Archaeology - Indiana · 2019-10-03 · Indiana’s Cultural Resources Management Plan 1998-2003...

Commer./Factory

Civil/Government

11.County

14.Addition

17.USGS 7.5 Min Quad (attach map or copy)

12.Town/city

15.Lot number

13.Civil township

16.Reserve/military grant

18.Section grid alignment

21.UTM (1)

22.UTM (2)

19. 1/4

20.

1/4 1/4 1/4 Section Twp. Range

7.Cul

3.Site name

5.Other names and numbers

6.Project name and number

SITE NAME

INDIANA HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES INVENTORY -ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITESState Form 24402 (R/10-94)

1.State site number

2.Resurvey

The Indiana Historian A Magazine Exploring Indiana History

Archaeologyin Indiana—the Science TodayArchaeology

2 The Indiana Historian, December 1999 © Copyright Indiana Historical Bureau 2000

Focus

The Indiana HistorianDecember 1999ISSN 1071-3301

Order Number 7051

EditorPamela J. Bennett

Lead ResearcherLead ResearcherLead ResearcherLead ResearcherLead ResearcherPaula A. Bongen

DesignerDesignerDesignerDesignerDesignerDani B. Pfaff

Contributing EditorsContributing EditorsContributing EditorsContributing EditorsContributing EditorsCarole M. Allen, Janine Beckley,

Paula Bongen, Alan Conant, Dani B. Pfaff,James Williams

The Indiana Historian provides resources and modelsfor the study of local history to encourage Indiana’scitizens of all ages to become engaged with the historyof their communities and the state of Indiana.

The Indiana Historian (formerly The Indiana JuniorHistorian) is issued quarterly from March throughDecember.

It is a membership benefit of the Indiana JuniorHistorical Society. One complimentary subscription isprovided to Indiana libraries, school media centers, andcultural and historical organizations.

Annual subscriptions are available for $5.00 plustax. Back issues are available at individual and bulkpricing.

This material is available to visually impairedpatrons in audio format, courtesy of the Indiana HistoryProject of the Indiana Historical Society. Tapes areavailable through the Talking Books Program of theIndiana State Library; contact the Talking Books Pro-gram, 317-232-3702.

The Indiana Historian is copyrighted. Educatorsmay reproduce items for class use, but no part of thepublication may be reproduced in any way for profitwithout written permission of the Indiana HistoricalBureau. Room 408, 140 North Senate Avenue, India-napolis, IN 46204; 317-232-2535.

E-MAIL [email protected] www.state.in.us/history

You be the archaeologist

Front cover illustrations: from top tobottom—a portion of an officialarchaeological site form, an excavatedarchaeological unit showing the limestonefoundation of a French-Canadian furtrader’s cabin (photograph by James R.Jones III), archaeologists screening soil forartifacts (photograph courtesy KimTinkham), and a Late Middle Woodlandcomplicated stamped sherd from thecollection of the Glenn A. Black Laboratoryof Archaeology, Indiana University(photograph by Richard Fieldsfor Outdoor Indiana).

• Have you ever wondered what itwould be like to go on a dig and helprecover valuable information andartifacts?

For those who are interested in pre-serving information about Indiana’s rap-idly disappearing archaeological re-sources, there are many ways to becomeinvolved.• Become familiar with those in thearchaeological community who canhelp.

Did you know that Indiana has a StateArchaeologist, and there are other pro-fessional archaeologists who work forthe state and federal governments anduniversities?• Contact an avocational archaeo-logical group in our state.

These groups advocate the wise col-lecting of artifacts, proper recording ofsites, and the study of cultures in Indi-ana. They often help professionals byadding to our knowledge of Indiana’sarchaeological resources.• Volunteer to work on a profes-sional excavation, or dig.

Contact the universities and ask ifthere would be volunteer opportunitiesduring their next summer field school.

• Participate in Indiana Archaeol-ogy Week.

Each year, numerous activities areheld all over the state which allow peopleto visit excavations, meet archaeolo-gists, go on archaeological laboratorytours, and have artifacts identified. Con-tact the Division of Historic Preserva-tion and Archaeology about IndianaArchaeology Week held in September.• Contact a professional archaeolo-gist and ask questions!

Professionals are happy to explaintheir careers, and their science, as wellas help you understand what real ar-chaeology is all about. • Look up information about ca-reers, sites to visit, books to read,etc. on the World Wide Web.

Professional archaeological organiza-tions have Web sites to visit, as douniversities, private archaeology com-panies, and many others. There are evenWeb sites which offer “virtual digs.”

No matter how you become involved,you will see the endless variety anduniqueness of the archaeological recordin Indiana. There are many ways toparticipate and to help record informa-tion about our non-renewable resourceof archaeological sites.

This issue continues the IndianaHistorical Bureau’s collaborationwith the Division of Historic Preser-vation and Archaeology, IndianaDepartment of Natural Resources.Its staff members have providedboth information and images for thisissue. James R. Jones III and AmyJohnson served as guest editors.Nikki Waters, Kimberly Tinkham,and James Mohow also contributed.

Below is listed informationabout the many avenues available topeople, both adults and students,who are interested in learning aboutand participating in Indiana archaeology.

Page 3 brings the remarkabletransformation of the science ofarchaeology up to date.

Page 4 provides a brief overviewof the development of archaeology inIndiana over the past sixty years.

Page 5 provides in chart forma timeline of cultures in Indianabeginning 12,000 years ago andconcluding with the Europeanmigration to America.

Pages 6 through 13 demon-strate the various steps of profes-sional archaeological surveying andexcavation using both pre-contactand historical examples.

Page 14 highlights some of thelegal duties and responsibilitiesrequired of both the Division ofHistoric Preservation and Archaeol-ogy and the public, includingrealtors, developers, and construc-tion managers.

We have again chosen thesecond ink color to match a soilcolor—10YR, 7/8—from the MunsellSoil Color Charts (rev. ed., NewYork, 1992).

© Copyright Indiana Historical Bureau 2000 3The Indiana Historian, December 1999

Throughout the middle decades ofthe twentieth century, the practiceof archaeology in North Americahas been influenced by new meth-ods, techniques, and theories. Animportant breakthrough came in1949 when American chemistWillard Libby discovered radiocar-bon dating. Libby recognized thatthe age of dead plant or animaltissue could be calculated by mea-suring the amount of radiocarbon inthe artifact, and he developed anaccurate way to measure radiocar-bon decay. Sites could be dated asfar back as 50,000 to 100,000 years.Now, archaeologists could develop areliable timeline of world cultures.Other methods of dating followed,including potassium-argon dating,fission track dating, obsidian hydra-tion, archaeomagnetism, thermo-luminescense, and fluorine analysis.

Today archaeologists canexamine a site without disturbingthe ground. In addition to aerialphotography, satellite imagery isused. Global positioning systems canlocate sites to within one meter.Magnetometry, gradiometry, electri-cal resistivity, gravity analysis, andground penetrating radar are usedto determine if an area has beendisturbed by non-geologic processes.

Computers have contributedconsiderably to archaeologicalinvestigations. They are used tocreate maps of sites or regions,store data about sites, features, andartifacts, and analyze statisticalinformation. Electron scanningmicroscopes and spectroscopic analy-ses are used to identify uses of andwear on artifacts, manufacturingtechniques, raw materials, and otherinformation.

