NATIONAL REGISTERBULLETIN

Technical information on the National Register of Historic Places:survey, evaluation, registration, and preservation of cultural resources

* • U.S. Department of the InteriorNational Park ServiceCultural Resources

GUIDELINES FOREVALUATING AND REGISTERING

ARCHEOLOGICAL PROPERTIES

The mission of the Department ofInterior is to protect and provideaccess to our Nation's natural andcultural heritage and honor ourtrust responsibility to tribes.

The National Park Servicepreserves unimpaired the naturaland cultural resources and valuesof the National Park System forthe enjoyment, education, andinspiration of this and futuregenerations. The Park Servicecooperates with partners toextend the benefits of natural andcultural resource conservation andoutdoor recreation throughoutthis country and the world.

This material is partially basedon work conducted under acooperative agreement betweenthe National Conference ofState Historic PreservationOfficers and the U.S. Departmentof the Interior.

Cover photo:Adolph Bandelier at PecosNational Historical Park,New Mexico, in 1880.Photo taken byGeorge C. Bennett,Museum of New Mexico.

NATIONAL REGISTERBULLETIN

GUIDELINES FOREVALUATING AND REGISTERING

ARCHEOLOGICAL PROPERTIES

byBarbara Little

Erika Martin Seibert

Jan TownsendJohn H. Sprinkle, Jr.

John Knoerl

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, NATIONAL PARK SERVICENational Register, History and Education

2000

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 5

I. INTRODUCTION 7What is archeology? 7What is an archeological property? 7What is the purpose of this bulletin? 9Archeology and the National Historic Preservation Act 9Who can prepare nominations for archeological properties? 10Who can determine the eligibility of archeological properties? 11When should information be restricted from public access? 11Using the National Register 12What if an archeological property is nationally significant? 12What other National Register bulletins may be helpful? 12What other National Park Service guidance may be helpful? 13

II. HISTORIC CONTEXTS FOR ARCHEOLOGICAL EVALUATION 14

III. HOW ARE ARCHEOLOGICAL PROPERTIES IDENTIFIED? 17

IV EVALUATING THE SIGNIFICANCE OF ARCHEOLOGICAL PROPERTIES 19

National Register Criteria 19Criteria Considerations 19Evaluating Properties in Context 20

Local Context 20State Context 21National Context 21The Importance of Small or Overlooked Sites 21

Evaluating Archeological Properties Under the Criteria 22Criterion A: Event(s) and Broad Patterns of Events 22Criterion B: Important Persons 24Criterion C: Design, Construction, and Work of a Master 25Criterion D: Information Potential 28

Data Sets 31Important Information and Research Questions 31

Other Significance Considerations 33Areas of Significance 33Period of Significance 34

Significant Dates 35Significant Person(s) 35Cultural Affiliation 35Architect or Builder 35

Aspects, or Qualities of Integrity 35Location 38Design 39Setting 40Materials 40Workmanship 41Feeling 42Association 42

V PREPARING DOCUMENTATION FORNATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBILITY AND LISTING 43

Classification 43Sites and Districts 43Multiple Property Submissions 44

Archeological Districts: Contributing and Noncontributing Resources 45

Historic and Current Functions or Uses 46

Architectural Classification Materials 46

Narrative Description 47

Narrative Statement of Significance 49

VI. BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES 50

Previous National Park Service Documentation 50

VII. ESTABLISHING BOUNDARIES AND GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION 51

Acreage 51

UTM References 52

Verbal Boundary Description 53

Boundary Justification 53

VIIL MAPS AND PHOTOGRAPHS 54

Maps 54

Photographs 54

IX. OWNERSHIP 57

X. BIBLIOGRAPHY 58

APPENDIX A—NATIONAL REGISTER BULLETINS 61

APPENDIX B—MULTIPLE PROPERTY SUBMISSION COVER DOCUMENTSUNDER WHICH ARCHEOLOGICAL PROPERTIES HAVE BEEN NOMINATED 62

APPENDIX C—CHECKLIST FOR ARCHEOLOGICAL NOMINATIONS 65

4

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This bulletin was prepared byDr. Barbara Little and Ms. ErikaMartin Seibert, working from the1993 bulletin on historical archeol-ogy prepared by Ms. Jan Townsend,Dr. John H. Sprinkle, Jr. andDr. John Knoerl. Dr. Sprinkle andMs. Townsend prepared the finalversion of that initial bulletin basedon Dr. Knoerl's initial work. Dr. Littleexpanded the bulletin and bothDr. Little and Ms. Seibert incorpo-rated comments to prepare thefinal version. Ms. Carol D. Shull,Keeper of the National Registerand Chief of the National HistoricLandmarks Survey, reviewed allversions of the bulletin, providedguidance, and pressed first for thecompletion of a historical archeologyNational Register bulletin and thenfor a more general bulletin onarcheology.

The authors wish to thank all ofthe individuals who assisted in thedevelopment and review of thisbulletin. Mr. Douglas Kupel, for-merly a historian with Arizona StateParks, initially proposed the prepa-ration of a historical archeology bul-letin and drafted a paper on evaluat-ing historical archeological proper-ties. Although the historical archeol-ogy bulletin had been well-receivedas useful guidance, many archeolo-gists and other preservationists re-quested that a bulletin be preparedthat covered archeology in a moregeneral way. For example, many ofthe participants in National Registerworkshops given in conjunctionwith the Society for AmericanArchaeology annual meetingsrequested a broader bulletin.

Comments and input on thebulletin on historical archeologywere received from: J. Stephen

Alexandra wicz, ArchaeologicalConsulting Services; Patrick Andrus,National Park Service, National Reg-ister of Historic Places; Lawrence E.Aten, National Park Service, Inter-agency Resources Divisions; LeoBarker, National Park Service, West-ern Region Office; Beth M. Boland,National Park Service, NationalRegister of Historic Places; HarryE. Bradley, Jr., U.S. Department ofCommerce, Office of Federal Prop-erty Programs; Gordon Chappell,National Park Service, WesternRegional Office; Lloyd N. Chapman,National Park Service, Mid-AtlanticRegional Office; Patty Chrisman,National Park Service, NationalRegister of Historic Places; WilliamT. Civish, Bureau of Land Manage-ment, Branch of Recreation, Cultural& Wilderness; Alice P Coneybeer,General Services Administration,Region 4; Kirk A. Cordell, NationalPark Service, Southeast RegionalOffice; Julia G. Costello, Societyfor Historical Archaeology; ShellyDavis-King, Infotec Research, Inc.;Holly Dunbar, National Park ServiceWestern Regional Office; KathrynB. Eckert, Michigan Departmentof State; Jeanette Gaston, IdahoTransportation Department, LelandGilsen, Oregon State Historic Preser-vation Office; Donald L. Hardesty,University of Nevada, Reno, Depart-ment of Anthropology; MarilynHarper, National Park Service,National Register of Historic Places;Susan L. Henry, National ParkService, Interagency ResourcesDivision, Preservation PlanningBranch; Martha Sharp Joukowsky,Archaeological Institute of America;Roger E. Kelly, National ParkService, Western Regional Office;Thomas E. King, Consultant; Ruth-

ann Knudson, National Park Service,Archeological Assistance Division;Jan Lawson, National Park Service,Death Valley National Monument;Antoinette J. Lee, National ParkService, National Register of HistoricPlaces; Ben Levy, National ParkService, History Division; GretchenLuxenberg, National Park Service,Pacific Northwest Regional Office,Cathy Masters, National Park Ser-vice, Midwest Archeological Center;Barbara E. Mattick, Florida Depart-ment of State, Division of HistoricResources; Linda Flint McClelland,National Park Service, NationalRegister of Historic Places; Frances PMcManamon, National Park Service,Archeological Assistance Division;Diane Miller, National Park Service,Interagency Resource Division,Information Management Unit;Hugh C. Miller, Virginia Departmentof Historic Resources; Nancy Miller,National Conference of State His-toric Preservation Officers; David L.Morgan, Kentucky Heritage Council;Kenneth H. P'Pool, Mississippi De-partment of Archives and History;Patricia L. Parker, National ParkService, Interagency ResourcesDivision, Preservation PlanningBranch; Margaret Pepin-Donat,National Park Service, WesternRegional Office; Paul Robinson,Rhode Island Historical PreservationCommission; Stephanie Rodeffer,Western Archeological and Con-servation Center, National Park Ser-vice; Beth L. Savage, National ParkService, National Register HistoricPlaces; Douglas H. Scovill, NationalPark Service, Anthropology Divi-sion; Donna J. Seifert, John MilnerAssociates; Carol D. Shull, NationalPark Service, National Register ofHistoric Places, National Historic

Landmarks Survey; Brona Simon,Massachusetts Historical Commis-sion; Cathy Buford Slater, ArkansasHistoric Preservation Program; CarlSpath, Metcalf Archaeological Con-sultants, Inc.; Pat H. Stein, ArizonaState Parks; Thomas Thiessen, Na-tional Park Service, Midwest Archeo-logical Center; and Robert Wilson,National Park Service, SoutheastArcheological Center.

Comments and input on thebulletin on archeology were re-ceived from: Michael A. Aimone,DCS/Installations and Logistics,Department of the Airf orce; DaphneOwens Battle, Alabama HistoricalCommission; Mark F. Baumler andStaff, Montana State Historic Preser-vation Office; Ira Carl Beckerman,Pennsylvania Department of Trans-portation; Diane Dallal and Mem-bers, The Professional Archaeologistsof New York City, South StreetSeaport Museum; Elsa Gilbertson,Vermont Division for Historic Pres-ervation; Leland Gilsen, OregonState Historic Preservation Office;David B. Guldenzopf, Departmentof the Army; Ruben O. Hernandezand Staff, Resource Stewardship,Tennessee Valley Authority; ThomasE. King, Consultant; Chris Kula,Pennsylvania Department ofTransportation; Joni L. Manson,Ohio Historical Society; CecilMcKithan and Staff, National ParkService, Southeast Regional Office;Anmarie Medin, California Depart-ment of Transportation; Sheila Mone,California Department of Transpor-tation; Nancy Niedernhofer, Oregon

State Historic Preservation Office;Sarah Pope, National Park Service,National Register of Historic Places;Sue Henry Renaud, National ParkService, Heritage Preservation Ser-vices; Becky Saleeby, National ParkService, Alaska Support Office; BethL. Savage, National Park Service,National Register of Historic Places;Gary D. Shaffer, Maryland Depart-ment of Housing and CommunityDevelopment; Carol D. Shull,National Park Service, NationalRegister of Historic Places, NationalHistoric Landmarks Survey; DaveSkilton, Oregon State Historic Pres-ervation Office; Gary P Smith andStaff, Bureau of Land Management,Montana State Office; CatherineSpohn, Pennsylvania Department ofTransportation; Fern Swenson, StateHistorical Society of North Dakota;Charlotte Taylor and Staff, RhodeIsland Historical Preservation andHeritage Commission; Al Tonetti,ASC Group, Inc.; Jan Townsend,Bureau of Land Management,Eastern States; Rosetta Virgilio,Nuclear Regulatory Commission;John R. Welch, Bureau of IndianAffairs, Fort Apache Agency andWhite Mountain Apache Tribe.

Dr. Little and Ms. Martin Seibertespecially would also like to thankthe following people who partici-pated in the Evaluation subgroupduring the Workshop on Evaluatingand Improving Federal ArcheologyGuidance in Washington, D.C.,June 27-29, 2000 and providedvaluable comments during the laststages of this bulletin's preparation:

Jeff Altschul, Statistical Research,Inc.; Sarah T. Bridges, Natural Re-sources Conservation Service; Tho-mas Emerson, Illinois Departmentof Transportation; Mike Hargrave,U.S. Army Construction EngineersResearch Laboratory; William Reed,U.S. Forest Service, Boise NationalForest; Brona Simon, MassachusettsHistorical Commission; JosephTainter, U.S. Forest Service, RockyMountain Research Station.

The collective contribution ofpeople who gave their time andexpertise in commenting hasvastly improved the quality ofthis publication.

This bulletin has been preparedpursuant to the National HistoricPreservation Act of 1966, asamended, which directs theSecretary of the Interior to developand make available informationconcerning historic properties.It was developed under the generaleditorship of Carol D. Shull, Keeperof the National Register of HistoricPlaces and Chief of the NationalHistoric Landmarks Survey. BethL. Savage, architectural historian,National Register of Historic Places,is responsible for publicationscoordination. Sarah Dillard Pope,historian, National Register ofHistoric Places, provides editorialand technical support. Commentson this publication may be directedto Keeper, National Register ofHistoric Places, National Park Ser-vice, 1849 C Street, NW, NC400,Washington, D.C. 20240.

I. INTRODUCTION

WHAT ISARCHEOLOGY?

Archeology is the study ofpast ways of life through materialremains. Archeology is oftencombined with oral history andethnography to generate multi-disciplinary or interdisciplinarystudies of past lifeways and is usu-ally categorized as a social science.In the United States it is consideredone of the four fields of anthropol-ogy along with cultural, biological,and linguistic anthropology.

Archeologists have at least threeconnected over-arching goals. Thefirst is to reconstruct sequences ofsocieties and events in chronologicalorder in local and regional contexts.The second is to reconstruct pastlifeways, including the ways thatpeople made a living (such as howthey obtained and raised food aswell as how they produced, distrib-uted and consumed tools and othergoods); the ways they used the land-scape (such as the size and distribu-tion of camps, villages, towns, andspecial places); and their interactionswith other societies and within theirown society (such as householdstructure, social organization, politi-cal organizations and relationships).The third is to achieve some under-standing of how and why humansocieties have changed through time.

To pursue these goals, archeolo-gists must assemble informationfrom many individual sites. Thesynthesis of archeological researchrequires a great deal of time, but it isthe accumulation and comparison ofanswers to many questions of seem-ingly local or short-term interest thatallow questions of major anthropo-logical significance to be addressed.

For example, archeologists seek tounderstand the effects of environ-mental change and populationpressure and the impact of humanactions on the landscape. Suchquestions often require pieces ofinformation from numerous smalland large sites. Like most sciences,archeology is less involved withspectacular discoveries than withtesting modest hypotheses aboutrather humble phenomena. Theaccumulated results of such testsprovide the basis for large scale re-search. Thus, no one should be sur-prised at the fact that archeologistsoften work more on small, simple,ordinary, and seemingly commonproperties rather than the rare, big,impressive monuments.

WHAT IS ANARCHEOLOGICALPROPERTY?

As humans interact with theirenvironment and with each other,they leave behind evidence of theiractions. Derived from the commonphrase "archeological site," theNational Register defines an arch-eological property as the place orplaces where the remnants of a pastculture survive in a physical contextthat allows for the interpretation ofthese remains. It is this physicalevidence of the past and its pattern-ing that is the archeologist's database. The physical evidence, orarcheological remains, usually takes

Figure 1. Metal artifacts of Spanish origin excavated from site LA 12315 inBernalillo County, New Mexico, represent the physical remnants resulting fromcontact between the Spanish and Native American groups in the southwesternUnited States. (Museum of Albuquerque)

the form of artifacts (e.g., fragmentsof tools or ceramic vessels), features(e.g., remnants of walls, cookinghearths, or trash middens), andecological evidence (e.g., pollensremaining from plants that were inthe area when the activities occurred).Ecological remains of interest toarcheologists are often referred toas "ecofacts." Things that are ofarcheological importance may bevery subtle, that is, hard to see andrecord. It is not only artifacts them-selves that are important but thelocations of artifacts relative to oneanother, which is referred to asarcheological context (not to beconfused with historic contexts,discussed below).

In accordance with National Reg-ister terminology, an archeologicalproperty can be a district, site, build-ing, structure, or object. However,archeological properties are mostoften sites and districts.

An archeological property maybe "prehistoric" (pre-contact),"historic" (post-contact), or containcomponents from both periods.What is often termed prehistoricarcheology studies the archeologicalremains of indigenous Americansocieties as they existed before sub-stantial contact with Europeans andresulting written records. The Na-tional Historic Preservation Acttreats prehistory as a part of historyfor purposes of national policy;therefore the terms "historic," and,"historical," as used in this docu-ment, refer to both pre and post-contact periods. We use the term"pre-contact" instead of "prehistoric"in this bulletin unless we are directlyquoting materials which use theterm "prehistoric," quoting legisla-tion or regulations, or unless we arereferring to the language used inother bulletins.

The date of contact varied acrossthe country. Therefore there is nosingle year that marks the transitionfrom pre-contact to post-contact.It is important to use the periodsof significance for a property tounderstand its chronological placein the history of what is now the

Figure 2. An excavated Spanish house from site LA 12315 in Bernalillo County,New Mexico, is an example of an archeological feature.(Museum of Albuquerque)

D

I I I I lcm.1

I1

/

1

F

da

j

G•tK

Figure 3: Ecofacts can include juniper berries, charred corn cobs, corn kernels,squash seeds, egg shell fragments, wild plant seeds, peach pits, gourd seeds,and domesticated beans. (Museum of Albuquerque)

8

United States. For example, between1492 and 1495, Christopher Columbuslanded on the island of Puerto Rico;Juan Ponce de Leon named and ex-plored the Florida peninsula in 1513;the English labeled a portion of theAtlantic coastline (now North Caro-lina) as "Virginia" in 1584, and JeanNicolet arrived in Wisconsin in 1634.In the western United States, Juande Anza contacted the Native Ameri-cans of what is now inland SouthernCalifornia in 1749, the year that Alex-andria, Virginia, already a thrivingport, was officially chartered; andMeriwether Lewis and William Clarkfirst contacted the Native Americansof the northwest plains in 1805, sev-eral centuries after Columbus arrivedin the New World. Thus, the bound-ary between the pre-contact andpost-contact periods is individuallydefined from region to region. Whatconstitutes contact between NativeAmericans and Europeans also varies.In most regions of the country, Na-tive American groups experiencedEuropean contact through long-rangetrade and the diffusion of Europeandiseases long before they had anydirect, face-to-face interaction withEuropeans.

Historical archeology is the arche-ology of sites and structures datingfrom time periods since significantcontact between Native Americansand Europeans. Documentaryrecords as well as oral traditions canbe used to better understand theseproperties and their inhabitants.An integrated historical and archeo-logical investigation will generallyproduce more information abouta particular historic property (oractivities associated with that prop-erty) than would have been gleanedthrough the separate study of eitherthe archeological remains or thehistorical record alone. For reasonsof consistency, we use the term"post-contact" instead of "historical,"when referring to archeology, whereappropriate, in this bulletin unlesswe are directly quoting materialswhich use the term "historical,"quoting legislation or regulations,or unless we are referring to thelanguage used in other bulletins.

Archeological properties also mayinclude standing or intact buildingsor structures that have a direct his-torical association with below-groundarcheological remains. Historicplaces such as Mount Vernon, thehome of George Washington, thatare well-recognized for their histori-cal and architectural importanceoften contain hidden archeologicalcomponents.

Archeological remains can beterrestrial or underwater. Althoughit is common to think of underwaterarcheology as dealing exclusively withshipwrecks, there are many types ofsites that are submerged. Some sites,for example, are submerged underthe water of reservoirs.

Archeologists strive to better un-derstand humankind and its historythrough the study of the physicalremains that are left behind and thepatterning of these remains. Evenmodern trash cans and landfills maybe worthy of investigation (e.g., Rathje1977,1979). For the purposes of theNational Register of Historic Places,however, archeological properties areat least 50 years old. An archeologicalproperty less than 50 years old maybe listed in the National Register if theexceptional importance of the archeo-logical remains can be demonstrated.

WHAT IS THE PURPOSEOF THIS BULLETIN?

The purpose of this bulletin isto assist in the documentation ofarcheological properties for theNational Register. Across theUnited States, archeological proper-ties are a finite and increasinglythreatened cultural resource.Because archeological sites containa unique source of informationabout the past, their study can oftenrequire a considerable investmentof personnel and funding in back-ground research, excavation, andcuration. As the only official nationallisting of important archeologicalproperties, the National Register isa valuable tool in the managementand preservation of our increasinglyrare archeological resources. Thus,National Register nominations

should be prepared for archeologicalproperties where the managementor preservation of the property isanticipated or desirable. All arche-ologists should be well versed inthe kinds and level of informationneeded to complete a NationalRegister nomination form prior toconducting fieldwork.

In many ways, a National Regis-ter nomination often is similar to asynopsis of an archeological researchreport. Research summaries describethe physical environment of the site,sketch the cultural background forthe project area, outline the historyof previous investigations, detail thenature of the archeological recordat the site, and elucidate the impor-tant scientific questions that wereaddressed by the study. NationalRegister nominations contain com-ponents comparable to this idealresearch report, with specific em-phasis on the description of the siteand its significance in understandingour past (See also, Sprinkle 1995).

This bulletin provides specificguidance on how to prepareNational Register of Historic Placesnomination forms for archeologicalproperties. This guidance appliesalso to the preparation of the indi-vidual nominations that accompanymultiple property National Registernominations. It also applies to Deter-mination of Eligibility (DOE) docu-ments. Although DOE documentsneed not be prepared on the stan-dard nomination forms, use of theforms will ensure that all relevantinformation is included.

ARCHEOLOGYAND THENATIONAL HISTORICPRESERVATION ACT

Most archeology in theUnited States is done as a result ofstatute and regulation, particularlythat of the National Historic Preser-vation Act of 1966, as amended(NHPA). Section 106 of the NationalHistoric Preservation Act requiresthat Federal agencies take intoaccount the effect their projects

have on properties listed in oreligible for listing in the NationalRegister of Historic Places. As partof the process, the State HistoricPreservation Officer (SHPO), Fed-eral Preservation Officer (FPO) orTribal Historic Preservation Officer(THPO) and the Advisory Councilon Historic Preservation, whereappropriate, must be afforded anopportunity to comment on theproposed project. It is the respon-sibility of the Federal Agency tocomply with the Advisory Council'sregulations, 36 CFR Part 800, toensure that these cultural resourcesare considered in the Federal plan-ning process.

The evaluation criteria for theNational Register of Historic Placesare used for the daily work ofcultural resource management byevery Federal agency to identifycultural resources that may beaffected by Federal or Federallyassisted projects. The criteria areapplied far beyond the actual listingof sites in the Register; they areapplied to nearly every potentiallythreatened site on Federal, muchstate land, and on private lands.Defining the research potential andother values of archeological sitesand districts according to these crite-ria has affected the way the public,as well as the profession, regards thesignificance of archeology. There hasbeen a great deal of discussion inthe professional literature about thesignificance concept and its applica-tion to archeological properties.For an annotated bibliography seeBriuer and Mathers (1997). See alsoBriuer and Mathers (1996) and Leesand Noble (1990a, 1990b). Differentgroups value properties for manydifferent reasons. The importanceof consultation with descendantand other concerned communitieshas been emphasized in much pro-fessional and scholarly literature(Dongoske et al. 2000; Stapp andLongenecker 2000; Epperson 1999;Blakey 1997; Blakey and LaRoche1997; Swidler et al. 1997), encourag-ing professionals to promotecommunication among the social,

Listing of a property in the National Register of Historic Placesdoes not give the Federal government any control over aproperty, nor does it impose any financial obligations on theowners, or obligations to make the property accessible to thepublic, or interfere with an owner's right to alter, manage,or dispose of their property. Listing in the National Registerprovides recognition that a property is significant to the Nation,the State, or the community and assures that Federal agenciesconsider the historic values of the property in the planning forFederal or Federally assisted projects. In addition, listing in theNational Register ensures that significant archeological resourcesbecome part of a national memory. Listing may influence thepublic's perception of archeological resources, and often influencesa community's attitude toward its heritage (See also NPS 1994:viii, ix; Little 1999).

For more information about the Advisory Council's regulationsand Section 106, see the website for the Advisory Council forHistoric Preservation at www.achp.gov, or refer to the FederalRegister/Vbl. 64, No. 95.

scientific, and preservation commu-nities about the significance concept,archeology, and cultural resourcemanagement in general.

WHO CAN PREPARENOMINATIONS FORARCHEOLOGICALPROPERTIES?

Anyone may prepare an archeo-logical property nomination andsubmit it to the National Registerthrough the appropriate SHPO, aFPO, or a THPO. At a minimum, thepreparer(s) should have a first-handknowledge of the relevant archeo-logical and historical literature andof archeological resources similarto the property being nominatedor have the assistance of personswho do.

In general, archeologists whomeet the minimum qualifications fora professional in archeology havethe knowledge or expertise neededto adequately describe and evaluate

the significance of an archeologicalproperty. These qualifications in-clude a graduate degree in archeol-ogy, anthropology, or a related field;field and analytical experience inNorth American archeology; at leastone year of full-time supervisoryexperience in the study of archeo-logical properties; and a demon-strated ability to carry research tocompletion. With guidance from aSHPO, FPO, or THPO or Federalagency or with training throughparaprofessional certification pro-grams or academic course work,avocational archeologists and otherscan acquire the knowledge neededto prepare archeological nomina-tions. The minimum qualificationsfor an archeologist are outlined inthe Professional QualificationStandards for Archeology in theSecretary of the Interior's Standardsand Guidelines for Archeology andHistoric Preservation (48 FR 44716).Laws, regulations, standards, andconventions related to cultural re-sources can be found on the Internetat <www.cr.nps.gov/linklaws.htm>.

