Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T04:45:28.566Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Determining Site Size and Structure: A Fort Ancient Example

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Robert A. Cook  and
Jarrod Burks
Robert A. Cook
Affiliation:
The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio (cook.426@osu.edu)
Jarrod Burks
Affiliation:
Ohio Valley Archaeology, Inc., Columbus, Ohio (jarrodburks@ovacltd.com)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A basic problem in archaeological research is determining site size and structure. In this paper we develop an approach that sequentially employs several survey techniques, including aerial photography, magnetic gradiometry, magnetic susceptibility, and shovel testing in the context of the Wildcat site (33My499), a Fort Ancient habitation site located near Dayton, Ohio. Defining site size and structure was a challenge at Wildcat since it is located in an agricultural field that has not been plowed for many years. Magnetic susceptibility and close-interval shovel testing worked well to define the basic site structure, and magnetic gradiometry and targeted magnetic anomaly excavations efficiently revealed a series of features. Alone, each of the methods produced somewhat misleading data regarding site size and structure, but together they revealed a much smaller site than originally anticipated.

Resumen

Resumen

Un problema básico de la investigación arqueológica es determinar la extensión y estructura de los sitios. En este artículo, desarrollamos una metodología que aplica un enfoque secuencial de varias técnicas de prospección que incluye la fotografìa aérea, los métodos gravimétricos, la susceptibilidad magnética y la excavación de sondeos. Esta metodología se aplicó en el sitio Wildcat (33My499), que es un antiguo fuerte habitacional ubicado cerca de Dayton, Ohio. La determinación de la extensión y la estructura fue complicada en Wildcat por su ubicación dentro de un campo agrícola que nofue sembrado por varios años. La susceptibilidad magnética y los sondeos de excavación intensivos documentaron bien la estructura básica del sitio. Los métodos gravimétricos y las excavaciones enfocadas en las anomalias magnéticas descubrieron una serie de elementos de una manera eficiente. Cada método por sí solo produjo datos que fueron un poco confusos con respecto a la extensión y a la estructura del sitio, pero juntos nos revelaron un sitio mucho más pequeño que el esperado.

Type
Reports
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 76 , Issue 1 , January 2011 , pp. 145 - 162
Copyright
Copyright © Society for American Archaeology 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References Cited

Banning, E. B. 2002 Archaeological Survey. Springer, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bevan, Bruce W. 1998 Geophysical Exploration for Archaeology: An Introduction to Geophysical Exploration. Special Report No. 1. Midwest Archeological Center, National Park Service, Lincoln, Nebraska.Google Scholar
Brady-Rawlins, Kathy 2007 The O. C. Voss Site: Reassessing What We Know about the Fort Ancient Occupation of the Central Scioto Drainage and its Tributaries. PhD dissertation, Department of Anthropology, The Ohio State University, Columbus.Google Scholar
Brose, David S. 1982 The Archaeological Investigation of a Fort Ancient Community Near Ohio Brush Creek, Adams County, Ohio. Kirtlandia 34:1–69.Google Scholar
Brose, David S., and White, Nancy M. 1983 Recent Data on Fort Ancient Occupation in the Ceasar Creek Valley, Southwestern Ohio. West Virginia Archaeologist 35:3–26.Google Scholar
Burks, Jarrod 2005a Geophysical Survey. In Archaeological Investigations of Sites 33Co38 (Phase II) and 33Co874 (Phase II & II) Columbiana County, Ohio, edited by A. Pecora and S. Biehl, pp. 37-57. OVAC Contract Report #2005-03. Report on file, Ohio Historic Preservation Office, Columbus.Google Scholar
