trapezoidal pendant 1963 Dragoo, D. W. Mounds for the Dead, and Georgiady,1998) shown in Figure 5. The pendant is broken Annals of Carnegie Museum No. 37, in half along the banding, and the two Pittsburgh, PA

8 Figure 1 (Bartlett) Cache of blades showing damage by fire. Blade on Figure 2 (Bartlett) Early Adena projectile points found on the site, right was found in three pieces. Seventy five pieces of broken blades including two hafted scrapers. Large broken point is fashioned from were found on the surface. Sonora flint. Broken section is 3" long with stem length of 1%°.

Figure 3 (Bartlett) Large hafted scrapers, cache blades and two other Figure 4 (Bartlett) Two stone celts from the site. finely chipped scrapers from site.

•< Figure 5 (Gramly) Trapezoidal pendant 4W in length found in two pieces over a period of three years.

9 SUGAR QUARTZ POINT FROM NORTHERN OHIO by The Edwards Family Berlin Hts., OH

A site we have hunted for about 30 years has produced some unusual points and flint. Over the years we saved every­ thing from this site which would amount to about 4 or 5 pickup loads of site material. It would take days to catalog our find after each trip to this site. Then there was the exciting part . . . trying to match broken points, slate, bone pieces, pipes, birds, copper, and core flake knives. In about 1989 I found the base of this point. It is the only sugar quartz point found thus far on this site. In 1994, my wife, Lynne, and son, Tim, decided to go hunting - I had to work. They were late coming back and I was impatient to see their finds and had thought about it all day at work. When they finally returned they were mud from head to toe. Hunting the Sandusky River area you get muddy and wet. The first thing they pulled out of their bag was the tip to the sugar quartz base. I said that we had the bottom but they didn't believe me. I immediately went to the broken point box and after a short search came up with the base. Then I started to rib them for not finding the splinter that is missing. Maybe some other day ... we will keep looking. The source of sugar quartz is 150 miles northwest of Madison, Wisconsin. How it found its way to Ohio is a mystery. One has to marvel at the trade networks of prehistoric man. There is a chance this may be glacial stone. I doubt it because of the size, 4" long by 1V wide. Converse Ohio Flint Types has this as a wide base dovetail Early Archaic 5000 BC (Page 74, 75.). There is more to this story coming in the Figure 1 (Edwards) Sugar Quartz Point from Sandusky Co., Ohio. future. They found a lot more that day.

Reference Ohio Flint Types by Robert N. Converse

10 FRIENDS OF AMERICA'S PAST A nonprofit organization dedicated to promoting and advancing the rights of scientists and the public to learn about America's past It's time to stand up for the right to ask questions about the past.

Why did we organize? Your contribution helps us to known as widely as possible. We are We've created Friends of America's • continue efforts to successfully resolve building awareness of Friends of Past to promote and advance the rights the Kennewick Man suit, to provide America's Past and the legal barriers of scientists and the public to learn about funds for scientific study and analysis being created against study of the past America's past. We believe every citizen of the results, and to publish the results through personal contacts, public lec­ has the right to understand and appre­ for public review, use, and discussion. tures, media articles, and our website. ciate the past. We have no paid staff. The board Our mission is to keep the door of sci­ • defend the rights of all scientists to donates their time and expenses to run entific inquiry open and to work to main­ study the past and provide resources Friends of America's Past. We are tain the integrity of science in this to help them. keeping all expenses to a minimum. For country. We want to raise public aware­ now, this means 100% of your contribu­ ness and to act as a resource to advise • increase public awareness that we are tions will directly support the Kennewick others about their scientific rights under losing our right to learn from the past. Man suit and scientific study of the the law. skeleton when permission is granted. As New theories are emerging our resources grow with your support, we We all share the past — no one owns it. We are all familiar with the idea that will expand our activities so that we can We believe America's prehistory must this continent was populated by bands of provide financial assistance and guidance be preserved. Disputes over scientific hunters crossing the Bering Strait, fol­ in similar disputes. lowing big game into the New World. We access to ancient and culturally unaffili­ For the latest news about our activities, are now finding through tantalizing dis­ ated human remains are increasing at an visit our website coveries, across many scientific disci­ alarming rate. Materials and remains from www.friendsofpast.org the past are being buried without dating plines, that human presence in the New World may stretch back to a much earlier or adequate study. Our request... time than first thought. Scientists need our help. They are Help us keep our country free for being denied access to publicly funded Evidence suggests that multiple waves exploring and expressing all views and museums and institutions. Too frequently of people came to the New World, the explanations of the American past. they lack the resources or expertise to later groups probably replacing earlier insist on their rights. Laws designed to peoples through greater numbers or cul­ Please send whatever you can to protect our nation's heritage are being tural advantage. Very likely many of the ignored, arbitrarily interpreted, or applied earliest people came along the coast and Friends of America's Past in unintended ways. moved inland. 7410 SW Oleson Rd., Suite 202 We all share the past, no one owns it. New techniques are available to test Portland, OR 97223 We must preserve it for future generations. these theories. Scientists know more about paleozoology, paleobotany, geology, early environments, and physical What are we doing? Name diversity than ever before. The picture is Our purpose is to raise public aware­ forming, but important pieces to this ness and support. We are puzzle are missing. Address • raising funds to support scientists in Will our legacy to future generations be disputes such as the Kennewick Man empty libraries and museums? City, State, & Zip suit. Scientists are eager to test their theo­ Phone • gathering and distributing information ries just at the time when access to the concerning the preservation and study collections that could yield important of important objects and sites relating insights is being denied. e-mail to America's past and the restrictions Today's children, the scientists of now being placed on access to them. tomorrow, will have nothing of the past to • I'd like updates about the activities of study, if this generation removes evi­ the Friends of America's Past. • preparing written materials to support dence of the past from public access. Will • I'd like to help. individuals and organizations involved our legacy to future generations be empty in actual or potential disputes over the libraries and museums? We have filed for tax exempt status. If you study of prehistoric human remains or care to give us your name and address, other objects of scientific interest. Our organization we'll notify you when yor contribution Friends of America's Past is a nonprofit • acting as a referral source for con­ qualifies for a tax deduction. We'll keep organization based in Portland, Oregon. your name confidential. tacting and retaining experts who can Our board of directors has four members: assist with the resolution of disputes. two archaeologists, a physical anthropol­ For the latest news about our activities, ogist, and an attorney. visit our website • sponsoring public lectures relating to Our strategy is to build a strong net­ the study of America's past. work of support by making our activities www.friendsofpast.org

11 TOLU by Elaine Holzapfel 415 Memorial Drive Greenville, OH 45331

The Tolu site (5 Cn 1) lies on the Ohio graves sometimes intruded through ear­ humans, birds, fish, and dogs. Arc mea­ River in Crittenden County, Kentucky. It lier ones. James Griffin (1943) estimated surements of rim sherds indicated that dates mostly from the Mississippian that similar intrusions revealed the pas­ many vessels had diameters of two feet period which began in A. D. 1000, but sage of around 100 years between inter­ or more - such large containers were there was also a small, unique earlier ments, as five generations were probably probably used for storing maize. occupation (the Yankeetown phase) as long as the exact location of ancestral Another large ceramic vessel type was around A. D. 700 to 1000. The site, first burials was remembered. We witness the salt pan. Salt pans, massive and excavated by Webb and Funkhouser in similar treatment in cemeteries today, heavy, measured two to three feet wide 1930, was not examined again until the where small century-old tombstones are and a foot deep, and had flat bottoms. 1960s. However, a well-known and bulldozed rather than mowed around. Webb and Funkhouser believed that respected collector, Al Wakefield, of Most of the burials at Tolu were these containers were manufactured at Youngstown, Ohio, maintained Tolu arti­ accompanied by artifacts such as pottery the location where they were used, near facts which he found on the site in the sherds, triangular flint points, pottery saline springs where water was evapo­ 1940s, and these have only recently come discs, worked fluorite fragments, bone rated to obtain salt. Adding salt to the diet to light. I was given the opportunity to sort tools, mussel shells and/or unmodified had not been necessary when meat was and photograph the material, which had deer bones. Skulls exhibited artificial flat­ the main part of the diet, but when maize been stored in a large box for over fifty tening in the occipital region (at the back became the predominant food source, years. In the first part of this article I of the head). Some individuals had per­ additional salt was required. review what is presently known about the fect teeth, while others showed alveolar Tolu site, then the Wakefeld material will bone recession, a result of gum disease. Later Research and Relationships be presented. The former may reflect the balanced diet From 1932 to the 1960s there was little of hunter-gatherer-horticulturalists, and or no research on the Tolu site (Pollack Webb and Funkhouser the latter could result from an increasingly 1990). But during this interval it was During the summer of 1930, Webb and maize-dominated diet. Although Webb learned that various aspects of pre-Mis- Funkhouser (1931) of the University of and Funkhouser noted lesions on some of sissippian had developed. These aspects Kentucky, excavated the Tolu site. Littering the bones, I am unaware of any study of are known as Terminal Late Woodland or the surface of the ground were pottery paleopathology in specimens from Tolu. Emergent Mississippian and date around sherds and bones of deer, elk, bear, The excavators found no individual A.D. 700-1000. Eastern Kentucky and turkey, tortoise, and fish. Flint points and female burials. The only female skeletons southern Ohio were apparently at this drills, bone awls, needles, and handles, as occupied graves with males, suggesting time still (sparsely) occupied by the Intru­ well as fluorite crystals and fragments were that in some instances wives were killed sive Mound people (Converse 1999). still abundant although they had been for burial with husbands. The Mississippian Fort Ancient did not appear until A.D. picked up from the surface for years. ritual of executing retainers for interment 1000, and archaeological evidence now Webb and Funkhouser discovered with chiefs was known to have been prac­ indicates that it developed from indigenous three mounds on the site, two of which ticed at Cahokia, and was observed and cultures and was not the result of migra­ they partially excavated. The first, built on reported historically among the Natchez in tions of Mississippians (Lewis 1996). The a natural elevation, was stratified with Louisiana by Charlevoix and du Pratz. people of Fort Ancient may not have culti­ layers of clay, soil, charcoal, and car­ The third mound was not examined. vated maize as extensively as the Missis­ bonized grass. As excavation proceeded, sippians - and studies suggest that even hundreds of postmolds became evident Ceramics the variety of maize used by Fort Ancient through the mound. It was surmised that Although some pottery sherds were differed from that grown by Mississippians. the carbonized grass was the remains of plain, more than half were textile- The Terminal Late Woodland/Emergent a large structure made of wattle and daub impressed and shell-tempered, typical of Mississippian period was a time of which had burned. The excavators Mississippian ceramics. Textile impres­ unprecedented change in the Midwest. termed this a ceremonial mound, and it sions appear to have been made by The bow and arrow, along with triangular probably was a platform mound typical of open-twined bags, some of which display points had been introduced, which would the Mississippian period. The soil of the intricately-designed, fine weaving, while have revolutionized hunting methods. mound-fill contained debris from earlier others are loosely-twined, distorted in Dependence on maize possibly increased Woodland and Archaic periods, as well as shape, and look worn out. Penelope the need for ownership of land and seden- six bushels of pottery sherds. Drooker (1992: 186,7) commented that tism (Griffin 1943). Population growth her analysis of textile impressions on Tolu altered social structure. These influences Burials sherds revealed that "the diversity of its seem to have come from Cahokia, which The second mound was a burial impressed fabrics is perhaps the greatest itself may have been influenced by the mound. The southwest side of this mound reported in the literature." Twenty-five per elaborate cultures of Mexico. had been partially destroyed by cultiva­ cent of the sherds she examined showed One of these individual enclaves of tion and erosion, and gullies sliced "worn" textiles. Emergent Mississippian is known as the through its slopes. Because the northeast Distinctive ceramic tools known as pot­ Yankeetown Phase. It was (as is often the portion was more intact, it was here that tery trowels may have been used in the case) discovered by a collector (Smith Webb and Funkhouser excavated. They manufacture of pottery or for plastering Hazen), who visited Glenn Black and told recovered 22 shallowly-buried extended walls constructed of wattlework, or both. him about unusual pottery eroding out of a skeletons, lying in no orderly arrangement Webb and Funkhouser picture ceramic bank of the Ohio River (Redmond 1990). or directional alignments. Subsequent zoomorphic forms (p. 403) which include Brian Redmond outlined the geographical

1? boundaries of Yankeetown - an area 140 was used in the manufacture of steel. Flu­ of salt and the colorful mineral, fluorite. miles long and 10 miles wide, following orite is soft, with a hardness of only 4 on The Wakefield collection will be dis­ floodplains and terraces of the Ohio River Moh's scale, so it should have been played at the March ASO meeting at the through Indiana, Kentucky, and Illinois. Sit­ shaped with little effort. The mineral is Shrine Temple in Columbus. It will then be uated about twenty miles downstream probably hard to work with, though, placed with the anthropology department from the Yankeetown sites, the Tolu site, because it is brittle and fractures easily. at Ball State University, Muncie, Indiana. mainly Mississippian, exhibits a minor Yan­ Although fluorite is semi-translucent keetown component, easily recognized by and colorful, it does not seem to have Acknowledgments distinctive Yankeetown pottery sherds. been an object of trade. It has not been Thanks to Bill Piatt for answering my Yankeetown pottery is tempered with reported on Ft. Ancient sites or with Intru­ questions; thanks to Brian Redmond, of grog (clay or crushed sherds), while the sive Mound burials, and, according to the Cleveland Museum of Natural History, later Mississippian pottery is tempered Bob Converse (1999), artifacts made of for promptly identifying the photographed with shell. Yankeetown ceramics differ in the mineral have never been found in items I sent; and thanks to Bob Maslowski surface treatment - they are incised, Ohio. Fluorite beads and effigies were of West Virginia for providing the articles stamped, appliqued, and/or notched, and uncommon even at nearby Angel site, as by Drooker and Pollack. sometimes cord marked. Mississippian Glenn Black (1967) found only six. pottery is plain or fabric impressed. Strangely, under the surface of Mound F REFERENCES CITED at Angel, he uncovered an unusual fig­ Black, Glenn A. Significance of the Angel Site to Tolu urine - a seated male carved of yellow flu­ 1967 Angel Site. Indiana Historical Society, The large Angel site is located on the orite, nine and one half inches high. Indianapolis. Converse, Robert N. Ohio River about 100 miles northeast of (Black devoted a full-page color plate to the effigy in his book.) 1999 Intrusive Mound People. Manuscript, Tolu. Angel, occupied around A. D. 1100 - Plain City, Ohio. 1450 (Lewis 1996:134), was the western­ Wakefield found a number of chipped Drooker, Penelope Ballard most expression of Mississippian. The two flint chisels with polished bits. He and Bill 1992 Mississippian Village Textiles at Wick- sites exhibit similarities as well as differ­ Piatt surmised that these chisels had liffe. The University of Alabama Press, ences in material culture. Glenn Black, of been used prehistorically to quarry fluo­ Tuscaloosa. Indiana University, devoted a great portion rite, as the mineral outcrops between 1997 The View From Madisonville. Memoirs of his life to the excavation of the Angel layers of limestone, and chisels would of the Museum of Anthropology, No. site, and the complete results of his work have been needed to pry it out. 31, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. are publicly available in a two-volume set, Shell-tempered ceramic effigies in the Griffin, James Bennett complete with copious photographs. Wakefield collection include human fig­ 1943 The Fort Ancient Aspect. University of ures, owls, conch shells, and the heads of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor. Al Wakefield's Collection from wood ducks (Figures 20, 21). Pictured is Lewis, Barry R. (editor) Tolu in the 1940s an owl made of yellow fluorite from the 1996 Kentucky Archaeology. University Press Al Wakefield, of Youngstown, Ohio, Wakefield collection, and Bill Piatt of Kentucky, Lexington. now deceased, was stationed at Fort reported that he recovered an owl effigy Pollack, David, et al. Breckenridge, Kentucky, during World of purple fluorite on the site. 1990 The Archaeology of Kentucky: Past War Two. He explored the Tolu site on One grog-tempered clay ball the size of Accomplishments and Future Direc­ tions. Vol. 2. Kentucky Heritage weekends. His collection includes flint a marble is in the collection. Black (1967) Council, Frankfort. chisels, pottery sherds, triangular points, found forty-nine pottery balls at Angel, worked and unworked fluorite, rectan­ most of which were shell tempered. Redmond, Brian G. 1990 The Yankeetown Phase: Emergent Mis­ gular scoria bars, animal bone, pottery An interesting artifact is the shaped and sissippian Cultural Adaptation in the trowels (broken), zoomorphic forms, polished astragalus bone (Figure 22). The Lower Ohio River Valley. Doctoral Dis­ stone and pottery discoidals, an astra­ astragalus, homologous with the talus sertation, Indiana University. galus die, and polished cannel coal. bone in humans, is from the hock of the Webb, W. S. and W. D. Funkhouser Two rectangular bars made of rust-col­ hind leg of a deer. The protuberances were 1931 The Tolu Site in Crittenden County, ored scoria (vesicular lava), a volcanic ground off the small bone and the edges Kentucky. Reports in Archaeology and basalt which must have been glacially squared. This artifact was probably a Anthropology no. 5, University of Ken­ deposited, are in the collection. Because game piece, and the polish suggests use tucky, Lexington. scoria is hard and porous, and because and handling. Glenn Black found 152 deer of the smoothed surface of one of the and 7 elk astragali "dice" at Angel site. bars, I believe they were used as abra­ Not pictured are fragments of effigies of sives. Glenn Black (1967: 485) reported "a conch shells, one of which is quite large. porous material resembling pumice" at The collection also includes deer bones, Angel site, which I suspect is identical to an elk tooth, the drilled shell of a bivalve, the scoria bars from Tolu. three unworked turtle plastrons, frag­ Yellow, white, and purple fluorite in ments of polished cannel coal, and addi­ chunks, crystals, beads, and effigies were tional pottery sherds, some with found by Wakefield at Tolu (Figure 3). Bill red-slipped surfaces. Piatt, of West Farmington, Ohio, a friend of Al Wakefield, told me the fluorite beads Finis and effigies were all recovered within an The Tolu site was an important location area about one hundred feet in diameter. for the Yankeetown people of A.D. 700 to According to the Audubon Society Field 1000, then to the Mississippians who Guide to North American Rocks and Min­ lived there, probably for hundreds of erals (1989:428), "excellent" fluorite years, beginning in A.D. 1000. Not only occurs naturally in Crittenden County, was it located on the Ohio River which Figure 1 (Holzapfel) Map showing geo­ Kentucky. It has long been commercially provided fish and mussels for diet and graphical relationship of Tolu with Yankee- mined there, even prior to Webb's work in decoration, but the material evidence town sites (as outlined by Brian Red­ 1930. Because the mineral melts easily, it indicates that the site was near a source mond), Cahokia, and the Angel site.

13 Figure 2 (Holzapfel) Effigy of an owl made of yellow fluorite. Found at the Tolu site in the 1940s, the figurine is about one inch high.

Figure 3 (Holzapfel) Fluorite from the Mississippian component of the Tolu site (from A.D. 1000). Forms include crystals, beads, balls, and worked fragments.

14 •^ Figure 7 (Holzapfel) Loop handle which would have been appliqued to a vessel. The tannish-brown handle has 7 oval punctates.

Figure 4 (Holzapfel) Figures 4 through 9 are Tolu sherds from the Yankeetown phase of Terminal Late Woodland/Emergent Mississippian, dating A.D. 700 to 1000. All are grog tempered. This buff-colored rim sherd of a bowl measure 2'A inches, and is stamped with slanted bars at the rim thickening. Diameter of orifice would have been 8 inches.

Figure 8 (Holzapfel) Two and one-half inch rim sherd of bowl with orifice of around 12 inches, although this tan and brown sherd is only 3/,e inch thick. It has a small lip, punctates, a rim, then zoned incising. There is also a row of punctates around the insider perimeter.

\ \ llfey M Figure 9 (Holzapfel) Two-inch rim sherd \ M with notched rim. Almost flat. Gray-brown sherd is s/.s inch thick, thinner near rim.

Figure 5 (Holzapfel) Two-inch brown sherd shows incising within expanding lines. Incising appears as short, irregular slashes. Appliqued cone at lower right.

MH>rj

Figure 10 (Holzapfel) Bowl with scalloped rim. Tan and gray, with finely pulverized Figure 6 (Holzapfel) Reddish-brown rim sherd of a jar, shell temper. This sherd differs greatly in both design and temper from either Yan­ 17/B inches, has a flat, notched lip, and incised vertical keetown or Mississippian ceramics; maybe it was a trade item. Orifice diameter lines below appliqued cones. Thickness 'A inch. Orifice estimated at 8 inches, and scallops would add an inch to bowl width. About 3Ae diameter 4 inches. inch thick. Similar sherds were found by Webb at Tolu (1931:399).

15 Figure 11 (Holzapfel) Two parts of broken pottery trowel. Figure 14 (Holzapfel) Side and front view of large Mississippian pot from Tolu. It Trowel handle shown is bifurcated. Coarsely shell tempered, it is coarsely shell tempered, and the opening would have measured around 15 would have looked like this: inches. Judging from the flare evident in the side-view, the pot was probably two feet wide. These large vessels are believed to have stored maize.