10

WHO CAN DETERMINETHE ELIGIBILITY OFARCHEOLOGICALPROPERTIES?

Section 106 of the NationalHistoric Preservation Act (NHPA)requires Federal agencies to considerthe impacts of their undertakings onproperties included in or eligible forinclusion in the National Register ofHistoric Places. Regulations providetwo ways to make eligibility evalu-ations. Formal determinations aremade by the Keeper of the NationalRegister at the request of the Federalagency official (36 CFR 63.2). Morecommonly, Federal agencies usethe Consensus Determination ofEligibility (Consensus DOE) processprovided by Section 800.4 of theAdvisory Council on HistoricPreservation's regulations. Thisallows Federal decision makers, inconsultation with SHPOs, FPOs orTHPOs, and other consulting partiesto assess a property and, shouldthey both agree that it meets thecriteria for listing on the NationalRegister of Historic Places, treat theproperty as eligible for purposes ofcompliance with Section 106 of theNHPA as implemented by theCouncil's regulations.

The use of the consensus processdoes not allow for a lower thresholdfor significance than the formalDetermination of Eligibility or Na-tional Register listing procedures.Determination of Eligibility is alegally recognized finding that aproperty meets the criteria for listingin the National Register. UnderSection 106, properties that areeligible are given the same legalstatus as properties formally listedin the National Register, requiringthat the Federal agency official"take into account" the effects of anundertaking upon them. To qualify,a property must be found to meetone or more of the National Registercriteria (See "Evaluating Archeologi-

cal Properties Under the Criteria/'in Section IV) either by the formaldetermination of the Keeper (36 CFR63) or by the consensus process. It isessential to note that the same criteria,including concepts of significanceand integrity, apply to propertiesdetermined eligible and thoseaccepted by the Keeper for formallisting in the National Register. Thismeans that a property determinedeligible could be nominated to theNational Register because it meetsthe same criteria, although nomina-tion is not legally required.

WHEN SHOULDINFORMATION BERESTRICTED FROMPUBLIC ACCESS?

Although the information in theNational Register is part of thepublic record, Section 304 of theNational Historic Preservation Act(NHPA), as amended in 1992 andSection 9(a) of the ArcheologicalResources Protection Act (ARPA)provide the legal authority for re-stricting information about archeo-logical properties. The NationalRegister bulletin Guidelines forRestricting Information About Historicand Prehistoric Resources specifies thelegislative authority and providesprocedural guidelines for restrictinginformation in the National Registeras well as in other inventories.

Section 304 (a) Authority toWithhold from Disclosure, readsas follows:

The head of a Federal agencyor other public official receivinggrant assistance pursuant to thisAct, after consultation with theSecretary, shall withhold fromdisclosure to the public, informa-tion about the location, character,or ownership of a historicresource if the Secretary and theagency determine that disclosuremay — (1) cause a significant inva-

sion of privacy; (2) risk harm to thehistoric resource; or (3) impede theuse of a traditional religious site bypractitioners.

In this context privacy refers to theprivacy of individuals, as this term isdefined by Federal law.

Archeological Resources Protec-tion Act (ARPA) protects archeologi-cal resources on public lands andIndian lands. Section 9(a) permitsthe withholding from the public ofinformation concerning the natureand location of any archeologicalresource unless such informationdoes "not create a risk of harm tosuch resources or to the site at whichsuch resources are located" [(9(a)(2)].

The full text of the relevant sectionsof these laws should be consulted.

Vandalism, artifact collecting(also called pot hunting, looting,relic hunting, bottle collecting, etc.)and removal of historic featuresor structures are all activities thatdiminish the integrity of an archeo-logical site. In order to minimize thepossibility that these activities willoccur as a result of nominating thesite to the National Register, thepreparer or the appropriate Preser-vation Officer may ask that thespecific location of the property berestricted. There is no need to provethat a particular site is at risk if othersimilar types of sites are endan-gered. Other kinds of information(e.g., the presence of human remainsor marketable artifacts) may also berestricted. Restricted informationother than location should be clearlymarked as such on a separate con-tinuation sheet and not in the bodyof the text. Locational information isprovided in specific sections of thenomination and is deleted easily.For this reason, the preparer shouldensure that locational informationis indeed restricted to easily deletedparts of the text and not scatteredthroughout the description ofthe property.

i i

If the property and its location aregenerally known, then locationalinformation should not be restricted.Also, if all of the site informationshould be made available to thoseconducting research or, for exampledeveloping heritage tourism or edu-cation projects, then the informationshould not be restricted.

USING THENATIONAL REGISTER

The National Register helps usunderstand and appreciate ourheritage and what specific placesmean in American history. NationalRegister documentation is used byresearchers, planners, teachers,tourism professionals, communityadvocates, property owners and thegeneral public. National Registerdocumentation is an importantsource of archeological informationdirectly available to the generalpublic. The National Register Infor-mation System (NRIS) is a data basethat is available to anyone via theInternet as a link on the NationalRegister Web Page: www.nr.nps.gov.It does not contain specific locationalinformation for properties wherethis information is restricted. TheNRIS facilitates research that isregional and comparative. Multipleproperty documentation, in par-ticular, can provide excellent sourcematerial for both professional re-search and popular interpretation(See Appendix B of this bulletin).

The National Register's Teachingwith Historic Places program devel-ops lesson plans based on NationalRegister documentation. Theselesson plans are available to teachersand others via the Internet at< www.cr.nps.gov/nr/twhp >.National Register travel itineraries,Discover Our Shared Heritage,describe and link registered historicplaces. Travel itineraries are availableon the Internet at www.cr.nps.gov/nr/travel and some are availablein print.

Listing of resources promotestheir preservation rather than de-struction, thereby fostering steward-ship of significant places. Planningis more efficiently done when infor-mation about properties that arerecognized as significant is readilyavailable in nominations. Unlessproperties are actually listed in theNational Register, it is difficult forarcheological sites—particularlythose not readily apparent to thecasual observer—to be fully appre-ciated by the public. However, theSection 106 process treats propertiesthat are eligible for the NationalRegister in the same manner asproperties that are listed in the Na-tional Register for the purposes ofmanaging archeological properties.

WHAT IF ANARCHEOLOGICALPROPERTY ISNATIONALLYSIGNIFICANT?

Archeological properties arenominated at the local, state, ornational level of significance. TheSHPO, THPO or the FPO make therecommendation as to level of sig-nificance based upon the documen-tation presented in the nomination.Most archeological sites are listedas significant at a statewide orlocal level. Note that" state wide" ischecked for "regionally" significantproperties. The preservation officermay check "nationally" significantif the significance of the propertytranscends regional significance.

The Secretary of the Interior cango a step further with national sig-nificance and designate a propertyas a National Historic Landmark(NHL). In order to make this deter-mination, the Secretary applies theNHL Criteria and follows the pro-cedures in 36 CFR, Part 65-NationalHistoric Landmarks Program. TheNHL Criteria set a stringent test for

national significance, including highhistorical integrity. There are sixNHL Criteria, however, archeologi-cal sites are evaluated generallyunder Criterion 6, which reads:

(6) that have yielded informationof major scientific importanceby revealing new cultures, or byshedding light upon periods ofoccupation over large areas ofthe United States. Such sites arethose which have yielded, orwhich may reasonably beexpected to yield, data affectingtheories, concepts and ideas to amajor degree.

If a property appears to benationally significant and qualify fordesignation as a National HistoricLandmark, then Appendix V ofHow to Complete the National RegisterRegistration Form should be con-sulted for additional guidelines oncompleting the National Registerform and providing supplementalinformation. (Also see technicalbriefs on the NHL program: Grumet1988; 1990.) In-depth guidance isprovided in the National Registerbulletin How to Prepare National His-toric Landmark Nominations (For moreinformation on ordering and view-ing National Register Bulletins viathe Internet, go to: www.cr.nps,gov/nr/publications).

WHAT OTHERNATIONALREGISTER BULLETINSMAY BE HELPFUL?

Appendix A, of this bulletin liststhe current National Register bulle-tins that provide guidance on nomi-nating properties to the NationalRegister. The primary bulletin for allindividual and district nominationsis How to Complete the National Regis-ter Registration Form. How to Completethe National Register Multiple PropertyDocumentation outlines how to pre-pare a multiple property documen-tation form.

12

It is important to consult How toApply the National Register Criteriafor Evaluation, especially when evalu-ating archeological properties thatmay also be important for theirassociation with historical events orbroad patterns, significant persons,or significant architecture. How toEstablish Boundaries for NationalRegister Properties and in particularits appendix, Definition of NationalRegister Boundaries for ArcheologicalProperties, will be especially helpful.Those working with places of cul-tural value to local communities,Indian tribes, other indigenousgroups, and minority groups willwant to consult Guidelines for Evalu-ating and Documenting TraditionalCultural Properties. Other NationalRegister Bulletins, especially thoseon particular resource types such as:America's Historic Battlefields, MiningSites, and Rural Historic Landscapes,may also be useful.

In addition to the requirementsdescribed in this and other NationalRegister bulletins, individual SHPOs,THPOs and FPOs may request addi-tional information not required aspart of a complete National Registerform. Prior to budgeting for, orembarking upon, a nominationproject, consult the appropriatePreservation Officer about addi-tional requirements and the nomi-nation review process.

WHAT OTHERNATIONAL PARKSERVICE GUIDANCEMAY BE HELPFUL?National Park Service Thematic

Framework (NPS 1996)www.cr.nps.gov/history/thematic.html

Archeological Assistance ProgramTechnical Briefs www.cr.nps.gov/aad/aepubs.htm#briefsl):#3: Archeology in the NationalHistoric Landmarks Program.1988,1990. Robert S. Grumet.#10: The National HistoricLandmarks Program ThemeStudy and Preservation Planning.1992. Robert S. Grumet.

Heritage Preservation Services(www2.cr.nps.gov): ProtectingArcheological Sites on Private Lands.1993. Susan L. Henry Preserva-tion Planning Branch, Inter-agency Resources Division,National Park Service.

Strategies for Protecting ArcheologicalSites on Private Lands. 2000.Susan L. Henry Renaud. HeritagePreservation Services, NationalPark Service, www2.cr.nps.gov/pad/strategies

13

II. HISTORIC CONTEXTS FORARCHEOLOGICAL EVALUATION

Historic contexts provide a basisfor judging a property's significanceand, ultimately, its eligibility underthe Criteria. Historic contexts arethose patterns, themes, or trends inhistory by which a specific occur-rence, property, or site is understoodand its historic meaning (and ulti-mately its significance) is made clear.Context discussion includes relevantinformation from what is oftencalled a "culture history" or "histori-cal and archeological background"section in archeological site reports.This bulletin addresses evaluation,but survey and identification goalsalso should be based on historiccontexts.

A historic context is a body ofthematically, geographically, andtemporally linked information. Foran archeological property, the his-toric context is the analytical frame-work within which the property'simportance can be understood andto which an archeological study islikely to contribute importantinformation.

A historic context is multi-dimensional; numerous contextsmay be appropriate for an indi-vidual archeological property. Forexample, an architectural contextwould be applicable if one werenominating a property with a stand-ing structure that is directly associ-ated with the archeological depositsand is also an excellent example ofan important architectural style thathas been rarely documented.

Many factors influence thedetermination of which contextsare most important vis-a-vis a givenarcheological property. These factors

include the type of property; thedata sets and archeological pattern-ing represented at the site; theregion in which the property islocated; the time period that theproperty was occupied or used; thehistory of the region where the siteis located; the role that the propertyplayed in the historical developmentof the jurisdiction, state, and regionin which it is located; the property'srole in America's history; the infor-mation identified in the State

historic preservation plan basedupon work and research that hasalready been done; and the researchinterests and theoretical orientationof the archeologist.

Archeological properties can beassociated with a variety of historiccontexts, and these contexts willcontain varying levels of refinementand sophistication. Only those con-texts important to understandingand justifying the significance of theproperty must be discussed.

EXAMPLE: Through research one has learned that the well-preserved ruins of an eighteenth-century sugar factory are di-rectly linked to the chartering and early economic developmentof a town in which they are located. The ruins also are the onlysurviving sugar factory ruins that illustrate the region's earlymaritime and international trade activities. In addition, researchindicates that 100 years after its abandonment the sugar factoryhoused a state militia unit for a few weeks; this was the onlyother use of the property.

• To illustrate the sugar factory's significance, discuss theestablishment and early economic development of the townand the maritime and international trade activities of theregion at the time the factory was in operation. The associationof the sugar factory with these activities, as well as the tech-nology of sugar production, must be addressed.

• Assuming no historical importance associated with the militia'sstay, however, it is unlikely that an archeological study of theproperty would contribute information important to under-standing the state's military history. As a result, this aspect ofthe property's history need not be discussed as a context.

• If the use of the factory by the militia unit has a bearing onthe integrity of the property, this should be noted in thedescriptive text.

14

The discussion of historic contextsshould be organized in a mannerthat best presents the context infor-mation for the given property.Document the supporting evidencefor the significance criteria checkedand for the information categories(Areas of Significance, HistoricFunction, Period of Significance,and Cultural Affiliation). If appli-cable, document Architectural Clas-sification, Criteria Considerations,Significant Dates, Significant Person,and Architect/Builder. Each informa-tion category does not need to bediscussed separately. Nevertheless,the reader should be able to see thelink between the information pre-sented in the discussion of historiccontexts and that provided in theinformation categories. For example,if "Education" is entered under"Areas of Significance," the "HistoricContext" discussion must includesufficient information to justifyentering that category.

In addition, the informationpresented in the historic contextsand in other sections of the signifi-cance section must be interrelated.For example, a nomination thatincludes hypotheses on economicdevelopment among its importantresearch questions should havea discussion of the property's,district's, or region's economic de-velopment in the historic context.

Major decisions about identifying,evaluating, registering, and treatinghistoric properties are most reliablymade in the context of other relatedproperties. A historic context is anorganizational format that groupsinformation about related historicproperties, based on a theme, geo-graphic limits and chronologicalperiod. Contexts should identifygaps in data and knowledge tohelp determine what is significantinformation.

The National Register bulletinHow to Apply the National RegisterCriteria for Evaluation states that,

Further guidance may be found in the National Registerbulletin How to Complete the National Register Multiple PropertyDocumentation Form. For additional guidance, consult theNational Park Service's Thematic Framework (1996). TheThematic Framework provides guidance on the developmentof historic contexts. Consideration of the main themes andassociated topics will promote a framework that includes manylevels of community and regional history. The framework isdesigned to assist in the development of historic contexts byguiding researchers to ask thorough questions about a propertyor region. The text of the Thematic Framework is available atwww.cr.nps.gov/history/thematic.html. While the ThematicFramework may serve as a guide for developing contexts,please see, "Areas of Significance," in Section IV of this bulletinfor guidance on determining the area of significance.

".. .a property is not eligible if itcannot be related to a particulartime period or cultural group and,as a result, lacks any historic contextwithin which to evaluate the impor-tance of the information to begained." However, pre-contact siteswhich lack temporal diagnostics orradiocarbon dates may still be eli-gible within a context which definesimportant atemporal or non-culturalquestions, such as those that concernsite formation processes or archeo-logical methodology. Therefore, sitesof unknown age, or broadly definedage, may be found eligible within aresearch framework which specifiesthe important information potentialof such sites.

Evaluation uses the historiccontext as the framework withinwhich to apply the criteria forevaluation to specific properties orproperty types. Historic contexts arelinked to actual historic propertiesthrough the concept of the propertytype. The following proceduresshould be included in creating ahistoric context:

1. Identify the concept, time periodand geographic limits for thehistoric context;

2. Assemble existing informationabout the historic context;

3. Synthesize the information;4. Define property types;5. Identify further information needs.

All archeological sites have somepotential to convey informationabout the past, however, not all ofthat information may be importantto our understanding of the pre andpost-contact periods of our history.The nature of important informationis linked to the theories or paradigmsthat drive the study of past societies.It is important to realize that historiccontexts, and therefore site signifi-cance, should be updated andchanged to keep pace with currentwork in the discipline. As NicholasHonerkamp (1988:5) writes:

We ignore theory at our peril...It is very easy to become scientifi-cally and/or humanistically super-fluous if we do not continuallyredefine what is important andwhy it is important. If as arche-ologists we can identify questionsthat matter and then explain whythey matter, a number of thingsthen begin to fall into place. For

15

instance, field methodologies andanalysis routines become drivenby solid research designs insteadof existing in a theoretical vacuumand being applied in a mech-anistic fashion; in the culturalresource management context,the "significance" concept be-comes better defined and lessslippery in its application...

To assist in the preparation ofNational Register nominations, allSHPOs have gathered information,such as county and state histories,cartographic sources, archeologicaland architectural site files, and man-agement documents that foster theidentification, evaluation, and pres-ervation of cultural resources. Thesematerials may include previously

identified local, regional, or state-wide historic contexts. The State,Tribal or Federal historic preserva-tion office may be able to providerelevant historic contexts. In manycases, the "Areas of Significance" orthe historic "Functions and Uses,"listed in How to Complete the NationalRegister Registration Form suggestappropriate historic contexts. Help-ful information regarding historiccontexts also may be found in mul-tiple property National Registersubmissions for similar historicproperties (see "Appendix B" of thisbulletin). For discussion on evaluat-ing archeological properties in con-text, please see "Evaluating Proper-ties in Context" in Section IV

16

III. HOW ARE ARCHEOLOGICALPROPERTIES IDENTIFIED?

Proper identification of a historicproperty serves as the foundationfor evaluation, a sound NationalRegister nomination, and for sub-sequent planning protection, andmanagement of the resource. Whenconsidering a property for listing inthe National Register, the nomina-tion preparer needs to be able toanswer questions about the historyof the property and its physical set-ting, the characteristics of the site'sarcheological record, and the bound-aries of the property.

The identification of archeologicalproperties generally involves back-ground research, field survey,archeological testing and analysis,and evaluation of the results. Arche-ologists use a variety of informationsources to reconstruct the history ofa property including written docu-ments, oral testimony, the presenceand condition of surviving build-ings, structures, landscapes, andobjects, and the archeological record.Where the archeological record iswell-known, the locations and typesof sites may serve as the basis forpredictive models for further siteidentification. Written documentaryresources, oral history, and tradi-tional knowledge may provide infor-mation about the people and activi-ties that occurred at a site, and canenumerate aspects of the archeologi-cal property's use, abandonmentand subsequent alteration. Extantbuildings, structures, landscapefeatures, and objects can provideimportant temporal and functionalinformation upon which to baseadditional research.

Generally background researchshould be completed prior to thefield studies. This research may in-volve: examining primary sources ofhistorical information (e.g., deedsand wills), secondary sources (e.g.,local histories and genealogies),and historic cartographic sources;reviewing previous archeologicalresearch in similar areas, models thatpredict site distribution, and archeo-logical, architectural, and historicalsite inventory files; and conductinginformant interviews.

Information obtained onlythrough archeological survey ortest excavations may be needed formany archeological properties be-fore a nomination can be prepared.The identification of archeologicalproperties is discussed more thor-oughly in the National Registerbulletin Guidelines for Local Surveys:A Basis for Preservation Planning,especially Chapter 11, "Conductingthe Survey/' and Appendix 1,'Archeological Surveys." Also seeThe Secretary of Interior's Standardsand Guidelines for Identification.Individual states or localities mayhave specific guidelines or permitrequirements for archeologicalinvestigations. Contact yourSHPO, THPO, or the FPO priorto beginning any archeologicalresearch project.

In order to identify the presenceand location of a site, an archeologistgenerally begins by inspecting theground surface or probing belowthe surface using soil cores or shoveltests. Artifacts and features are themost common indicators of archeo-

logical properties. Artifacts in theplow-disturbed soils of active andformer agricultural fields can alsodemonstrate the location of archeo-logical properties. Non-native plantspecies or spatial patterning ofplants (such as clusters of daffodils,lilac bushes, or groupings of cedartrees) may signal the presence of anarcheological property.

Archeologists usually identify thepresence and extent of a site throughexcavation of randomly, systemati-cally, or judgmentally placed testunits. Test units are used to show thepresence or absence of artifacts andfeatures below the present groundsurface. The fieldwork to determinethe National Register eligibility of anarcheological property should followlogically from the historic contextused. For example, the contextshould provide important researchquestions and the data needed foran eligibility determination. Suchdata may include the horizontal andvertical extent of a site, chronologyor periods of occupation/use, sitetype, site function, and internalconfiguration.

Increasingly, archeologists areusing scientific instruments toidentify subsurface archeologicalfeatures. Remote sensing techniques,that include ground-penetratingradar (GPR), soil resistivity, and soilchemistry surveys, are often appliedin conjunction with test excavationsthat confirm the presence of subsur-face cultural remains (Thomas 1987).Such prospecting techniques arenon-destructive and can providerapid three-dimensional reconnais-

17

EXHIBITING A SECTION OF 511 MILES•r the

TAI.NT t'KKKK VAM.KY,

sance of a site, but the results areoften ambiguous unless they arechecked in the field. For furtherinformation see, for example,Heimmer and Devore (1995)and Bevan (1998).

After the field studies are com-plete, the archeologist identifies anddocuments the artifacts, features,and ecofacts that make up the prop-erty. For the purpose of comparisonwith other properties, these data arequantified. Special attention is givento describing and analyzing tempo-rally, functionally, and culturallydiagnostic artifacts, features, orecofacts. Generally, one must com-plete the laboratory analysis phaseof a project before determining thepotential significance of an archeo-logical property.

Among American archeologists,specific test strategies—that is, thenumber, shape, placement, andmethod of test excavations—are asdiverse as the characteristics of thearcheological record. Because of theimpact on the quality of informationrecovered, the archeological fieldmethods used are an important partof the description of any archeologi-cal research project.

M* 2.

SCALE

1000 ft.to Inch.

Figures 4 and 5: Historic cartographic resources are an excellent sourceof information on a variety of archeological properties. These 1848 mapsby Squire and Davis show earthen walls in the shape of a square, circleand semi-circle with mounds inside and outside of enclosures associatedwith the Hopewellfrom 300 B.C. to A.D. 500. The area is part of theSeip Earthworks and Dill Mounds District in Seip County, Ohio.(Ohio Historical Society, Seip Mound State Memorial)

18

IV. EVALUATING THE SIGNIFICANCEOF ARCHEOLOGICAL PROPERTIES

NATIONAL REGISTERCRITERIA

The quality of significance inAmerican history, architecture,archeology, engineering and cultureis present in districts, sites, build-ings, structures, and objects thatpossess integrity of location, design,setting, materials, workmanship,feeling, association, and:

A. that are associated with eventsthat have made a significantcontribution to the broad patternsof our history; or

B. that are associated with the livesof persons significant in our past;or

C. that embody the distinctivecharacteristics of a type, period,or method of construction, or thatrepresent the work of a master,or that possess high artistic value,or that represent a significantand distinguishable entity whosecomponents may lack individualdistinction; or

D. that have yielded, or may belikely to yield, information impor-tant in prehistory or history.

A National Register propertymust meet at least one of the aboveNational Register criteria; it may meetmore than one. Each criterion that ischecked on the nomination formmust be fully justified. For example,if a Civil War battlefield qualifiesunder Criteria A and D, then boththe battle and its importance and theimportant information that archeo-logical investigations would likelyyield need to be addressed.

Properties nominated to theNational Register under Criteria A,B, or C often contain archeologicaldeposits. For example, a nineteenth-century farmstead (including themain houses and outbuildings) thatqualifies for listing under Criteria A,B, or C may have intact archeologicaldeposits. In many cases, however,these deposits are undocumented.In such cases, the preparer shouldclearly note the potential for archeo-logical deposits in the text of thenomination. Unless the significanceof the property is justified underCriterion D, Criterion D should notbe checked on the nomination form.Once additional studies are done todocument the archeological infor-mation retained from the site, thenthe nomination form should beamended to add Criterion D.

In a case, such as that notedabove, the archeological depositsneed not relate to the significance ofthe documented standing structures.For example, the Henderson HillHistoric District in West Virginia is alarge nineteenth-century farm com-plex eligible under A, B, C, and D.The archeological component of thefarm itself has not been evaluatedbut three Woodland period moundson the property are likely to yieldimportant information. If additionaldocumentation were to be addedto demonstrate the informationpotential of the nineteenth-centuryarcheological deposits, both sig-nificant contexts (the relevant,nineteenth-century historic context,and the Woodland period) shouldbe justified.