Burks, Jarrod 2005b The Magnetic Structure of Ohio’s Past: Summarizing Three Years of Intensive Ground Truthing Data. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Archaeological Conference, Dayton, Ohio.Google Scholar
Burks, Jarrod 2007 Magnetic Anomaly Verification (Ground Truthing) on Prehistoric Sites in Ohio. Poster presented at the 72nd annual meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Austin, Texas.Google Scholar
Burks, Jarrod 2008 Geophysical Survey at the Heckleman Site (33ER14), A Woodland and Late Prehistoric Site in Erie County, Ohio. Contract Report # 2008-61. Ohio Valley Archaeology, Inc. Report on file, Cleveland Museum of Natural History, Archaeology Department.Google Scholar
Burks, Jarrod, Pederson, Jennifer, Willsey, Lynette, Walter-Gagliano, Dawn, and Brady-Rawlins, Kathy 2004 New Discoveries Right in Our Front Yard: Preliminary Results of Recent Research at Mound City Group. Hopewell Archaeology Newsletter 6(1).Google Scholar
Clay, R. Berle 2001 Complementary Geophysical Survey Techniques: Why Two Ways Are Always Better Than One. Southeastern Archaeology 20:31–43.Google Scholar
Clark, Anthony J. 1996 Seeing beneath the Soil (2 nd edition). Batsford, London.Google Scholar
Cook, Robert A. 2007 Single Component Sites with Long Sequences of Radiocarbon Dates: The SunWatch Site and Middle Fort Ancient Village Growth. American Antiquity 72:439–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, Robert A. 2008 SunWatch: Fort Ancient Development in the Mississippian World. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.Google Scholar
Dalan, Rinita A. 2008 A Review of the Role of Magnetic Susceptibility in Archaeogeophysical Studies in the USA: Recent Developments and Prospects. Archaeological Prospection 15:1–31.Google Scholar
Dalan, Rinita A., and Banerjee, Subir K. 1998 Solving Archaeological Problems Using Techniques of Soil Magnetism. Geoarchaeology 13:3–36.Google Scholar
Dancey, William S. 1981 Archaeological Field Methods: An Introduction. Burgess Publishing, Minneapolis.Google Scholar
Drooker, Penelope 1997 The View from Madisonville: Protohistoric Western Fort Ancient Interaction Patterns. Museum of Anthropology, Memoirs No. 31. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
Ehrenreich, Robert M., Crumley, Carole L., and Levy, Janet E. (editors) 1995 Heterarchy and the Analysis of Complex Societies. Archaeological Papers No. 6, American Anthropological Association, Arlington, Virginia.Google Scholar
Evans, Michael E., and Heller, Friedrich 2003 Environmental Magnetism: Principles and Applications of Enviromagnetics. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Fassbinder, J. W. W., Stanjek, H., and Vali, H. 1990 Occurrence of Magnetic Bacteria in Soil. Nature 343:161–163.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fitzpatrick, R. W. 1985 Iron Compounds as Indicators of Pedogenic Processes: Examples from the Southern Hemisphere. In Iron in Soils and Clay Minerals, edited by J. W. Stucki, B. A. Goodman, and U. Schwertmann, pp. 351–396. NATO ASI Series C 217. D. Reidel, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
Gaffney, Chris, and Gater, John 2003 Revealing the Buried Past: Geophysics for Archaeologists. Tempus Publishing, Stroud, England.Google Scholar
Graham, I., and Scollar, I. 1976 Limitations on Magnetic Prospection in Archaeology Imposed by Soil Properties. Archaeo-Physika 6: 1–125.Google Scholar
Griffin, James B. 1943 The Fort Ancient Aspect. University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
Hargrave, Michael L. 2006 Ground-Truthing the Results of Geophysical Surveys. In Remote Sensing in Archaeology: An Explicitly North American Perspective, edited by J. K. Johnson, pp. 269–304. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.Google Scholar
