Bladelet Polish: a Lithic Analysis of Spracklen (33GR1585), an Upland Hopewell Campsite
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
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. -
Visualizing Paleoindian and Archaic Mobility in the Ohio
VISUALIZING PALEOINDIAN AND ARCHAIC MOBILITY IN THE OHIO REGION OF EASTERN NORTH AMERICA A dissertation submitted to Kent State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Amanda N. Colucci May 2017 ©Copyright All rights reserved Except for previously published materials Dissertation written by Amanda N. Colucci B.A., Western State Colorado University, 2007 M.A., Kent State University, 2009 Ph.D., Kent State University, 2017 Approved by Dr. Mandy Munro-Stasiuk, Ph.D., Co-Chair, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Dr. Mark Seeman, Ph.D., Co-Chair, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Dr. Eric Shook, Ph.D., Members, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Dr. James Tyner, Ph.D. Dr. Richard Meindl, Ph.D. Dr. Alison Smith, Ph.D. Accepted by Dr. Scott Sheridan, Ph.D., Chair, Department of Geography Dr. James Blank, Ph.D., Dean, College of Arts and Sciences TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ……………………………………………………………………………..……...……. III LIST OF FIGURES ….………………………………………......………………………………..…….…..………iv LIST OF TABLES ……………………………………………………………….……………..……………………x ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS..………………………….……………………………..…………….………..………xi CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 STUDY AREA AND TIMEFRAME ........................................................................................................................ 3 1.1.1 Paleoindian Period ............................................................................................................................... -
IAU Division C Inter-Commission C1-C3-C4 Working Group for Archaeoastronomy and Astronomy in Culture Annual Report for 2019
IAU Division C Inter-Commission C1-C3-C4 Working Group for Archaeoastronomy and Astronomy in Culture Annual Report for 2019 Steven Gullberg (Chair) Javier Mejuto (Co-chair) Working Group Members (48 including Chair and Co-chair) Elio Antonello, G.S.D. Babu, Ennio Badolati, Juan Belmonte, Kai Cai, Brenda Corbin, Milan Dimitrijevic, Marta Folgueira, Jesus Galindo-Trejo, Alejandro Gangui, Beatriz García, César González-García, Duane Hamacher, Abraham Hayli, Dieter Herrmann, Bambang Hidayat, Thomas Hockey, Susanne Hoffmann, Jarita Holbrook, Andrew Hopkins, Matthaios Katsanikas, Ed Krupp, William Liller, Ioannis Liritzis, Alejandro Lopez, Claudio Mallamaci, Kim Malville, Areg Mickaelian, Gene Milone, Simon Mitton, Ray Norris, Wayne Orchiston, Robert Preston, Rosa Ros, Clive Ruggles, Irakli Simonia, Magda Stavinschi, Christiaan Sterken, Linda Strubbe, Woody Sullivan, Virginia Trimble, Ana Ulla, Johnson Urama, David Valls-Gabaud, Iryna Vavilova, Tiziana Venturi Working Group Associates (32) Bryan Bates, Patricio Bustamante, Nick Campion, Brian Davis, Margaret Davis, Sona Farmanyan, Roz Frank, Bob Fuller, Rita Gautschy, Cecilia Gomez, Akira Goto, Liz Henty, Stan Iwaniszewski, Olaf Kretzer, Trevor Leaman, Flavia Lima, Armando Mudrik, Andy Munro, Greg Munson, Cristina Negru, David Pankenier, Fabio Silva, Emilia Pasztor, Manuel Pérez-Gutiérrez, Michael Rappenglück, Eduardo Rodas, Bill Romain, Ivan Šprajc, Doris Vickers, Alex Wolf, Mariusz Ziółkowski, Georg Zotti 1 Objectives The IAU Working Group for Archaeoastronomy and Astronomy in Culture (WGAAC) continues from the 2015-2018 triennium and is in part a discussion and collaboration group for researchers in Archaeoastronomy and all aspects of Astronomy in Culture , and as well for others with interest in these areas. A primary motivation is to facilitate interactions between researchers, but the WG also has significant interest in promoting education regarding astronomy in culture in all respects. -
Middle and Late Archaic Mortuary Patterning: an Example from the Western Tennessee Valley
University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Masters Theses Graduate School 8-1977 Middle and Late Archaic Mortuary Patterning: An Example from the Western Tennessee Valley Ann L. Magennis University of Tennessee - Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes Part of the Anthropology Commons Recommended Citation Magennis, Ann L., "Middle and Late Archaic Mortuary Patterning: An Example from the Western Tennessee Valley. " Master's Thesis, University of Tennessee, 1977. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/1340 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 Ann L. Magennis entitled "Middle and Late Archaic Mortuary Patterning: An Example from the Western Tennessee Valley." 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. Fred H. Smith, Major Professor We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: William M. Bass, Richard L. Jantz, Charles H. Faulkner 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.) To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Ann L. -