CRITERIACONSIDERATIONS

Unless certain special requirements(known as the criteria considerations)are met, moved properties; birth-places; cemeteries; reconstructedbuildings, structures, or objects;commemorative properties; andproperties that have achieved sig-nificance within the past 50 yearsare not generally eligible for theNational Register. The criteria con-siderations, or exceptions to theserules, are found in How to Completethe National Register RegistrationForm and How to Apply the NationalRegister Criteria for Evaluation.

The National Register criteriaconsiderations are:

A. A religious property may beeligible if it derives its primarysignificance from architecturalor artistic distinction or historicalimportance.

B. A property removed from itsoriginal or historically significantlocation can be eligible if it issignificant primarily for itsarchitectural value or it is thesurviving property most impor-tantly associated with a historicperson or event.

C. A birthplace or grave of a histori-cal figure may be eligible if theperson is of outstanding impor-tance and if there is no otherappropriate site or buildingdirectly associated with his orher productive life.

19

D. A cemetery may be eligible if itderives its primary significancefrom graves of persons of tran-scendent importance, from age,from distinctive design features,or from association with historicevents.

E. A reconstructed property may beeligible when it is accurately ex-ecuted in a suitable environmentand presented in a dignified man-ner as part of a restoration masterplan and when no other buildingor structure with the same asso-ciations has survived.

F. A property primarily commemo-rative in intent can be eligible ifdesign, age, tradition, or symbolicvalue has invested it with its ownhistoric significance.

G. A property achieving significancewithin the last 50 years may beeligible if it is of exceptionalimportance

Note: if a property is an integralpart of a district or site that meetsthe criteria, then do not apply thecriteria considerations to theindividual property. For example,a nomination for an archeologicaldistrict consisting of archeologicalsites, some above-ground ruins,several standing structures, and twohistorically associated cemeteriesneed not address the criterion con-sideration for cemeteries because thetwo cemeteries are an integral partof the district. For more informationon cemeteries and burial places,see the National Register bulletinGuidelines for Evaluating and Register-ing Cemeteries and Burial Places. Acemetery that is nominated underCriterion D for information potentialdoes not need to meet CriteriaConsideration D.

EVALUATINGPROPERTIES INCONTEXT

The National Register bulletinHow to Apply the National RegisterCriteria for Evaluation, recommends

the following sequence forevaluation:

1. Categorize the Property;

2. Determine which historic con-texts) the property represents;

3. Determine whether the propertyis significant under the NationalRegister Criteria;

4. Determine if the property repre-sents a type usually excludedfrom the National Register.;

5. Determine whether the propertyretains integrity.

There are a few things to keep inmind when following this sequence.Historic contexts usually have beendeveloped in some form for theidentification of properties. It is pos-sible, though, that the contexts willneed to be further developed forevaluation. The assessment of integ-rity is the final step in the sequenceand should not be used as an initialstep with which to screen properties.

Since decisions regarding theevaluation of properties involvesplacing properties in historic con-texts, the more that is known abouta given context, the better the evalu-ation decisions about particularproperties will be. Evaluation deci-sions can be made on the basis ofincomplete data, but it is wise notto make them without someinformation on historic contexts,significance, and their componentproperty types. A decision that agiven property is not significantshould never be made without ac-cess to a reasonable body of data onrelevant historic contexts, since suchan uninformed decision may resultin the property's destruction with-out attention to its historic values.

When an evaluation must bemade without a firm understandingof the relevant historic contexts,however, it should be made on thebasis of as much relevant data as it ispossible to accumulate. There shouldbe full recognition that it may resultin the destruction of a property thatmight later be found to be very sig-nificant, on the basis of complete

survey results, or in the investmentof money and other resources ina property later found to lackhistoric value.

A statement of significance,whether designed to show that aproperty is or is not significant,should be developed as a reasonedargument, first identifying the his-toric context or contexts to which theproperty could relate, next discuss-ing the property types within thecontext and their relevant character-istics, and then showing how theproperty in question does or doesnot have the characteristics requiredto qualify it as part of the context.

In order to decide whether aproperty is significant within itshistoric context, determine:

• the facet of history of the localarea, state, or the nation that theproperty represents;

• whether that facet of pre-contact orpost-contact history is significant;

• whether it is a type of propertythat has relevance and importancein illustrating the historic context;

• how the property illustrates thathistory; and

• whether the property possessesthe physical features necessary toconvey the aspect of pre-contactor post-contact history withwhich it is associated.

LOCAL CONTEXT

The level of context of archeologi-cal sites significant for their informa-tion potential depends on the scopeof the applicable research design.For example, a late Mississippianvillage site may yield information ina research design concerning onesettlement system on a regionalscale, while in another research de-sign it may reveal information oflocal importance concerning a singlegroup's stone tool manufacturingtechniques or house forms. It is aquestion of how the available infor-mation potential is likely to be used.

20

STATE CONTEXT

Pre-contact and many early colo-nial sites are not often considered tohave "State" significance, per se,largely because States are relativelyrecent political entities and usuallydo not correspond closely either toNative American political territoriesor cultural areas or to U.S. landsprior to statehood. Numerous sites,however, may be of significance to alarge region that might geographi-cally encompass parts of one, orusually several, States. Pre-contactresources that might be of State sig-nificance include regional sites thatprovide a diagnostic assemblage ofartifacts for a particular culturalgroup or time period or that providechronological control (specific datesor relative order in time) for a seriesof cultural groups.

NATIONAL CONTEXT

A property with national signifi-cance helps us to understand thehistory of the nation by illustratingthe nationwide impact of events orpersons associated with the prop-erty, its architectural type or style, orinformation potential. It must be ofexceptional value in representing orillustrating an important theme inthe history of the nation. AwatoviRuins in Navatjo County, Arizona, isan example of a pre-contact site ofnational significance. Designated aNational Historic Landmark in 1966,Awatovi, meaning "high place of thebow/' was one of the largest andmost important of the five villagesof Tusayan. Settled during the latetwelfth century, it was the site of atleast two thriving Hopi villages. Apost-contact site that is of nationalsignificance is Mission Santa Ines inSanta Barbara County, California.This National Historic Landmarkrepresents one of the most intactphysical records of a colonial mis-sion institution in the westernUnited States. Archeological infor-mation recovered from MissionSanta Innes can shed light on thehistory of this diverse mission com-

munity and the relationship of thisSpanish colony to world economicnetworks. (See the previous section,"What if an archeological property isnationally significant?")

THE IMPORTANCE OF SMALLOR OVERLOOKED SITES

Archeological properties whichobviously stand out within thelandscape, such as the ruins ofsouthwestern pueblos and themounds and earthworks of the mid-continent, may clearly convey theirsignificance simply because they arevisible. It is no surprise that arche-ologists have spent a lot of energyon researching and writing aboutthese salient sites (e.g. Tainter andTainter 1996:7). However, it is clearfrom many studies that small sitesalso yield important information.Many of the arguments made byTalmage and others (1977) in "TheImportance of Small, Surface, andDisturbed Sites as Sources of Signifi-cant Archeological Data" still hold.For example, demonstrating thesignificance of small sites on theColorado Plateau, Alan Sullivan(1996) has looked at the evidence ofwild-resource production from twonon-architectural sites along the east-ern south rim of the Grand Canyon.The most obvious features at thesesites are piles of fire-cracked rocks.Several things suggest that these areproduction locations—the form of therock piles, paleobotanical contents,and patterned artifacts, includingmanos and metates and TusayanGrayware. There are no fragmentsof trough metates, a form associatedwith maize processing. In the UpperBasin trough metates are foundexclusively at architectural sites.Sullivan (1996:154) surmises that"these patterned differences inmetate form support the hypothesisthat the role of wild resources inWestern Anasazi subsistence econo-mies has been underestimated"because our economic models arebased on data skewed toward con-sumption rather than productionlocales and assemblages.

Sullivan states that archeologistshave been remiss in not fully evalu-ating the contexts of subsistenceremains. Because we have focusedall our attention on sites of foodconsumption (the large Pueblo siteswith architecture) rather than onsites of production (including thesesmall sites), we have misinterpretedthe role of wild resources amongthe Western Anasazi. The editors(Tainter and Tainter 1996:17) of arecent volume summarize his pointthis way:

Sullivan makes the importantsuggestion that we have mis-understood Puebloan subsistencebecause we have focused ourresearch on locations where foodwas consumed (pueblos) ratherthan locations where it wasproduced. The latter may besmall, ephemeral artifact scatters.Many archaeologists overlook theimportance of these small sites[See also Sullivan, Tainter, andHardesty 1999; Tainter 1998].

Overlooking the significance ofsmall sites may skew our under-standing of past lifeways as thosesites not only receive less researchattention, but also are destroyedwithout being recorded thoroughlybecause they are "written off" asineligible for listing in the NationalRegister. Such losses point up theneed to continuously reexaminehistoric contexts and allow new dis-coveries to challenge our ideas aboutthe past. The development of local,statewide, and national historic con-texts is also important because thesecontexts are used to judge signifi-cance by developing research agen-das for all types of sites. If no historiccontext exists which relates to a spe-cific property, a site's significancemay be difficult to distinguish andconsequently, the site may be deter-mined ineliglible and/or destroyed.

Evaluators of archeological prop-erties using the National RegisterCriteria should be aware of new dis-coveries and developments that affecthistoric contexts and take them intoaccount during site evaluation.

21

It is also important to considersignificance before consideringintegrity. At Fort Leonard Wood inMissouri, Smith (1994:96) developeda regional context through a com-bined cultural, historical, and land-scape approach. The context assistsin identifying sites that best repre-sent the range and variety of culturehistory. Smith found that the mostdifficult part in devising such a con-text was the integration of the his-toric context with the archeologicalremains. Smith used site types asthe key in an approach that could beused as a model for approaching theevaluation and management of com-mon site types. In developing thecontext for the Fort Leonard Woodsettler community, Smith identifieddifferent types of settlers with pur-poses ranging from subsistence tocash cropping and characterizedassociated sites according to theirarcheological visibility, signature,and sensitivity. Some sites, such astwentieth-century tenant sites, havehigh visibility, easily identified sig-natures, and low sensitivity. It wouldbe important to examine some butby no means all of this common typeof site. (See also Peacock and Patrick1997 for a discussion of common sitetypes and information potential).Other sites, such as those of earlysquatters, have very low visibility,low signatures (that is, they are diffi-cult to identify), and very high sensi-tivity because they are extremelyrare and would provide importantinformation. Even a damaged sitecould address research questionsif it were a less common type. In aregion that is very poorly known, forexample, the investigation even ofdeflated sites may yield informationpotential for 1) basic archeologicalquestions about use of the regionand 2) baseline data on site condi-tion with which to evaluate othersimilar sites in the region.

EVALUATINGARCHEOLOGICALPROPERTIES UNDERTHE CRITERIA

The use of Criteria A, B, and C forarcheological sites is appropriate inlimited circumstances and has neverbeen supported as a universal appli-cation of the criteria. However, it isimportant to consider the applica-bility of criteria other than D whenevaluating archeological properties.The preparer should consider aswell whether, in addition to researchsignificance, a site or district hastraditional, social or religious sig-nificance to a particular group orcommunity. It is important to notethat under Criteria A, B, and C thearcheological property must havedemonstrated its ability to conveyits significance, as opposed to siteseligible under Criterion D, whereonly the potential to yield informa-tion is required.

CRITERION A:EVENT(S) AND BROADPATTERNS OF EVENTS

Mere association with historicevents or trends is not enough, inand of itself, to qualify underCriterion A—the property's specificassociation must be consideredimportant as well. Often, a com-parative framework is necessary todetermine if a site is considered animportant example of an event orpattern of events.

1. Identify the event(s) withwhich the property is associated.Generally for archeological proper-ties this is demonstrated primarilythrough specific historic contexts.Archeological evidence supports thelinkage. Event or events include:

• a specific event marking animportant moment in American(including local) history (e.g., abattle, treaty signing, courtdecision); or

• a series of linked events or ahistorical trend (e.g., a militarycampaign, relocation of NativeAmericans to missions, establish-ment of a town, growth of a city'sfishing industry, a major migration,establishment of a new culturalor political system, emergenceof agriculture).

2. Document the importance ofthe event(s) within the broadpattern(s) of history. For example,the nomination of a RevolutionaryWar battle site, at a minimum,should include a discussion of theimportance of the battle and itsrelevance to the Revolutionary War.Note that broad patterns of ourhistory (including local history)are the same as what the NationalRegister calls historic contexts,which are defined as relevanthistoric themes set within a timeperiod and geographic region.

3. Demonstrate the strength ofassociation of the property to theevent or patterns of events. In orderto do this, the property must haveexisted at the time of and be directlyassociated with the event or patternof events. A mission built 50 yearsafter the Pueblo Revolt would prob-ably have no direct association withthe Pueblo Revolt. A mission thatwas abandoned as a result of thePueblo Revolt, on the other hand,would have a direct association.

4. Assess the integrity of theproperty. Under Criterion A, a prop-erty must convey its historic signifi-cance. For example, archeologicalproperties must have well-preservedfeatures, artifacts, and intra-sitepatterning in order to illustrate aspecific event or pattern of eventsin history. Refer to the section'Aspects, or Qualities, of Integrity/'on page 40 for an example of whena site would or would not be eligibleunder Criterion A due to integrityof setting.

22

Archeological sites that are recog-nized "type" sites for specific archeo-logical complexes or time periods areoften eligible under Criterion A.Because they define archeologicalcomplexes or cultures or time peri-ods, type sites are directly associatedwith the events and broad patternsof history. In addition, archeologicalsites that define the chronology of aregion are directly associated withevents that have made significantcontributions to the broad patternsof our history.

Properties that have yielded im-portant information in the past andthat no longer retain additional re-search potential, such as completelyexcavated archeological sites, mustbe assessed essentially as historicsites under Criterion A. Such sitesmust be significant for associativevalues related to: 1) the importanceof the data gained; or 2) the impactof the property's role in the historyof the development of anthropology/archeology or other relevant disci-plines. Like other historic properties,the site must retain the ability toconvey its association as the formerrepository of important information,the location of historic events, or therepresentation of important trends.For instance, a completely excavatedpre-contact quarry site known tohave been the only quarry siteutilized by Native Americans in anortheastern state has revealed im-portant information concerning theseasonal rounds of Native groups,and the procurement and reductionof local lithic materials. Informationabout how mining materials fromthis quarry functioned within theoverall cultural system of the areaand affected settlement and subsis-tence practices and the intact physi-cal environment of the site conveyits importance as the best example ofpre-contact industry and commercein this locale. The quarry is visible,located in a remote area, and main-tains integrity of location, setting,feeling, and association. The sitewould be eligible at the local level of

significance under Criterion A, butnot D. The site may not be eligible atthe state level of significance underCriterion A, as it may not exemplifyan important quarry, comparatively,for the region.

Some sites may be listed for theirsignificance in the history of archeol-ogy. In Colorado, the first Basket-maker II rockshelter excavated islisted under Criterion A at the statelevel for archeology. House typesand domestic features were identi-fied archeologically here for the firsttime. The rockshelter, excavated inLaPlata County by Earle Morris in1938, is also listed for Criterion Dbecause at least half of the middenremains and there is likely to beinformation there on the transitionfrom the Archaic to Basketmakeradaptations.

The Yamasee Indian towns in theSouth Carolina Low Country are

eligible under Criterion A as well asD as part of the first Indian landreservation in South Carolina. TheYamasee played a key role in thedefense of South Carolina againstthe Spanish from 1684 to 1715.

A cultural landscape whichincludes both traditional culturalplaces and archeological sites may beeligible under Criteria A and D forits significance in the areas of EthnicHeritage and Archeology. In an ex-ample from California, a landscapecontaining a village site and addi-tional cultural features, as well asnatural features of oak groves andgrasslands, demonstrates the man-agement of hunted and gatheredresources through burning to pro-mote particular environments.One of several research questionsidentified concerned the relation-ship between inland and coastalsites in the region.

Figure 6: Listed under Criteria A and D, the Charles Forte site (38BU51)is near Beaufort, South Carolina. The fort was built in 1562 andrepresents the first European occupation of South Carolina.(J.M. Rhett)

23

The Multiple Property Submission (MPS) "Precontact AmericanIndian Earthworks, 500 BC - AD 1650" for Minnesota creates regis-tration requirements for earthworks under Criteria A, B, C, and D.The following two examples demonstrate the requirements.

Site X was first mapped in 1885 and contains more than 60mounds and earthworks. A village site appears to be immediatelyassociated with the site. Several of the mounds have looter's holesin them but the site has never been plowed. The site is still woodedand there is no recent development on or near the site. It is essen-tially in pristine condition. This site has excellent integrity ofdesign, setting, materials, feeling, and association, and couldtherefore be nominated to the National Register under Criteria A,C, and D.

Site Y consisted of at least 225 earthworks and mounds andassociated village site. It is the type site for a Late Pre-Contactcontext. However, the site has been extensively plowed, severalfactories have been built on it, and it is within an industrial park.Although the location of the mounds have been relocated usingaerial photography and remote sensing, most have been destroyed.There is some evidence, however, that there are still some intactmaterials at the site. In this case, the site is not eligible underCriteria A or C because integrity of design, setting, and feeling arevery poor and integrity of materials and association are merelyacceptable. However it is eligible under Criterion D if the moundgroup and village are considered one site because together theystill hold significant research potential.

A site determined eligible under Criteria A and D under thisMultiple Property Submission cover document is eligible underCriterion A because it typifies a distinctive type of site that ispart of the broader pattern associated with the emergence ofagriculture along the margin of the eastern Plains and increasingpopulation nucleation after circa 1100 A.D. For further examplesof sites listed under Criterion A, see the "Summary of Significance"for Cannonball Ruins and Fort Davis under "Narrative Statementof Significance," in Section V of this bulletin.

CRITERION B:IMPORTANT PERSONS

In order to qualify under Crite-rion B, the persons associated withthe property must be individuallysignificant within a historic context.The known major villages of indi-vidual Native Americans who wereimportant during the contact periodor later may qualify under CriterionB. As with all Criterion B properties,the individual associated with theproperty must have made somespecific important contribution to

history. Examples include sitessignificantly associated with ChiefJoseph and Geronimo.

1. Identify the important personor persons associated with the prop-erty. (For in-depth guidance onnominating a property under Crite-rion B, refer to the National Registerbulletin Guidelines for Evaluating andDocumenting Properties Associatedwith Significant Persons) "Personssignificant in our past" refers toindividuals whose activities are de-monstrably important within a local,

state, or national historic context.Under Criterion B, a property mustbe illustrative rather than commem-orative of a person's life. An illustra-tive property is directly linked to theperson and to the reason why thatperson is considered to be important.In most cases, a monument built tocommemorate the accomplishmentsof a judge, for example, important inthis nation's history would not beeligible for listing in the NationalRegister. (For exceptions to thisgeneral rule refer to the "CriteriaConsideration F: CommemorativeProperties" discussion in How toApply the National Register Criteria forEvaluation) The courthouse wherethe judge worked and wrote hisopinions, on the other hand, may beeligible under Criterion B.

2. Discuss the importance ofthe individual within the relevanthistoric context(s). The person asso-ciated with the property must beindividually significant and not justa member of a profession, class, orsocial or ethnic group. For example,a doctor who is known to have beenimportant in the settlement andearly development of a communitywould be important under CriterionB. A person who is known to havebeen a doctor but with no specialprofessional or community standingwould not be important under Crite-rion B.

3. Demonstrate the strength ofassociation between the person andthe property. Generally, propertiesshould be associated with the activi-ties, events, etc. for which the personis important. For example, the labwhere a renowned scientist devel-oped his inventions would be morestrongly associated with the scientistthan the apartment house where helived. The importance or relevanceof the property in comparison toother properties associated withthe person should be addressed.Properties that pre- or post-date anindividual's significant accomplish-ments usually are not eligible underCriterion B.

24

4. Address the property's integ-rity. Sufficient integrity implies thatthe essential physical features dur-ing its association with the person'slife are intact. If the property is asite that had no material culturalremains, then the setting must beintact. Under Criterion B, archeologi-cal properties need to be in goodcondition with excellent preserva-tion of features, artifacts, and spatialrelationships. An effective test is toask if the person would recognizethe property. If "no," then integritymay be insufficient to qualify underCriterion B. Refer to "Aspects, orQualities, of Integrity," in Section IVof this bulletin.

The Puckshunubbee-Haley Sitein Madison County, Mississippi, islisted under both Criteria B and D asthe residence site (without standingstructures) of two significant indi-viduals: Puckshunubbee, an impor-tant Choctaw chief from about 1801to 1824, and pioneer Major David W.Haley, who purchased the chief'shouse after his death and was centralto land negotiations with the Choctaw.This three-acre property also con-tains a Late Mississippian mound.

The farm site where a famousscientist lived for several years whenshe was a young woman is now inthe middle of a modern day housingdevelopment. Several other proper-ties associated with this scientist'scareer and her birthplace are alreadylisted on the National Register. Inaddition, research and excavationshave shown that the site is highlydisturbed. This site would not beeligible under Criterion A, B, C, or D.

The Modoc Lava Beds Archaeo-logical District in California is listedunder Criteria A, B, and D. Under A,this 46,780-acre district is associatedwith the Modoc War of 1872-73 andcontains places of traditional culturalsignificance to the Modoc people.Eligibility under B is for associationwith Captain Jack, the principalModoc leader during the war, forthe areas of significance: ETHNICHERITAGE: Native American, andMILITARY. Important informationunder Criterion D is associated withchronology; settlement and subsis-

tence; exchange relationships; mili-tary architecture; art and religion.The Modoc Lava beds were a majorgeographic crossroads for the farwestern United States. The role ofthe district's inhabitants in control-ling the distribution of obsidian fromthe Medicine Lake Highland volca-nic field is one of the specific re-search topics.

The Kukaniloko Birth Site in Ha-waii is listed under A, B, and D for,"ARCHEOLOGY: Prehistoric; ETH-NIC HERITAGE: Native Hawaiian;SOCIAL HISTORY; POLITICS-GOV-ERNMENT; and RELIGION.Kukaniloko is a celebrated place setaside for the birth of high rankingchiefs, marked by large basalt stones.Once part of a larger religious com-plex, Kukaniloko continues to bevisited by Hawaiians who occasion-ally leave offerings. It is associatedwith a number of prominent chiefsborn there. The nomination statesthat important information may begathered from the analysis of theboulders and petroglyphs, whichare thought to have astronomicalsignificance.

CRITERION C:DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION,AND WORK OF A MASTER

To be eligible under Criterion C,a property must meet at least oneof the following requirements: theproperty must embody distinctivecharacteristics of a type, period, ormethod of construction, representthe work of a master, possess highartistic value, or represent a signifi-cant and distinguishable entitywhose components may lackindividual distinction.

A Significant andDistinguishable EntityWhose Components MayLack Individual Distinction.This portion of Criterion Crefers to districts. For detailedinformation on districts,refer to the NationalRegister bulletin How toApply the National RegisterCriteria for Evaluation.

Figure 7: The bedrock mortars and rock alignment on a bedrock base marka work area or former above-ground structure in the Modoc Lava BedsArchaeological District in Tulelake County, California, part of theLava Beds National Monument. (Janet P Eidsness)

25

The above requirements shouldbe viewed within the context of theintent of Criterion C; that is, todistinguish those properties that aresignificant as representatives of thehuman expression of culture ortechnology (especially architecture,artistic value, landscape architecture,and engineering).

1. Identify the distinctive charac-teristics of the type, period, ormethod of construction, master orcraftsman, or the high artistic valueof the property. Distinctive charac-teristics of type, period, or method ofconstruction are illustrated in one ormore ways, including:

• The pattern of features commonto a particular class of resources,such as a sugar mill with associ-ated archeological remains thatis representative of eighteenth-century Caribbean sugar mills;

• The individuality or variation offeatures that occurs within theclass, such as the well-preservedruins of an 1860s brewery thatwas designed and built to pro-duce one type of ale;

• The evolution of that class, orthe transition between the classesof resources, such as the well-preserved sites of four adjacent

shipyards, each representing adifferent time period in clippership building.

A master is a figure of generallyrecognized greatness in a field, aknown craftsman of consummateskill, or an anonymous craftsmanwhose work is distinguishable fromothers by its characteristic style andquality. If a well-preserved, eigh-teenth-century pottery kiln site,such as the Mt. Sheppard, NorthCarolina pottery, illustrates how aparticular type of exceptional pot-tery was produced by a renownedpottery manufacturer, then it wouldqualify under Criterion C.

High artistic valuemay take a varietyof forms includingcommunity design orplanning, landscaping,engineering andworks of art. A prop-erty with high artisticvalue must (whencompared to similarresources) fully ex-press an aesthetic idealof a particular conceptof design. The well-preserved ruins of abuilding that was usedas a hospital and still

has intact walls covered with pic-tures and graffiti drawn by Civil Warsoldiers who stayed there would beeligible under Criterion C.