With changes in archaeologicalmethods and techniques camechanges in theories about the very

nature of archaeology. Archaeolo-gists attending graduate schoolsafter World War II demandedrigorous and logical research aswell as reporting. They studiedastronomy, geography, botany,geology, zoology, sociology, ethnol-ogy, and other science-related areasin order to expand their interpreta-tions of cultures, cultural processes,cultural interactions, etc. Theydeveloped specialties, such aszooarchaeology, ethnobotany,underwater archaeology, rock-shelter studies, industrial or urbansites, and conservation of fragile ordamaged artifacts.

Archaeologists developed andapplied new theoretical perspec-tives, including evolutionary archae-ology, postprocessual archaeology,symbolic archaeology, structuralarchaeology, cognitive archaeology,

behavioral archaeology, publicarchaeology, critical theory, Marxistarchaeology, ecological archaeology,cultural ecology, materialism, histori-cal archaeology, systems theory,experimental archaeology, andscientific archaeology. Each of thesetheoretical perspectives greatlyinfluences how a site is investigatedand interpreted.

As new discoveries and techno-logical advances are made, archaeo-logical studies will continue to berefined. A most important elementwill be the preservation of artifactsand information in museums andlaboratories so that data can berestudied as new methods of discov-ery and analysis are developed.Sources: Fagan, Oxford Companion, 703-4;Renfrew, 122; James R. Jones III, StateArchaeologist.

The science of archaeology

Div

isio

n o

f H

isto

ric

Pre

serv

atio

n a

nd

Arc

haeo

logy

.

Archaeologists use various techniques to determine where to dig or whether to dig atall. One such test requires an electrical current to be shot into the ground at specificpoints and the soil resistivity measured. The results of these measurements can be usedto locate features within a site and to identify the positions of those features in thesubsoil. Archaeologist Mark Schurr, Notre Dame University, is demonstrating suchtesting at Prophetstown.


Into the 1960s, Glenn A. Black andEli Lilly were two of the mostprominent names in Indiana archae-ology. Black spent much of hiscareer studying the Angel Site insouthwestern Indiana that Lilly hadpurchased in 1938 and given to thestate of Indiana in 1947. AfterBlack’s death in 1964, Eli Lillyworking through the Indiana His-torical Society and collaboratingwith Indiana University establishedthe Glenn A. Black Laboratory ofArchaeology. The Lilly Endowmentcontributed funds for the buildingwhich would house a permanentcollection of artifacts and recordsfrom Black’s thirty years of re-search.

Throughout the 1960s and1970s Indiana universities (IU, BallState, Indiana State, Purdue, NotreDame) added archaeology appoint-ments to their faculties. The numberof archaeological research projectsin Indiana steadily increased.Another impetus to the growth ofarchaeological information wasfederal and state legislation, particu-

larly after 1966 with the NationalHistoric Preservation Act. Thislegislation, passed by the U.S.Congress, created the NationalRegister of Historic Places and statehistoric preservation officers andprograms.

One requirement of this law,and subsequent legislation, was thereview by archaeologists of proposedconstruction or building sites, fortheir impact on the cultural re-sources at those sites. In responseto these laws, the Indiana GeneralAssembly in 1971 created a statepreservation program within theIndiana Department of NaturalResources. In 1977, Gary D. Elliswas the first professional archaeolo-gist hired by the Department ofNatural Resources. In 1981, theDivision of Historic Preservationand Archaeology was created withinthe same department.

As a result of the federal andstate legislation and the buildingboom of the 1980s and 1990s, therehas been an explosion of archaeo-logical information about Indiana.

Archaeology in Indiana

Currently, there are over 47,000documented prehistoric and historicsites in Indiana. Common prehis-toric site types include campsites,villages, mounds, chert quarries,cemeteries, artifact caches, toolmanufacturing areas, food process-ing and gathering areas, and hunt-ing and butchering sites.

Historical site types in Indianainclude refuse heaps or dumps, oldhomesteads and farmsteads, forts,battlefields, cemeteries, family plots,burials, workshops, quarries, historicIndian villages, fortifications, canals,old trails and transportation routes,mills, towns, shipwrecks, and indus-trial and business sites.

The ages of these sites rangefrom nearly 12,000 years ago to thetwentieth century. There is stillmuch more to learn.Sources: Jame H. Kellar, An Introduction to thePrehistory of Indiana (Indianapolis, 1983);Indiana’s Cultural Resources Management Plan1998-2003 (Indianapolis: Indiana Department ofNatural Resources Division of Historic Preserva-tion and Archaeology, 1998); James R. Jones III,State Archaeologist.

This illustration reproduces part of a map of the Muskegon Shipwreck Site located offthe coast of Indiana in Lake Michigan. Underwater archaeologists recorded informationabout this nineteenth-century steam-powered, wooden hull passenger-freighter designedfor Great Lakes travel. This site was listed in the National Register of Historic Places in1989; the map was an attachment to the nomination for the Muskegon site prepared byGary D. Ellis in 1988.


Cultural chronology of Indiana

Paleoindian(ca. 10,000-7500 B.C.)

•earliest known human inhabitants of the Americas, including Indiana•lived during last glacial advance; mastodons still roamed Indiana•nomadic hunters and gatherers, lived in small bands of related people•left behind well-made stone tools including Clovis, Agate Basin,

and Hi-Lo points

Early Archaic(ca. 8000-6000 B.C.)

•climate more similar to today•greater numbers of sites; rise in population•nomadic, seasonally roaming and exploiting environment•evidence of cremation mortuary practices•variety of stone tool types including grinding stones

and pitted stones for food processing

Middle Archaic(ca. 6000-3500 B.C.)

•climatic warming trend•sites larger; reflect longer-term settlements•mortuary activities including human and dog burials•side notched points and grooved axes appear

Late Archaic(ca. 4000-1500 B.C.)(ca. 4000-1500 B.C.)(ca. 4000-1500 B.C.)(ca. 4000-1500 B.C.)(ca. 4000-1500 B.C.)

•more recognizable cultural groupssuch as French Lick, Bluegrass,Glacial Kame, Early Red Ochre,and Maple Creek

•scheduled harvesting activities ofanimal and plant resources, early

selectivity of certain plants•many site types occur including

mounds•large cemeteries•tool types include woodworking

and food processing implements

Terminal LateArchaic

(ca.1500-700 B.C.)

•barbed or small projectile points•turkey-tail points, copper implements, and use of red ochre

Early Woodland(ca. 1000-200 B.C.)

