Front Cover
 Table of Contents
 Editor's page
 Calusa canals in southwestern Florida...
 A Seminole burial on Indian Field...
 St. Augustine under siege - St....
 Editorial postscript to St. Augustine...
 Instruments to measure hafting...
 Fort Walton wonders - Four odd...
 Book reviews
 Current research and comments
 The Florida Anthropological Society...

Group Title: Florida anthropologist
Title: The Florida anthropologist
Full Citation
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00027829/00030
 Material Information
Title: The Florida anthropologist
Abbreviated Title: Fla. anthropol.
Physical Description: v. : ill. ; 24 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Florida Anthropological Society
Conference on Historic Site Archaeology
Publisher: Florida Anthropological Society.
Place of Publication: Gainesville
Frequency: quarterly[]
two no. a year[ former 1948-]
Subject: Indians of North America -- Antiquities -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Antiquities -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: periodical   ( marcgt )
Summary: Contains papers of the Annual Conference on Historic Site Archeology.
Dates or Sequential Designation: v. 1- May 1948-
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00027829
Volume ID: VID00030
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: Department of Special Collections and Area Studies, George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 01569447
lccn - 56028409
issn - 0015-3893

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Front Cover 1
        Front Cover 2
    Table of Contents
        Page 85
    Editor's page
        Page 86
        Page 87
        Page 88
    Calusa canals in southwestern Florida - Routes of tribute and exchange - George M. Luer
        Page 89
        Page 90
        Page 91
        Page 92
        Page 93
        Page 94
        Page 95
        Page 96
        Page 97
        Page 98
        Page 99
        Page 100
        Page 101
        Page 102
        Page 103
        Page 104
        Page 105
        Page 106
        Page 107
        Page 108
        Page 109
        Page 110
        Page 111
        Page 112
        Page 113
        Page 114
        Page 115
        Page 116
        Page 117
        Page 118
        Page 119
        Page 120
        Page 121
        Page 122
        Page 123
        Page 124
        Page 125
        Page 126
        Page 127
        Page 128
        Page 129
        Page 130
    A Seminole burial on Indian Field (8LL39), Lee County, southwestern Florida - George M. Luer
        Page 131
        Page 132
        Page 133
    St. Augustine under siege - St. Augustine's archaeological preservation ordinance - Bruce John Piatek, Stanley C. Bond, Jr., and Christine L. Newman
        Page 134
        Page 135
        Page 136
        Page 137
        Page 138
        Page 139
        Page 140
        Page 141
        Page 142
        Page 143
        Page 144
        Page 145
        Page 146
        Page 147
        Page 148
        Page 149
        Page 150
        Page 151
        Page 152
    Editorial postscript to St. Augustine under siege - Louis D. Tesar
        Page 153
        Page 154
    Instruments to measure hafting angles of whelk shell tools in both the vertical and horizontal planes - Arthur R. Lee
        Page 155
        Page 156
        Page 157
    Fort Walton wonders - Four odd artifacts in the Florida panhandle - Yulee W. Lazarus
        Page 158
        Page 159
        Page 160
        Page 161
        Page 162
    Book reviews
        Page 163
        Page 164
        Page 165
        Page 166
        Page 167
        Page 168
        Page 169
        Page 170
        Page 171
        Page 172
        Page 173
        Page 174
    Current research and comments
        Page 175
    The Florida Anthropological Society wants you (FAS membership application)
        Page 176
        Page 177
Full Text


2000 Florida Anthropological Society Inc.

The Florida Anthropological Society Inc. holds
source text of the Florida Anthropologist
considered the copyright holder for the text
these publications.

all rights to the
and shall be
and images of

The Florida Anthropological Society has made this publication
available to the University of Florida, for purposes of
digitization and Internet distribution.

The Florida Anthropological Society reserves all rights to this
publication. All uses, excluding those made under "fair use"
provisions of U.S. Code, Title 17, Section 107 are restricted.

Contact the Florida Anthropological Society for additional
information and permissions.



JUNE 1989


.* :, '. ... ..

: I OCT 1 | ;
> .-
'.'..,, .

Published by the

qj3. ?s5

THE FLORIDA ANTHROPOLOGIST is published by the Florida Anthropological Society
Inc., P.O. Box 1013, Tallahassee, Florida 32302. Subscription is by membership
in the Society. Membership is not restricted to residents of the State of
Florida nor to the United States of America. Membership is for the calendar
year, January 1st through December 31st. Except as otherwise noted in periodic
special offers, membership may be received for any current year by remitting
dues for that year ON OR BEFORE SEPTEMBER 30TH of that year; although, there is
a $2 discount for dues received before February 1st and a $4 late charge for
added postage and handling for dues received after August 1st. Dues postmarked
or hand-delivered on October 1st or later will be applied to membership in the
following calendar year. Annual dues are as follows: individual $18, family
$20, Institutional subscription $18, sustaining $25 or more, patron $100 or
more, and life $200. Foreign subscriptions are an additional $5 US to cover
added postage and handling costs for individual, family or institutional
memberships categories. Except for back issues purchases, copies of the journal
will only be sent to members with current paid dues.

Requests for information on the Society, membership application forms and
notifications of changes of address should be sent to the Membership Secretary.
Donations should be sent to the Treasurer or may be routed through the Editor to
facilitate acknowledgement in subsequent issues of the journal (unless anonymity
is requested). Submissions of manuscripts should be sent to the Editor. Please
follow the American Antiquity style guide in preparing manuscripts for
submission to the journal, and submit five (5) copies for use in peer review.
Only one set of original graphics need be submitted. Newsletter items should be
sent to the Newsletter Editor. Address changes should be made AT LEAST 30 DAYS
prior to the mailing of the next issue. The Post Office will not forward bulk
mail nor retain such mail when "temporary hold" orders exist. Such mail is
returned to the Society postage due. We publish the journal quarterly in March,
June, September and December of each year.


Jerry Hyde
4233 Oristano Road
Jacksonville, FL 32210

Kate Hoffman
Florida Museum of
Natural History
University of Florida
Gainesville, FL 32611

(Three Years) :
Ray Williams
Dept. of Anthropology
University of
South Florida
Tampa, FL 33620

Elizabeth Horvath
P.O. Box 290876
Temple Terrace, FL 33687

Joan Deming
308 6th Street NE
Largo, FL 34640


(Two Years):
Robert Austin
P.O. Box 919
St. Petersburg, FL 33731


Chris Newman
Historic St. Augustine
Preservation Board
P.O. Box 1987
St. Augustine, FL 32084

Richard Estabrook
106 W. Logarto Circle
Apt. B 105
Tampa, FL 33612

(One Year) :
Donna Ruhl
Florida Museum of
Natural History
University of Florida
Gainesville, FL 32611

Louis D. Tesar
P.O. Box 1013
Tallahassee, FL

Joan Deming
308 6th Street NE
Largo, FL 34640

George Luer
3222 Old Oak Drive
Sarasota, FL 34239

Gandy Printers
1800 S. Monroe St.
Tallahassee, FL

James J. Miller
Div. of Historical Resources
Department of State
The Capitol
Tallahassee, FL 32399-0250

John W. Griffin
Route 5 Box 19
St. Augustine, FL 32084


William H. Marquardt
Florida Museum of
Natural History
University of Florida
Gainesville, FL 32611

Morgan H. Crook
Dept. of Anthropology
Georgia State University
Atlanta, GA 30303

Glen Doran
Department of Anthropology
Florida State University
Tallahassee, FL 32306

NOTE: In addition to the above Editorial Board members, the review comments of
others knowledgable in a manuscript's subject matter are solicited as part of
our peer review process.

Bill Johnson
P.O. Box 13265
Gainesville, FL 32604

William F. Keegan
Florida Museum of
Natural History
Gainesville, FL 32611

Mickler's Floridiana, Inc.
181 West Broadway
P.O. Box 1450
Oviedo, Florida 32765



JUNE 1989


Editor's Page: FA 42(2) . . . ... . 86

Calusa Canals in Southwestern Florida: Routes of Tribute and
Exchange by George M. Luer . . . .... 89

A Seminole Burial on Indian Field (8LL39), Lee County, South-
western Florida by George M. Luer . . .... 131

St. Augustine Under Siege: St. Augustine's Archaeological
Preservation Ordinance by Bruce John Piatek, Stanley C.
Bond, Jr., and Christine L. Newman . . .... 134

Editorial Postscript to St. Augustine Under Siege by Louis D.
Tesar . . . .. . . . 153

Instruments to Measure Hafting Angles of Whelk Shell Tools in
Both the Vertical and Horizontal Planes by Arthur R. Lee 155

Fort Walton Wonders: Four Odd Artifacts in the Florida
Panhandle by Yulee W. Lazarus . . .... 158

BOOK REVIEWS . .. . . . . 163

Wet Site Archaeology, edited by Barbara A. Purdy. Reviewed by
Michael Wisenbaker . .... . . 163

Key Marco's Buried Treasures: Archaeology and Adventure in the
Nineteenth Century by Marion Spjut Gilliland. Reviewed by
Louis D. Tesar . . . . . . 172

CURRENT RESEARCH . .. . . . 175

COMMENTS . .... .. . . . . . 175

The Florida Anthropological Society Wants You (FAS Membership
Application) . . . . . . 176

Published by the


From prehistoric public works to
modern archaeological ordinances,
from two devices for measuring
shell tools to exotic artifacts
found in Northwest Florida, from
Seminole burials in shell fields to
wet site book reviews, this issue
provides a wide range of articles
prepared by our professional and
avocational members. I hope that
you enjoy them.
While earthworks and mounds of
both earth and shell have received
attention in South Florida re-
search, while water courts have
been recognized at many sites, and
while the necessity and importance
of aboriginal canoes and water
travel has long been acknowledged
in Florida's coastal environments,
everglades, rivers, lakes and broad
swamps, the presence and role of
Native American canals has received
only passing attention. George M.
Luer, in his article "Calusa Canals
in Southwestern Florida: Routes of
Tribute and Exchange," has made a
major effort to correct that over-
sight. The article is comprehen-
sive in scope, and pose a number of
research questions on aboriginal
canals which merit further re-
George also prepared the cover
illustration for this issue. That
illustration, drawn to scale, illu-
strates the immensity of the
features described in his canal
Luer's "Calusa Canals ..." arti-
cle is followed by one on "A
Seminole Burial on Indian Field
(8LL39), Lee County, Southwestern
Florida." The text of this article
was originally included within the
former article, until reviewers of
the manuscript recommended that it
be treated separately. Luer's
"Seminole Burial ..." article re-
views information on a Seminole
Indian burial uncovered during land
clearing for house construction

around 1950, and subsequently in-
vestigated by John Goggin in 1952.
The data reported, while meager, is
important as little research on
Seminole sites has been conducted
in Southwest Florida.
With the growing awareness
and recognition of the signifi-
cance of archaeological sites and
historic structures, Florida's
residents are becoming increas-
ingly interested in the study and
preservation of these tangible
remains of the State's prehis-
toric and historic heritage.
Other states are experiencing a
similar trend.
Communities are learning that
these links to our past provide a
sense of place and community
identity; an exciting educational
opportunity which can provide a
sense of reality to historic
events taught in our schools;
aesthetic features, such as reha-
bilitated (note: a term which in-
corporates the concept of sensi-
tive adaptive reuse of a struc-
ture and associated property to
meet current code and use re-
quirements while retaining those
architectural details, landscap-
ing, archaeological and other
features which contribute to its
historic significance) and re-
stored structures and the quite
solitude and natural features of
archaeological sites; and, the
economic return to a community as
a consequence of establishing
passive archaeological parks, im-
proved property values, and, of
course, tourism dollars generated
by the almost magnetic appeal and
draw of archaeological sites,
historic structures, and associ-
ated museum visitation. One of
Florida's communities which early
learned the benefits of archaeo-
logical site and historic struc-
ture preservation is St. Augus-
tine. Other communities have

June, 1989


Vol. 42 No. 2

since followed St. Augustine's
Management of a community's
archaeological sites and historic
structures and associated fea-
tures is best accomplished
through the provision of archaeo-
logical ordinances and historic
district or property ordinances
linked to building and zoning or-
dinances, and based on the re-
sults of site identification and
assessment studies. Many commu-
nities have ordinances pertaining
to archaeological sites. In
Florida, Metro-Dade County, Sara-
sota County, the City of Pen-
sacola and the City of St. Augus-
tine have such ordinances.
This issue contains an arti-
St. Augustine's Archaeological
Preservation Ordinance, by Bruce
John Piatek, Stanley C. Bond,
Jr., and Christine L. Newman. In
that article, they explain how
the ordinance came into being and
how it operates. They offer it
as a model for other communities.
In his article, Instruments
to Measure Hafting Angles of
Whelk Shell Tools in Both the
Vertical and Horizontal Planes,
the title says it all, Arthur R.
Lee describes two instruments
which he devised to assist ar-
chaeologists in the measurement
and analysis of some whelk shell
tools. The device is not diffi-
cult to fabricate and appears
easy to use. Interested readers
should contact Mr. Lee for fur-
ther details.
Over the years, relics of the
Old World have been found in the
New World and touted as evidence
of contact between the two.
Yulee W. Lazarus, now retired
curator of the Ft. Walton Temple
Mound Museum, in her article,
"Fort Walton Wonders: Four Odd
Artifacts Found in the Florida
Panhandle," reports on a
Melanesia carved wood figurine,

an Ethiopian spear, an Egyptian
funerary figurine, and a Chinese
coin. The explanation which ac-
counts for their occurrence in
the Choctawhatchee Bay area of
Northwest Florida is that of
abandoned or lost military per-
sonnel souvenirs, and not evi-
dence of widescale prehistoric
trade. Nevertheless, they are
interesting curios worthy of
An area of archaeology which
has gained increasing attention
in recent years is wet site ar-
chaeology. In 1986, an Interna-
tional Conference on Wet Site
Archaeology was held in
Gainesville, Florida. Dr. Purdy,
who edited Wet Site Archaeology,
attempted to limit the definition
of wet sites to "permanently sat-
urated deposits that entomb and
preserve organic objects that
seldom survive elsewhere," in
contrast to ship wrecks and inun-
dated terrestrial sites. How-
ever, she did not limit her se-
lection of articles to those
which fit that definition, nor
did she order the selected arti-
cles topically, geographically or
otherwise. Nevertheless, in view
of the importance of wet sites of
all types, in his review of this
important volume, Michael
Wisenbaker has offered a brief
critique of each of twenty
articles included in Wet Site
As a companion to Purdy's Wet
Site Archaeology, it is appro-
priate that a review of
Gilliland's Key Marco's Buried
Treasure: Archaeology and Adven-
ture in the Nineteenth Century
(1989) be included in this issue.
It is a historical narrative con-
structed around the chronological
ordering of letters, diaries and
reports of the participants in
Frank Hamilton Cushing's famous
wetlands Key Marco excavation
project. It is quite readable,

and Gilliland is to be commended
for its compilation.

the information on the bottom of
the inside cover. In addition to
this journal, the Florida Anthropo-
logical Society publishes a quar-
terly Newsletter. Bill Johnson is
the editor of that publication,
which is published cross-quarterly
with the journal. A new formal
addition to the journal, will be an
"Annual Reviews" section edited by
William F. .Keegan. It is planned
for this section to provide an
annual review of anthropological
work in regional areas, with each
issue to address a different region
in rotation. More information on
this topic will be published in
future additions of the journal and
newsletter. However, interested
individuals may contact Mr. Keegan
directly. Finally, Mickler's
Floridiana, Inc. is now handling
all back issues sales of The
Florida Anthropologist for the
Society. Please see the inside
cover of this issue for further
As always, any comments or sug-
gestions which you may wish to send
to me will be appreciated. I use
those comments as a measure on how
well I am performing as your
journal editor, and as a guide on
what changes in content, format,
etc. may be warranted.