Figure 15 (Holzapfel) Mississippian shell-tempered rim of a vessel with an orifice about 12 inches in diameter. It is heavy and Vn inch thick. Drooker (1997:209) reports a similar vessel with paired nodes or teat lugs from the Ft. Ancient Madisonville site, the "last occupied settlement in western Ft. Ancient territory." Figure 12 (Holzapfel) One of two bars made of scoria, a porous volcanic basalt; this one measures 3'A inches long, and 3A inch thick. Probably used as an abrasive.

Figure 13 (Holzapfel) Cup or small bowl Wakefield found at Tolu and gave to his friend, Rocky Falleti. Coarsely shell tempered. Photograph courtesy of Figure 16 (Holzapfel) Much of the pottery was impressed with what Rocky Falleti. appeared to be worn-out textiles, such as this.

16 Figure 17 (Holzapfel) A cast can be made by pressing clay into a sherd. What is revealed is this, an example of Mississippian weaving - in this case, open twining.

MM i

Figure 18 (Holzapfel) Sherd showing an example of the intricate weaving sometimes impressed into ceramics by the Mississippian residents of Tolu, — ^UK&^ around 700 to 1000 years ago. Figure 21 (Holzapfel) Ceramic effigies. Left to right: human head, a hand, a foot, and an owl.

M Figure 22 (Holzapfel) Astragalus die (singular of dice). This bone from the hock of a deer has been flat­ tened and squared. It was probably used as a game piece, as astralagi have been used as game pieces in many parts of the world. Use of similar bones may have been ancestral to modern dice.

•< Figure 19 (Holzapfel) Pottery handles. All are shell tempered, except the one at top-right, which is grog tempered and, therefore, was probably made by the Yankeetown people sev­ eral hundred years earlier than the others.

17 Figure 23 (Holzapfel) Left to right: Unfinished discoidal (?) is heavy and made of a hard stone (leaves no streak). Slate celt measures VA inches long. Last two are pottery discs, tempered with coarsely-ground shell.

Figure 24 (Holzapfel) Two shell-tempered rim sherds of salt pans found at Tolu by Wakefield. The sherd at top measures 3'A inches wide. Both sherds are around an inch thick at the rim thickening, indicating that these were parts of large, heavy containers. Figure 25 (Holzapfel) Wakefield's Tolu collection contained this variety of triangular points, some of which are slightly notched. No distinction between Yankeetown point types and those of Mississippian has been made, partly because Yankeetown burials with points in association have never been discovered, and partly because there may be no difference.

18 THE EVOLUTION OF TUBULAR PIPES AS RITUALISTIC SMOKING DEVICES by D.R. Gehlbach 3435 Sciotangy Drive Columbus, OH

In my book Ohio's Prehistoric Pipes, I state they may have obtained satisfaction able use. In their residual configurations, suggested that pipe smoking likely origi­ for individual and communal pleadings. both their useful lives and utility value nated from inhaling smoke during reli­ In Ohio, where tubular styles were were diminished. Despite this, the under­ gious or secular fire ceremonies. The evolving into an advanced art form by the lying purpose for the pipes probably dic­ Archaic and the later Adena probably early Adena period, designated individ­ tated their preservation for future inhaled the smoke during special events uals also probably used puffing tubes to ceremonies. I surmise that these pipes when incenses were being burned. In communicate to higher powers. The finished their functional lives and were time they practiced blowing on the impractical simplistic design of these forfeited as funerary objects, perhaps to burning embers using simple hollow pipes barely allowed for their special-pur­ accompany religious leaders. tubular devices such as cane, reeds, pose deployment. To achieve some level bone and other materials. These primitive of comfort for the smoker, a plug was REFERENCES tubes could also have been used in inserted just inside the stem end to block sniffing or puffing the materials that were the flow of juices and burning materials. Gelbach, Donald R. being burned. Then, at a later point, the It can be surmised that Adena tubular 1998 Ohio's Prehistoric Pipes. Privately printed. same incenses were inserted into the pipes were instruments of religious smoking chambers of these tubes, and empowerment and as such were both Robicsek, Francis pipe smoking became a tradition. Subse­ highly valued and carefully preserved. 1997 The Smoking Gods. University of quently, more durable stone materials They also may have served as clan sym­ Oklahoma Press. were utilized exclusively in making these bols or community tools. special-purpose tubular pipes. The pictured Adena tubular pipes were Evidence in support of the evolution of recovered in Adams and Scioto Counties. prehistoric pipe use comes from archaeo­ They are crafted from Scioto County fire logical investigators who found pictures clay or pipestone, an impure silica-based of pre-Columbian Mesoamericans compound containing iron, aluminum inhaling fireplace smoke through primitive oxide, magnesium and other trace mate­ tubular cigars made of long, thick, wild rials. The relative discomfort of smoking tobacco. The ancient Mayans were through the slightly expanded blocked- smokers as apparently were their gods. end stem opening and the heat-pene­ From decoded pictographs we know that trating characteristics of the porous they believed that their deities, who lived pipestone suggest special purpose use, in the highest heaven, smoked tubular instead of pleasure smoking. The stream­ cigars. It also appears that they smoked lined shape and upward angle of the these cigars in important ceremonies. hollow tube when in use suggest use as a According to their decoded writings they communication conveyance with exhaled believed that meteors traveling through smoke as the message carrier to the the tropical skies were still-glowing cigars upper world. that had been discarded. The pictured examples, both once From trace materials recovered, longer tubes, were probably damaged inhaling in Mesoamerica also likely pro­ through use. The remaining unbroken duced intoxication which in turn portions were then re-worked, resulting in enhanced the dreamed-for connection shorter lengths. Note the polished sur­ Figure 1 (Gehlbach) Mayan Vase, Photo­ with heavenly beings. In their trance-like faces at the repaired end, indicating prob­ graph from Heye Foundation collections.

Figure 2 (Gehlbach) Two Adena pipes showing blocked stem end, Figure 3 (Gehlbach) Two Adena pipes showing re-worked polished Ohio pipestone. bowl end, Ohio pipestone

19 THE SHADY BEND SITE by Wayne A. Mortine, Newcomerstown, OH and Doug Randies, Warsaw, OH

The Shady Bend report is the fourth dence of striking platforms in the basal area. Pit Features and Ceramics and last in a series of articles based on Another basal fragment was broken when Also in the collection from the Shady site material excavated or surface col­ the process of removing an initial flute Bend site were two small cellophane lected by the late Leonard Brown of New- caused a hinge fracture. The remaining envelopes that contained small amounts of comerstown, Ohio. Previous articles in early points have lanceolate forms. charcoal. A note with an explanation of the this series are listed in the reference sec­ circumstances surrounding the recovery of tion. We trust that these site reports have Early and Middle Archaic (38 examples) the charcoal was also included. The first added to the archaeological record of In Brown's collection from the Shady note, dated December 13, 1968, read east-central Ohio. All four of the sites that Bend site are eight Thebes or Archaic "From gravel lined fire pit down 20 inches. Brown excavated or surface hunted are Bevels (Figure 3); twelve points that are Found after being partly exposed by gravel now destroyed and are no longer avail­ small versions of the Kirk Corner Notched operation. No artifacts." able for investigation. type (Figure 4); three Big Sandy points The note in the second envelope read The Shady Bend site was located in (Figure 5); and eleven bifurcated base "Charcoal and pottery sherd from one of eastern Oxford Township, Coshocton points (Figure 6). The middle Archaic is the three fire pits exposed by bulldozer County. The site is situated on a Pleis­ represented by four Stanley Stemmed stripping for gravel. February 1970. Pit tocene terrace remnant on the south side of points (Figure 5). about 30 inches across times 20 inches the Tuscarawas River (elevation 800 feet), deep, full of fire cracked boulders and about 13 miles upstream from Coshocton, Late Archaic (42 examples) charcoal. No artifacts." The small pottery where the Tuscarawas and Walhonding The late Archaic is represented by fifteen sherd referred to in the second note was rivers join to form the Muskingum. Brewerton Corner Notched points (Figure 11 mm thick, light brown/tan, grit tem­ 7); twenty Brewerton Side Notched points pered, plain surfaced, and probably dates Earliest Artifacts (14 examples) (Figure 7); and two Matanzas Side to the Adena occupation at the site. In The earliest artifact in Brown's collec­ Notched points (Figure 7). These point addition to this sherd, there were eight tion from the site is a basal fragment of a types are related to the Late Archaic Lau- more plain body sherds and two rims sur­ Paleo-lndian fluted point (Figure 1). This rentian tradition of the northeastern United face collected at the site which were also point was probably broken and discarded States and are the most numerous types probably Adena. The two rims each had in the final stages of manufacture. On the found on terrace sites in the Newcomer­ slightly rounded lips. The average thick­ obverse side two flutes were removed. stown and Shady Bend areas. There are ness of the sherds was 11.7 mm. The The first was 34 mm long and 15 mm also five Table Rock Stemmed points thinnest were the rims, measuring only 9 wide. The second flute, which overlapped (Figure 7). Table Rock points commonly mm in thickness, and the thickest body the first, is 23 mm long and 19 mm wide. occur in Midwestern states that border the sherd was 14 mm. There is a well defined nipple or striking Ohio and Mississippi rivers. Also among the ceramics from the site platform worked into the base, positioned were three large basal sherds that Brown there to assist in the fluting process. How­ Transitional (16 examples) was able to match and glue back ever, no additional flutes were removed There are sixteen points in the collec­ together. These averaged 21 mm in thick­ from the obverse face and the reverse tion that are considered Transitional ness and also probably date to the Adena side showed no evidence of fluting what­ (Figure 8). In Ohio these points are called component at the site. soever. Retouch and lateral grinding of the Ashtabula. In our area of the Tuscarawas sides, considered to be the last step in the River valley they are common finds on the Remarks manufacturing process of fluted points, higher terraces. The number of artifacts found at the are missing on this example. Shady Bend site is not as impressive as The second Paleo-indian artifact is a Woodland (11 examples) the number recovered at other terrace basal fragment of a Crowfield point There are seven Adena points in the sites along the Tuscarawas River. Our (Figure 1). This point measures 32 mm collection (Figure 9). Five are made from examination of the site before it was wide and, typical of Crowfield points, is Flint Ridge flint and two from Upper destroyed showed a sparse scatter of relatively thin, measuring 6 mm in thick­ Mercer material. There are also two small artifacts on the terrace edge. That Brown ness. It has multiple flutes on both sides, Middle Woodland points (Figure 10) and was able to recover as much material and three on the obverse and three on the two Late Woodland/Mississippian trian­ information as he did is a tribute to his reverse. There is light grinding on the gular points (Figure 10). skill and determination. sides. Crowfield points are more com­ Proof that the terrace was available at an monly found in northern Ohio and the Miscellaneous Stone Items early age for human habitation are the Great Lakes region. The rest of the stone items in the col­ Paleo-indian artifacts that were recovered. The third Paleo-indian point is nearly lection consist of four axe or celt blade Mammoth teeth, tusk fragments, and other complete; only one ear is missing (Figure fragments; two net sinkers; one small skeletal remains are often found during 1). It measures 58 mm long, 26 mm wide, hammerstone; two cup stones, thirty- sand and gravel mining operations along and is also 6 mm thick. For unknown rea­ three blanks or preforms, thirty-two end this portion of the Tuscarawas valley, sons this point has been modified by scrapers (Figure 10); twenty-three broken although none of these remains have thus rechipping along the upper portion of the tips; sixteen Hopewell bladelets; forty-five far been associated with Paleo-indian sides. Light grinding occurs along this pieces of debitage worked on one or both stone tools. Brown himself recovered sec­ rechipped area. edges; nineteen large blades that have tions of the tusks of a mastodon or mam­ Eleven other points from the site have retouch on both edges (Figure 11); one moth at the base of a Shady Bend gravel elements that suggest Paleo-indian origin broken hematite plummet (Figure 12); and pit. The largest section measured 22 (Figure 2). Three basal fragments show evi- three drills (Figure 10). inches in length (Figure 15).

20 At this time it is not known for certain Since the Shady Bend site is now References which group of occupants at the site dug destroyed, we are fortunate to have a Mortine, Wayne A. and Doug Randies and used the fire pits, although the pres­ documented assortment of artifacts from 1995 The Powelson Site: An Adena Mound in the Lower Tuscarawas River Valley. ence of the pottery sherd in one of these this location collected by the late Leonard Ohio Archaeologist 45(4):14-16. features suggests that this feature at least Brown. may have been Adena. We can add that a 1996 The Young Site: A Chert Processing knowledgeable informant told us that a Acknowledg ments Site in Coshocton County, Ohio. Ohio Archaeologist 46(4):4-11. series of five evenly spaced fire pits were We wish to thank the following individ­ uncovered by former farming operations uals for their support and help with this 1997 The Laurel Run Rock Shelter. Ohio along the terrace edge. These pits con­ report - Jeff Carskadden, Bonnie Mortine, Archaeologist 47(2):4-7. tained charcoal, large fire cracked rocks, and members of Leonard Brown's family. and in one instance bone refuse. The age of these features is not known.

3 4 5 | CM | IN I ? Figure 1 (Mortine and Randies) First point, basal frag­ ment, Paleoindian, broken or abandoned in the final stages of its manufacture. There is a nipple or striking platform, used in the fluting process, worked into the Figure 2 (Mortine and Randies) Points related to an early time period. center of the concave base. Second point, basal frag­ First and second basal fragments, top row, have nipples or striking plat­ ment of a Paleoindian Crowfield. Third point, nearly forms worked into the basal areas. The third basal fragment, top row, complete Paleoindian artifact. This point for an shows evidence of a hinge fracture that was caused by the removal of unknown reason was modified by rechipping along an initial flute. Bottom row, three points that have lanceolate forms. the upper portion of the side.

Figure 4 (Mortine and Randies) Early Archaic Kirks Corner Notched points. Figure 3 (Mortine and Randies) Early Archaic Figure 5 (Mortine and Randies) First point, top Bevels. row, Middle Archaic, Stanley Stemmed point. The other points are Early Archaic, Big Sandy/Raddatz point types.

21 Figure 6 (Mortine and Randies) Early Archaic Bifurcated points.

Figure 7 (Mortine and Randies) Top row, Late Archaic, Brewerton Side Notched. Middle row, Late Archaic, Brewerton Corner Notched. Bottom row, the first two points are Late Archaic Matanza Side Notched. The last three points are Late Archaic, Table Rock points.

Figure 8 (Mortine and Randies) Transitional, Ashtabula points.

Figure 9 (Mortine and Randies) Early Woodland, Adena points.

M Figure 10 (Mortine and Randies) First point, upper row, Middle Woodland, Hopewell. Second and third points are Late Woodland/Mississippian Trian­ gles. Fourth and fifth artifacts are drills. Bottom row, left to right scraper, broken drill, scraper, and a flake tool worked on both sides.

22 Figure 11 (Mortine and Randies) Large prepared blades worked on both sides. Figure 12 (Mortine and Randies) Early Woodland, Adena pottery sherds and on the bottom row, middle artifact a broken hematite plummet.

w^^T s"f~ t

V • » • •••'.. . -, '•••' 1 jfl "... f I

• 1 1 ' '^fl 1 1 ^^—^^ $f. ' ^H • '• ^f 2 1 ^B •*. *.

^H^k

Iky.'*

Figure 13 (Mortine and Randies) Exterior of a grit tempered, smoothed Figure 14 (Mortine and Randies) Interior view of the surface, light brown/tan restored conical base of Early Woodland, Plain restored conical base shown in Figure 13. vessel.

Figure 15 (Mortine and Randies) Section of tusk of Woolly Mammoth or Mastodon. Found by Brown at the base of a Shady Bend Gravel pit.

23 A SHELL ARTIFACT FROM MUSKINGUM COUNTY, OHIO by John Mocic RD#1 Dilles Bottom, OH

Shell artifacts are rarely found on the sur­ Since so few prehistoric shell artifacts The species of the mollusk is the family face of the ground. They are soft, easily are found it is difficult to define them. Myacidae I believe (Abbot 1968). broken and deteriorate quickly. Animals There is nothing which can be used for gnaw on them for the calcium they contain. comparison. I believe this piece to be a Reference: I was surprised to find the intact piece fish scaler. The thick side of the shell fits Abbot, R.T. shown in figures 1 and 2 on the surface the hand nicely and the serrated portion 1968 Guide to Field Identification of and it is likely that it had recently been would remove fish scales perfectly. When Seashells of North America Western I first found it the notches were more pro­ brought up by the plow. It was found Publishing Company. near Coal Run along Route 60 in Wash­ nounced but with time parts of the ington County on an upper terrace of the thinner areas have scaled off. Muskingum River.

Figures 1 & 2 (Mocic) Obverse and reverse of a shell fish scaler from Muskingum County.

OHIO ECCENTRICS by George Armann Albany, OH

When I first started collecting Indian There seem to be two types of eccentric is that every example has iden­ relics as a boy in Powhatan Point, Ohio, I eccentrics. The first type was, I believe, tical tip configuration. often traveled ten miles along Captina made solely for ornamentation or for cer­ There is great variation within the Creek and returned home with a cigar emonial use. These probably date from second type. Most are extremely well box full of artifacts. The relics I found the Archaic period (7,000 to 1,000 B. C.) made. I believe that this type were not were common, and in order to improve for three reasons: they have ground originally intended as eccentrics. my collection, finer relics had to be pur­ bases, they resemble other Archaic ser­ Eccentrics are unusual artifacts which chased. It was at this time that I learned rated types, and the fact that one eccen­ require much further investigation. that I must educate myself about prehis­ tric was found in proximity to a bifurcated toric artifacts. I learned to recognize the point. A salient feature of this type of multitude of fake flint items, such as fish hooks, buffalo effigies, and eccentrics. I was surprised, therefore, when I found an eccentric in a field in Monroe County, Ohio. Several months later I picked up another in Coshocton, County. When my wife, Marie, found a third one in Meigs County, my idea was confirmed that there really were authentic eccentrics in Ohio. I now have nine of these unusual artifacts.

Figure 1 (Armann) Eccentrics from Ohio. Top row: Athens Co., Licking River flint; Gallia Co., Carter Cave flint; Perry Co., Flint Ridge flint; Coshocton Co., Nethers flint (personal find); Monroe Co., River pebble chert (personal find). Bottom row: Meigs Co., River pebble chert (Marie's find); Licking Co., Upper Mercer flint.

24 THE ADENA PIPE by Steven Carpenter Plain City, OH

As with all artistic artifacts which have skeleton of a dwarf found in the Adena derived from ancient civilizations there is mound it is believed that the Adena Pipe an element of mystery about their purpose was carved to represent a real person for and meaning to the people who created as Webb and Baby have reported: them. The Adena Pipe is one such artifact. "Since the details of this carving The Adena Pipe was found by William C. are so realistic, with brief loin Mills in 1901 while excavating a burial cloth, the headdress, the ear mound on the estate (named Adena) of spools and finger and toe nail Ohio's first governor, Thomas Wor- relief, we are probably justified in thington. The pipe was found in a broken making a diagnosis from a phys­ condition, possibly the result of having ical form. There is a definite indi­ been ceremonially killed. It is to this day cation of dwarfism in the the only such human effigy pipe ever to be individual. The heavyset muscular found which can be linked to the Adena body and a trunk of normal pro­ culture (Converse, 1998). portions, stubby arms and legs are Fashioned from Ohio pipe stone, it very characteristic." depicts a dwarf who has a goiter and Obviously the artisan must have felt whose limb joints depict the affliction that he was worthy of such a worshipful medically known as "Rachitis" (Webb, and masterful undertaking. The subject Baby 55). Pipe stone originates from the may have been an individual who was a Feurt Hill deposits in Scioto County, religious or social leader, or one who Ohio. Upon examination it is obvious that because of his affliction, may have been the Adena Pipe was made for ritual thought to be a deity (Webb, Baby 55). smoking. Tubular pipes, drilled from end Today, we are left to ponder the mystery to end, were a common type of pipe behind the Adena Pipe. However, its rep­ used by the prehistoric Ohio Indian cul­ resentation as an expression of prehis­ ture known to us today as the "Adena". toric art leaves no mystery at all. The mystery of the Adena Pipe was the meaning, to the artisan and his people, References of the individual who the pipe was sculp­ Baby, Raymond, S. and Webb, William, S. tured to immortalize. According to Webb 1957 The Adena People-No. 2 Columbus: and Baby, individuals who were born The Ohio State University Press. with deformities appeared to have a spe­ Converse, Robert N. cial meaning to the Adena people. A 1998 Personal Interview. number of skeletons have been found in Adena burial mounds which show these Figure 1 (Carpenter) The Adena Pipe excavated afflictions. Although there was no 'Rachitis is a disease of the spine. in 1901. A PORPHYRY BIRDSTONE FROM HANCOCK COUNTY, OHIO by Stod Rowe Cincinnati, OH Porphyry birdstones are among the nessee, acquired the piece in 1953. In the The birdstone was subsequently acquired rarest prehistoric artifacts in Ohio. Exam­ late 1950s Dr. Young gave the artifact to by Red Tully, then later by Dave Zinkie. ples made of slate outnumber hard por­ his friend E.E. Curtis, of Gilbertsville, Ken­ This prehistoric artifact, therefore, has an phyry types such as this by almost ten to tucky, who kept it for the rest of his life. interesting modern history. one (Townsend 1959). The phenocrysts in the "pop eyes" of this artifact are so posi­ tioned that they seem to "look" at you from the Late Archaic of 2500 to 500 B.C. This birdstone was found in 1926 by J.D. Alspach near Vanlue, Ohio, in Han­ cock County. Sometime prior to 1942, it was acquired by Harry B. Maples, of Columbus. The artifact was featured on the cover of the Minnesota Archaeologist in 1942, at which time it was listed in the collection of A.B. Cassell. Raymond Fig. 1 (Rowe) Vietzen of Elyria, Ohio, owned the bird­ Porphyry Bird­ stone from 1942 to 1949 and later pic­ stone from tured it in his 1981 book, The Old Warrior Hancock Speaks. Dr. T.H. Young, of Nashville, Ten­ County, Ohio. Found in 1926.