Hargrave, Michael L., Britt, Tad, and Reynolds, Matthew D. 2007 Magnetic Evidence of Ridge Construction and Use at Poverty Point. American Antiquity 72: 757–769.Google Scholar
Hawkins, Rebecca A. 1998 Coming Full Circle: Plowzone Assemblages and the Interpretation of Fort Ancient Settlement Structure. In Surface Archaeology, edited by Alan P. Sullivan, pp. 91–109. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.Google Scholar
Heilman, J. M., and Hoefer, Roger 1981 Possible Astronomical Alignments in a Fort Ancient Settlement at the Incinerator Site in Dayton, Ohio. In Archaeoastronomy in the Americas, edited by Ray Williamson, pp. 157–171. Ballena Press, Menlo Park, California.Google Scholar
Heilman, James M., Lileas, Malinda, and Turnbow, Christopher (editors) 1988 A History of 17 Years of Excavation and Reconstruction: A Chronicle of 12th Century Human Values and the Built Environment. Dayton Society of Natural History, Dayton, Ohio.Google Scholar
Henderson, A. Gwynn (editor) 1992 Fort Ancient Cultural Dynamics in the Middle Ohio Valley. Prehistory Press, Madison, Wisconsin.Google Scholar
Henderson, A. Gwynn 1992 Capitol View: An Early Madisonville Horizon Settlement in Franklin County, Kentucky. In Current Archaeological Research in Kentucky, volume 2, edited by David Pollack and A. Gwynn Henderson, pp. 223–240. Kentucky Heritage Council, Frankfort.Google Scholar
Henderson, A. Gwynn 1998 Middle Fort Ancient Villages and Organizational Complexity in Kentucky. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Kentucky, Lexington.Google Scholar
Henderson, A. Gwynn, and Pollack, David 2001 Fort Ancient. In Encyclopedia of Prehistory, vol. 6, edited by Peter N. Peregrine and Melvin Ember, pp. 174–194. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York.Google Scholar
Johnson, Jay K. (editor) 2006 Remote Sensing in Archaeology: An Explicitly North American Perspective. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.Google Scholar
Jones, Geoffrey, and Maki, David L. 2005 Lightning-Induced Magnetic Anomalies on Archaeological Sites. Archaeological Prospection 12: 191–197.Google Scholar
Kintigh, Keith W. 1988 The Effectiveness of Subsurface Testing: A Simulation Approach. American Antiquity 53:686–707.Google Scholar
Kvamme, Kenneth L. 2003a Geophysical Surveys as Landscape Archaeology. American Antiquity 68:35–457.Google Scholar
Kvamme, Kenneth L. 2003b Multidimensional Prospecting in North American Great Plains Village Sites. Archaeological Prospection 10:131–142.Google Scholar
Kvamme, Kenneth L. 2006 Magnetometry: Nature’s Gift to Archaeology. In Remote Sensing in A rchaeology: An Explicitly North American Perspective, edited by J. K. Johnson, pp. 205–233. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.Google Scholar
LeBorgne, E. 1955 Susceptibilite magnetiques anomale du sol superficial. Annales de Geophysique 11:399–419.Google Scholar
LeBorgne, E. 1965 Les Properties Magnetiques du Sol. Application a la Prospection des Sites Archaeologiques. Archaeo-Physika 1:1–20.Google Scholar
Linford, N. T., and Canti, M. G. 2001 Geophysical Evidence for Fires in Antiquity: Preliminary Results from an Experimental Study. Archaeological Prospection 8: 211–225.Google Scholar
Lovis, William A. 1978 Quarter Sections and Forests: An Example of Probability Sampling in the Northeastern Woodlands. American Antiquity 41:364–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lynott, Mark J., and Weymouth, John 2002 Preliminary Report, 2001 Investigations, Hopeton Earthworks. Hopewell Archeology Newsletter 5(1): 1–10.Google Scholar
Maher, B. A. 1986 Characterization of Soils by Mineral Magnetic Measurements. Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors 42: 76–92.Google Scholar
