A Comparative Spatial Analysis of Two Communities from the Hickory Ground Site in Wetumpka, Alabama by Kelly M. Ervin A thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Auburn University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Masters of Science in Geography Auburn, Alabama December 13, 2014 Keywords: Creek Native American, Protohistoric, Community, GIS, Spatial Analysis, Culture Change Copyright by Kelly M. Ervin Approved by Philip L. Chaney, Chair, Associate Professor of Geography Yingru Li, Assistant Professor of Geography John W. Cottier, Associate Professor of Anthropology Abstract This thesis presents analyses on the intra-site spatial arrangement of two communities from the Hickory Ground site, 1EE89, in Elmore County, Alabama. Spatially referenced archaeological datasets of a Protohistoric community and a Historic Creek community are compared to investigate how the adaptive actions of community members structured the spatial patterning of the town. Using Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and field maps taken during the 2002-2007 archaeological excavations of the Hickory Ground site, I present an 18 acre map with over 9,000 features. Statistical tests suggest Protohistoric structures are randomly nucleated around the community center, and Historic Creek structures are clustered into groups scattered away from the community center. The research presented here utilizes the archaeological community as the fundamental unit of analysis to evaluate social meaning from spatial attributes and contributes to a wider understanding of the cultural changes encountered by Native Americans during the Historic Period. ii Acknowledgements Many years of hard work went into the excavations of the Hickory Ground site under the supervision of Dr. John Cottier and Dr. Craig Sheldon. This thesis would not be possible without their efforts, nor would it have been possible without the funding provided by the Poarch Band of Creek Indians. I thank Dr. Philip Chaney for accepting me into the Geology and Geography program as my thesis committee Chair. He taught me a skill no other professor has, and that was how to “tame the dragon.” I also thank Dr. Yingru Li for taking time away from her summer research to help with the spatial statistics presented in this thesis. I acknowledge Dr. Ashraf Uddin, GPO of the Geology and Geography Department, for playing a primary role of my acceptance into this graduate program. I will always think of him and his dove, Rodinia. Thank you to all Auburn University students and faculty members who either directly or indirectly influenced this work. I would also like to thank Craig Sheldon, Vincas Steponaitis, Kathryn Braund, Cameron Wesson, Jon Marcoux, and Chris Rodning for answering any question I had with great concern. I must show gratitude for my Grandpa, Vincent Paul Benedetti, who taught me how to canoe, fish, and grow dahlias. He was the first to teach me about Native American culture. The many years he spent working as an underwater physicist for the U.S. Navy in Orlando, Florida inspired me to write this thesis. iii Table of Contents Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... ii Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................... .iii List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. vi List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... vii Chapter 1 Introduction .....................................................................................................................1 1.1 Hypotheses………………………..……………………………………………….3 Chapter 2 The Socio-geographic Structure ......................................................................................4 2.1 A Brief Summary of Spatial Analyses in Archaeological Studies………………..6 2.2 Making Room for an Intra-Site Perspective………………………………………7 2.3 Conceptualizing the Archaeological Community ……..………………………….8 2.4 Agency in Action at the Community Level…………..……..…………………….9 Chapter 3 Study Site: The Hickory Ground (1EE89) ....................................................................10 3.1 The Protohistoric Tradition……………..………………………………..………12 3.2 The Historic Creek Tradition…………………………………………………….13 3.3 Hickory Ground in the Ethnohistoric Record……………………………………15 iiii 3.4 The Creek Town Plan……….