2. Discuss the importance of theproperty given the historic contextsthat are relevant to the property andthe applicability of Criterion C. Notethat the work of an unidentifiedcraftsman or builder is eligible if thework (usually a building or struc-ture) rises above the level of work-manship of other similar or themati-cally-related properties. As a result,comparison with other propertiesis usually required to make the caseof eligibility under Criterion C.

Figures 8 and 9: Florida's New SmyrnaSugar Mill ruins (left) (Florida State NewsBureau) and Seven Towers Pueblo (above),nominated under the Great Pueblo Periodof the McElmo Drainage Unit MPS inColorado (Richard Fuller), are goodexamples of archeological propertieswith significant standing architecturaland subsurface archeological components.

26

For example, a colonial plantationsite may have standing buildingsthat are excellent examples of a rareform of colonial construction. Toillustrate this, Colonial-period con-struction methods need to be dis-cussed to a level of detail sufficientto demonstrate that the constructionmethods seen at the exampleplantation are rare.

3. Evaluate how strongly theproperty illustrates the distinctivecharacteristics of the type, period, ormethod of construction, master orcraftsman, or the high artistic valueof the property. For example, anarcheological property with a stand-

ing structure that was used as a stagestop for the Butterfield Overland Mailservice may qualify under Criterion Abut not be eligible under Criterion Cbecause the structure is not represen-tative of the stage stops that wereactually built to service the stages andmail carriers.

4. Address the integrity of theproperty. To meet the integrity re-quirement of Criterion C, an archeo-logical property must have remainsthat are well-preserved and clearlyillustrate the design and construc-tion of the building or structure.An exception to the above-groundrule is structures that were inten-

tionally built below the ground. Forexample, many industrial complexes,such as brick manufacturing or min-ing sites, contain potentially signifi-cant architectural or engineeringremains below ground. Anotherexception might be found at archeo-logical sites that contained relativelyintact architectural remains buriedthrough either cultural or naturalprocesses. Thus, well-preservedarchitectural remains that were un-covered by archeological excavationmight be considered eligible underCriterion C. Refer to "Aspects, orQualities, of Integrity" in Section IVof this bulletin.

A late Mississippian village thatillustrates the important concepts inpre-contact community design andplanning will qualify. A Hopewellianmound, if it is an important exampleof mound building construction tech-niques, would qualify as a methodor type of construction. A NativeAmerican irrigation system modifiedfor use by Europeans could be eligibleif it illustrates the technology of eitheror both periods of construction.Properties that are important repre-sentatives of the aesthetic values of acultural group, such as petroglyphsand ground drawings by NativeAmericans, are generally eligible.

Figure 10: The Blythe Intagliosin California represent a propertywith high artistic value.(Bureau of Land Management)

Figure 11: At the multicomponentYarmony Archaeological Site in

Colorado, the 7000 year old EarlyArchaic pithouses (such as the oneshown here) are exemplary build-

ings in their age, complexity offeatures, artifact associations,

and physical integrity. Thissite is listed under Criterion C

for architecture and Criterion Dfor archaeology. (Figure from

Michael Metcalf and Kevin Black,Southwestern Lore 54(1) 1988)

27

The Beattie Mound Group indowntown Rockford, Illinois, iseligible under Criteria C and D forarchitecture and archeology. Themound group embodies distinctivecharacteristics of the earthwork typeof construction in three forms:conical, linear, and turtle effigy.This group is unusual in represent-ing a variety of forms in a smallarea. These mounds are part of the"Effigy Mound" tradition of theUpper Mississippi Valley, whichdates from about A.D. 300-1100.

An archeological district in Colo-rado is listed at the state level ofsignificance under Criteria C and Dfor architecture and archeology. Thedistrict contains at least 24 sites dat-ing from A.D. 975-1150. These sitesinclude rock shelters with coursedmasonry features, rock shelters withwall alignments, rock shelters with-out architectural features, open ma-sonry which incorporate boulders/rocks outcrops into room features,and mesa top sites with alignments.Research questions focus on therelationship of the district to relatedsites in the Four Corners region. Asa frontier community establishedduring a time of dynamic culturalchange, this district may establishthe extreme northern extension ofan important culture area. Theboundary contains a complete envi-ronmental profile from the mesa topdownslope to the creek.

The archeological remains of aseventeenth-century integrated ironproduction facility are important atthe state level of significance as theyrepresent the earliest example ofthis type of facility in the state.Road construction has disturbedonly a portion of the site, however,the major activity areas are not dis-

cernable archeologically due to thisdisturbance. This site is not eligibleunder Criterion C as an example ofthe first phase in the evolution ofiron production facilities in this lo-cale, but may still be eligible underCriterion D if other areas of the siteare intact enough to produce impor-tant information.

In Alaska, a cedar dugout canoemore than 29 feet long is listed as astructure and a site. Its historic func-tion is Transportation/water-related;it is not currently in use. In fact, itwas never finished by the TlingitIndian(s) who began constructionsometime before 1920. Because it isunfinished, it shows part of the con-struction process that would not beapparent in a finished canoe. It is anexample of an early Northern typeof Indian canoe with a distinctiveprofile. When it was listed in 1989,it was the only partially finishedNative canoe of this type found insitu in southeast Alaska. The canoeis eligible under Criterion C as itembodies the distinctive characteris-tics of a type—the Northern canoe;and method of con-struction—the unfin-ished canoe retainsconstruction elementsusually lost in acompleted canoe.The construction siteitself is preserved asthe tree stump fromwhich the log was cutis intact and exhibitssaw marks that helpdate the constructionto no earlier thanthe late nineteenthcentury. The sitehas the potential toyield important

information about the use of theforest by Tlingit peoples and aboutthe construction of canoes duringthe last decades when they werebeing made. Archeological investi-gations at the site are likely to yieldartifacts or features associatedwith manufacture.

CRITERION D:INFORMATION POTENTIAL

Criterion D requires that a prop-erty "has yielded, or may be likely toyield, information important in pre-history or history." Most propertieslisted under Criterion D are archeo-logical sites and districts, althoughextant structures and buildings maybe significant for their informationpotential under this criterion. Toqualify under Criterion D, a propertymust meet two basic requirements:

• The property must have, or havehad, information that can contrib-ute to our understanding of humanhistory of any time period;

• The information must be consid-ered important.

Figure 12: Leluh Ruins, located on Leluh Island, Kosrae State,Federated States of Micronesia, includes massive basalt walls,

high chief's compounds, a royal tomb and other sacred compounds,several streets, a canal system and extensive archeological deposits.The site is listed under Criteria A, C, and D as it is associated with

the rise of complex society in the Pacific, contains a distinctiveform of architecture in its stacked basalt prisms and blocks,

and the associated archeological remains may address awide range of important research questions. (R. Cordy)

28

Nominations should outline thetype of important information that aproperty is likely to yield as shapedby the applicable research topics. Todo this, the property must have thenecessary kinds and configuration ofdata sets and integrity to addressimportant research questions.

Specific questions may changebut there are a number of categoriesof questions that are used routinelyto frame research designs in termsof anthropological observations ofsocieties. Such general topics includebut are not limited to: economics ofsubsistence, technology and trade;

There are five primary steps in a Criterion D evaluation.

1. Identify the property's data set(s) or categories of archeological,historical, or ecological information.

2. Identify the historic context(s), that is, the appropriate historicaland archeological framework in which to evaluate the property.

3. Identify the important research question(s) that the property'sdata sets can be expected to address.

4. Taking archeological integrity into consideration, evaluate thedata sets in terms of their potential and known ability to answerresearch questions.

5. Identify the important information that an archeological studyof the property has yielded or is likely to yield.

Application of Criterion D re-quires that the important informa-tion which an archeological propertymay yield must be anticipated at thetime of evaluation. Archeologicaltechniques and methods haveimproved greatly even in the fewdecades since the passage of theNational Historic Preservation Act.The questions that archeologists askhave changed and become, in manycases, more detailed and more so-phisticated. The history of archeol-ogy is full of examples of importantinformation being gleaned from sitespreviously thought unimportant.Because important information andmethods for acquiring it changethrough time, it may be necessaryto reassess historic contexts and siteevaluations periodically.

Changing perceptions of signifi-cance are simply a matter of thenormal course of all social sciencesand humanities as they evolve anddevelop new areas of study. Whatconstitutes "information importantin prehistory or history" changeswith archeological and historicaltheory, method, and technique.

land use and settlement; social andpolitical organization; ideology,religion, and cosmology; paleo-environmental reconstruction; andecological adaptation. In addition, acategory of questions that relate toimprovement to archeologicalmethodology should be considered.For other general categories see

the National Park Service ThematicFramework (NPS 1996), availableat <www.cr.nps.gov/history/thematic.html >.

Through the disciplined study ofthe archeological record and sup-porting information, archeologistscan provide answers to certain im-portant questions about the past thatare unobtainable from other sources.Archeological inquiry generally con-tributes to our understanding of thepast in three ways. It:

• describes, records, and recon-structs past lifeways across timeand space;

• tests new hypotheses about pastactivities; and

• reinforces, alters, or challengescurrent assumptions aboutthe past.

The Mt. Jasper Lithic Source inCoos County, New Hampshire, islisted under "ARCHEOLOGY:Prehistoric; and INDUSTRY," forits contribution to the understandingof lithic technology and, secondarily,for its contribution to understandingsettlement and exchange patterns.The lithic source area contains placeswhere a rare and high quality rawmaterial was found, mined, and madeinto tools essential for survival byhunter-gatherers from ca. 7000 BC

Figure 13: The Shenks Ferry Site in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania,an important contact period village site, was excavated in the 1930s and 1970s.It was listed in the National Register in 1982 without additional excavations.(Archaeology Laboratory, WPMM, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania)

29

to A.D. 1500. The recovery of toolsmade from Mt. Jasper rhyolite atsites distant from the source showsit widespread use.

In the southern Idaho uplands, alarge district significant at the statelevel encompasses the drainages oftwo creeks and represents 6000 yearsof occupation. Site types in this highdesert sagebrush-grass-juniper envi-ronment include rockshelters andcaves, rock art sites, campsites, lithicscatters, workshops, and rock align-ments. Important research questionsunder Criterion D concern the ar-rival of the Shoshoni in southernIdaho, the relationship of the areapeople to the Fremont residents inUtah, and the function of varioustypes of rock alignments.

The Big Sioux Prehistoric PrairieProcurement System ArcheologicalDistrict contains a representativesample of the best preserved ele-ments of a hunting and gatheringsystem in the northwest Iowa plainsfrom 10,000 to 200 years ago. It in-cludes large and small sites, plowedand unplowed, and material on alltypes of landforms in the rivervalley. This discontiguous district's30 sites are stretched along 15 milesof river terraces and blufftops. Theyinclude: late base camps; deeply-buried early Archaic camps; andprocurement sites from all pre-contact time periods. The nomina-tion argues that there is a commonbias toward emphasizing individualsites, especially large and spectacularsites. Small, temporarily occupiedsites seem to be the first to fall outof research designs. Small sites mayappear to produce little informationbecause broad cultural patterns can-not be reconstructed from one smallsite. However, small sites, especiallysingle-component sites may containdetailed information which isunobtainable from larger, multi-component sites. Without thecontext of a larger subsistence andsettlement system, small sites mayappear meaningless but in a well-developed context, their significancecan be assessed realistically. Basecamps must be connected with tern-

LOUISIANA CAMP 1C

IM

T

/•• ehlmnif

—— Mtallaw Trinan

O • • • • > • Oump

a • « •

V'll'J •

• /

\0 \

\V\

'. \

\

•

/•

7t\ /

\\

•

f ••* •

v ^

Figure 14: Because the recorded surface manifestations were obvious atCamp Carondelet, Prince William County, Virginia, archeological excavationswere not required to list this Civil War encampment under Criterion D.(Jan Townsend)

porary sites in order to reconstructthe whole settlement system.

If archeological studies wereconducted previously at a site,additional test excavation may notbe required before preparing aNational Register nomination. Forexample, the Shenks Ferry site inLancaster County, Pennsylvania(a contact period village dating fromthe sixteenth century), was exca-vated in the early 1930s and in the1970s and was listed in the National

Register in 1982 without additionalfield investigations.

The patterning of artifacts andfeatures on the ground surface ofsome properties may be sufficientto warrant nominating them to theNational Register. If this is the case,then demonstrating the presence ofintact subsurface artifact or featurepatterning through test excavationsmay not be required. That is, thereis no mandatory testing of sites todetermine their significance. For

30

example, Camp Carondelet in PrinceWilliam County, Virginia, the 1861-1862 winter camp of a Louisianabrigade, was listed in the NationalRegister without excavations. ThisCivil War camp, which is evidencedby above-ground patterning of hutoutlines, chimney falls, trash pits,roads, and rifle pits lias sufficientsurface information to justify a state-ment of significance. Field workincluded mapping the above campfeatures and noting the location ofartifacts visible on the surface of theground and in and around holesdug by relic hunters. Similarly,mounds or earthworks such as thoseof the Effigy Mound tradition of theUpper Mississippi Valley would notrequire intrusive testing for a con-vincing statement of significance tobe argued based on analogy withsimilar excavated properties.

At the John Dickinson house, aNational Historic Landmark locatednear Dover, Delaware, ground-penetrating radar was used to locatesubsurface evidence of outbuildings,barns, and other features prior to thereconstruction of this eighteenth-century plantation's architecture(Bevan 1981). At Fort Benning,Georgia, electromagnetic, magnetic,and GPR investigations at the Creektown of Upatoi revealed highlypatterned subsurface features inter-preted as probably graves. The useof non-destructive techniques pro-vided evidence of subsurface re-mains and raised the priority of siteprotection as a land managementconcern (Briuer et al. 1997).

Data Sets

Data sets, or data categories, aregroups of information. Data sets aredefined by the archeologist, takinginto consideration the type of arti-facts and features at the property,the research questions posed, andthe analytical approach that is used.Whatever their theoretical orienta-tion, all archeologists look at pat-terns in the archeological record. It isthe evaluation or analysis of datasets and their patterning within theframework of research questionsthat yields information. Data sets

can be types of artifacts (such asceramics, glass, or tools), archeologi-cal features (such as privies, trashmiddens, or tailings piles), or pat-terned relationships between arti-facts, features, soil stratigraphy, orabove-ground remains. A graveyard,for example, might contain at leastthree data sets: the human remains,items buried with the deceased, andthe arrangement of the graveswithin the cemetery.

Data sets that are known or ex-pected to be represented at theproperty should be described. If theproperty is a district and there aremultiple data sets (which is likely),then each of the kinds of data setsshould be described. The data setsrepresented at each site may be pre-sented in tabular form or in a matrix.The data sets described in this sec-tion must be consistent with theartifact and feature informationincluded in the "Narrative Descrip-tion" of the site. For example, if achronology data set is described,then the property must have data(such as time-diagnostic artifacts)that can be used to address chronol-ogy. If there is a data set, or data sets,linked to a research topic of non-local exchange systems, for example,then there must be evidence of suchactivities represented in the archeo-logical deposits.

Important Informationand Research Questions

What are important questions inarcheology? Even if a current list ofimportant research questions existed(that archeologists could agree upon),the questions would still change asthe discipline evolves and certainquestions are answered and othersare asked. Moreover, as researchquestions of the future cannot beanticipated, the kinds of datanecessary to answer them cannotbe determined with certainty. Thus,the research potential of a historicproperty must be evaluated in lightof current issues in archeology,anthropology, history, and otherdisciplines of study (Ferguson 1977).The list of important research ques-tions does not need to be lengthy or

exhaustive. Examples of the kinds ofresearch questions anticipated maybe provided. A single importantquestion is sufficient.

Theoretical positions on andpragmatic debates about importantresearch questions are expressed atprofessional archeological confer-ences and in the professional litera-ture and journals. For example, theSociety for Historical Archeologysponsored a plenary session titled"Questions that Count in Archeol-ogy" at its annual meeting in 1987.This session addressed the issue ofwhich theoretical frameworks orgeneral research topics will generatethe most important questions forpost-contact archeology (e.g. Deagan1988). From a theoretical viewpoint,Kathleen Deagan (1988:9), forexample, makes the case that thequestions that "count cannot beanswered by either historical orarcheological data alone, or throughsimple comparisons of two datacategories/' Rather than simply rein-forcing other documentary sources,the interpretation of archeologicalevidence provides a supplementaryand complementary record of thepast. Other questions that count arethose that apply archeological tech-niques to answering history-basedquestions about which there is in-adequate documentation. In fact,to date, this has been post-contactarcheology's most successful schol-arly contribution (Deagan 1988:9).According to Deagan (1988:9), "otherquestions appropriate to the uniquecapabilities of historical archeologyfocus on understanding generalcultural phenomena that transcendspecific time and space/'

A nomination should provide aclear link between the contexts, theresearch questions, and the datafound at the property. Whatever thetheoretical orientation of the arche-ologist, the connection between thearcheological data and the importantquestions should be explicit in theNational Register nomination.

One way to link archeologicalremains with research questions isthrough middle-range theories thatconnect the empirical world withgeneralized hypotheses (Leone 1988;

31

Merton 1967; Binford 1977,1981a,1981b; Thomas 1983a, 1983b; South1977,1988). The middle-range andgeneral theories should follow fromand be consistent with the informa-tion presented in the discussion ofhistoric contexts.

As noted above, there is no setoutline that must be followed indescribing research questions withinthe narrative statement of signifi-cance. General theories and themore specific hypotheses that shapethe research questions, for example,may be presented in the historiccontext discussion and simplyreferenced during the descriptionof important research questions.The National Register nominationshould include a clear and concisepresentation of the required infor-mation. The specific format fordoing this will be determined inlarge part by the nature of thearcheological property and itsinformation potential.

Archeologists have recognizedthe importance of comparative infor-mation from a regional data base inmaking effective eligibility decisions.This is especially true when dealingwith large numbers of a commonresource type that have not beenevaluated, such as nineteenth-century farmsteads or stone circles.A regional perspective provides alogical framework in which toevaluate seemingly "mundane" or"redundant" historic properties (e.g.,Hardesty 1990; McManamon 1990;Peacock and Patrick 1997; Smith1990; Wilson 1990).

Preparing Multiple PropertySubmission cover documents mayalso help solve the problems en-countered with the eligibility of"redundant" resources. The formatof the multiple property documentmay serve as a research design thatspecifies significance, importantinformation, documenting protocolsand identification strategies for par-ticular types of resources that areworthy of preservation. For instance,registration requirements specifyeligibility requirements. (For furtherguidance on multiple property sub-missions, see the National Register

bulletin How to Complete the NationalRegister Multiple Property Documenta-tion Form).

A good example of a regionalstudy proposed in National Registerdocumentation is the Multiple Prop-erty Submission, "Native AmericanArchaeological Sites of the OregonCoast." In the cover document, sev-eral sets of research topics and ques-tions are presented at local, regional,and national scales of research. Top-ics used to evaluate the eligibility ofindividual sites include: how haveOregon Coast environments beenoccupied and/or used by NativeAmericans varied through spaceand time; when and how did coastaladaptations develop along theOregon Coast; how did OregonCoast settlement and subsistencechange through time; when didethnographic patterns first developon the Oregon Coast; how didEuroamerican colonization affectOregon Coast Native Americans andhow did Native Americans affect thecourse of colonization; and questionsrelated to general archeologicalmethod and theory.

Under each of these topics aremore detailed questions. The Mul-tiple Property Submission coverdocument recognizes that the studyof individual sites creates the build-ing blocks for regional models andultimately for more general andbroadly applicable archeological andanthropological method and theory.Regional research topics that can beaddressed through the comparativestudy of individual sites include thefollowing: 1) Changes in Oregoncoast environments through time;2) Antiquity of coastal adaptations;3) Regional developments in settle-ment and subsistence; 4) Originsand development of ethnographiccultural patterns; and 5) Effects ofEuropean contact and colonizationon Native Americans and theirresources.

General topics of broad impor-tance are addressed in a comparativeframework. Four such topics areextensions of the regional questions.These are: 1) Environmental Changeand Human Adaptations; 2) Coastal

Adaptations and Maritime CulturalEcology; 3) Cultural Complexity andits origins; and 4) "European radia-tion" and indigenous societies.

When evaluating sites within aregional perspective, the followingkinds of information should be pre-sented:

• definition of the region or com-munity under consideration;

• relative estimate of how manyother similar properties wereonce located within the region;

• identification, where applicable,of surviving standing structuresor sites;

• evaluation of level of archeologi-cal investigation of similarproperties; and the

• outline of the documentary, eth-nographic, or other supportingevidence related to the property.

To systematically evaluate proper-ties, National Register nominationpreparers often use an evaluationmatrix, especially for pre-contactarcheological properties. This ap-proach to evaluation can also beparticularly useful for evaluatingthe scientific or information poten-tial of a post-contact archeologicalproperty. Donald L. Hardestydescribes the development of asignificance evaluation matrix inhis 1988 publication, The Archeologyof Mining and Miners: A View Fromthe Silver State. Although Hardesty'sfocus is on mining properties, theprocess that Hardesty calls "a logicalquestioning framework" is appli-cable to all kinds of archeology prop-erties (1990:48).

In Hardesty's evaluation matrixthe vertical axis comprises key areasof research (such as demography,technology, economics, social organi-zation, and ideology) while the hori-zontal axis describes three researchlevels (world system, region, andlocality) where questions about thepast may be addressed. The specificfeatures of an evaluation matrix aredetermined taking into considerationthe theoretical framework, middlerange theories linking the data sets

32

to the relevant research questions,the research questions or topics, andthe data sets represented at theproperty. In this example, a post-contact archeological property wouldbe eligible for the National Registerif its archeological record containsinformation with sufficient integritythat can be used to address one ofthe topics within the evaluation matrix.If the information at the site cannotbe used to address these researchthemes, then the property may notbe eligible for the National Register.

Archeological properties that fallbetween the clearly eligible and theclearly ineligible are the most diffi-cult to evaluate for inclusion in theNational Register. Moreover, it isimportant to realize that profes-sional archeologists, historians, andarchitectural historians may disagreeon the eligibility of a particular his-toric property. In theory, given highquality, and often site-specific, ar-cheological research designs andcomprehensive historic contexts,questions of eligibility should beminimal. As with all scientific andhumanistic endeavors, it is the qual-ity and bias of the questions we askthat determines the nature of theanswers we recover from the past.

OTHER SIGNIFICANCECONSIDERATIONS

The following: Areas of Signifi-cance, Period of Significance, Sig-nificant Dates, Significant Person(s),Cultural Affiliation, Architect orBuilder, are important for all nomi-nations, whether Criteria A, B, C,or D are being applied. Criteriaconsiderations are listed and dis-cussed on pp. 19-20 under "NationalRegister Criteria."

AREAS OF SIGNIFICANCE

For post-contact archeologicalproperties enter "ARCHEOLOGY:Historic-Aboriginal" or "ARCHEOL-OGY: Historic-Non-Aboriginal" orboth. For pre-contact propertiesenter "ARCHEOLOGY: Prehistoric."In addition, enter any categoriesand subcategories about which theproperty is likely to yield importantinformation and list them in relativeimportance to the property. For ex-ample, an Indian industrial schoolmay have the following areas ofsignificance: "ARCHEOLOGY:Historic-Aboriginal," "EDUCA-TION," and "ETHNIC HERITAGE:Native American." If the school was

of a special architectural design, then"Architecture" may also be added tothe list. A pre-contact lithic sourcemay have areas of significance "AR-CHEOLOGY: Prehistoric" and "IN-DUSTRY." A paleo-Indian kill sitemay have the areas of significance"ARCHEOLOGY: Prehistoric" and"ECONOMICS" because there areno areas of significance specific tonon-agricultural societies.

The ARCHEOLOGY Area ofSignificance has the subcategoriesnoted above. Many archeologicalsites can be associated with a specificethnic group, which also has subcat-egories. If this is the case, then enter"ETHNIC HERITAGE: Asian,""ETHNIC HERITAGE: Black,""ETHNIC HERITAGE: European,""ETHNIC HERITAGE: Hispanic,""ETHNIC HERITAGE: NativeAmerican," "ETHNIC HERITAGE:Pacific Islander," or "ETHNICHERITAGE: Other."