Louis D. Tesar, Editor
The Florida Anthropologist


George M. Luer


The pine Island Canal (8LL34)
was a four-kilometer long (2.5
mile) aboriginal canal which
crossed pine Island in coastal Lee
County, southwestern Florida
(Figure 1). Both ends of the canal
were associated with aboriginal
sites: the west end's Pineland Site
(8LL33, 8LL36, 8LL37, 8LL38) (see
Luer 1986c, also Luer n.d.) and the
east end's burial mounds (8LL40,
8LL783) and nearby "shell key"
named Indian Field (8LL39) (see
below). These associated sites
pertain to late prehistoric and
early contact period times. The
Pine Island Canal appears to be of
the same age.
The Pine Island Canal was one
of several lengthy aboriginal
canals in southern Florida, all
apparently dug to facilitate canoe
travel. In this paper, these canals
are suggested to have functioned as
conduits for interregional exchange
and tribute, particularly between
the Pine Island Sound, Lake
Okeechobee, and Ten Thousand
Islands areas. The roles of canals
are examined in terms of cultural
models attempting to explain this
behavior. This paper points to
varied evidence for interregional
exchange and tribute with the hope
of inspiring additional study.
Canals and evidence of exchange
and tribute should provide some of
the critically needed archaeologi-
cal data to help understand both
the nature and development of the
complex social formation described
for the Calusa by early French and
Spanish accounts. This paper sug-
gests that canals are a reflection
of a post-A.D. 1000 political inte-
gration among the polities of the

Figure 1. The Location of Lee County, Pine Island, and the Pine Is-
land Canal. For centuries, the shell mounds at Pineland
provided a landing on Pine Island's wet, mangrove shore.
There, a huge aboriginal canal crossed the island.

Pine Island Sound, Ortona, and Ten
Thousand Islands areas. This cul-
tural manifestation is viewed here
as evidence of the Calusa. prior
to this social formation, or pre-
A.D. 1000, the aboriginal societies
of southern Florida also were
undoubtedly complex, but they are
suggested to have been less inte-
grated and more regional in
character than were the Calusa.


In the late 1800s and early
1900s, the prevailing means of
transportation along Lee County's
sparsely settled coast was by boat.
Along Pine Island's low-lying
mangrove shore, one of the few


Vol. 42 No. 2

June, 1989

landings was provided by the huge,
aboriginal shell mounds at Pineland
on the northwestern shore of pine
Island. There, the curiosity of
some travellers was piqued by a
huge aboriginal canal or "ditch"
which, according to the assurances
of local residents, extended east-
ward to cross the entire width of
pine Island. Impressed by this
immense canal, several educated men
who saw it wrote brief descriptions
of it. These early accounts in-
clude those by Kenworthy (1883),
Simons (1884), Douglass (1881-1885,
1885) Cushing (1897), Moore
(1905), and Wainwright (1918).
As the years passed, however,
the Pine Island Canal attracted
much less attention. This neglect
went hand-in-hand with the dramatic
changes of the 20th century. Few
travelers wrote of the area as its
wildness and novelty gave way to
increasing settlement. Early on,
the pine woods were cut for timber,
and some tracts were cleared for
cultivation. Then, automobiles
appeared, and roads and drainage
ditches spread. This encouraged
the clearing of more land, the cut-
ting of firebreaks, the commercial
removal of pine stumps, and the
digging of mosquito control
ditches. With this "progress," the
canal's condition deteriorated
greatly. Some of the canal was
destroyed, and most of it became
scarcely visible. The whereabouts
of the canal became virtually un-
known to all except a few residents
of Pine Island.
In 1979, the author realized
that, due to increasing land devel-
opment and due to the obscurity
surrounding the pine Island Canal,
there was a danger that much infor-
mation about the canal might be
lost. For example, the scientific
literature lacked even a record of
the route of the canal across pine
Island. Thus, in March 1979, the
author briefly visited Pine Island
to see if any of the area traversed

by the canal might still be
reasonably intact. Fortunately, it
seemed that the eastern half of the
canal might be traceable since the
eastern portion of pine Island was
still undeveloped. However, it was
also obvious that land development
was accelerating, and that any
traces of the canal probably would
be destroyed in the next few years.
A follow-up visit was made in
December 1979 with the purpose of
first inspecting the remnants of
the canal's west end at pineland.
There, the author met Patricia and
Colonel (ret.) Donald H. Randell,
residents of pineland and owners of
much of the pineland Site. The
Randells offered their assistance,
and invited the author to return to
pineland after the completion of
their new house in May 1980.

pineland and the Canal

On returning to pineland in
June 1980, it was clear that the
west end of the pine Island Canal
had been drastically altered by
land use earlier in this century.
In fact, it had been converted to a
narrow drainage ditch which more
closely conformed to property
boundaries than to the original
course of the canal. However, por-
tions of the drainage ditch did
follow the canal's original course.
For example, like the canal, the
ditch led in from pine Island Sound
and ran between the pineland Site's
two huge shell mounds. From there,
the ditch continued eastward and
ran through the rest of the
pineland Site, finally reaching
Roberts Road (see Figure 2).
Thus in 1980, the Pineland Site
held no visible trace of the Pine
Island Canal as it had appeared to
Douglass (1885) and Cushing (1897).
Here, the huge size of the original
canal had impressed both men. In
fact, Cushing had described the
canal as the: "... greatest, except
one, of all the monuments of the

Figure 2. The Course of the Pine Island Canal (Heavy Line). Note locations of Pineland and
Indian Field. In 1980, remains of the canal still were traceable east of Harbor
Drive. Arrow shows site of the 1981 excavation (see Figure 3 for plan view and
profile). Contour line shows 3-meter (10-foot) elevation traversed by the canal.

ancient key builders on the Florida
coast ..." (1897:14). Apparently in
Cushing's opinion, he considered
the "Court" at Key Marco to be the
only monument to surpass the
"greatness" of the Pine Island
Indeed, at a point approxi-
mately midway through the pineland
Site, Cushing and Douglass each
described a tremendous, nine meter
(30-foot) wide canal bed. This bed,
although partially filled, was
still about 1.5 to 2.5 meters (5 to
8 feet) in depth when measured from
the crests of its banks which were
both formed by parallel, flanking
ridges representing soil dug from
the bed of the canal.
Based on early descriptions,
this western section of the pine
Island Canal was an integral and
fairly elaborate part of the

pineland Site. According to Cushing
(1897) the canal had led into and
out of a midmostt court" located
between the Pineland Site's two
large shell mounds. Also according
to Cushing, the pine Island Canal
had opened to lateral canals which
were associated with other mounds
and ponds. These various components
and their associations with the
pine Island Canal are discussed
elsewhere (see Luer 1986c, and Luer

Finding the Canal

After following the course of
the former Pine Island Canal
through the pineland Site, the next
task was to find the rest of the
canal. It was clear from early ac-
counts that the canal had continued
eastward. Indeed, its original ap-

pearance must have been dramatic.
Even in the 1880s, Douglass wit-
nessed a stunning scene as the
canal left the pineland Site and
started to cross the higher pine-
lands of Pine Island:

Far as the eye could reach, we
could trace this canal in a direct
line through the sparse pine woods;
its course being especially marked
by the tall fronds of the cabbage
palms, which the moisture of the
depression tempted to grow within
the banks, and were confined to
that level (Douglass 1885).

Unfortunately, this scene no
longer existed in 1980. Instead,
the canal had been obliterated when
the land was cleared and leveled,
apparently in the 1960s. By 1980,
the land just east of Roberts Road
(Figure 2) had become densely over-
grown. The canal was nowhere to be
Land clearing and leveling also
had obliterated the canal farther
to the east. Thus in 1980, the
canal was no longer visible to
either side of Stringfellow Road,
State Road 767 (Figure 2)
Slightly farther to the east along
Harbor Drive, a dense growth of ex-
otic punk trees was spreading over
the altered land -- and the canal
was not to be seen.
In response to this situation,
Col. Randell and the author con-
sulted aerial photographs, first at
the Greater Pine Island Chamber of
Commerce. These 1970s aerials
(Bennett, Bishop, and passalaqua,
ca. 1975) showed a faint linear
streak running through the pine-
lands remaining on the northeastern
portion of pine Island. This long,
narrow streak appeared to corre-
spond to the remnants of the
canal's eastern stretch. After
studying and measuring the photo-
graphs, it appeared that this
linear feature could be inspected
most readily on the ground just
east of Harbor Drive at a point

about 360 meters (1200 feet) north
of the intersection of Harbor Drive
and Stringfellow Road (Figure 2).
In 1980, Harbor Drive was a
broad, flat, graded marl road
passing through undeveloped land.
After driving north on it from
Stringfellow Road for about 360
meters, and walking a short dis-
tance eastward across overgrown,
once-cleared land, a fairly open
woods of pine and saw palmetto was
encountered. Luckily, the pinelands
still extended eastward as far as
the eye could see. After walking a
few north-south transects through
the palmettos, it was clear that
the faint streak shown by the
aerials did indeed represent the
remnants of the canal!
The canal, however, proved to
be very badly eroded and visible
only to a trained eye. uniformly
overgrown with scattered pines and
numerous saw palmettos, the canal's
flanking ridges of spoil were
almost flat, and its central bed
was almost completely filled. The
worn-down crests of the canal banks
were no more than 10 cm above the
flat surface of the natural
terrain. The middle of the much-
filled canal bed reached no more
than a few centimeters below that
natural level. Clearly, the Pine
Island Canal was much deteriorated.
Tracing the Canal

Having successfully determined
that the pine Island Canal could
still be detected on the ground,
the next task was to trace its
exact course across Pine Island.
At the suggestion of Col. Randell,
he and the author visited vince
Hone of Bokeelia, a long-time Pine
Island resident. Mr. Hone kindly
showed us 1950s aerial photographs
(Rader and Associates, ca. 1955).
These aerials showed a then-clearly
visible Pine Island Canal as it
crossed the island all the way from
Roberts Road at Pineland to the
wide, eastern mangrove fringe of

pine Island directly opposite the
island of Indian Field (see Figure
2). These aerials were helpful for
their clarity, and because they
showed the canal between Roberts
Road and Harbor Drive, a portion
later erased by land clearing.
Again at Col. Randell's sugges-
tion, he and the author visited
Alan peterson of Bokeelia, another
long-time Pine Island resident.
Mr. Peterson also kindly showed us
aerial photographs clearly record-
ing the course of the canal. As an
engineer, Mr. peterson called our
attention to the canal's apparently
uniform width as it crossed most of
the island. He felt that this was
a curious attribute considering
that the canal crossed terrain
ranging from sea level to slightly
more than 3 meters (10 feet) in
elevation (see U.S.G.S. 1958a). He
wondered how groundwater, which
undoubtedly would have flowed into
the canal, was kept from running
out either end of the canal.
Using his engineer's calipers,
Mr. Peterson carefully measured the
canal's width. His photographs
recorded a dark central strip,
representing the middle of the
filled canal bed, which measured
about 4.5 meters (15 feet) in
width. The bracketing, worn-down
canal banks showed as light grey
strips, each measuring about 6
meters (20 feet) in width. Thus,
the overall width of the eroded
canal was about 16.5 meters (55
Obviously, the original canal
bed must have been wider before it
gradually became filled by erosion.
Had the canal bed been uniformly
about 10 meters (30 feet) in width?
Had the canal bed originally been
wide and shallow, holding a series
of stepped sections (see this
issue's front cover), each holding
groundwater at a slightly higher or
lower elevation as the canal
ascended or descended the gentle
slopes of either side of pine

These questions seemed intrigu-
ing enough to warrant digging a
trench across the pine Island Canal
in order to obtain a cross-section
or soil profile across the canal.
Such a profile could possibly yield
stratigraphic evidence of the
canal's original width and depth.
Mr. Peterson's mother, Mrs. Sophie
Peterson, who in 1980 owned a 40-
acre parcel straddling about one-
fifth of the eroded eastern section
of the canal, graciously gave her
permission to dig such a trench.

Trenching the Canal

The Peterson parcel lay midway
between Harbor Drive and the
eastern mangrove fringe. It was
reached by leaving Harbor Drive and
driving eastward on Allen park
Drive (see Figure 2) and then
southward on an unimproved, off-
road trail leading through the saw
palmettos along the western edge of
the Peterson property. According to
the aerials, this trail would cross
over the canal at a distance of
about 270 meters (900 feet) to the
south of the eastern segment of
Allen park Drive. On driving
southward along the off-road trail,
a close eye was kept on the sandy,
natural ground exposed by the
trail's tire ruts. There in the
trail, at the appropriate distance,
were two bright white sandy
patches, each corresponding to
where the trail crossed one of the
canal's worn-down spoil banks.
With the canal thusly located,
the canal was inspected on foot.
Its appearance was very similar to
that described above for the canal
just east of Harbor Drive. How-
ever, some of it had been impacted
by firebreaks and by the removal of
pine stumps. On following the canal
a short distance eastward on the
Peterson property, however, an
intact section was found.
A narrow swath across this rem-
nant of the canal was then pruned
of vegetation in anticipation of

digging a trench. The growth con-
sisted primarily of saw palmetto
and other plants common to the pine
flatwoods. In the swale between
the canal banks, there were several
small patches of open ground where
puddles of rainwater collected dur-
ing heavy rains. A thin layer of
fine organic debris had accumulated
on the surface of these patches.
After clearing vegetation, an
investigation of the canal's sub-
surface began. A manual posthole
digger was used to test the soil in
and around the canal. This reveal-
ed soil typical of the poorly-
drained, sandy pine flatwoods of
this region of Florida. Basically,
the posthole digger exposed soil
profiles characteristic of what
soil scientists classify as
"Myakka" or "Immokalee" soils (see
U.S.D.A. 1984). This soil consists
of a grey, fine sand surface soil
and a grey or white, highly-leached
subsurface sand zone which is
shallowly underlain by a very ir-
regular or wavy, black, organic pan
layer. Beneath the organic pan are
tan and dark brown sand zones.
Under natural conditions, this
soil has a shallow water table
which fluctuates seasonally, rising
with the summer rains. Regarding
Myakka soil, it has been written
In most years, under natural
conditions, the water table is
within 10 inches of the surface for
1 to 3 months and 10 to 40 inches
below the surface for 2 to 6
months. It recedes to a depth of
more than 40 inches during extended
dry periods (U.S.D.A. 1984:87).
After digging several postholes
across the canal, it became evident
that subsurface traces of the canal
were not readily visible. Rain-
water percolation had leached the
surface sands, leaving white or
grey soil. Moreover, a shallow,
organic pan layer was evident under
the entire canal, apparently having

re-formed under the filled canal
bed due to the presence of shallow
It soon became obvious that, if
any subsurface evidence of the
canal still remained, it would vis-
ible only if a lengthy trench were
dug which could reveal a sizeable
profile. However, to dig a trench
across the canal, by hand, would be
a time-consuming, laborious task.
Thus, the job had to be postponed
for a year until Col. Randell
arranged for Roger Boyd of
pineland's new Alden Pines Country
Club to donate the use of a backhoe
(Blohm 1981).
In June 1981, the backhoe dug a
trench measuring 15 meters (50
feet) in length and 2 meters (6
feet) in width (Figure 3). In
order to avoid the caving-in of the
trench's walls and to minimize the
amount of digging, this trench was
dug in a stepped fashion as the
backhoe moved from south to north
across the canal. That is, first
the backhoe dug the trench to a
depth of about 1 meter (3 feet)
whereupon it dug a narrower, cen-
tral portion which left a step or
protective shelf along each wall of
the trench. The trench's narrow,
central portion was dug for almost
another meter in depth, thus ex-
tending the middle of the trench to
about 2 meters below the ground
In the trench, groundwater was
encountered at a depth of about 1.7
meters (5 feet). This represented
a fairly deep watertable, probably
due to nearby, artificial drainage
and wells, and since the summer
rains had not yet begun. Since the
surface of the groundwater which
collected in the bottom of the
trench represented a level surface,
it was used as an aid in measuring
and mapping the various soil
layers. This careful mapping helped
to produce the profile discussed

eroded north canal bank m -ffilled canal bed,-*-- --eroded south canal bank
crest edge slight edge crest

NE # swale between banks SE
I- ----------------------------
deeper mid portion of trench I
shelf or ledge along wall
0 im 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

upper wall
-lm ----------- -- shelf

lower wall

120 'white :. :... white

40 dark brown ,


Figure 3. A Cross-Section of the Pine Island Canal (8LL34), June 1981. Top: plan view of,
canal features and trench. Center: side view of trench's east wall. Bottom:
vertical scale doubled to show profile in trench's east wall -- note stippled
area representing the light grey sand of the filled canal bed above the wavy,
black organic pan layer.

-'- 2+

Figure 4. Cross-Sections of Aboriginal Canals. All show canals
after much deterioration. Note similar widths of beds.
Top right: scales. Top: Naples Canal (Kenworthy 1883).
Upper center: Naples Canal (Douglass 1881-1885, 1885).
Lower center: West Ortona Canal (Griffin 1940). Bottom:
Pine Island Canal (Luer -- see Figure 3, this issue).

