University of Mississippi eGrove Electronic Theses and Dissertations Graduate School 2019 Households and Changing Use of Space at the Transitional Early Mississippian Austin Site Benjamin Garrett Davis University of Mississippi Follow this and additional works at: https://egrove.olemiss.edu/etd Part of the Anthropology Commons Recommended Citation Davis, Benjamin Garrett, "Households and Changing Use of Space at the Transitional Early Mississippian Austin Site" (2019). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 1570. https://egrove.olemiss.edu/etd/1570 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at eGrove. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of eGrove. For more information, please contact [email protected]. HOUSEHOLDS AND CHANGING USE OF SPACE AT THE TRANSITIONAL EARLY MISSISSIPPIAN AUSTIN SITE A Thesis presented in partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree of Masters of Arts in the Department of Sociology and Anthropology University of Mississippi by BENJAMIN GARRETT DAVIS May 2019 ABSTRACT The Austin Site (22TU549) is a village site located in Tunica County, Mississippi dating to approximately A.D. 1150-1350, along the transition from the Terminal Late Woodland to the Mississippian period. While Elizabeth Hunt’s (2017) masters thesis concluded that the ceramics at Austin emphasized a Late Woodland persistence, the architecture and use of space at the site had yet to be analyzed. This study examines this architecture and use of space over time at Austin to determine if they display evidence of increasing institutionalized inequality. This included creating a map of Austin based on John Connaway’s original excavation notes, and then analyzing this map within the temporal context of the upper Yazoo Basin. Based on five chronometric dates, reconstructed houses, and Hunt’s ceramic analyses from Austin’s pit features, this study created a chronology for Austin, identifying which households were likely the oldest at the site and how they relate to the rest of the village. This resulted in the identification of the oldest households excavated at the site, which may have established the mound as well as differentiated status at Austin. Additionally, this study places this analysis within the cultural context of the broader upper Yazoo Basin, displaying Austin’s changing role in this region during the Early Mississippian period. This study support’s Hunt’s conclusion that Austin is an example of “independent co-existence” in which the initial Late Woodland households at Austin adapted to changing regional circumstances while simultaneously maintaining and retaining many facets of their Late Woodland material culture. These changes, however, saw the inhabitants incorporating some typical traits of Mississippian sites, such as ii defensive stockades and status differentiation between households, in order to manage the rising tensions of a changing region. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First, I would like to recognize and thank my thesis committee, Dr. Maureen Meyers, Dr. Tony Boudreaux, and Dr. Jay Johnson. Throughout this process, they have always been available for consultation, continuously providing advice and direction. In particular, I would like to thank Dr. Meyers, my advisor and committee chair, for constant help and guidance in writing this thesis. Without her suggestions, edits, and direction, this thesis would not have been possible. Also, thank you Dr. Boudreaux for continuous help understanding the various statistical analyses and mapping involved in this thesis. Additionally, Dr. Jay Johnson provided his invaluable expertise and knowledge on the archaeology of the upper Yazoo Basin, Mississippi. Dr. Robbie Ethridge also provided immense help in the early stages of this thesis, providing indispensable advice on narrowing down this thesis topic, helping me to understand what question I was really trying to answer. Finally, I would like to extend a special thanks to John Connaway for his consistent and continuous availability and expertise throughout this process. Without his first hand experience and notes from Austin, none of this thesis would have been possible. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................... ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................ iv LIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................................................... viii LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................................... ix I. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 1 II. LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................................................... 5 The Archaeology of Structures and Households ......................................................................................... 5 The Woodland-Mississippian Transition Debate ..................................................................................... 13 The Regional Scale........................................................................................................................................... 21 The Southern Yazoo Basin and Natchez Bluffs .................................................................................................... 23 The Upper Yazoo Basin .............................................................................................................................................. 25 The Austin Site ................................................................................................................................................. 31 Summary ............................................................................................................................................................ 33 III. METHODS AND RESEARCH QUESTION .................................................................... 35 1991 Field Methods and Excavation ........................................................................................................... 35 Lab Methods ..................................................................................................................................................... 41 Data Input and Map Creation ...................................................................................................................... 41 Analysis .............................................................................................................................................................. 43 Research Question ........................................................................................................................................... 44 v Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................................... 48 IV. RESULTS .............................................................................................................................. 50 Features .............................................................................................................................................................. 50 Houses .............................................................................................................................................................................. 52 Pits ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 54 Stockades ......................................................................................................................................................................... 54 Postmolds ........................................................................................................................................................................ 55 Chronology ........................................................................................................................................................ 57 Chronometric Data ...................................................................................................................................................... 57 Superposition of Overlapping Structures and Pit Features ............................................................................ 61 House Group One ......................................................................................................................................................... 63 House Group Two ......................................................................................................................................................... 64 House Group Three ...................................................................................................................................................... 64 House Group Four ....................................................................................................................................................... 65 House Group Five........................................................................................................................................................