Brad Lepper - Academia.edu (original) (raw)

Papers by Brad Lepper

Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology, 2018

Radiocarbon dates reported by Romain and colleagues (2017) suggesting that Serpent Mound (33AD1) ... more Radiocarbon dates reported by Romain and colleagues (2017) suggesting that Serpent Mound (33AD1) is an Adena effigy mound are problematic because they cannot be linked reliably to cultural activities associated with the original construction of the effigy mound. Additional arguments offered by Romain and colleagues (2017) in support of an Early Woodland age for Serpent Mound also are unconvincing. A Late Prehistoric age for Serpent Mound is supported by the radiocarbon dates reported previously, new radiocarbon dates, the relative abundance of serpent imagery in the Fort Ancient culture and the contemporaneous Mississippian Tradition, the virtual absence of serpent imagery in the Adena culture, and the fact that, whereas effigy-mound building is otherwise unknown in the Early Woodland period, it is well documented, if rare, for the Fort Ancient culture and in the not-so-terribly-far-away upper Midwest it is so common that it defines the broadly contemporaneous Effigy Mound culture.

North American Archaeologist , 2022

The effigy mounds of the Upper Midwest and the Ohio Valley long have been regarded as distinct an... more The effigy mounds of the Upper Midwest and the Ohio Valley long have been regarded as distinct and independent cultural developments. A review of effigy mound iconography in both regions reveals similarities suggesting that they are elements of a shared cultural tradition. Comparisons with rock art imagery from the Upper Midwest and Missouri, the inferred centers of this artistic and ceremonial florescence, reveal co-occurrences of specific motifs and provide additional evidence of cultural connections among the Late Woodland to early Late Precontact societies

Hero, Hawk, and Open Hand: American Indian art of the ancient Midwest and South, 2004

A summary for a general audience of what we think we know about the Newark Earthworks.

Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology, 2019

The debate over the age of Serpent Mound (33AD01) is important because without a cultural context... more The debate over the age of Serpent Mound (33AD01) is important because without a cultural context it is impossible to make meaningful statements about what this monumental effigy mound might have meant to its builders. In this response to Romain and Herrmann’s rejoinder, we clarify the provenience of the samples, which yielded the radiocarbon dates that contribute to our argument for a post–Late Woodland age for the effigy. In
addition, we extend our critique of Romain and colleagues’ arguments to include the results of an independent study of soil cores extracted from the Serpent and surrounding landscape, which fails to corroborate Romain and colleagues’ assertion that a buried A horizon underlies the mound. Finally, we suggest that the construction of Serpent Mound may be historically linked to droughts in the Mississippi Valley that began at around AD 1100, which resulted in an influx of Mississippian refugees into the region.

Current Research in Ohio Archaeology, 2020

Recent research on the difficulties with obtaining accurate radiocarbon dates for burial mounds i... more Recent research on the difficulties with obtaining accurate radiocarbon dates for burial mounds in Denmark independently validates the arguments of Lepper and colleagues and clarifies the nature of the problems with dates obtained on bulk sediment extracted from soil cores taken from mounds.

The Late Prehistoric Period - Ohio Archaeology: an illustrated chronicle of Ohio's ancient American Indian cultures, 2005

Selected portions of the chapter on the Late Prehistoric Period from the now out-of-print book, O... more Selected portions of the chapter on the Late Prehistoric Period from the now out-of-print book, Ohio Archaeology: an illustrated chronicle of Ohio's ancient American Indian cultures.

Late Woodland Period - Ohio Archaeology: an illustrated chronicle of Ohio's ancient American Indian cultures, 2005

Selected portions of the Late Woodland Period chapter of the now out-of-print book, Ohio Archaeol... more Selected portions of the Late Woodland Period chapter of the now out-of-print book, Ohio Archaeology: an illustrated chronicle of Ohio's ancient American Indian cultures.

Early Woodland Period - Ohio Archaeology: an illustrated chronicle of Ohio's ancient American Indian cultures., 2005

Selected portions of the Early Woodland chapter from the now out-of-print book, Ohio Archaeology:... more Selected portions of the Early Woodland chapter from the now out-of-print book, Ohio Archaeology: an illustrated chronicle of Ohio's ancient American Indian cultures.

Archaic Period - Ohio Archaeology: an illustrated chronicle of Ohio's ancient American Indian cultures, 2005

Selected portions of the chapter on the Archaic Period for the now out-of-print book Ohio Archaeo... more Selected portions of the chapter on the Archaic Period for the now out-of-print book Ohio Archaeology: an illustrated chronicle of Ohio's ancient American Indian cultures.

Middle Woodland Period - Ohio Archaeology: an illustrated chronicle of Ohio's ancient American Indian cultures, 2005

Selected portions of the chapter on the Middle Woodland Period from the now out-of-print book, Oh... more Selected portions of the chapter on the Middle Woodland Period from the now out-of-print book, Ohio Archaeology: an illustrated chronicle of Ohio's ancient American Indian cultures.