•fired clay pottery vessels, found in broken fragments or sherds•large bladed projectile points•selection of certain plants and horticulture•sites with mound groups occur

Middle Woodland(ca. 200 B.C.-A.D. 600)

•large trade networks of more exotic goods: copper,mica, Gulf Coast marine shells

•large earthworks and ceremonial sites•expanded stemmed points and blade technology•horticulture and gardening•specific design motifs for Hopewellian vessels

Late Woodland(ca. A.D. 500-1200)

•first intensive maize agriculture, hoes for agriculture•bow and arrow and the first notched

and unnotched stone arrowheads•sites smaller, more scattered, fewer mounds•ceramic pots with collared or thickened rims

Mississippian(ca. A.D. 1000-1650)

•large-scale maize, beans,and squash agriculture

•shell-tempered pottery•Yankeetown phase: characteristics of

both Late Woodland and Mississippian •Middle Mississippian—“classic”

traits of complex and ranked

Protohistoric(ca. A.D. 1450-1650)

•precontact Native American groups which may have continuedinto the times of European exploration and settlement of Americasand written history, and/or may have been predecessors to historictribes in the area; in Indiana there is little direct evidence ofassociations with historic tribes

•peoples with Old World and various ethnic and religious back-grounds settled in Indiana: French, British, African-American,German, Irish, Hispanic, Swiss, Baltic, Quaker, Amish are examples

Historic(ca. A.D. 1650-Present)

societies: Angel Mounds,the Vincennes Culture,the Caborn-Welborn phase

•Upper Mississippian—fewermound complexes, smaller andmore dispersed: Fisher, Huber,and Fort Ancient

Indiana‘s prehistory (the time before written records were kept) includes avariety of cultures spanning almost 12,000 years. The chart below includes(from left to right) the name and approximate age of the culture, an image of

a representative artifact, and some characteristics of the culture or timeperiod. Drawings of projectile points are by Amy Johnson and JamesMohow, Division of Historic Preservation and Archaeology.

Source: Jones and Johnson, 2-18; James R. Jones III, State Archaeologist.

Historic knife not to scale.


1966 1966-1984 1974 19741968 1968-19691965

Angel Moundsplaced in NationalRegister of HistoricPlaces; also aNational HistoricLandmark (DHPAfiles).

Ball State Universityexcavates Van Nuyssite, Henry Co.; over3,000 Late Woodlandartifacts (Glenn A.Black LaboratoryWeb site).

NationalAnthropologicalArchives (NAA),SmithsonianInstitution, is estab-lished (NationalPark ServiceWeb site).

“Terracotta army” ofover 6,000 life-sizemodel soldiers isdiscovered in the tombof China‘s first emperor(Williams, 649).

Glenn A. BlackLaboratory ofArchaeology atIndiana University isestablished (GlennA. Black LaboratoryWeb site).

Indiana Universityexcavates FortOuiatenon site nearLafayette (Glenn A.Black LaboratoryWeb site).

Archaeological and HistoricPreservation Act passes.Assigns oversight andcoordination of U.S. publicarchaeology to U.S.Secretary of the Interior(National Park ServiceWeb site).

Gary Ellis is firstprofessionalarchaeologisthired by IndianaDepartment ofNatural Resources(DHPA files).

1977

An archaeologist always begins a research projectwith a question. What can a site tell about thepast, past cultures, or how culture works andchanges through time? He or she may need tosurvey or excavate a site when an area has beendamaged or is in danger of being destroyed byhuman or natural forces. Even emergencyexcavations will take place under the guidance ofa research question to be answered or a problemto be investigated.

Before an archaeologist begins a field orlaboratory project, he or she:

• researches what is already known about thepast peoples, cultures, and archaeological sitebeing investigated,

• studies all available records (archaeology,history, geology, soils, flora and fauna, rivers,streams, water sources, and otherenvironmental char-acteristics) about theparticular cultures who inhabited specific sitesand the surrounding regions,

• develops a series of research questions whichmay be related to how past peoples lived,adapted, or changed through time—theirtechnology, social organization, subsistence,ecology, belief systems, economics, biologicaland population characteristics, art, music,dance, and other aspects of past societies andcultures,

• develops a research design focused on thestudy of the question or questions to beanswered. The research design includes fieldmethods and techniques to recover informationin a logical, systematic way.Research and research questions often

suggest a region or certain site to investigate.Archaeologists will target areas for survey orexcavations where they expect to find informa-tion relevant to their studies. Survey andexcavation projects can occur all over Indiana—incities and towns, in fields, forests, and even inrivers or lakes.

Why and where to begin

This map shows the numbers of archaeological sites that have currently beenrecorded for each county. These numbers are not necessarily indicative of the totalnumber of sites but reflect how much work has been done in a county. For example,some counties have been subjects of large scale archaeological surveys fundedby grants. Some areas are near universities with archaeology programs and havebeen surveyed more heavily. Other counties are coal mining locales, and stateand federal laws require archaeological surveys before the mining may begin.Information changes as avocational and professional archaeologists continue torecord new site information. As a result, our knowledge about Indiana’sarchaeological past is continually expanding.

Archaeological sites recorded in Indiana today

Source: DHPA site files,May 30, 2000.

0 to 100 sites

101 to 250 sites

251 to 500 sites

501 to 1000 sites

1001 to 1500 sites

1501 to 2050 sites

Adams

Allen

Bartholomew

Benton

Black-ford

Boone

Brown

Carroll

Cass

Clark

Clay

Clinton

Crawford

Daviess

Dearborn

Decatur

De Kalb

Delaware

Dubois

Elkhart

Fayette

Floyd

Fountain

Franklin

Fulton

Gibson

Grant

Greene

Hamilton

Hancock

Harrison

Hendricks

Henry

Howard

Huntington

Jackson

Jasper

Jay

Jefferson

Jennings

Johnson

Knox

Kosciusko

La Grange

Lake

La Porte

Lawrence

Madison

Marion

Marshall

Martin

Miami

Monroe

Montgomery

Morgan

Newton

Noble

Ohio

Orange

Owen

Parke

Perry

Pike

Porter

Posey

Pulaski

Putnam

Randolph

Ripley

Rush

St. Joseph

Scott

Shelby

Spencer

Starke

Steuben

Sullivan

Switzerland

Tippecanoe

Tipton

Union

Vander-burgh

Verm

illio

n

Vigo

Wabash

Warren

Warrick

Washington

Wayne

Wells

White

Whitley

599500

333385

402

219 208

359272

487

371120

68

16

4849

59

190

292

338

588813

1211

1683

2005

338 428

287

958

135

269 205 115 587

5041056

659217

359145

185861

540

618

304

241870

162

397414

356

280

420

587

325

437271

498

489838

1158 2631300

409

1598

10251137

602

943

631

415

409181

532

190

393512

611

61234

75592486

1154

1068658

1052

517

1235

688716

737


1977 1979

Council for theConservation ofIndiana Archaeologyestablished;promotes archaeologyas profession(DHPA files).

Archaeological ResourcesProtection Act (ARPA) passes.Affirms public policyof Antiquities Act of 1906and promises to improveenforcement of resourceprotection (National ParkService Web site).

Underwater archaeologi-cal investigations docu-ment over 50 Indianashipwrecks from historicaldata and result in the fieldrecording of 16-17wrecks (Jones, 1997:15).

Mary Rose, 16thcentury warship,sunk off Portsmouth,England, raised;contains Tudor artifacts(Mary Rose Trust Website).

1980s 1982

Recovery of archaeological databegins with an archaeological (orreconnaissance) level survey. Thetwo primary goals of a Phase Isurvey are identification and pre-liminary evaluation of archaeologicalsites. Historical and archaeologicalrecords help archaeologists makepredictions about what kinds ofcultural resources may be presentwithin their areas of investigation.They then determine what kinds ofmethods will be most effective forstudying the site.