15 feetl I 1

5 feet
5 feet




obtaining A Profile

By combining surface measure-
ments alongside the trench with
vertical measurements of the
trench's east wall, a profile
across the Pine Island Canal was
obtained (Luer 1982). First, the
canal's surface features could be
measured easily (see Figure 3:top).
The width of the swale between the
canal banks measured about 5.5
meters (18 feet). The distance be-
tween the crests of the canal banks
measured about 13 meters (43 feet).
The distance from the crest of each
canal bank to the swale's edge was
about 3.5 meters (12 to 13 feet) .
These surface measurements compared
very favorably with the widths
provided by the aerial photographs
(see above).
Measurements below the surface
were obtained less easily. While
the backhoe dug the trench, traces
of the canal were not visible below
the surface. Indeed, at and below
the pan layer, all traces of the
canal apparently had been obscured
or destroyed by groundwater and
soil formation processes. For ex-
ample, the organic pan apparently
had re-formed across the entire
filled canal bed. Nonetheless, a
detailed map was made of the soil
layers in the trench's east wall.
However, after letting the walls of
the trench dry out for a day, the
upper portion of the filled canal
bed could be seen above the organic
pan layer (see Figure 3:bottom).
This upper portion of the fill-
ed canal was evidenced by light
grey sand. The light grey sand was
distinct from the natural, highly-
leached white sand to either side
of the canal bed. The light grey
sand appeared to represent soil
which had washed or blown into the
canal bed and which gradually had
filled it. In contrast, the white
sand had been situated under the
now worn-down canal banks where it
had remained undisturbed by the

This light grey sand allowed a
profile of the upper portion of the
canal to be sketched. This profile
is important because it confirms a
wide canal bed. Indeed, the pro-
file indicates that the bed was
about 8 meters (25 feet) wide at a
depth of about 30 cm (1 foot) below
the level of natural ground, and
about 5 meters (15 feet) wide at a
depth of about 60 cm (2 feet) below
ground level and where the pan
subsequently re-formed, presum-
ably, the canal bed would have
extended more deeply to reach and
to retain groundwater.
The data recovered by this pro-
file is shown by Figure 3.
Comparable data from other sources
for the pine Island Canal, and for
other aboriginal canals in southern
Florida, is presented in Figure 4
and summarized in Table 1.

The Canal's East End

In June 1980, the pine Island
Canal was observed in one more
location besides the two described
above. This additional portion was
near the eastern shore of Pine
Island where the canal descended
from the pinelands. From there, it
originally ran across a wide strip
of tidally-influenced land before
entering the open water of Matlacha
Pass (Figure 2). This portion of
the canal was directly in line with
another aboriginal site, Indian
Field (8LL39) which is described
below. Before reaching Matlacha
Pass, however, one or two burial
mounds, described below, were at or
near the canal's eastern end.
In 1980, remnants of the east-
ern portion of the pine Island
Canal could be seen where the canal
descended from the pinelands to the
east of the northeastern corner of
Tropical Nurseries (Figure 2).
Covered by saw palmetto, the canal
banks were evidenced by two low
ridges where the palmetto fronds
were slightly higher than those to
either side. Between these ridges,

Associated Selected
Sites References

1) Pine Island

2) Cape Coral
3) Ortona, west

4) Ortona, east

5) Naples

6) Mud Lake

7) Snake Bight

4.2 km 6-9 m 1-2 m 8LL33, 36, 37,
(2.6 miles) (20-30 ft) (4-6 ft) 38, 39, 40,
783, 784

6.5 15.5 km 6-9 m ?
(4-9.6 miles) (20-30 ft 7)
3.7 km 5 m
(2.3 miles) (15 ft)

3.2 km 5 m
(2 miles) (15 ft)
2.4 km 2.5 4 m
(1.5 miles) (8-12 ft)

? 8LL24

Douglass 1895;
Cushing 1897;
this article
1944 photos,
this article

1 m 8GL5, 8GL35 Griffin 1940;
(3 ft) Goggin 1949a;
F.D.OT. 1986a

1 m
(3 ft)
1.5 m
(5 ft)

8Cr60, 8Cr61

3 km 6-9 m 0.3-0.6 m 8Mo30, 8Mo33,
(1.9 miles) (20-30 ft) (1-2 ft) and small

2.4-3.2 km 6 m 0.3-0.6 m
(1.5-2.0 miles) (20 ft) (1-2 ft)

Goggin 1949a;
F.D.O.T. 1986b

Douglass 1895;
Hrdlicka 1922;
Goggin 1949a
Small 1924,1929;
Goggin 1949a;
Tebeau 1968;
Griffin 1988
Goggin 1949a

Table 1. Data for Aboriginal Canals in Southern Florida. Measurements are approximate --
all were taken after much deterioration. Note that the canals were wide as well
as long.

the central canal bed was evidenced
by a swale with fewer palmettos.
This stretch of the canal had the
distinction of being the most
clearly visible of any remaining
portion of the canal in 1980.
On encountering the low-lying
tidal land, however, all visible
traces of the canal disappeared.
Undoubtedly, rains and tides gradu-
ally had obscured the canal. How-
ever, it had been obscured further,
if not erased, by the digging of
many mosquito-control ditches in
the 1950s. Thus, in 1980, this
area was laced by ditches and spoil
piles, and densely overgrown with
exotic vegetation including punk
In the mid-1980s, vandals began
to damage two previously unreported
aboriginal sites situated in this
densely overgrown area. According
to an informant, one of these sites
was a sand burial mound located
very near, if not adjacent to,
where the Pine Island Canal appar-

ently had run. In May 1986, three
men were arrested for removing
human bones from the area (Katz
1986; Rinella 1986). Residents liv-
ing nearby were instrumental in
making this arrest, and have pro-
tected the area vigilantly since.
In October 1987, the new un-
marked human burial provisions of
Chapter 872, Florida Statutes, made
any unpermitted disturbance of
human burials a felony. This law
will help to protect these two
threatened sites which have been
recorded as 8LL783 and 8LL784 in
the Florida Master Site File main-
tained by the Florida Department of
State, Division of Historical

pine Island 8 Burial Mound

Another site, named the "pine
Island 8" burial mound (8LL40),
once existed near the Pine Island
Canal's eastern end. This mound was
built of sand overlying "lime-rock"





and was situated "... away from the
solid ground, on ... territory not
usually covered by tides, but sub-
ject to overflow during unusually
high ones ..." (Moore 1905:305) .
The mound reached slightly more
than 1.4 meters (5 feet) in height
and was about 18 meters (60 feet)
in diameter except "... at the
northeast side of the mound where
wash of tides had carried away a
portion, leaving an abrupt section"
(Moore 1900:362).
Tragically, Clarence B. Moore
and his crew of diggers demolished
the mound in 1900 and 1904, uncov-
ering more than 250 burials. Most
of these consisted of skulls, but
many others were loosely or tightly
flexed interments. From these
numerous burials, Moore (1905:306)
kept only three crania which were
preserved at the Academy of Natural
Sciences of Philadelphia (accession
numbers 2228, 2229, 2230) These
three skulls were among the 182
crania of Florida Indians of which
detailed measurements were publish-
ed by the physical anthropologist
Ales Hrdlicka (1922:137, see
"Charlotte Bay"). Hrdlicka's work
revealed that Moore's three Pine
Island crania were all male crania
which showed no signs of artificial
deformation and which were average
among Florida crania in terms of
most measurements.
Moore's terrible destruction of
the Pine Island 8 burial mound also
uncovered many cultural materials.
Unfortunately, Moore failed to re-
cord detailed provenience for any
of them. These materials included:
numerous whelk shell cups, many
fragments of plain pottery, one
small intact plain vessel, three
check-stamped sherds, two sherds
with loop handles, a rim sherd with
a notched lip, and a few pieces of
an incised and punctated vessel.
Moore published a photograph of a
rim sherd from this last vessel
(1905:PI. 6) which showed it to be
from a carinated bowl, which ap-

pears to be of the type today
classified as Fort Walton Incised,
variety Sneads. This pottery has a
long temporal range from circa A.D.
900 1700 (Scarry 1985:219, Fig.
2, Fig. 3:b, Fig. 5:b). Fort Walton
Incised pottery of this variety is
very rare in southern and central
Florida where it appears to be an
imported ware from the Fort Walton
area of northwestern Florida.
Moore's tragic digging also un-
covered contact period materials of
European origin. These materials
included: various iron tools, glass
beads, rolled sheet silver beads, a
silver petaloid pendant, a silver
kite-shaped pendant, projectile
points, and perforated fossil shark
teeth. The available data indicate
that some cultural materials like
those reported by Moore also have
been reported from various contact
period burial contexts in south-
central and southern Florida (see
Allerton, Luer, and Carr 1984:7-8,
10, also see catalog entries).
The Pine Island 8 burial mound
was one of several contact period
burial mounds along the coast of
southwestern Florida. Also tragic-
ally destroyed or severely damaged
by artifact-hunting, these mounds
included 8Chl, 8LL2, 8LL8, and
8Cr41 (see Allerton et al. 1984:
catalog entries for MT#10, #30,
#34, #36-39, #42; also see Luer
1985 for information relating to
MT#3 and MT#4). Unlike the latter
mounds, however, the pine Island 8
burial mound did not yield a cere-
monial tablet. This could suggest
that the pine Island 8 burial mound
dates to early in the contact
period -- perhaps prior to the
widespread use of metal ceremonial
tablets, some of which apparently
were deposited through the 1600s
and perhaps even into the early
1700s (see Allerton et al. 1984:9-
On the basis of Moore's report,
Widmer (1988:86-87) has assigned
the pine Island 8 burial mound to

the "very early contact period
(circa 1560)". Indeed, Goggin
identified one of Moore's pictured
finds (1905:Fig. 9) as a "Florida
Cut Crystal Pendant" and wrote that
they pertain to: "Probably the last
half of the 16th century and part
of, perhaps the first half of the
17th century" (Goggin n.d.).
Perhaps also dating to early in the
contact period are kite-shaped pen-
dants such as those from the picnic
Mound (8Hi3) (Bullen 1952:Fig.
22,B; Allerton et al. 1984:Fig. 5,
row 4, right) Bear Lake (8Brll)
(Rouse 1951:145-146, pi. 7:0) and
the Pine Island 8 burial mound
(Moore 1900:Fig. 5).
The pine Island 8 burial mound
probably helps to date the Pine
Island Canal. It seems likely that
such a large and important burial
mound situated so near to the canal
would have been associated with it.
An early contact period date for
the Pine Island 8 burial mound is
significant because it suggests
that the Pine Island Canal was in
use into post-Columbian times. As
discussed below, however, the canal
probably was built originally in
late prehistoric times.

Indian Field -- Collections

Near the eastern end of the pine
Island Canal is an island in
Matlacha Pass called Indian Field,
formerly known as "Indian Old
Field." This island is just off
the eastern shore of pine Island
(see Figure 2) Most of Indian
Field appears to be of recent sedi-
mentary origin and supports a tidal
mangrove forest. However, along
the island's southeastern edge is
an area of high ground which is the
remains of a moderate-sized abo-
riginal shell key recorded as
"Indian Field" (8LL39) in the
Florida Master Site File.
Indian Field is not readily ac-
cessible. This has been true for
many years, and even Cushing did

not reach the island's shellworks.
Rather, he only heard of them when
he "was told" that the pine Island
Canal extended across pine Island
where it reached "shell elevations"
on the "other" or eastern side of
pine Island (Cushing 1897:15). A
few years later, however, Clarence
B. Moore plied by Indian Field in a
steamer. He wrote:

About three miles below the
northeastern extremity of Pine
Island, just off shore, is a key
... called "Indian Old Field,"
which is an aboriginal shell
deposit with a shell mound upon it
(Moore 1905:305).
Almost half a century later,
Indian Field was assigned "Site No.
L 39" by an archaeological site
survey crew boating through
Matlacha Pass. The survey crew re-
ported that, in August 1951, Indian
Field had "several large fruit
trees on the mounds and a house"
and that the site had "been dis-
turbed by bulldozing" (Florida
Master Site File form for 8LL39).
This 1951 visit led to a follow-up
visit about half a year later. A
brief, firsthand account of this
second visit was left by archaeolo-
gist John M. Goggin in one of his
field notebooks (see "A Seminole
Burial on Indian Field (8LL39), Lee
County, Southwestern Florida," this
Goggin's 1952 visit to Indian
Field lasted only a day. He did not
map the site, nor did he note its
relationship to the pine Island
Canal. By the early 1980s, the
site still had not been assessed by
an archaeologist. Any initial as-
sessment would include sketching an
overall contour map and making a
surface collection. Since these
basic tasks would help to interpret
the relationship of Indian Field to
the Pine Island Canal, a visit to
Indian Field was in order.
In March 1982, Col. Randell
secured permission for the author

to embark from private property on
the nearby shore of pine Island.
After canoeing over clear, sea
grass shallows, a landing was made
at an old dock leading through the
mangrove fringe at the southern
edge of Indian Field. A short path
northward led to cleared and sun-
drenched high ground. The island's
owner, Dr. John Scheuren, quickly
consented to an investigation.
A single day was spent walking
over the island's high ground.
Besides sketching a site map (see
below) a general surface collec-
tion was made. Various shell tools
were found including: 14 perforat-
ed ponderous ark valve net sinkers,
an intentionally cut and smoothed
portion of a spire from a large
robust left-handed whelk shell, two
horse conch shell hammers, and six
left-handed whelk shell hammers of
which five had an accessory hafting
hole in the spire (see Luer et al.
1986:Fig. 14 and Table 3:site 8).
Surface collecting also reveal-
ed many pottery sherds. A total of
135 sherds were collected. About
one-fifth of this total (8 rim, 14
body) were Belle Glade Plain
sherds. A single sherd of olive jar
pottery was found. Of the remain-
ing sherds, more than half (4 rim,
60 body) were sand-tempered plain
sherds whereas most of the others
(17 rim, 33 body) pertained to an
apparently local pinellas Plain-
like ware. Two remaining body
sherds were sand-tempered and bore
parallel linear incisions. Rim pro-
files of this collection are shown
by Figure 5.
This pinellas Plain-like ware
has a dark grey or black color and
a fairly friable paste that is
often laminated and sometimes con-
torted. Rimsherds of this ware are
usually medium or thin-walled,
outward-curving, and flat-lipped
(see Figure 5; also Luer and Almy
1980). The top of the lip some-
times shows striations, apparently
from the serrated edge of a shark

tooth knife. Two of these sherds
display a dull orangish color on
their surfaces. It should -be noted
that some sherds which were identi-
cal in paste, color, and form to
the latter two sherds were collect-
ed from a site (8CH87) in neighbor-
ing Charlotte County (Luer and
Archibald 1988a). There, some rim-
sherds also displayed small ticks
in their lips, reminiscent of the
notched lips of late Pinellas plain
ware in the Tampa Bay and Charlotte
Harbor areas.
Significantly, Luer obtained
three C-14 dates from a 1986 test
unit at 8CH87 (Beta-16104: 610 +/-
90 B.P.; Beta-16105: 670 +/- 80
B.P.; Beta-16106: 1120 +/-60 B.P.).
Two of these dates are among the
most recent dates yet obtained for
a prehistoric aboriginal site in
southwestern Florida. These dates,
combined with: 1) rim and lip forms
which are known to be late (see
Luer and Almy 1980) and 2) late
occurrences of lip-notched pinellas
plain ware (for example, Griffin
and Bullen 1950; Bullen and Bullen
1956) indicate a post-A.D. 1200 age
for this pottery. This in turn in-
dicates a similar late age for the
shellworks of Indian Field.
Additional data bolstering this
late age of Indian Field has been
presented by Mitchem (1989:Table
41) This data, based on sherds
recovered by Goggin and the 1952
field party (curated at FMNH), sug-
gest that occupation was intensive
in very late prehistoric, and pos-
sibly early contact period times.
Many laminated sherds were re-
covered which were classified as
"Pinellas plain," some with notched
lips. These sherds are similar to
those described above as Pinellas
plain-like. In addition, several
Glades Tooled and numerous Belle
Glade Plain sherds were recovered
also (see Table 2, below).
That Indian Field was used also
in more recent times is evidenced
by the single olive jar sherd.



5 cm


i -

Z aa

Figure 5. Profiles of Rimsherds Found on the Surface of Indian
Field (8LL39), March 1982. Pinellas Plain-like sherds:
a-p; Belle Glade Plain: R-w; sand-tempered plain: x-aa.
Note medium or thin walls, outward-curving rims, and
flat lips typical of late prehistoric times.





Central Peninsular Gulf Coast Region

Palm River Midden, 8Hi108
Karklins 1968:71

Pillsbury Burial Md., 8Ma31
Bullen and Bullen n.d.

