Effigy Mounds Research Papers - Academia.edu (original) (raw)

The ages and cultural affiliations of the effigy mounds of the Upper Midwest have been pondered and discussed for nearly 200 years. Effigy Mound culture history and economic strategies are fairly well understood, but the nature of the... more

The ages and cultural affiliations of the effigy mounds of the Upper Midwest have been pondered and discussed for nearly 200 years. Effigy Mound culture history and economic
strategies are fairly well understood, but the nature of the connections between Effigy Mound and succeeding groups is clouded. Oral traditions of some of the presumed descendants—Ho-Chunk and Chiwere people—seem incompatible with both Effigy Mound and Oneota archaeology. The demise of effigy mound building was coeval with the spread of Mississippian ideology via ritual adoption into fictive-kin networks and connection to the Cahokian “founders cult.” This process fostered appropriation of Mississippian mythology and accounts for the seeming incongruity between oral traditions and archaeology. It also shows that the cultural affiliation of the effigy mound builders cannot be determined because the Effigy Mound–Oneota transformation involved establishment of new ideologies, relations of production, and identities.

This article aims at giving an overall view of the real and mythical topography of the Abaton of Biggeh, which housed a relic, the left leg of the God Osiris, in connection with the rituals. After a geographical and archaeological... more

This article aims at giving an overall view of the real and mythical topography of the Abaton of Biggeh, which housed a relic, the left leg of the God Osiris, in connection with the rituals. After a geographical and archaeological presentation, I will stress in particular the different species of trees growing on and around the Abaton. A new French translation will be provided, with commentary, of the Abaton Decree, in relation to the depictions on the Gate of Hadrian in the temple of Philae. A discussion of all the classical sources in chronological order will follow, in order to draw comparisons with the Egyptian sources. Lastly, the possible location and spatial organization of the Abaton in comparison with other sacred mounds will be addressed.

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... 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.

What can copper artifacts tell us about effigy mounds, and the distinction of snake versus hawk? Here I try to solve the mystery and debate over the creation of Serpent Mound in Ohio, and include a survey of copper artifacts and maps that... more

What can copper artifacts tell us about effigy mounds, and the distinction of snake versus hawk? Here I try to solve the mystery and debate over the creation of Serpent Mound in Ohio, and include a survey of copper artifacts and maps that demonstrate trade in this ideology.

The earliest documented excavation of an effigy mound group by a professional archaeologist occurred in 1883 when Frederic Ward Putnam and local acquaintances excavated portions of four mounds at the Myrick Park site (47Lc10) in La... more

The earliest documented excavation of an effigy mound group by a professional archaeologist occurred in 1883 when Frederic Ward Putnam and local acquaintances excavated portions of four mounds at the Myrick Park site (47Lc10) in La Crosse, Wisconsin. Putnam worked on one effigy (similar to the short-tailed turtle form) and three conical mounds. Theodore H. Lewis visited the site in 1885 and mapped one additional conical mound. We examined documentation and collections housed at the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology at Harvard University. Artifacts include a portion of a Madison Cord Impressed jar (a common Effigy Mound offering) and a trailed rim sherd similar to terminal Late Woodland types. Human remains represent a minimum of 23 individuals: 18 adults and 5 subadults. Dental and skeletal evidence indicates a relatively healthy population with low levels of nutritional deficiency, early life stress, and trauma, similar to other regional Late Woodland populations.

Raised archaeological features form an abundant part of the prehistoric record, and come in many forms, from earthen mounds to shell middens. To calculate the volume of these features, archaeologists have relied on multiple strategies... more

Raised archaeological features form an abundant part of the prehistoric record, and come in many forms, from earthen mounds to shell middens. To calculate the volume of these features, archaeologists have relied on multiple strategies from simple geometric formulae to the use of aerial photogrammetry, typically to create energetic estimates of construction. No matter the technique, an undeveloped application of such volume estimates has the potential to inform our understanding of erosional processes and feature degradation. The largest of these earthen structures are typically best mapped and studied, leaving a paucity of data on the smaller, ubiquitous and often peripheral earthworks presently understudied at major archaeological sites. Using case studies from the Mound City and Newark mounds of the United States, we compare traditional methods of calculating mound volume for the purposes of ascertaining erosional processes with new photogrammetric protocols. Prior to this, the methodology is checked using artificially constructed earthworks of known volume, which are modified in controlled ways. The results presented here have implications not only for understanding prehistoric energetics more accurately in commonly overlooked portions of archaeological sites, but can also be used in the protection and potential reconstruction of archaeological mound features. While these sites are often afforded better protection than in the past, they are still exposed to natural and man-made erosional processes which warrants their detailed recording.

The dragon/serpent and opposing bird motif pairing had prominent symbolic roles in world mythologies during ancient times. The duo, along with the triangle shape, have persisted for millennia and continue to be mainstays in the art,... more

The dragon/serpent and opposing bird motif pairing had prominent symbolic roles in world mythologies during ancient times. The duo, along with the triangle shape, have persisted for millennia and continue to be mainstays in the art, architecture and symbolism of current major world religions. In a previous paper which demonstrated the prolific presence of a unknown symbol using these motifs were located on rock outcroppings at the serpent site proper and adjacent land, the question was asked where are the serpent's bird partners? If the constructors had the motivation, resources and knowledge to construct a 1348' earthen serpent aligned to solar and lunar events, would they not be able to construct large scale birds? This follow up paper presents illustrations demonstrating the symbol was duplicated in large scale at Serpent Mound and other sites in southern Ohio and the Western Hemisphere. I also present findings that demonstrate the geoglyphs shape, multiple sizes and number are consistent with canons found in Vedic Śulvasūtra texts specifying the construction and reconstruction of falcon shaped fire altars requiring geometry based measurements. Using independently derived conventions, it is shown how the symbol exponentially increases in number and their resultant geometric expansion across the landscape. Graphics also suggest the positioning of the serpent effigy and burial mounds were based upon the antecedent symbol. This is presented using working LIDAR images from multiple imaging studies and symbol template overlays. The paper focuses on my methodology and specific LIDAR features used in the placement and sizing of the templates.

An attempt to determine the meaning of the Serpent Mound through comparative depictions of Serpents by various cultures. This is a re-write that provides a more detailed translation of the Mayan glyph demonstrating an extended background... more

An attempt to determine the meaning of the Serpent Mound through comparative depictions of Serpents by various cultures. This is a re-write that provides a more detailed translation of the Mayan glyph demonstrating an extended background to the Egg-Serpent relationship.

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... 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.

The Ward Long Mound site (13AM129) contains a linear mound located along the Upper Iowa River in western Al- lamakee County, Iowa. A remote sensing survey of the mound was conducted in June 2016 using a Bartington Grad 601-2 gradiometer.... more

The Ward Long Mound site (13AM129) contains a linear mound located along the Upper Iowa River in western Al- lamakee County, Iowa. A remote sensing survey of the mound was conducted in June 2016 using a Bartington Grad 601-2 gradiometer. The results indicate that the mound was likely constructed in stages that included the de nition of the mound through removal of the existing topsoil and the use of topsoil from the surrounding area for the mound ll. urther, the presence of several anomalies within the mound likely indicates features such as limestone concentrations or hearths.

Brief summary report published in The Wisconsin Archeologist (2016)