Fieldwork is the critical secondstep of any archaeological investiga-tion. In general, Phase I archaeologi-cal fieldwork involves one or moreof the following techniques: pedes-trian survey, shovel probe survey,and machine sub-surface excavation.Pedestrian survey is used whentwenty-five to thirty percent or moreof the ground surface is bare andexposed. When the ground surfaceis obscured, however, archaeologistsmust employ the shovel probetechnique. Machine excavation isused only in areas where consider-able soil buildup may have deeplyburied evidence of former culturalactivities.

An example of a successfulPhase I survey occurred in 1990.The Glenn A. Black Laboratory ofArchaeology at Indiana Universityconducted an archaeological recordscheck of LaGrange County, Indiana.The initial research revealed thatvirtually nothing was known aboutthe archaeological history of thecounty! By using geological, geo-

graphical, floral, faunal and otherkinds of environmental data, how-ever, the archaeologists involved inthe Phase I survey predicted thatmore than 20,000 archaeologicalsites were probably present andwaiting to be identified withinLaGrange County alone. The archae-ologists constructed a model ofwhere the majority of these sitesmight be located and what kinds ofcultural resources might be found atthe sites. Once the records checkwas complete, the archaeologists setout to test this model by gatheringarchaeological data in the field.

The archaeologists working onthe Phase I survey of LaGrange

Phase 1

Carrying out a pedestrian survey archaeologists walk in parallel lines across an area,usually no more than ten meters apart, and visually search for signs of cultural activity.

When the ground surface is obscured, archaeologists must employ the shovel probetechnique: archaeologists excavate small holes with a shovel, usually fifty centimeters

in diameter and fifty centimeters deep, in parallel lines no more than ten meters apart.

County, Indiana used visual pedes-trian surveys and numerous inter-views with local residents to identifyand document over fifty previouslyunrecorded archaeological sites.These sites represent the entire12,000 year period of known humanoccupation of the region. Thissurvey helped to lay a sound founda-tion for future archaeological re-search within the region.Source: Mark Schurr, An ArchaeologicalSurvey of LaGrange County, Indiana,Indiana University, Glenn A. Black Labora-tory of Archaeology Reports of Investiga-tions, 91-2-1 (Bloomington, 1991).

Div

isio

n o

f H

isto

ric

Pre

serv

atio

n a

nd

Arc

haeo

logy

.

1977-1979

Virgil E. Noble, Jr.,Michigan StateUniversity conductsexcavations at FortOuiatenon, TippecanoeCounty, Indiana (GlennA. Black LaboratoryWeb site).

1980

Warren’s Shaft, vertical wellthat was part of Jerusalem’swaterworks before KingDavid, is rediscovered;provides access to ancientwaterworks system(Williams, 710).

Roman Temple ofSulis Minerva inBath, Englandexcavated(Williams, 741).

1983


1985-1986 1986 1986

Ball State University conductsexcavations at the All Seasonssite, a significant site in MiamiCo. providing data on a 3,000year period of history(Cochran and James, 1986).

Archaeologists inEgypt discoverundisturbed 3,500year old tomb ofMaya, Tutank-hamen’s treasurer(Williams, 772).

French archaeologistsreport discovery of hearthin Brazilian rockshelterradiocarbon dated toabout 32,000 years old—oldest archaeological sitein New World (Williams,772).

1984

Remains of an 8,000year old settlement,Atlit-Yam, discoveredunderwater off thecoast of Israel(Williams, 749).

Phase IIA potentially important archaeologi-cal site might undergo what isknown as “testing” or Phase IIinvestigations after it has beenlocated by a Phase I survey. Animportant site is one that may meeteligibility criteria for either theIndiana Register of Historic Sitesand Structures or the NationalRegister of Historic Places, or both.

A Phase II investigation mustbegin with a plan, or researchdesign. This plan must include asummary of previous investigationsat the site, information regardingthe cultural and physiographicalbackground of the area, researchquestions to be addressed, anddetails of the work that will beaccomplished.

The importance of a site israrely determined without some sortof subsurface investigations. PhaseII field investigations involve handexcavated test units, careful use ofmachinery to open up areas forinvestigation, and the scientificrecovery of information at everylevel. Techniques such as remotesensing can provide non-destructiveways to recover additional informa-tion. Excavations may uncoverfeatures or deposits that the archae-ologists must record. Photographs,measurements, and notes are taken,while illustrations and maps aremade of everything that is discov-ered. All artifacts and specialsamples (i.e. radiocarbon samples)are collected, but information is themost important thing recovered!

Several years ago, the RappGranary/D.D. Owen Laboratory in

New Harmony, Indiana provided thesetting for a Phase II archaeologicalinvestigation. The structure wasoriginally constructed by Germancraftsmen for George Rapp in 1817-1818. It later served as the labora-tory of geologist David Dale Owenfrom 1837 until his death in 1860.The building is one of the mostimportant sites related to NewHarmony’s Harmonist and Oweniteperiods. A recent renovation of thestructure prompted archaeologicaltesting in an attempt to “fill in thegaps” where historic records left off.

Several years of scientific testexcavations by Indiana University atthis site resulted in the discovery oftwenty-three historic cultural fea-tures within and around the struc-ture. The excavations also producedover 17,000 historic and prehistoricartifacts. These archaeological

discoveries were studied alongsidehistoric documents related to thestructure and its use. Through thisprocess, the archaeologists identifiedpreviously undocumented featuresand information about the granary,and gained dramatic insights intothe structure’s 180-year period ofuse. Part of the archaeologicalevidence that was uncovered hasbeen left in place so that the publicmay learn more about the history ofthe property and the importance ofthe archaeological record in inter-preting that history.Source: Patrick K. O’Brien, Wendy L. Natt,Mary E. Pirkl, and Elizabeth E. PennefatherO’Brien, Filling in the Blanks: Archaeologi-cal Investigations at the Historic RappGranary/D. D. Owen Laboratory in NewHarmony, Posey County, Indiana, IndianaUniversity, Office of Cultural ResourceManagement, Glenn A. Black Laboratory ofArchaeology Reports of Investigation, 97-05(Bloomington, 1999).

1983-1988

Indiana State Universitysurveys thousands ofacres in southwestIndiana and locateshundreds of prehistoricand historic sites(Stafford et al., 1988).

1986

U.S. archaeologistdiscovers tomb ofMayan woman ofhigh status challengingtheory that Mayanwomen held in lowesteem (Williams, 773).

1986

Indiana Universityexcavates Swan’s Landingsite, Harrison Co. Thissignificant Early ArchaicSite is listed in the NationalRegister of Historic Places(Glenn A. BlackLaboratory Web site).


The AbandonedShipwreck Act passes.Places managementresponsibility ofshipwrecks with stategovernments (NationalPark Service Web site).

1986 1986 1986-1987 19871986-1988 1987

Indiana Universityexcavates Little PigeonCreek Cemetery, WarrickCo.; 31 burialsuncovered, including adog (Glenn A. BlackLaboratory Web site).

The nature and age ofprehistoric and earlyhistoric human use ofcaves in south-centralIndiana is studied(Munson andMunson, 1990).

