Presenting the First Chronometric Dates from Big Mound City, Florida
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
PRESENTING THE FIRST CHRONOMETRIC DATES FROM BIG MOUND CITY, FLORIDA Nathan R. Lawres, M.A., F.F.T.21, Matthew H. Colvin, M.A.2 1Department of Anthropology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611 2Department of Anthropology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602 The Belle Glade archaeological culture, situated within the Kissimmee-Okeechobee- Everglades (KOE) watershed, is a notably understudied cultural manifestation (Griffin 2002:140; Johnson 1991:1-3; Milanich 1994:281; Milanich and Fairbanks 1980:181). While numerous cultural resource management projects have been conducted in the region – primarily led by Robert S. Carr (Archaeological and Historical Conservancy) and the archaeologists working for the Seminole Tribe of Florida’s Tribal Historic Preservation Office – the majority of our knowledge-base is drawn from two major archaeological projects and several important theses and dissertations. The first is Matthew Stirling’s work at the Belle Glade and Big Mound City sites during the early portion of the 1930s (Stirling 1935) (Figure 1). This work, however, was not widely available until Gordon Willey’s publication of Excavations in Southeast Florida (1949). These detailed excavations predated the radiocarbon revolution, leading Willey to create the initial two-period cultural chronology of the region based entirely on the seriation derived from the Belle Glade site. However, the majority of the Big Mound City materials had been misplaced, which severely limited Willey’s interpretation of the site and Figure 1. Map detailing the Kissimmee-Okeechobee-Everglades (KOE) obscured his ability to definitively align this watershed (shaded area) and the sites mentioned in the text. important monumental site to his Belle Glade chronology (Willey 1949:73-77). William Sears’ (1982) work at the Fort Center site during of social and cultural change. This is troublesome because the the 1960s provides the other major source of information rates of change may vary dramatically from site to site. Two regarding this enigmatic archaeological culture. This important things are needed to unmask the presence of variation. First, a work refined Willey’s initial chronology with the addition of regional, rather than site-based or microscalar, perspective is a large dataset and a series of chronometric dates. Drawing on integral to achieving this goal. Second, chronometric data from the data he collected, Sears was able to create a four-period multiple sites throughout the region are needed to verify Sears’ chronology based on a tight-knit seriation of ceramic materials, chronology at the regional scale. As discussed further below, settlement patterns, the incorporation of imported materials our objective is to begin evaluating this chronology from a into the cultural repertoire, and construction activities. This regional perspective by collecting regional chronometric data. chronology has become the primary reference point for the It is important to note that subsequent to Sears’ (1982) regional culture history. We view this as problematic because a work at Fort Center, several archaeologists have already regional chronology extrapolated from a single archaeological begun addressing the Belle Glade archaeological culture site masks variation, which ultimately leads to a biased view from a regional perspective. First, Steven Hale (1984, Vol. 70 (1-2) The Florida Anthropologist March-June 2017 62 The Florida Anthropologist 2017 70 (1-2) 1989) and Scott Mitchell (1996) evaluated Belle Glade is problematic if we have as our goal to understand a regional subsistence patterns based on data obtained from several population in the archaeological past. This, however, has sites throughout the Kissimmee-Okeechobee-Everglades started to change, with chronometric dates from several sites watershed. Second, William Johnson (1991, 1996) assessed in the Kissimmee River Basin becoming available (Austin monumental constructions throughout the region by drawing 1996; Butler and Lawres 2014; Wilder et al. 2007), and with on the chronometric data from Fort Center as well as artifact the occupational chronology of the Everglades tree island associations from monumental features. Additionally, Johnson hammocks to the South being reported (Schwadron 2006, (1990, 1991) reevaluated the evidence for maize agriculture 2010). While the latter are not directly related to the Belle through sedimentological analysis at Fort Center, bringing Glade archaeological culture, they can aid in understanding Sear’s (1982) interpretations into question. Sears (1982:178) the early development and occupation of landscape features hypothesized that the Great Circle Complex - a series of that