Old Oak Site, 8So51, Units 1-11
Luer 1977:46

Palmer Burial Md., 8So2
Bullen and Bullen 1976:Table 5

Indian Mound Park, 8So23, Test 5
Bullen 1971:Table 3

Caloosahatchee Region

John Quiet, 8Ch45, Tests III, V
Bullen and Bullen 1956:Table 5

Brothers Site, 8So31
Goodwin et al. 1978:Table 1

Acline Mound, 8Ch69, surface
Luer 1980, 1986a

Indian Field, 8LL39
Mitchem 1989:Table 41(top)

Indian Field, 8LL39, surface
Luer, this article

Pineland, 8LL33, surface
Luer's 1980 collection

Josslyn Island, 8LL32, 8LL50
Luer's 1980 collection, at FMNH

Lake Okeechobee Region

Platt Site, 8GL14
Goggin 1951:Table 2

Fisheating Creek Midden, 8GL13A
Goggin 1951:Table 3

Gaging Station Site, 8Hg18
Austin 1987b:Table 2


746 8,569

120 5,090

346 1,454




5.9 %

6.5 %

5 %

8.7 %

2.3 %

23.7 %

53.9 %

30 %

22 %

19 %

40 %

10 %

94.2 %

85.9 %

57.3 %

Fischer Site, 8Po1044, Zones A,B 19 80
Austin and Hansen 1988:Table 1

Barley Barber II, 8Mt28 539 1,458
Williams 1975:Table I

Indian River Region

Grant Site, 8Br56, Test I, II 462 5,914
Sears 1958:Figure 2

S. Ind. Field, 8Br23, Y1, Lvl. 1 161 1,672
Ferguson 1951:Table 1

S. Ind. Field, 8Br23, Y2, Lvl. 1 547 1,528
Ferguson 1951:Table 2

East Okeechobee Region

Rocky Point 2,'8Mt33 133 577
Browning 1975

Boynton Midden, 8PB56 470 3,747
Jaffe 1976:Table 1

Boca Weir, 8PB56 128 3,224
Furey 1972

Boca Raton Inlet, 8PB3 38 84
Furey 1972

Everglades Region
Markham Park 2, 8Bd183 544 26,706
Williams and Mowers 1977:Table 1

Everglades Corporate Park, 8Bd1453 7 239
Carr 1988

Granada Site, 8Da1l 213 7,122
Griffin 1985:Table 11

Ten Thousand Islands Region

Goodland Point Midden, 8Cr45 62 4,607
Goggin 1949b:Table 3

Table 2. Relative Quantities of Belle Glade Plain Sherds at Selected
Sites in Peninsular Florida. These sherds are from roughly
coeval contexts, approximately from Glades II and/or Glades
III times (circa A.D. 500 1500). Also see Figure 11.

24 %

37 %

7.8 %

9.6 %

35.8 %

25.3 %

12.5 %

39.9 %

45.2 %

2 %

2.9 %

2.9 %

1.6 %

Most olive jar sherds in the
Charlotte Harbor area have been in-
terpreted as evidence of Cuban
fishermen, perhaps accompanied by
Seminoles, circa A.D. 1750 1850.
Such occupation has been inter-
preted on the basis of olive jar
sherds in stratigraphic context at
two Cape Haze sites (Bullen and
Bullen 1956:14, 32, 48, 53). Many
other sites in the Charlotte Harbor
area also have yielded olive jar
sherds, including 8LL32 (Luer col-
lection at FMNH), 8LL774, and 8CH9
(Luer and Archibald 1988a). Consi-
dering the apparent Seminole burial
on Indian Field (see "A Seminole
Burial on Indian Field (8LL39), Lee
County, Southwestern Florida," this
issue), some olive jar sherds could
pertain to Seminole occupations.
It should be noted, however, that
some olive jar material on
Florida's Gulf Coast also pre-dates
Cuban and Seminole occupations (for
example, see Griffin and Bullen

Indian Field -- Mapping

Careful sketching of surface
contours produced Figure 6 which
documents the complex shellworks of
Indian Field. This map reveals that
the site consists of four major
areas: 1) a low-lying, bisecting,
linear cleft or valley; 2) a
northern portion with a fairly
elevated shell mound deposit; 3) a
southern portion with a fairly
small and low-lying area of shell
deposit; and, 4) two linear, insu-
lar shell features lying in the
mangrove forest along the western
edge of the island.
Attempting some interpretation
of these principal site areas seems
straightforward. The central,
dividing valley appears to be a
partially sedimented and filled-in
channel which probably corresponds
to a continuation or insular
segment of the pine Island Canal.
This segment of the canal would
have been a sea level passage

through the shellworks of Indian
Field. Interestingly, its width is
similar to that of the Pine Island
Canal (see Figure 6) The linear
ridges along the western shore of
the key appear to be breakwaters
which were constructed to shield
the western end of the key's divid-
ing channel from winds and waves.
The opposite end of the dividing
channel apparently opened into a
broad, shallow basin which occupied
the southeastern portion of the
site. This basin probably was pro-
tected behind part of the low-
lying, natural, curving berm which
still extends along the southeast-
ern shore of the key (Figure 6).
Today, a one-story concrete-
block house sits near the northern
end of Indian Field where the
shellworks reach their highest ele-
vation. Surface contours indicate
that the area under and around this
house was flattened out before the
house was built. (This apparently
is the vicinity where an unmarked
"presumably" Seminole burial was
uncovered -- see "A Seminole Burial
on Indian Field (8LL39), Lee
County, Southwestern Florida," this
issue.) The existing contours
indicate that the area northwest of
the house was cut into, and mater-
ial was pushed southeastward.
Southwest of the house, rows of old
citrus trees grow on the remaining
high area. A feature which may
represent a water court occupies
the southeastern area of the site's
southern portion (Figure 6).
It should be noted that the
shellworks of Indian Field show
similarities to shellworks at other
sites in the Charlotte Harbor area.
For example, an apparent breakwater
also occurs at 8CH362 (Luer and
Archibald 1988a). In addition, both
breakwaters at Indian Field appear
to have turned and bracketed each
side of the western mouth of the
key's dividing channel. This would
have been similar to the low-lying
ridges paralleling the mouths of
two canals at Demorey Key (see



50 m

north south z z
5.0 bank bank
2. 5 canal
0 / -/#//rfrfrrrrrrr----'r/ 0
0 10 3.0 0
feet meters

Figure 6. Map of Indian Field (8LL39), March 1982. Top: contours
in feet above mean high tide level -- note grove south-
west of house and X's locating cross-section of canal.
Bottom: cross-section showing width similar to that of
the Pine Island Canal. Indian Field is privately-owned.
Any visit without the owner's permission is prohibited.

-\ e

Sawyer's depiction in Cushing 1897:
Plate XXVIII).
It is also interesting to note
that the approximate southwest-
northeast orientation of the divid-
ing canal at Indian Field, as well
as its entrance being near the
southwest corner of the site, are
both similar to features at other
nearby sites. For example, a
roughly similar orientation is
shown by the main valley at Josslyn
Island (8LL32, 8LL50) and by the
sea level opening at 8CH357 (Luer
and Archibald 1988a) .
Indian Field's dividing canal
and associated breakwaters strongly
suggest an intimate association
with the Pine Island Canal. It
should be noted that the canal is
likewise intimately associated with
the pineland Site (see above, and
Luer 1986c, n.d.). However, whereas
the Pineland Site apparently served
as a point of embarkation (for
those east-bound on the canal) as
well as a major or a final destina-
tion (for those west-bound), it
appears that Indian Field might
have served primarily as a kind of
way-station along a much longer and
roughly east-west canoe route con-
necting pine Island Sound with the
Lake Okeechobee region (see this
paper's next section).
In addition though, Indian Field
probably functioned as a local
monitoring point for westward ac-
cess to the canal. Indeed, Indian
Field appears to be the most size-
able aboriginal shell key in
Matlacha Pass. This probably re-
flects an important role as a local
focal point. Similarly, Pineland
was a focal point receiving canal
traffic from the east and regulat-
ing traffic to and from the west --
that is, to and from other sites in
Pine Island Sound.
These roles reflect the prob-
able function of canals as funnels
or conduits for interregional trade
or exchange. This possible func-
tion is discussed more fully below.

First, however, the larger route
for canoe traffic between the Pine
Island Sound area and the Lake
Okeechobee region is examined in
light of a possible Cape Coral

A Cape Coral Canal?

After having successfully re-
located and traced the pine Island
Canal across pine Island in 1980, a
puzzling feeling continued to
occur. It was a feeling that the
canal and its associated works were
part of a much larger picture.
Certainly, the magnitude of the
labor which was expended to build
the canal seemed far in excess of
the possible benefit derived from
merely shortening the travel route
to Matlacha pass. Besides,
Matlacha pass offered only some of
the same resources already avail-
able in Pine Island Sound, San
Carlos Bay, and Charlotte Harbor.
These considerations obviously
pointed to a need to look farther
Aware of this need, a sentence
in Kenworthy's hundred-year old
(1883) account of the pine Island
Canal took on added significance.
Could this be a long-overlooked
clue to understanding an underlying
function of the pine Island Canal?
Kenworthy had written that:
I was assured, by a gentleman who
had resided on the [Pine] island
for 24 years, that the canal ex-
tended across the island for a
distance of 3 miles, and that it
could be traced inland (from the
shore of the mainland) a distance
of 14 miles (Kenworthy 1883:633).

On reflection, the logic behind
another long canal on the mainland
seemed clear. If a mainland canal
of such length had run east-west as
the Pine Island Canal had run, then
such a canal would have crossed the
broad peninsula of Cape Coral to
reach the Caloosahatchee River.

igure 7. The Course of the Possible Cape Coral Canal. Such a canal would have provided a
shorter, more protected route between Indian Field and the upper Caloosahatchee
River. Combined with the Pine Island Canal, it would have saved much time and
effort for travel between Pineland and the Caloosahatchee River.

Such a canal would have provided a
much shorter canoe route to the
Caloosahatchee, saving about 13
kilometers (8 miles) when measured
from Indian Field. Much more
distance would have been saved by
adding the Pine Island Canal and
measuring from Pineland and other
points farther west. These canals
would have provided a much more
protected route than the long, open
circuit southward through Matlacha
pass or Pine Island Sound and then
up the broad mouth of the
The attraction offered by the
Caloosahatchee was its direct ac-
cess to the Lake Okeechobee region.
Thus, if a canal crossing Cape
Coral had been combined with the
pine Island Canal, they would have
provided a direct route between

Pine Island Sound and the Lake
Okeechobee region. This would have
facilitated each region's access to
needed, non-local resources which
would have made building the pine
Island Canal worthwhile (see this
paper's next section).
Attempting to find evidence of
a possible canal across Cape Coral
was an obvious next step. A lesson
already learned by re-locating the
pine Island Canal was that aerial
photographs would be needed.
Indeed, they would be essential for
the Cape Coral area because a
massive, 1960s land development
project had destroyed almost all of
the original natural landscape of
Cape Coral.
Thus in 1980, aerial photo-
graphs were inspected at the Lee
County Soil Conservation Office in

Fort Myers. Those dating to 1944
showed the Cape Coral area prior to
development. These photographs
were of a smaller scale than those
seen previously of the Pine Island
Canal, and thus showed less detail.
However, after careful scrutiny, a
thin, dark line was detected (Lee
County Soil and Water Conservation
District: photographs DCT-1C-71,
DCT-2C-155, and DCT-3C-27).
Could this line represent the
deteriorated bed of a canal? This
seemed very possible after compar-
ing the line on these photographs
with others of the same scale which
showed the pine Island Canal (Lee
County Soil and Water Conservation
District: photographs DCT-2C-55 and
DCT-2C-70). That is, the Pine
Island Canal and the line across
Cape Coral both appeared the same!
Clearly, neither compared favorably
to any recent alterations, such as
drainage ditches, which showed as
bright gashes often accompanied by
paralleling bright dots represent-
ing spoil piles.
On very close inspection, the
line could be traced across several
photographs for a distance of about
6.5 kilometers (4 miles) fading
off at either end (Figure 7). The
line's western stretch began at a
point about 8 kilometers (5 miles)
to the east of Indian Field and ran
eastward for about 3.2 kilometers
(2 miles) The line then turned
slightly and ran east-northeastward
for another 3.2 kilometers (2
miles) where it faded near the
upper reaches of Hancock Creek.
The similarity of this line and the
one evidencing the pine Island
Canal suggested that both had
similar widths -- about 9 or 10
meters (30 feet).
This route supported the possi-
bility that the line represented
the remnants of an aboriginal
canal. Indeed, the route was the
most direct across Cape Coral while
taking advantage of geometry and
natural features. That is, a route

running eastward from a point east
of Indian Field would have been the
shortest path if the route repre-
sented a mainland continuation of
the east-west pine Island Canal.
Moreover, by bending slightly
toward the east-northeast, this
route would have stayed on flat
terrain for the longest available
distance while avoiding the
sloping, lower-lying bank of the
Caloosahatchee (U.S.G.S. 1958b,
1958c). Along the way, this route
would have incorporated advanta-
geous natural features such as a
broad, shallow slough along part of
its western stretch and shallow
ponds farther to the east. Its
eastern end would have led to a
natural creek draining into the
It seems very possible for a
canal to have followed such a
route. Importantly, it appears that
there would have been sufficient
water for a canal. This is because
prior to draining and filling in
the 1960s, the natural soils of the
Cape Coral area were poorly-
drained. The area apparently had a
high watertable, including standing
water during the summer rainy
season. Indeed, standing water in
late summer was typical of some
undeveloped tracts which still
existed north of Cape Coral in
1980. The soils were so poorly
drained on these tracts that water
stood for weeks despite enormous
drainage works nearby. These in-
cluded huge, deep waterways in
nearby Cape Coral and a long,
linear ditch, the Gator Slough
Canal, which was dug to carry sur-
face run-off prior to the massive
land alteration at Cape Coral.
Before the tragic destruction of
the natural landscape, what was the
appearance of the original environ-
ment through which a canal might
have passed? Old government land
records from the 1860s and 1870s
give some evidence. For example,
the individual township and range

maps conspicuously show many
seasonal ponds, patches of prairie,
scattered pines, and a few creeks
and sloughs (Surveyor General's
Office 1872a, 1872b, 1873). A sur-
veyor's firsthand account charac-
terized the land as "low and wet"
with "small, stunted pine very
scattering, and an undergrowth of
saw palmetto" (Clay 1873:47). A
more recent study, based on the
interpretation of 1944 and 1945
aerial photography, indicates that
much of this area was classifiable
as "palmetto prairies" with less
than 10% tree cover (Florida
Department of Transportation 1983).
Thus, most of the original Cape
Coral landscape was open, wet,
palmetto prairie with scattered
stunted pines.
The possibility of a Cape Coral
Canal needs further investigation.
In 1980, on-ground inspection dis-
closed that traces of the line
visible on the 1940s aerials, like
the natural landscape, had been
erased by land development. None-
theless, this line has been
assigned a Florida Master Site File
number, 8LL756, until further
determination can be made. For
example, it may be possible to find
traces of the canal's western end
where land alteration has not
occurred. It should be noted,
however, that the alignment of the
possible canal is as shown by
Figure 7. This is important
because the Florida Master Site
File form shows the eastern half of
the possible canal too far to the
north, and a Lee County map in
Austin (1987a) shows the western
half of the possible canal too far
to the south.
Finally, it should be noted
that the Corbett Mound (8LL24)
appears to have been directly in
line with the eastern half of the
possible Cape Coral Canal. This
flat-topped sand mound was "just
north of a small pond or glade" a
short distance west of Yellow Fever

Creek (Florida Master Site File
form for 8LL24). If there had in-
deed been a Cape Coral Canal, it
could have extended slightly far-
ther eastward than described above,
passing though a pond near the
headwaters of Hancock Creek and
terminating at the Corbett Mound
and associated pond or glade. From
there, the Caloosahatchee was
readily accessible via Yellow Fever
As a footnote, it should be
mentioned that the Corbett home-
stead, as well as an area of scrub
vegetation in the immediate vicin-
ity of the Corbett Mound, were both
shown by the U.S. Government survey
(Surveyor General's Office 1872a).
The scrub area is the only one
depicted, most of the survey cover-
ing poorly-drained land much like
that described above for the rest
of Cape Coral. A correlation be-
tween well-drained scrub areas and
sand mounds has been noted previ-
ously (Luer and Almy 1987:301, Fig.
1 and Fig. 2), and the Corbett
Mound apparently conforms to that

Perspectives On Aboriginal Canals

There are two basic classes or
types of aboriginal canals. One
type consists of a long, linear,
purposefully dug canal with exca-
vated spoil placed along both
banks. Few canals of this type were
built, and those at pine Island,
Naples, and Ortona were outstanding
examples. This is the type of canal
which is addressed by this paper.
previous interpretations, reasons
for construction, and social impli-
cations of these lengthy canals are
discussed below.
The second type of canal, which
is not discussed below, includes
relatively short, often narrow and
usually linear canals which were
constructed as part of a shell
mound or shellworks site. These
canals were fairly common, and they

displayed much variation. For ex-
ample, they included numerous,
radiating, narrow canals such as at
Key Marco (Cushing 1897:Plate XXX)
or Chokoloskee Island (Beriault
1986:1, Maps 1 and 2), or a major,
dividing canal such as at Mound Key
in Estero Bay (Moore 1900:367) or
at Pineland (Luer 1986c:Fig. 2 and
Fig. 3) or Indian Field (above,
Figure 6).

