DOCSLIB.ORG

Tuscaloosa, Alabama

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

RAISED GROUND, RAZED STRUCTURE: CERAMIC CHRONOLOGY, OCCUPATION AND CHIEFLY AUTHORITY ON MOUND P AT MOUNDVILLE by ERIK STEVEN PORTH JOHN BLITZ, COMMITTEE CHAIR ROBERT CLOUSE JASON DeCARO KATHRYN OTHS A THESIS Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in the Department of Anthropology in the Graduate School of The University of Alabama TUSCALOOSA, ALABAMA 2011 Copyright Erik Steven Porth 2011 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ABSTRACT Mound P is the largest mound on the western plaza periphery at Moundville in west- central Alabama. Excavations on the western mound flank revealed at least two mound construction episodes and a large amount of modern disturbance. Excavations on the mound summit intersected a large burnt daub structure that was previously indicated by a magnetometer survey. Moundville was depopulated around A.D. 1400 and the occupation of mound summits after this time indicates that leadership positions in the region were still important. Mounds were used as symbols of authority that leaders could co-opt to legitimize their position. A ceramic chronology was developed based on the site’s type-variety system for the mound to determine the date of terminal occupation on the summit of the mound. This revealed that the mound was used lightly during the Moundville IV (A.D. 1520-1650) ceramic phase. Other artifacts from the mound suggest that the pigment complex was in use on the summit but a stone manufacturing industry was not. It is suggested that Mound P was occupied late in Moundville’s history but abandoned prior to the Protohistoric period and the Spanish intrusion into the Southeastern United States. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS It is my honest opinion that I truly would not be in a position to complete this thesis without the support, guidance and help from my advisers, peers, friends and family. This research project would have been impossible without my adviser Dr. John Blitz and the constant advice and input he has had during this process. I would also like to thank the rest of my thesis committee for the input they have provided to me during this process that only made my thesis stronger: Dr. Robert Clouse, Dr. Jason DeCaro and Dr. Kathryn Oths. In addition to my committee members, I would like to acknowledge and thank other individuals at the University of Alabama, Department of Anthropology that contributed to the completion of this thesis: Dr. Ian Brown, Dr. Keith Jacobi, Dr. Vernon James Knight, Jr., Dr. Lisa LeCount, Dr. Michael Murphy and Dr. Cameron H. Lacquement. I would like to provide a special thank you to Dr. Claire Nanfro Thompson for her guidance and assistance with artifact identification in the laboratory. Also, Dr. Chester Walker provided the magnetometer data for Mound P. I would like to thank Mary Bade, Eugene Futato and Erin Harney of the University of Alabama, Alabama Museum of Natural History for providing access to the Mound P collections and for allowing me to have a space to analyze these materials. The work on Mound P could not have been done without the dedicated work from the staff of OAR and the members of the 2009 fall field school: Jeremy Henning, Robert Kolaczek, Dallas Manning, Tatiana Monroy, Justin Quinley, Jessica Robinson, Joseph Sherrill, Kelley Sommers and Andrew Winston. iii I would like to thank my peers within the Department of Anthropology for their input and constant scholarly deliberation that exercised my cognitive abilities and kept me thinking about the project at hand. Without the advice, support and help from my friends, I could not have gotten by: Jeremy Davis, Daniel LaDu, Paul Eubanks, Andrew Scruggs, Lauren Downs, Francois Dengah and Brooke Persons. Without the mentorship and friendship of other individuals, I would not have set upon this path with the support that only a few people can provide. From this vantage, the following people are as responsible for this project as I am: Dr. Shannon Hodge, Dr. Tanya Peres, Dr. Kevin E. Smith, Dr. Hugh Berryman, Emily Beahm, Jesse Tune, Lynn Funkhouser, Teresa Ingalls, Tom Schegelsberger, John Judkins, and the Schrader family. Finally, I would like to thank my family, Steve, Jan and Ryan Porth. My mother and father’s patient support has provided me with the ability to pursue the career that was right for me. I hope that this project can meet their expectations and make them proud. My brother Ryan helped to keep me in tune to the sports world that we both love dearly, making it possible to have a brief reprieve from work now and again without having to become entirely distracted. iv CONTENTS ABSTRACT……………………………………………………………..………………………..ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS……………………………………………………………………....iii LIST OF TABLES……………………………………….