Frontier History of Coshocton
Frontier History of Coshocton By Scott E. Butler, Ph. D. Frontier History of Coshocton First printing 2020 Library of Congress Control Number: 2020915741 Copyright 2020 Scott E. Butler Copyright of photographs, maps and illustrations remains with persons or institutions credited. All rights reserved. ISBN 978-0-578-75019-4 Printed by Carlisle Printing Sugarcreek, Ohio Cover art is a digital photo of an oil-on-canvas painting by the author’s father, Dr. John G. Butler, a veterinarian in Coshocton for many years. He enjoyed painting animals. Manufactured in the United States of America on acid-free paper. Open Your Eyes and Ears and Clear Your Mind and Listen to What I Have to Say – Adapted from customary opening words of northeast Native American conferences among tribes and nations and with white people in the 18th Century. Dedicated to the people of Coshocton, that present and future generations may know the truth about the grand history of their place in the world. Contents Page # Preface i Acknowledgements ii Illustrations iii Maps iv Terminology v Sources vi Chapter Page # 1. Introduction & the Pre-European Era 1 2. Mary Harris 21 3. Early Habitation of Ohio after 1701 40 4. The Conflict Begins 56 5. The War Years in Ohio 66 6. Recovery in Coshoctonia 78 7. Delaware Survival in Coshoctonia 107 8. Delaware Revival in Coshoctonia 118 9. Conversions and Conflicts 133 10. Coshoctonia on January 1, 1775 168 11. Resolution and Revolution 178 12. Lichtenau & New Leaders 197 13. Peace and War 209 14. Alliance and Breakdown 234 15. Fort Laurens 253 16. -
Archeological and Bioarcheological Resources of the Northern Plains Edited by George C
Tri-Services Cultural Resources Research Center USACERL Special Report 97/2 December 1996 U.S. Department of Defense Legacy Resource Management Program U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Construction Engineering Research Laboratory Archeological and Bioarcheological Resources of the Northern Plains edited by George C. Frison and Robert C. Mainfort, with contributions by George C. Frison, Dennis L. Toom, Michael L. Gregg, John Williams, Laura L. Scheiber, George W. Gill, James C. Miller, Julie E. Francis, Robert C. Mainfort, David Schwab, L. Adrien Hannus, Peter Winham, David Walter, David Meyer, Paul R. Picha, and David G. Stanley A Volume in the Central and Northern Plains Archeological Overview Arkansas Archeological Survey Research Series No. 47 1996 Arkansas Archeological Survey Fayetteville, Arkansas 1996 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Archeological and bioarcheological resources of the Northern Plains/ edited by George C. Frison and Robert C. Mainfort; with contributions by George C. Frison [et al.] p. cm. — (Arkansas Archeological Survey research series; no. 47 (USACERL special report; 97/2) “A volume in the Central and Northern Plains archeological overview.” Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 1-56349-078-1 (alk. paper) 1. Indians of North America—Great Plains—Antiquities. 2. Indians of North America—Anthropometry—Great Plains. 3. Great Plains—Antiquities. I. Frison, George C. II. Mainfort, Robert C. III. Arkansas Archeological Survey. IV. Series. V. Series: USA-CERL special report: N-97/2. E78.G73A74 1996 96-44361 978’.01—dc21 CIP Abstract The 12,000 years of human occupation in the Northwestern Great Plains states of Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, and South Dakota is reviewed here. -
Paleoindian Mobility Ranges Predicted by the Distribution of Projectile Points Made of Upper Mercer and Flint Ridge Flint