Interpretations of Canals

Previous Interpretations. One
hundred years ago, early observers
of southern Florida's long, linear
canals were cautious in their
interpretations of these huge and
impressive works. Kenworthy (1883:
663) concluded that "they were not
constructed for defensive purposes,
but evidently for canals." Simons
(1884:795) accepted this view and
ventured that the Pine Island Canal
"... shortened the distance to
Mattlacha Channel [Matlacha Pass]
fully 10 miles for canoes."
The interpretation that these
works were canoe canals which
facilitated travel was repeated by
Goggin (1949). However, in a later
paper, Goggin and Sturtevant (1964:
195) lumped together all of
southern Florida's prehistoric
canals, including the long, linear
ones as well as those of shellworks
sites. Moreover, they interpreted
these canals "... to be ceremonial
in nature because most are associ-
ated directly with other earth-
works." Recently, Widmer (1988:6)
apparently accepted Goggin and
Sturtevant's interpretation, writ-
ing that canals "... are apparently
without economic function but are,
rather, ceremonial in nature ...."
New Interpretations. A solely
"ceremonial" ascription for canals
seems far too limited. This seems
particularly clear for the long,
linear canals whose strategic
placements and tremendous lengths
suggest an overriding aim of facil-

itating canoe transportation. For
example, the Ortona Canal would
have provided direct access from
the Ortona Site to the
Caloosahatchee River and Lake Flirt
(Figure 8). The Bear Lake or Mud
Lake Canal would have provided a
connection between Florida Bay and
Whitewater Bay, via Mud Lake and
Coot Bay, thus making the long cir-
cuit around Cape Sable through the
open Gulf unnecessary. The Naples
Canal would have shortened travel
in the open Gulf and given access
to the uppermost end of the Ten
Thousand Islands. The Pine Island
and Cape Coral Canals would have
connected the upper Pine Island
Sound area to the Caloosahatchee
River and thereby to the Lake
Okeechobee region (Luer 1986c:286).
Overall, these long canals can be
viewed as forming a system or
network of strategically-located
canals (Figure 8).
It seems that southern Florida's
long, linear canals were built for
transportation, facilitating the
movement of people and resources.
They joined populous areas, in
particular the Pine Island Sound,
Ten Thousand Island, and Lake
Okeechobee areas. The association
with major sites, such as Ortona
and pineland, suggests political
and economic importance in addition
to possible ceremonial functions.

The Need for Canals

Natural Factors. The need for
a system of lengthy canoe canals in
southern Florida arose in part from
environmental conditions. Canoes
were indispensable given the watery
environments of vast areas, such as
the inshore waters of the south-
western coast and the Everglades
(see Figure 9). This wet and
extremely flat terrain, however,
caused some essential resources to
be separated by considerable dis-
tances (resources such as smilax
roots, cypress wood, and marine




-- -* Ortona

s River



* Cypre



s Everglades

S.' a

Figure 8. Aboriginal Canals and the Watery Environments of South-
ern Florida. These strategic canals connected natural
travel routes along rivers, sloughs, lakes, and coastal







Figure 9. The Flat and Watery Natural Environments of Interior and Coastal Southern Florida
Encouraged the Widespread Use of Dugout Canoes. This photograph was taken in 1910
by A. B. Skinner in the Everglades (Courtesy of Museum of the American Indian,
Heye Foundation, Negative Number 1546).

shells -- see below) Given this
fact, the mobility provided by
canoes undoubtedly became vital in
obtaining and distributing needed
Social Factors. As southern
Florida Indian societies grew in
population size and in social com-
plexity, there arose a need to
facilitate and to control the
interregional distribution and
exchange of resources. While canoe
travel in most of southern Florida
was unimpeded by natural barriers,
a few features of the natural land-
scape did hinder direct routes in a
few crucial localities. By con-
structing direct canoe canals at
such localities, the distribution
of resources could be facilitated.
Before societies reached a de-
velopmental level at which canals
could be constructed, there prob-
ably already existed canoe routes
and interregional networks of ex-
change in southern Florida. The
construction of canals can be
viewed as a further evolution or
extension of these patterns. The
canals probably were advantageous
economically because they assisted
and strengthened existing patterns
of needed exchange. Canals prob-
ably were advantageous politically
because they served as conduits
which could be controlled and moni-
tored. Militarily, canals assured
shorter, more protected routes
which ensured fast, safe, and
reliable travel.

Aboriginal Canals and Cultural

Aboriginal canals should be ex-
amined in the light of cultural
models proposed for late prehis-
toric cultures in southern Florida.
These models have important aspects
which should have direct bearing on
the future investigation and inter-
pretation of canals. Most impor-
tant among these aspects are sub-
sistence and tribute.
Subsistence. The most often-

used models applied to southern
Florida portray nonagricultural,
fishing-gathering-hunting economies
(for example, Goggin and Sturtevant
1964; Milanich and Fairbanks 1980;
Carr and Beriault 1984; Widmer
1988; Marquardt 1987, 1988). Other
models include maize horticulture
(that is, Sears 1982; Dobyns 1983).
With regard to subsistence,
canals should be considered in the
redistribution of food. Milanich
and Fairbanks (1980) suggest that
the interregional redistribution of
food was an important activity
among the historic Calusa:
The complexity of the Calusa
political system seems to be tied
to the subsistence potential of
both the Southwest Florida coastal
waters and the savannahs and
wetlands of the Okeechobee Basin
and to the need to maintain
exchange routes through which food
could be rapidly redistributed.
For instance, should fishing be bad
one week at Calos, dried palm
berries or smilax or zamia flour
(or unprocessed roots) could be
already on hand or brought by canoe
from a village on Lake Okeechobee
via the Caloosahatchee River to
Calos. Or smoked fish brought by
canoe from a village elsewhere on
the coast could feed the Calos
villagers. Food surpluses could be
moved from one place to another via
waterways along established politi-
cal and economic channels. The key
to such a system is the potential
of the environment to produce food
surpluses which were relatively
easily obtainable and which were
Fish, both marine and fresh-
water, dried meats (especially
reptiles from the basin) and
starchy roots which could be
processed into flour were such
foods (Milanich and Fairbanks

The interregional redistribu-
tion of food is also posited by
Dobyns (1983) Although he sug-
gests that the subsistence base is
augmented by maize horticulture, he

shares the notion of interregional

The very complexity of Calusa
social structure ceases to appear
anomalous the moment one perceives
that it organized the distribution
of foodstuffs and other commodities
among horticulturalists tending
tubers, maize, gourds, and orchards
and exploiting rich freshwater and-
saltwater fishing waters (Dobyns

It should be noted that Dobyns
(1983) makes an important new addi-
tion to the southern Florida sub-
sistence strategy. This is the com-
munal storehouse of dried food-
stuffs. Such storehouses or
"granaries" were prominent features
among the Timucua observed by the
French in the 1560s in northeastern
Florida (Le Moyne 1946:79, 81, 83).
With regard to the possible use
of storehouses in conjunction with
canals, it should be noted that the
French recorded the use of canoes
and baskets in stockpiling supplies
as well as the strategic placement
of storehouses:

The reason their granaries are
always built ... on the bank of a
stream ... is that they should be
accessible by water. Thus, if they
are in need of food ..., they are
able to get supplies by canoe (Le
Moyne 1946:83).

Exchange and Tribute. These as-
pects of cultural models could have
direct bearing on canals. In each
of two different models, Widmer
(1988:274-276) views interregional
exchange as "... important in the
maintenance and, perhaps, the
establishment of alliances and
political ties among existing
chiefdoms." One model discounts
the importance of roots as items of
exchange and posits a demographic
imbalance between the interior and
the coast which encouraged military
intensification and tribute extrac-
tion. A second model proposes pro-
duction and exchange of surplus

economic items which was motivated
by obtainment of prestige items and
power. A close variant of this
latter model was expressed by
Austin (1987b:297). Clearly, canals
could have been very important in
the interregional exchange or
tribute posited in these models.
Comments. To date, models of
late prehistoric cultures in
southern Florida have overlooked
the roles and implications of
lengthy canoe canals. Canals should
be incorporated into these models
for several important reasons.
Canals seem to be important econo-
mically for their possible role in
the transport of roots, fish, wood,
and other items. Such a role would
justify the investment of the large
amounts of work required to build
them. Canals seem to be consistent
with military-tribute models,
especially if the labor needed to
build them had been a form of
tribute. A highly organized
political-military authority would
help to account for the assembling,
organizing, feeding, and directing
of workers needed to build lengthy,
huge canals. Once constructed,
canals could have "belonged" to a
central authority, much like a
"king's highway." Griffin (1988)
has noted that the lengthy canals
of southwestern Florida are ".
certainly construction efforts of a
scale suggesting organized group
activity under leadership."
Canals can be used to help test
the models described above. Canals
may even help reveal information of
relevance to the study of aborig-
inal demographics in southern
Florida (see Dobyns 1983). Obtain-
ing a better picture of aboriginal
population numbers would help in
refining and amplifying cultural
models, especially with regard to
social structure.
Toward this aim, it is recom-
mended that the amount of work that
was required to build canals, such
as those at Pine Island, Naples,

and Ortona, be estimated carefully
based in part on the data presented
above in Table 1. In addition to
Table l's data regarding volumes,
computations of work should also
consider the weights of wet versus
dry sand, top soils versus hardpan,
sizes of basket loads, distances
over which sand was lifted and
carried, etc. These estimates can
then be utilized to project further
variables such as the number of
laborers involved, the amounts of
time required, and the amounts of
food needed to build each of these
Studying canals in this manner
could help test and refine cultural
models. Obtaining better models
could help shed much light on the
Indian societies which built the

Canals and Further Considerations

Researchers should consider abo-
riginal canals also in the light
of: 1) the efficiency of canoes and
canals for easing transport of
weighty materials, 2) the possible
role of canals in centralizing re-
distribution and storage, 3) the
role of canals in bettering commun-
ication, 4) the role of canals in
transportation for special func-
tions such as chiefly travel, and
5) the relationship between canal
width and possible kinds of canoes
or other watercraft.
Efficiency of Transport. Canoes
offer considerable physical effi-
ciency in terms of moving weighty
items. Dobyns (1983:242) emphasizes
the role of canoe transport in
allowing the development of dense,
sedentary populations. Dobyns
(1983:242-244) warns not to under-
rate the cultural complexity of
societies which developed extensive
transport by canoe. The lengthy
canals of southern Florida are
evidence of societies which did
develop extensive canoe transport.

Centralization. By moving sur-
plus production of foodstuffs and
other items in canoes via canals,
such items could be assembled at
certain points for redistribution,
or stored for future consumption or
redistribution. Storage of food-
stuffs would seem to have been
essential for societies which were
capable of harnessing the surplus
labor evidenced by the construction
of lengthy canals. Points of assem-
blage, storage, and redistribution
of food and other items would be
expected along the canals, and
sites such as the Corbett Mound,
Indian Field, and Pineland seem
obvious candidates.
Communication. Historic ac-
counts often refer to, or imply the
use of, messengers to carry news.
Two passages from Jonathan
Dickinson's journal of 1696, both
quoted below, refer to a messenger
bringing news of the impending
arrival of a chief and his retinue
or, in the other instance, of the
impending arrival of visitors to a
chief. Messengers would seem to
have had important roles and added
status among the aborigines. Long-
range messengers probably would
have utilized canoes and paddlers
to speed their task. Clearly,
canals would have offered rapid
travel to canoe-borne messengers.
Stored foodstuffs at points along
the way would have assured the
replenishment of these and other
Special Functions. Regarding
the role of canals as routes of
travel, perhaps canals were used by
chiefs and other special status
individuals to travel between
regions. For example, according to
the Frenchman Le Moyne, who wrote
in the 1560s, chief Oathkaqua from
the Cape Canaveral region was to
travel to southwestern Florida
where his daughter (or perhaps his
sister -- see Griffin 1988) was to
marry his ally, the Calusa chief

Oathkaqua, with a large reti-
nue, was escorting one of his
daughters, a maiden of great beauty
of face and form, to King Calos, to
whom she was to be married. Hear-
ing about this, the people of the
island ambushed the cortege, at-
tacked and routed Oathkaqua and his
followers, captured the bride and
her attendants, and carried them
off to their island (Le Moyne
1946:60) .

Clearly, water travel is indicated
by reference to an "island" which
many scholars believe to have been
located in the Kissimmee River
region (for example, Dobyns 1983:
163; Hale 1984:176). The quickness
and efficiency of water travel is
suggested also by Le Moyne's com-
ment that the trip between
Oathkaqua and Calos was a "four or
five days' journey" (Le Moyne
1946:58) Could the travel route
have been along the St. Johns and
Kissimmee Rivers, around Lake
Okeechobee to the Caloosahatchee
River, and then downstream to the
Cape Coral and Pine Island Canals?
This might have been a four or five
day journey by canoe (see Figure
Canal Width and "Double-Canoes."
Consideration also should be given
to the great width of the pine
Island Canal. Why was it 9 meters
(30 feet) wide? Obviously, this
width appears to be much greater
than that required for a single
canoe. Several reasons can be sug-
gested: 1) assuming that the canal
was deep in the middle, a wide
canal would have accommodated a
changing water table so that there
always would have been water in the
canal; 2) a wide canal would allow
for two-way traffic; 3) a wide
canal would allow for groups to
pass (such as royalty and their
attendants, traders, or military
groups); and 4) a wide canal might
have allowed passage of "double-
canoes" lashed together catamaran-

The possibility of canoes lashed
together in pairs is suggested by
historic documentation and archaeo-
logical finds (Lewis 1978:20-21).
The first reference to such canoes
is very early in the contact period
-- that is, in June 1512 during
ponce de Leon's first voyage (see
Davis 1935). According to Herrera's
account, Ponce de Leon reached the
coast of southwestern Florida,
apparently in the Charlotte Harbor
area, where: "...there appeared at
least twenty canoes, and some
fastened together by twos" (Davis
1935:20). The fullest historical
description for a "double-canoe,"
however, is provided by Jonathan
Dickinson for the year 1696 when he
was shipwrecked among Indians of
the southeastern coast of Florida:

This morning early came a mes-
senger giving an account that the
Old Casseekey was within some few
leagues of the town, and that we
might expect him this forenoon;
within the time he came in sight.
We all drew down to the water-side
to receive him; we perceived he
came in state, having his two
canoes lashed together with poles
athwart from the one to the other,
making a platform, which, being
covered with a mat, on it stood a
chest .... Upon this chest he sat
cross-legged, being newly painted
red, his men with poles setting the
canoes along unto the shore. ..
He was received by his people with
great homage, holding out his hands
(as their custom is) to be kissed
... (Andrews and Andrews 1981:34).
The archaeological evidence is
less clear. In the court at Key
Marco, several toy canoes were
excavated (Cushing 1897:36-37,
Plate XXXII: Figures 6 and 7). Two
of these toy canoes were lying next
to each other:
Little sticks and slight shreds of
twisted bark were lying across them
and indicated to me that they had
once been lashed together, and, as
a more finished and broken spar-


like shaft lay near by, I was
inclined to believe that they
represented the sea-going craft of
the ancient people here (Cushing
1897:37) .

The width of the pine Island
could be viewed as indirect evi-
dence supporting the possibility of
"double-canoes." The stability and
strength of such water craft would
have made them desirable for moving
heavy loads. The possibility that
the Pine Island Canal as well as
the Cape Coral Canal could have
accommodated such heavy load-
bearing craft should be considered.

Evidence For Interregional Exchange

Demonstrable functions for abo-
riginal canals will emerge as more
evidence accumulates. It is pro-
posed here that ethnographic and
archaeological evidence of inter-
regional exchange and tribute will
provide the best clues for the
functions of canals.