25 DAMAGE REPAIR by Robert Haag 165 Merot Court Doylestown, OH 44230

Shown in Figures 1 and 2 are two ever, I acquired a second shovel pendant In conversation with Bob Converse, it shovel pendants. Of interest is the with abrading which seems to confirm the was observed that damaged shovel pen­ abrading done in what I believe is repair method. dants are usually engraved or tally- damage repair. When I obtained the first The first example (Fig 1) shows damage marked (Fig 2). Although perfect in all pendant I thought it was a rare example from a large flake scar - the fracture line other ways, this pendant shows rare of damage control and when I compared corresponds with the last tally-mark at the engraving which may confirm the fact that it with other shovel pendants in my col­ top. Whether the application of a tally-mark this was a damaged and repaired piece. lection I found no similar markings. But caused the fracture which later resulted in this pendant type is rare and my compar­ the damage, or whether the tally-mark ative sample was small. Recently, how­ actually removed the flake is conjectural.

Figure 1 (Haag) Fractured and repaired shovel pendant. Figure 2 (Haag) Engraved shovel pendant.

26 **NOTICE TO ALL A.S.O. CHAPTER PRESIDENTS** AND OTHER INTERESTED PARTIES

Applications are now being accepted GIST. No one other than a chartered Run. If you are the president or an officer from the A.S.O. Chapters for 1999 A.S.O. Chapter can request a summer of one of these Chapters, please advise summer picnic meetings. To be eligible, a meeting. Such requests are to be the Vice-President of your status. It Chapter must be one in good standing received by 1 May, 1999 in order that states in the A.S.O. by-laws (Article VII, with the A.S.O. and be able to provide selections may be considered. Meeting Section 3) and agreed to by the Chapters adequate facilities. Two or more Chapters locations will be announced at the May when receiving their charters, that a can co-sponsor a meeting if so desired. 1999 state meeting in Columbus. yearly report listing Chapter officers and All rules concerning the display and the activities is to be forwarded to the Vice- buying and selling of artifacts that are in ***************************** President. In some cases this failure to effect at regular state A.S.O. meetings will Our local Chapters are almost always in report has been a yearly occurrence. If be in effect at picnic meetings as well. need of speakers or other program mate­ no word is received by 15 March, 1999 Table charges are optional. If a Chapter rials for their monthly meetings. If there are your Chapter will be declared inactive. It wishes to sponsor a summer meeting, a any A.S.O. members who are willing to is not the wish of the A.S.O. to lose any written request must be submitted to the give a program to a chapter other than Chapters so your cooperation would be A.S.O. stating which Chapter/Chapters their own or have an interesting video that much appreciated. If yearly report forms will be involved, where in the state the can be shared, drop a line to the President are needed by these or any other meeting would be held and provide both or Vice-President. Chapter they can be obtained from the a preferred date and a back-up date if Vice-President at the address listed on one is available. Also include some sort of ***************************** the inside cover of this magazine. Thank street address and a brief description of Due to a lack of activity on their part, you. the facilities available (food, shelter, etc.). the status of the following A.S.O. Chap­ Requests should be sent to the A.S.O. ters is in question: Kyger Creek, Lake Sincerely, Vice-President at the address listed inside County, Lower Ohio River Valley Basin, William H. Pickard the front cover of OHIO ARCHAEOLO­ Mahoning Valley, Painted Post and Plum Vice-President, A.S.O.

MISSING BIRD by Mike Kiel 13537 Pinewood Ct. Perrysburg, Ohio 43551

The accompanying photo is of a bird­ stone that was a personal field find which disappeared from a case in my home more than a year ago. It is made of dark red banded slate and has the appearance of fire treatment. The entire left side and tail of the bird had been sheared off during use and had been totally reground by its user. If anyone should have any informa­ tion on the whereabouts of this piece, please contact me at (419) 872-0912 or (419) 891-2933. If returned there will be no questions asked.

Figure 1 (Kiel) Missing Birdstone

27 EXPANDED CENTER ADENA GORGETS by Richard Sisson 4250 Dublin Road Columbus, OH

Shown in the color plate are six Adena expanded center gorgets. All are made of banded slate and are typical of early Adena types which date to around 500 BC.

Figure 1 (Sisson) Top to bottom: Preble County, Ohio — Whitley County, Indiana — Randolph County, Indiana — Darke County, Ohio — ex-Judge Payne and Al Wakefield collections.

28 A CROOKSVILLE FLINT FLUTED POINT by Robert N. Converse 199 Converse Drive Plain City, Ohio 43064

Crooksville flint is not widely distributed outside southeastern Ohio. It is seen in collections along the Ohio River in many Archaic type points and it is possible that there are outcroppings of this distinct stone in areas south of its Perry County origin which have yet to be identified. Per­ haps with an extensive study of site col­ lections in southeastern Ohio a more comprehensive picture of its distribution and identity of local sources may develop. The flint can be somewhat cherty but individual pieces may have a better quality with some glossy inclusions. Its most recognizable characteristics are yellow ocher-colored inclusions or splotches in a matrix of cream, tan or greenish-tan material. These yellow inclu­ sions may not be typical of Crooksville flint from other sources distant from Crooksville. Some of the higher quality pieces are translucent and may even have thin veins of nearly transparent quartz. It apparently was like many flints and chert used by prehistoric Indians in that it was used by local groups and not often exported to distant areas. For example, it is unusual to see even a small point or tool of Crooksville flint in central Ohio. The fluted point shown in the accom­ panying color plate was found in Hocking County, Ohio, and was originally col­ lected by Max Shipley of Columbus, Ohio. It is the only fluted point I have ever seen of Crooksville flint. It is an out­ standing example of the Paleo Indian preference for strange, unusual, unidenti­ fiable, or exotic but high quality flint. It also demonstrates that Paleo knappers could produce points from nearly any Figure 1 (Converse) Fluted point made of Crooksville flint. Originally collected by the late kind of flint if they so desired. Max Shipley of Columbus, Ohio, it is from Hocking County. Three and three-quarter inches long, it is the only fluted point of this flint the author has ever seen.

29 CACHE BLADES FROM ASHLAND COUNTY by Jeff Zemrock 903 Green Township Road 2850 Perrysville, OH 44864

This group of rough blades was discov­ Chipping is fairly rough, and is mainly side area, black Upper Mercer flint is most ered in Lake Township, Ashland County, in to side. All are of the same black flint with often seen in archaic tools. They show no the vicinity of Round Lake. Four of these yellow inclusions. characteristics of either Adena or blades were discovered on December 31, In mid-March of 1995, I returned to the Hopewell blades. I also believe that these 1994, along with one large utilized flake site, which I probed with a metal rod for blades have become scattered by and one large less-worked piece. The first almost two hours in an attempt to find the repeated plowing and that more will sur­ of the five worked blades was found two main cache. Although I failed to find the face in the future. I am hoping for further years previously and was considered a cache, I did uncover three more blades. clues as to who the maker of these stray find at that time. Size of these pieces Again, they were the same material and blades was. is 1% inches for the smallest, and 2% workmanship as the earlier pieces. References inches for the largest. Generally these are My opinion is that these are archaic Holzapfel, Elaine curved or have a flatter back side, and are blades, even though no points or other More Prehistoric Flint Caches From the worked more on the curved or top side. tools have been found nearby. In our Ohio Area, Ohio Archaeology; Spring, 1994.

Figure 1 (Zemrock) Five rough blanks, second from left found two years previously. All other artifacts found December 31, 1994, and March 6, 1995. Bottom row; Left, large flake blade. Right, broken or unfinished piece.

MY NEPHEW'S FIRST FIND by Dan Kramer 112 W Columbus St. St. Henry, OH 45883

Last year, after showing my twelve year old nephew Matt Thobe, my surface col­ lection and seeing his interest, I invited him along for a hunt. We had no luck in the first field so we moved on and I explained to him how much time it can take to find a nice piece. In the second field we did better and found a complete bifurcate and a small celt. On our way out of the field, Matt found his first artifact - a lanceolate. It was a happy day and we both still enjoy surface hunting. That same week I found Fig. 1 (Kramer) Lance­ a 3/4 groove axe 3'A inches long in the olate made of Four same field. The site is in Jackson Twp., Mile Creek chert and Auglaize Co., Ohio. other artifacts from cama cite*

30 AN HISTORIC PIPE TOMAHAWK by Lloyd Harrishfeger 203 Steiner St. Pandora, OH 45877

The pipe tomahawk shown in Figure 1 is in the collection of Mike Cramer, Rawson, Ohio. It was originally in the collection of Eldon Powell and was found in a gravel pit one mile west of Gilboa, Ohio. It is typical of English manufacture and was probably a trade item from the 1700s.

Fig. 1 (Harnishfeger) English type pipe tomahawk 8% inches long from near Gilboa, Ohio.

A BIRDSTONE FROM MIAMI COUNTY by Rich Millhoff 1607 Nicklin Ave. Piqua, OH 45356

March 1, 1998, was a forty degree day and I was surface hunting the flood plains south of Piqua along the Miami River. I had found several Archaic points, a scraper, and an Early Adena point (Fig. 2) but the day was getting late. I decided to make one more pass through the field and finish my day of hunting. At the end of a chisel-plowed area I found the bird­ stone shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1 (Millhoff) Obverse and reverse of Miami County birdstone. It is made of white quartzite and is undrilled.

Figure 2 (Millhoff) Large three inch hafted knife and Early Adena point.

31 A REBUTTAL TO THE ARCHAEOASTRONOMERS: SCIENCE BEGINS WITH THE FACTS by James A. Marshall 1828 South Roselle Road Schaumburg, IL 60172-5016

ABSTRACT: The author is a civil engineer theories on only one or a few facts or Serpent's mouth, which is about 102 feet with about 40 years practice around especially, as we shall see below, no facts by 47 feet. The entire work is also too Chicago, Illinois. His avocation since 1965 at all about these works. These practices small to be even one item in a database has been searching in nineteenth century provide few or no constraints on wild the­ for such theories. Other Ohio works, such books and archives for sites of prehistoric orizing. A third non-scientific procedure as all those at Newark in Licking County constructions. He has located more than has been to start with one or more theo­ and the several sites in Ross County, 225 of these sites in the field, acquired ries, gather facts that fit these theories, would constitute a much better database aerial photographs of the sites, and and ignore other facts that don't fit. together than the Ohio Serpent Mound instrumentally surveyed and mapped the This researcher reviews other articles alone. These have circles or ellipses sites and remnants of these works in the published since 1987 in Ohio Archaeolo­ 1,000 feet or more across, but these field so that the images on air photos are gist about these same earthworks that he authors ignore these works. Hence, I have precisely located. A large number of has surveyed and mapped. He builds on to conclude that their article is a highly these works are circles, squares, rectan­ his spring 1995 article, Astronomical speculative piece. gles, octagons, and ellipses built of earth Alignments Claimed to Exist on the Serpent Mound Revisited, by William F. and more than 1,000 feet across. From Eastern North American Prehistoric Earth­ Romain. He criticizes the Hardmans' this entire data base of primary source works and the Evidence and Arguments paper above, finding fault with Hardmans' material, he has determined the facts of Against Them. This researcher sums his solstice alignments, their calculations, their layout procedure, dimensions, align­ criticism of these papers he reviews in knowledge of circumpolar stars, assump­ ment, unit of measure, and geometric one brief sentence: They have not mar­ tion that the work was built at the begin­ knowledge, and has reported some of shaled the facts. ning of the Christian era, and the these findings in 5 articles so far pub­ assumption of a flat horizon. This article lished in Ohio Archaeologist. An important 1987 seems to be prefatory to the one below. aspect of his surveying and mapping has The Great Serpent and the Sun. by Clark The Serpent Mound Map, by William F. been to plot the works on the Ohio State Hardman, Jr. and Marjorie M. Hardman. Romain. He spends an entire article Grid Coordinate System, so that the pre­ The authors advance several theories laboring the technical end of his surveying cise distance and direction of every site built solely on this work such as that the and mapping of the Serpent. Much of from each other is determinable. construction was carefully laid out, the what he says are standard procedures in Why execute this research at all? It is builders were aware of natural directions, any property or topographic survey by because here in these facts we have an there were units of measure (one about professional civil engineers or land sur­ important chapter in American pre-history 36 feet, the other about 77 feet), there veyors, so I am at a loss as to why he and early history that has been very much was geometry at work at this mound, and labors this matter so much. The result of ignored and is profoundly at odds with a there was orientation to solstice and his survey, Figure 1, The Serpent Mound popular understanding that Native Ameri­ equinox rising and setting of the sun and Map, could have been much better. At cans could not even count their fingers orientation to horizon hilltops. All this the­ the time he surveyed this site, he should and toes. The minimum knowledge of orizing is built on the one work, which have taken elevation readings on about 4 geometry and land layout that was makes a completely inadequate data­ or 5 times as many spot locations on the required to lay out and build these works base. As to their units of measure, they work, then he would have had enough is a high achievement. South of the Rio show these in their Figures 2, 3, and 4, field data to produce a very good topo­ Grande, New World prehistoric peoples but these units don't measure from center graphic map. In the absence of elevation had systems of writing but north of this to center of any part of the Serpent and contour lines, it leaves this reviewer border there has been found no pre- Mound. There is also no indication of wondering just what is represented in this Columbian system of writing. In the such units being used in the layout of the figure by the various numbered points, absence of such, the mathematics in work. Their units simply measure from and what constitutes his definition of the these geometric earthworks is closest to one random part of this work to another edge of this work. a written record of these people yet dis­ random part. covered. This researcher has deemed it Their Figure 4 shows how two concen­ 1988 important to record all the geometric tric circles fit the Serpent Mound. The Serpent Mound; A New Look at an Old works and related works so that a perma­ radii of these circles are not indicated, but Snake-in-the-Grass, by Robert Fletcher nent record can be established of as these scale about 146 feet and 246 feet. and Terry Cameron. Their article is appar­ many aspects of this high achievement as The first radius is about 4 times the 36- ently a summary of their knowledge of the possible and so that any conclusions foot unit, but the 246-foot radius does not Serpent Mound and a critique of the about these works can be based on pre­ fit either unit. Furthermore, both curves fit Hardmans' paper that reinforces that of cise maps of as many of these works as the work poorly and at only random Romain's. Their map of the Serpent possible. This researcher has no theories points, so I have to conclude that their Mound, with the help of Bill Gustin, is about these works, has advanced no the­ case of units of measure and this geom­ shown in Figure 1 but again I ask where ories, and will be advancing none at all in etry at the Great Serpent Mound is not are the elevations and where are the con­ order to keep these facts free from the proved. Their north alignments and sol­ tour lines that should be mapped results bias of theory. stice and equinox alignments are also not of any such survey? They apparently did In contrast to these above stated pur­ persuasive because they involve only this not determine such elevations, so I must poses and methods, there have been one small work of the entire serpent say that they do not have a good map. many nonscientific but popular ways of which is about 600 feet from one end to Geometry at the Serpent Mound, by analyzing these works, such as building the other and the elliptical work in the William F. Romain. He announces that a

32 different unit of measure from the Hard­ such structures, three of them in Kentucky Ancient Eclipse Paths at the Serpent mans' way better fits the dimensions and for example near which I have searched Mound, by William F. Romain. His proce­ geometry of the Serpent Mound and pro­ for and found no similar prehistoric con­ dure I have criticized in my archaeoas­ poses one equal to 126.4 feet. He also struction and I think there are none. There tronomy article of Spring 1995. proposes a base line of 379.3 feet. This is is one cryptoexplosive structure in each of approximately equal to 3 times that Shelby, Woodford, and Knox counties, 1989 dimension. He calls his unit of 126.4 feet hence it should be clear that the proximity F.W. Putnam at the Serpent Mound in the Serpent Mound Unit, or SMU. In his of the Serpent Mound to this structure is Adams County, Ohio: A Historical Review, Figure 1, he shows the use of this unit on very likely a coincidence. by Ralph W. Dexter. His statement twice the Serpent Mound as he sees it and He notes in the area of the Serpent made that this Serpent Mound is the indicates that an octagon of regularity fits Mound frequent occurrence of under­ largest of its kind in North America I rebut part of the Serpent. His Figures 2, 3, 4 ground streams, caves and sinkholes. in my archaeoastronomy article of Spring and 5 purport to show use of % and V> of Yes, but these features are common also 1995. Romain's SMU. However, the units he in areas absent of known prehistoric con­ shows measure from one random part of structions. Also, there are effigies 1991 the Serpent Mound to another. They are common in areas absent of such forma­ Possible Astronomical Alignments at as random as the dimensions from your tions. For example, in the state of Wis­ Hopewell Sites in Ohio, by William F. kitchen sink drain to the far top corner of consin, there were more than 15,000 Romain. He concludes his article by your back door: a random dimension not effigies known to have existed in 1840. saying that the author welcomes com­ at all likely to have been used in the There might be 5,000 that are still trace­ ments about his article. Let us hope he layout of your house or apartment able on which at least a few such sites he will welcome all these further comments. building. Also, Figure 1 and 4 show an could have tested his theories. He would His theory is that walls and openings in octagonal shape that does not exist on have found no caves, underground walls are aligned to winter solstice sunrise any of the sites I have surveyed and springs, or sinkholes in entire glaciated and sunset, summer solstice sunrise and mapped. Also, the neck to the circle on counties in which there are large numbers sunset, moon minimum north and south Figure 4 does not relate to any such of these effigies. rise and set, and moon maximum north octagon in that fashion and there is no The Serpent Mound Solar Eclipse and south rise and set. His paper seems even approximate octagonal or circular Hypothesis: Ethnohistoric Considerations, to be based on the thesis that if an align­ work known to me of these sizes. This by William F. Romain. His hypotheses or ment to some astronomical rising or set­ octagon and circle are apparently a theories I rebut in my archaeoastronomy ting point can be found on a work, it product of his imagination, not a fact article, Spring 1995. follows that such possibly was the intent anywhere. On Romain's 1987: "Serpent Mound of the prehistoric builder. Not so. On just Romain says that also evident in the Revisited" Paper, by Clark Hardman, Jr. about every house, apartment, commer­ Serpent Mound is a secondary unit of and Marjorie H. Hardman. This paper is cial, educational or other structure built in length equivalent to about 149.5 feet. another example of the great number of the last 100 years, astronomical align­ These units he, as well as the Hardmans, alternative contradictory theories that can ments can be found. Twice a year as one has found cannot become evident on this be advanced by researchers working sits at one's breakfast table, or at one's lone small mostly non-geometric figure. from too small a database. Hardmans' work desk, or as one drives to work along To be the least bit persuasive, he should Figure 1 shows the diversity of interpreta­ Main Road, or drives home from work, show the occurrence of this unit on at tion of the edge of the Serpent Mound. the sun is right in one's eyes. All of us least 40 other sites in such as radii of cir­ Both parties of surveyors should have have had such experiences, but such cles. Circles have only one dimension, taken elevations and produced a topo­ does not mean that it was the intent of the radius. He has done no such thing. graphic map. They found Romain's paper the "late historic" builders of this house, Furthermore, the Serpent Mound is too misleading and inappropriate. apartment, place of work or the road that small and the extent of the exactness of More on Great Serpent Maps, by Clark it be that way. The same applies to Mr. its replication with its original condition in Hardman, Jr. and Marjorie H. Hardman. Romain's azimuths assuming that they prehistoric time is too uncertain for it to Their article counter-rebuts articles by are accurate. I have found that many are be a good database for his theories. The Fletcher and Cameron and also William not. He allows himself so much leeway in units of measure cited by Hardman and F. Romain reviewed above. The various his choice of points on almost any work Romain are not evident on the more than maps advanced by each of the parties that it would be surprising if there would 225 sites I have surveyed and mapped are criticized but none of these three par­ be a work on which he could find no such and that makes them not units of mea­ ties did their work as well as it could have azimuths. He is for all practical purposes sure. The diversity of their theories is a been done. They should have instead starting with a theory as he has stated good example of what happens when taken numerous elevation readings all above, then reporting facts that support researchers work from too few facts. over the site and then produced a topo­ his theory, and ignoring many facts that Together, they have come up with a total graphic map as said previously. Had do not support his theory. Such is a pop­ of nine units of measure on this one site. each one produced such, the three ular misconception of scientific proce­ It is possible that on any one site there resulting maps could have been com­ dure. Good scientific procedure begins be a unique unit of measure. That unit pared with great rigorousness. Instead, with facts, not theories. has often been found to be the length of Figures 1 through 6 are only outline His Figures 1, 2 and 3 that deal with the the foot of the person who stepped off drawings of where each rodperson called Hopeton Work north of Chillicothe, Ohio the site or it may be the length of the the edge and the crest of each part of the and now a part of Hopewell Culture forearm of that person. Serpent and comparisons thereof. National Monument are a case in point. I Terrestrial Observations at the Serpent Having worked with land surveyors and first visited this site in 1965 and made Mound, by William F. Romain. He says rodpersons for more than 40 years, I am topographic and other instrumental sur­ that the Serpent Mound is located in the aware that it is not so important as when veys from 1970 to 1977. Facsimiles of southeast quadrant of what is known as the rodperson calls the end of a mound these Figures of his are shown respec­ the Serpent Mound Cryptoexplosion as are the elevations at each location. tively as my Figures 1, 2, and 3. The Structure, a construction in geological The above three parties of mapmakers azimuths Romain finds on his Figures, time. He attaches significance to this. He don't seem to have learned that lesson even if such were precisely correct, are should have known that there are other but it is a very important one. very likely coincidences for several rea-

