Recent Discussions In Late Prehistoric Southern Archaeology (original) (raw)
Related papers
Watson Brake, a Middle Archaic Mound Complex In Northeast Louisiana
American antiquity, 2005
Middle Archaic earthen mound complexes in the lower Mississippi valley are remote antecedents o younger Poverty Point earthworks. Watson Brake is the largest and most complex of these early m coring and stratigraphic studies, aided by 25 radiocarbon dates and six luminescence dates, sho were begun here at ca. 3500 B.C. in association with an oval arrangement of burned rock middens terrace. The full extent of the first earthworks is not yet known. Substantial moundraising began ued in stages until some time after 3000 B. C. when the site was abandoned. All 1 1 mounds and th occupied between building bursts. Soils formed on some of these temporary surfaces, while lithic fired clay/loam objects became scattered throughout the mound fills. Faunal and floral remains f cate all-season occupation, supported by broad-spectrum foraging centered on nuts, fish, and dee are so acidic that organics have not survived. The area enclosed by the mounds was kept clean of as ritual space. The reasons why such elaborate activities first occurred here remain elusive. Howe covary with very well-documented increases in El Nino/Southern Oscillation events. During such frequencies, rainfall becomes extremely erratic and unpredictable. It may be that early moun response to new stresses of droughts and flooding that created a suddenly more unpredictable fo Los complejos de monticulos de tierra del Arcaico Medio del valle del rio Mississippi son los an famosos monticulos de Poverty Point, que sefechan mucho mas temprano. Watson Brake es el mas
Alluvial geoarchaeology of a Middle Archaic Mound complex in the lower Mississippi Valley, U.S.A
Geoarchaeology-an International Journal, 2006
The Nolan site (16MA201), 14 C dated 5200-4800 cal yr B.P. and located in the Tensas Basin of northeastern Louisiana, is the only recorded Middle Archaic mound site in the alluvial valley of the Mississippi River. Alluvial deposition has buried the Nolan site under 3-4 m of Holocene sediment, prohibiting traditional excavation of the site. Because data are unattainable by other means, soil coring and subsequent stratigraphic and sedimentological analyses permit reconstruction of the natural and cultural depositional history of the Nolan site. The sedimentary characteristics of basal deposits within cores suggest the presence of an Arkansas River paleochannel immediately adjacent to the site. Chronostratigraphic data show this channel was no longer active by ca. 5200 cal yr B.P. Contrary to existing models, the Arkansas River Meander Belt 4 and the Mississippi River Meander Belt 4 are not the same age. Microartifact and losson-ignition analyses of sediment identify natural versus cultural strata and permit the identification of artificial constructions-including four earthen mounds and one earthen ridge-at the Nolan site. Overbank sediments attributed to a mapped Mississippi River Stage 4 meander belt are dated ca. 4800-3800 cal yr B.P. This age is considerably younger than previous estimates and demonstrates the existing chronological models for Mississippi River meander belts must be carefully assessed. Core analyses also reveal flood-related crevasse splays deposited throughout the Tensas Basin after the occupation of the Nolan site. These deposits serve as relative chronological indicators and aid in stratigraphic assessments of the Nolan site. Reconstruction of the earthworks and their stratigraphic context reveals one of the largest and earliest Middle Archaic mound sites in North America.
On the Age of Serpent Mound: A Reply to Romain and Colleagues
Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology, 2018
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.
The Mazique site (22Ad502), in Adams County, Mississippi, is believed to have been occupied during both the Coles Creek (A.D. 700-1000) and Mississippi periods (A.D. 1000-1680). However, Ian W. Brown (2007) has suggested that mound building at Mazique was primarily a result of Plaquemine activity. This thesis presents new evidence suggesting that mound construction at Mazique occurred primarily during the Coles Creek period and that the Plaquemine presence here during the Mississippi period has been overestimated. The larger implications of these conclusions are that the construction, arrangement, and use of flat top mounds and plaza complexes was an indigenous development of the Coles Creek period in the Natchez bluffs region as it was in the greater Lower Mississippi Valley, and that the characterization of the Plaquemine culture as a hybridization of Coles Creek and Mississippian cultures should not be discarded as a theory of cultural interaction in the region.
A Reassessment of the Chronology of Mound A at Toqua
Southeastern Archaeology 30(1) Summer 2011
The Toqua site (40MR6) is one of the most thoroughly excavated Late Mississippian mound sites in East Tennessee. The site has been a focal point of research on late prehistory in southern Appalachia, but there are issues surrounding its chronological placement. The radiometric dates obtained for the site in the 1970s and the archaeomagnetic dates reported in 1999 have large standard deviations. These dates are too imprecise to be usefid for a temporal placement of the site that is clear enough for current discussions of the development of Mississippian culture. A newly obtained Accelerator Mass Spectrometry (AMS) date from the large platform mound (Mound A) allows a réévaluation of the occupation sequence of the Toqua site. This date provides an anchor for a refined chronology for Mound A. In addition to the new AMS date, this refined chronology is based on complementary lines of evidence, including architectural evidence, mortuary practices, pottery traditions, and shell gorget styles.
Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology, 2019
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.