Florida State University Libraries Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations The Graduate School 2019 A Preliminary Analysis of Artifacts and Area Usage Associated with the Spanish Fort at San Luis de Talimali (8LE4), Leon CDaovidu J. n(Dtavyid, JFasolno) Kroirdkuac Follow this and additional works at the DigiNole: FSU's Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected] FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES A PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS OF ARTIFACTS AND AREA USAGE ASSOCIATED WITH THE SPANISH FORT AT SAN LUIS DE TALIMALI (8LE4), LEON COUNTY, FLORIDA By DAVID J. KORKUC A Thesis submitted to the Department of Anthropology in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science 2019 David J. Korkuc defended this thesis on April 9, 2019. The members of the supervisory committee were: Tanya M. Peres Professor Directing Thesis Rochelle A. Marrinan Committee Member Jayur M. Mehta Committee Member The Graduate School has verified and approved the above-named committee members, and certifies that the thesis has been approved in accordance with university requirements. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank the professors and staff of the Florida State University Department of Anthropology for their guidance, patience, and companionship. I must also thank Jerry Lee, senior archaeologist at Mission San Luis. Not only did he allow me into his lab and grant me access to the materials, his oversight of my analysis has made me a more knowledgeable archaeologist of Spanish-mission era and Apalachee Indian materials. To Michelle Gray, fellow FSU anthropology graduate student, whose access to and knowledge of ArcGIS allowed me to produce the artifact distribution maps in Chapter 4. To my wife Sara, who shared late nights and long weekend hours, anniversary getaways, vacation and poolside reading time, all by my side as we completed our post-graduate education together. To my kids who always give me a reason to be a good role model. And to my parents who waited a long time to see me get my college degree. Without the support of all of these people, none of this would have been possible. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables ...................................................................................................................................v List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ vi Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... ix 1. HISTORY AND BACKGROUND OF SAN LUIS DE TALIMALI (8LE4) ............................1 2. FROM TREASURE HUNTING TO ARCHAEOLOGY: AN OVERVIEW OF INVESTIGATIONS AT SAN LUIS DE TALIMALI (8LE4) ........................................................8 3. THE 1998-2002 EXCAVATIONS IN THE SAN LUIS FORT COMPLEX ...........................20 4. RESULTS OF ARTIFACT ANALYSIS ..................................................................................30 5. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS FROM CONTEMPORARY SPANISH FORTS IN THE SOUTHEASTERN UNITED STATES ....................................................................................49 6. CONCLUSIONS .......................................................................................................................65 APPENDIX A: FIELD SAMPLE LOG WITH CORRESPONDING ARTIFACT WEIGHTS EXCAVATED FROM BLOCK 4/FORT SAN LUIS ...................................................................68 References ......................................................................................................................................75 Biographical Sketch .......................................................................................................................78 iv LIST OF TABLES 1 Combined weight and artifact categories from analyzed field samples ..................................31 2 Non-Aboriginal artifacts and counts, Fort San Marcos de Apalachee (8WA26), Wakulla County, Florida ........................................................................................................................52 3 Non-Aboriginal artifacts and counts, Fort Apalachicola (1RU101), Russell County, Alabama ...................................................................................................................................55 4 Artifact and situado items in Swann’s “Arms” comparative inventory list; Archaeological record on the left, historical record on the right .............................................................................61 v LIST OF FIGURES 1 Modified from the 1705 map made during Adm. Landeche’s survey of the Apalachee Province .....................................................................................................................................5 2 Modified from the 1778 Purcell-Stuart map of Tallahassee ......................................................6 3 John Griffin (kneeling) conducting the first excavations at the Fort San Luis complex .........10 4 Fragment of iron cannon from Excavation Unit “O”, 31cm long ............................................10 5 Documented excavations within the San Luis fort complex from 1948 through 1993 ...........11 6 Distribution of aboriginal pottery from auger tests..................................................................14 7 Distribution of Spanish pottery and colonowares ....................................................................14 8 Distribution of burned clay and daub.......................................................................................15 9 Comparison of Williams’ and Landeche’s observations of the fort ........................................16 10 Locations of the 1989 soil surveys and the 1990 excavation of the southern moat.................17 11 1993 excavations within the Fort San Luis complex ...............................................................18 12 Final 2003 blockhouse excavation map ...................................................................................21 13 2003 excavation map of entire fort complex ...........................................................................23 14 Overhead picture collage of the Fort San Luis excavation area, looking to the east ...............24 15 Profile of the collapsed western wall of the blockhouse, facing north ....................................25 16 Standard artifact analysis log sheet used by the Mission San Luis archaeology lab ...............29 17 Fort San Luis artifact categories by weight in grams ..............................................................32 18 Military artifact distribution throughout project area. Examples of recovered military artifacts are shown in Figures 25 – 32. From the distribution patterns shown, areas along the southeastern wall of the blockhouse contain the highest concentration of military artifacts and may indicate a possible armory area ........................................................................................35 19 Olive jar distribution in grams throughout project area. While olive jar sherds were recovered from all analyzed areas of the blockhouse, the northeast corner contained the largest concentration, indicating a possible storeroom or pantry ........................................................36 vi 20 Colonoware distribution throughout project area, showing high concentrations in the northeast corner. Colonoware was based on European styles but manufactured locally ........37 21 Earthenware distribution throughout project area. Earthenware pottery was manufactured in Europe and transported to the New World but is less common than olive jar. No earthenware was recovered from the analyzed units of the southwest bastion ............................................38 22 Majolica distribution throughout project area. Only small amounts of majolica were recovered from the area of the fort ..........................................................................................39 23 Metal distribution throughout project area. Metal was recovered from every excavation unit at the fort ..................................................................................................................................40 24 Glass distribution throughout project area. The most common type of glass recovered was hand-blown green glass............................................................................................................41 25 Personal artifacts distribution throughout project area. High concentrations of personal artifacts along the southeast wall of the fort may indicate sleeping quarters or other living spaces .......................................................................................................................................42 26 Brass bell fragment. It may be possible to trace the decorations to other sites or to the manufacturer ............................................................................................................................43 27 6-lb iron shot, used with Spanish “Falcon” cannons during the seventeenth century .............43 28 Examples of lead shot. The larger two were probably used with mounted swivel guns, while the smaller caliber would have been fired from a flintlock musket .........................................44 29 Iron key found on the western end of the blockhouse .............................................................44 30 Iron ferrule, used to cap the bottom end