33 sons. The first reason is that the distances Romain says, then how do these points Romain's Figure 8 is of Mound City in from one opening to another are in most relate to the design and layout of the the national monument north of Chilli­ cases 800 to 1,000 feet. This makes the entire work? Or to put it another way, why cothe. I began surveys of the site in 1965 far opening in each case very difficult or have a "circular" work, plus the odd with more work in 1966, 1968, and 1970 to even impossible to see from the near shaped figure south of it, and the three 1976. He finds three significant azimuths opening at sunrise and sunset even small circles, if a design purpose of the on this site, but the back end or forward assuming an area unobstructed by woods work is to document these azimuth lines? end of each azimuth is a random point. or high grass prairie. Given these obstruc­ On Romain's Figure 3, a facsimile of Hence, these azimuths again do not in tions in vision, it could be expected that which is my Figure 3, he shows the par­ reality have the significance he claims. the prehistoric viewers would have sen­ allel walls southwest of the Hopeton Romain's Figure 9 is of the Piketon sibly stood on the wall, which was 4 or 6 Works as having an azimuth of 53°.2. He Square, now obliterated near Piketon, feet above the ground near the openings is clearly in error. The actual azimuth, Ohio. I surveyed and mapped this site in in the wall so that they could get a better which I found from my field surveys and the early 1970's. The drawing Romain view. However, then the heavenly body air photos years ago, is 57°.5. Thus his uses is from an exhibit of several of my would have been out of the azimuth. error is 4°.3 which is unacceptably large. surveyed maps of these works at the Illi­ Romain is necessarily saying that with the His figures 4 and 5 are of the Liberty nois Institute of Technology in 1982 and at difficulty in sighting across the work, they Work south of Chillicothe, Ohio. I sur­ the Newberry Library in 1992, both in still would have stood in the low spots of veyed and mapped this site beginning in Chicago. The azimuths Romain finds sig­ the openings. This is not at all likely. As to 1966, did further work in 1968 and in the nificant are again not through centers of moonrise and moonset, it would simply be early 1970's, and more work in 1984 openings and also have errors he has too dark to see the far opening that dis­ assisted by Rick Pack of Chillicothe. On made of 0°.7 to 2°.8. The latter errors are tance away. Romain's Figure 4, Liberty Square, a fac­ too large. A second reason Romain's azimuths are simile of which I reproduce in my Figure 7, Romain's Figure 10 is of the Circleville at best coincidences is that his azimuth he shows six significant azimuths. The Work, which existed in the Ohio municipality numbers are for a horizon provided by the potential azimuths on this work that are of the same name. I measured off streets on ocean. Due to the fact that the site of ignored by Romain total 45. On this site of this site and produced a drawing in 1980. Hopeton has high hills to the southeast, 51 potential azimuths, he finds six that are His Figure 10 is another drawing from my his azimuths in that direction are from one significant. This is also not at all persua­ 1982 exhibit. Romain found that the main to four degrees in error. These errors are sive. Furthermore, his azimuth lines are axis of this work, which is today Main Street unacceptably large. As to his Figure 2 from 2° to 2°.2 in error. These sight lines in Circleville, to be the same as Moon min­ azimuth, at 122°.1, it is about 3°.8 in error are each from 1,100 feet to 1,550 feet in imum north set. This is a very close fit. This for its horizon. This azimuth is in error for length making it also unlikely that there fact however ignores the reality that the axis other reasons also. I wrote him about his was the requisite visibility from one point of the work is open to the east, not the west, Figure 2 and he said that his azimuth radi­ to another. and hence is not oriented to view Moon set. ates from the center of the circle. How­ On Romain's Figure 5 the Liberty Small Romain then shows that there are points of ever, there is no one center of this "circle". Circle reproduced as my Figure 8, he the rectangle that provide the azimuth to I found from my precise surveys and other shows an azimuth from a random point on Moon minimum north rise. These are at published surveys that this "circle" con­ the west side of the mounded circle. His cross lots across the rectangular work and sists of two half circles with centers I have east point is where part of the embank­ they are not very accurate. The lines he labeled S and T on Figures 2 and 4. I ment was removed in historic times: This shows actually have azimuths of 65° but he found from my survey that these are about east point was not an opening or signifi­ calls them each 67°.2. This is a large error. 76 feet apart. He did not locate either of cant point in prehistoric times. Romain's Also, Romain does not address the question these circle centers. In addition, the azimuth is hence not a line from one spe­ why his first azimuth was monumented as opening he shows in his Figure 2 did not cific mounded point to another as such he claims by the centerline of the work and exist in prehistoric time or early historic existed in prehistoric time. It is simply a the latter two only by cross-lots azimuths? time. The earthwork then was like what line on his drawing. Also, the azimuth that The only answer I can think of is that Romain shows in his Figure 3, a facsimile he says is 122°.1 is actually 116°. This is Romain has simply found again some of which is shown in my Figure 3. Romain his error of 6°.1, which is unacceptably random points of the work that line up at has found an azimuth significant to his large. Furthermore, the sight line distance least roughly with something but such are theory through an opening that did not is about 800 feet making the required visi­ just coincidences. On the Circleville rec­ exist before about 1855 to 1880. His bility over this length again not likely. tangle, he has found a total of five significant azimuths. However, there are about 46 other azimuth line on his Figure 2 is simply a line Romain's Figures 6 and 7 are of the potential azimuths across the square that he on a sheet of paper. It is pure bunk. Baum Work in Ross County, Ohio. I sur­ ignores similar to my statements about Lib­ veyed this site beginning in 1966, returned A third reason why Romain's azimuths erty and Baum Squares. are at best coincidences is that potential in 1968 and 1969, did more work in the azimuths on this site that don't fit his early 1970's, 1978, and in 1983, in which I Romain's Figure 11 is of the Hopewell theory are ignored although such azimuth was assisted by Monica Parrish of the site, also called Clark's Work, in Ross lines are right in front of him. Figure 5 Mohawk Nation. Romain's Figure 6 of the County, Ohio. I surveyed this site in 1966, shows my survey of Hopeton, with more entire Baum Work I criticized in my 1996 1968, and 1973. His errors of azimuth are than 110 azimuth lines from a circle center article in my Figures 17 through 20 and very large rendering his theory without to one opening or one opening through accompanying text. His Figure 7, Baum facts to support it all across this site. another that are ignored by him, presum­ Square, a facsimile of which is shown as ably because they don't fit his theory. my Figure 9, shows 3 significant azimuths. Romain's Romain A fourth reason is that such do not There are about 48 other potential azimuths Azimuths Actual Error relate to any design and layout procedure on this figure as at Liberty Square ignored 244M 229°.5 14°.6 of the work. His azimuth lines and the by Romain. Length of sight lines is from 59°.5 51° 8°.5 points of openings are shown alone in 1,100 feet to 1,550 feet, again making visi­ 53°.2 46°.6 6°.6 Figure 6. If these points are significant as bility across the site highly unlikely. 130°.5 123°.5 7°.0

34 He finds five significant azimuths on the azimuth to Moon maximum north rise. To lines and raised points at the edges and square at Clark's Work but he ignores 43 be consistent with this theory of his, the center, which it does not. Also missing other potential azimuths across this Romain should first find that the long par­ is evidence that the tablet stood on a square. The other azimuths he shows allel walls at Dunlap that trail off to the pedestal, which is required for its use as a across the site are through random points southeast also have a significant astro­ sighting device. Hence, I conclude that and therefore of no significance. nomical azimuth. He should also find that Romain has in no way proved his case. He Romain's Figure 12 is of the Turner the short parallel walls pointing north to projects these same sight lines on to other Group. Nearly all this site has been the circle also have a significant astro­ tablets in his Figures 6, 7, 8, and 9. On his destroyed long before 1965 by gravel nomical azimuth. And third, he should find Figures 11 through 19, he again projects extraction. I surveyed and mapped the that these significant azimuths should these sight lines and also sight lines roads that cross this area from 1976 to point to an astronomical phenomenon having to do with the moon. The same 1978 in order to precisely scale off the related to that which he finds at Hopeton. comments of mine apply to these other images of this site on old air photos in the He does no such thing. Instead, Romain tablets and sightlines. Furthermore, some Smithsonian Anthropological Archives. has one theory at Hopeton, and rather of his sight lines fit his various tablets only Romain's drawing is dated 1887 with a than find facts that confirm his theory at incidentally. Hence, I find this entire article north arrow that is very short. I found his Dunlap's, he instead ignores the facts at not at all persuasive. The tablets' sides do azimuths at least 9° in error making his Dunlap's that contradict his theory: these form a rough proportion of 3 to 5 or 5 to 8, claims on this site worthless. He also fails facts are that both sets of parallel walls at which are Fibonacci proportions. These in to find a significant azimuth for the Dunlap point toward parts of the sky at turn probably reflect the interest in this graded way consisting of two parallel which for all practical purposes nothing and other Fibonacci as clarified in my walls. Furthermore, the lengths of his rises or sets. Such at least suggests also 1987 article. sight lines are in all cases from 1,000 feet that the parallel walls at Hopeton were Evidence for a Basic Hopewell Unit of to 2,300 feet making it most unlikely that also not astronomically oriented. Measure, by William F. Romain. The errors theses lines would be useful for sighting Symbolic Associations at the Serpent in this article are almost too numerous to for all the reasons stated above. It is most Mound, by William F. Romain. His Figure mention. He says in the first paragraph unlikely that there was any visibility at all 6 shows his map of the Serpent Mound in that often-times these earthworks incor­ on one of his lines that from the center of Adams County, Ohio that he discussed in porate 90° right angles that are laid out to its elevated circle to the center of circle B. previous articles; azimuths significant to an accuracy of better than 10 minutes of Romain's Figure 13 is Squier and him are added. A tracing of his Figure 6 arc. It is not so! There are one or two such Davis' drawing of Dunlap's Works, which appears as my Figure 12. His azimuths cases, but the majority are far less accu­ is in the Ross County Fairgrounds north pass through random points on the earth­ rate. Romain says that many of these of Chillicothe, Ohio. A facsimile of his work and this allows so much play on earthworks are aligned to true north or to Figure 13 is shown as Figure 10. I sur­ these azimuth lines that I say he can significant celestial events within 10 or 15 veyed and mapped this site starting in prove just about any astronomical align­ minutes of arc. Not so as we have seen 1966, did more work there in 1974 and ment he wants using his procedure on the from the above reviews. He says that also completed my work there assisted by Serpent Mound. He also inexplicably evident is the recurrence of certain linear Rick and Marilyn Pack in 1984. A prelimi­ leaves one bend, the southernmost, units of measure. Yes, this is factual, but nary print of my map of this site greatly without an azimuth. the units he advances, he has not demon­ reduced from 20 feet per inch is shown in Also, he is in error in calling this effigy strated as being of consistent use. He Figure 11. The coordinates shown on this The Serpent Mound, as if it is or was the found five different units on the Ohio Ser­ map are of the Ohio State Grid Coordi­ only such in Ohio. He apparently did not pent Mound, yes, but the Hardmans found nate System South Zone. If the citizens of look very far for a similar work on which four other units. Nine or even 5 units on Ross County want to do so, this original to test his theory. He might have found one site are not a demonstration of con­ of the Figure 11 map provides the means that there was another such Serpent sistent use. This is his first paragraph. by which a registered land surveyor or Mound in Warren County, Ohio, now In his second paragraph, he continues civil engineer with surveying equipment destroyed by gravel extraction. Figure 13 his practice of advancing a theory and can stake out in the field the entire works. shows a June 1892 map of it. Figure 14 then going out and finding facts that fit Then a professional archaeologist can shows my map of the same site with his theory and ignoring facts that don't fit sink trenches across these staked out arrows of azimuths that are the counter­ his theory. Such is not good scientific walls and from such derive information by parts of Romain's azimuths. These practice. In this case, his theory is that which the entire earthwork could be azimuths, except for the one at 269°.5, do there was a specific unit of measure rebuilt. The area could still be used as a not point toward astronomical events being used by the Hopewell people, and parking lot during county fairs by related to those that Romain found at the it was equal to 1.053 feet. He also fails to installing temporary wooden ramps over Adams County site. show use of this unit on a large database the linear walls. Calendric Information Evident in the such as about 40 large sites. He confines Returning to Romain's Figure 13, my Adena Tablets, by William F. Romain. He himself to Hopewell houses for the most Figure 10, he shows two significant advances the theory that three related part; these are very small. For example, in azimuths that he represents as fitting his units of time are referenced in the Cincin­ his Figures 1 and 2, which are of houses theory. They don't. He says one wall has nati tablet. The first are summer and in Seip Works, he finds a large number of an azimuth of 292°.7, but is actually at winter solstice lines, the second are Moon postholes that he claims are this distance 293°.3 and the other, the south one, he phases in the course of the year and the apart. The first reality as shown in his fig­ says is at azimuth 292°.7, but is actually third are lines separating these cycles of ures is that his claimed lengths don't fit at azimuth 295°.7. This latter error of his the moon. These lines and corners of the the postholes very well and at least half is unacceptably large. Romain also tablet are all on its periphery. Mr. Romain the posts and their spacing are ignored ignores azimuths across the site to and offers no explanation for the symbols in by him. At his Figures 4 through 7 of from each corner and each opening. the interior of the tablet and these seem to Mound City houses, he again ignores the These number 48. be totally unrelated to the sight lines and majority of the posts and their spacing. He also states in his Figure 3 that the astronomical phenomena he invokes. The The same at his Figures 8 and 9 of parallel walls at Hopeton, which is about tablet measuring 3 by 5 inches is too small houses found at Liberty Earthworks. At 2 miles from Dunlap's, had a significant to be a sighting device even if it had sight his Figure 10 of the Serpent Mound, all

35 the dimensions shown which he says are are ignored: the neck connecting the with coordinates of points on the earth­ equal to 30 or 60 times his basic circle and octagon; radius of that circle; work walls shown in this grid system. Hopewell unit are to and from random the distance from center of circle to Romain's Moon minimum north rise points on this Mound and hence of no center of octagon; the various diameters azimuth of 67°.3, I extended from the significance. On his Figures 11 and 12, he of the octagon; the length of each of the northwestern and southeastern points shows his SMU (Serpent Mound Unit) octagon's 8 sides; and the dimensions of toward Mound City and Hopeton. These equal to 120 times his basic Hopewell the axis to true north-south and true east- lines actually pass 2,270 feet and 1,326 unit, but these are again from random west lines. That is total of about 20 feet north of the northernmost point of the points to random points. dimensions ignored by Romain. Layout Mound City work and pass 1,804 feet and Let us return to Romain's third para­ procedures and their dimensions for 860 feet north of the northernmost point of graph. He says that Squier and Davis Newark and several other works are Hopeton, far off target. Romain's claim is noted that the circular embankments at shown in my 1997 article Figures 1, 2, 3A, that such lines pass very near these earth­ High Bank and Hopeton are the same and 7. works. They don't. Romain also claims that diameter. The reality of these circular On Romain's Figure 14, he finds two the moon minimum south rise azimuth of embankment diameters is otherwise. dimensions significant, but the dimen­ 115°.9 from Anderson Earthwork passes Figure 15 shows High Bank Circle and sions he should have studied are what are through the middle of High Bank Work. It Hopeton "Circle" to the same scale one shown in my 1997 article, Figure 7, which does not! Lines extended from the extreme plotted on the other from my surveys and shows 8 dimensions, all but 1 ignored by northeast and southwest points of those of the Smithsonian. Romain. Anderson at this azimuth pass 4,639 feet In Romain's fourth paragraph, he cites On Romain's Figure 15, he compares and 3,414 feet north of the northernmost Whittlesey as finding a measure of about the radius of the Newark Observatory point of High Bank Circle. In view of the 30 inches. Whittlesey paced off most of his Circle, 526.9 feet with the diagonal of the fact of these large errors of his, I decided works making his findings not that reliable. Baum Square and says that the latter is 3 that it is not worth checking Romain's other claimed astronomical azimuths in his In Romain's tenth paragraph, he speaks times the former or 1,580.7 feet. It is not article. Possibly in the future I will have of researchers Hively and Horn and their so. These diagonals actually are 1,561.5 enough time to do so. conclusions from their work on several feet and 1,585.6 feet. He says the same earthworks. I am familiar with their publica­ about the Liberty Square, which diagonals Romain further ignores potential inter- tions in this regard and their conclusions actually are 1,566.6 feet and 1.563.5 feet. site relationships between clusters of are from a database that is too small. Furthermore, he ignores dimensions such works in other counties such as those In Romain's eleventh paragraph, he as the 4 sides of each square and the around Portsmouth, Ohio into Greenup speaks of the unit he found at the Serpent dimensions utilized in the layout proce­ County, Kentucky, the works around Mound. He did not find it there as I have dures of Baum and Liberty as I show in my Hamilton-Fairfield, Ohio, those in Licking said above because he measured 1997 article, Figure 2 and 3A. This is a total County, Ohio, and the large number of between random points on the earthwork. of 26 dimensions he ignores on both sites. works around Lake Okeechobee in In Romain's paragraph seventeen, Romain's Figure 16 and his claims Florida. He appears to be not interested headed Analysis, he departs again from thereon I have criticized in my 1995 article in testing his theory on these sites. good scientific practice by proposing that and found such without substance. Further Evidence for a Calendar System a basic unit of measure can be derived in Expressed in the Adena Tablets, by William several ways, and that one way is to 1992 F. Romain. The first tablet in question is divide Hively and Horn's unit of measure Hopewell Inter-Site Relationships and the Wamsley Tablet which Romain states by 1,000 but he states no sensible reason Astronomical Alignments, by William F. is 2% inches by 1'/ie inches. This is very to divide that dimension or any other by Romain. In this article, Romain continues small. He says further that the face of the 1,000. Good scientific practice requires his practice of citing facts that confirm tablet is engraved with mirrored geometric that one peruse a large number of large whatever his theory is and he continues to designs. It is not so. And his Figure 3 prehistoric constructions with attention ignore large numbers of other facts that do shows otherwise. He goes on to propose given to the layout procedure that had to not confirm his theory. He pays no atten­ that the Sun's summer and winter solstice be followed and then attempt to derive the tion to the fact that such procedures are rising and setting positions are repre­ unit of measure from the lowest common not good science. His Figure 1 shows 14 sented in the proportions of the tablet. On denominator of the layout dimensions. prehistoric constructions in Ross County, the contrary, the proportions are more Returning to Romain's Figures 1 through Ohio and the 10 lunar alignments that he likely Fibonacci. He says further that the 12, none - not even one - of the dimen­ claims run from the center of one site to many lines in the interior of the tablet, sions cited by him is a layout dimension another. However, given that there are 14 because they total 29, reflect the Moon's (i.e. a dimension that had to be used in the such sites with which he is working and progress through the month. The lines and layout of the respective figure). Such that there are 12 or 13 possible alignments the entire object are so small that I must makes Romain's argument based on from each such site to each of the others, dismiss his entire article as not persuasive. these figures as having no substance. this makes a total of 162 or so potential More Astronomical Alignments at Romain's Figure 13 is his schematic alignments. He ignores all but 10 of these Hopewell Sites in Ohio, by William F. plan of the Newark Earthworks. I first vis­ approximately 162 alignments presumably Romain. In this article, Romain continues ited this site in 1965 and obtained because they don't fit his theory. to find the same astronomical alignments aerophotogrammetric maps of the site Secondly, I surveyed and mapped these on additional works, but the facts are from the city engineer at that time. These sites from 1965 and tied them to the Ohio often otherwise. His Figure 1 is the maps did not show the Newark Square State Grid Coordinate System South Zone. Opossum Mound east of Granville in and I located it in 1976 from surveys pub­ This coordinate system provides means of Licking County, Ohio. I surveyed and lished by the Smithsonian from the determining with precision what is actually mapped this site in the early 1980's and if 1880's. On his plan he finds 5 specific at any azimuth from one site to another. I I remember correctly, the rodman was dimensions significant to his theory, but have found through perusal of his data that Paul J. Pacheco. The azimuth Romain does not seem to be aware that he has to many of his claimed alignments are thou­ claims to be 244°.9 is actually 252°, an demonstrate use of his unit of measure in sands of feet off target, which are unac­ unacceptably large error of more than 7 °. the procedure that had to have been fol­ ceptably large errors. Let us, for example, Romain's Figure 3, a facsimile of which lowed in prehistoric time to layout the refer to the Anderson Earthwork: Figure 16 is reproduced as my Figure 17, is of the work. Also, other dimensions on this work is a tracing of my surveyed map of this site Anderson Earthwork in Ross County,