Indiana Universityexcavates Mississippianhouse basin site, Stephan-Steinkamp, Posey Co.(Glenn A. Black LaboratoryWeb site).

IUPUI investigateshistoric aboriginalsites in TippecanoeCo. (Jones andTrubowitz, 1987;Trubowitz, 1989).

In Wash., archaeologistsfind Clovis spear pointsfrom about 11500 B.C.;one of oldest occupiedsites in North America(Williams, 784).

Excavations by IndianaUniversity continue at FortKnox II, Knox Co.; militaryfort occupied 1803-1813 (Glenn A. BlackLaboratory Web site).

The Rapp Granary/David Dale Owen Laboratory was built in1817-1818. It is the largest structure of its type built byGerman craftsmen in the U.S. or Germany. It was built withsandstone and brick with interior timber framing and a tile roof.This photograph was published in George R. Lockwood, TheNew Harmony Movement (New York, 1905). Photographssuch as this one often provide archaeologists with valuableclues about a site.

Feature 16 at the Rapp Granary/D. D. Owen Laboratory site was alarge rectangular brick wall enclosure located in front of the north

granary entrance. This structure is believed to have served as anenclosure for the scales in use during the early twentieth century

when the granary was used as a flour mill. The scales still existand show a date of 1903. This feature was documented and

permanently removed from the site (O’Brien, 71, 106).

Gle

nn A

. Bla

ck L

abor

ator

y of

Arc

haeo

logy

,O

ffic

e of

Cul

tura

l Res

ourc

e M

anag

emen

t.

The illustration to the left is a profiledrawing of Feature 16 which isshown in the photograph above. Itindicates length and depth of thefeature as well as various kinds ofbuilding materials found throughexcavation.The capital letters on theprofile indicate the variety of soiltypes found at this feature. This is anexample of the type of informationwhich archaeologists record.

1987

Gle

nn A

. Bla

ck L

abor

ator

y of

Arc

haeo

logy

,O

ffic

e of

Cul

tura

l Res

ourc

e M

anag

emen

t.


1987 1988 1989 1990 1990-1991

The Hesher site, a LateWoodland cemetery in HenryCo., is investigatedby Ball State University.(Cochran, 1988).

Archaeologists investigate one of thelargest Hopewell mounds in the easternU.S. The Mount Vernon, Posey Co. sitereveals exotic and unique artifacts and iscurrently listed in the National Registerof Historic Places (Tomak, 1990).

Indiana enacts one ofU.S.’s most stringentarchaeological andhuman burial siteprotection laws, nowIndiana Code 14-21-1(DHPA files).

Native AmericanGraves Protection andRepatriation Act(NAGPRA) enacted(National Park ServiceWeb site).

Indiana University surveys OliverPhase occupation sites;prehistoric farming cultureoccupied east and west forks ofWhite River valleys between1000 and 1500 A.D. (Glenn A.Black Laboratory Web site).

1989

Muskegon Shipwreck, LaPorte Co., becomes 1stIndiana marinearchaeological site listedin National Registerof Historic Places (DHPAfiles).

Phase III

In cultural resource management,data recovery is the final and mostrefined level of archaeological siteinvestigation. First archaeologistsmust determine that a site containssignificant, undisturbed culturaldeposits that contain informationpertinent to studying questionsabout the past. The next question tobe answered is “Can the archaeologi-cal site be safely preserved in placefor future investigation?” Often thesite cannot be left undisturbed, or isendangered by development or bynatural destruction. Then the onlyway to save even a portion of thesite may be by means of systematicdata recovery—the formal excavation

Out

door

Ind

iana

, ph

otog

raph

er, Ric

hard

Fie

lds.

Large shelters were built on a Harrison County property to protect theexcavation sites and to provide work space for related activities. Thearticle “Ancient Hoosiers” in the January/February 2000 issue ofOutdoor Indiana contains more information and photographs aboutthe extensive archaeological work.

Div

isio

n o

f H

isto

ric

Pre

serv

atio

n a

nd

Arc

haeo

logy

.


1991

Indiana Universityexcavates Clampitt site,Lawrence Co.; permanentOliver Phase villageoccupied during 14thcentury (Glenn A. BlackLaboratory Web site).

of all or part of the archaeologicalsite, to preserve a representativesample of what it has to tell usabout the past.

During data recovery, archae-ologists try to recover as muchinformation as possible from thesite before it is disturbed or de-stroyed. To do this, excavationmust be very precise. A wide rangeof techniques is used to identify andrecover information from the site.Information is uncovered in manyforms, including artifacts, features,chemical evidence, and plant andanimal remains. Data recoveryexcavation is difficult, labor inten-sive, and sometimes tedious work,

but it is the best method for learn-ing detailed information about thepast.

In recent years, archaeologicalinvestigations for a gaming projectin southern Indiana included datarecovery of four prehistoric archaeo-logical sites. The sites in HarrisonCounty have yielded a wide range ofinformation about prehistoriccultures in the Ohio River Valleydating from 8500 B.C. to 500 A.D.Controlled excavation of these siteshas recovered more than 1,000cultural features and millions of

prehistoric artifacts. The earliestradiocarbon (carbon 14) date fromone site is 9930 +/- 60 years beforepresent.

All of the sites being excavatedhave yielded a wealth of unique andirreplaceable information aboutprehistoric cultures in the easternUnited States. Like any livingculture, development and change areessential to the survival of society.Archaeological data recovery allowsus to preserve pieces of our pastand learn more of past cultures,even as we develop and change.

Out

door

Ind

iana

, ph

otog

raph

er, Ric

hard

Fie

lds.

Out

door

Ind

iana

, ph

otog

raph

er, Ste

phen

Sel

lers

.

Far left: An archaeologistrecovering informationand artifacts at one ofthe sites. The hand-drawnmap and artifact bagsrecord information forfurther research andanalysis.

Left: Principalinvestigator, C. RussellStafford from IndianaState University, TerreHaute, stands in one ofthe excavated areas.The photograph showsvarious levels of excava-tion as well as thecomplex nature of theproject.

1992-1993 1992-1993

Indiana University studies theMann Site, one of the largest andmost complex archaeologicalsites in the region. Other MannPhase sites exist in southwestIndiana (Ruby, 1993).

University of NotreDame investigatesWoodland and EarlyHistoric periodsettlement patterns inLa Porte Co. (Schurr,1993).

1992

Largest Bronze Age hillfort in the British Islescovering an area of 320acres discovered inRepublic of Ireland(Williams, 841).

1993-1994 1995

Indiana Universityexcavates Cox’sWoods, an OliverPhase site (Glenn A.Black Laboratory Website).

Indiana-Purdue UniversityFort Wayne conductsarchaeological survey ofthe St. Mary’s Rivervalley–2,511 acres and131 sites (Jeske, 1996).

1993

Wabash and ErieCanal Corridor inTippecanoe Co. issurveyed forarchaeological sites(Bischoff, 1994).


Laboratory processing,analysis, and reporting

By the end of an archaeological survey or excavation project, all of thematerials recovered and data recorded are taken to an archaeologicallaboratory for processing. Perhaps the most important work of anarchaeologist is done in the laboratory. Most researchers plan for threeor four times the amount of time it took to do the fieldwork to do thelaboratory work. This allows for time to process, analyze, and interpret

the artifacts, data, and records recovered during the project.The final step in any archaeological project is a written report on the

investigations. Once data has been taken from the field by survey orexcavation all or part of the physical record of history has been modifiedor destroyed. The written report may become the only record of historyor prehistory for that site.