Ethnographic Evidence. Although
limited in number and detail, there
are important early historic ac-
counts of interregional tribute in
southern Florida. The items of
tribute observed by Fontaneda
(1944:13-14) in the 1550s-1560s
include: food such as "bread of
roots," fish, birds, eels, alliga-
tors, snakes, and turtles as well
as roots, deerskins, and "other
articles." Around 1570, Rogel (see
Zubillaga 1946:278) mentions
feathers, mats, fruits, and other
foods. All these items were being
sent to the coast by interior
peoples. They could have been
transported via canals.
Additional items of exchange or
tribute, as well as the use of a
canoe to transport them, are
described by an account of a visit
to a chief in southeastern Florida
in the year 1696:

... the strange Indian and his
companions went forth to the water-
side, unto their canoe lying in the
sound, and returned ... with such
presents as they had brought,
delivering them unto the Casseekey
.... The presents were some few
bunches of the herb they make their
drink of, and another herb which
they use instead of tobacco, and
some platted balls stuffed with
moss to lay their heads on instead
of pillows (Andrews and Andrews

Archaeological Evidence. In recent
years, archaeological evidence has
been growing which can help reveal
interregional exchange and tribute
in southern Florida. Some of this
evidence includes: shell drinking
cups, cypress wood, deer bone, fish
and turtle bone, shell tools,
ceramic smoking pipes, and Belle
Glade Plain pottery.
Drinking Cups. The occurrence
of whelk shell drinking cups at
numerous sites in west-central and
southern Florida can be interpreted
as evidence of prehistoric exchange
in two ways: 1) some of the shells
themselves were traded, and 2) the
probable use of the cups for imbib-
ing black drink suggests that
yaupon holly leaves were an item of
That some shell drinking cups
were themselves items of exchange
is suggested by their occurrence at
sites located far from estuarine
areas where such shells originated.
Thus, left-handed whelk shell
drinking cups at such interior
sites as Fort Center (Steinen
1982:Fig. 6.3,C; Sears 1982:157) or
Myakkahatchee (Luer et al. 1987:
147) can be interpreted as having
been traded inland from the coast.
Moreover, an even wider ex-
change network is suggested for
yaupon holly leaves. These leaves
were needed to brew the black
drink, yet the yaupon holly plant
apparently was not native to
southern Florida (see Merrill 1979:

Map 1) Nonetheless, the occur-
rence of numerous shell drinking
cups throughout southern Florida
suggests that the leaves were wide-
ly available and that there was a
considerable demand for them. That
the cups were most probably used in
black drink ritual is indicated by
their frequent occurrence in burial
contexts. This is one of the con-
texts identified by Milanich (1979:
84-85) as strongly supportive of
the cups and the black drink having
occurred together. That the black
drink ritual probably did extend
into southern Florida should be
noted because the area is not in-
cluded by Merrill (1979:Map 2) in
the distribution of the use of
black drink.
If black drink was consumed in
late prehistoric times in the Pine
Island Sound area, yaupon leaves
could have been brought from either
the Tampa Bay or Cape Canaveral
areas where the plant apparently
occurs naturally. Leaves from the
latter area could have been trans-
ported via the St. Johns,
Kissimmee, Lake Okeechobee,
Caloosahatchee, Cape Coral Canal,
and Pine Island Canal to reach the
pine Island Sound area (see Figure
Cypress Wood. Bald cypress wood
seems to have been used commonly at
Key Marco (8Cr48, 8Cr49) for a
great variety of carved items rang-
ing from tubs to a canoe (see
Cushing 1897; Gilliland 1975)
Presumably, this was a desired wood
which had widespread use at many
sites. However, cypress trees did
not grow naturally on Key Marco,
nor did they grow on other insular
shellworks sites. Indeed, cypress
trees are restricted to freshwater
swamps and are not indigenous to
large areas surrounding Charlotte
Harbor and Pine Island Sound as
well as large areas around the Ten
Thousand Islands.
It would seem that cypress
wood, which was abundant in the

interior, would have been a valued
item of exchange. More paleo-
botanical work could reveal much
data relating to exchange networks
and wood. various kinds of wood
could have been moved to the coast
via canals.
Deer Bone. Deer probably were
much more available to inhabitants
of the interior than to island-
dwellers of the Pine Island Sound
and Ten Thousand Island areas. The
numerous deer bone tools at some
insular shellworks sites obviously
represent deer hunted elsewhere.
There are indications at a site
located along an inland slough just
north of Charlotte Harbor that deer
were hunted in that area and cer-
tain bones removed for use else-
where. That is, at the Myakka-
hatchee Site (8So397) there was a
scarcity of deer metapodials, com-
monly used for tools, while there
was an abundance of deer carpels
and inner ear sections which which
are seldom used for tools. In
other words, this evidence suggests
that deer were dismembered at this
inland site (see Figure 10) and
certain bones discarded while
others were removed from the prem-
ises (see Luer et al. 1987:149).
Similar behavior may be evidenced
at sites in the Lake Okeechobee
region. Deer bone and deerhides
from there could have been trans-
ported to the pine Island Sound
area via canals.
Fish and Turtle Bone. Some
faunal bone at interior sites
apparently represents food trans-
ported from the coast. For example
at Fort Center, Hale (1984:184)
notes the occurrence of small
amounts of sea turtle, jack, mul-
let, and marine mollusk remains.
At the Myakkahatchee site (Figure
10) some remains of shark, jack,
and spadefish were noted (Luer et
al. 1987:149).
Much more zooarchaeological work
at interior sites is needed to re-
veal the nature and extent of such

Figure 10. Some Significant Sites in the Charlotte Harbor Pine
Island Sound Area. These widespread sites in diverse
environments contain evidence of the area's complex
cultural adaptations.

importation. Based on the faunal
samples from Fort Center, Hale
(1984:184) wrote that there did
"... not appear to have been major
commerce in vertebrate or molluscan
food resources" from the coast to
the interior. Several factors may
help give this appearance. The
poor preservation of some faunal
bone, such as exceptionally oily
mullet bones, may account for the
small amounts of those bones. Some
heavy bones of jacks, however, do
tend to preserve rather well, but
such fish could have been split,
dried, and large bones removed
before having been transported
In addition, it could be that
the transport of food and other
tribute was primarily one-way --
that is, from the interior to the
coast. This could account for the
apparent scarcity of coastal faunal
remains at interior sites. More

archaeological work and zooarchae-
ological analysis at -southwest
Florida coastal sites are needed to
help resolve this question. Fresh-
water turtles, an abundant resource
in many interior areas, could have
been transported easily to the
coast using canoes and canals.
Evidence of an abundant and steady
supply of freshwater turtles at
insular sites in pine Island Sound
could be interpreted as evidence of
transport from the interior. Zoo-
archaeological analyses currently
underway by Karen Jo Walker of the
Florida Museum of Natural History
promise some of the data sorely
needed for such questions.
Shell Tools. There is some evi-
dence that marine shell tools were
transported inland. For example,
left-handed whelk shell cutting-
edged tools have been recovered
from elite contexts in Mound A at
Fort Center (Steinen 1982:84-87;
Hale 1984:183). Tools like these
were usually fashioned from robust
shells found along barrier islands,
particularly along the Charlotte
Harbor/Pine Island Sound estuary
(Luer et al. 1986).
In addition, Mound A yielded
eight large valves of the southern
quahog clam which were all left
valves like many occurrences along
the lower Gulf coast (see Luer
1986b:152). Considering the heavy
and bulky nature of these shells
and shell tools, transport from the
coast by canoe, perhaps via canals,
is possible.
Smoking Pipes. Ceramic pipes
and pipe fragments have been
recovered at Pineland, Fort Center,
and at a site in Dade County (see
Luer 1986c). The very similar
designs and pastes of these smoking
pipes are evidence of close contact
between the Pine Island Sound, Lake
Okeechobee, and southeastern
Florida areas. The Pineland
specimen was recovered from a boggy
area associated with the pine
Island Canal (see Luer 1986c:Fig. 2


and 3). Further investigation of
this boggy area, possibly the
remains of a charnel pond, could
disclose evidence of ties to the
interior, perhaps via the boggy
area's adjoining Pine Island Canal.
Belle Glade plain. This pot-
tery is abundant around Lake
Okeechobee (Figure 11). Indeed, the
Lake Okeechobee region is a "core
area" for Belle Glade plain pottery
(see Table 2). Temporally, the
pottery spread outward from the
Lake Okeechobee region in Glades II
and Glades III times (circa A.D.
500 1500)
Since the 1940s, some investi-
gators have interpreted the occur-
rence of Belle Glade Plain pottery
at widespread sites around the
coast of southern Florida as evi-
dence of contact with the Lake
Okeechobee region. Goggin, Rouse
(1951) Porter (1951) and others
noted its occurrence in small
amounts in such areas as the
Florida Keys, the Indian River
region, and the Tampa Bay area. On
the lower Gulf Coast at Goodland
Point (8Cr45) Goggin noted that
the Belle Glade plain pottery
occurring there, although scarce,
increased in frequency through time
(Goggin 1949b:87).
In the 1960s, some investiga-
tors of southern Florida prehistory
viewed the Caloosahatchee River and
the Everglades as having provided
canoe trails over which Belle Glade
Plain pottery was transported out-
ward from the lake region. For
example, Sears (1967) wrote of
sites in Lee County at the mouth of
the Caloosahatchee as having:
... some evidence for contact up-
stream with the Lake Okeechobee
Basin in the form of Belle Glade
Plain sherds, which are the char-
acteristic pottery of the Belle
Glade Culture area (Sears

The next year, Laxson (1968:59)
viewed Belle Glade plain sherds at

the mouth of the Miami River
(8Dall) as being evidence of "trade
up-river to the region of Lake
Okeechobee." These views are
consistent with the belief that,
prior to artificial drainage, the
Everglades was criss-crossed by
numerous canoe trails connecting
insular habitation sites (see
Tebeau 1968:20-21, 41; Mowers
In the 1970s, Sears (1975, 1982)
proposed that the occurrence of
very small amounts of Belle Glade
plain sherds at some of the large
coastal Everglades sites was due to
trade, the interior Lake Okeechobee
Indians supposedly receiving sea
shells for the lime they might have
needed in maize production. In a
panel discussion with John W.
Griffin, Sears (1975) suggested
that Belle Glade Plain vessels
might have been used to carry
"corn" (prepared?) outward from the
lake region.
The 1970s also brought a great
deal of archaeological work all
over southern Florida. Some of the
new data showed changes in the
amounts of Belle Glade plain
pottery through time and space.
This information was helpful in
delimiting some of the new culture
regions which were being recognized
after the dissolution of Goggin's
former "Glades Area" (see Sears
1967; Griffin 1974; Milanich and
Fairbanks 1980; Luer and Almy
1980:217; Widmer 1988:74).
The new data for Belle Glade
plain pottery helped define
boundaries all the way to each
coast on both sides of Lake
Okeechobee. Projects such as those
by Florida Atlantic University
(Furey 1972), the University of
South Florida (Williams 1975;
Goodwin et al. 1978), and and the
Broward County Archaeological
Society (Williams and Mowers 1977)
produced sherd frequencies for
Belle Glade Plain pottery (see
Table 2). New information such as
this was assembled by Griffin,

florida ..Ka/y9

Figure 11. Map of Belle Glade Plain Sherd Frequencies. Percentages
reflect the percent of Belle Glade Plain sherds of the
total number of sherds at deposits of Glades II and/or
Glades III times -- see Table 2. Note the interior core
area, 80% plus, and the approximate 20-50% zone extend-
ing to Charlotte Harbor.

Miller, and Fryman (1979) to help
delimit a geographic boundary for
the area southeast of Lake
Okeechobee, a boundary reflected in
Carr and Beriault's (1984) "East
Okeechobee" region.
Also important, new evidence
from the upper Charlotte Harbor
area showed sizeable frequencies of
Belle Glade Plain pottery at the
Brothers Site (Goodwin et al.
1978) Aqui Esta (Luer 1980) and
the Acline Mound (see Table 2).
This data was interpreted as
helping to link that area to the
Caloosahatchee region (Luer 1980,
1982) thereby helping to delimit
the boundary between the Central
peninsular Gulf Coast and
Caloosahatchee regions (see Carr
and Beriault 1984:Fig. 1; Luer
1986b:Fig. 13). Most previous
researchers had divided Charlotte
Harbor through Boca Grande Pass
into northern and southern halves,

but now it was united as a single
area within the Caloosahatchee
Other new, 1970s data was as-
sembled and synthesized by Luer and
Almy (1980, 1982). They pointed
out the rather late appearance
(post-A.D. 400) of relatively small
amounts of Belle Glade Plain pot-
tery in the area from Tampa Bay to
Charlotte Harbor (Luer and Almy
1980:217, Table 1). They inter-
preted the comparatively small
amount of Belle Glade Plain pottery
in the Manatee-Sarasota area as
"trade ware" (Luer and Almy 1980:
220) or "exogenous ware" obtained
from the south and east through
"trade, warfare, and marriage"
(Luer and Almy 1982:49).
This idea of attributing Belle
Glade plain pottery to some kind of
extra-regional exchange could apply
as well to the Caloosahatchee
region. The Belle Glade plain
sherds at Indian Field and pineland
(see Table 2) could represent
vessels, and perhaps some of their
makers, transported to the coast
via canals. Ceramic vessels could
have been brought in canoes from
the Lake Okeechobee region via the
Caloosahatchee River and the pos-
sible Cape Coral Canal to reach the
pine Island Sound area.
Belle Glade plain vessels are
often large, shallow, open bowls
with very thin sides and fairly
thin bottoms. These large-mouthed
vessels would have been awkward to
carry by hand, especially if con-
taining a weighty liquid. The form
of the vessels, however, would have
made them stable and useful on a
fairly flat surface, and very well-
suited for transport in the bottoms
of dugouts. Moreover, their thin-
ness would have made them light-
weight, another advantage for canoe
But what could the vessels have
carried? Traces of what might have
been a resinous coating (see Luer
and Archibald 1988b:40) are often

found on the outer surface of Belle
Glade Plain sherds. If such
material represents pine pitch
(Candice and Herrman Trappman,
pers. comm. 1980) the thin body
walls of Belle Glade Plain vessels
might have been reinforced and
rendered water-tight with it.
perhaps the characteristic shaved
outer surface of Belle Glade Plain
pottery created a surface which was
scratched and pitted enough that
pitch would adhere to it. If
water-tight, the vessels could have
been used to carry many things,
especially liquids or moist foods
if covers of some sort had been
stretched over the wide, circular
mouths of the vessels, perhaps some
Belle Glade Plain vessels were used
to carry the "bread of roots" which
Fontaneda (1944) mentioned as an
item of tribute sent to the coast
by the Indians of the interior lake
Whatever their use, however, the
vessels do seem to have spread out
from a core area around Lake
Okeechobee, and some transport of
the vessels appears fairly certain.
Recently, Widmer (1988:84) has sug-
gested that Belle Glade plain pot-
tery does not appear in the
Caloosahatchee region until circa
A.D. 700. He uses its appearance,
or its dramatic increase, at this
time as a marker for the beginning
of his Caloosahatchee II period
(circa A.D. 700 1200).
Field work by Luer and others
around Charlotte Harbor supports
the appearance of Belle Glade plain
pottery in that area around A.D.
500 to 700. It is absent at many
sites dating prior to that time,
but is common in a late Weeden
Island context, circa A.D. 800, at
state-owned 8Ch16. It has been
found also in a coeval context at a
pit feature in the summit of the
West Platform Mound on 8ChlO (Luer
et al. 1986:103-104; Luer 1986b:
145,Table 1). It also occurs in
slightly later contexts at the

Southwest Mound on 8Chl0 (Luer et
al. 1986:105) as well as at the
Aqui Esta Burial Mound (8Ch68)
(Luer 1980; Luer and Almy
The occurrence of Belle Glade
plain pottery in substantial quan-
tities in the Caloosahatchee region
suggests a high degree of inter-
action with peoples of the interior
Lake Okeechobee region. Ceramic
studies comparing the pastes of
Belle Glade Plain sherds in the two
regions might prove a common source
for some of the pottery, while
other Belle Glade Plain sherds on
the coast may be of local mater-
ials. If some vessels indeed were
transported to the coast, were they
most common at Indian Field and
Pineland where canals apparently
led from the interior? And was the
pottery dispersed widely -- for
example, was it transported by
canoe northward across Charlotte
Harbor to the Cape Haze area (see
Figure 10) and on to the mouth of
the Myakka River?
Belle Glade Plain pottery should
be investigated for possible evi-
dence of interregional exchange.
Its use may give important clues to
the function of canals. The pot-
tery could prove useful also in
tracing exchange within the
Caloosahatchee region.