36 Ohio. He says that it was discovered in valid. Romain's other azimuths are sub­ Potential azimuths on this site are again 1975, not so. I saw this work on air ject to smaller displacements due to ignored by Romain. With 6 openings on photos in the late 1960's and surveyed hilltop horizons. All such seems to be the Schriver work - one from each opening and mapped it in the early 1970's. An ignored by Romain. to the other 5 equals 30 potential azimuths elderly man living on the premises said Romain's Figure 9 of the Junction of which 27 are ignored by him. Then he that he knew of it from, he thought, was Group Earthworks shows astronomical ignores 6 additional azimuths from the before 1930. Given that Romain has alignments that are similarly flawed. I sur­ center mound of the work out each found four corners to the work, and an veyed and mapped this site from rem­ opening and 6 or 7 additional azimuths he opening to the north and south, each into nants I found in the field, fence rows, also ignores from the small circle north of a circular enclosure and an opening to the roads, and images on old aerial pho­ Schriver to these various openings. east, this array yields 34 potential astro­ tographs about 1980. Romain's first flaw Romain's Figure 13 is of the Milford nomical alignments. He finds 3 that are is to assume that the north arrow on the Work, nearly all of which has been significant and ignores the other 31. Squier and Davis drawing is correct. It destroyed by a shopping center and a Romain's Figure 4 is a plan of Cedar isn't. I found that it points to 10°.6 east of residential subdivision. With property line Bank Works north of Chillicothe, Ohio. I true north. He further assumes that the data I obtained in 1967, I was able to surveyed and mapped this work in 1973 easternmost work on the drawing is cor­ make a precise survey and map of the and 1974 assisted by John Morici of Wor- rectly stated on the drawing as 240 feet images of the work on air photos. The thington, Ohio. Romain's claim is that across. The remnants and images I found walls and openings of the work that there is a significant astronomical align­ put it at 205 feet. His line, which he says Romain says are at azimuth 292°.6 are ment at 306°.8 from the southeast corner is at azimuth 59°.5 to summer solstice actually at 298°.5. The alignments of to that edge of the earthwork wall sunrises, is actually at 67°.5. His azimuth openings that he says are at 67°.4 are remaining after many centuries of erosion to moon maximum north set he calls at actually at 73°. These are Romain's large by the Scioto River. This latter point did 306°.8 but the azimuth of that line is actu­ errors of 5°.9 and 5°.6. Potential azimuths not exist as such at the time the earth­ ally 320°. These are unacceptably large he ignored on the Milford squares number works were built. Hence, this claim and errors of his. He also ignores potential 48 minus the 6 he has found. A large figure is worthless as a support of azimuths of openings and to and from number of other potential azimuths Romain's theory. Furthermore, from my comers on the other 8 works of this Junc­ involving the rest of the figure are also surveys and maps of this site in the tion Group: Potential azimuth lines of the ignored by Romain. Also ignored by him 1970's, I have determined that this openings of these works and alignments is that the site of the square was and is so azimuth in question actually is 319°.5. from the center of one work to another crowded by high hills and provides so This is another Romain large error. total at least 65 azimuths, all but 2 of limited a view of the sky and horizon, that Romain's Figure 5 is of the Dunlap's which are ignored by Romain. it seems most unlikely that it would have Earthwork, but from a source different Romain's Figure 10 is of the Squier and been used for astronomical purposes. from that I show in Figure 10. This bears Davis' map of the Old Fort Work in Ken­ Romain's Figure 14 is of the Bull Works minimal resemblance to the Dunlap's tucky, southeast of Portsmouth, Ohio. I by Squier and Davis. I surveyed and Earthwork I mapped and show in Figure surveyed and mapped this site starting in mapped this site assisted by Monica Par­ 11. Mr. Romain's moon minimum south 1966, returned in the early 1970's, and rish, in 1983 and assisted by Gary set alignment line that he says is at completed the work in 1977. Romain McDaniel of Highland County, Ohio, in azimuth 244°.1, actually has an azimuth finds 5 significant azimuths that support 1984. The site is one of a very small of 239°.6. This is another large error of his theory. However, there are at least 50 number that are not on level ground. The his. His other claimed alignments on this potential azimuth alignments on this site dense woods make it unlikely to have been site I deal with in my review above of his that he ignores similar to those he ignores used for astronomical purposes. He finds 3 Possible Astronomical Alignments at on works I reviewed above. astronomical alignments on the site, but Hopewell Sites in Ohio article. Romain's Figure 12 is Squier and there are corners, openings, and mounds Romain's Figure 6 is of the Seip Earth­ Davis' map of Mound City and the to provide 45 additional azimuths on the 4- work in Ross County, Ohio. I began sur­ Schriver Earthwork. I surveyed and sided figure. There are also at least 10 veying and mapping this site in 1966, did mapped Schriver in the late 1960's. On additional azimuths to and from the 4- more work in 1969 and the early 1970's, the many air photos I studied, I located sided figure to the crescent and horseshoe and finished it in 1983 assisted by Monica the Schriver image but not images of the shaped works all ignored by Romain. Parrish. I rebutted Romain's claims on openings. Romain has found 3 significant Romain's Figure 15 is Squier and Davis' this site in my Spring 1995 article. azimuths on his Figure 12 map but I map of the Frankfort, Ohio work at the Romain's Figure 8 is of the Marietta, found more than 30 years ago serious town of the same name. I surveyed and Ohio Earthworks. I surveyed and mapped errors such as those I list below. Hence, I mapped this site starting in 1970, and was this site in the late 1970's assisted by see no reason to have any confidence in assisted in the 1980's by Nathan Bender. Charles Peterson of Roselle, Illinois. Romain's alignments and azimuths based On this site, Romain does something new. Romain's Figure 8 shows the north on this Squier and Davis' map. He finds significant azimuths from the far polygon's 4 acute corners and 12 addi­ end of the west circle to tangent points on tional wall openings. The south polygon the big circle. If such are to be considered shows an opening at each corner and in Scaling From as astronomical alignments, then the the middle of each wall. This generates a Squier & Davis Actual number of such potential alignments total of 228 potential azimuths. Of all Distance from center of ignored by Romain on the previous works these, he finds 7 significant azimuths and Schriver to center of I have reviewed vastly increases. Romain, the other 221 are ignored by him. His Mound City 2,200 feet 3,274 feet instead of finding 10 or 12 percent of all azimuth is 53°.2 for Moon maximum Distance across potential alignments significant, has been north rise. The moon would not rise at Mound City, actually finding 5 or 6 percent or less sig­ that azimuth at that spot. The azimuth for East-West 750 feet 838 feet (+ -) nificant. On the square, he finds 5 align­ that location, due to the fact of the high Distance East-West ments significant but that leaves 43 other hills immediately east of the town, would of Schriver 1,100 feet 1,221 feet (+-) potential alignments that he ignores be displaced about 7° to the south: it Azimuth from center of across the square, plus a vast number would instead be about 60°. Hence, Schriver to center of from various points of the square tangent these azimuth claims of Romain's are not Mound City 18" 2" to the circles. As to the tangent align-

37 ments, one Romain says is at azimuth enth paragraph, he says that although together, I found that the radius varied 67°.3 is actually at 73°.5. The one he says there are errors in Squier and Davis' work, from 584.0 to 608.2 feet with a mean of is at 130°.5 is actually at 138°. These are their volume is still the best source docu­ 594.0 feet. Thus it is Romain's error to more of Romain's large errors. ment available in terms of maps and fig­ represent this as a precise circle of 1,190 Romain's Figure 16 is Squier and ures. The reality is otherwise. Squier and feet diameter. The Newark Square, I Davis' map of High Bank Works. I sur­ Davis were notoriously inaccurate. The found and published in my 1979 article as veyed and mapped this site starting in best source documents regarding these having side lengths of 926, 928, 951, and 1966 and finished in 1976, assisted by many earthworks are my surveys and 939 feet, but he represents it as a precise John Morici of Worthington, Ohio. The maps in my basement. This was clarified square of 928 feet on a side. That it is not. walls in question show faintly on air in my 1987 article, which Romain cites. The Moundbuilders Circle perimeter was photos. The alignment Romain says is at His errors continue. He says in his found by old surveys to be 3,726 feet. 53°.2 is actually at 44°, the alignment eighth paragraph that the next step was Romain calls at 3,736.6 feet. The square Romain says is at 59°.5 is actually at 49°, to redraw these sites in such a way as to perimeter is 3,744 feet by Thomas' 1880's the alignment Romain says is at 122°.1 is reduce them to their most essential or survey, but Romain calls it 3,712.0 feet. actually at 111°. In addition, Romain idealized geometric shapes while at the These are errors of Romain's. Also, in ignores large numbers of potential same time standardizing their scale. This focusing on perimeters, Romain con­ azimuths at this site including its most is an unscientific procedure because it tinues to ignore layout procedures of obvious one, the axis of the High Bank turns each fact of the work in the field into these figures that had to be followed. The Octagon and Circle. Furthermore, with a non-fact-idealized-form on which radius is the significant dimension of a corners, each one having a potential Romain then builds his theory. Science circle, not the perimeter or circumference; azimuth line to each other corner, 56 does not begin with idealized forms, sci­ the side and diagonal not the perimeter more potential azimuths are ignored by ence begins with the facts. Hence with are the significant dimensions for laying him. More potential azimuths from each this idealization practice, Romain is not out a square. of these corners to the 6 partial or com­ doing science. Romain's Figure 2, Hopeton, shows plete circle centers are ignored, and more In his eleventh paragraph, he says that something called the Hopeton Circle of tangent to each of these circles. This the resultant set of drawings were then 960 feet diameter. There is no such thing makes about 140 additional azimuths examined for geometric relationships on this site. I found from my surveys, Romain ignores beyond the 56. between component parts and for pat­ maps and analysis that the figure is close Romain's Figure 17 is a map of the terns or regularities between sites. Then to being two half circles with centers 76 Newark Earthworks. The alignment he he says that each site was checked for feet apart and measuring 964 feet in a says has an azimuth of 52°.8 actually has multiples of the basic Hopewell unit of north-south direction and 1,020 feet in an an azimuth of 55°.7 and is 2,550 feet long length. Well, what Romain is saying bears east-west direction. Romain's Hopeton through what probably were dense some resemblance to my analytic proce­ Square also never existed either except in woods. Furthermore, the two points - the dure that I have been following since his imagination. It is shown in my Figures center of Moundbuilder's Circle and the 1965. The difference is that I started with 1 and 4. It does not have each side equal corner of the Square are not intervisible in my precise surveys and maps of the rem­ to 957 feet as Romain claims. Hence, his the first place due to the high wall of the nants and air photo images of now more non-existent diameter of the Hopeton Circle. Hence, Romain's claim is most than 220 sites, whereas Romain starts Circle is not virtually the same as a side of unlikely. If this azimuth is a potential with the often erroneous data of Squier the non-existent Hopeton Square which is azimuth as he says it is, then there are a and Davis' and further errors of his ideal­ as Romain claims. large number of additional such azimuths ized forms. Romain's Figure 3, Circleville, shows ignored by Romain on this site. There are He also had defined a basic Hopewell the large circle diameter at 1,188 feet. a large number of circle centers, tangents unit of length equal to 1.053 feet as he This is a good approximation, but to other circles, the square, and the says in his paragraph 12. His derivation of Romain's Circleville Square is not. octagon. I count 15 circles on the Squier this length is from a database of only a Romain says that each side is 841 feet and Davis map, plus an octagon and a few works and that is completely inade­ and quotes me as his source. He is in square, plus long lines and mounds. A quate to support any such conclusion. In error twice: two sides were 841.5 feet and line from each circle center to each other Romain's table 1, he shows that multiples the other two 874.5 feet from the best center and tangent is 3 lines from each of his basic unit of 1.053 feet occur on sources. These side dimensions yield a circle center to each other. This equals about 2 dozen earthworks and nearby diagonal of 1,213.6 feet, not the 1,180 630 such potential azimuth alignments, prehistoric houses. His claims that multi­ feet claimed by Romain. Romain focuses nearly all of which he has ignored. How­ ples of this unit from 1 to 7 show on var­ again on diameters and diagonals, which ever, nearly all these alignments will be as ious houses: all such claims are void. His dimensions are not part of the layout un-intervisible as is the one Romain 30, 60 and 120 multiples are from the process and again, his claims are without shows in his Figure 17. Serpent Mound and I have shown them to substance. His Figure 3 far left is hence Romain's Figure 18, East Side Work be actually based on random measure­ not factual. and his claims about it, I have criticized in ments. His 500 times 1.053 feet that he A facsimile of Romain's Figure 4 is my Spring 1995 paper Figures 22, 23 and says occurs at Newark does yields a shown as my Figure 18. The left is a fac­ 24 as being without substance. dimension that is his lone claim that is simile of something called the Milford Hopewellian Concepts in Geometry, by valid. However, "One robin does not Circle. This circle also never did exist. The William F. Romain. There are numerous make a spring". His claim as to the other work as I have recovered it is shown in my factual errors in this article. In his fourth units are either errors in the first place, or Figure 19, and one cannot derive a diam­ paragraph, he says that there are only a ignore the many other dimensions that eter of this entity he calls a circle because couple of dozen or so geometrically necessarily had to be used in the layout it is not a circle. Also, one cannot make shaped earthworks. It is not so. There are procedure of each work. Romain says the figure circumscribe a square 950 feet at least 100. He then says that virtually all that his Figure 1 shows the Fairgrounds on a side as Romain shows in his Figure 4 these earthworks appeared to have been circle as being a diameter of 1,190 feet. It far left. On my Figure 19, a square 950 aligned to significant celestial events. is not so. I surveyed and mapped this site feet is drawn and no matter how one Also not so as my critique above indi­ in 1966 and gathered additional data in adjusts it, one cannot make the entity cir­ cates. Romain is mistaken in such claims 1976, some of it previously published at cumscribe it. So, what is Romain's Figure he has clarified in his article. In his sev­ the Smithsonian. Putting all the surveys 4 (left) that shows a circle inscribing a

38 square? It is purely imaginary. He also angles. Romain's claim that the 852 feet struction measures 1,848 feet. North- says that the Milford Square has sides of length sides of the square are very close south, it measures 1,487 feet. A tracing of 950 feet. I found it had sides of lengths to the length of any one side of an equilat­ my surveyed map of this "circle" is shown 936, 926, 940.5, and 919 feet with one eral triangle inscribed within the Pike in Figure 27. Yes, a 1,470 feet on a side diagonal 1,345 feet and the other 1,310 Circle is in error. A triangle of this size equilateral triangle can be inscribed in the feet, but these data are not certain. requires a circle of 983 feet diameter, not "circle", but the "circle" is not as Romain Romain's Figure 5 is the Squier and the 1,050 feet that Romain claims. The has represented it. Davis map of Works East of Chillicothe. I circle of 1,050 feet in diameter in turn cir­ Romain's Liberty Square drawing is surveyed and mapped this site in the cumscribes a 909 feet on a side equilat­ approximately correct. However, Romain's 1970's and then returned in 1986 for eral triangle. Hence, all of Romain's claims Liberty Small Circle is like his large Circle: more data. I criticized Romain's use of in his Figure 7 are not grounded in fact. it has not existed on this site in the first the Squier and Davis map in my 1995 Romain's Figure 8, a facsimile of which place. What Romain is calling the Small article Figures 22, 23, and 24. His diam­ is shown in my Figure 22, is from Squier Circle, is what he shows in his Figure 5, in eter of the large circle he calls 1,480 feet; and Davis' map of Shriver and Mound his Possible Astronomical Alignments at it is as I found it tentatively 820 feet City. He claims that the Shriver Circle has Hopewell Sites in Ohio, a facsimile of radius. The square he says has a diagonal a diameter of 1,000 feet. I found that it is which is shown as my Figure 8. The work of 1,480 feet. This is not determinable 1,221 feet east-west and 1,152 feet is 866 by 748 feet. Romain's diameter of because the Scioto River eroded the east north-south. Romain's further claim in his 800 feet also does not exist. Hence, end of the work before historic time. The Figure 8 is that an equilateral triangle of Romain's claims on this circle are not side that remains, I found has a dimen­ sides each equal to 880 feet can be cir­ grounded in fact. sion of about 1,125 feet which if the work cumscribed by the Shriver Circle. Not so, Romain's Figure 11 is of Squier and was a square yields a diagonal of 1,590 as my Figure 23 shows. Also, a 1,000-foot Davis' map of the Seip Works. The Seip feet. The small circle he says has a diam­ diameter circle cannot have a triangle of square, he says, is 1,141 feet on a side eter of 760 feet, but I found it to have a 880-foot length of each side inscribed and diagonal 1,607 feet but I found radius of about 425 feet. Hence, all of his within it. The length has to be 866 feet. unpublished Smithsonian documents that claims on this work are not substantiated. Romain says also in his Figure 8 that indicate that it was 1,113, 1,139.7, Romain's Figure 6, a facsimile of which Mound City is a square 880 feet on a 1,140.0 and 1.113.0 feet on each side. is my figure 20, is of the Frankfort Earth­ side. He is in error. It is a four-sided figure One diagonal is 1,576.5 feet and another work and his interpretive geometries. He 838 by 878 feet more or less. Further­ is 1,609.6 feet. I found the radius of the claims that the large circle is of a diam­ more, because the corners of the earth­ large circle to vary from 807.2 to 839.1 eter that can circumscribe the square and work are rounded, Mound City does not feet, and a regular distance across the that the diagonal of the square is equal to have the diagonal length Romain claims. circle to be 1,626 feet, almost 100 feet the diameter of the large circle and that Hence, all of Romain's claims in his greater than Romain's claim of 1,532 feet diameter is 1,480 feet. He further claims Figure 8 are not based on fact. as the diameter. Romain's Small Circle that the diameter of the small circle is 720 Romain's Figure 9 is Squier and Davis' has a diameter of 750 feet. No such feet. The facts are otherwise. What map of the Baum Works in Ross County, diameter circle has existed on this site. I Romain calls the Frankfort Large Circle, I Ohio, and his interpretive geometries, a found the radii of the small circle to vary found to be a 720-foot radius circular arc facsimile of which is reproduced in my from 496.8 to 548.1 feet, and to be about that spirals out to about 925 feet radius. Figure 24. Romain claims that the Baum 1,028 feet across. Again, Romain's claims What he calls the Frankfort Square of Large Circle diameter is 1,320 feet. It is are not grounded in fact. diagonal 1,470 feet, I have found to be an not so. I found the radius to vary from Romain's Figure 12 is of Squier and approximate square of 1,132, 1,103, 824.5 feet to 887.7 feet yielding a diam­ Davis' map of the High Bank Earthwork 1,130, and 1,080 feet sides and diagonals eter of around 1,663 feet. Thus, Romain plus his data. He says that the diameter of 1,563 and 1,575 feet. Romain's Frank­ starts with a gross error. Romain further of the circle is 1,052 feet. I found it from fort Small Circle of diameter 720 feet as says that the Baum Square is 1,124 feet an examination of several surveys unpub­ he says, I found not to be a circle at all, on a side. It is also not so. The Smith­ lished in the Smithsonian to be 1,056.2 but a dromus about 700 feet across one sonian found these sides in the 1880's to feet. His dimensions from corner to way and 528 feet across the other. be 1,113, 1,129.3, 1,107, and 1,118.3 corner of the octagon he states at 1,250 Romain's claim that the Frankfort Large feet. The diagonals I found to be 1,586 feet. I found it to be 1,277.2 and 1,260.4 "Circle" is a size that can circumscribe and 1,580 feet. Romain's further claim in feet. His other dimension across the the Frankfort Square is examined in my his Figure 9 is that an equilateral triangle octagon of 1,052 feet is meaningless Figure 21. It does not work. The "Circle" of 1,150 feet on a side can be inscribed because it goes from one random point is too large for the square. In sum, all of by the Baum Large Circle. No it cannot as on the octagon wall to another. Hence, Romain's claims on this work are not my Figure 25 shows. Romain's Figure 9 Romain claims in his Figure 12 are also grounded in fact. also says that the Baum Small Circle has without substance. Romain's Figure 7 is Squier and Davis' a diameter of 760 feet. It is again not so. I Romain's Figure 13 is of the Newark map of the Pike Earthwork. The large found the radius to vary from 485.7 feet Observatory Circle and Octagon with an circle was not surveyed and mapped as to 513.0 feet. It is an approximate circle of inset of Squier and Davis' map of Newark far as I know since their time and was 1,006 feet across more or less. Hence, all Works. Romain says that the diameter of destroyed by gravel extraction early in the of Romain's claims in his Figure 9 are not the west circle is 1,054 feet. I found the Twentieth Century. Hence, it does not based on fact. radius to average 525.17 feet or 1,050.34 show on any air photos known to me and I Romain's Figure 10 is of Squier and feet diameter. His dimension of the inte­ cannot vouch for the accuracy of Squier Davis' map of the Liberty Earthwork and rior square of the octagon he says is and Davis' claim that its diameter is 1,050 his interpretation of the geometries. He 1,050 feet. I found it to be 1,053.6, feet. Romain's drawing of the Pike Square says that the large circle has a diameter 1,041.8, 1,050.87, and 1,053.4 feet. The is reasonably accurate, but he says the of 1,700 feet. It is not so. The east half of dimension he calls 1,720 feet, I found to diagonal is 1,200 feet. I found the diago­ that construction is a half circle with radii be 1,719.1 and 1,711.7 feet. His claim is nals to be 1,198 and 1,219 feet. Romain varying from 725 to 748 to 762 feet, then that the Observatory circle is of a size that does not seem to be aware that these to the west it spirals to radii from 810 to it can be circumscribed by the square "squares" are often not exactly at right 1,060 to 1,190 feet. East-west, the con­ within the octagon, but I've known that