Other Areas of Significance in-clude: AGRICULTURE, ART, COM-MERCE, COMMUNICATIONS,COMMUNITY PLANNING ANDDEVELOPMENT, CONSERVATION,ECONOMICS, EDUCATION, ENGI-NEERING, ENTERTAINMENT/RECREATION, EXPLORATION/

Research Domain

Demography

Technology

Economics

SocialOrganization

Ideology

AN EVALUATION

World System

Comparative data onpatterns of mining frontierdemography

Adaptive variety andchange in industrial andappropriate technologieson the mining frontier

Adaptive patterns ofeconomic productionand distributions on themining frontier

Patterns of mining frontiersocial structure and change

Emergence of "syncretic"mining frontier ideology

MATRIX FOR MINES

Region

Patterns of occupation /abandonment in district

Adaptive change inindustrial technologiesimported into district

Patterns of economicdistribution andproduction withinthe district

Patterns of "colony"social structure andethnic relations

Interaction of Victorianand ethnic folk cultures

Locality

Reconstructionof householdpopulation

Reconstructionof mining/millingtechnologies

Reconstructionof householdconsumption andproduction

Reconstruction ofhousehold statusand ethnicity

Reconstruction ofhousehold ideology

33

SETTLEMENT, HEALTH/MEDICINE,INDUSTRY, INVENTION, LAND-SCAPE ARCHITECTURE, LAW, LIT-ERATURE, MARITIME HISTORY,MILITARY, PERFORMING ARTS,PHILOSOPHY, POLITICS/GOV-ERNMENT, RELIGION, SCIENCE,SOCIAL HISTORY, TRANSPORTA-TION, AND OTHER. Each of theseAreas of Significance, none of whichhave subcategories, are denned inthe National Register bulletinHow to Complete the National RegisterRegistration Form.

Every effort should be made touse the listed "Areas of Significance."If none are applicable (except,of course, "Archeology..."), then"Other" may be entered and theappropriate area(s) of significancedescribed in the text. The use of the"Other" category, however, pre-cludes analysis of the property interms of the other properties listedin the National Register. Each ofthe areas of significance must bedescribed in the narrative signifi-cance section, and, if the property

is eligible under Criterion D, linkedto the information potential ofthe property.

PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE

The period of significance for anarcheological property is the timerange (which is usually estimated)during which the property wasoccupied or used and for which theproperty is likely to yield importantinformation if evaluated underCriterion D. There may be morethan one period of significance. Ifthe periods of significance overlap,then they should be combined intoone longer period of significance.Periods of significance should belisted in order of importance relativeto the property's history, the areasof significance, and the criteriaunder which the property is beingnominated. The periods of signifi-cance must follow from the datapresented in the narrative descrip-tion and significance statements inthe nomination.

For example, an antebellumplantation that was built in 1820and burned in 1864 and has wellpreserved archeological depositsdating from 1820 to 1864 has a 1820-1864 period of significance. If the sameproperty was reoccupied from 1870through 1900 and this period is repre-sented by intact archeological depos-its, then the periods of significanceare 1820-1864 and 1870-1900. If thesame site was then occupied sporadi-cally from 1910 to 1920 by transientsand there are no archeological re-mains associated with this period ofuse, then the periods of significanceare still 1820-1864 and 1870-1900.

If a portion of the same propertywas mined for gold from 1875through 1880 and the remains of thismining activity are intact and wellpreserved, then the periods of sig-nificance will still be 1820-1864 and1870-1900. If the mining activityextended from 1865 to 1875, then theproperty's period of significancewould be 1820-1900. The subperiodsof significance (i.e., 1820-1864,1865-1875, and 1870-1900) may be listedbelow the overall period of signifi-cance but, since subperiods are notcoded into the National Registerdatabase, this is not required. Thesubperiods of significance, however,should be described in the narrativesignificance statement.

Figures 15 and 16: Archeological properties illustratethe diversity of a region's history. In Hawaii,

for example, post-contact archeological propertiesinclude the Kalaoa Permanent House Site (above)

(ca. A.D. 1400-1800) (R Cordy) and theKalaupapaLeprosy Settlement (right) (early twentieth century). (NPS)

34

SIGNIFICANT DATES

Significant dates are single yearsin which a special event or activityassociated with the significance of theproperty occurred. A significant dateis by definition included withinthe period of significance time range.The property must have historicalintegrity for all the significant datesentered. The beginning and closingdates of a period of significance are"significant dates'" only if they markspecific events or activities related tothe significance of the property. Thedates should be listed in order ofimportance given the property'shistory and why it is significant.Martin's Hundred in Virginia hastwo significant dates: 1619, the yearwhen it was established; and 1622,the year when it was almost com-pletely destroyed in a Native Ameri-can uprising (Noel Hume 1982).

For archeological districts enterdates that relate to the significanceof the district as a whole and not forindividual resources unless the datesare also significant relative to thedistrict. For many archeologicalproperties, specific significant datescannot be identified. If this is the case,enter "N/A." Radiocarbon, tree ringor other scientifically-determinedabsolute dates can be entered in thissection. Note, however, that radio-carbon dates will be listed in theNRIS without their standarddeviations.

SIGNIFICANT PERSON(S)

If an archeological property isbeing listed in the National Registerunder Criterion B (i.e., associationwith a significant person or persons),then this category should be com-pleted. Enter the full name of thesignificant person, placing the lastname first. If there is more than onesignificant person, list them inorder of importance relative to theproperty's history. Do not enter thename of a family fraternal group ororganization. Enter the names ofseveral individuals in one family ororganization, only if each personmade contributions for which theproperty meets Criterion B. Enter

the name of a property's architector builder only if the property meetsCriterion B for association withthat individual.

CULTURAL AFFILIATION

Cultural affiliation must be filledout when nominating a propertyunder Criterion D. Cultural affilia-tion has been defined by theNational Register to be "the archeo-logical or ethnographic culture towhich a collection of artifacts orresources (or property) belongs."For pre-contact archeologicalresources, "cultural affiliation"generally refers to a cultural groupthat is, in part, defined by a certainarcheological assemblage and timeperiod. For example, "Paleoindian,""Hopewell," "Hohokam," "Adena,"and "Shoshonean" are commonlyused cultural affiliation terms.Archeologists also commonly enterthe archeological time period in thiscategory; for example, "Early Ar-chaic/7 "Late Woodland," and "LatePrehistoric," and "Proto-historic."

Archeologists who study thepost-contact period usually are ableto enter the ethnic identity of thegroup that occupied or used theproperty because the information isgenerally available through docu-ments, oral histories, or comparativestudies. For example, "Hawaiian,""Chemehuevi," Creek," "Irish-American," "Chinese-American,""African-American," "British,""Spanish," and "Dutch" are commoncultural affiliation entries. Entriessuch as "Shaker" and "Mormon" arealso used. When a historical prop-erty, such as a mining camp, cannotbe linked to a specific cultural group,then the appropriate entry simplymay be 'Anglo-American" or "Euro-American" or even "American."Every effort should be made to com-plete the cultural affiliation section;however, if the cultural affiliation isunknown, enter "unknown."

ARCHITECT OR BUILDER

The name of the person(s) re-sponsible for the design or construc-tion of the property, if known, is

entered in this category The full nameshould be used. If the property'sdesign derived from the stock plansof a company or government agencyand are not credited to a specificindividual, enter the name of thecompany or agency; for example,"Southern Pacific Railroad," "Sears,"or "U.S. Army." Enter the name ofproperty owners or contractors onlyif they were actually responsible forthe property's design or construc-tion. If the architect or builder isunknown, enter "unknown."

ASPECTS,OR QUALITIESOF INTEGRITY

The National Register criteriastipulate that a property mustpossess integrity of location, design,setting, materials, workmanship,feeling, and association. TheNational Register bulletin How toApply the National Register Criteria forEvaluation directs that "integrity isthe ability of a property to convey itssignificance" and "to retain historicintegrity a property will alwayspossess several, and usually most, ofthe aspects." (For further guidance,see How to Apply the National RegisterCriteria for Evaluation).

The evaluation of integrity issometimes a subjective judgment,but it must always be grounded inan understanding of a property'sphysical features and how they re-late to its significance. The retentionof specific aspects of integrity isparamount for a property to conveyits significance. Determining whichof these aspects are most importantto a particular property requiresknowing why, where, and when theproperty is significant.

The importance of each of theseaspects of integrity depends uponthe nature of the property and theCriterion or Criteria under which itis being nominated. Integrity oflocation, design, materials, and asso-ciation are of primary importance,for example, when nominatingarcheological sites under Criteria Aand B. Design, materials, and work-manship are especially importantunder Criterion C. Location, design,

35

materials, and association are gener-ally the most relevant aspects ofintegrity under Criterion D. Integrityof setting within the site is importantunder Criteria A and B. UnderCriteria C and D, integrity of settingadds to the overall integrity of anindividual site and is especially im-portant when assessing the integrityof a district. Integrity of feeling alsoadds to the integrity of archeologicalsites or districts as well as to othertypes of properties. Integrity ofsetting and feeling usually increasesthe "recognizability" of the site ordistrict and enhances one's ability tointerpret an archeological site's ordistrict's historical significance.

Assessment of integrity mustcome after an assessment ofsignificance:

Significance + integrity = eligibility.

To assess integrity, first define theessential physical qualities that mustbe present for the property to repre-sent its significance.

Second, determine if thosequalities are visible or discernibleenough to convey their significance.Remember to consider the questionof "to whom significance might beconveyed." For example, the signifi-cance of particular historic buildingsmay be apparent primarily to archi-tectural historians but not to manyindividuals in the general public.Similarly, the significance of someproperties may be apparent primarilyto specialists, including individualswhose expertise is in the traditionalcultural knowledge of a tribe. Aproperty does not have to readilyconvey its significance visually tothe general public; however,National Register documentationof the significance of a propertyshould be written such that mem-bers of the general public can under-stand the property's significanceand the physical qualities whichconvey that significance.

Third, determine if the propertyneeds to be compared to other simi-lar properties. This decision is madein light of the historic context(s) inwhich the property's significanceis defined.

ASPECTS, OR QUALITIES, OF INTEGRITY

Aspect/Quality

Location

Design

Setting

Materials

Workmanship

Feeling

Association

Definition

The place where the historic property wasconstructed or the place where the historicevent occurred.

The combination of elements that createthe form, plan, space, structure, and style ofa property.

The physical environment of a historic property.Setting includes elements such as topographicfeatures, open space, viewshed, landscape,vegetation, and artificial features.

The physical elements that were combined ordeposited during a particular period of timeand in a particular pattern or configuration toform a historic property.

The physical evidence of the labor and skill of aparticular culture or people during any givenperiod in history.

A property's expression of the aesthetic orhistoric sense of a particular period of time.

The direct link between an important historicevent or person and a historic property. UnderD it is measured in the strength of associationbetween data and important research questions.

Finally, based on the significanceand essential physical qualities,determine which aspects of integ-rity are vital to the property beingnominated and whether they arepresent (See also the recommendedsequence for evaluation under"Evaluating Sites in Context," inSection IV of this bulletin).

Solely meeting any aspect ofintegrity is not sufficient to meeteligibility requirements. For in-stance, just because most archeologi-cal sites retain integrity of locationdoes not make them eligible. As theNational Register bulletin How toApply the National Register Criteriafor Evaluation states,

To retain historic integrity a prop-erty will always possess severaland usually most, of the aspects.The retention of specific aspectsof integrity is paramount for aproperty to convey its signifi-

cance. Determining which of theseaspects are most important to aparticular property requiresknowing why, where and whenthe property is significant.

Archeologists use the wordintegrity to describe the level ofpreservation or quality of informa-tion contained within a district, site,or excavated assemblage. A propertywith good archeological integrityhas archeological deposits that arerelatively intact and complete. Thearcheological record at a site withsuch integrity has not been severelyimpacted by later cultural activitiesor natural processes. Propertieswithout good archeological integritymay contain elements that areinconsistent with a particular timeperiod or culture. For example, thecontents of a thirteenth-centuryNative American trash pit shouldnot contain artifacts indicative of a

36

nineteenth-century American farm-stead. Because of the complexity ofthe archeological record, however,integrity is a relative measure and itsdefinition depends upon the historiccontext of the archeological property.

Few archeological properties havewholly undisturbed cultural depos-its. Often, the constant occupation orperiodic reuse of site locations cancreate complex stratigraphic situa-tions. Above-ground organization offeatures and artifacts may be used asevidence that below-ground pattern-ing is intact. Because of the complex-ity of the archeological record andthe myriad of cultural and naturalformation processes that may impacta site, the definition of archeologicalintegrity varies from property toproperty. For properties eligibleunder Criterion D, integrity require-ments relate directly to the types ofresearch questions defined withinthe archeologist's research design. Ingeneral, archeological integrity maybe demonstrated by the presence of:

• Spatial patterning of surfaceartifacts or features that representdifferential uses or activities;

• Spatial patterning of subsurfaceartifacts or features; or

• Lack of serious disturbance to theproperty's archeological deposits.

In addressing the presence ofnineteenth-century farmsteads,archeologist John Wilson, for ex-ample, posed three sets of questionsthat are helpful in determining thepotential archeological integrity of agiven site or district (Wilson 1990):

• Are the archeological features andother deposits temporally diag-nostic, spatially discrete, andfunctionally defined? Can youinterpret what activities tookplace at the property and whenthey occurred?

• How did the historic propertybecome an archeological site?Were the cultural and natural siteformation processes catastrophic,deliberate, or gradual? How didthese changes impact the property'sarcheological deposits?

What is the quality of the docu-mentary record associated withthe occupation and subsequentuses of the property? Are thearcheological deposits assignableto a particular individual's,family's, or group's activities?

Generally, integrity cannot bethought of as a finite quality of aproperty. Integrity is relative to thespecific significance which the prop-erty conveys. Although it is possibleto correlate the seven aspects ofintegrity with standard archeological

Figure 17: Seventeenth-century foundations at Gloucester Point, Virginiahelp to demonstrate the archeological integrity of this district.(Virginia Research Center for Archaeology)

Figure 18: At the Shea Site in North Dakota, the visibility of an exterior ditchand interior ditch (shown here) are evidence of the high integrity of thisNortheastern Plains Village dating ca. A.D. 1400-1600. This site addressesquestions of sedentism, defense, domestic plant use in the Red River region,and fluid cultural boundaries between the Plains and the Woodlands.(Michael Micholovic)

37

site characteristics, those aspectsare often unclear for evaluating theability of an archeological propertyto convey significance under Crite-rion D. The integrity of archeologicalproperties under Criterion D isjudged according to important infor-mation potential. Archeological sitesmay contain a great deal of impor-tant information and yet have hadsome disturbance or extensive exca-vation (and, thereby, destruction).For example, sites that have beenplowed may be eligible if it isdemonstrated that the disturbancecaused by plowing does not destroythe important information that thesite holds.

For example, survey has identi-fied the first free African Americansettlement in the state, dating tothe early nineteenth century. Fewdocumentary records exist whichdocument the site, therefore, mostinformation about the settlementwill be gained through archeologicalresearch. However, more than halfof the site has been destroyedthrough previous development ofthe area. While the integrity of thesite is questionable, the site may stillbe eligible under Criterion D for theimportant information it can provideabout the free African Americancommunity in the state during thistime period.

All properties must be able toconvey their significance. UnderCriterion D, properties do thisthrough the information that theycontain. Under Criteria A, B, and C,the National Register places a heavyemphasis on a property looking likeit did during its period of signifi-cance. One of the tests is to ask if aperson from the time or the impor-tant person who lived there, wouldrecognize it. If the answer is "yes,"then the property probably has in-tegrity of materials and design. If theanswer is "no/7 then the propertyprobably does not. Keep in mindthat the reason why the property issignificant is a very important factorwhen determining what it is thatthe person should recognize. Forexample, if a plantation was bestknown for its formal and informal

gardens and agricultural activities,then recognizable landscapes maybe more important than recogniz-able buildings.

One of the most common ques-tions asked about archeological sitesand integrity is: Can a plowed sitebe eligible for listing in the NationalRegister? The answer, which relatesto integrity of location and design,is: If plowing has displaced artifactsto some extent, but the activity areasor the important information at thesite are still discernable, then thesite still has integrity of location ordesign. If not, then the site has nointegrity of location or design.

A 17-acre multi-component campsite in the southeastern United Stateshas been plowed continuously since1965 to depths greater than thethickness of topsoil. Portions of somefeatures remain intact and the prop-erty has horizontal integrity, withArchaic, Troyville and Plaqueminecomponents somewhat co-mingledyet concentrated in different sec-tions. The nomination states that'The nature and dispersion patternsof the artifacts from the various com-ponents indicate that the hill wasprimarily a scene of small scale and/or temporary activities. It was nevera large village occupied by numerouspeople. Therein lies a compellingreason for the site's importance/'The site is significant in the lowerMississippi Valley partly because ofthe small scale occupation there.Small sites are not always evaluatedbecause attention is paid primarilyto large mound and village sites inthe region. Important research ques-tions would involve the relationshipof this small hamlet/work camp tothe larger mound sites and villages.The nomination points out specificresearch goals from the State archeo-logical plan as well.

Sites that have lost contributingelements may retain sufficient integ-rity to convey their significanceunder Criterion D. For example, at a25-acre mound site in the southeast-ern United States, of four moundsdescribed in 1883, there is now oneleft associated with an extensiveartifact scatter. Repeated surface

collections were carried out to betterunderstand the internal organizationof the settlement. The nominationstates that "On the basis of knowl-edge of similar sites, subsurfacefeatures such as cooking facilities,storage pits, and domestic habita-tions are likely to exist/' One of theresearch domains likely to beaddressed at this A.D. 600-1000property, which was listed in 1995,concerns the study of the technologyand social organization of craft pro-duction. The researchers expect tofind evidence of rudimentary craftspecialization in connection with theemergence of social inequality. Atthis major mound group, such craftscould have been used by the elitewho could control access to or theproduction of craft items in supportof their status.

LOCATION

The location of a property oftenhelps explain its importance. Ar-cheological sites and districts almostalways have integrity of location.Integrity of location is closely linkedto integrity of association, which isdiscussed below. Integrity of locationwould not necessarily preclude theeligibility of secondary or redepos-ited deposits in an archeologicalproperty. Integrity depends uponthe significance argued for the prop-erty. Shipwreck sites best illustratethe subtleties of integrity of location.

EXAMPLES: The shipwreck com-prises a ship that fought in a veryimportant battle of the Civil War.Its significance is tied to only thisbattle.

• If the ship sank during the battleor in a place away from the battlesite but the sinking was related tothe battle, then the shipwreck stillretains integrity of location underany of the criteria.

• If, for reasons unrelated to thebattle, the ship sank in anotherlocation, then the shipwreck, nomatter how intact it is, does nothave integrity of location underCriterion A.

38

EXAMPLE: The above mentionedship is also important because ofits unique construction.

• If the ship's sinking is unrelatedto its role in the Civil War, thenthe shipwreck may still be eligiblefor listing under Criterion C,because the location of the ship'ssinking is unrelated to the impor-tance of the ships construction.

EXAMPLE: The shipwreck is a shipthat was commanded by one navalofficer from 1850 to 1870. It engagedin blockades, battles, and generaltransport. The naval officer is nowrecognized as one of the mostimportant naval officers in theCivil War and an innovator of navalengagement techniques.

• No matter where the ship sank,it may still be eligible underCriterion B.

Note that, as under Criterion A,integrity of location is usually a pre-requisite under Criterion B. In thisexample, however, the property'ssignificance is tied to an importantnaval officer and by nature, shipschange location.

EXAMPLE: The shipwreck is asailing ship that patrolled Maine'scoast from 1840 to 1890. Its signifi-cance is tied to that function. It hasstatewide significance.

• If the ship later sank off Maine'scoast or in an adjoining river orbay, then the ship has integrity oflocation under Criterion A.

• If the ship sailed to Florida in1890 to serve as a private yachtand along the way sank off CapeHatteras, then the ship does nothave integrity of location underCriterion A.

EXAMPLE: Each of the aboveshipwreck examples have intactarcheological deposits.

• If each of the shipwreck sites canyield important informationthrough archeological investiga-tions, then each, as a post-contactarcheological site, has integrity oflocation under Criterion D.

EXAMPLE: The shipwreck is aship that sank during a War of 1812naval battle. Subsequent naturalerosion and turbulence has sincescattered the ship's structure andcontents over at least a two square-mile area. Occasionally, divers findartifacts that are believed to be fromthe ship, but there is no discernablepatterning of remains.

• The shipwreck has no integrity oflocation under any of the criteria,including Criterion D.

DESIGN

Elements of design include orga-nization of space, proportion, scale,technology, ornamentation, andmaterials. It is of paramount impor-tance under Criterion C and is ex-tremely important under Criteria Aand B. The word "design" brings tomind architectural plans and imagesof buildings or structures. Design,however, also applies to the layoutof towns, villages, plantations, etc.For an archeological site, integrityof design generally refers to thepatterning of structures, buildings,or discrete activity areas relative toone another. Recognizability of aproperty, or the ability of a propertyto convey its significance, dependslargely upon the degree to whichthe design of the property is intact.The nature of the property and itshistorical importance are alsoa factor.

Under Criterion D, integrity ofdesign for archeological sites mostclosely approximates intra-siteartifact and feature patterning. Fordistricts, inter-site patterning can beused to illustrate integrity of design.

EXAMPLE: The archeological sitewas a large 1890s horse farm thathad a main house and office, manyoutbuildings, a race track, and pad-docks. The horse farm is most notedfor the innovative layout of itsbuildings and structures. Becauseits site plan proved to be especiallyefficient, all later horse farms in thearea adopted the same design forplacement of their buildings and

structures. Because of the increasedefficiency, horse farming surpassedcrop-based farming and has servedas the economic base for the regionsince 1900.

• If only the foundation of the mainhouse and adjacent archeologicaldeposits still exist, then thearcheological site does not havesufficient integrity to qualifyunder Criterion A (or Criterion Bif the property was owned andoperated by an important horsebreeder). The site may still retainsufficient archeological data on1890s settlement and consumerbehavior to nominate it underCriterion D.

• If this archeological site encom-passes the entire horse farmcomplex and its significance canbe conveyed from the patterningof the remaining building andstructure foundations and track,remnants of paddock fence posts,intact road beds, etc., then thehorse farm site likely has suffi-cient integrity of design underCriteria A and D, and perhaps C.If the horse farm was built andoperated by a renowned horsebreeder, then the property wouldqualify under Criterion B.

Keep in mind that the reason whythe property is significant is a veryimportant factor. For example, if aplantation was best known for itsformal and informal gardens andagricultural activities, then theintegrity of the landscapes may bemore important than the integrityof the buildings.

EXAMPLE: The site was a 1790smill site. Above-ground ruins,including the millrace and millfoundation, are present. The millwas the village's first and onlyindustry, and the village grew uparound it.

• If the site is in a 1950s subdivisionand the creek is gone, then thisarcheological site lacks sufficientintegrity of design underCriterion A.

39

• If the mill site is located within asmall, relatively intact 1790svillage and its importance in theearly development of the villageis evident given its placementrelative to the neighboring 1790sbuildings and the still flowingcreek, then the archeological sitehas sufficient integrity of designunder Criterion A. If it wereassociated with a miller importantin the establishment and earlydevelopment of the village, thenthe site would qualify underCriterion B.

SETTING

Setting includes elements suchas topographic features, open-space,views, landscapes, vegetation, man-made features (e.g., paths, fences),and relationships between buildingsand other features.

Archeological sites may be nomi-nated under Criterion D withoutintegrity of setting if they haveimportant information potential.For example, if a site has rich andwell-stratified archeological depositsdating from the 1690s to the 1790s

but is located under a modernparking lot and between twomodern commercial buildings, itwill still qualify under Criterion D.In this case, the setting does notdetract from the informationpotential of the site.

If a site's or district's historicalsetting (or the physical environmentas it appeared during its period ofsignificance) is intact, then the abilityof the site or district to convey itssignificance is enhanced. If the set-ting conveys an archeological site'ssignificance, then the site has integ-rity of setting under Criteria A andB. In order to convey significance,the setting should:

• appear as it did during the site'sor district's period of significance;and

• be integral to the importance ofthe site or district.

EXAMPLE: The archeological dis-trict encompasses an area occupiedby a Native American tribe duringthe Late Woodland period. Fifteenfishing camps are located on pointsof land that jut into the large lake

Figure 19: The LSU Campus Mounds Site (16EBR6) is located on the campusof Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge. The site dates from 3000 B.C.to 2000 B.C. and is nominated under Criterion D as it has the potential tocontribute to our understanding of Archaic lifeways. Even though the site'ssetting does not have integrity because it is physically surrounded by LSUstructures and buildings, limited investigations have shown that the moundsare extremely well preserved. (Chris Hays)

and three villages are on highknolls overlooking the lake.These fishing camps and villagestogether represent Native Americanoccupation and exploitation of thelake during the Late Woodlandperiod. The economy was basedon fishing and local trapping. Thefishing camps and villages arerepresented by below-ground ar-cheological deposits.

• If the natural environment aroundthe lake and on the knolls appearssimilar to its Late Woodlandappearance and the visitor caneasily understand the significanceof the sites and their relationshipsto each other and the lake andthe surrounding knolls and canappreciate the Late Woodlandlifeways of the Native Americanswho lived there, then the districtis eligible for listing under Crite-rion A.

• If modern cabins and large resi-dences are near most of the fish-ing camps, high-rise structuresline much of the lake shoreline, ashopping center is located on oneof the three villages, and smallplay-ground parks are atop theother two villages, then this dis-trict does not have sufficient in-tegrity for listing under Criteria A.In this scenario, Criterion D mightbe questioned.