……………………………………….vi LIST OF FIGURES………………………………………………………………………………iv 1. RAISED GROUND…………………………………………………………………………….1 2. RESEARCH QUESTION, THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE AND RESEARCH BACKGROUND…………………….…………………………………….5 3. MOUND P FLANK AND SUMMIT EXCAVATIONS……………………………………...21 4. ANALYSIS OF EXCAVATED MATERIALS FROM MOUND P………………………….47 5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION………………………………………………………………86 6. RAZED STRUCTURE……………………………………………………………..………..118 REFERENCES CITED………………………………………………………………………....122 APPENDIX A…………………………………………………………………………………..128 APPENDIX B…………………………………………………………………………………..149 APPENDIX C…………………………………………………………………………………..159 APPENDIX D…………………………………………………………………………………..161 v LIST OF TABLES 4.1. List of present ceramic types, Mound P……………………………………………………..55 4.2. List of non-vessel ceramic artifacts, Mound P………………………………………………68 4.3. List of projectile points, Mound P………………………………………………….……….74 4.4. List of unmodified stone, Mound P…………………………………………………………79 4.5. List of vertebrates, invertebrate and botanical remains by weight, Mound P…………….…82 4.6. List of modern materials, Mound P…………………………………………………..……..84 5.1. List of ceramic types. Flank Unit 1, Mound P………………………………………...…….88 5.2. List of diagnostic decorative modes and vessel forms. Flank Unit 1, Mound P…………….89 5.3. List of ceramic types. Flank Unit 2, Mound P…………………………………………...….93 5.4. List of diagnostic decorative modes and vessel forms. Flank Unit 2, Mound P…………….93 5.5. List of ceramic types. Summit plowzone, Mound P………………………………….……..94 5.6. List of diagnostic decorative modes and vessel forms. Summit plowzone, Mound P…...….94 5.7. List of flaked lithic. Flank Unit 1, Mound P…………………………………………..…….98 5.8. List of ground lithic. Flank Unit 1, Mound P……………………………………….………98 5.9. List of ground tools. Flank Unit 1, Mound P………………………………………………..98 5.10. List of all modified lithic. Flank Unit 2, Mound P…………………………………...……99 5.11. Summit plowzone and summit feature flaked lithic, Mound P…………………………..100 5.12. List of expedient flaked stone tools. Summit, Mound P……………………………….....101 5.13. Ground stone tools. Summit, Mound P…………………………………...………………101 5.14. List of greenstone, Mound P…………………………………….………………………..104 5.15. Materials recognized as a part of the pigment complex, Mound P………………….……105 vi 5.16. Flank Unit 1, daub by excavation level, Mound P………………………….…………….107 5.17. Flank Unit 2, daub by excavation level, Mound P…………………..……………………107 5.18. Summit, excavated daub, Mound P……………………………………………...……….108 vii LIST OF FIGURES 1.1. Map of Moundville in west-central Alabama………………………………………………...2 3.1. Mound P topographic map: (a) 2009 OAR western flank excavations; (b) 2009 summit excavations; (c) 1988 Driskell eastern flank excavations………………...22 3.2. Magnetometer survey data. Summit, Mound P…………………………………………..…26 3.3. Walker’s magnetometer survey interpretation. Summit, Mound P…………………………27 3.4. Natural mound strata. Flank Unit 1, Mound P………………………………………………30 3.5. Flank Unit 1 with excavation levels overlaying natural mound strata, Mound P………...…31 3.6. Natural mound strata. Flank Unit 2, Mound P……………………………………………....36 3.7. Flank Unit 2 with excavation levels overlaying natural mound strata, Mound P…………...37 3.8. Summit Block 1, Mound P……………………………………………………………….…41 4.1. Carthage Incised: (a and d) variety Lupton; (b and e) variety Fosters; (c and f) variety Akron. Multiple proveniences, Mound P…………………………………………....57 4.2. Moundville Engraved; (a-c) variety Hemphill; (d) variety Tuscaloosa. Multiple proveniences, Mound P……………………………………………………………………...59 4.3. Moundville Engraved, variety Jones, short-neck bowl……………………………………..60 4.4. Moundville Engraved, variety Jones…………………………………………………..……61 4.5. Alabama River Appliqué…………………………………………………………………....63 4.6. Decorative ceramic modes: (a, c and e) beaded rim; (b) notched lip; (d) jar handle with nodes; (f) frog effigy feature; (g) scalloped rim; (h and j) white filmed; (i and k) red-on-white filmed. Multiple proveniences, Mound P……………………………………..66 4.7. Ceramic disks: (a-b) burnished; (c, d and f) unburnished; (e) large disk sherd. Multiple proveniences, Mound P…………………………………………………………....69 4.8. Non-vessel ceramic: (a) decorated pendant fragment; (b) burnished pendant fragment; (c) ceramic ornament. Multiple proveniences, Mound P……………………………………69 viii 4.9. Two views of a ceramic pipe bowl fragment: left, exterior view; right, profile and interior view. Mound P………………………………………………………………...……70 4.10. Two views of a cylindrical object: left, exterior with scar on the left; right, interior with scar to the right. Mound P………………………………………………...….70 4.11. Expedient flaked tools, Mound P…………………………………………………..………73 4.12. Projectile points: (a, c, e and g) heat treated Tuscalsoosa gravel chert; (b) quartzite; (d) Bangor chert; (f) blue-grey Fort Payne chert. Multiple proveniences, Mound P………74 4.13. Ground lithic: (a) sandstone
Recommended publications
  • LITHIC ANALYSIS (01-070-391) Rutgers University Spring 2010