39 from 1966 and have been talking about it diagonal is 1,480 feet. It is also not so. I the Mills Atlas. I surveyed and mapped this since then. Hardly a new discovery by found the diagonals to be 1,197 and 1,228 site in 1984 and 1985 and precisely scaled Romain in 1992. feet. Romain says that the Hopewell off the images on air photos. The images Romain's Figure 14 continues his ideal­ square and the Frankfort square are virtu­ of this work are very sharp and differ sig­ ization of these works into dimensions and ally identical in size; also not so. The nificantly from that in the Mills Atlas. What I forms that prove his theory, but the facts dimensions of the Frankfort square I found found is my Figure 29. I have no idea why as such exist or existed in the field are dif­ above are not near those of the Hopewell there is such a big difference in this one ferent. Romain's Marietta Large Square square. Romain's further claim is that the rare case between fieldwork and topo­ has a side of 1,510 feet and a diagonal of Hopewell square and Frankfort square are graphic survey from the Nineteenth Cen­ 2,120 feet. After carefully measuring the both on the same lunar azimuth and refers tury and air photo image. Also, the Mills streets and right-of-way of Marietta, I the reader to his Figure 19. Romain's Atlas north arrow points to about 13° west found that the actual work is very dif­ Figure 19 shows a line at azimuth 115°.9 - of true north, making Romain's claimed ferent. It is a 5-sided figure - not a square moon minimum south rise - from what alignments, in his Figure 7 and 8, that far in at all - with sides measuring approxi­ appears to be the center of the Frankfort error. Also, the azimuth in his Figure 8 orig­ mately 1,450, 1,442, 1,395, 415 and 951 square to the center of the Hopewell inates from a random point on the wall. feet with diagonals of 1,961 and 2,002 square. His alignment extended to the Hence, both Romain's Figure 7 and 8 pro­ feet. Romain's Marietta Small Square is Hopewell square is thousands of feet in vide no facts to support his theory. 1,040 feet on a side with a 1,460-foot error and actually passes about 2,740 feet diagonal. The reality is again far different. I - more than one half mile - north of the 1993 found the work to have sides of 975, 920, center of the Hopewell square. This fact Hopewell Ceremonial Centers and Geo- 978 and 885 feet with diagonals of 1,320 fails to substantiate Romain's claim. mantic Influences, by William F. Romain. and 1,328 feet more or less. Romain says Hence, all of Romain's claims on his Figure Romain begins by saying that he has sug­ that the diagonal or any one side of the 17 are not substantiated by the facts. gested that the Ohio Hopewell had a Marietta Small Square is almost exactly Romain's Figure 18 is of the Anderson working knowledge of some of the sim­ two thirds its counterpart on the Marietta Works in Ross County, Ohio, a facsimile pler concepts of plane geometry and Large Square. This is approximately true, of which is my Figure 17. My surveyed used a basic unit of measure. Yes, but I but the Marietta Large Square does not map of the site is Figure 16 herein. He is have been saying that in Ohio since 1966 exist in the first place. Romain's errors are calling this irregularly shaped figure a and Squier and Davis were saying such in unacceptably large and make his state­ square, which it is not, and stating that it the mid-Nineteenth Century. He says fur­ ments about his units of measure on this is 900 feet on a side and has a diagonal ther that he has suggested that they site without foundation. of 1,270 feet. The work as I found it is aligned their geometrically shaped earth­ Romain's Figure 15 is his drawing of about 915 by 868 feet and has diagonals, works and charnel houses to significant the Dunlap Earthwork. This earthwork as I if you want to call them that, of about astronomical events and had a lunar- recovered it can be seen in my survey of 1,116 and 1,260 feet. He is calling this based calendar system. These latter the site in my Figure 11 and it is obviously irregularly shaped work in Figure 16 a points, as we have seen above, are not not a square or even a 4-sided figure or square, which it is not and then drawing proved by Romain. 800 feet on a side. He says that the conclusions about it. In this article, Romain continues his Dunlap Square is almost exactly three- I wrote to Romain on or about July 18, practice of building his theories on one fact quarters the size of the Hopewell Square. 1992 and advised him that what he had or one county of facts about these earth­ Maybe it is, but the entities called the published - as above - is not science, works, ignoring the way other clusters of Dunlap Square and the Hopewell Square that science begins with the facts and the earthworks, for example, those in a wide do not exist in the first place. scientists' first loyalty is to the facts. arc from Cincinnati through Xenia and Romain's Figure 16 is Squier and Azimuths to the Otherworld: Astronom­ Dayton to Springfield, Ohio, the many Davis' drawing of the Cedar Bank Earth­ ical Alignments of Hopewell Charnel works around Lake Okeechobee in Florida, work. Romain says that this earthwork is Houses, by William F. Romain. Romain's those in upstate New York an so on. His a square. There are no material facts to Figure 1 is the Harness Mound posthole "intersecting physiographic and biotic support his statement. First, because one pattern modified after Greber 1983. I zones", river confluences, river terraces, side of the work was eroded in prehistoric remember doing the surveying and map­ and special soils, and special outcropping time, and secondly, the interior angle of ping on this Liberty work for Dr. Nomi should have included all these regions. the work, at the northeast corner, is about Greber in the 1970s that located this Romain's section titled Along Cardinal 96°, not 90° as is required for the work to house with respect to the Ohio State Grid Azimuths is similarly flawed: The reality is be a square. These material facts indicate Coordinate System and the remainder of that if you look long enough and far that this work was not a square or an the Liberty Work. Romain's north arrow enough, you will find something lining up approximate square. Romain then says points to 8° or 10° east of true north and with something else. The dimensions are that the diagonal of this figure is 1,620 his azimuth alignment claims are in error not as he states. He says that Mound City feet. It can't be because that requires by that amount. This is to say that his is 2 miles south of Dunlaps, actually it is each side of the square to be 1,146 feet. claims on the drawing are worthless. 2.42 miles. Romain says Shriver is 2,500 The side of the figure that is complete is My comments about his Figures 1 feet south of Mound City, actually it is almost exactly 1,300 feet long. If the through 7 are the same as those figures he 3,270 feet center to center. Romain says Cedar Bank Work actually were a square, published in his Evidence for a Basic that possibly related too is the Large 1,300 feet on a side, its diagonal would Hopewell Unit of Measure. He ignores all Square at Junction Group. There is no be 1,838 feet, not the 1,620 feet he but the facts that fit his theory. Assuming such figure as the Large Square. It is a claims. Hence, Romain's claims on this his drawings and work across are accu­ figure with 4 curved sides. He says this figure are not substantiated. rate, and we have seen above that many figure is 6.6 miles south of the Shriver Romain's Figure 17 is of the Hopewell such are not, he ignores on each drawing Circle. It actually is about 3.8 miles south. Work Square in Ross County, Ohio using large numbers of potential azimuths, pre­ Romain says that Cedar Bank is located an old map. Romain says that this square sumably because they do not fit his theory. 4,000 feet directly and precisely north of is 1,060 feet on a side. It is not so. I found Romain's Figure 8, a facsimile of which the Hopeton Earthwork, not so. It is about this square to be 860, 844, 857, and 878 is shown as my Figure 28, is of Tremper 6,530 feet north and 480 feet east center feet on its sides. Romain says that the Mound in Scioto County, Ohio as shown in to center.

-to Romain's Figure 9 is very seriously together with anything like the regularity recover the entire lengths of these walls. flawed. His idealized outlines of 18 geo­ of Romain's figure. His claim that the He says that Dunlap's earthwork is barely metric figures are placed together and Marietta Large Square can be defined by visible at ground level. This is true as far shown to create a nesting phenomenon. the diagonals of the Hopewell, Frankfort, as I know. Then he says that it continues The reality is otherwise: these idealized Marietta Small and Works East Small to be plowed. Not as far as I know. It is outlines of his are often remotely different squares is not substantiated. the parking lot for the Ross County Fair­ from what is in the field and do not form a Figure 32 shows a facsimile of grounds. "nesting" phenomenon. There was, and I Romain's Figure 6, which he says is a Toward the end of this article, Romain have spent 33 years researching these schematic showing how these circles can says that most of the Hopewellian enclo­ works and hence know it well, a con­ be defined by circumscribing any of the sures were not perfect geometric figures. sciousness of design on the part of four constructed squares found within the Recognizing such, Romain fails to realize Hopewell People and it was on a tremen­ Marietta Large Square. The reality is oth­ that he has to begin with such field facts, dous scale, but Romain's work has for the erwise as shown in my Figure 33 in which not his idealized figures. most part not been fact-based and hence I show Marietta Large Square, which it does not verify this statement. I tried to isn't. Circleville inner circle is shown of 1994 create a diagram that shows the actual the four proposed by Romain, but it fails Hopewell Geometric Enclosures: Sym­ shapes of Romain's idealized figures but it to circumscribe the said constructed bols of an Ancient WorldView, by William was too complicated. So, let us deal with square - it is too large by about 40 feet at F. Romain. In Romain's fifth paragraph, Romain's simpler diagrams below. each of 3 corners. The other 3 circles pro­ he refers to his Figure 1, a facsimile of Romain's Figures 10 to 15 are also posed by Romain fit about as badly. which is shown in my Figure 39 and flawed. I suspect that the north arrows Romain's Figures 7 and 8 are summed in shows his idealized forms of these works are not accurate, as we have found his Figure 9, a facsimile of which is shown neatly nesting. The reality is otherwise. In above, but even if these arrows are pre­ as my Figure 34. The reality is far different my Figure 40, I show the actual shapes of cise and Romain's alignments precise, and I show it in Figure 35. These circles these works all to the same scales. They the fact remains that there are large num­ don't fit as Romain shows them at all. do not nest neatly. Romain's Figure 2, a bers of potential azimuth alignments Figure 36 shows a facsimile of facsimile of which is shown in my Figure across each of these houses. He ignores Romain's Figure 10. Figures 37 and 38 41, he shows the same and other works them presumably because such do not fit show the reality of these overlays. There also neatly nesting. The reality is again his theory. is no comparison between Romain's otherwise as I show in Figure 42. Further Notes on Hopewellian Astro­ Figure 10 and the facts. Romain's Figure 3 shows all his Figure 1 nomy and Geometry, by William F. Romain's Figure 11 shows that several and 2 earthworks. I do not show a fac­ Romain. Under paragraphs titled The works north of Chillicothe are located simile of it because such would be too Newark Eagle Mound he speaks of an directly west of respective mountain complicated. In his paragraph 8, he repre­ archaeoastronomical survey and analysis peaks. Not mentioned is that there are sents that the implications of his Figure 3 of these works that was stunning: several other such works in various Ohio are stunning. Yes, they are stunning, but Researchers had discovered that the entire Valleys that do not fit this pattern. this Figure 3 of his is not fact based. It is Newark complex was designed so as to Early Aerial Photographs of the Ross true that his 3 diagrams not grounded in incorporate into its walls the azimuth or County Enclosures, by William F. Romain. the facts are stunning. Much of what else direction on the horizon of the moon's Romain herein makes a number of state­ Romain says in this 1994 article, I said as maximum and minimum northerly and ments that are inappropriate and mis­ early as 1966 and summarized in my southerly rising and setting positions (at leading. He says that based on 1979 article, so why does he represent least 17 lunar alignments). As far as I correspondence which was kindly for­ this as something new? He continues know, I have rebutted all such alignments. warded to me, I have learned that the neg­ also to advocate his 1.053-foot unit as a Furthermore, Romain's lines taken atives for the 1938 Ross County aerial basic unit of measure, which claim as I together are like the azimuth lines I show in photographs are on file with National said above does not have an adequate my Figure 6. Romain's azimuth lines do Archives and Records Administration. That database. He continues to advocate not generate the Hopeton Works, hence, is not so. When correspondence between archaeoastronomical claims that I have these lines were not part of the design Romain and myself began in 1988, I told above rebutted. Much of the rest of this process of the Hopeton Work and his him of these air photo positives and nega­ article contains his further speculations. claimed azimuth lines at Newark were also tives and my work with these starting in not part of its design process. Hence, the 1966. Then Romain says that these nega­ 1995 reality is that such is not stunning at all. tives should be of tremendous value to In Search of Hopewell Archaeoas­ Romain's Figures 1 through 4 show the future investigators. Maybe so. The fact is tronomy, by William F. Romain. In this Fairground Circle after Thomas with a lunar that these negatives since 1966 have been article, Romain continues his search for alignment from the center out the gateway of tremendous value to my research. astronomical alignments and in the fifth which he says is at 66°.6 to moon min­ Romain makes remarks about 9 earth­ paragraph takes up the Seal Township imum north rise. Romain claims that this work sites that apparently are based on Square. In the eighth paragraph he says astronomical azimuth is 67°.36, a near cursory examination of air photos. With that the alignment of the work to cardinal approximation. The actual azimuth of his much more detailed examination and directions is precise. It is not so. The line that I found in the field and from the ground survey, I made these same Smithsonian in a survey which I believe aerophotogrammetric survey of Newark photos and other earlier and later photos was never published, found the north wall and Heath is 69°.3, making these claims yield far more information, enough in and the south wall to be each at an by Romain and others not supported. most cases to recover the entire work azimuth of 91°42, not the 90° Romain's In Romain's section titled More Fun and to determine coordinates of each statement claims. with Hopewell Geometry, it can be shown part of each wall. He says of the Dunlap In his section on Dunlap's Earthwork, that he actually is simply having fun and Works that the 1938 photo does not he says that the diagonal of this enclo­ not doing science. His Figure 5 is our first show these parallel walls leading to or sure is aligned to the summer solstice case in point, a facsimile of which is away from the earthworks that are sunrise to within 'A of one degree. Again, shown in my Figure 30. depicted by Squier and Davis. Well, not so. Romain's first error is to speak as Figure 31 shows the actual sizes and those photos and other photos worked if Dunlap's has precise southwest and shapes of these works. They do not fit together have made it possible for me to northeast corners. It doesn't. The corners

41 are as shown in my Figure 11. Secondly, REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY County Hopewell Enclosure. Ohio the diagonal between these corners as Archaeologist 43(4): 44-49. nearly as can be determined from these Anderson, Jerrel A. 1993 Further Notes on Hopewellian curved corners is several degrees away 1980 A Recent Discovery-The Anderson Astronomy and Geometry. OA»'o from Romain's claim. These curved cor­ Earthwork. Ohio Archaeologist 30(1): Archaeologist 43(3): 48-52. 31-35. 1993 Hopewell Ceremonial Centers and ners cannot be made to yield the preci­ Geomantic Influences. Ohio Archaeolo­ sion that Romain claims. Dexter, Ralph W. gist 43(1): 35-44. In Romain's section on Hopeton, the 1989 F.W. Putman at the Serpent Mound in 1992 Azimuths to the Otherworld: Astronom­ entity he calls the Hopeton Square also Adams County, Ohio: A Historical ical Alignments of Hopewell Charnel does not have corners as precise as is Review. Ohio Archaeologist 39(4): Houses. Ohio Archaeologist 42(4): required to yield the diagonal azimuth he 24-26. 42-48. claims. With Romain's Anderson Work, 1992 Further Evidence for a Calendar the same reality holds. The work is as Fletcher, Robert and Terry Cameron System Expressed in the Adena shown in my Figure 16. 1988 Serpent Mound: A New Look at an Old Tablets. Ohio Archaeologist 42(3): Snake-in-the-Grass. Ohio Archaeolo­ 31-36. In Romain's section on Hopewell Earth­ gist 38(1): 55-61. 1992 Hopewellian Concepts in Geometry. work, the Square was also surveyed and Ohio Archaeologist 42(2): 35-50. mapped by the Smithsonian in the Nine­ Hardman, Clark, Jr., and Marjorie H. Hardman 1992 More Astronomical Alignments at teenth Century and such has remained 1988 More on Great Serpent Maps. Ohio Hopewell Sites in Ohio. Ohio Archaeol­ unpublished as far as I know. From the Archaeologist 38(4): 37-41. ogist 42(1): 38-47. Smithsonian and my own surveys, I have 1988 On Romain's 1987 "Serpent Mound 1992 Hopewell Inter-Site Relationships and found that the azimuth of the diagonal in Revisited" Paper. Ohio Archaeologist Astronomical Alignments. Ohio Archae­ question is very close to what Romain 38(3): 50-53. ologist 42(1): 4-5. claims, but from this fact it does not 1987 The Great Serpent and the Sun. Ohio 1991 Calendric Information Evident in the follow that it was the intent of those who Archaeologist 37(3): 34-40. Adena Tablets. Ohio Archaeologist 1987 A Map of the Great Serpent Effigy 41(4): 41-48. laid out this work to build a rectangle with Mound. Ohio Archaeologist 37(1): 35- 1991 Evidence for a Basic Hopewell Unit of a diagonal oriented to this astronomical 39. Measure. Ohio Archaeologist 41 (4): rising. Romain fails to take up this ques­ 1987 An Analysis of the Maps of the Great 28-37. tion of establishing intent. Serpent Mound. Ohio Archaeologist 1991 Possible Astronomical Alignments at Romain's section on Mound City is 37(2): 18-25. Hopewell Sites in Ohio. Ohio Archaeol­ similarly flawed due to the well-known ogist 41(3): 4-16. fact of rounded comers at this earthwork. Hively, Ray and Robert Horn 1991 Symbolic Associations at the Serpent Romain's work on Marietta is also flawed 1984 Hopewellian Geometry and Astronomy Mound. Ohio Archaeologist 41(3): at High Bank. Archaeoastronomy 29-38. by failure to establish intent on the part of 7:S&S-S100 (Supplement to Vol. 15, 1988 Ancient Eclipse Paths at the Serpent the designers of the work, and failure to Journal for the History of Astronomy). Mound. Ohio Archaeologist 38(4): show that any of these azimuths are a part 1982 Geometry and Astronomy in Prehistoric 24-28. of the prehistoric process of laying out Ohio. Archaeoastronomy 4:SI-S20 1988 The Serpent Mound Solar Eclipse these works. He also seems unaware that (Supplement to Vol. 13 Journal for the Hypothesis; Ethnohistoric Considera­ there are a large number of these works in History of Astronomy). tions. Ohio Archaeologist 38(3): 32-37. an arc from Cincinnati to Columbus, Ohio, 1988 Terrestrial Observations at the Serpent works in Tennessee, and possibly 50 earth­ Marshall, James A. Mound, Ohio. Ohio Archaeologist 38(2): works around Lake Okeechobee in Florida. 1969 Engineering Principles and the Study of 15-19. That is the database I have attempted to Prehistoric Structures: A Substantive 1988 Geometry at the Serpent Mound. Ohio Example. American Antiquity Vol. 14, Archaeologist 38(1): 50-54. assemble since 1965 and that should be No. 2, April, 166-171. 1987 Serpent Mound Revisited. Ohio the database from which any such conclu­ 1970 A Project for Amateur Archaeologists, Archaeologist 37(4): 4-10. sions should be drawn. Earth Science Magazine, January 1987 The Serpent Mound Map. Ohio Archae­ 1978 American Indian Geometry, Ohio ologist 37(4): 38-42. 1998 Archaeologist 28(1): 29-33. Winter Solstice Alignments at Marietta, 1980 Geometry of the Hopewell Earthworks, Squier, Ephriam G. and Edwin H. Davis by William F. Romain. He repeats claims I Ohio Archaeologist 30(2): 8-12. 1848 Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi 1982 Discovering the Lost Race of Mound Valley, Smithsonian Contributions to have already criticized above, but he also Builders, Professional Surveyor, Knowledge Vol. 1, Smithsonian Institu­ herein has done something new. He has March/April Vol. 2, No. 2. tion, Washington, DC. found his point A at the intersection of 1987 An Atlas of American Indian Geometry. Second Street and the Sacra Via as signifi­ Ohio Archaeologist 37(2): 36-49. Thomas, Cyrus cant for winter solstice sunset, when a 1995 Astronomical Alignments Claimed to *1894 Report on the Mound Explorations of more logical place would be at Third Street, Exist on the Eastern North American the Bureau of Ethnology; Twelfth the beginning of the parallel walls. From Prehistoric Earthworks and the Evi­ Annual Report on the Bureau of Amer­ this more logical place, he has shifted his dence and Arguments Against Them. ican Ethnology tor the years 1890- location to the point which his observed Ohio Archaeologist 45(1): 4-16. 1891, Washington, DC. azimuth fits his theory more exactly. 1997 Defining the Bounds of the Hopewell 1889 The Circular, Square and Octagonal Core and Periphery Utilizing the Geo­ Earthworks of Ohio, Bureau of Amer­ In conclusion, these researchers would metric Earthworks. Ohio Archaeologist ican Ethnology Bulletin No. 10, Smith­ do well to recall a mid-Nineteenth Century 47(4): 24-32. sonian Institution, Washington, DC. conversation: 1889 et seq. Unpublished Materials in Smith­ "How many legs has a sheep?" asked Romain, William F. sonian Anthropological Archives. the Great Emancipator. 1998 Winter Solstice Alignments at Marietta. "Four," was the answer. Ohio Archaeologist 48(1): 16-18. Whittlesey, Charles 1995 In Search of Hopewell Astronomy. OA»'o 1852 Descriptions on Ancient Works in Ohio, "And how many if we call its tail a Archaeologist 45(1): 35-41. Smithsonian Institution, June 1852. leg?" 1994 Hopewell Geometric Enclosures: Sym­ "Five," he was told. bols of an Ancient World View. Ohio Archaeologist 44(2): 37-42. "Wrong," said Mr. Lincoln, "Calling a 1993 Early Aerial Photographs of the Ross tail a leg doesn 't make it one."