Step 1:

Analysis

Artifacts from eachfeature, level, unit, orother provenience arewashed separatelyfrom those of otherlocations and contexts.

Artifacts are sortedby raw material:• stone,• bone,• clay,• metal,• wood,• shell,• glass, etc.

After cleaning,artifacts arestudied by:• grid unit,• level, and• feature.

The archaeologist looks at eachartifact and type to find out:• how many were found?• which ones are most common?• what were they used for?• what changes occur through time?• what kind of past behavior do they reflect?

The written report begins with anintroduction that describes:• the nature of the project,• why it was conducted,• who did the project,• where, when, and what questions were

being investigated, and• what was expected to be found.

Artifacts and records from asite are preserved at a lab,museum, or other publicinstitution for further study.

Cleaningand

Organizing

Step 2:

WrittenReport

Step 3:

Preservation

Step 4:

The report includes:• a detailed description of the research design

and questions,• a description of the natural and environmental

characteristics of the area,• a description of the background research

on the site,• an explanation of all field and lab techniques used,

The photograph above shows a unit of a sitein Bartholomew County. Note the grid marking the

excavation unit and the hand tools on the right.

Projectile points fromthe Late Archaic Period.

Div

isio

n o

f H

isto

ric

Pre

serv

atio

nan

d Arc

haeo

logy

.

Div

isio

n o

f H

isto

ric

Pre

serv

atio

nan

d Arc

haeo

logy

.

1995 1995-2000 1996

Governor Evan Bayhissues proclamation,establishing state’s 1stIndiana ArchaeologyWeek, celebrating scienceof archaeology (DHPAfiles).

Purdue University conductsan archaeological surveyof 1,365 acres in WhiteCo. (Helmkamp, 1996).

Indiana State Universityexcavates remarkable Kirktradition site in Harrison Co.Hundreds of thousands ofartifacts recovered (Stafford,2000).

1997 1997-1998

Indiana Department ofNatural Resourcespublishes professionalarchaeological journal,Indiana Archaeology(DHPA files).

Archaeological investigationsby Ball State Universityexpand knowledge ofAfrican-American andQuaker farms in East CentralIndiana (Rotman et al.,1998).

Investigations by Ball StateUniversity and Hoosier NationalForest archaeologists providenew information aboutrockshelter utilization duringthe prehistoric period (Watersand Cochran, 1999).

1997


1999-2000 2000

Indiana has over 47,000recorded archaeologicalsites. Division of HistoricPreservation andArchaeology maintainsa database of the sites(DHPA Web site).

University of Notre Damestudies prehistoric moundsin northwest Indiana(Schurr, 1999).

Cemetery and gravesprotection legislation isstrengthened by IndianaGeneral Assembly. Plansmade for statewide databaseof cemeteries (DHPA files).

1998-1999

Materials are:• identified,• divided into classes of

artifacts such asprojectile points, axes,scrapers, grindingstones, awls,beads, nails, etc.

Artifacts are:• counted,• weighed,• measured,• recorded,• numbered according to

site, type, provenience,• entered into computer

databases.

Sometimes specializedanalyses are conducted,such as:• flotation,• carbon dating,• chemical, mathematical,

and statistical analyses.

Lab work alsoincludes:• drafting, redrawing,

and labelling sitemaps, profiles,locations of grids,units, features, etc.

• a list and analysis of all data and artifacts recovered,• written and visual descriptions of all areas

surveyed and excavated,• the condition of the site,• statement on the curation of the artifacts

and records,• interpretation of the findings

and significance of the site.

Every report shouldalso include:• a detailed bibliography,• photographs and maps

depicting the site,• the grids, the areas, and

units investigated, etc.

Materials may be:• exhibited to the public,• used in educational

displays, and• made available for

people to see and“experience”the past.

Workers cleaning and analyzingartifacts in a field laboratory

at a major archaeological site.

Out

door

Ind

iana

, ph

otog

raph

er, Ric

hard

Fie

lds.

Mappinga unit wallprofile atLanier StateHistoric Sitein Madison,Indiana.

Pho

togr

aph

cour

tesy

Kim

Tin

kham

.

Far left: Archaeologists excavatea large site. Note post moldfeatures in foreground.Left: Excavation at this siterevealed a lock on theWabash and Erie Canal.

Div

isio

n o

f H

isto

ric

Pre

serv

atio

nan

d Arc

haeo

logy

.

Div

isio

n o

f H

isto

ric

Pre

serv

atio

nan

d Arc

haeo

logy

.

1998

British archaeologist reports thatradar surveys of Angkor,Cambodia, reveal temple remainsfrom 8th-13th centuries A.D.,much older than previous ruinsfound there (Williams, 935).

1998

Israeli archaeologistsreport discovery ofoldest ruins of Jewishsynagogue from around70 A.D. near Jericho inthe West Bank(Williams, 935).

2000

Wildfires at Mesa VerdeNational Park in Coloradoendanger numerousarchaeological sites.Archaeologists performemergency archaeology torecover information (ScrippsHoward News Service).

As unique and dynamic geological formations,Indiana rockshelters have long been recognizedas potentially important sources of archaeologicalinformation. Rockshelters often provide cluesabout how people used floral and faunalresources through time, and what many of theirdaily activities were like. Data obtained fromrockshelter sites can also help moderninvestigators construct models of past climateand environment.

Only within the past few years, however, hasthe systematic investigation of these fascinatinglocales moved forward. Recent research,including investigations by Ball State University incooperation with the Hoosier National Forest,has resulted in the identification and study of over100 previously unrecorded rockshelter sites inIndiana. Rockshelter research projects continueto play a critical role in the investigation andmanagement of Indiana’s irreplaceablearchaeological heritage.

A rockshelter surveyed by Ball State University studentsand the Hoosier National Forest staff during 1998.

U.S.D.A. Forest Service, Hoosier National Forest.

Rockshelters


Indiana Department of Natural Resources

Division of Historic Preservation and Archaeology

The Archaeology Section of theDivision of Historic Preservationand Archaeology (DHPA) conductsthe state program for protecting andpreserving Indiana’s precontact(prehistoric) and historic archaeo-logical sites. Notable duties of thesection include:

• conducting reviews and comment-ing on effects of thousands offederal and state projects onarchaeological resources;

• issuing archaeological permits andconducting investigations accordingto Indiana Historic Preservation andArchaeology law (IC 14-21-1);

• providing training in and educa-tional materials about archaeologyin Indiana; coordinating Archaeol-ogy Week activities;

• serving the Native AmericanCouncil which provides a publicforum for discussion of the relation-ships of Native American issues andstate policies and procedures;

• maintaining archaeological recordsand database; creating andmaintaining a cemetery and burialgrounds registry;

• providing technical assistance to thepublic and to professionals;

• administering a grants program tofund archaeological survey and testexcavation projects.The Indiana Historic Preserva-

tion and Archaeology Law (IC 14-21-1) protects and preserves archaeo-logical and burial sites in the state.It is one of the strongest laws in thenation and it