    LITHIC ANALYSIS (01-070-391) Rutgers University Spring 2010

    SYLLABUS LITHIC ANALYSIS (01-070-391) Rutgers University Spring 2010 Lecture days/hours: Thursday, 2:15-5:15 PM Lecture location: BioSci 206, Douglass Campus Instructors: Dr. J.W.K. Harris J.S. Reti, MA [email protected] [email protected] Office: BioSci, Room 203B Office: BioSci, Room 204C Office Hours: Friday 11:00 – 1:00 Office Hours: Thursday 1:00 – 3:00 COURSE DESCRIPTION: This course is an integrated course that incorporates theoretical, behavioral, and practical aspects of lithic technology. Lithic Analysis is an advanced undergraduate course in human and non-human primate stone technology. Each student is expected to already have taken an introductory course in human evolution, primatology, and/or archaeology. Lithic Analysis is a sub-discipline of archaeology. The focus is on the inferential potential of stone tools with regard to human behavior. Early human ancestors first realized the utility of sharp stone edges for butchery and other practices. Arguably, without the advent of stone tools human evolution would have taken a different path. Stone tools allowed early hominins efficient access to meat resources and provided as avenue for cognitive development and three-dimensional problem solving. This course will provide a three-fold approach to lithic analysis: 1) study of archaeological sites and behavioral change through time relative to lithic technological changes, 2) insight into the art of laboratory lithic analysis and methods employed to attain concrete, quantitative behavioral conclusions, and 3) extensive training in stone tool replication. Such training will provide students with both an appreciation for the skills of our ancestors and with personal skills that will allow for further research into replication and human behavior.
  • A Many-Storied Place