……………………………………………………17 Chapter 4 Methods .........................................................................................................................20 4.1 The Dataset: 1EE89 Field Maps Collection………………………………….......21 4.2 From the Ground to GIS: Digitizing the Hickory Ground site……………..........22 4.3 Projections and Transformation………………………………………………….27 4.4 Calculating the Geodetic Centroid for Archaeological Features………………...27 4.5 The Nearest Neighbor Statistic…………………………………………………..30 4.6 The Standard Distance Statistic………………………………………………….32 Chapter 5 Results and Discussion ..................................................................................................34 5.1 Test Results: Mean Center, Nearest Neighbor, and Standard Distance………….34 5.1.1 Mean Center Results……………………………………………………..34 5.1.2 The Nearest Neighbor Results…………………………………………...37 5.1.3 Standard Distance Results……………………………………………….40 5.2 Synthesizing the Sociospatial…………………...……………………………….44 5.3 The Protohistoric Community……...…………………………………………….49 5.4 The Historic Creek Community………………………………………………….50 5.5 Finding Common Ground: The Cherokee and Creek Community ………...…....54 Chapter 6 Summary and Conclusions ............................................................................................56 6.1 Future Research………………………………………………………………….57 References ......................................................................................................................................61 v List of Tables Table 1 Projected Feature Average Dimensions and Coordinates………………………..30 Table 2 Mean Center Results for Structures……………………………………………...35 Table 3 Mean Center Results for Structures and Features………………………………..35 Table 4 Protohistoric Standard Distance Results (1 Standard Deviation)……….……….40 Table 5 Historic Creek Standard Distance Results (1 Standard Deviation)……………...40 Table 6 Protohistoric Standard Distance Results (2 Standard Deviations)……….….…...41 Table 7 Historic Creek Standard Distance Results (2 Standard Deviations)……………..41 vi List of Figures Figure 1 The Socio-geographic Theoretical Diagram…………………………....................5 Figure 2 The Hickory Ground site shown on the Wetumpka SW Quadrangle……...…….11 Figure 3 William Bartram’s Drawing of the Apalachicola Headman’s House……………18 Figure 4 William Bartram’s Plan of the Muscogee or Upper Creek Town……………….19 Figure 5 Methodology Flow Chart………………………………………………………...21 Figure 6 60 x 60 cm 1EE89 Field Map Example………………………………………….22 Figure 7 A Series of Geo-Corrected Field Maps…………………………………………..23 Figure 8 The Geo-referencing Process in ArcMap………………..……………………...24 Figure 9 Map showing all Geo-referenced and Projected Features from 1EE89…..……...26 Figure 10 Map showing Spatially Adjusted Structures on the Surveyor’s Grid………...….28 Figure 11 Map of 1EE89 and Features on the Wetumpka SW 2006 aerial image……….....29 Figure 12 The Nearest Neighbor Statistic…………………………………………………..31 Figure 13 The Standard Distance Statistic………………………………………………….32 Figure 14 Mean Center Results……………………………………………………………..36 Figure 15 Protohistoric Average Nearest Neighbor Summary…………………….……….38 Figure 16 Historic Creek Average Nearest Neighbor Summary……………………………39 Figure 17 Standard Distance Results (1 Standard Deviation)………………………………42 vii Figure 18 Standard Distance Results (2 Standard Deviations)……………………………..43 Figure 19 The Protohistoric Occupation showing the Public Council House, Feat. 495…..48 Figure 20 The Historic Creek Occupation.............................................................................48 Figure 21 An Historic Creek House Compound……………………………………………52 viii Chapter 1 Introduction Aboriginal culture in the American Southeast encountered significant changes in response to Euro-American expansion and colonization during the eighteenth and early nineteenth-centuries (Ashley 1988; Ethridge 1997; Ethridge and Hudson 2002; Hudson 1976; Marcoux 2008, 2009, 2010; Marcoux et al. 2013; Martin 1994; Milner 1980; Rodning 2002, 2007; Smith 1987; Waselkov 1990; Waselkov et al. 1985; Wesson 2008). At the archaeological site 1EE89, or the Historic Creek Indian town known as the Hickory Ground, a reorganization coincided with European contact. These cultural changes are represented spatially in the way people constructed and organized their local communities. The research offered by this thesis diachronically considers the effect of culture change on a Protohistoric community and a Historic Creek community by sampling geographic distance in a theoretically social, political, and economic way to explain the internal distribution patterns of archaeological features and structures. The archaeological remains excavated from the Hickory Ground site are remnants not only of past social realities, but also of past spatial realities. Artifact and feature assemblages are indicators of human activities and demonstrate social organization within a spatially patterned manner.