Other Considerations

Spatial Arrangements. Another
category of possible evidence bear-
ing on the function of canals is
the relative spatial placement of
apparently coeval sites. These pos-
sibly intentional placements are
along north-south and east-west
lines (see Figure 12). That is, a
north-south imaginary line can be
said to run through Josslyn Island
(8LL32, 8LL50), Pineland (8LL33),
and the Howard Shell Mound (8LL44).
An east-west imaginary line can be
said to run through state-owned
8LL86, Useppa Island (8LL51),

Figure 12. Possible North-South, East-West Site Alignments.

Pineland, along most of the Pine
Island Canal to Indian Field, and
along the west half of the Cape
Coral Canal.
The intersection at pineland of
these two imaginary lines suggests
a central importance for pineland.
Perhaps this reflects the role of
Pineland as a focus of activity
associated with the west end of the
canal and the numerous sites in the
Pine Island Sound area. Some grand
scheme of site alignments would be
consistent with centralized control
of this canal activity involving
the redistribution of items of
An evolution of this geographic
scheme can be suggested. Perhaps
Useppa Island was the central
starting point. Next, pineland was
begun just off of the shore of pine
Island at a point due east of
Useppa, the canal and Indian Field
then falling into place along this
axis. That the pine Island Canal

was not built across the narrowest
stretch of Pine Island suggests
another factor in determining its
placement, such as this east-west
axis. At right angles to this
axis, Josslyn Island was next con-
structed to the south in the tidal
shallows of Pine Island Sound, and
the Howard Shell Mound was con-
structed to the north on Bokeelia
Island. On discussing these align-
ments with civil engineer James A.
Marshall, he felt that in addition
to alignments, there may also be
standard units of distance involved
in some of these site placements
(Jim Marshall, pers. comm. March
North-south and east-west
alignments have been suggested
previously for platform mounds in
the Tampa Bay area (see Luer and
Almy 1981:141). The Tampa Bay
platform mound alignments may be
derived from sightings to the north
star (Luer and Almy 1981:144).

These alignments, however, are
intra-site rather than between
sites such as those described above
for the pine Island Sound area.
possible intra-site alignments
among some earthworks at pineland
are suggestive of alignments based
on sightings at the summer and
winter solstices as well as at the
spring and fall equinoxes (Luer
n.d.) For example, the orienta-
tion of the westernmost portion of
the pine Island Canal which ran
through Pineland was apparently
along a line of sight running from
the Randell Mound to the double-
crested Adams Mound (8LL38). This
line appears to have been oriented
toward sunrise at summer solstice.
Such possible alignments sug-
gest that the earthworks at Pine-
land might have served in part as a
giant calendar. Goggin and
Sturtevant (1964:208) note the
occurrence of "calendrical cere-
monies" among the Calusa. Such
ceremonies might have served to
regulate the timing of the hypo-
thesized assemblage, storage, and
redistribution of foodstuffs
involving canoes and canals (see
above). Obviously, the regular and
recurring timing of such activities
would have been critical in order
to maximize and make efficient the
collection of seasonally available
foodstuffs. Linking such activities
to ceremonies connected to
seasonal, celestial phenomena would
have insured that. Such ceremonies
need not have been associated with
agriculture as asserted by Dobyns
Timed ceremonies connected to
the obtainment and redistribution
of food could have served also to
reinforce and to legitimate the
political and hierarchical struc-
ture of the Calusa stratified
society. A Timucua chief, for
example, reportedly directed ritual
to a stuffed deer stag filled and
decorated with fruits and roots
which was placed on a pole facing

the sunrise "just before spring"
(the spring equinox?) to insure the
productivity of the land through
the coming year (see Le Moyne 1946:
105). The Timucua also reportedly
shared the contents of their store-
houses "according to ... rank; the
chief, however, has the first
choice and takes whatever he
pleases" (Le Moyne 1946:81).
The possible assemblage and re-
distribution of food at prescribed
times and through prescribed cere-
monies should be investigated.
Regulation by a chief would be
consistent with the ideology and
authority described by Marquardt
for the chief/paramount in the
Calusa social formation (1987:101;
1988:174). The hypothesized be-
havior (that is, chiefly regulated
assemblage and redistribution of
food from and to a large area) also
should be viewed in light of the
class and tributary relations
(ranking, ritual exchange, chiefs'
marriage alliances) described for
the Calusa (see Goggin and
Sturtevant 1964; Marquardt
Social Implications. That canoes
were an integral part of life in
southern Florida is indicated by
canals. An integral role for
canoes is consistent with the view
that southern Florida Indians
subsisted by fishing, hunting, and
gathering. Canoes and canals would
have afforded the mobility needed
to subsist on the watery environ-
ments of southern Florida.
Cushing (1897) perceived an in-
timate relationship between man and
canoe with profound implications
for aboriginal society:

Therefore ... there can be no
question that the executive, rather
than the social side of government
was developed among these ancient
key dwellers to an almost dispro-
portionate degree .... A curious
side of their life may be seen to
have almost unavoidably helped
toward such a development. ... The

one most important possession of
the key dwellers was the canoe.
This was essentially a man's
possession (italics original). ...
This property right of the men, in
canoes that were so directly
related to the public works which
fostered the executive function in
government ... helped ... toward
the establishment of king-like
chieftainships ... (Cushing

In light of this, canals as "public
works" take on added dimensions.
The grand scale of their develop-
ment could be viewed as paralleling
the development of the "king-like
chieftainship." These two much-
evolved phenomena are linked by a
common technological necessity:
the canoe. Indeed, their develop-
ment underscores an elemental facet
of culture in prehistoric southern
Florida: the integral role of the
canoe in everyday life.
This elemental relationship be-
tween Indian and canoe is critical
to understand the aboriginal world-
view. Such an understanding
approaches the individual human
being and possibly the collective
ideology. That is, this approach
may transcend various scientific
approaches and divulge cognition,
including symbolism and metaphor.
Similar ideas involving canoe
manufacture and shell tools have
been expressed by Carr and Reiger

Canals And Social Development

Southern Florida's lengthy abo-
riginal canals probably reflect
political integration. That is,
they apparently were constructed
only after there was an integration
of political authority among some,
but not all, of the societies in
southern Florida. This probably
happened after A.D. 1000, in Glades
III or Mississippian-influenced
times. This socio-political inte-
gration involved the societies of

the pine Island Sound, Ortona, and
Ten Thousand Islands areas.
Specifically, this might have
involved the polity centered at
Useppa/Pineland and the one cen-
tered at Ortona. Integration might
have been achieved through royal
marriage alliance rather than
through military conquest.
In this author's view, it is
this interregional political and
economic arrangement which marks
the culture of the Calusa. Archae-
ological remains of this particular
cultural manifestation can be
identified as Calusa. Other appro-
priate terms should be used for
prior cultural developments. For
example, this includes "late Weeden
Island" for the Cape Haze area, and
other terms for the Ten Thousand
Islands region (see Beriault et al.
n.d.). This is important for
clarity and for understanding each
cultural 'adaptation in its own
valid terms.
Immediately prior to the inter-
regional developments of the
Calusa, cultural adaptations were
more regional in character. That
is, southern Florida societies had
grown into complex but still
largely independent local and
regional polities. Such polities
would be compatible with Widmer's
model which proposes that chiefdoms
did not develop until after circa
A.D. 800 when critical carrying
capacity on a regional level was
reached (Widmer 1988:222-223).
In the case of Charlotte Harbor,
the society which preceded the pre-
historic Calusa's far-flung politi-
cal and economic arrangement was a
more local society integrated by
elaborate, late Weeden Island
burial ceremonialism (Luer and
Archibald 1988b). This was a
period when many sizeable political
and religious centers were spaced
fairly evenly along the coast from
Charlotte Harbor to Tampa Bay (see
Luer and Almy 1987:311, Fig. 6).
This pattern appears to reflect


locally autonomous polities with
shared participation in late Weeden
Island mortuary ceremonialism which
was widespread along the peninsular
Gulf coast.
These late Weeden Island soci-
eties seem to have had economies
oriented primarily toward inten-
sively exploiting local coastal
resources. The small sizes of
exploited mollusk shells (Luer et
al. 1986:120; Archibald and Deming
1988:14, 30) are evidence of inten-
sive exploitation and suggest that
these economies were approaching,
and perhaps reached, the critical
carrying capacity of the coastal
zone. That these economies
apparently included some horti-
culture is suggested by ceramic
effigies of bottle gourds from one
of the late Weeden Island period
centers at Charlotte Harbor
(MacKinnon and Luer 1987).
After late Weeden Island times,
the trend was toward fewer and
larger centers which apparently
integrated the former locally inde-
pendent polities. This integration
could have resulted in a geographic
polarization of political power on
the lower Gulf coast, with Tampa
Bay and pine Island Sound each
supporting a regionally dominating
political center. This polariza-
tion could have continued into
early contact period times and
could correspond to the Tocobaga
and Calusa polities of historic
Following political integration
around A.D. 1000, local subsistence
strategies appear to have become
more strongly influenced by inter-
regional exchange, probably con-
trolled by the dominant centers.
If critical carrying capacity on
the coast had been reached around
A.D. 800, interregional exchange
could be viewed as an adaptive
means to obtain or augment
This exchange already was be-
ginning in late Weeden Island or

Glades II times. The occurrence of
Belle Glade Plain pottery in late
Weeden Island contexts at the
palmer Burial Mound (8So2), at
8Ch16, and other Gulf coast burial
mounds (see Table 2, also Luer and
Almy 1982:Table 2) can be inter-
preted as evidence that ties were
developing between the peoples of
the Gulf coast and peoples of the
interior Lake Okeechobee area. The
continuance and strengthening of
these ties into subsequent times
attest to their need and to their
success. These complex patterns of
exchange apparently led to the
building of canals.

Future Research

The canals of southern Florida
need much more investigation.
Historically, they have been over-
looked and their importance in
understanding cultural adaptation
in southern Florida has not been
recognized. In fact, canals are an
important key to the investigation
of the Calusa, and should be incor-
porated into future research
designs. They offer a potentially
great return on costly research
time and effort.
Canals should be recognized as
valuable prehistoric resources
worthy of protection, preservation,
and study. Indeed, portions of them
represent archaeological "wet-
sites" possibly holding concentra-
tions of data not otherwise avail-
able. For example, spillage from
canoe traffic might have left
remains which accumulated nowhere
else. In addition, exceptional
preservation of paleobotanical and
other remains may be found. It is
urged that future research be
directed toward some of the sub-
tidal openings or terminations of
canals where items of interregional
exchange may still be preserved.
Finally, research on canals may
prove to be a race against time.
In the last several years, most of

the eastern portion of the Pine
Island Canal has been destroyed by
land development. Also, vandals
have ripped into sites associated
with the canal. Preservation and
vigorous study are sorely needed so
that the Pine Island Canal can be
understood and appreciated.


The Pine Island Canal was a
nine-meter wide (30 feet) four-
kilometer long (2.5 mile) aborigi-
nal canal which crossed Pine
Island. Both ends of the canal
were associated with aboriginal
sites: Pineland at the west end,
burial mounds at the east end, and
the shellworks of Indian Field
close by. The Pine Island Canal
and its associated sites pertain to
late prehistoric and early contact
period times.
Breakwaters and a dividing
channel, now filled, suggest that
Indian Field received canoe traffic
from the canal. Another possible
canal across Cape Coral might have
linked Indian Field and the Pine
Island Canal with the Caloosa-
hatchee River which in turn led to
the Lake Okeechobee region. Thus,
the pine Island Canal might have
helped to join the Pine Island
Sound area with the interior of
south Florida.
The Pine Island Canal, the
Ortona Canals, and the Naples Canal
were all lengthy canals apparently
dug to facilitate canoe travel.
These canals are suggested to have
served as conduits for interregion-
al exchange and tribute between the
Pine Island Sound, Lake Okeechobee,
and Ten Thousand Islands areas.
Future work should examine the
roles of canals in terms of varied
evidence for interregional exchange
and tribute. Evidence of exchange
includes marine shell artifacts,
paleobotanical remains, faunal
bone, and Belle Glade plain pottery

Canals and evidence of exchange
and tribute should provide some of
the critically needed archaeologi-
cal data to help understand, in
real terms, both the nature and the
evolutionary development of the
complex social formation described
for the Calusa by early historic
accounts. Canals may reflect a
circa-A.D. 1000 political integra-
tion among the polities of the Pine
Island Sound, Ortona, and Ten
Thousand Islands areas. Remains of
this cultural manifestation are
proposed by this paper to represent
the Calusa. Prior to the Calusa
social formation, or pre-A.D. 1000,
the aboriginal societies of
southern Florida also were undoubt-
edly complex, but they are sug-
gested to have been less integrated
and more regional and local in
character than were the Calusa.


This report would not have been
accomplished without the aid of
many persons. Special thanks are
due to Patricia and Donald H.
Randell of Pineland who helped to
facilitate most phases of the field
In addition, Roger Boyd of the
Alden Pines Country Club at
Pineland contributed the use of a
backhoe to dig across the Pine
Island Canal, Anita Jones of Punta
Gorda helped to obtain the canal
profile, Sophie and Alan Peterson
of Bokeelia gave permission to test
the canal, Don Cyzewski of Bokeelia
lent his canoe for the paddle out
to Indian Field, John Scheuren of
Indian Field allowed mapping of his
island, and Suzette Goodwin of the
Lee County Soil and Water
Conservation District helped with
1944 aerial photographs.
John W. Griffin generously
shared his 1940 field notes about
the Ortona Site. Larry R. Luckey of
Ortona kindly shared aerial photo-

graphs of the Ortona Canals.
Marion M. Almy, Robert J. Austin,
James J. Miller, and Jeffrey M.
Mitchem generously provided some
archaeological reports.
For giving valuable insights on
the prehistory of southern Florida,
I owe special gratitude to archaeo-
logists John G. Beriault of Naples
and Robert S. Carr of Miami, both
with the Archaeological and
Historical Conservancy, Inc.

References Cited

Allerton, David, George M. Luer, and Robert S.
1984 Ceremonial Tablets and Related Objects
from Florida. The Florida Anthropolo-
gist 37:5-54.

Andrews, Evangeline, and Charles Andrews, eds.
1981 Jonathan Dickinson's Journal; or God's
Protecting providence. Southeastern
Printing Company, Inc. Stuart, Florida.

Archibald, Lauren C., and Joan G. Deming
1988 A Phase I Archaeological Survey of Phil-
lippi Plantation Park, Sarasota County,
Florida. On file, Sarasota County Parks
and Recreation Department.

Austin, Robert J.
1987a An Archaeological Site Inventory and
Zone Management Plan for Lee County,
Florida. Piper Archaelogical Research,
St. Petersburg, Florida.

1987b Prehistoric and Early Historic Settle-
ment in the Kissimmee River valley: An
Archaeological Survey of the Avon Park
Air Force Range. The Florida Anthropol-
ogist 40:287-300.

Austin, Robert J., and Howard Hansen
1988 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of
the Walker Ranch DRI Development Site,
Polk and Osceola Counties, Florida.
Piper Archaeological Research, Inc. St.

Bennett, Bishop, and passalaqua, Inc.
ca. 1975 Aerial photographs of T44S, R22E,
S7/8/9 for Greater Pine Island Water
Association, Inc.

Beriault, John G.
1986 Report and Recommendations Concerning
the Barron Collier Company Tract on
Chokoloskee Island, -Collier County,
Florida. Report on file, Southwest
Florida Archaeological Society, Naples.

Beriault, John, Robert Carr, George Luer, and
Richard Johnson
n.d. Archeological Tests at Addison Key, Ten
Thousand Islands, 1981. MS in prepara-

Beriault, John G., and Charles E. Strader
1984 A Preliminary Report of a Stratigraphic
Excavation on Chokoloskee Island,

Florida. MS dated July 2, 1984; on file,
Southwest Florida Archaeological Society

Blohm, Elaine
1981 Indian Canal Studied. Pine Island Eagle,
July 1, page 16.

Browning, William D.
1975 Archaeological Investigation at the
Rocky Point 2 Site: 8Mt33. Miscellaneous
Project Report Series 21. Division of
Archives, History and Records Management

Bullen, Ripley P.
1952 Eleven Archaeological Sites in Hills-
borough County, Florida. Florida Geo-
logical Survey, Report of Investigations
No. 8. Tallahassee.

1971 The Sarasota County Mound, Englewood,
Florida. The Florida Anthropologist 24:

Bullen, Ripley p., and Adelaide K. Bullen
1956 Excavations on the Cape Haze Peninsula,
Florida. Contributions of the Florida
State Museum, Social Sciences, Number 1.