Martin, Kristie R. 2009 Eastern Agricultural Complex Traditions in Small Fort Ancient Communities—The Wildcat Example. M. A. thesis, Department of Anthropology, The Ohio State University, Columbus.Google Scholar
Moorehead, Warren K. 1892 Primitive Man in Ohio. G. P. Putnam’s Sons, New York.Google Scholar
Mullins, C. E. 1974 The Magnetic Properties of the Soil and Their Application to Archaeological Prospecting. Archaeo-Physika 5: 143–247.Google Scholar
Mullins, C. E. 1977 Magnetic Susceptibility of the Soil and Its Significance in Soil Science—A Review. Journal of Soil Science 28:223–246.Google Scholar
Nolan, Kevin C., Burks, Jarrod, and Dancey, William S. 2008 Recent Research at the Reinhardt Site. Current Research in Ohio 2008. Electronic document, http://www.ohioarchaeology.org/joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=236&Itemid=32, accessed March 4, 2009.Google Scholar
Oldfield, F., Thompson, R., and Dickson, D. P. E. 1981 Artificial Enhancement of Stream Bedload: A Hydrological Application of Superparamagnetism. Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors 26:107–124.Google Scholar
Pacheco, Paul J., Burks, Jarrod, and Wymer, Dee Anne 2005 Investigating Ohio Hopewell Settlement Patterns in Central Ohio: A Preliminary Report of Archaeology at Brown’s Bottom # 1 (33Ro21). Current Research in Ohio Archaeology 2005. Electronic document, http://www.ohioarchaeology.org/joomla/index.php?option =com_content&task=view&id=103&Itemid=32, accessed March 3, 2009.Google Scholar
Pacheco, Paul J., Burks, Jarrod, and Wymer, Dee Anne 2009 The 2006 Archaeological Investigations at Brown’s Bottom #1 (33RO1104). Current Research in Ohio Archaeology 2009. Electronic document, http://www.ohioarchaeology.org/joomla/index.php?option=com_content&ta sk=view&id=268&Itemid=32, accessed July 8, 2009.Google Scholar
Pecora, Albert M., Keener, Craig S., Burks, Jarrod, and Biehl, Stephen 2004 Phase II Archaeological Assessments of Sites 33Li182, 33Li183, 33Li185, 33Li195, and 33Li196 Located within the LIC-7017.70 Rest Areas on Interstate 70, Licking County, Ohio (PID 24413). OVAC Contract Report #2004-01. Report on file, Ohio Historic Preservation Office, Columbus.Google Scholar
Pederson, Jennifer, Burks, Jarrod, and Dancey, William S. 2001 Hopewell Mound Group: Data Collection at the Hopewell Type Site, 2001. Paper presented at the 47th Midwest Archaeological Conference, LaCrosse, Wisconsin.Google Scholar
Purtill, Matthew P. 1999 Evidence for a Late Fort Ancient Fall/Winter Occupation in Southwestern Ohio. North American Archaeologist 20: 105–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putnam, Frederic W. 1886 Report of the Curator. Peabody Museum Annual Report 18: 401–419, 477-502.Google Scholar
Railey, James A. 1985 Van Meter (15MS52) National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form. On file, Kentucky Heritage Council, Frankfort.Google Scholar
Riordan, Robert 1981 An Archaeological Investigation of the Proposed North Regional Wastewater Systems Improvements. Public Archaeology Report No. 14, Laboratory of Anthropology, Wright State University, Dayton, Ohio.Google Scholar
Riordan, Robert 2000 Peas in a Pod?: Diversity at Small Late Prehistoric Components in Southwest Ohio. In Cultures Before Contact: The Late Prehistory of Ohio and Surrounding Regions, edited by Robert A. Genheimer, pp. 404–424. Ohio Archaeological Council, Columbus.Google Scholar
Sahlins, Marshall D. 1968 Tribesmen. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.Google Scholar
Schwarz, Kevin, Burks, Jarrod, Striker, Michael, Miller, Donald A., and Ericksen, Annette 2005 Phase II Archaeological Testing of the Oberschlake Site #1 (33Ct648) for Realignment of State Route 232 (CLE-S.R. 232–10.54; PID 24598) in Tate Township, Clermont County, Ohio. Report on file, ASC Group, Columbus, Ohio.Google Scholar