42 Figure 1 (Marshall) Facsimile of Romain's Figure 1 in his Figure 2 (Marshall) Facsimile of Romain's Figure 2 in his Possible Astronomical Alignments at Hopewell Sites in Possible Astronomical Alignments at Hopewell Sites in Ohio showing his possible lunar alignments. He found 9 Ohio showing winter solstice sunrise at azimuth of 122°.1. such azimuths. Romain has ignored the fact of the two centers of half cir­ cles that make up the Figure. I added these and labeled them S and T. The opening through which his azimuth passes did not exist in prehistoric time. Romain ignores azimuths from these two circle centers through an opening I label P above. Romain has ignored this opening but it existed in prehistoric time. Romain also ignores potential azimuths from the circle centers through openings I label Q andR.

Figure 3 (Marshall) Facsimile of Romain's Figure 3 in his Possible Astronomical Alignments at Hopewell Sites in Ohio. Romain claims that these parallel walls have an azimuth of 53°.2. The actual azimuth is 57°.5. This is an error of 4°.3.

Figure 4 (Marshall) Preliminary map of Marshall site survey of Hopeton Earthwork showing Ohio State Grid Coordinate System and half circle centers within the "Hopeton ellipse". These are labeled S and T.

43 Figure 6 (Marshall) Romain's azimuth lines and the points generating such. These do not generate the Hopeton work. Any number of mounded points could have generated these azimuths including linears along each azimuth line. Hence his azimuths are not a part of the design and layout process followed in prehistoric time. These azimuths are simply incidental and co-incidental to the construction.

Figure 5 (Marshall) Hopeton Works showing some of the many potential azimuths on this work that are ignored by Romain. These number more than 110.

ft / ^5fe,

Figure 9 (Marshall) Facsimile of sgBSo. • Romain's Figure 7, Baum Square in his Possible Astronomical Alignments at Hopewell Sites in Ohio. This figure Figure 7 (Marshall) Facsimile of Romain's Figure 4, shows 3 significant azimuths. However, Figure 8 (Marshall) Facsimile of Romain's Figure in my Figure 5 and notation of Figure 7, Liberty Square from his Possible Astronomical 5, Liberty Small Circle from his Possible Astro­ Alignments at Hopewell Sites in Ohio, which is there are 48 other potential azimuths on nomical Alignments at Hopewell Sites in Ohio. this construction ignored by Romain. based on Thomas, 1889. PlateX showing his 6 lunar Both ends of the azimuth line are random points azimuths that he has found significant. Following on the earthwork. The east point is where the the procedure shown in my Figure 5, there are a earthwork was removed some time between 1855 total of 51 potential azimuths on the square, 45 of and 1880 and hence was not an opening or sig­ which are ignored by Romain. nificant point in prehistoric time.

44 DUNLATS WORKS. jtoss couHir; OHIO

Ii I-I -V"'" •""' BH Bavii S*i-rtt

Figure 11 (Marshall) Preliminary map of Mar­ shall site survey of Dunlap's Earthwork showing Figure 10 (Marshall) Facsimile of Romain's Ohio State Grid Coordinate System, all recov­ Figure 13 of Dunlap's Works in his Possible ered from site topographic survey and old air Figure 12 (Marshall) Tracing of Romain's map of Astronomical Alignments at Hopewell Sites in photos. the Oho Serpent Mound in Adams County, Ohio Ohio. as shown in his Symbolic Associations at the Serpent Mound. It is one of the most famous of all Native American effigies. Arrows show lunar alignments and one eclipse alignment that Romain found significant on this site.

lftG,1?7.l( 411,Ml./ •tftrx. 1 l»"' S; ,SJO»77.Jl «l1,1lHi\ A| -t »11.5J» AS* l4fl,«J.» '"."•

of

WaA«nCo.,0.

Figure 13 (Marshall) Outline drawing by Dr. C.L. Metz of the Serpent Mound in Warren County, Ohio, June 1892. The existence of this mound seems to have been ignored by Romain. 411. MO V

Figure 14 (Marshall) The author established ground control and picture points based on Ohio State Grid Coordinate System South Zone and from such precisely scaled the image of the Serpent Mound in Warren County, Ohio from Dache Reeves air photo #187 dated January 1, 1934. Applying Romain's azimuth procedure to this mound we have coils at azimuths 81°, 97°, 255°, and 269°.5 as shown and the head possibly at azimuth 33°.

45 ISA PiWtc UW.k-

Figure 75 (Marshall) Tracing of author's surveyed maps of High Bank Works "Circle" and Hopeton "Circle", both to same scale. The gap between the two mounded works is from 30 to 50 feet wide. Figure 16 (Marshall) The author established ground control and pic­ ture points based on Ohio State Grid Coordinate System South Zone in the early 1970's and from such precisely scaled the image above of what later was referred to as the Anderson Earthwork in Ross County, Ohio west of Chillicothe. Romain's moon minimum north rise azimuth which he quotes at 67°.3 and moon minimum south rise azimuth which he quotes at 115°.9 are shown from corners of this work and extended as in his Figure 1 in his article Hopewell Inter-site Relationships and Astronomical Alignments.

•> s • -

1 V * \ V" \ \ s \ Jg 950 FT

Figure 18 (Marshall) Facsimile of Romain's Figure 4, Schematic plan of the Milford Earthwork in his Hopewellian Concepts in Geometry showing good fit of what he calls the Milford Circle and Milford Square. The circle he shows as circumscribing the square.

Figure 17 (Marshall) Facsimile of Romain's Figure 3, Anderson Earthwork, from his More Astronomical Alignments at Hopewell Sites in Ohio from Anderson 1980 Figure 4. This is to be compared with author's survey and work based on airphoto images shown in Figure 16.

S^~—-^ \ \

/ 720 FT \ (K h \ \ \ \ VI ^ I/ s \^_ _^

•4 Figure 20 (Marshall) Figure 19 (Marshall) Tracing of Milford Work as found by Facsimile of Romain's author from ground control, picture points, and air photo Figure 6, Frankfort images. Referring to Romain's Figure 4 in his Hopewellian Earthwork, in his Concepts in Geometry this author has placed the Milford Hopewellian Concepts Square over the Milford Circle and it is obvious that the in Geometry to be com Circle cannot circumscribe the square at all. Hence, pared with Figure 21. Romain's claim is not fact based,

46 Figure 22 (Marshall) Facsimile of Romain's Figure 8, Schriver Circle and Mound City Square in his Hopewellian Concepts in Geometry to be com­ pared with Figure 23.

Figure 21 (Marshall) Tracing of Frankfort Circle from the > author's ground control, picture points, and aerial photo­ graph images, with Frankfort Square superimposed on it. This actual Frankfort Circle cannot be made to circum­ scribe the Frankfort Square. Hence, Romain's claim on this site is without validity.

|

Figure 24 (Marshall) Facsimile of Romain's Figure 9, schematic plan of Baum Earthworks in his Hopewellian Concepts in Geometry to be com­ pared with Figure 25.

Figure 23 (Marshall) Tracing of the Schriver Circle as author found it from field surveys and air photo images. An equi­ lateral triangle of sides 880 feet that Romain claims can be inscribed within the circle is shown and it does not fit.

Figure 26 (Marshall) Facsimile of Romain's Figure 10, Liberty Earthwork, in his Hopewellian Concepts in Geometry to be compared with Figure 27.

•4Figure 27 (Marshall) Tracing of Liberty Large Circle as author found it from surveys, maps, remnants, and air photo images. Yes, 1,470 feet on a side Figure 25 (Marshall) Tracing of Baum Large Circle from equilateral triangle can author's surveying and mapping showing an attempt to be inscribed in the circle, but it is not as place an equilateral triangle 1,150 feet on a side in the Romain represents it. Large Circle. Romain claims that the Large Circle circum­ scribes the equilateral triangle. The reality is otherwise. 47 afg-.^Jon ; ,; *•*•*

Figure 30 (Marshall) Facsimile of Romain's Figure 5, in his Further Notes f^to** on Hopewellian Astronomy and Geom­ etry showing clockwise from upper left Hopewell Square, Marietta Small Figure 29 (Marshall) Preliminary map of Tremper Square, Works East Square, Frankfort Figure 28 (Marshall) Facsimile of Romain's Mound as the author found it from his ground Square, and in the center, a diamond Figure 8, Tremper Mound, from the Mills Atlas in control, picture points, and remnants in the field his Azimuths to the Otherworld: Astronomical positioned Marietta Square. This is to be and images on air photos plotted n the Ohio State compared with Figure 31. Alignments of Hopewell Charnel Houses. The Grid Coordinate System South Zone. arrow shows his significant azimuth to winter solstice sunset at 237°.9.

Figure 33 (Marshall) Drawing showing actual sizes and shapes of works cited in Romain's Figure 6, author's Figure 32. These circles are about 40 feet too large for the quadrant shown. etry. The large square is the Marietta Large Square. Romain divided it into 4 Figure 31 (Marshall) Actual sizes and shapes of the quadrants and he claims that any of works indicated in Figure 30 traced from the author's these four squares can be circumscribed surveys of remnants in the field and images on air by Newark Observatory, High Bank, Seal photos. These do no fit together with the regularity Township, and Circleville inner circles. Romain shows in his Figure 5, author's Figure 30. This is to be compared with Figure 33.

•4 Figure 34 (Marshall) Fac­ •

48 Figure 36 (Marshall) Facsimile of Romain's Figure 6, in his Further Notes on Hopewellian Astronomy and Geom­ etry. Schriver Circle and Hopeton Circle Figure 37 (Marshall) Tracing shows the actual Figure 38 (Marshall) Tracing shows the actual are shown upper left. Lower right shows sizes of Schriver Circle, Baum Small Circle, and sizes of Hopeton Circle enclosed by the Marietta Works East Small Circle, Frankfort Small Works East Small Circle enclosed by the Marietta Large Square. Again, a far different picture from Circle, Baum Small Circle, and Seip Large Square, all to the same scale. A far dif­ Romain's Figure 10. Small Circle, all enclosed by Marietta ferent picture from Romain's Figure 10, author's Large Square. Figure 36.

•4 Figure 40 (Marshall) Actual sizes and shapes of geometric earth­ works shown in Romain's Figure 1, author's Figure 39, indi­ cating that Romain has idealized these works to a condition that is removed from field determined facts.

Figure 39 (Marshall) Facsimile of Romain's Figure 1 in his Hopewell Geometric Enclosures: Symbols of an Ancient World View. He claims that his diagram shows idealized forms of Liberty Large Circle, Cir­ cleville Inner Circle, Newark Observatory Circle, High Bank Circle, Seal Circle, Marietta Large Square, Newark Octagon, Marietta Small Square, Works East Square, Frankfort Square and Hopewell Square.

•4 Figure 41 (Marshall) Facsimile of Romain's Figure 2 in his Hopewell Geometric Enclosures: Symbols of an Ancient World View. His claim is that the diagram shows idealized forms of: Works East Large Circle, Frank­ fort Large Circle, Cir­ cleville Outer Circle, Newark Fairground Circle, Mound City Square, Anderson Square, Mari­ etta Small Square, Works East Square, Frankfort Figure 42 (Marshall) Actual sizes and shapes of Geometric Square, Hopewell Square, Earthworks shown in Romain's Figure 2, author's Figure 40, and High Bank Octagon. indicating further the extent of Romain's idealization of these works, far removed from field determined facts.

49 LETTER FROM ALAN TONETTI TO A.S.O. OFFICERS

December 7, 1998 chief is appointed by the Governor to rep­ tionalists or surface collectors who have resent the interests of all Ohioans in his­ permission from landowners to collect or Dear Officer of the Archaeological toric preservation matters. dig, or for farmers, landowners, or pro­ Society of Ohio (ASO): Mr. Converse states that he and other fessional archaeologists, because Ohio's vandalism and desecration statutes I write to you in response to Mr. Con­ ASO members who contacted members retain what is known as the "privilege" verse's editorial in the Ohio Archaeolo­ of the Ohio General Assembly about the clause. As long as a person has the "priv­ gist, 1998, 48(3):3. I want to clarify the bill were told that "this bill was formu­ ilege" to take Native American human many misstatements made in his egre­ lated and steered through the legislature remains and/or objects, the person can gious and unwarranted attack on the by the Ohio Archaeological Council and not be prosecuted under the revisions to Ohio Archaeological Council (OAC), of the Ohio Preservation Office in concert Ohio's vandalism and desecration which I am a member, chair of the Leg­ with two or three people professing to be statutes according to HB 429. "Privilege" islative Issues Committee, and a past- 'native Americans'." If that is what Mr. is defined in the Ohio Revised Code sec­ President. I trust that you will take Converse and others were told by their tion 2901.01 (L) as appropriate action to correct the mis­ legislators, then Mr. Converse and others statements made by Mr. Converse so were either misinformed or lied to by their "An immunity, license, or right that the readers of Ohio Archaeologist legislators. Having participated in drafting conferred by law, or bestowed by will know the facts concerning this the OAC's response to HB 429 and mon­ express or implied grant, or arising out matter, and I request that you begin this itoring its status in the Ohio General of status, position, office, or relation­ process by publishing this letter in its Assembly on behalf of the OAC's Leg­ ship, or growing out of necessity." entirety in the next issue of the magazine. islative Issues Committee, I know for a fact that the OAC had no part whatso­ Ask for and receive permission from House Bill (HB) 429 grew out of HB ever in sponsoring or "formulating and the property owner to collect or dig up 432, the latter of which was introduced steering" this bill through the legislature, Native American burials and/or burial into the 121st Ohio General Assembly's despite Mr. Converse's claim to the con­ objects, then HB 429's revisions to Regular Session (1995-1996). HB 432 trary. To my knowledge, neither did the Ohio's vandalism and desecration was presented to the 121st Ohio General OHPO. In fact, the OAC presented statutes are not applicable. Assembly by the Ohio Council of written and oral testimony on HB 429 to Mr. Converse's statement that the Church's Native American Task Force, the House Local Government and Town­ 3,000 members of the ASO "outnumbers which spent a year or more examining ships Committee indicating its many all the archaeologists and 'native Ameri­ the issue of how to better protect prehis­ problems and shortcomings. A copy of cans' in Ohio ten to one" is incorrect. toric and historic Native American burial that testimony is also available from the Native Americans residing in Ohio greatly places in Ohio. The OAC made a formal OAC. outnumber the ASO's 3000 members. presentation to the Task Force about our concerns, a presentation in which I par­ HB 429 was, in fact, initially sponsored Mr. Converse is also mistaken when he ticipated, and we presented testimony to by State Representative William Ogg on states that "members [of the OHPO] are the House Local Government and Town­ behalf of some Native Americans who appointed by a Governor..." There are no ship Committee, where it was being con­ live in his southern Ohio district. Thirty- "members," only staff, of which I was one sidered, opposing HB 432 because it nine other state representatives co-spon­ until 1997. What he is apparently refer­ was poorly conceived, unworkable, and sored the bill as it went through hearings ring to is the Ohio Historic Site Preserva­ did little to better protect places of pre­ in Committee, and it passed the House tion Advisory Board (OHSPAB), whose historic and historic Native American 96-0 on January 27, 1998. The bill was members are appointed by the Governor burial in Ohio from farming, construction, then sent to the Ohio Senate, where it to advise the State Historic Preservation and illegal excavations. A copy of that was sponsored by six Senators, including Officer on a number of historic preserva­ testimony is available from the OAC. The Senator Shoemaker, also from southern tion matters, including archaeology. For a ASO also opposed HB 432. I have a copy Ohio. With a minor amendment, the bill few years, the ASO had its President as a of an undated statement made by then- passed the Senate 32-0 on May 19, member of this body, but in the 1980s President Stephen J. Parker outlining the 1998, and the House concurred with the ethical matters involving the buying and reasons why the ASO opposed HB 432. Senate 97-0 on May 20, 1998. The Gov­ selling of artifacts by the ASO's President ernor signed the bill into law on July 1, resulted in the discontinuance of ASO In his editorial, Mr. Converse writes that 1998, and it became effective on Sep­ representation on this Board. Represen­ "most of our [the ASO's] officers were tember 30, 1998. tation on OHSPAB is more than "token unaware of its [HB 429] presentation to recognition," as Mr. Converse writes, for the legislature and subsequent passage." Mr. Converse also writes that this bill any organization. "Most" indicates that some of the ASO's "could have serious consequences for officers were aware of HB 429's introduc­ avocationalists, surface collectors, Mr. Converse also insinuates that the tion into the 122nd Ohio General farmers and landowners." The only per­ OAC spoke on behalf of the ASO before Assembly's Regular Session (1997-1998) sons that this bill could have serious con­ the Ohio General Assembly concerning on May 6, 1997, and I personally know sequences for are persons who take HB 429. This is not so, and you can read that some ASO officers were aware of the Native American human remains and/or about it in our written testimony. The bill's introduction into the Ohio House of burial objects without the permission of Indian gambling casino linkage to this bill Representatives. That some of the offi­ the landowner, legally known as theft. In is a farce, and the OAC is not "in con­ cers of the ASO apparently did not com­ fact, even before HB 429 was signed into cert," as Mr. Converse writes, with the municate this matter to Mr. Converse, or law persons who stole such remains and OHPO or Native Americans on this issue. perhaps to other officers of the ASO, if we objects from landowners already faced In fact, Indian gambling casinos is not a are to believe Mr. Converse, is the fault of serious consequences under Ohio's van­ concern of the OAC's. the ASO, not of the OAC or the Ohio His­ dalism and desecration statutes, which Mr. Converse's reference to the toric Preservation Office (OHPO). Mr. HB 429 modifies, as well as Ohio's tres­ "hidden problems" with professional Converse incorrectly refers to the OHPO passing and other pertinent statutes. HB archaeology in Ohio and the OHPO are 429 does not change a thing for avoca­ as the "Ohio Preservation Office," whose generally without merit. There are prob-

50 lems, but they are hardly "hidden." After these archaeological investigations are that I have read or heard Mr. Converse's all, Mr. Converse knows of them, doesn't not readily made available to the public is tirades against professional archaeology he? There may be a few examples of the true, and there are good reasons for this, or archaeologists. Yes, there are "prob­ "non-reporting of excavations paid for such as the client's right to keep certain lems" between the OAC and the ASO, with public money," but this a very rare information private, such as the location and Mr. Converse is in the middle of occurrence. He states that "no abstracts of archaeological sites and the names of them. These matters do need to be or summaries of the reports are pub­ property owners, and from unscrupulous addressed by OAC's Board of Directors lished or even written and made available persons who may use such information to and the ASO's Officers and Board of to the public who pays for them." All illegally collect or dig for artifacts. The Trustees. I have recommended to the public archaeology reports contain financial costs of government sponsored OAC's President, Martha Otto, that she abstracts and summaries. It is true that or required archaeological investigations initiate a series of meetings between the they are not published, in the sense of is not readily available, as Mr. Converse Boards of each organization to address publishing them in the Ohio Archaeolo­ states. I welcome Mr. Converse's call for Mr. Converse's editorial in particular, and gist, but they are available to responsible an Ohio law requiring public archaeology to begin working on bettering relation­ people from the appropriate state or fed­ reports to be filed with public libraries ships between the two organizations. I eral agency, or the OHPO. Yes, some­ once the project is completed, and for ask that you reply in kind. times public funds are used to pay for disclosing the costs of these projects. Sincerely, archaeological investigations, but often Unfortunately, it's not as simple as that. the money is private. With certain restric­ tions, entire archaeological reports filed The false statements made by Mr. Alan C. Tonetti with the OHPO, or state or federal agen­ Converse in your magazine's editorial 339 Olentangy St. cies, are available to responsible people are, I hope, simply based out of igno­ Columbus, OH 43202 on a need-to-know basis. That most of rance. However, I fear that there is more (614)268-3416 to this, given that this is not the first time [email protected]

REPLY TO THE LETTER OF ALAN TONETTI To Members of the Archaeological Society of Ohio From Robert Converse