    A Many-Storied Place

    A Many-storied Place Historic Resource Study Arkansas Post National Memorial, Arkansas Theodore Catton Principal Investigator Midwest Region National Park Service Omaha, Nebraska 2017 A Many-Storied Place Historic Resource Study Arkansas Post National Memorial, Arkansas Theodore Catton Principal Investigator 2017 Recommended: {){ Superintendent, Arkansas Post AihV'j Concurred: Associate Regional Director, Cultural Resources, Midwest Region Date Approved: Date Remove not the ancient landmark which thy fathers have set. Proverbs 22:28 Words spoken by Regional Director Elbert Cox Arkansas Post National Memorial dedication June 23, 1964 Table of Contents List of Figures vii Introduction 1 1 – Geography and the River 4 2 – The Site in Antiquity and Quapaw Ethnogenesis 38 3 – A French and Spanish Outpost in Colonial America 72 4 – Osotouy and the Changing Native World 115 5 – Arkansas Post from the Louisiana Purchase to the Trail of Tears 141 6 – The River Port from Arkansas Statehood to the Civil War 179 7 – The Village and Environs from Reconstruction to Recent Times 209 Conclusion 237 Appendices 241 1 – Cultural Resource Base Map: Eight exhibits from the Memorial Unit CLR (a) Pre-1673 / Pre-Contact Period Contributing Features (b) 1673-1803 / Colonial and Revolutionary Period Contributing Features (c) 1804-1855 / Settlement and Early Statehood Period Contributing Features (d) 1856-1865 / Civil War Period Contributing Features (e) 1866-1928 / Late 19th and Early 20th Century Period Contributing Features (f) 1929-1963 / Early 20th Century Period
  • Plant Remains from the Smokemont Site in the Appalachian Mountains of North Carolina

    Plant Remains from the Smokemont Site in the Appalachian Mountains of North Carolina

    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Masters Theses Graduate School 8-2013 Plant Remains from the Smokemont Site in the Appalachian Mountains of North Carolina Gabrielle Casio Purcell [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons Recommended Citation Purcell, Gabrielle Casio, "Plant Remains from the Smokemont Site in the Appalachian Mountains of North Carolina. " Master's Thesis, University of Tennessee, 2013. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/2447 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Gabrielle Casio Purcell entitled "Plant Remains from the Smokemont Site in the Appalachian Mountains of North Carolina." I have examined the final electronic copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Master of Arts, with a major in Anthropology. Kandace D. Hollenbach, Major Professor We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: Gerald Schroedl, Michael Logan Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) i Plant Remains from the Smokemont Site in the Appalachian Mountains of North Carolina A Thesis Presented for the Master of Arts Degree The University of Tennessee, Knoxville Gabrielle Casio Purcell August 2013 ii Copyright © 2013 by Gabrielle Casio Purcell All rights reserved.
  • Durham E-Theses

    Durham E-Theses

    Durham E-Theses Neolithic and chalcolithic cultures in Turkish Thrace Erdogu, Burcin How to cite: Erdogu, Burcin (2001) Neolithic and chalcolithic cultures in Turkish Thrace, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/3994/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk NEOLITHIC AND CHALCOLITHIC CULTURES IN TURKISH THRACE Burcin Erdogu Thesis Submitted for Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. No quotation from it should be published without his prior written consent and information derived from it should be acknowledged. University of Durham Department of Archaeology 2001 Burcin Erdogu PhD Thesis NeoHthic and ChalcoHthic Cultures in Turkish Thrace ABSTRACT The subject of this thesis are the NeoHthic and ChalcoHthic cultures in Turkish Thrace. Turkish Thrace acts as a land bridge between the Balkans and Anatolia.
  • OAR Strategy (2020-2026)

    OAR Strategy (2020-2026)

    OAR Strategy 2020-2026 Deliver NOAA’s Future OAR Strategic Plan | 1 2 | OAR Strategic Plan Contents 4 Introduction 5 Vision and Mission 5 Values 6 Organization 8 OAR’s Changing Operating Landscape 10 Strategic Approach 13 Goals and Objectives 14 Explore the Marine Environment 15 Detect Changes in the Ocean and Atmosphere 16 Make Forecasts Better 17 Drive Innovative Science 18 Appendix I: Strategic Mapping 19 Appendix II: Congressional Mandates OAR Strategic Plan | 3 Introduction Introduction — A Message from Craig McLean Message from Craig McLean The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) was created to include a major Line Office, Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR), focused on determining the relationship between the atmosphere and the ocean. That task has been at the core of OAR’s work for the past half century, performed by federal and academic scientists and in the proud company of our other Line Offices of NOAA. Principally a research organization, OAR has contributed soundly to NOAA’s reputation as being among the finest government science agencies worldwide. Our work is actively improving daily weather forecasts and severe storm warnings, furthering public understanding of our climate future and the global role of the ocean, and helping create more resilient communities for a sound economy. Our research advances products and services that protect lives and livelihoods, the economy, and the environment. The research landscape of tomorrow will be different from that of today. There will likely be additional contributors to the sciences we study, including more involvement from the private sector, increased philanthropic participation, and greater academic integration.
  • Oar Manual(PDF)