Paleoindian Mobility Ranges Predicted by the Distribution of Projectile Points Made of Upper Mercer and Flint Ridge Flint A thesis submitted to Kent State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Arts by Amanda Nicole Mullett December, 2009 Thesis written by Amanda Nicole Mullett B.A. Western State College, 2007 M.A. Kent State University, 2009 Approved by _____________________________, Advisor Dr. Mark F. Seeman _____________________________, Chair, Department of Anthropology Dr. Richard Meindl _____________________________, Dean, College of Arts and Sciences Dr. Timothy Moerland ii TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures ............................................................................................................................ v List of Tables ........................................................................................................................... v List of Appendices .................................................................................................................... iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................... vi Chapter I. Introduction ..................................................................................................................1 II. Background ...................................................................................................................5 The Environment.............................................................................................................5 -
Antiquity (August 2007)
Set the wild echoes flying By Jerry D. Moore Department of Anthropology, California State University Dominguez Hills, 1000 K Victoria Street, Carson, CA 90747, USA (Email: [email protected]) BARRY BLESSER & LINDA-RUTH SALTER. Spaces speak, The two volumes under review are you listening? Experiencing aural architecture. form a complementary pair of xiv+438 pages, 21 illustrations. 2007. Cambridge texts, although not a perfect (MA): Massachusetts Institute of Technology; 978-0- fit. Barry Blesser and Linda- 262-02605-5 hardback £25.95. CHRIS SCARRE & Ruth Salter's book, Spaces GRAEME LAWSON (ed.). Archaeoacoustics. x+126 Speak, Are You Listening?, is a pages, 68 illustrations, 5 tables. 2006. Cambridge: broad overview, an often en- McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research; 1- gaging introduction to aural 902937-35-X hardback £25. architecture and spatial Second only to scent as the most evanescent of acoustics. Archaeoacoustics, sensations, sound would seem particularly elusive of edited by Chris Scarre and archaeological inquiry. And yet — and obviously — Graeme Lawson, is a human life is inherently aural, and ancient sound is collection of conference papers intertwined in our species' evolution and social that present specific case existence. Throughout prehistory humans have studies about the creation extended the ambit of sound with instruments, of auditory spaces and, to a specially created spaces, and composed tonalities. lesser extent, the development of culturally For such reasons, at some level archaeology must formalised -
Ch. 4. NEOLITHIC PERIOD in JORDAN 25 4.1
Borsa di studio finanziata da: Ministero degli Affari Esteri di Italia Thanks all …………. I will be glad to give my theses with all my love to my father and mother, all my brothers for their helps since I came to Italy until I got this degree. I am glad because I am one of Dr. Ursula Thun Hohenstein students. I would like to thanks her to her help and support during my research. I would like to thanks Dr.. Maysoon AlNahar and the Museum of the University of Jordan stuff for their help during my work in Jordan. I would like to thank all of Prof. Perreto Carlo and Prof. Benedetto Sala, Dr. Arzarello Marta and all my professors in the University of Ferrara for their support and help during my Phd Research. During my study in Italy I met a lot of friends and specially my colleges in the University of Ferrara. I would like to thanks all for their help and support during these years. Finally I would like to thanks the Minister of Fournier of Italy, Embassy of Italy in Jordan and the University of Ferrara institute for higher studies (IUSS) to fund my PhD research. CONTENTS Ch. 1. INTRODUCTION 1 Ch. 2. AIMS OF THE RESEARCH 3 Ch. 3. NEOLITHIC PERIOD IN NEAR EAST 5 3.1. Pre-Pottery Neolithic A (PPNA) in Near east 5 3.2. Pre-pottery Neolithic B (PPNB) in Near east 10 3.2.A. Early PPNB 10 3.2.B. Middle PPNB 13 3.2.C. Late PPNB 15 3.3. -
2016 Athens, Georgia
SOUTHEASTERN ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS & ABSTRACTS OF THE 73RD ANNUAL MEETING OCTOBER 26-29, 2016 ATHENS, GEORGIA BULLETIN 59 2016 BULLETIN 59 2016 PROCEEDINGS & ABSTRACTS OF THE 73RD ANNUAL MEETING OCTOBER 26-29, 2016 THE CLASSIC CENTER ATHENS, GEORGIA Meeting Organizer: Edited by: Hosted by: Cover: © Southeastern Archaeological Conference 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS THE CLASSIC CENTER FLOOR PLAN……………………………………………………...……………………..…... PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS…………………………………………………………………….…..……. LIST OF DONORS……………………………………………………………………………………………….…..……. SPECIAL THANKS………………………………………………………………………………………….….....