also are present in the Belle Glade region (see also circular ditch features - of Fort Center functioned as a drained Bernhardt 2011). Yet, the Okeechobee Basin has continued field agricultural system. This system required the ditch to to wallow in a dearth of chronometric assessment, with the maintain water flow to drain the interior field, which would only other reported chronometric data available being from have required periodic cleaning of the ditch itself to maintain themoluminescence dates on sand-tempered plain pottery with flow and the materials removed to be used as fertilizer for very high error ranges (Backhouse et al. 2014). the field. Johnson’s (1991:62-72) analysis demonstrates A second problem with the chronology of the region is that that Sears was correct in noting the need for the spodosols Sears’ (1982) chronological categories place a greater amount of the interior to require fertilizer for agriculture, but his of weight on ceramics than on other variables. Specifically, sedimentological analysis shows that the ditch was never they rely heavily on the variability of frequencies in diagnostic, cleaned and thus could not have maintained flow and drainage. extra-local ceramic types and changes in Belle Glade plain Thompson et al.’s (2013) recent work has further brought the wares (Griffin 2002; Johnson 1991; Milanich 1994; Sears agricultural interpretation into question. Third, Robert Austin 1982) that would be considered microvariables (sensu Hill (1997) considered lithic use behaviors in terms of economic 1977), such as shifts in lip shape and the thickness ratio of rims perspectives, showing that the Belle Glade peoples used lithic to lips (Cordell 1992, 2013; Porter 1951; Sears 1982). This materials in very strategic ways to maximize the use of a scarce makes it difficult to assess the temporal relationship of many material (see also Butler and Lawres 2014). Austin (1996) of the smaller sites in the region, which often have miniscule also further extended the Belle Glade cultural chronology, ceramic assemblages, if any at all. There are, however, more along with its ceramic sequence, into the Kissimmee River visible aspects of Belle Glade culture that have been argued to Basin, effectively demonstrating strong enough affiliations in have strict temporal associations. material culture to tie the two basins together archaeologically. Specifically, Johnson (1991, 1996) has proposed a While these studies have been essential for elucidating our chronology and typology of monumental constructions for understanding of the Belle Glade peoples by drawing on the region. He divides the architecture of the region into four the chronological data from a single site, they have also led primary types, each associated with one of the Belle Glade to a limited view of changes in culture, landscape use, and culture-historical periods. During the Belle Glade I period, architectural construction because, with the exception of which spans cal 1000 BC – AD 200 (Johnson 1991, 1996; Austin (1996), they relied solely on Sears’ chronometric data Thompson and Pluckhahn 2012), circular ditches emerged and extrapolated his chronology to the entire region rather as the prevalent monumental construction type. Based on than attempting to refine his chronology with new dates. chronometric data from Fort Center, these were being built Following these important regional studies, very few by 750-800 BC and possibly as early 1000 BC (Johnson archaeologists have ventured back into the Kissimmee- 1991, 1996; Thompson and Pluckhahn 2012). The Belle Okeechobee-Everglades watershed outside of the context of Glade II period, spanning cal. AD 200 – 1000 (Johnson 1991, cultural resource management surveys. It is only in the past 1996; Thompson and Pluckhahn 2012, 2014), witnessed the decade that academic archaeologists have returned to the emergence of the Type A circular-linear earthworks. These region to re-ignite work aimed at gaining a more thorough architectural features exhibit a midden-mound partially understanding of this archaeological culture. However, with enclosed by a semi-circular embankment, and from that semi- the exception of Carr et al. (1995), they too have focused circle a linear embankment, comprised of two parallel ridges, on Fort Center (Austin 2015; Thompson 2015; Pluckhahn projects outwards to terminate in a conical mound surrounded and Thompson 2012; Thompson and Pluckhahn 2012, 2014; on one side by a smaller semi-circular embankment (Figure 2a) Thompson et al. 2013). This work has contributed to shifting (Johnson 1991, 1996). The Belle Glade III period, enduring our understandings of Fort Center by elucidating the subtleties from cal. AD 1000 – 1513, exhibits a transformation of the of cultural change, illuminating the role of political and ritual Type A circular-linear earthworks.