    Oar Manual(PDF)

    TABLE OF CONTENTS OAR ASSEMBLY IMPORTANT INFORMATION 2 & USE MANUAL GLOSSARY OF TERMS 3 ASSEMBLY Checking the Overall Length of your Oars .......................4 Setting Your Adjustable Handles .......................................4 Setting Proper Oar Length ................................................5 Collar – Installing and Positioning .....................................5 Visit concept2.com RIGGING INFORMATION for the latest updates Setting Inboard: and product information. on Sculls .......................................................................6 on Sweeps ...................................................................6 Putting the Oars in the Boat .............................................7 Oarlocks ............................................................................7 C.L.A.M.s ..........................................................................7 General Rigging Concepts ................................................8 Common Ranges for Rigging Settings .............................9 Checking Pitch ..................................................................10 MAINTENANCE General Care .....................................................................11 Sleeve and Collar Care ......................................................11 Handle and Grip Care ........................................................11 Evaluation of Damage .......................................................12 Painting Your Blades .........................................................13 ALSO AVAILABLE FROM
  • Microlith® T Stir-In Pigment Preparations for Solvent-Based Coatings with High Transparency

    Microlith® T Stir-In Pigment Preparations for Solvent-Based Coatings with High Transparency

    Microlith® T Stir-in pigment preparations for solvent-based coatings with high transparency Key features Wood coating with ® ▪ Organic pigments Microlith T predispersed in a modified ▪ Easily incorporated into a rosin ester resin variety of solvents with ▪ Dry powder, low dust dissolvers or high-shear processing mixers without preliminary milling ▪ Small particle size and extremely narrow particle size ▪ Suitable for wood stains, distribution glazes and lacquers ▪ Excellent color strength, ▪ Combination with effect gloss, light fastness and pigments offers endless transparency, as well as styling opportunities outstanding dispersion Microlith® T Ideal for solvent-based coating systems Pigment Fastness to light Resistance to overlacquering Colour Product name Chemical type content Index Oak with Oak without Poly- Acid Nitro- [%] NC [3%]* NC [3%]* urethane curing cellulose Microlith® Black 0066 T P.Bk.7 Carbon black 33 7 7 5 5 5 Microlith® Yellow 2040 T P.Y.110 Isoindolinone 33 7 7 5 5 5 Microlith® Brown 3001 T P.BR.23 Azo condensation 30 7 7 5 5 5 Microlith® Red 3890 T P.R.144 Azo condensation 33 6 6 5 5 5 Microlith® Blue 7080 T P.B.15:3 Cu-phthalocyanine (β) 34 7 7 5 5 5 Cu-phthalocyanine Microlith® Green 8750 T P.G.7 33 7 7 5 5 5 halogenated * Concentration of the pigment preparation in the applied stain Guidelines for incorporation An important factor in the incorporation of Microlith® T pigment preparations into surface coatings is the solubility of the carrier resin in the various types of solvents normally used. Microlith® T pigment preparations have: ▪ very good dispersibility in aromatic hydrocarbons and chlorinated hydrocarbons ▪ good dispersibility in esters, ketones and glycol ethers ▪ limited dispersibility in aliphatic hydrocarbons and higher alcohols ▪ no dispersibility in water, methanol and ethanol Compatibility with solvents and binders Formulation guidelines for the preparation The carrier resin in Microlith® T pigment preparations has of a wood stain good compatibility with many binders and additives.
  • OAR 437, Division 2, Subdivision Z, Asbestos