……….. SEAC AT A GLANCE……………………………………………………………………………………….……….....…. GENERAL INFORMATION & SPECIAL EVENTS SCHEDULE…………………….……………………..…………... PROGRAM WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 26…………………………………………………………………………..……. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 27……………………………………………………………………………...…...13 FRIDAY, OCTOBER 28TH……………………………………………………………….……………....…..21 SATURDAY, OCTOBER 29TH…………………………………………………………….…………....…...28 STUDENT PAPER COMPETITION ENTRIES…………………………………………………………………..………. ABSTRACTS OF SYMPOSIA AND PANELS……………………………………………………………..…………….. ABSTRACTS OF WORKSHOPS…………………………………………………………………………...…………….. ABSTRACTS OF SEAC STUDENT AFFAIRS LUNCHEON……………………………………………..…..……….. SEAC LIFETIME ACHIEVEMENT AWARDS FOR 2016…………………….……………….…….…………………. Southeastern Archaeological Conference Bulletin 59, 2016 ConferenceRooms CLASSIC CENTERFLOOR PLAN 6 73rd Annual Meeting, Athens, Georgia EVENT LOCATIONS Baldwin Hall Baldwin Hall 7 Southeastern Archaeological Conference Bulletin -
Research Designs for Hawaiian Archaeology
Research Designs for Hawaiian Archaeology Research Designs for Hawaiian Archaeology Agriculture, Architecture, Methodology Thomas S. Dye, editor Special Publication 3 Society for Hawaiian Archaeology All rights reserved. Copyright © 2010 by Society for Hawaiian Archaeology. Published in 2010 in the United States of America by Society for Hawaiian Archaeology, P.O. Box 23292, Honolulu, HI 96823. Contents List of Figures vii List of Tables ix 1 Watershed: Testing the Limited Land Hypothesis Robert J. Hommon 1 2 Traditional Hawaiian Surface Architecture: Absolute and Rel- ative Dating Thomas S. Dye 93 3 Lady Mondegreen’s Hopes and Dreams: Three Brief Essays on Inference in Hawaiian Archaeology Dave Tuggle 157 Index 185 v List of Figures 2.1 Map of the Hawaiian Islands . 96 2.2 Oblique schematic of Kaneaki Heiau . 98 2.3 Plan of site 50–10–04–22268 ................... 104 2.4 Interior of the U-shape enclosure at site 50–10–04–22268 . 105 2.5 Panoramic view of site 50–10–04–22268 ............ 106 2.6 Hypothetical stratigraphic section . 110 2.7 Bayesian calibration yields interpretable results . 113 2.8 Deduction and induction . 115 2.9 Plan of site 50–10–04–22119 .................... 121 2.10 Dated enclosure at site 50–10–04–22119 ............ 122 2.11 Plan of site 50–10–04–22201 ................... 124 2.12 Plan of site 50–10–04–22248 ................... 125 2.13 Plan of site 50–50–17–1089 .................... 127 2.14 Plan of site 50–50–17–1088 .................... 128 2.15 Estimated ages of construction events . 132 2.16 Plan of H¯apaiali‘i Heiau . -
Managing Lithic Scatters and Sites
Managing Lithic Scatters and Sites Archaeological guidance for planning authorities and developers 0 Managing Lithic Scatters and Sites: Archaeological guidance for planning authorities and developers Summary Lithic scatters and sites are an important archaeological resource that can provide valuable insights into prehistory. Most commonly found as scatters of worked stone, usually suspended in modern ploughsoil deposits, which have been disturbed from their original archaeological context through ploughing. Undisturbed lithic sites can also be found through further evaluation and excavations, where lithics have been sealed by cover deposits or preserved in sub-surface features/horizons. Lithic scatters can represent a palimpsest of activity, sometimes containing several technologies from different archaeological periods. Consequently, the value of lithic scatters as a source for investigating past behaviour has often been undervalued. However, in many cases, especially for sites dating from the Palaeolithic period through to the Bronze Age, lithic scatters are likely to represent the only available archaeological evidence of past human activity and subsistence strategies. By studying and understanding their formation, spatial distribution and technological attributes, we can get closer to understanding the activities of the people who created these artefacts. Lithic scatters are often perceived as being particularly problematic from a heritage resource and development management perspective, because the standard archaeological methodologies presently employed are often not sufficiently subtle to ensure their effective identification and characterisation (Last 2009). This can either lead to an unquantified loss of important archaeological evidence, or the under-estimation of the magnitude of a site’s scale and importance, leading to missed research opportunities or, in a planning/development context, potentially avoidable expense, delay and inconvenience.