MATERIALS

According to the National Regis-ter bulletin How to Apply the NationalRegister Criteria for Evaluation, "thechoice and combination of materialsreveal the preferences of those whocreated the property and indicatethe availability of particular types ofmaterials and technologies." Integ-rity of materials is of paramountimportance under Criterion C.Under Criteria A and B, integrityof materials should be consideredwithin the framework of theproperty's significance.

Under Criterion D, integrity ofmaterials is usually described in

40

Figure 20: The Madison Buffalo Jump State Monument in Gallatin County,Montana, shown in this aerial photo, exhibits excellent integrity of setting.The area includes a site identified for communal buffalo drives by pre-contactpeoples over a period of at least 4,000 years. The pristine physical environmentenhances the site's ability to convey its significance. (Rocky Rothweiler)

Figure 21: The Melting Furnace Site, part of the Estellville Glassworks Historic Dis-trict, is in Atlantic County, New Jersey. Cemented with limestone mortar, it wasconstructed of sandstone and aggregated stone. All four walls of this structure wereonce pierced with large arched openings in brick. The site displays integrity of work-manship because of its standing wall surface, showing the brick arched colonnade.(Karen DeRosa)

i

•

« • *

terms of the presence of intrusiveartifacts/ features, the completenessof the artifact/feature assemblage,or the quality of artifact or featurepreservation.

EXAMPLE: The archeological siteis a battery built by the Confeder-ates early in the Civil War to block-ade the Potomac River, which wasWashington, D.C.'s primary supplyroute. The battery was formedby an intricate pattern of earthenberms shored up by woodenplanks. Wood was also used to linethe magazines and provide levelplatforms for guns. The wood isnow gone.

• If the battery consists of earthenberms and depressions whichshow the configuration of theoriginal battery and the locationof gun platforms, magazines, etc.,then this site has integrity ofmaterials and is eligible underCriterion A.

• If the battery's earthen berms anddepressions are indistinct becauseof erosion or other factors, thenthe site does not have integrityof materials under Criterion A.

WORKMANSHIP

Workmanship "is the evidence ofan artisan's labor and skill in con-structing or altering a building,structure, object, or site." It can ap-ply to the property as a whole or toits individual components. Mostoften, integrity of workmanship isan issue under Criterion C. UnderCriteria A and B, integrity of work-manship is important if workman-ship is tied to the significance of theproperty.

Under Criterion D, workmanshipusually is addressed indirectly interms of the quality of the artifactsor architectural features. The skillneeded to produce the artifact orconstruct the architectural feature isalso an indication at of workmanship.The importance of workmanship isdependent on the nature of the siteand its research importance.

41

EXAMPLE: The archeological sitewas a late eighteenth-century glasshouse that produced a unique kindof glassware. Rare silicates and anunusual melting technique wereused to produce the unusual charac-teristics of the glass. The individualglass items were prized for theirhigh quality and decorative styles.

• If the furnaces are still evident andactivity areas where the com-ponents were processed and formedinto vessels are discernable, thenthe site may have integrity ofworkmanship and be eligibleunder Criterion C. If the glassmaker and owner of the glasshouse is well-known, then theproperty may be eligible underCriterion B.

FEELING

A property has integrity of feelingif its features in combination with itssetting convey a historic sense of theproperty during its period of signifi-cance. Integrity of feeling enhancesa property's ability to convey itssignificance under all of the criteria.

• If the site itself is still intact, but itis now surrounded by housingsubdivisions and commercialbuildings, then the site does nothave integrity of feeling underCriterion A.

EXAMPLE: The archeologicalproperty was an early 1900s railwaystop. It was located in the desert at apoint were the railroad crossed oneof the region's primary cattle trials.There were two nearby springs,structures to load cattle onto therail cars, and a hinged, wooden

sidewalk that could be realignedto accommodate the shifting sands.Camp sites were situated on anearby knoll and adjacent to oneof the springs. The closest townwas 30 miles away when the sitewas used. This remote railwaystop was vital to the surroundingranches whose economy was basedon cattle ranching.

• If the site is still in a remote areaof the desert, and what remains atthe site evokes a feeling of earlycattle ranching days, then the sitehas integrity of feeling underCriterion A. The presence of thesprings, remnants of the cattle-loading structures, segments ofthe hinged sidewalk followingthe railway tracks, and scatteredrock-lined hearths, tobacco tins,solder tin cans, broken glass, etc.,in combination with the site'sremoteness, conveys feelings oftimes past.

• If the site itself is still intact, but itis now surrounded by housingsubdivisions and commercialbuildings, then the site does nothave integrity of feeling underCriterion A.

ASSOCIATION

According to the National Regis-ter bulletin How to Apply the NationalRegister Criteria for Evaluation, "aproperty retains association if it isthe place where the event or activityoccurred and is sufficiently intactto convey that relationship to anobserver/' Integrity of association isvery important under Criteria A andB. The association between a prop-erty and its stated significance mustbe direct under these two criteria.

Under Criterion D, integrity ofassociation is measured in terms ofthe strength of the relationshipbetween the site's data or informa-tion and the important researchquestions. For example, a site withwell-stratified archeological depositscontaining butchered animalremains has information on sub-sistence practices over time. There isa strong association between thesite's information and questions onsubsistence practices. How to Applythe National Register Criteria forEvaluation, should be consulted foradditional guidance on evaluatingintegrity.

EXAMPLE. The archeologicalproperty is an 1830s Cherokeesettlement located in Georgia. Theevent or broad pattern of eventsunder Criterion A is the removalof the Cherokee to Oklahoma.

• If soldiers invaded the settlementin 1839, taking the Cherokeeprisoners and moving them intocamps before marching them toOklahoma, then the propertyis directly associated with theremoval of the Cherokee toOklahoma. The site has integrityof association under Criterion A.

• If the property was abandonedin 1835 because of disease andthe Cherokee moved to anothersettlement several miles away,then the property probably hasno direct association with theremoval of the Cherokee toOklahoma. The site does nothave integrity of associationunder Criterion A.

42

V. PREPARING DOCUMENTATIONFOR NATIONAL REGISTERELIGIBILITY AND LISTING

When completing the NationalRegister form with name and lo-cational information, please consultthe previous section "When shouldinformation about historic propertiesbe restricted from public access?"In some cases, the common name ofa site may give its location. In suchcases, a Smithsonian trinomial orsimilar designation may be moreappropriate as the preferred name.

CLASSIFICATIONSITES AND DISTRICTS

Most archeological properties areclassified either as a site or as a dis-trict. A site is the location of a signifi-cant event or of historical humanoccupation or activity. The locationmust possess historical, cultural, orarcheological value regardless of thevalue of any existing building orstructure. Comprising the remainsof a sixteenth- through nineteenth-century Spanish mission, MissionSocorro in El Paso County, Texas, isan example of an archeological site.Established after the Pueblo Revoltof 1680, this property functioned as arefugee mission for the Piro Indians.This site contains a material recordof Piro acculturation into the Span-ish and subsequent Anglo-Americancultures. Study of the property couldreveal information about lifewaysat eighteenth-century Spanishmissions and changes in Spanishand Native American technology,society, and ideology in a colonialfrontier setting.

A district is a grouping of sites,buildings, structures, or objects thatare linked historically by function,theme, or physical development oraesthetically by plan. The propertieswithin a district are usually con-tiguous. For example, the WakullaSprings Archeological and HistoricalDistrict in Florida contains 55 ar-cheological properties and six build-ings that contribute to this diverseNational Register district with aperiod of significance beginning in15,000 B.C. Because archeologicalinvestigations are labor intensiveand time consuming, survey andevaluation of 100 percent of theresources within a proposed archeo-

logical district may be impractical,if not unattainable. If it can be dem-onstrated that the area between theindividual properties, although notcompletely surveyed, is likely tocontain significant resources relatedto the documented properties, thenclassification as a district may stillbe appropriate despite the lack of a100 percent survey.

If sites have a direct relationshipthrough cultural affiliation, relatedelements of a pattern of land use,or historical development, but theyare not contiguous and the spacebetween the sites is not significant,then the property is best describedas a discontiguous district.

Figure 22: A contributing resource in the Wakulla Springs FloridaArcheological District, this early twentieth-century turpentine processingcamp was identified through surface evidence. (Stephen C. Byrne)

43

A discontiguous district is mostappropriate where:

• Elements, such as sites, arespatially discrete;

• Space between the elements, orsites, has not been demonstratedto be significant as it relates to thedistrict;

• Visual continuity is not a factorin the significance.

The Brogan Mound and VillageSite in Clay County, Mississippi, isan example of a discontiguous dis-trict. This property consists of aMiddle Woodland burial mound andan associated multi-component habi-tation area approximately 200 metersaway. A highway right-of-way and ahouse occupy the area betweenthese portions of the district.

MULTIPLE PROPERTYSUBMISSIONS

Multiple Property Submissionscomprise a group of individualproperties that share a commontheme or historic context. Multipleproperty nominations facilitate theevaluation and registration of indi-vidual properties by grouping themwith other properties with similarcharacteristics. A Multiple PropertySubmission calls for the develop-ment of historic contexts, selectionof related property types, and theidentification and documentation ofrelated significant properties. It maybe based on the results of a compre-hensive interdisciplinary survey fora specific area, county, or region of astate, or it may be based on an inten-sive study of the resources illustra-tive of a specific type of site, a singlecultural affiliation, or a single orclosely related group of historicevents or activities.

Multiple Property Submissionsare made up of a cover document(NPS 10-900-b) and individual nomi-nations. The cover document includesthe following sections: Statementof Historic Contexts; AssociatedProperty Types; Geographical Data;Summary of Identification andEvaluation Methods; and Major

Bibliographic References. The indi-vidual nominations, which can bedistricts, sites, structures, buildingsand/or objects, include brief descrip-tion and significance sections andboundary and bibliographic infor-mation. Multiple Property Submissionsare designed to facilitate evaluatingthe eligibility and/or nominatingadditional properties at a later date.

Previously prepared MultipleProperty Submissions can be usefulguides to appropriate historic con-texts and registration requirementsfor archeological properties. Multiple

property submissions are discussedin the National Register bulletinHow to Complete the National RegisterMultiple Property DocumentationForm. The National Register main-tains a list of approved multipleproperty submissions; the list andcopies of the documentation areavailable upon request and on theweb at: www.cr.nps.gov/nr/research/mplist.htm. A list of current multipleproperty submissions under whicharcheological properties have beennominated is included as AppendixB in this bulletin.

NATIONAL REGISTER PROPERTY CATEGORIESDistrictA district possesses a significant concentration, linkage, or continuity ofsites, buildings, structures, or objects united historically or aestheticallyby plan or physical development. Examples: college campuses; centralbusiness districts; residential areas; commercial areas; large forts; indus-trial complexes; civic centers; rural villages; canal systems; collections ofhabitation and limited activity sites; irrigation systems; large farms, ranches,estates, or plantations; transportation networks; and large landscaped parks.

SiteA site is the location of a significant event, a pre or post-contact occupa-tion or activity, or a building or structure, whether standing, ruined, orvanished, where the location itself possesses historic, cultural, or archeo-logical value regardless of the value of any existing structure. Examples:habitation sites, funerary sites; rock shelters; village sites; hunting andfishing sites; ceremonial sites; petroglyphs; rock carvings; gardens;battlefields; ruins of historic buildings and structures; campsites; sitesof treaty signing; trails; areas of land; shipwrecks; cemeteries; designedlandscapes; and natural features, such as springs, rock formations, andland areas having cultural significance.

BuildingA building, such as a house, barn, church, hotel, or similar construction,is created principally to shelter any form of human activity. "Building"may also be used to refer to a historically and functionally related unit,such as a courthouse and a jail or a house and a barn. Examples: Houses;barns; stables; sheds; garages; courthouses; city halls; social halls;commercial buildings; libraries; factories; mills; train depots; stationarymobile homes; hotels; theaters; schools; stores; and churches.

StructureThe term "structure" is used to distinguish those functional constructionsmade usually for purposes other than creating human shelter. Examples:bridges; tunnels; gold dredges; fire towers; canals; turbines; dams; powerplants; corncribs; silos; roadways; shot tower; windmills; grain elevators;kilns; mounds; cairns; palisade fortifications; earthworks; railroad grades;systems of roadways and paths; boats and ships; railroad locomotivesand cars; telescopes; carousels; bandstands; gazebos; and aircraft.

ObjectThe term "object" is used to distinguish those constructions that areprimarily artistic in nature or are relatively small in scale and simplyconstructed. Although it may be, by nature or design, movable, an objectis associated with a specific setting or environment. Examples: sculpture;monuments; boundary markers; statuary; and foundations.

44

ARCHEOLOGICALDISTRICTS:CONTRIBUTING ANDNONCONTRIBUTINGRESOURCES

A contributing site, building,structure, or object adds to thehistorical associations, historic archi-tectural qualities, or archeologicalvalues for which a property issignificant. A contributing resourcehas the following characteristics:

• It was present during the periodof time that the property achievedits significance;

• It relates to the documentedsignificance of the property;

• It possesses historical integrity oris capable of yielding importantinformation relevant to the sig-nificance of the property.

A noncontributing building, site,structure, or object does not add tothe historical associations, historicarchitectural qualities, or archeologi-cal values for which a property issignificant because:

• It was not present during theperiod of time that the propertyachieved its significance;

• It does not relate to the docu-mented significance of theproperty;

• Due to alterations, disturbances,additions, or other changes, itno longer possesses historicalintegrity or is capable of yieldingimportant information relevant tothe significance of the property.

Contributing and noncontributingresources need to be differentiatedand tallied. Identify all sites, build-ings, structures, and objects locatedwithin the property's boundariesthat are substantial in size and scaleand determine which are contribut-ing and which are noncontributing.As a general rule:

• Count a geographically continu-ous site as a single unit regardlessof its size or complexity;

• Count separate areas of a dis-contiguous district as separateentities (e.g., sites, structures, etc.);

• Do not count minor resources(such as small sheds, grave mark-ers, or machinery) unless theyare important to the property'ssignificance;

• Do not count architectural ruinsseparately from the site of whichthey are a part;

• Do not count landscape features(such as fences and paths) sepa-rately from the site of which theyare a part unless they are particu-larly important or intrusive. Forexample, a narrow gravel pathwaybuilt 10 years ago to guide touristsfrom one mission building toanother should not be counted.

• Do not count individual archeo-logical components of stratifiedarcheological sites separately;

A landscape feature, such as aformal garden or complex of formalgardens, may be classified andcounted either as a site or as a dis-trict. Landscape features associatedwith archeological properties, how-ever, will generally be counted assites. The National Register bulletinGuidelines for Evaluating and Docu-menting Rural Historic Landscape andthe National Register bulletin How toEvaluate and Nominate DesignedHistoric Landscapes provide guidanceon denning, describing, and evaluat-ing rural and designed landscapes.Refer to How to Complete the NationalRegister Registration Form for furtherguidance on counting resources.

CLASSIFICATION EXAMPLES

Situation

1870s homestead archeologicalsite with no standing structuresor above-ground ruins.

1870s homestead archeologicalsite with a standing barn andhouse dating to the 1870s.

1870s homestead archeologicalsite situated atop and adjacentto important pre-contactarcheological deposits.

Four 1870s homestead sitesadjacent to one another.

A pre-contact irrigation systemfragmented by modern developments.

Three historically-related shipwrecksthat are located approximatelyone-quarter mile apart.

Twenty shell midden sites locatedwithin a particular county.

Classification

Site

Site

Site

District

Discontiguous District

Discontiguous District

Multiple PropertySubmission

45

HISTORIC ANDCURRENT FUNCTIONSOR USES

Historic function or use relates tothe function of the property duringthe time period associated with theproperty's significance. Currentfunction refers to the present-dayfunction/use of the property. Historicfunction and current function forarcheological properties usually differ.For example, a Colonial-period sitewith a buried foundation of a countycourthouse that is currently undercultivation has a historic function of

GOVERNMENT/ county courthouseand a current function of AGRICUL-TURE / SUBSISTENCE/ agriculturalfield. If none of the listed functionsand uses is appropriate, then the"Other" category may be checkedand a description filled in.

Note that completion of the"Functions/Uses" category is espe-cially important. There is no site-typecategory, in the sense that archeolo-gists use the term, on the nomina-tion form. Since most archeologicalproperties are classified by functionor use, the Function/Use designationapproximates a site-type designation.

ARCHITECTURALCLASSIFICATIONMATERIALS

The descriptive categories, Archi-tectural Classification and Material,are applicable only for archeologicalsites that have standing buildingsor structures. If the property has astanding, contributing structure orbuilding then these descriptive cat-egories must be completed.

Data categories for "ArchitecturalClassification" and architecturalstyle references are listed in How to

FUNCTIONS AND USES PERTAINING TO ARCHEOLOGICAL PROPERTIES

Category Subcategory

Domestic

Agriculture/SubsistenceIndustry/Processing/Extraction

Commerce/Trade

Transportation

Government

Defense

Recreationand Culture

Landscape

EducationReligionFuneraryHealth CareSocial

Vacant/Not in UseWork in ProgressUnknownOther

Single dwelling, multiple dwelling, secondary structure, hotel, institutional housing,camp, village site

Processing, storage, agricultural field, animal facility, fishing facility or site,horticultural facility, agricultural outbuilding, irrigation facility

Manufacturing facility, extractive facility, waterworks, energy facility,communications facility, processing site, industrial storage, quarry site,tool production site

Business, professional, organizational, financial institution, specialty store,department store, restaurant, warehouse, trade (archeology)

Rail-related, air-related, water-related, road-related (vehicular), pedestrian-related, trail

Capitol, city hall, correctional facility, fire station, government office, diplomaticbuilding, custom house, post office, public works, courthouse

Arms storage, fortification, military facility, battle site, Coast Guard facility, navalfacility, air facility

Theater, auditorium, museum, music facility, sports facility, outdoor recreation, fair,monument/marker, work of art

Parking lot, park, plaza, garden, forest, unoccupied land, underwater, natural feature,street furniture/ object, conservation area

School, college, library, research facility, education-related

Religious facility, ceremonial site, church school, church-related residence

Cemetery, graves/burial, mortuary

Hospital, clinic, sanitarium, medical business/office, resort

Meeting hall, clubhouse, civic

(Use this category when the property is not being used)

46

Complete the National Register Regis-tration Form. These categories repre-sent American architectural styles.If the building or structure does notfit into the classification schemeand an appropriate classification isknown, then '"Other" should bechecked and the name written in—for example,"Other: Mesa VerdePueblo." If a building or structurestyle is not listed in the "Architec-tural Classification'' list and "Other"is inappropriate, then "No Style"should be entered.

Architectural classification suchas categories, subcategories, andother stylistic terminology have notbeen established for ruins. Ruinsare defined by the National Registeras buildings or structures that nolonger possess original design orstructural integrity. When there isconsiderable structural integrity stillremaining, which is the case at manypueblos, the property should beclassified as buildings rather thanruins. The principal existing andvisible exterior materials, whetherhistoric or non-historic, of standingbuildings or structures or of aboveground ruins must be described. Alisting of materials from which tochoose is provided in How to Com-plete the National Register RegistrationForm. If there are no abovegroundbuildings, structures, or ruins, enter"N/A." For example, if there is a sub-surface stone foundation but noabove-ground evidence, "N/A"should be entered.

NARRATIVEDESCRIPTION

The narrative description is thetext that describes the archeologicalproperty as it was in the past (i.e.,during its "period of significance")and as it is in the present. It alsodescribes the property's environ-mental or physical condition, includ-ing the property's past environmen-tal setting and its current setting.The property's physical integrityshould also be discussed. There is nooutline that must be followed whendescribing archeological properties.Many preparers, however, havefound the following outline useful.

1. SUMMARY

Summarize the highlights of theinformation presented in the de-scription narrative. At a minimum,the summary paragraph(s) shouldidentify the general location of theproperty, its type, period of signifi-cance, the cultural group(s) associ-ated with the property, the rangeof contributing resources, and theintegrity of the property and itssetting. Note that the period of sig-nificance and the cultural groupassociated with the property will bediscussed more fully in the preced-ing "Evaluating Significance"section. For the purposes of thissummary, these subjects should bediscussed to the level needed toprovide the reader with a basic ori-entation regarding the property.

2. ENVIRONMENT

Describe the present and, ifdifferent, the relevant past environ-ment and physical setting thatprevailed during the property'speriod(s) of occupation or use, orperiod of significance. This descrip-tion should focus on the environ-mental features or factors that areor were relevant to the location,use, formation, or preservation ofthe archeological property.

3. TIME PERIOD OFOCCUPATION OR USE

Identify the time period when theproperty is known or projected tohave been occupied or used. Explainhow the period of time was deter-mined, especially the beginning andend dates. Include comparisons withsimilar properties if data from themwere used to establish the timeperiod. The period of occupationoften corresponds to the period ofsignificance. Note that the indi-vidual period(s) of occupation oruse is discussed in detail under thephysical description of the property.This section is intended to be moregeneral and inclusive of the periodsof occupation.

4. PERSONS,ETHNIC GROUPS,OR ARCHEOLOGICALCULTURES

Identify those who, through theiractivities, created the archeologicalproperty or, in the case of a district,occupied or used the area and cre-ated the sites within it. Discuss thesupporting evidence for makingsuch a determination.

5. PHYSICALCHARACTERISTICS

Describe the physical makeupof the nominated property orproperties. Where appropriate, thedescription of a site or a districtshould include the following:

Site

• Site type, such as village, quarry,tavern, rural homestead, militaryfortification, or shoe factory;

• Important (or contributing) stand-ing structures, buildings, or ruins;

• Kinds and approximate numberor density of features (e.g.,middens, hearths, roads, or gar-den terraces), artifacts (e.g.,manos and metates, lithicdebitage, medicine bottles), andecofacts (e.g., insects,macrobotanical remains);

• Known or projected depth andextent of the archeological depos-its and the supporting evidencefor archeological integrity.Known or projected dates forthe period(s) in w hich the sitewas occupied or used and thesupporting evidence;

• Vertical and horizontal distributionof features, artifacts, and ecofacts;

• Natural and cultural processes,such as flooding and refuse dis-posal, that have influenced theformation of the site;

• Noncontributing buildings, struc-tures, and objects within the site.

47

District

• Type of district, such as an eigh-teenth-century New Englandvillage or a Middle Woodlandmound group.

• Cultural, historical, or other rela-tionships among the sites thatmake the district a cohesive unit.

• Kinds and number of contribut-ing sites, buildings, structures,and objects that make up thedistrict.

• Information on individual orrepresentative sites and otherresources within the district.Refer to the "Physical Character-istics" of a site previously pre-sented. For districts with fewsignificant archeological resources(usually sites), describe the indi-vidual sites. For archeologicaldistricts with a number of re-sources (usually sites), describethe most representative resourcesor types of resources and presentthe data on the individual re-sources in a table.

• Noncontributing sites, buildings,structures, and objects within thedistrict.

6. LIKELY APPEARANCEOF THE PROPERTYDURING ITS PERIOD(S)OF OCCUPATION OR USE

Because of limited data, thisdescription is often general andspeculative, especially if above-ground elements no longer exist.Nevertheless, the description shouldbe consistent with the description ofthe archeological remains. Knowl-edge of similar properties that havebeen comprehensively investigatedmay be used to support the descrip-tion. A description of the propertyas it likely appeared in the past isparticularly useful in evaluatingintegrity.

7. CURRENT ANDPAST IMPACTS

Identify the impacts, natural andcultural, past and current, on orimmediately around the property,such as modern development, van-dalism, neglect, road construction,agriculture, soil erosion, or flooding.For a district, describe the integrityof the district as a whole and theintegrity of individual sites. Theemphasis in this section should beon identifying the kinds of impactsand assessing the extent or degreeof impact. If qualitative categories,such as "high/ "low/' etc., are used,then these should be defined.

8. INTEGRITY

As defined by the National Regis-ter, properties that are eligible forinclusion have integrity. Integrityhas seven aspects: location, design,setting, materials, workmanship,feeling, and association. As withmuch of the National Register nomi-nation process, assessment of thearcheological integrity at a particularhistoric property or district dependsupon the identified historic contexts,questions, and research design.A comprehensive, accurate, andexplicit evaluation of archeologicalintegrity is an essential part of anynomination. For further discussionof integrity, refer to "Aspects, orQualities, of Integrity/' in Section IVof this bulletin for further guidance.

9. PREVIOUSINVESTIGATIONS

Previous investigations are dis-cussed for the purposes of (1) docu-menting disturbances from archeo-logical investigations, (2) identifyingthe information that the propertyhas already yielded, and (3) deter-mining, in part, the informationpotential if additional studies are

conducted at the property. The fol-lowing topics should be addressed:archival, literature, and oral historyresearch; the extent and purpose ofany excavation, testing, mapping, orsurface collection; dates of relevantresearch and field work and perti-nent biases; the identity of the re-searchers and, if relevant, their insti-tutional or organizational affiliation;and directly relevant bibliographicreferences. Focus on those studiesthat pertain to the specific propertybeing nominated. Other relevantstudies and research should becomeevident through reading the"Contexts" section in the narrativesignificance discussion. Of particularimportance are the archeologicalstudies conducted to identify theproperty and to determine its hori-zontal and vertical extent and itsintegrity. Identify the location ofrepositories where collections andsite records are maintained.