• requires approved plans orpermits to conduct archaeologicalexcavations;

• protects from disturbance in-groundartifacts dating before December11, 1816 and human remainsdating before 1940;

• protects archaeological sites onstate properties and sites on allground in Indiana;

• encourages amateur archaeologiststo establish and maintain a code ofethics.Within the past two years, two

laws have been passed which requireadditional protection for Indianacemeteries and burial grounds.Indiana Code 14-21-2

• protects grave memorialsfrom being removed from acemetery, except under certaincircumstances;

• prohibits the buying and sellingof grave memorials and other itemsthat have been removed from acemetery.Recent additions to IC 14-21-1

• authorize the DHPA to create aregistry of cemeteries and burialgrounds;

• require development plans involv-ing ground within 100 feet of acemetery to be submitted forapproval;

• require burial grounds or cemeter-ies to be recorded in the countyrecorder’s office, with a copysent tothe Department of NaturalResources.Currently, archaeology in

Indiana is a lively and viable disci-pline contributing much to theunderstanding and enrichment ofour lives. The future of archaeologyin Indiana and elsewhere is tied notonly to new scientific and techno-logical achievements but also toincreased public awareness andsupport of legal protections for ourcultural sites and ethical standardsfor all participants.

Young students participate in a mockexcavation learning methods and

values of archaeology. Public supportof archaeological research and

protection of sites and information iscritical to the future of archaeologyand to the preservation of our past.

Opportunities are growing in Indianafor public participation in archaeology.Events like Archaeology Week provide

educational sessions, demonstrations,hands-on activities, artifact

identifications, and excavationexperiences. Avocational archaeology

groups throughout the state provideadditional ways to learn about

Indiana’s past and to help preserve itfor future generations.

Div

isio

n o

f H

isto

ric

Pre

serv

atio

n a

nd

Arc

haeo

logy

.


Selected ResourcesA Note Regarding Resources: Items are listed on this page that enhance workwith the topic discussed. Some older items, especially, may include datedpractices and ideas that are no longer generally accepted. Resourcesreflecting current practices are noted whenever possible. Some referenceslisted below are available to qualified individuals only.

Bibliography•Bischoff, Wayne. The Archaeological Survey ofthe Wabash and Erie Canal Corridor inTippecanoe County, Indiana. Michigan StateUniversity, Department of Anthropology.Lansing, 1994.•Cochran, Donald R. The Hesher Site: A LateAlbee Cemetery in East Central Indiana. BallState University, Archaeological ResourcesManagement Service Reports of Investigation, 24.Muncie, 1988.•Cochran, Donald R., and Mary Lou James.Interim Report: 1985 Excavations at the AllSeasons Site. Ball State University, Archaeologi-cal Resources Management Service Reports ofInvestigation, 20. Muncie, 1986.•Fagan, Brian M., ed. The Oxford Companion toArchaeology. New York, 1996.

Comprehensive look at archaeology andarchaeologists for wide range of audiencesincluding nonspecialists.•Helmkamp, R. Criss. White County Archaeologi-cal Data Base Enhancement Survey. PurdueUniversity, Department of Sociology andAnthropology. West Lafayette, 1996.•Jeske, Robert J. The Saint Marys River Valley:A Systematic Archaeological Survey in Allen andAdams Counties, Indiana. Indiana-PurdueUniversity Fort Wayne, Department of Sociologyand Anthropology, Report of Investigations, 5.Fort Wayne, 1996.•Jones, James R., III. “Historical Archaeology inIndiana: A Brief Summary.” Indiana Archaeology,1:1. Indiana Department of Natural Resources,Division of Historic Preservation and Archaeol-ogy. Indianapolis, 1997.•Jones, James R., III, and Amy L. Johnson.Early Peoples of Indiana. Indianapolis, 1999.

A useful overview from IDNR, DHPA.•Jones, James R., III, and Neal L. Trubowitz.1986 Archaeological Reconnaissance and Testingof Historic Occupations Along the Wabash Riverin the Vicinity of Lafayette, Tippecanoe County,Indiana. Indiana University-Indianapolis,Department of Anthropology. Indianapolis, 1987.•Munson, Patrick, and Cheryl Ann Munson. ThePrehistoric and Early Historic Archaeology ofWyandotte Cave and Other Caves in SouthernIndiana. Indiana Historical Society, PrehistoryResearch Series, 7:1. Indianapolis, 1990.•Renfrew, Colin, and Paul Bahn. Archaeology:Theories, Methods, and Practice. New York, 1991.

A comprehensive examination of the science ofarchaeology.•Rotman, Deborah L., Rachel Mancini, AaronSmith, and Elizabeth Campbell. African-Americanand Quaker Farmers in East Central Indiana:Social, Political, and Economic Aspects of Life inNineteenth-Century Rural Communities. Ball StateUniversity, Archaeological Resources Manage-ment Service Reports of Investigation, 51.Muncie, 1998.•Ruby, Bret J. An Archaeological Investigation ofMann Phase Settlement Patterns in SouthwesternIndiana. Indiana University, Glenn A. BlackLaboratory of Archaeology Reports of Investiga-tions, 93-18. Bloomington, 1993.•Schurr, Mark R. Woodland and Early HistoricPeriod Settlement Patterns in the KankakeeDrainage of La Porte County, Indiana. Universityof Notre Dame, Department of Anthropology

Reports of Investigations, 93-1. Notre Dame, 1993.•Schurr, Mark R. Geophysical Surveys of MiddleWoodland Mounds. University of Notre Dame,Department of Anthropology Report of Investiga-tions, 99-1. Notre Dame, 1999.•Stafford, C. Russell. Personal communication.Indiana State University, Anthropology Depart-ment. Terre Haute, 2000.•Stafford, C. Russell, C. Michael Anslinger,Mark Cantin, and Robert E. Pace. An Analysis ofData Center Site Surveys in Southwestern Indiana.Indiana State University, Anthropology Labora-tory Technical Report, 3. Terre Haute, 1988.•Tomak, Curtis H. The Mount Vernon Site: AHopewell Ceremonial/Burial Site in Posey County,Indiana. Indiana Department of Transportation.Indianapolis, 1990.•Trubowitz, Neal L. Archaeological Survey andTesting of Late-18th Century Settlements inCentral Indiana. Indiana University-PurdueUniversity at Indianapolis, Department ofAnthropology. Indianapolis, 1989.•Waters, Nikki A., and Donald R. Cochran.Rockshelter Survey and Testing in the HemlockCliffs and Mesmore Cliffs Areas of the HoosierNational Forest Crawford County, Indiana. BallState University, Archaeological ResourcesManagement Service Reports of Investigation,53. Muncie, 1999.•Williams, Neville. Chronology of World History.Vol. IV, 1901-1998 The Modern World. SantaBarbara, Calif., 1999.

Additional resources•Ashmore, Wendy, and Robert J. Sharer.Discovering Our Past: A Brief Introduction toArchaeology. Palo Alto, Calif., 1999.•Black, Glenn A. Angel Site: An Archaeological,Historical, and Ethnological Study. 2 vols.Indianapolis, 1967.