    OAR 437, Division 2, Subdivision Z, Asbestos

    Oregon Administrative Rules Oregon Occupational Safety and Health Division ASBESTOS Z OAR 437, DIVISION 2 GENERAL OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH RULES SUBDIVISION Z – TOXIC AND HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES 437-002-0360 Adoption by Reference. In addition to, and not in lieu of, any other safety and health codes contained in OAR Chapter 437, the Department adopts by reference the following federal regulations printed as part of the Code of Federal Regulations, 29 CFR 1910, in the Federal Register: (2) 29 CFR 1910.1001 Asbestos, published 3/26/12, FR vol. 77, no. 58, p. 17574. These standards are on file at the Oregon Occupational Safety and Health Division, Oregon Department of Consumer and Business Services, and the United States Government Printing Office. Stat. Auth.: ORS 654.025(2) and 656.726(4). Stats. Implemented: ORS 654.001 through 654.295. Hist: APD Admin. Order 13-1988, f. 8/2/88, ef. 8/2/88 (Benzene). APD Admin. Order 14-1988, f. 9/12/88, ef. 9/12/88 (Formaldehyde). APD Admin. Order 18-1988, f. 11/17/88, ef. 11/17/88 (Ethylene Oxide). APD Admin. Order 4-1989, f. 3/31/89, ef. 5/1/89 (Asbestos-Temp). APD Admin. Order 6-1989, f. 4/20/89, ef. 5/1/89 (Non-Asbestiforms-Temp). APD Admin. Order 9-1989, f. 7/7/89, ef. 7/7/89 (Asbestos & Non-Asbestiforms-Perm). APD Admin. Order 11-1989, f. 7/14/89, ef. 8/14/89 (Lead). APD Admin. Order 13-1989, f. 7/17/89, ef. 7/17/89 (Air Contaminants).
  • Archaeology Activity Pack

    Archaeology Activity Pack

    Archaeology activity pack Primary KS2 Stone Age to Iron Age 1 All images and content © Museum of London 2015. This sheet is designed to be edited by teachers. The museum cannot take responsibility for edited content. How does archaeology help us understand what life was like in prehistory? This series of activities looks at how archaeologists record and interpret objects to inform our understanding about life in the past. Pupils will: use clues to sort artefacts into categories consider how and why an archaeologist records accurately where things are found use images of artefacts to think about how groups of objects can give us information about the past suggest reasons why some of our activities leave traces when others do not consolidate prior learning about Stone Age hunter-gatherers understand that there were people living here before London existed. Activity 1 Sort it! Identifying different flint tools Activity 2 The archaeological jigsaw What can we learn from a group of objects? Activity 3 Case study: Three Ways Wharf Hunter-gatherers in Uxbridge Activity 4 Leaving traces Make a Stone Age tool Activity 5 Dig it! Archaeological dig record and field journal worksheets 2 All images and content © Museum of London 2015. This sheet is designed to be edited by teachers. The museum cannot take responsibility for edited content. Activity 1 Sort it! Identifying different flint tools Introduction Begin by showing your pupils a selection of brushes; a toothbrush, a dustpan and brush, a hairbrush, a paintbrush and a floor brush. Ask pupils: What do all these objects have in common? What is each one is used for? Although all the objects are brushes, they are all used to perform different tasks.
  • A Lesson in Stone: Examining Patterns of Lithic Resource Use and Craft-Learning in the Minas Basin Region of Nova Scotia By

    A Lesson in Stone: Examining Patterns of Lithic Resource Use and Craft-Learning in the Minas Basin Region of Nova Scotia By

    A Lesson in Stone: Examining Patterns of Lithic Resource Use and Craft-learning in the Minas Basin Region of Nova Scotia By © Catherine L. Jalbert A thesis submitted to the School of Graduate Studies for partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts. Department of Archaeology Memorial University of Newfoundland May 2011 St. John’s Newfoundland Abstract Examining the Late Woodland (1500-450 BP) quarry/workshop site of Davidson Cove, located in the Minas Basin region of Nova Scotia, a sample of debitage and a collection of stone implements appear to provide correlates of the novice and raw material production practices. Many researchers have hypothesized that lithic materials discovered at multiple sites within the region originated from the outcrop at Davidson Cove, however little information is available on lithic sourcing of the Minas Basin cherts. Considering the lack of archaeological knowledge concerning lithic procurement and production, patterns of resource use among the prehistoric indigenous populations in this region of Nova Scotia are established through the analysis of existing collections. By analysing the lithic materials quarried and initially reduced at the quarry/workshop with other contemporaneous assemblages from the region, an interpretation of craft-learning can be situated in the overall technological organization and subsistence strategy for the study area. ii Acknowledgements It is a pleasure to thank all those who made this thesis achievable. First and foremost, this thesis would not have been possible without the guidance and support provided by my supervisor, Dr. Michael Deal. His insight throughout the entire thesis process was invaluable. I would also like to thank Dr.
  • Archaeologists Solve a 40-Year-Old Mystery? 2 Lay of the Land