10. CONTRIBUTING ANDNONCONTRIBUTINGRESOURCES

List the contributing and noncon-tributing resources if they have notalready been described as such inprevious subsections. Often in thecase of archeological properties, allcategories of resources except "site"are noncontributing. When thisoccurs, the preparer simply needsto state, for example, that "all ninebuildings on the property postdatethe period of significance and arenoncontributing resources" andthat "there is only one contributingresource—the archeological site."Note that the totals of the contribut-ing and noncontributing counts inthe text must match with thosefound on the National Register formunder the heading "Number of Re-sources within Property" and matchthose identified on the site map.

48

NARRATIVESTATEMENT OFSIGNIFICANCE

The "Statement of Significance"is an analytical statement. It is themost important section of anyarcheological nomination, and docu-ments and justifies the significanceof the property. In this section thesignificance of the property isjustified by addressing applicableNational Register criteria, areas ofsignificance, period of significance,cultural affiliation, and, if applicable,

criteria considerations, significantdates, significant persons, and thearchitect or builder.

With the exception of the "Sum-mary of Significance" at the begin-ning of the section, there is noestablished outline for presentingthe significance information. At aminimum, all statements of signifi-cance should describe the historiccontexts used to evaluate the sig-nificance of the historic property,include a discussion of how theproperty is significant in these con-texts, and an explanation of how

archeological information providesimportant information for under-standing these contexts (See also"Evaluating Sites in Context," inSection IV of this bulletin).

The "Summary of Significance" isa concise statement, accompanied bythe supporting rationale, of why theproperty is significant. The criterionor criteria under which the propertyis being nominated and the areas ofsignificance should be cited. In addi-tion, the important information thatthe property is likely to yield shouldbe summarized.

SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANCE:FORT DAVIS, IN JEFF DAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS

The significance of Fort Davis, 41SE289, lies in the fact that it was a major force in providingprotection for Euro-American settlers who remained in the Rolling Plains southwest of Fort Worthduring the Civil War. In the absence of adequate military protection, families realized they wouldhave to "fort up" together, or retreat east to larger settlements. Their decision to stay was animportant determinant in the subsequent settlement and history of the western frontier of Texasfollowing the Civil War, qualifying the site for listing on the National Register under Criterion A.Moreover, the site is significant as the only family fort that has been investigated archeologically,and contains an archeological assemblage of a very short time span (1864-1867) from families livingat some distance from supplies during the Civil War. Such a collection will be of value to otherresearchers working on properties dating to this period. The cemetery is considered significantfor the genealogical and historical data that it can provide concerning the fort residents and theirdescendants. Therefore, Fort Davis also meets Criterion D for inclusion in the National Register(Kenmotsu 1992).

SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANCE:CANNONBALL RUINS, IN MONTEZUMA COUNTY, COLORADO (LISTED

UNDER THE GREAT PUEBLO PERIOD OF THE MCELMO DRAINAGE UNIT MPS)

Cannonball Ruins is eligible under Criterion D in the areas of Community Planning/Developmentand Ethnic Heritage. The site has the potential to provide information regarding the organizationof pre-contact communities as well as information regarding Mesa Verde cultural tradition andhow it contributes to historic Pueblo Indian culture. The site is also significant in the area ofAgriculture for its ability to provide information regarding the role of intensified horticulture.Habitation sites with public architecture are extremely important to our understanding of South-western U.S. pre-contact political and social development, population aggregation and regionalabandonment. Cannonball Ruins is eligible under Criterion A for association with the movementof Mesa Verde Anasazi settlements to canyon and canyon-head settings in the thirteenth centuryA. D., an event that made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of Southwestern pre-history. The site represents a well-preserved example of a thirteenth-century village and is one ofthe largest and last villages from this period. The site is also eligible under Criterion B because ofits association with the life and career of Sylvanus G. Morley, a person significant in the history ofAmerican archeology. Cannonball Ruins was the only excavation Morley undertook in the continentalUnited States and the one in which he obtained his first fieldwork experience. Cannonball Ruinsis eligible under Criterion C for its architectural significance. The standing structures at the siteembody the distinctive characteristics of "Hovenweep-type" architecture and construction.

49

VI. BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES

In the bibliography, or referencesection, include all primary andsecondary sources that were usedin documenting and evaluatingthe property and in preparing theNational Register nomination. Allreferences cited in the text must belisted in the bibliography. Estab-lished historic context reports ormultiple property nominations thatwere used to evaluate the propertyalso should be cited.

There is no mandatory biblio-graphic style. The National Registerdoes require, however, that a stan-dard style be used and only onestyle be used for any given nomina-tion. Standard bibliographic stylesare found in A Manual of Style andA Manual for Writers, both publishedby the University of Chicago Press.Archeologists may choose to use thebibliographic styles endorsed bythe primary professional journals—American Antiquity and HistoricalArchaeology.

If an archeological property is ina national park and has standingstructures or buildings, then the"List of Classified Structures'" (LCS)should be consulted and cited. Eachpark maintains a list of propertieswithin its boundaries, and eachNational Park Service RegionalOffice has a LCS Coordinator whomaintains the files for the park unitswithin the region.

PREVIOUSNATIONAL PARKSERVICEDOCUMENTATION

Although the nominating official(i.e., the SHPO, THPO, or FPO) isresponsible for completing thissection of the nomination, thepreparer of the nomination shouldknow whether or not the propertyhas been:

• listed in the National Register, ordetermined eligible by the Na-tional Register for listing in theNational Register (DOE);

• designated as a National HistoricLandmark (NHL);

• recorded by Historic AmericanBuildings Survey (HABS);

• recorded by Historic AmericanEngineering Record (HAER); or

• preliminarily determined to beeligible as an individual listingunder 36 CFR 67, that are rulesand regulations regarding thecertification of historic propertiesfor rehabilitation tax benefits.

Files are maintained by theNational Park Service for all of theabove kinds of evaluated historicproperties. The National Register,History and Education program ofthe National Park Service, which islocated in Washington D.C., main-tains the National Register andofficial DOE files and the NationalHistoric Landmark files. Records ofmany other properties determinedeligible are found in files maintainedby SHPO, THPO and FPO. HistoricAmerican Buildings Survey andHistoric American EngineeringRecord files are prepared by theNational Park Service's HABS/HAERdivision, which also maintains acomprehensive listing of all HABS/HAER documented properties. MostHABS/HAER files and accompany-ing photographs are availablethrough the Library of Congress.These files, some dating back to the1930s, typically include detailedarchitectural drawings and excellentblack-and-white photographs. StateHistoric Preservation Offices main-tain files on the properties listed ordetermined to be eligible for listingin the National Register and on theproperties certified for tax purposesunder 36 CFR 67.

50

VII. ESTABLISHINGBOUNDARIES ANDGEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION

Boundaries define the horizontalextent of a historic property. Defin-ing the perimeter of an archeologicalsite is often difficult because of theunique environmental setting andarcheological characteristics of indi-vidual properties. There is no singlestandard method for defining theextent of an archeological site'sboundaries.

The methods for defining anddocumenting the boundaries of anarcheological property should beexplicitly described Although finalboundaries may have to be deter-mined after data analysis is com-plete, the archeologist should makeevery effort to define preliminaryboundaries of the property whilein the field (For further guidance,consult the National Register bulle-tin Defining Boundaries for NationalRegister Properties and its appendix,Definition of National Register Bound-aries for Archeological Properties).

The intent of the 'GeographicalData" section of the National Registernomination is to define the locationand extent of the property beingnominated. The parameters thatphysically define and describe theproperty's boundaries and the ratio-nale for establishing those param-eters are of paramount importancein this section.

Absolute boundary definition isoften not achievable, especially forarcheological properties. Neverthe-less, for public administration pur-poses, defensible boundaries are

required. This means that theboundaries chosen have to bejustified and that justification mustbe consistent with the informationpresented in the description andsignificance sections.

When selecting boundaries,keep in mind the following generalguidelines:

• The boundaries should encompass,but not exceed, the full extent ofthe significant resources and landarea making up the property;

• Buffer zones or acreage notdirectly contributing to the sig-nificance of the property shouldbe excluded;

• Include landscape features thatare important in understandingthe property;

• A setting that directly contributesto the significance of the propertymay be included;

• Leave out peripheral areas of theproperty that no longer retainintegrity;

• As a general rule, because it isinconsistent with the concept of asite or district representing a dis-crete entity, specific areas withinthe boundaries of the propertycannot be excluded from thenomination of the property. If thedistrict does contain individualresources or areas that are linkedby historic association or functionbut are separated geographically,

then it may be appropriate todescribe and evaluate the prop-erty as a discontiguous district.

National Register bulletins pro-vide guidance on defining bound-aries, including How to Complete theNational Register Registration Form,and Defining Boundaries for NationalRegister Properties and its appendix,Definition of National Register Bound-aries for Archeological Properties.

Note that for discontiguousdistricts, each separate area of landmust be described in terms of acreage,Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM)references, a boundary description,and a boundary justification.

ACREAGEEnter the total acreage for the

property. Acreage should be accurateto the nearest whole acre; or, ifknown, to the nearest tenth of anacre. If the property is less than oneacre, enter "less than one acre."On the other hand, if the propertyacreage is known to be, for example0.7 acres, then 0.7 may be enteredinstead. (For properties that aremore than 100 acres, a United StatesGeological Survey (USGS) acreageestimator or other accurate methodmay be used to calculate the acreage).If the property is a discontiguousdistrict, then the acreage for eacharea must be listed as well as thetotal acreage (e.g., A = 0.3; B = 1.2;and C = 5.7 acres. Total = 72 acres).

51

GUIDELINES FOR SELECTING BOUNDARIES(summarized from

How to Complete the National Register Registration Form, p . 57)

The selection of boundaries for archeological sites and districtsdepends primarily on the scale and horizontal extent of thesignificant features. A regional pattern or assemblage of remains, alocation of repeated habitation, a location or a single habitation, orsome other distribution of archeological evidence, all imply differentspatial scales. Although it is not always possible to determine theboundaries of a site conclusively, a knowledge of local cultural his-tory and related features such as site type can help predict the extentof a site. Consider the property's setting and physical characteristicsalong with the results of archeological survey to determine the mostsuitable approach.

Obtain evidence through one or several of the followingtechniques:

• Subsurface testing, including test excavations, core andauger borings, and observation of cut banks;

• Surface observation of site features and materials that have beenuncovered by plowing or other disturbance or that have remainedon the surface since deposition;

• Observation of topographic or other natural features that may ormay not have been present during the period of significance;

• Observation of land alterations subsequent to site formation thatmay have affected the integrity of the site;

• Study of historical or ethnographic documents, such as maps andjournals.

If the techniques listed above cannot be applied, set the bound-aries by conservatively estimating the extent and location of thesignificant features. Thoroughly explain the basis for selecting theboundaries in the boundary justification section.

If a portion of a known site cannot be tested because access to theproperty has been denied by the owner, the boundaries may bedrawn along the legal property lines of the portion that is accessible,provided that portion by itself has sufficient significance to meet theNational Register criteria and the full extent of the site is unknown.

Archeological districts may contain discontiguous elements underthe following circumstances:

1. When one or several outlying sites has a direct relationship to thesignificance of the main portion of the district, through commoncultural affiliation or as related elements of a pattern of land use;and

2. When the intervening space does not have known significantresources.

(Geographically separate sites not forming a discontiguous districtmay be nominated together as individual properties within amultiple property submission.)

UTM REFERENCESUniversal Transverse Mercator

(UTM) grid references are used toidentify the exact location of theproperty. A USGS quadrangle mapand a UTM coordinate counter aretools for determining UTM referencepoints. Other methods for accuratelydetermining UTMs, such as GPS, arealso acceptable. Many state historicpreservation offices will assistapplicants in completing this item.Appendix VIII of How to Completethe National Register Registration Formand Using the UTM Grid System toRecord Historic Sites (only availableon the National Register Web site at:www.cr.nps.gov/nr/publications)provides instructions on how todetermine UTMS. The following aregeneral guidelines that apply to allkinds of properties:

• For properties that are less than10 acres, enter the UTM referencefor the point corresponding to thecenter of the property;

• For properties of 10 or more acresenter three or more UTM refer-ences. The references shouldcorrespond to the vertices of apolygon drawn on the USGS mapaccompanying the nomination;

• For linear properties of 10 or moreacres, such as canals or trails, enterthree or more UTM references,all of which should correspondto points along the line drawn onthe accompanying USGS map;

• If UTM references define theboundaries of the property, aswell as indicate the location,the polygon or line delineatedby the references must corre-spond exactly to the property'sboundaries;

• If the property is a discontiguousdistrict, then a UTM reference isneeded for each area. Three ormore UTM references will beneeded for those areas that aregreater than ten acres.

52

VERBAL BOUNDARYDESCRIPTION

The verbal boundary descriptionis a textual description of the bound-ary of the property as shown onthe maps accompanying the nomi-nation. It usually takes one of thefollowing forms:

• a legal parcel number (e.g.,Henderson County tax map 40,parcel 0024);

• a block and lot number (e.g.,Block or Square 52, Lot 006);

• a subsection of a section withinthe Township and Range system(e.g., NW 1/4, NW 1/4, SE 1/4 ofSection 11, Township 10S, Range7E);

• metes and bounds (e.g., From thenorth side of the intersection ofWalnut Creek and County High-way 36, the boundary proceeds ina northwest direction for 600 feet,the boundary line then turns andheads east for 200 feet, at whichpoint the boundary turns andproceeds in a south-southeastdirection to the original startingpoint.) This type of descriptionshould always begin at a readilyidentifiable feature located on theground as well as on the map.

• the dimensions of a parcel of landfixed upon a given point such asthe intersection of two streets, abenchmark, the tip of a spit ofland jutting into a bay (e.g., Theproperty boundary forms a rect-angle which is 2000' in a north-south direction and 1000' in an

east-west direction. The property'ssoutheast corner corresponds tothe northwest corner of the inter-section of U.S. Highway 40 andMain Ave.).

A map drawn to a scale of at least1" = 200' may be used in place of averbal description. When using amap for this purpose, note under theheading "Verbal Boundary Descrip-tion" that the boundaries are indi-cated on the accompanying basemap. For example, "The boundary ofthe property is shown as the dashedline on the accompanying WillowCreek County parcel map #14." Themap must have a scale and a northarrow and clearly show the relation-ship between the archeologicalproperty, its boundaries, and thesurrounding natural and culturalfeatures. The primary disadvantageof simply referring to a map for theproperty boundary is a pragmaticone—if the map is misplaced, thenthe location cannot be accuratelydetermined.

If the boundaries of a large prop-erty are exactly the same as theUTM polygon, then the boundariesmarked on the USGS map may beused in place of a verbal boundarydescription. For example, the bound-ary of the Anywhere ArcheologicalDistrict is delineated by the polygonwhose vertices correspond to thefollowing points: A 18 2136004136270; B 18 322770 4125960; andC 18 314040 4166790. If the UTMpolygon is the same as the property'sboundaries, then the boundaries ofthe property may be recreated evenif the map is misplaced.

BOUNDARYJUSTIFICATION

The boundary justificationexplains the reasons for selectingthe boundaries of the property. Thereasons should follow from thedescription and significance discus-sions. For archeological propertiesmore than one reason may apply.All the reasons should be given andlinked to the boundaries as they aredrawn on the map. For example,"The property's western and south-ern boundaries correspond to thehistoric boundary of the property;the northern boundary follows theshoreline of the bay, which has notchanged since the time period ofthe property's significance; and theeastern boundary corresponds tothe eastern extent of intact archeo-logical deposits. These boundariesencompass all of the archeologicaldeposits and above-ground featuresand structures associated withthe property."

For discontiguous districts, explainhow the property meets the condi-tion for a discontiguous district andhow the boundaries were selectedfor each area. If the boundary justifi-cation is the same for all the areas ofthe district, simply present the justi-fication and explain that this appliesto each of the areas and list them.

53

VIII. MAPS AND PHOTOGRAPHS

At a minimum, a USGS mapshowing the location of the property(and, if more than 10 acres, itsboundaries) and black-and-whitephotographs documenting theappearance and condition of theproperty must be included withevery National Register nomination.Additionally, because of the complexnature of archeological properties,a site map (sketch or to scale) is usu-ally required. The National RegisterBulletin How to Complete the NationalRegister Registration Form outlinesthe requirements for maps andphotographs. See also the NationalRegister Bulletin How to Improve theQuality of Photos for National RegisterNominations. Some basic informationis presented below.

MAPSFor most properties, the National

Register requires a sketch map todocument a district or a complexsite. Site maps drawn to scale arepreferable. All maps need to con-form to the following requirements:

• Maps should be drawn, printed,or photocopied on archival paper.Maps should be folded to be nolarger than 8/2 by 11 inches.When submitting a large mapthat is not on archival paper, foldthe map and submit it in an archi-val folder no larger than 8 Yi by 11inches;

• Display the following 14 items onthe map:1. Boundaries of the property,

including points of UTMreadings, carefully delineated;

2. Names of major streets nearthe district and all namedstreets bordering the property;

3. Names of places, especiallythose mentioned in the textsections of the nomination;

4. Highway numbers;

5. A north arrow (magnetic ortrue);

6. Approximate scale for a sketchmap and exact scale for a mapdrawn to scale;

7. Contributing sites, buildings,structures, and objects (Theseshould correspond to the de-scription or list of contributingresources in the narrativesections and to the totals ofcontributing resources.);

8. Noncontributing sites, build-ings, structures, and objects(These should correspond tothe description or list of non-contributing resources in thenarrative sections and to thetotals of noncontributingresources.);

9. Land uses and natural featurescovering substantial acreageor having historic significance,such as forests, fields, orchards,quarries, rivers, lakes, andharbors;

10. The general location and ex-tent of disturbance, especiallythat described in the narrativesections;

11. The location of previous ar-cheological excavations, espe-cially those that were exten-sive enough to cause somedisturbance to the archeologi-cal deposits;

12. The location of features andartifact loci described in thenarrative section;

13. The distribution of sites in adistrict. If more practical, thisinformation may also beshown on the USGS map;

14. For districts, the number of theaccompanying photographsintended to show views of theproperty.

If the property is more than10 acres, then a USGS map may beused in place of a sketch map as longas it can legibly show the requiredinformation. Maps drawn to a largerscale may be used to show theconcentration of resources or typesof representative sites. These mapsshould be keyed to a larger mapcovering the entire propertyArcheological site numbers areusually sufficient for keying.

PHOTOGRAPHSClear black-and-white photo-

graphs need to be submitted witheach nomination form. The photo-graphs should accurately representthe property as described and itsintegrity. One photograph may beadequate to document a very smallarcheological site; more, however,are generally needed to adequatelydocument the property. Document-ing each property in an archeologi-cal district is unnecessary Photo-graphs of the properties most repre-sentative of the district, however,should be submitted. The photo-graphs should be keyed to thoserepresentative properties describedin the narratives. Prints of historicphotographs, artifacts, features, etc.may supplement documentation.All, or a representative sample, ofthe contributing standing structuresmust be photographed.

54

Figure 23: Marking boundaries on low-level aerial photographs is an effectiveway of showing boundaries and the location of excavations. This photographshows the Sand Hill Archeological Site in Jackson County, Indiana (see bottom,left-hand corner of photograph). (John W. Winship)

Guidelines include the following:

The number of photographic viewsdepends on the size and complex-ity of the property. Submit asmany photographs as needed todepict the current condition andsignificant aspects of the property.Include representative views ofboth contributing and, if instruc-tive, noncontributing resources.Photographs of representativeartifacts and features may beincluded as well.

For archeological sites submitone or more photographs thatdepict:

• the condition of the site andabove-ground or surfacefeatures;

• significant disturbances; and

• the site in relation to its envi-ronmental setting.

For archeological districts submitone or more photographs that show:

• the principal sites;

• the representative site types;

• the overall integrity of the district;and

• areas of significant disturbance.

The National Register requestsrecent photographs to document thepresent condition of the property. Ifphotographs already exist and theyaccurately depict the condition ofthe property, then the older photo-graphs may be used. A note to thiseffect, however, should be includedin the nomination.

One copy of each photograph issubmitted to the National Register.The SHPO, THPO or FPO mayrequire additional sets of photo-graphs. In addition, they may alsorequire a set of slides. It is importantto know this information prior toconducting field work or even bud-geting a National Register nomina-tion project.

Photographs must be:

• unmounted;

• of high quality;

• at least 3V& by 5 inches, preferably8 by 10 inches for the most impor-tant views;

• printed on double or mediumweight black and white paperhaving a standard finish (matte,glossy, satin); and

• labeled in pencil or with a photo-graphic marker.

The preferred way to label photo-graphs is to print in pencil (soft leadpencils work best) on the back of thephotograph. Photographs with ad-hesive labels will not be accepted.Include the following information:

1. Name of the property or, if adistrict, the name of the resources(e.g., site number), and then thename of the district;

55

2. County and state where theproperty is located;

3. Name of the photographer;

4. Date of the photograph;

5. Location of the original negative;

6. Description of the view indicatingdirection of the camera;

7. Photograph number. For districtsuse this number to identify thevantage point on the accompany-ing sketch map.

Alternatively, continuation sheetsmay be used instead of completelylabeling each photograph. To do this,label the photographs by name of

property, county, and state, andphotograph number (Items 1,2, and7 above). For each photograph, listthe remaining information (Items3-6) and Items 1,2, and 7 on a con-tinuation sheet. Information com-mon to all photographs, such as thephotographer's name or the locationof the negatives, may be listed oncewith a statement that it applies toall photographs.

If the photographic paper will notaccept pencil marks, print Items 1,2,and 7 using a permanent marking penin the front border near the lowerright corner of the photograph (donot mark on the image area) and usethe continuation sheets alternative.

In submitting a photograph to theNPS with a National Register form,photographers grant permissionto the NPS to use the photographfor publication and other purposes,including duplication, display,distribution, study, publicity, andaudio-visual presentations. Thephotographer will be credited.Please indicate on the photographlabel which photos fall under Sec-tion 304 of the National HistoricPreservation Act (For guidance onSection 304, see, "When should in-formation be restricted from publicaccess?" in Section I of this bulletin)

Figure 24: It is often difficult to get good photographs of underwater shipwrecks. The F. T. Barney is an exception. Thisphotograph shows an interior view of a stern cabin. (Dale Purchase)

56

IX. OWNERSHIP

All State Historic PreservationOffices need the names and ad-dresses of all fee-simple propertyowners. This information is usedto notify owners of the intendednomination of their property tothe National Register and its listing.The SHPO, THPO, or FPO mayask applicants to enter this infor-mation on the nomination form,on continuation sheets, or onanother form.

The preservation officer will alsosubmit the following items with thecompleted National Register form:

• notarized letters of objection fromproperty owners; and

• comments received from publicofficials, owners, and the generalpublic.

For more information on the noti-fication process, see 36 CFR 60.

57

X. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bevan, Bruce W.1998 Geophysical Explorationfor Archeology: An Introductionto Geophysical Exploration.Midwest Archeological Center.Special Report No. 1. NationalPark Service.1981 A Ground-Penetrating RadarSurvey at Dickinson Mansion. Pre-pared for Delaware Division ofHistorical and Cultural Affairs,Bureau of Archaeology andHistoric Preservation, Dover,Delaware.

Blakey, Michael1997 Past is Present: Commentson ''In the Realm of Politics: Pros-pects for Public Participation inAfrican-American Plantation Ar-chaeology/7 Historical Archaeology31(3):140-145.

Blakey, Michael and Cheryl LaRoche1997 Seizing Intellectual Power:The Dialogue at the New YorkAfrican Burial Ground. HistoricalArchaeology 31(3):84-106.

Binford, Lewis R.1977 General Introduction. InFor Theory Building in Archaeology.Essays on Faunal Remains, AquaticResources, Spatial Analysis, andSystemic Modeling, edited by L. R.Binford, pp. 1-10. Academic Press,New York.1981a Middle-range Researchand the Role of Actualistic-Studies. In Bones: Ancient Menand Modern Myths, edited by L. R.Binford, pp. 21-30. AcademicPress, New York.1981b Introduction to Part 11:Middle-range Research-In Searchof Methodology. In Bones: AncientMen and Modern Myths, edited byL. R. Binford, pp. 31-34. AcademicPress, New York.

58

Briuer, Frederick L., andClay Mathers, editors

1996 Cultural Resource Signifi-cance Evaluation: Proceedings ofa U.S. Army Corps of EngineersWorkshop 3-4 October 1994,Vicksburg, Mississippi.