Paleoindian period - Ohio Archaeology: an illustrated chronicle of Ohio's Ancient American Indian cultures, 2005

Selected portions of the chapter on the Paleoindian period from the now out-of-print book, Ohio A... more Selected portions of the chapter on the Paleoindian period from the now out-of-print book, Ohio Archaeology: an illustrated chronicle of Ohio's Ancient American Indian cultures.

Introduction - Ohio Archaeology: an illustrated chronicle to Ohio's ancient American Indian cultures, 2005

Introduction to the now out-of-print book Ohio Archaeology: an illustrated chronicle to Ohio's an... more Introduction to the now out-of-print book Ohio Archaeology: an illustrated chronicle to Ohio's ancient American Indian cultures. It addresses, among other things, how we know what we think we know about things that happened long ago.

Journal of Ohio Archaeology, 2020

Serpent Mound (33AD1) is one of the most recognizable icons of American archaeology, yet there is... more Serpent Mound (33AD1) is one of the most recognizable icons of American archaeology, yet there is ongoing debate over its age. Without an understanding of its antiquity and thus its cultural context it is difficult to address the broader question of what it might have meant to its builders. Various attempts to obtain radiocarbon dates for Serpent Mound have yielded more or less inconclusive results. A panel of Mississippian pictographs in Picture Cave in Missouri includes three motifs that are strikingly similar to the three principal components of Serpent Mound. Radiocarbon dates for the Picture Cave pictographs are contemporaneous with dates from Serpent Mound. When considered in the light of Dhegiha Siouan traditions, these pictographs offer insights into the original purpose and meaning of Serpent Mound. The general relevance of this iconography for the Late Prehistoric Ohio valley is affirmed by a fragment of an effigy pipe depicting a humanoid in association with a snake, which was found in Morgan County, Ohio. Serpent Mound was built during a period of severe droughts in the Mississippi valley, which resulted in Mississippian refugees migrating to the Ohio valley. I suggest that these refugees, or a local Fort Ancient community they influenced, created Serpent Mound as a means of calling upon the Great Serpent, Lord of the Beneath World, to maintain favorable environmental conditions in the Ohio valley.

Kennewick Man: the scientific investigation of an ancient American skeleton, 2014

Overview of North American Paleoindian/Paleoamerican human remains older than 8,000 B.P.

Timeline, 2001

A review for a general audience of what is known about "Alligator" Mound -- Ohio's other effigy m... more A review for a general audience of what is known about "Alligator" Mound -- Ohio's other effigy mound.

Alligator Mound is an animal effigy mound in central Ohio, USA. Since Ephraim Squier and Edwin Da... more Alligator Mound is an animal effigy mound in central Ohio, USA. Since Ephraim Squier and Edwin Davis first recorded and mapped it in 1848, many have speculated regarding its age and meaning, but with remarkably little systematic archaeological investigation. Many scholars have assumed the Hopewell culture (c. 100 BC–AD 400) built the mound, based principally on its proximity to the Newark Earthworks. The Hopewell culture, however, is not known to have built other effigy mounds. Limited excavations in 1999 revealed details of mound stratigraphy and recovered charcoal embedded in mound fill near the base of the mound. This charcoal yielded radiocarbon dates that average between AD 1170 and 1270, suggesting that the Late Prehistoric Fort Ancient culture (c. AD 1000–1550) made the mound. This result coincides with dates obtained for Serpent Mound in southern Ohio and suggests that the construction of effigy mounds in eastern North America was restricted to the Late Woodland and Late Prehistoric traditions. Ethnographic and ethnohistoric analogies suggest that the so-called ‘Alligator’ might actually represent the Underwater Panther and have served as a shrine for invoking the aid of supernatural powers.

The Newark Earthworks complex is unprecedented in the Hopewell world in terms of its scale and th... more The Newark Earthworks complex is unprecedented in the Hopewell world in terms of its scale and the precision of both its geometry and its embedded astronomical alignments. The diversity of discrete earthwork components suggests that each of the several monumental enclosures fulfilled a particular function and the integration of all these components into a unified design suggests those separate functions all were necessary to achieve a more comprehensive ultimate purpose. Largely missing from discussions of Newark has been the mortuary component. This is due principally to the early destruction without serious study of Newark's burial mounds. A review of the not-as-meager-as-previously-assumed-but-still-meager archival sources provides some of the missing pieces of the puzzle and suggests that the burial mounds were the focus of the site and key to its ultimate purpose.

An article intended for a general audience on the Newark Holy Stones, several engraved stones dis... more An article intended for a general audience on the Newark Holy Stones, several engraved stones discovered in the 19th century and argued to be evidence for ancient Hebrews in America.

Article intended for a general audience on the discovery and analysis of the Burning Tree Mastodon.