Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 11-15-2018 The rbU an Archaeological Supersite Paradigm: Integrating Archaeology and HGIS into Heritage Management Andrea P. White Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons Recommended Citation White, Andrea P., "The rU ban Archaeological Supersite Paradigm: Integrating Archaeology and HGIS into Heritage Management" (2018). LSU Doctoral Dissertations. 4763. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/4763 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please [email protected]. The THE URBAN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SUPERSITE PARADIGM: INTEGRATING ARCHAEOLOGY AND HGIS INTO HERITAGE MANAGEMENT A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in The Department of Geography and Anthropology by Andrea Paige White B.A., University of Florida, 1997 M.A., College of William and Mary, 2002 December 2018 For my parents who first brought me to Louisiana and David Livingstone who helped preserve Louisiana’s heritage. ii Acknowledgements Although the dissertation can be a solitary endeavor, I am grateful for the many individuals who contributed their time and expertise to make it possible. Dr. Rebecca Saunders, who supervised this dissertation, guided and vastly improved my research. She endured the tedium of reading several drafts, offering insightful and excellent comments that helped crystalize my ideas. I appreciate her willingness to take on a part time, out-of-town student. Her patience and positive attitude have been exceptional. State Archaeologist, Dr. Chip McGimsey has been steadfast in his support for New Orleans archaeology. Our lengthy conversations on urban archaeology were instrumental in shaping many of the thoughts and conclusions presented herein. I am thankful for his friendship and intellect; without him, this research would not have been possible. Thank you to the other members of my committee, Dr. Andrew Sluyter and Dr. Michael Desmond, for their guidance, constructive comments, and support for my dissertation. This endeavor has been supported in many ways by the staff at the Louisiana Division of Archaeology. In addition to Chip McGimsey, Nancy Hawkins and Rachel Watson willingly shared data, as well as provided wonderful suggestions and encouragement during various stages of my research. It has been such a pleasure to work with dedicated archaeologists who are passionate about preserving Louisiana’s archaeological heritage. Not only did this project require the insight that only archivists can provide, it necessitated the logistical challenges of scanning historical maps at a high resolution for use in a GIS platform. I am indebted to those who went above and beyond to meet these challenges. Those that deserved recognition include: Rebecca Smith, Daniel Hammer, and Keely Merritt at The Historic New Orleans Collection; Greg Lambousy, Sarah-Elizabeth Gundlach, and Beth Sherwood at the Louisiana State Museum; and Irene Wainwright and Yvonne Loiselle at the City iii Archives at the New Orleans Public Library. On the Louisiana State University campus, John Anderson at the Cartographic Information Center, and Germain Bienvenu and Judy Bolton at the Special Collections, Hill Memorial Library deserve special thanks. This research grew out of a grant project I directed while at the University of New Orleans via the Greater New Orleans Archaeology Program (GNOAP). Support for a portion of my research stemmed directly from 2005 hurricane-recovery funds provided by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, through the Louisiana Office of Community Development, and the Louisiana Department of Culture, Recreation and Tourism, Office of Cultural Development, Division of Archaeology. The Department of Anthropology, School of Urban Planning and Regional Studies, University of New Orleans provided additional support. I appreciate the assistance by various university colleagues and administrative staff that fostered my work. In the GNOAP archaeology lab, Ben Shirtcliff provided indispensable GIS processing skills, while Susan Badon and Abraham Santa Cruz helped with the tedious GIS data entry. Finally, it is the ones closest that provided the most moral support. To my friends—my chosen family—I appreciate the joy, emotional boosts, and comic relief you all have delivered over the years. My family has always been my biggest cheerleaders. Larry, Susan, and Andrew White and the Savoie clan offered a constant supply of encouragement and love. I thank my parents for bringing me to Louisiana as a small child. It is where I formed my earliest memories and the state’s had a gravitational pull on me ever since. At home, Gumbo and Matanzas were sentinels and companions during the late-night writing process. Saving the best for last, my husband, Kenneth Savoie, is the one deserving the most praise. He is an amazing source of strength and reassurance. Despite the unfulfilled promise of LSU football season tickets, his support never wavered. Just this once, you get to enjoy seeing me wear purple and gold. iv Table of Contents Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ iii List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ vii List of Figures .............................................................................................................................. viii Abstract ............................................................................................................................................x Chapter 1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................1 The Urban Archaeological Supersite Paradigm .......................................................................... 3 Chapters ...................................................................................................................................... 8 Chapter 2. Urban Archaeology in the Historic City .....................................................................11 The Historic Urban Landscape Approach ................................................................................ 13 Challenges Discovering and Excavating the Urban Archaeological Supersite ........................ 16 Palimpsest: Urbanization and the Process of Creating the Supersite ....................................... 20 Toward a More Cohesive Archaeological Understanding of the Historic City ........................ 22 Conceptualizing the City’s Archaeology via the Urban Archaeological Supersite Paradigm . 26 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 33 Chapter 3. Using GIS to Examine and Manage the Past ..............................................................35 Archaeological Site-Location Models and the Power of GIS ................................................... 36 Historical Archaeology and GIS ............................................................................................... 40 Historical GIS (HGIS) .............................................................................................................. 42 Previous Archaeological Modeling in New Orleans ................................................................ 47 Conceptualizing Site Location in the Urban Archaeological Supersite ................................... 61 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 62 Chapter 4. Contextualizing the New Orleans Supersite ................................................................64 Archaeological and Historical Overview of New Orleans ....................................................... 64 Antecedents of New Orleans’ Urban Historical Archaeology and the Data Generated ........... 74 Physical Geography and Human-Environment Interaction in New Orleans ............................ 76 A Cartographic Overview of Urban Landscape Production in New Orleans ........................... 81 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 94 Chapter 5. The New Orleans Supersite Geodatabase Research Methods .....................................95 Raster Data: Historical Map Research and Turning Historical Maps into Digital Data ........... 97 Vector Data: Extracting Information from Historical Maps: .................................................. 109 Vector Data: Previous Archaeological Research and Collections .......................................... 121 Vector Data Limitations .......................................................................................................... 124 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................