Briuer, Frederick L. and Clay Mathers1997 Trends and Patterns inCultural Resources Significance:A Historical Perspective andAnnotated Bibliography. Tech-nical Report EL-97-5, April 1997.U. S. Army Corps of EngineersWaterways Experiment Station,Vicksburg, Mississippi.http://134.164.46.9/Archimages/6646.PDF

Briuer, Frederick, Janet E. Simms,and Lawson M. Smith

1997 Site Mapping, GeophysicalInvestigation, and GeomorphicReconnaissance at Site 9ME395Upatoi Town, Fort Benning, Geor-gia. U.S. Army Corps of EngineersMiscellaneous Paper EL-97-3.http://134.164.46.9/Archimages/6645.PDF

Deagan, Kathleen A.1988 Neither History Nor Prehis-tory: the Questions that Count inHistorical Archaeology. HistoricalArchaeology 22:7-12.

Dongoske, Kurt E., Mark Aldenderferand Karen Doehner (editors)

2000 Working Together: NativeAmericans and Archaeologists.Society for American Archaeol-ogy. Washington, D.C.

Epperson, Terrance1999 The Contested Commons:Archaeologies of Race, Repres-sion, and Resistance in New YorkCity. In Historical Archaeologies ofCapitalism, edited by Mark PLeone and Parker B. Potter, Jr.Kluwer Academic, Plenum Pub-lishers, New York, pp. 81-110.

Ferguson, Leland (editor)1977 Historical Archaeologyand the Importance of MaterialThings. Special Publication Series,Number 2. Society for HistoricalArchaeology.

Grumet, Robert S.1988 Archeology in the NationalHistoric Landmarks Program. Tech-nical Brief No. 3, ArcheologicalAssistance Program, NationalPark Service, Washington, D.C.www.cr.nps.gov/aad/aepubs.htm#briefsl1990 The National Historic Land-marks Program Theme Study andPreservation Planning. TechnicalBrief No. 10. (revised 1992)Archeological Assistance Division,National Park Service, Washing-ton, D.C. www.cr.nps.gov/aad/aepubs.htm#briefsl

Hardesty, Donald1988 The Archeology of Miningand Miners: A View From theSilver State. Society for HistoricalArchaeology Special PublicationSeries 6. Ann Arbor, Michigan.1990 Evaluating Site Significancein Historical Mining Districts,Historical Archaeology 24:42-51.

Heimmer, D. H., andSteven L. De Vore

1995 Near Surface, High Resolu-tion Geophysical Methods forCultural Resource Managementand Archeological Investigations.USDI, NPS, Rocky MountainRegional Office, InteragencyArcheological Services, Denver.Second Edition.

Honerkamp, Nicholas1988 Questions that Count inArchaeology: Plenary Session,1987 Meeting of the Society forHistorical Archaeology Conferenceon Historical and UnderwaterArchaeology Savannah, Georgia.Historical Archaeology 22:5-6.

Kenmotsu, Nancy1992 Fort Davis Family Fort,Stephens County, Texas. NationalRegister of Historic Places Nomi-nation, National Register ofHistoric Places, Washington, D.C.

Lees, William B, and Vergil E. Noble1990a Methodological Approachesto Assessing the ArchaeologicalSignificance of Historic Sites,Historical Archaeology 24:9.1990b Other Questions thatCount: Introductory Commentson Assessing Significance inHistorical Archaeology, HistoricalArchaeology 24:10-13.

Leone, Mark P1988 The Relationship BetweenArchaeological Data and theDocumentary Record: 18thCentury Gardens in Annapolis,Maryland. Historical Archaeology22:29-35.

Little, Barbara J.1999 Nominating ArchaeologicalSites to the National Register ofHistoric Places: What's the Point?Society for American ArchaeologyBulletin 17 (4): 19. www.saa.org/Publications/index.html

McManamon, Francis P1990 A Regional Perspective onAssessing the Significance ofHistoric Period Sites, HistoricalArchaeology 24:14-22.

Merton, Robert K.1967 On Theoretical Sociology.Vive Essays, Old and New. The FreePress, Glencoe, Illinois.

National Park Service [NPS]1996 Thematic Framework.www.cr.nps.gov/history/thematic.html

National Park Service [NPS]1994 National Register of HistoricPlaces, 1966 to 1994. Cummulativelist through January 1,1994. Incooperation with The Preserva-tion Press, National Trust for His-toric Preservation, Washington,D.C, and the National Confer-ence of State Historic PreservationOfficers.

Noel Hume, Ivor1982 Martin's Hundred. VictorGollancz Ltd., London.

Peacock, Evan and Alanna J. Patrick1997 Site Survey and Land-Records Research: A Comparisonof Two Methods for Locating andCharacterizing Historic PeriodSites on the Tombigbee NationalForest, Mississippi. MississippiArchaeology 32(l):l-26.

Rathje, William L.1977 In Praise of Archaeology: LeProject du Garbage. In HistoricalArchaeology and the Importanceof Material Things, edited byLeland Ferguson. Special Publica-tion Series, No. 2:36-42. Society forHistorical Archaeology.1979 Modem Material CultureStudies. In Advances in Archae-ological Method and Theory. Vol. 2.edited by Michael B. Schiffer.Academic Press, Inc., New York.

Smith, Samuel D.1990 Site Survey as a Methodfor Determining Historic SiteSignificance, Historical Archaeology24:34-41.

Smith, Steven D.1994 Context and Archaeology ofSettler Communities: An Examplefrom Fort Leonard Wood,Missouri. Pp 95-105 in SettlerCommunities in the West', HistoricContexts for Cultural ResourceManagers of Department ofDefense Lands, edited by RobertLyon. National Park Service,Rocky Mountain Region.

South, Stanley1977 Method and Theory in Histori-cal Archeology. Academic Press,New York.1988 Whither Pattern? AmericanAntiquity 22:25-28.

Sprinkle, Jr., John H.1995 A Site Form for ImportantSites - Converting ArcheologicalReports into National RegisterNominations. CRM Supplement18(6):13-16. www.cr.nps.gov/crm/

Stapp, Darby C,and Julie Longenecker

2000 Working Together - 'TheTimes They Are A-Changin': CanArchaeologists and Native Ameri-cans Change with the Times?Society for American ArchaeologyBulletin 18:18-20. www.saa.org/Publications/index.html

Sullivan, Alan P III1996 Risk, Anthropogenic Envi-ronments, and Western AnasaziSubsistence. In Evolving Complex-ity and Environmental Risk in thePrehistoric Southzvest, edited byJ. A. Tainter and B. B. Tainter,pp. 145-165. Proceedings of theWorkshop "Resource Stress,Economic Uncertainty, and Hu-man Response in the PrehistoricSouthwest/7 held February 25-29,1992 in Santa Fe, New Mexico.Santa Fe Institute for Studies inthe Sciences of Complexity,Proceedings Volume XXIV,Addison-Wesley.

Sullivan, Alan P III, Joseph A. Tainter,and Donald L. Hardesty

1999 Historical Science, HeritageResources, and Ecosystem Man-agement. In Ecological Stewardship:A Common Reference for EcosystemManagement, edited by R.C. Szaro,N.C. Johnson, W.T. Sexton, andA.J. Malk, pp. 493-515. ElsevierScience, Oxford.

59

Swidler, Nina, Kurt E. Dongoske,Roger Anyon, and Alan S. Downer,editors

1997 Native Americans and Archae-ologist, Stepping Stones to CommonGround. Altamira Press, WalnutCreek, California.

Tainter, Joseph A.1998 Surface Archaeology:Perceptions, Values, and Potential.In Surf ace Archaeology, edited byA.P Sullivan, III, pp. 169-179.University of New Mexico Press,Albuquerque, New Mexico.

Tainter, Joseph A. andBonnie Bagley Tainter, Editors

1996 Evolving Complexity and En-vironmental Risk in the PrehistoricSouthwest. Proceedings of theWorkshop "Resource Stress,Economic Uncertainty, and Hu-man Response in the PrehistoricSouthwest/' held February 25-29,1992 in Santa Fe, New Mexico.Santa Fe Institute for Studiesin the Sciences of Complexity,Proceedings Volume XXIV,Addison-Wesley.

Talmage, Valerie, Olga Cheslerand Staff of InteragencyArcheological Services.

1977 The Importance of Small, Sur-face, and Disturbed Sites as Sourcesof Significant Archeological Data.USDI, National Park Service,Washington, D.C.

Thomas, David Hurst1983a The Archaeology of MonitorValley. 1. Epistemology. Anthropo-logical Papers of the AmericanMuseum of Natural History,Vol. 58: Parti. New York.

1983b The Archaeology of MonitorValley. 1. Gatecliff Shelter. Anthro-pological Papers of the AmericanMuseum of Natural History,Vol. 59: Part 1. New York.

1987 The Archaeology of MissionSanta Catalina de Guale 1. Searchand Discovery. AnthropologicalPapers of the American Museumof Natural History, Vol. 63: Part 2.New York.

Wilson, John S.1990 We've Got Thousands ofThese! What Makes an HistoricFarmstead Significant? HistoricalArchaeology 24:23-33.

60

APPENDIX ANATIONAL REGISTER BULLETINS

THE BASICSHow to Apply National Register Criteria for Evaluation *

Guidelines for Completing National Register of Historic Places Form

Part A: How to Complete the National Register Form*

Part B: How to Complete the National Register Multiple Property Documentation Form *

How to Prepare National Historic Landmark Nominations*

Researching a Historic Property*

PROPERTY TYPESGuidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Historic Aids to Navigation*

Guidelines for Identifying, Evaluating and Registering America's Historic Battlefields*

Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Historic Aviation Properties *

Guidelines for Evaluating and Registering Cemeteries and Burial Places*

How to Evaluate and Nominate Designed Historic Landscapes*

Guidelines for Identifying, Evaluating and Registering Historic Mining Sites*

How to Apply National Register Criteria to Post Offices*

Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Properties Associated with Significant Persons *

Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Properties That Have Achieved Significance Within the Last Fifty Years*

Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Rural Historic Landscapes*

Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Traditional Cultural Properties*

Nominating Historic Vessels and Shipwrecks to the National Register of Historic Places*

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCEDefining Boundaries for National Register Properties*

Guidelines for Local Surveys: A Basis for Preservation Planning*

How to Improve the Quality of Photographs for National Register Nominations

National Register Casebook: Examples of Documentation*

Telling the Stories: Planning Effective Interpretive Programs for Properties Listed in the National Register

Using the UTM Grid System to Record Historic Sites* (only available on the Web)

The above publications may be obtained by writing to the National Register of Historic Places, National Park Service,1849 C Street, NC 400, NW, Washington, D.C. 20240.

Publications marked with an asterisk (*) are also available in electronic form on the Web at www.cr.nps.gov/nr, or sendyour request by e-mail to nr_reference@nps.gov.

61

APPENDIX BMULTIPLE PROPERTY SUBMISSIONS

Multiple Property Submission cover documents under which archeological properties havebeen nominated as of January, 2000. A list of Multiple Property Submission cover documents mayalso be found on the web at: www.cr.nps.gov/nr/research/mplist.htm.

* Multiple Property Submission (MPS) is the format currently used by the National Registerfor multiple property documentation, together with individual registration forms. In the past, theNational Register has used the Multiple Resource Area (MRA) and Thematic Group Resources(TR) formats, however, these formats are no longer active. Nominations may still be submittedunder previously accepted MRAs and TRs if they are submitted on National Register individualregistration forms and meet the current standards for listing. For more information on multipleproperty submissions, refer to the National Register bulletin How to Complete the National RegisterMultiple Property Documentation Form. MRAs and TRs may also be updated and/or amended. Forguidance on preparing an amendment please see the National Register bulletin How to Completethe National Register Registration Form, Appendix VI.

ALABAMA• Plantation Houses of the Alabama

Canebrake and Their AssociatedOutbuildings MPS

ARIZONA• Bandelier's, Adolph F. A.,

Archeological survey of TontoBasin, Tonto NF MPS

• Casa Grande MRA• Fort Lowell MRA• Hohokam Platform Mound

Communities of the LowerSanta Cruz River Basin c. A.D.1050-1450 MPS

• Hohokam and EuroamericanLand Use and Settlement alongthe Northern Queen Creek DeltaMPS

• Logging Railroad Resources ofthe Conconino and Kaibab Na-tional Forests MPS

• Prehistoric Walled Hilltop sites ofPrescott National Forest andAdjacent Regions MPS

• Snake Gulch Rock Art MPS

ARKANSAS• Rock Art Sites in Arkansas TR

CALIFORNIA• Earth Figures of California -

Arizona Colorado River Basin TR

COLORADO• Archaic Period Architectural sites

in Colorado MPS• Dinosaur National Monument

MRA• Great Pueblo Period of the

McElmo Drainage Unit MPS• Historic Resources of Aspen MPS• Prehistoric Paleo-Indian Cultures

of the Colorado Plains MPS

CONNECTICUT• Lower Connecticut River Valley

Woodland Period ArchaeologicalTR

DELAWARE• Nanticoke Indian Community

TR• St. Jones Neck MRA

FLORIDA• Archaeological Resources in the

Upper St. Johns River ValleyMPS

• Archaeological Resources of theCaloosahatchee Region

• Archaeological Resources of theEverglades National Park MPS

• Archaeological Resources of theNaval Live Oaks ReservationMPS

• Rural Resources of Leon County

GEORGIA• BacontonMRA• Columbus MRA• Cumberland Island National

Seashore MRA• Old Federal Road in Georgia's

Banks and Franklin CountiesMPS

IDAHO• Chinese sites in the Warren Min-

ing District MPS

62

IOWA• Mines of Spain Archeological

MPS• Municipal, County, and State

Corrections Properties MPS• Prehistoric Hunters and

Gatherers on the NorthwestIowa Plains, C. 10,000-200 B.PMPS

• Prehistoric Mounds of theQuad-State Region of the upperMississippi River Valley MPS

KANSAS• Kansas Rock Art TR• Santa Fe Trail MPS

KENTUCKY• Ashland MRA• Clark County MRA• Early Stone Buildings of

Kentucky TR• Green River Shell Middens of

Kentucky TR• Hickman, Kentucky MPS• Mammoth Cave National Park

MPS• Pisgah Area of Woodford County

MPS• Prehistoric Rock Art Sites in

Kentucky MPS

LOUISIANA• Louisiana's French Creole Archi-

tecture MPS

MAINE• Native American Petroglyphs

and Pictographs in Maine MPS• Androscoggin River Drainage

Prehistoric Sites MPS• Boothbay Region Prehistoric

Sites TR• Cobscook Area Coastal Pre-

historic Sites MPS• Maine Fluted Point Paleoindian

Sites MPS• Penebscot Headwater Lakes

Prehistoric Sites MPS• Prehistoric Sites in North Haven

TR

MARYLAND• Delaware Chalcedony Complex

TR• Prehistoric human adaptation to

the Coastal Plain Environmentof Anne Arundel County MPS

MASSACHUSETTS• Barnstable MRA• Blue Hills and Neponset River

Reservations MRA• First Period Buildings of Eastern

Massachusetts TR• StonehamMRA

MICHIGAN• Shipwrecks of Isle Royale

National Park TR

MINNESOTA• American Indian Rock Art in

Minnesota MPS• Minnesota's Lake Superior

Shipwrecks MPS• Minnesota State Park CCC/WPS/

Rustic Style MPS• Pipestone County MRA• Portage Trails in Minnesota MPS• Pre-contact American Indian

Earthworks MPS• Washington County MRA

MISSOURI• Prehistoric Rock Shelter and

Cave Sites in Southwestern Mis-souri MPS

• Santa Fe Trail MPS

MONTANA• Archeological Resources of the

Upper Missouri River CorridorMPS

• Whoop-Up Trail of NorthcentralMontana MPS

NEW HAMPSHIRE• Harrisville MRA

NEW MEXICO• Anasazi Sites within the Chacoan

interaction sphere TR• Animas Phase sites in Hidalgo

county MPS• Anton Chico Land Grant MRA• Archaic sites of the northwest

Jemez Mountains MPS• Chaco Mesa Pueblo III TR• Corona Phase Sites in the Jicarilla

Mountains, New Mexico, MPS• Cultural Developments on the

Pajarito Platueau MPS• Gallina Culture Developments in

North Central New Mexico MPS• Jimenez Cultural Developments

in North-Central New Mexico• Jemez Springs Pueblo sites TR• Late Prehistoric Cultural Devel-

opments along the Rio Chamaand Tributaries MPS

• Lincoln Phase sites in the SierraBlanca Region MPS

• Mining sites in the Nogal miningdistrict of the Lincoln NationalForest MPS

• Navajo-Refugee Pueblo TR• Prehistoric adaptations along the

Rio Grande Drainage, SierraCounty, New Mexico TR

• Prehistoric and HistoricAgricultural sites in the LowerRio Bonito Valley TR

• Pueblo IV sites of the ChupaderaArroyo MPS

• Railroad Logging Era ResourcesMPS

• Rayado Ranch MPS• Ring Midden sites of the

Guadalupe Mountains MPS• Santa Fe Trail MPS

NEW YORK• Colonie Town MRA• Rhinebeck Town MRA

NORTH CAROLINA• Dan River Navigation System

in North Carolina TR• Durham MRA• Iredell County MRA

63

OREGON• Early French-Canadian Settle-

ment MPS• Native American Archeological

sites of the Oregon Coast MPS

PENNSYLVANIA• Bituminous Coal and Coke

resources of PA MPS• Gristmills in Berks County MPS• Industrial Resources of

Huntingdon county MPS• Iron and Steel Resources in

Pennsylvania MPS

RHODE ISLAND• Foster MPS• Indian use of Block Island,

500 BC-AD 1676 MPS• Indian use of Salt Pond Region

between ca. 4000 BP and ca 1750AD MPS

• North Kingstown MRA

SOUTH CAROLINA• Congaree Swamp National

Monument MPS• Early Ironworks of Northwestern

South Carolina TR• Edisto Island MRA• Historic Resources of St. Helena

Island c. 1740-c. 1935 MPS• Late Archaic-Early

Woodland period shell ringsof South Carolina

• McCormick MRA• Pacolet Soapstone Quarries TR• Yamasee Indian Towns in the

South Carolina Low county MPS

SOUTH DAKOTA• 19th century South Dakota

Trading Posts MPS• Big Bend Area MRA• James River Basin Woodland

sites TR• Petroforms of South Dakota TR• Prehistoric Rock Art of South

Dakota MPS• Rock Art in the Southern Black

Hills TR• South Dakota portion of the

Bismark to Deadwood trail MPS

TENNESSEE• Historic and historic archaeo-

logical resources of the AmericanCivil War MPS

• Iron Industry on the WesternHighland Rim 1790s-1920s MPS

• Mississippian CulturalResources of the Central Basin(AD 900-AD 1450) MPS

• Mocassin Bend MRA

TEXAS• 19th century pottery kilns of

Denton County TR• BastropMPS• Indian Hot Springs MPS• New Mexican Pastor Sites in

Texas Panhandle TR• SaladoMRA

UTAH• Great Basin Style Rock Art TR• Tintic Mining District MRA

VERMONT• Bellows Falls Island MRA

VIRGIN ISLANDS• Virgin Islands National Park MRA

VIRGINIA• Civil War Properties in Prince

William County MPS• Montgomery County MPS• Oakland Farm Industrial Park

MRA

WEST VIRGINIA• Berkeley County MRA• BulltownMRA• Rockshelters on the Gauley

Ranger District, MonongahelaNational Forest MPS

WISCONSIN• Cooksville MRA• Great Lakes Shipwrecks MPS• Late Woodland Stage in Archeo-

logical Region 8 (AD 650-1300)MPS

• Paleo-Indian Tradition inWisconsin MPS

• Prehistoric Archaeologicalresources of the Milwaukee VAMedical Center MPS

• Trempeauleau MRA• Wisconsin Indian Rock Art Sites

MPS

WYOMING• Aboriginal Lithic Source Areas

in Wyoming TR• Domestic Stone Circle Sites in

Wyoming MPS• Early and Middle Archaic

Housepit sites in Wyoming MPS

64

APPENDIX CCHECKLIST FORARCHEOLOGICAL NOMINATIONS

The following list of questionsmay be used as a checklist in thefinal review of a nomination prior tosubmission to the National Registerof Historic Places. Bold-printed seg-ments indicate major categories ofinformation in the National Registernomination.

2 LOCATION• Has the "not for publication" box

been considered?

7 DESCRIPTION• Is the environmental setting

described and related to the prop-erty or district? Cross check withtopographic and sketch maps andphotographs.

• Are the probable occupation orconstruction dates identified forall components of the property ordistrict? If the property can not bedated, the text should so state.Cross check with sketch maps andphotographs.

• Are all major or significant fea-tures identified and described?Cross check with topographic andsketch maps and photographs.Check areas and periods of sig-nificance.

• Are the major types of alterationsand disturbances identified andevaluated for their impact uponthe property's or district's integ-rity? Cross check with sketchmaps and photographs.

• Are all contributing and non-contributing properties in thedistrict identified and counted?Cross check with topographic andsketch maps and photographs.

• Does the description convey thesignificant qualities of the prop-erty? Do the significant aspectsretain integrity?

•v Is the character of the districtidentified?

• Does this character provide abasis for grouping properties intoa district?

8 SIGNIFICANCE• Does the narrative clearly repre-

sent and convey the Period(s) andArea(s) of Significance checked?Have they been justified in a spe-cific discussion within the State-ment of Significance?

• Have the applicable criteria beenidentified and documentedwithin the Statement of Signifi-cance?

• Does the context in which aproperty has been evaluated assignificant justify the local, state,or national level of significancechosen for the property?

• Is Cultural Affiliation (necessaryunder D) indicated in the State-ment of Significance?

• Have the criteria considerationsbeen indicated and justifiedwhere applicable?

FOR PROPERTIES MEETINGCRITERION A:

• Does the significance statementidentify the applicable majorevent(s) associated with theproperty or district?

• Does the significance statementjustify the importance of theevent(s) with respect to its impacton the broad patterns of prehis-tory or history?

• Does the significance statementdemonstrate that the property ordistrict has stronger associationsto the event(s) than other compa-rable properties or districts?

FOR PROPERTIES MEETINGCRITERION B:

• Does the significance statementidentify the specific person(s)who was significant in the past?

• Does the significance statementjustify the importance of theperson(s)?

• Does the significance statementdemonstrate that the property ordistrict has stronger associationsto the person(s) than other com-parable properties or districts?Comparison should be made onthe basis of length of associationand degree of integrity.

65

FOR PROPERTIES MEETINGCRITERION C

• Does the significance statementidentify and justify the impor-tance of an applicable designconcept(s), constructiontechnique(s), or usage of buildingmaterial(s)?

• Does the significance statementdemonstrate that the property ordistrict provides a better illustra-tion of a design concepts), con-struction technique(s), or usageof building materials than otherproperties or districts?

Comparison should be made onthe basis of those:• Characteristics that were

typically common to a:Design concept(s), constructiontechnique(s), or usage of build-ing material(s)

• Characteristics that expressindividuality or variationwithin a:Design concept(s), constructiontechnique(s), or usage of build-ing materials

• Characteristics that documentsthe evolution of a:Design concept(s), constructiontechnique(s), or usage of build-ing material(s)

• Characteristics that documentsthe transition of one:Design concept(s), constructiontechnique(s), or usage of build-ing material(s)

FOR PROPERTIES MEETINGCRITERION D:

• Does the significance statementdescribe the potential researchtopics that the property can ad-dress?

• Does the significance statementjustify the importance of theseresearch topics within an appli-cable historic context? Does thesignificance statement identifythe data that can address theseresearch topics?

• Does the significance statementaffirm that the property containsor is likely to contain these data?

9 BIBLIOGRAPHY• Were all appropriate areas in the

text properly referenced?

• Are all citations used in the textreferenced in the bibliography?

10 GEOGRAPHICALDATA

• Are boundary lines fixed atpermanent features or UTMreferences appearing on USGStopographic maps?

• Does the sketch map indicatethe boundary of the nominatedproperty?

• Does the verbal boundarydescription describe the bound-aries on all sides of the propertyor district?

• Does the boundary justificationdiscuss the:• method(s) used to define the

boundary, and• relationship between the

property's or district's signifi-cance and the boundary?

• Are all major or significant featuresincluded within the boundary?

• Does the boundary exclude un-justified acreage or buffer zones?

• Does the boundary include entirebuildings, structures, or objects asopposed to only portions of build-ings, structures, or objects?

ACCOMPANYINGDOCUMENTATION

• Are the sketch maps labeled?Do maps have a:• title,• legend,• north arrow, and• scale?

• Does the sketch map show theentire boundary of the propertyor district?

• Does the sketch map show features,disturbances, and contributingand non-contributing elementsdiscussed in the nomination?

• Do the photographs illustrate the:• environmental setting,• major or significant features,

and• major alterations or

disturbance?

66