A comprehensive report of the author’s manyyears of research at the site.•Dibble, Harold L., Shannon P. McPherron, andBarbara J. Roth. Virtual Dig: A SimulatedArchaeological Excavation of a Middle PaleolithicSite in France. Mountain View, Calif., 2000.

Workbook and CD-ROM allows reader to learnbasics of a dig. Uses real data based on excavations.•Fagan, Brian M. Ancient North America: TheArchaeology of a Continent. New York, 2000.•Folsom, Franklin, and Mary Elting Folsom.America’s Ancient Treasures. Fourth ed.Albuquerque, N.Mex., 1993.

Guide to North American museums andarchaeological sites. Recommended for secondarylevel and adults.•Hicks, Ronald, ed., Native American Cultures ofIndiana. Muncie, Ind., 1992.•Hume, Ivor Noel. In Search of This & That:Tales from An Archaeologist’s Quest.Williamsburg, Va., 1996.•Joukowsky, Martha. A Complete Manual of FieldArchaeology. Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1980.•Justice, Noel D. Stone Age Spear and ArrowPoints of the Midcontinental and Eastern UnitedStates. Bloomington, Ind., 1987.•Kellar, James H. An Introduction to thePrehistory of Indiana. Indianapolis, 1983.•Lilly, Eli. Prehistoric Antiquities of Indiana.Indianapolis, 1937.•Mason, Ronald J. Great Lakes Archaeology. New

York, 1981.•Muller, Jon. Archaeology of the Lower OhioValley. New York, 1986.•Orser, Charles E., Jr., and Brian M. Fagan.Historical Archaeology. New York, 1995.•Pollack, David, Cheryl Ann Munson, and A. GwynnHenderson. Slack Farm and the Caborn-WelbornPeople. Kentucky Archaeological Survey, EducationSeries Number One. Lexington, 1996.•Streuver, Stuart. Koster: Americans in Searchof their Prehistoric Past. New York, 1979.•Stuart, George E., and Francis P. McManamon.Archaeology and You. Washington, D.C., 1996.•Winters, Howard D. An Archaeological Surveyof the Wabash River in Illinois. Illinois StateMuseum, Reports of Investigations, No. 20.Springfield, 1967.

Resources for educators•Indiana Humanities Council. Humanities To GoVideo and Lending Library.

Two kits relate directly to Indiana—Archaeologyand the All Seasons Site and Exploring AncientCities: Teotihuacan and Angel Mounds.•Smith, KC, and Francis P. McManamon, eds.Archaeology and Education: the Classroom andBeyond. U.S. Department of the Interior,National Park Service. Archeological AssistanceStudy Number 2. Washington, D.C., October 1991.•Rogge, A. E., and Patti Bell. Archaeology in theClassroom: A Case Study from Arizona. U.S.Department of the Interior, National Park Service.Archeological Assistance Program Technical BriefNo. 4. Washington, D.C., May 1989.

Selected student resources•Avi-Yonah, Michael. Dig This! How Archaeolo-gists Uncover Our Past. Minneapolis, 1993.

Includes methods, pioneers, and generalhistory. Color photographs, index, glossary, andpronunciation glossary; intermediate students.•Cork, Barbara, and Struan Reid. Archaeology.Tulsa, Okla., 1991.

Excellent overview. Part of the Usborne YoungScientist series.•Duke, Kate. Archaeologists Dig for Clues. NewYork, 1997.

For readers ages 5-9.•Finney, Susan, and Patricia Kindle. AmericanIndians: Pueblo to Potlatch, Totems to Tepees.Parsippany, N.J., 1985.

An independent learning unit for grades 4-8.•Hackwell, W. John. Diving to the Past:Recovering Ancient Wrecks. New York, 1988.

Explores marine archaeology; intermediatestudents.•McIntosh, Jane. Archeology. New York, 1994.

Limited text but spectacular photographs; allstudents; Eyewitness Books series.•Porell, Bruce. Digging the Past: Archaeology inYour Own Backyard. Reading, Mass., 1979.

Stories, activities, and games; intermediate students.•Sterling, Mary Ellen. Archaeology. HuntingtonBeach, Calif., 1994.

A thematic unit at the “challenging” level.•Stones and Bones! How Archaeologists TraceHuman Origins. Minneapolis, 1994.

Describes how early humans may have lived andare studied; intermediate students.•Woodland Peoples: An Educational Unit.Minnetrista Cultural Center. Muncie, Ind., 1993.

In his 1874 book, History of Madison County, Samuel Hardenwrites of what was to become Mounds State Park: “. . . Thesemounds are annually visited by pleasure seekers from differentparts of the state. Many picnics and celebrations are heldhere . . . . The query naturally comes up, When and by whomwere these mounds built? The author does not proposeanswering either of these. One thing, however, is apparent: ithas been many hundred years since this vast work was done . . . .”

Just like Harden, we are fascinated by these mounds andearthworks and the questions they raise. Fortunately, throughthe science of archaeology, we have learned much about theprehistoric peoples of Indiana.

Today we can visit two remarkable sites which provideinsight into the lives of the builders. Mounds State Park,Anderson, is an Adena-Hopewell site which contains uniquemounds and earthworks. The largest mound dates to circa 160B.C. This complex and well-organized society had a tradesystem that reached as far as the Gulf of Mexico!

Angel Mounds, Evansville, is a Mississippian site whichdates to 1100 A.D. This was a complex agricultural society. Asthe political, religious, and economic center, it was the largestsettlement of its time in Indiana, with thousands of residents.

Extensive excavation and research has been done on theseincredible mounds and the mysterious peoples who lived there.To learn more, visit soon and be informed and fascinated. Bothsites are listed in the National Register of Historic Places.Angel Mounds is a National Historic Landmark as well.

These mounds. . .

Angel MoundsState Historic Site8215 Pollack AvenueEvansville, Indiana 47715HTTP://WWW.STATE.IN.US/ISM/SITES/ANGELMOUNDS/

In the late1870s, the mounds at Anderson, Indianawere described as “By far the most unique and wellpreserved in this State . . . .” The map above, drawnin the 1870s, shows the location, orientation, andrelative size of the mounds.Source: E. T. Cox, Eighth, Ninth and Tenth Annual Reports ofthe Geological Survey of Indiana . . . 1876-77-78 (Indianapolis,1879), 129, 131.

The Mounds at Anderson have been protectedsince 1930 as an Indiana State Park. The earthworksat Mounds State Park have been the subject ofprofessional archaeological investigations sincethe late 1960s. Ball State University archaeologistshave conducted surveys and excavations since the1970s uncovering much new information abouthow the mounds were made, the dates ofconstruction, and the unique artifacts found there.The map is adapted from: Beth Kolbe, 1988 Excavations atMounds State Park, Ball State University, ArchaeologicalResources Management Service Reports of Investigation, 34(Muncie, 1992).,

Angel MoundsState Historic Site

MoundsState Park

Mounds State Park4306 Mounds RoadAnderson, Indiana 46017HTTP://WWW.STATE.IN.US/DNR/PARKLAKE/PARKS/MOUNDS.HTML

Archaeology - Indiana · 2019-10-03 · Indiana’s Cultural Resources Management Plan 1998-2003...

Documents

Transcript of Archaeology - Indiana · 2019-10-03 · Indiana’s Cultural Resources Management Plan 1998-2003...