    Archaeologists Solve a 40-Year-Old Mystery? 2 Lay of the Land

    INTERPRETING MISSISSIPPIAN ART • CONFRONTING A CONUNDRUM • JEFFERSON’S RETREAT american archaeologyFALL 2005 a quarterly publication of The Archaeological Conservancy Vol. 9 No. 3 MesaMesa VVerde’serde’s ANCIENTANCIENT WAWATERWORKSTERWORKS $3.95 Archaeological Tours led by noted scholars Invites You to Journey Back in Time Jordan (14 days) Libya (20 days) Retrace the route of Nabataean traders Tour fabulous classical cities including Leptis with Dr.Joseph A.Greene,Harvard Magna,Sabratha and Cyrene,as well as the Semitic Museum.We’ll explore pre-Islamic World Heritage caravan city Gadames,with ruins and desert castles,and spend a Sri Lanka (18 days) our scholars.The tour ends with a four-day week in and around Petra visiting its Explore one of the first Buddhist adventure viewing prehistoric art amidst tombs and sanctuaries carved out of kingdoms with Prof.Sudharshan the dunes of the Libyan desert. rose-red sandstone. Seneviratne,U.of Peradeniya. Discover magnificent temples and Ancient Capitals palaces,huge stupas and colorful of China (17 days) rituals as we share the roads Study China’s fabled past with Prof. with elephants and walk in Robert Thorp,Washington U., the footsteps of kings. as we journey from Beijing’s Imperial Palace Ethiopia and Eritrea (19 days) and Suzhou’s exquisite Delve into the intriguing history of gardens to Shanghai.We’ll Africa’s oldest empires with Dr. visit ancient shrines,world-class Mattanyah Zohar,Hebrew U.Visit ancient museums,Xian’s terra-cotta Axumite cities,Lalibela’s famous rock-cut warriors and the spectacular churches,Gondar’s medieval castles,and Longman Buddhist grottoes.
  • Archaeology As Restoration Ecology: a Model from Sunwatch

    Archaeology As Restoration Ecology: a Model from Sunwatch

    ARCHAEOLOGY AS RESTORATION ECOLOGY: A MODEL FROM SUNWATCH INDIAN VILLAGE/ARCHAEOLOGICAL PARK (33My57) A thesis presented to the faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences of Ohio University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Science Sara Rose DeAloia August 2004 This thesis entitled ARCHAEOLOGY AS RESTORATION ECOLOGY: A MODEL FROM SUNWATCH INDIAN VILLAGE/ARCHAEOLOGICAL PARK (33My57) BY SARA ROSE DeALOIA has been approved for the Program of Environmental Studies and the College of Arts and Sciences by Elliot Abrams Professor of Anthropology Leslie A. Flemming Dean, College of Arts and Sciences DeALOIA, SARA ROSE. M.S. August 2004. Environmental Studies Archaeology as Restoration Ecology: A Model from SunWatch Indian Village/ Archaeological Park (33My57)(87 pp.) Director of Thesis: Elliot Abrams This research is intended to demonstrate how SunWatch Indian Village/Archaeological Park presents possibilities for how restoration ecology and archaeology can augment and inform each other by looking at both the site and the environmental restoration at the site from an historical ecology perspective. There are two major themes of this work: first, the application of archaeological data to modern environmental issues and second, the importance of viewing landscapes as both natural and cultural phenomena which interact in a series of complex relationships throughout time. I present a comprehensive overview of the site, providing the paleothnobotanical data collected by previous researchers in order to show how such archaeological data can be used to inform restoration work. The research ends with a presentation of how SunWatch can provide a model for doing this work in other places, as well as a series of questions and criteria necessary for determining when and where it is appropriate.