Since Alan Tonetti has sent all the Offi­ Tonetti says that we were misinformed or Representative Ogg's Statements cers of our Society a letter criticizing my lied to by Ohio legislators. Indeed, in the If Alan Tonetti asserts that none of the editorial about the "cemetery bill" in Vol. absence of even a single word to us from above is true then all he has to do is refer 48 No. 3 of the Ohio Archaeologist, I feel the OAC and its ad hoc committee, our to the various papers in which these it is my obligation to reply to his asser­ own ASO officers who are OAC mem­ points are documented. If the statements tions that I made misstatements or his bers, the Ohio Preservation Office or the made by Representative Ogg are not true intimations that have lied. Ohio Historical Society, who are we sup­ then Mr. Tonetti should call Representa­ Let me begin by stating that although posed to believe? tive Ogg and ask him to stop saying Alan Tonetti has been involved in the My Misstatements things that are not the truth. Ohio archaeological community for sev­ With regard to my misstatements. eral years both as a member of the Ohio The Consequences of the Preservation Office, a member, officer 1. In a telephone call from Russell Strunk Cemetery Law and president of the Ohio Archaeological to Rep. Ogg's office, Strunk was told My statement that the bill could have Council, and is presently employed by a that Ogg understood that the ASO did serious consequences for collectors, contract archaeology company, he does not oppose the law. Either someone farmers, etc., is dismissed by Tonetti. He not belong to our Society. told Rep. Ogg that or Rep. Ogg was says that the only consequences would not telling the truth. be for those who don't have the Alan Tonetti, the Cemetery Bill and 2. In information sent to us by Rep. Ogg landowners permission. (He includes the Who Knew About it it states that James Addington, a one­ words "illegal", "stole" and 'theft" when Mr. Tonetti states that he is the time OAC officer, helped formulate the speaking of violations). He says the law Chairman of the OAC Legislative Com­ wording of the bill. doesn't change a thing for any of the mittee. With regard to the recent enact­ 3. In a legislative communication, Ogg above. If the law doesn't change any­ ment of "cemetery bill" he states "/ stated that wording of the bill was thing, why did OAC President Robert personally know that some of the ASO changed in accordance with wishes of Genheimer testify that there were a officers were aware of this bill's introduc­ the Ohio Historical Society. number of problems with the private tion." He does not name the officer or 4. In the November OAC newsletter it property provisions and other sections of officers. Presumably he means Martha was stated unequivocally that the OAC the bill? I refer Tonetti to the many gray Otto who is a member of his committee. had informed the legislature of their areas of this law as articulated by his He goes on to say that if we didn't learn approval of the language of the bill own OAC ad hoc committee in their about this bill from this officer it is "the which to any reasonable mind would newsletter. If it doesn't change anything, fault of the ASO." In other words, he is lead to the conclusion that they why was it passed in the first place? telling us that it is our responsibility to approved the bill itself. The Privilege Clause either ask the OAC members who are 5. Tonetti's statement that the Preserva­ Mr. Tonetti explains the legal technical­ officers of the ASO about pending legis­ tion Office had no part in this bill may ities of the "privilege" clause - which is lation or it is our tough luck. be correct. However, how does he This statement by Mr. Tonetti fortifies not defined in the bill - as simply explain the fact that Franco Ruffini, a meaning the landowner's permission. the assertion by Bud Tackett that this staff member of the Preservation Needing the landowner's permission has information was known but simply with­ Office, is also listed as a member of always been Ohio law so why did the held from us. the special purpose OAC committee OAC support an additional law? He In the fourth paragraph of his letter Mr. which dealt with the bill? defines this privilege, but I don't believe

51 he is a lawyer and it will be up to the central Ohio which have been excavated some members of the professional com­ courts to interpret its meaning, not Mr. by professionals but about which not a munity uncomfortable is unfortunate. But Tonetti. If permission from a landowner single word has ever been, or ever will be when unneeded laws are enacted which means "privilege" then why doesn't the written. The non-reporting of excavated directly infringe on the rights of ASO bill say that in plain terms? Why doesn't sites is the height of unethical activity, members I will respond - no matter who the bill explicitly exempt the collecting of especially by professionals, and is a is behind them - that is my job. artifacts from the surface of the ground direct violation of the code of ethics of I don't like writing editorials - I have with permission of the landowner? It the Society for American Archaeology. It too many other things to do. I would doesn't - and that is an omission which is interesting that Mr. Tonetti does not much rather be writing about archae­ carries potential and ominous dangers rise up in righteous indignation at these ology and seeing that things get pub­ for ASO members. ethical violations - apparently he has two lished - a desire apparently not shared sets of "ethics" - one set for ASO mem­ by Mr. Tonetti and some members of the Alan Tonetti and the Indians bers and another for professionals. professional community. Tonetti states that there are more than 3,000 Indians in Ohio. I should have qual­ Contract Archaeology and Public Dis­ Mr. Tonetti's Letter ified my statement by saying people with closure When I first received Mr. Tonetti's at least a documented 50% Indian Mr. Tonetti says that abstracts of con­ letter, I had no problems with publishing parentage who are taxpaying residents of tract archaeology reports are made avail­ it in the Archaeologist. However, in light Ohio. He can count out-of-staters, or able on the "need-to-know" basis. He of recent developments and the fact that those with some illusory Indian ancestry says there are "good reasons" for this Mr. Tonetti is not a member of our if he wants to pander to them and be policy because of unscrupulous persons Society, I, and some of our board mem­ oblivious of the truth. who may use such information to commit bers, didn't feel obligated to give him a "illegal" acts. In the vernacular of the day, forum in our publication to disparage col­ Archaeological Ethics Mr. Tonetti, get real. The reason for lectors. But in order to let our members "Ethical matters" with buying and keeping them secret, which he doesn't know how we stand with some of the selling artifacts is the reason our Society mention, is that as long as they aren't professionals it is hereby published. I'm doesn't have a member on the Ohio His­ published they are not subject to peer sure that Mr. Tonetti and many members toric Preservation Advisory Board says review nor are they subject to assess­ of the OAC would not afford me the cour­ Mr. Tonetti. The Ohio Historic Preserva­ ment of their archaeological value. Are tesy of publishing my editorial in their tion Office and Mr. Tonetti are telling the they well done excavations and reports, newsletter. members of the Archaeological Society or are they bad ones? Was their cost of Ohio that past Presidents Michael excessive? What was their contribution in Robert N. Converse Kish, Don Casto, James Hovan, Steve the understanding of the past? No one Editor, The Ohio Archaeologist Parker, Larry Morris and Bud Tackett are will ever know and according to Mr. "unethical!" These are people who are Tonetti, no one should know. Postscript: To many of us, archaeology held in the highest respect and esteem Those reports could easily be obtained should be the most exciting and fasci­ and I would compare their ethics, morals, nating of all sciences. Ohio is at the honesty, integrity and dedication to by anyone through the Freedom of Infor­ mation Act if they wanted to go to the center of the Hopewell, Adena, Glacial archaeology to those of Mr. Tonetti or Kame, Red Ocher and Fort Ancient cul­ anyone he can name. trouble. Mr. Tonetti knows, as does every other professional and knowledgeable tures - no area surpasses Ohio in our If Mr. Tonetti feels, as do many OAC avocationalist, that keeping the abstracts Archaic and Paleo legacies. As Editor of members, that buying and selling is and reports of public archaeological work the Ohio Archaeologist, I have endeav­ unethical then it is also obvious that he secret is unethical if not illegal. Those ored to publish the sites and artifacts of thinks his personal standards are supe­ reports do not belong to the bureaucrats these cultures and let the world know of rior to those of collectors. If he believes - they belong to the taxpayers who paid Ohio's wealth of prehistoric material and that a collector, who buys relics at a farm for them and it is patently illegal to hide heritage. Unfortunately, the refusal by auction (collected a century ago by a them from the public. In fact, I believe many Professionals to publish their work, farmer) and publishes them is "unethical" that the law requires publication of pub­ especially those doing contract archae­ then I suggest he has a warped sense of licly financed archaeological work - not ology, has done nothing at all to the definition of ethics. just the writing of a report which is avail­ enlighten our understanding of the past. Frankly, I am growing tired of having able to only a selected group of govern­ The obstacles arbitrarily placed in the the many fine and outstanding people in ment employees. path of those, including myself, who wish our Society, who have as sincere an to publish material from some museums interest in archaeology as anyone in the My Editorials is even more disheartening and does little OAC, characterized as "unethical." Finally, my statements and editorials to improve the professional/non-profes­ I would like to debate Mr. Tonetti on are not based on ignorance, as Mr. sional relationship. archaeological ethics. We could begin by Toneti implies, and I can document what talking about all the mounds and sites in I say. The fact that my editorials make

52 DOES THE PURCHASE AND SALE OF ARTIFACTS BENEFIT THE STUDY OF ARCHAEOLOGY? by David W. Kuhn Portsmouth, OH 45662 "Archaeology" is defined as (1) The sci­ estate or personal property, know that of Ohio; by attending meetings, shows, entific study of historic or prehistoric cul­ much knowledge and information is museums and auctions which involve arti­ tures by excavation and analysis of their gained by simply being there, whether it facts; and by becoming vocal to the gen­ artifacts, inscriptions and monuments, is a formal gallery sale or a rural farm eral public, the media and public officials. (Random House Dictionary), and as (2) The sale. The auction catalog and/or the auc­ There are some individuals and groups science of prehistoric antiquities which tioneer provide a description of the items who oppose the sale of prehistoric arti­ investigates the history of peoples by the which are to be (and are) sold, thus pro­ facts, whether it be between individuals or remains belonging to the earlier periods of viding the attendees an opportunity to at auction. And the basis for their opposi­ their existence. (Webster International Dic­ identify the nature and type of each item. tion varies according to who is speaking at tionary). Specialized training in the field of Further, by mixing with the auction any given time. Some claim that artifacts archaeology makes it a profession as a crowd, one quickly becomes aware of should be re-buried. Others would prefer field of science; however, the study of the individual opinions about the quality, that absolutely no prehistoric artifact be subject of archaeology, as with any other authenticity, provenience, material and sold. Many of these individuals want the field of science, can be undertaken by ownership of the items which are to be ownership of the artifacts to be transferred amateurs as well as professionals. Ama­ auctioned. Finally, the relative value of to them, or to some group, claiming some teurs often make significant contributions in each item sold at an auction is deter­ connection or "cultural affinity" to the the various scientific fields, as a result of mined by the high bid. These observa­ maker or user of the artifacts. But what their studies and participation in the various tions apply to all auctions, regardless of makes a prehistoric artifact any different activities relating to the particular profes­ what type of property is being sold. from any other item of personal property? sion. One way in which amateurs partici­ Specifically, with respect to the auction "Artifact" is defined as an object produced pate in the study of archaeology is through and the sale of prehistoric artifacts, by human workmanship, such as a tool, the acquisition, ownership and transfer of which usually involves amateur archaeol­ weapon or ornament of archaeological prehistoric artifacts and other material from ogists and collectors, but occasionally interest. (American Heritage Dictionary). one person to another. Often times, the involves some professionals, directly and Whether it is a utilitarian artifact, a tool, a transfer of ownership of a collection of arti­ indirectly, it should be noted that these weapon, a decorative item, or an item the facts occurs through bequest or inheri­ events and transactions attract many use or purpose of which is unknown, its tance. More commonly, the transfer of people who have various backgrounds, prehistoric nature means that it was made ownership is accomplished on a person-to- interests and objectives. And these auc­ and used before written records existed. person basis, or by means of a public or tions not only promote the study of Through the years and throughout the private sale whether it be a single artifact or archaeology, but also serve to educate entire world, archaeologists have exca­ an entire collection. And the initial trans­ those persons involved as well as the vated habitation sites, for the purpose of feror could be a farmer or a gardener who public in general. What better way to studying, and thereby learning from, the found something turned up by the plow, or document the provenience and authen­ past. In the process, relics of the existence it could be a contractor whose earth- ticity of an artifact than to have it publicly of historic and prehistoric peoples are moving equipment uncovered a habitation displayed and described on an auction found. These products from the past help site, or it could be a collector who simply card? With so many reproductions cur­ tell us how they lived (hunters, gatherers, enjoys the hobby of spending an afternoon rently in existence, it may well become a farmers), what they ate and smoked, their walking the fields or creek banks in search standard to determine authenticity if an life span, their cause of death and the time of the works of art he collects, catalogs, item was sold at a particular auction, or if period of their existence, among other reports and eventually passes along to it was featured in this magazine. things. The development of this knowledge someone else, either in life of after death. Prehistoric artifacts are sold at public would not be possible without the acquisi­ Many times, the transfer of ownership and private auctions throughout the tion of, and access to, the artifacts pro­ of an artifact is from one individual to United States, and many of these auc­ duced by prehistoric people. And what another, through barter or sale, and can tions are held in the State of Ohio. It better way to preserve and learn from be accomplished through personal con­ behooves every person who is positively these artifacts, than the hands-on experi­ tact or by publication through advertising. and genuinely interested in artifacts to ence of being able to touch the item, and Many advertising sources are currently actively promote this avocation by pre­ to discuss its features with other knowl­ being used, including the internet. senting it to others in a positive and edu­ edgeable persons at an auction, meeting or show, so as to contribute to the educa­ Those who have attended an auction cational manner; by enlisting new tional aspect of archaeology? of any type of property, whether it be real members for the Archaeological Society

53 AN OPEN LETTER TO THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF OHIO from Bradley T. Lepper 3790 Milner Rd. Newark.OH 43055 (614)297-2642

The Archaeological Society of Ohio broader archaeological community His editorials are making archaeology c/o Jeb Bowen, President (through peer-reviewed publications more "contentious and "faction-ridden — Ohio Historical Society accessible to the general public, articles not less. These are difficult times for 1982 Velma Avenue in the Ohio Archaeologist, and presenta­ archaeology in America — and Columbus, OH 43224 tions for both the OAC and ASO). I have throughout the world. Those of us who An Open Letter to the Archaeological never been discouraged from doing so by believe in the importance of archaeology should work together, now more than Society of Ohio my professional colleagues. Indeed, many of my colleagues do the same and more ever, to insure the future of the past. This As a professional archaeologist and a would do so if they were as committed to means protecting archaeological sites member of both the Ohio Archaeological finding the time in their busy schedules. from undisciplined looting, doing more Council (OAC) and the Archaeological There is no conspiracy to hide these data archaeology (amateur and professional Society of Ohio (ASO), I am saddened from interested members of the general alike), and sharing the results of our work and angered by the recent editorials of public; there is only a limit to the hours in with the archaeological community (all of Robert Converse. These have appeared a day. us who share a love of the heritage left in the ASO's magazine Ohio Archaeolo­ behind by our prehistoric predecessors) Bob seems to be blind to the abuses of gist and appear to represent the official and with the more general public who some individuals whom I do not hesitate position of the ASO. I fervently hope that may not yet know they are interested in to label "looters." They are relatively rare the opinions expressed by Bob are not what we have to share. We can accom­ in Ohio, but they exist and they are a real shared by the majority of the members of plish more together than we ever could threat to our heritage. Bob is as wrong to the ASO. I believe these editorials are separately. Bob's editorials are an portray all "amateurs" as dedicated prac­ misguided and potentially will do expression of understandable frustration, titioners of archaeology as he is to portray irreparable damage to the relationship but they are counter-productive and all professionals as nefarious, money- between amateurs and professionals in should be repudiated by the Archaeolog­ mad bureaucrats. It is true that some pro­ this state and beyond. ical Society of Ohio. The Ohio Archaeolo­ fessional archaeologists are not as gist is a widely circulated and influential I have known Bob for years and I hold appreciative of the contributions of ama­ publication. Many amateurs will now him in high regard for his many and var­ teurs as they should be. But some of regard professional archaeologists with ious contributions to Ohio archaeology. I these same snobbish individuals are suspicion and fear. This may be war­ am personally indebted to him for nearly as unappreciative of the contribu­ ranted in the case of a few individuals, opening his home to me and allowing me tions of many of their "colleagues" with but I am deeply hurt by Bob's unfair por­ to study his collection of Ohio fluted PhDs. To my knowledge archaeology has trayal of the profession to which I have points while I was a graduate student. always been "a contentious, jealous, fac­ dedicated my life's work. Bob has many legitimate concerns and tion-ridden ... science." I don't like it, but complaints about the actions of some it's been true for a long time. I resent If it becomes clear that the Archaeolog­ professional archaeologists and the Bob's implication that all professional ical Society of Ohio as an organization changing political climate surrounding the archaeologists are ungrateful for and accepts or endorses Bob's views (whether practice of archaeology in the United unappreciative of the contributions of this is through acclamation or silent accep­ States. But Bob is wrong to paint all pro­ amateurs. I would not have a PhD were it tance), then it will be necessary for me to fessional archaeologists with the same not for the cooperation of the many ama­ end my association with the society. This broad brush of calumny. For example, I teur archaeologists who shared their col­ is a step that I would not take without pro­ agree with Bob that too much Cultural lections with me; and most of the found sadness and regret. Resource Management (CRM) archae­ archaeological projects I have worked on ology is not being shared with the tax- have benefited from the contributions of Best wishes to you all for a happy and paying public. As a result, I have always amateurs. I have never been shy about prosperous New Year! taken steps to share the results of every acknowledging these contributions! CRM project I have been involved with Sincerely,/^ (that yielded any interesting data) with the Bob is wrong to call for less coopera­ tion between amateurs and professionals. Bradley T/tepper THE POWER OF KIOWA SONG In a text that is engaging and easily read, Lassiter has combined experiential narrative with ethnological theory to create a new form of collaborative ethnography that makes anthropology accessible to everyone. This book is designed for anyone interested in Native American studies or anthropology, and it also serves as a resource written by and for the Kiowa themselves. Luke E. Lassiter is an assistant professor of anthropology at Ball State University in Muncie, Indiana. University of Arizona Press/f98AThe Power of Kiowa Song 270 pp., 12 illus.; 6 x 9; LC 98-8866 ISBN 0-8165-1834-3 $40.00s library cloth ISBN 0-8165-1834-1 $17.95s paper

54 ARCHAEOLOGY, HISTORY AND THE FALLEN TIMBERS CAMPAIGN OF 1794 G. Michael Pratt Heidelberg College In 1794 forces of the United States under Major General Anthony Wayne entered present Northwest Ohio in an attempt to force a treaty with the Native American tribes in the region and to establish control over acknowledged US territory. At the same time, Great Britain strengthened its hold on the region by constructing a new military post, Fort Miamis, inside US territory and encouraging its Indian allies to resist US Encroachment. The campaign ended in the Battle of Fallen Timbers, Aug. 20 1794. Since the 1980's archaeo­ logical and historic research at Fort Miamis and Fallen Timbers has addressed a number of goals: Assess each site's archaeological potential for significant new information about the events of 1794; determine the form and structure of each site; and gain new infor­ mation on the material culture of 18th century frontier military sites. Fort Miamis was sampled via test and area excavations designed to locate and identify the site, function, and construction of critical fort structures. The Fallen Timbers battlefield was located and course of the battle was charted through a remote sensing and recovery field survey interpreted by GPS and GIS mapping. The recovery and interpretation of the archaeological record led to significant reinterpretation of the history of both Fort Miamis and the Fallen Timbers Battlefield sites. Faiien Timiers$attfe{fief

The goal of this organization is to secure and preserve the site of the Battle of Fallen Timbers fought in August, 1794. This site is in danger of being sold for commercial development. We are working to stop the sale of such an important part of our heritage. This battlefield should become a National Historic Site. Once it's lost, it's gone forever. riease add your l/o/'ce to tkis nwrtku cause,

$10. Family Membership Additional Donation $ The FTBC is an IRS recognized 501(e)(3) All donations are tax deductible Please make check or money order payable to: Fallen Timbers Battlefield P.C. P.O. Box 8771, Toledo OH 43623

Necrology

William W. Smith, Wellsville, Ohio. Albert M. Wakefield, Warren, Ohio. Bill Smith died at age 56 September 27,1998, at City Hospital in Wellsville following a brief illness. Bill was Al Wakefield died at the age of a lifelong resident of Wellsville and a longtime 80 in December 1998 in member of our Society. Bill was a personal friend to Warren, Ohio. Al was a many of our members and will be greatly missed. member of long standing in our Our condolences go to his wife and family. Society and was a veteran of WW II. Al had many friends among the collecting commu­ nity and many members visited with Al to see his fine collec­ tion. He will be remembered by his many friends. Our sym­ pathy to his family.

Back Cover: Raptorial Bird Effigy Pipe - Steatite—3%" in height. An exceptionally powerful and finely crafted piece of prehistoric North American sculpture, found in a Hopewell cultural context and became part of Hopewell culture through trade with cultures south of the Ohio River. Found in Portsmouth, Scioto Co., Ohio — Ex. Dr. Gordon Meuser and Max Shipley Collections. Pictured on cover of the pamphlet issued in 1946 by Raymond C. Vietzen announcing publication of his The Ancient Ohioans and Their Neighbors, and also in The Ancient Ohioans and Their Neighbors (1946), Fig. 105, p. 245; The Meuser Collection (Converse), 1977, p. 35.

55 OBJECT OF THE SOCIETY The Archaeological Society of Ohio is organized to discover and conserve archaeological sites and material within the State of Ohio, to seek and promote a better understanding among students and collectors of archaeological material, professional and non-professional, including individuals, museums, and institutions of learning, and to disseminate knowledge on the subject of archaeology. Membership in the society shall be open to any person of good character interested in archaeology or the collecting of American Indian artifacts, upon acceptance of written application and payment of dues.