Shane, Orrin C. 1988 An Interim Summary Report of the Vertebrate Faunal Remains from the Incinerator Site. In A History of 17 Years of Excavation and Reconstruction: A Chronicle of 12th Century Human Values and the Built Environment, edited by James M. Heilman, Malinda C. Lileas, and Christopher A. Turnbow, pp. 157–213. Dayton Society of Natural History, Dayton, Ohio.Google Scholar
Shott, Michael 1985 Shovel-test Sampling as a Site Discovery Technique: A Case Study from Michigan. Journal of Field Archaeology 12:457–468.Google Scholar
Simonelli, Lynn M., and Kennedy, William E. 2003 “My Other Site is a National Historic Landmark”: Current Research at the Late Prehistoric Wegerzyn Garden Center Site (33My 127). Paper presented at the 68th annual meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Montreal.Google Scholar
Strezewski, Michael, McCullough, Robert G., McCullough, Dorothea, Arnold, Craig, and Wells, Joshua J. 2007 Report of the 2006 Archaeological Investigations at Kethtippecanunk (12-T-59), Tippecanoe County, Indiana. Reports of Investigations 703. IPFW Archaeological Survey, Indiana University-Purdue University at Fort Wayne.Google Scholar
Tite, M. S., and Mullins, C. 1970 Magnetic Properties of Soils. Prospezioni Archeologiche 5:111–112.Google Scholar
Tite, M. S., and Mullins, C. 1971 Enhancement of the Magnetic Susceptibility of Soils on Archaeological Sites. Archaeometry 13:209–219.Google Scholar
Turnbow, Christopher A., and Jobe, Cynthia E. 1984 The Goolman Site: A Late Fort Ancient Winter Encampment in Clark County, Kentucky. In Late Prehistoric Research in Kentucky, edited by David Pollack, Charles D. Hockensmith, and Thomas N. Sanders, pp. 25–48. Kentucky Heritage Council, Frankfort.Google Scholar
Turnbow, Christopher A., Jobe, Cynthia E., O’Malley, Nancy, Wymer, Dee Ann, Seme, Michelle, and Rovner, Irvin 1983 Archaeological Investigations of the Goolman, Devary, and Stone Sites in Clark County, Kentucky. Archaeological Report No. 78. Department of Anthropology, University of Kentucky, Lexington.Google Scholar
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) 2007 Miamian Series. Soil Survey Staff, National Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture, Official Soil Series Descriptions. Electronic document, http://soils.usda.gov/technical/classification/osd/index.html, accessed May 27, 2009.Google Scholar
Verrier, V., and Rochette, P. 2002 Estimating Peak Currents at Ground Lightning Impacts Using Remanent Magnetization. Geophysical Research Letters 29(18):1–4.Google Scholar
Vickery, Kent D., Sunderhaus, Theodore S., and Genheimer, Robert A. 2000 Preliminary Report on Excavations at the Fort Ancient State Line Site, 33Ha58, in the Central Ohio Valley. In Cultures Before Contact: The Late Prehistory of Ohio and Surrounding Regions, edited by Robert A. Genheimer, pp. 272–328. Ohio Archaeological Council, Columbus.Google Scholar
Wagner, Gail 1996 Feast or Famine? Seasonal Diet at a Fort Ancient Community. In Case Studies in Environmental Archaeology, edited by Elizabeth J. Reitz, Lee A. Newsom, and Sylvia J. Scudder, pp. 319–337. Plenum Press, New York.Google Scholar
Wagner, Gail 2008 What Seasonal Diet at a Fort Ancient Community Reveals about Coping Mechanisms. In Case Studies in Environmental Archaeology (second edition), edited by Elizabeth J. Reitz, Sylvia J. Scudder, and C. Margaret Scarry, pp. 277–296. Springer, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weinberger, Jennifer Pederson 2006 Ohio Hopewell Earthworks: An Examination of Site Use from Non-Mound Space at the Hopewell Site. Ph.D.. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, The Ohio State University, Columbus.Google Scholar
Weymouth, John W. 1998 Three Geophysical Surveys of the Hopeton Earth Works: The Second Season. Report on file at the Midwest Archeological Center, National Park Service, Lincoln, Nebraska.Google Scholar