1976 The Palmer Site. Florida Anthropological
Society Publications, Number 8.

n.d. Accession cards for 8Ma31, Pillsbury
Burial Mound; on file, Florida Museum of
Natural History, Gainesville.

Carr, Robert S.
1988 An Archaeological Survey of the Ever-
glades Corporate Park property, Broward
County, Florida. Archaeological and
Historical Conservancy Report. Miami.

Carr, Robert S., and John G. Beriault
1984 Prehistoric Man in Southern Florida.
Environments of South Florida: Present
and Past II. P. J. Gleason (ed.). Pp. 1-
14. Miami Geological Society. Coral

Carr, Robert S.
1980 Strombus

,and John F. Reiger
Celt Caches in Southeast
The Florida Anthropologist 33:

Clay, M. H.
1873 Surveyor's Field Log for Township 44S
Range 24E. January 25.

Cushing, Frank H.
1897 A preliminary Report on the Exploration
of Ancient Key-Dweller Remains on the
Gulf Coast of Florida. Reprint from
proceedings of the American Philosophi-
cal Society 35 (153).

Davis, T. Frederick
1935 History of Juan Ponce de Leon's voyages
to Florida. The Florida Historical
Society Quarterly 14:1-70.

Dobyns, Henry F.
1983 Their Number Become Thinned, Native
American Population Dynamics in Eastern
North America. University of Tennessee
press, Knoxville.

Douglass, Andrew E.
1881-1885 Florida Diary and Letters. Typed
copy on file, P. K. Yonge Library of
Florida History. Gainesville.

1885 Ancient Canals on the South-West Coast
of Florida. American Antiquarian 7:277-

Ferguson, Vera Masius
1951 Chronology at South Indian Field,
Florida. Yale University Publications
in Anthropology, Number 45. New Haven.

Florida Department of Transportation
1983 Land Use and Vegetation Inventory, State
of Florida, Matlacha 504. In coopera-
tion with the Bureau of Marine Research,
DNR, Tallahassee.

1986a Aerial Photograph of T42S, R30E, S15/16/
21/22. Glades County, Florida.

1986b Aerial Photograph of T42S, R30E, S13/14/
23/24. Glades County, Florida.

Fontaneda, Hernando d'Escalante
1944 Memoir of DO. d'Escalante Fontaneda
respecting Florida, written in Spain
about the year 1575. Translated by
Buckingham Smith and edited by David 0.
True. Coral Gables.

Furey, John F.
1972 The Spanish River Complex. M.A. Thesis.
Florida Atlantic University. Boca Raton.

Gilliland, Marion S.
1975 The Material Culture of Key Marco,
Florida. University Presses of Florida,

Goggin, John M.
1949a The Archeology of the Glades Area,
Southern Florida. Unfinished MS on file
at the Yale Peabody Museum.

1949b Cultural Occupation at Goodland Point,
Florida. The Florida Anthropologist 2:

1951 Archeological Notes on Lower Fisheating
Creek. The Florida Anthropologist 4:50-

n.d. Unfinished and Untitled "Bead Manu-
script." Copy on file, Archaeological
Consultants, Inc. Sarasota.

Goggin, John M., and William C. Sturtevant
1964 The Calusa: A Stratified, Nonagricul-
tural Society (With Notes on Sibling
Marriage). In: Explorations in Cultural
Anthropology. Ward H. Goodenough (ed.).
Pp. 179-219. McGraw-Hill. New York.

Goodwin, Larry, Jolee Pearson and John Fiorini
1978 Salvage Excavations at the Brothers
Site, Sarasota County, Florida. The
Florida Anthropologist 31:117-127.

Griffin, John W.
1940 Field notes concerning the Ortona Mound
site, Glades County, Florida. On file
with John W. Griffin.

1974 Archaeology and Environment in South
Florida. In: Environments of South

Florida, Present and Past. p. J. Gleason
(ed.). Miami Geological Society, Memoir

1982 Aboriginal Ceramics from the Granada
Site. In: Excavations at the Granada
Site, by John W. Griffin et al. Florida
Division of Archives, History and
Records Management. Tallahassee.

1988 The Archeology of Everglades National
Park: A Synthesis. Southeast Archeolo-
gical Center, National park Service.

Griffin, John W., and Ripley P. Bullen
1950 The Safety Harbor Site, Pinellas County,
Florida. Florida Anthropological Society
Publications, No. 2.

Griffin, John W., James J. Miller, and Mildred
L. Fryman
1979 A Survey of the Archeology and History
of Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge,
Florida. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Hale, H. Stephen
1984 Prehistoric Environmental Exploitation
Around Lake Okeechobee. Southeastern
Archaeology 3:173-187.

Hrdlicka, Ales
1922 The Anthropology of Florida. Florida
State, Historical Society. Deland.
Reprinted by AMS Press, New York.

Jaffe, Howard
1976 Preliminary Report on a Midden Mound and
Burial Mound of the Boynton Mound
Complex (8PB56). The Florida Anthropolo-
gist 29:145-152.

Karklins, Karlis
1968 The Palm River Midden, Hillsborough
County, Florida. The Florida Anthropol-
ogist 21:67-73.

Katz, Betty
1986 Three Arrested for Desecrating Burial
Sites. Pine Island Eagle, May 21, p. 2.

Kenworthy, Charles J.
1883 Ancient Canals in Florida.
Institution Annual Report

Laxson, Dan D.
1968 The Dupont Plaza Site.
Anthropologist 21:55-60.

for 1881:631-

The Florida

Le Moyne, Jacques
1946 The narrative of Jacques Le Moyne de
Morgues. In: The New World, the First
pictures of America. Stefan Lorant (ed.)

Duell, Sloan and Pearce. New York.

Lee County Soil and Water Conservation
1944a Aerial Photographs of Pine Island, DCT-
2C-55 and DCT-2C-70. Dated February 1944

1944b Aerial Photographs of Cape Coral, DCT-
1C-71, DCT-2C-155, and DCT-3C-27. Dated
February and April 1944.

Lewis, Clifford M.
1978 The Calusa. In: Tacachale, Essays on the

Indians of Florida and Southeastern
Georgia during the Historic period. J.
Milanich and S. Proctor, eds. university
presses of Florida. Gainesville.

Luer, George M.
1977 Excavations at the Old Oak Site,
Sarasota, Florida. The Florida Anthro-
pologist 30:37-55.

1980 The Aqui Esta Site at Charlotte Harbor:
A Safety Harbor-Influenced prehistoric
Site. Paper presented to The Florida
Anthropological Society 32nd Annual
Meeting, Winter Park.

1982 Investigations in the Caloosahatchee
Region. Slide presentation given to The
Florida Anthropological Society 34th
Annual Meeting, Tampa.

1985 An Update on Some Ceremonial Tablets.
The Florida Anthropologist 38:273-274.

1986a The Acline Mound. In: Charlotte County,
Alligator Creek C.A.R.L. Acquisition
Project. Proposal submitted to C.A.R.L.
Committee, Dept. of Natural Resources,

1986b Some Interesting Archaeological Occur-
rences of Quahog Shells on the Gulf
Coast of Central and Southern Florida.
Florida Anthropological Society publica-
tions No. 12.

1986c Ceramic Faces and a pipe Fragment from
South Florida, with notes on the Pine-
land Site, Lee County. The Florida
Anthropologist 39:281-286.

1989 A Seminole Burial on Indian Field
(8LL39), Lee County, Southwestern
Florida. The Florida Anthropologist 42:
this issue.

n.d. The pineland Site on pine Island, Lee
County, Florida. Manuscript in prepara-

Luer, George, David Allerton, Dan Hazeltine,
Ron Hatfield, and Darden Hood
1986 Whelk Shell Tool Blanks from Big Mound
Key (8ChlO), Charlotte County, Florida:
with Notes on Certain Whelk Shell Tools.
Florida Anthropological Society Publica-
tion No. 12.

Luer, George M., and Marion M. Almy
1980 The Development of Some Aboriginal Pot-
tery of the Central Peninsular Gulf
Coast of Florida. The Florida Anthro-
pologist 33:207-225.

1981 Temple Mounds of the Tampa Bay Area. The
Florida Anthropologist 34:127-155.

1982 A Definition of the Manasota Culture.
The Florida Anthropologist 35:34-58.

1987 The Laurel Mound (8So98) and Radial
Burials with Comments on the Safety
Harbor Period. The Florida Anthropolo-
gist 40:301-320.

Luer, George M., Marion Almy, Dana Ste.
Claire, and Robert Austin
1987 The Myakkahatchee Site (8So397) A Large
Multi-Period Inland From The Shore Site
in Sarasota County, Florida. The Florida
Anthropologist 40:137-153.

Luer, George M., and Lauren C. Archibald
1988a An Assessment of Known Archaeological
Sites in Charlotte Harbor State Reserve.
Archaeological and Historical Conserv-
ancy, Inc. Report. On file, Florida
Dept. of Natural Resources, Tallahassee.

1988b Archaeological Data Recovery at ...
Charlotte Harbor State Reserve, Winter
Field Season 1988. Archaeological and
Historical Conservancy, Inc. Report.

MacKinnon, Yvonne, and George M. Luer
1987 A Survey of Recent Vandalism ...
Charlotte Harbor State Reserve. Archae-
ological and Historical Conservancy,
Inc., and Florida DNR.

Marquardt, William H.
1987 The Calusa Social Formation in Proto-
historic South Florida. In: Power
Relations and State Formation, edited by
T.C. Patterson and C.W. Gailey. American
Anthropological Association, Washington.

1988 Politics and Production Among the Calusa
of South Florida. In: Hunters and
Gatherers 1. History, Evolution and
Social Change. T. Ingold et al., eds.
St. Martin's Press. New York.

Merrill, William L.
1979 The Beloved Tree: Ilex vomitoria among
the Indians of the Southeast and
Adjacent Regions. In: Black Drink A
Native American Tea. Charles M. Hudson,
ed. University of Georgia Press. Athens.

Milanich, Jerald T.
1979 Origins and Prehistoric Distributions of
Black Drink and the Ceremonial Shell
Drinking Cup. In: Black Drink A Native
American Tea. Charles M. Hudson, ed.
University of Georgia Press. Athens.

Milanich, Jerald T., and Charles H. Fairbanks
1980 Florida Archaeology. Academic Press. New

Mitchem, Jeffrey M.
1989 Redefining Safety Harbor: Late
Prehistoric/Protohistoric Archaeology in
West Peninsular Florida. Ph.D. disser-
tation, University of Florida. Univer-
sity Microfilms. Ann Arbor.

Moore, Clarence B.
1900 Certain Antiquities of the Florida West
Coast. Journal of the Academy of Natural
Sciences of Philadelphia 11:350-394.

1905 Miscellaneous Investigations in Florida.
In: Certain Aboriginal Remains of the
Black Warrior River. Journal of the
Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadel-
phia 13.

Mowers, Bert
1975 Prehistoric Indian Pottery in South
Florida. Palm Beach Archeological
Society. Hollywood.

Porter, Rita K.
1951 An Analysis of Belle Glade plain Rim
Sherds from Two Fisheating Creek Sites.
The Florida Anthropologist 4:67-75.

Rader and Associates, Inc.
ca. 1955 Aerial photographs of T44S, R22E,

Rinella, Frank
1986 Mound diggers rebut claims. Fort Myers
News Press, May 30, 1B-2B.

Rouse, Irving
1951 A Survey of Indian River Archeology,
Florida. Yale University Publications
in Anthropology, Number 44. New Haven.

Scarry, John F.
1985 A Proposed Revision of the Fort Walton
Ceramic Typology: A Type-variety System.
The Florida Anthropologist 38:199-235.

Sears, William H.
1958 The Grant Site -- Br-56. The Florida
Anthropologist 11:114-124.

1967 Archaeological Survey in the Cape Coral
Area at the Mouth of the Caloosahatchee
River. The Florida Anthropologist 20:

1975 Comments made during Conference on South
Florida Archeology, Broward Community
College, Ft. Lauderdale. Organized by
Robert S. Carr. Tape on file, FDAHRM,

1982 Fort Center, An Archaeological Site in
the Lake Okeechobee Basin. The Univer-
sity Presses of Florida.

Simons, M. H.
1884 Shell Heaps of Charlotte Harbor,
Florida. Smithsonian Institution Annual
Report for 1882:794-796.

Small, John K.
1924 The Land Where Spring Meets Autumn.
Journal of the New York Botanical Garden

1929 From Eden to Sahara: Florida's Tragedy.
The Science press, Lancaster, Pennsyl-

Steinen, Karl T.
1982 Other Nonceramic Artifacts. In: Fort
Center, An Archaeological Site in the
Lake Okeechobee Basin by W. H. Sears.
The University Presses of Florida.

Surveyor General's Office
1872a Map of Township 43 South Range 24 East.
Dated July 20, M. S. Strunns, Surveyor
General. Tallahassee.

1872b Map of Township 44 South Range 23 East.
Dated July 20, M. S. Strunns, Surveyor
General. Tallahassee.

1873 Map of Township 44 South Range 24 East.
Dated September 30, S. W. Gilbert,
Surveyor General. Tallahassee.

Tebeau, Charlton W.
1968 Man in the Everglades. University of
Miami press. Coral Gables.

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)
1984 Soil Survey of Lee County, Florida. U.S.
Government Printing Office. Washington,

United States Geological Survey (U.S.G.S.)
1958a Bokeelia Quadrangle, Florida. 7.5 Minute
Series, Topographic. photorevised 1972.

1958b Matlacha Quadrangle, Florida. 7.5 Minute
Series, Topographic. photorevised 1972.

1958c Fort Myers NW Quadrangle, Florida. 7.5
Minute Series, Topographic.

Wainwright, R. D.
1918 Further Archaeological Exploration in
Southern Florida, Winter of 1917. The
Archaeological Bulletin 9:28-32. Hico,

Widmer, Randolph J.
1988 The Evolution of the Calusa, a Nonagri-
cultural Chiefdom on the Southwest
Florida Coast. The University of Alabama
press. Tuscaloosa.

Williams, J. Raymond
1975 A Report on the Excavation of Two Small
Mounds in Martin County, Florida. Mis-
cellaneous Project Report Series 29.
Division of Archives, History and
Records Management. Tallahassee.

Williams, Wilma B., and Bert Mowers
1977 Markham Park Mound No. 2, Broward
County, Florida. The Florida Anthropol-
ogist 30:56-78.

Zubillaga, Felix (ed.)
1946 Monumenta Antiguae Floridae (1566-1572).
Monumenta Historica Societatis Jesu, 69,
Monumenta Missionum Societatis Jesu,

George M. Luer
Archaeological and Historical
Conservancy, Inc.
c/o 3222 Old Oak Drive
Sarasota, FL 34239


George M. Luer

This paper reports hitherto un-
published and obscure accounts of a
probable Seminole burial on Indian
Field, an island in coastal Lee
County, southwestern Florida. The
accounts are significant because
artifactual evidence of Seminole
occupation on the southwestern
Florida coast is scarce and can
provide clues to the process of
Seminole adaptation to the southern
Florida environment.


The following information is
based on three documents. Two are
preserved at the P. K. Yonge
Library of Florida History in
Gainesville, Florida, and the third
consists of notes in the Florida
Museum of Natural History (FMNH)
site file, also in Gainesville.
These accounts pertain to Indian
Field, a privately-owned island
situated in Matlacha pass near the
northeastern shore of pine Island.
The location of Indian Field is
shown by Figures 1 and 2 in the
article "Calusa Canals in South-
western Florida: Routes of Tribute
and Exchange" (see this issue).
Figure 6 in that same article shows
the configuration of Indian Field.
presumably, the apparent Seminole
burial was uncovered on the high,
northern portion of Indian Field
where Figure 6 shows an existing


The available information indi-
cates that around 1950, the then-
owners of Indian Field, Herman and
Anna Pieplow, began building a
house on the island. After barging

out heavy machinery, the Pieplows
graded an area of the island's
highest shell elevation. This
grading uncovered an unmarked human
burial. In March 1952, archae-
ologist John M. Goggin and several
students traveled to Indian Field
Goggin (1952:30) as having been
associated with the burial on
Indian Field. According to Mitchem,
the site file notes indicate that:

... 19 of these were faceted blue
glass beads, typical of Seminole
sites. There were also 22 faceted
black glass beads, three faceted
"crystal" beads (it is unclear
whether these were Florida Cut
Crystal or faceted colorless
glass), two faceted yellow or light
brown glass beads, and 12 globular
colorless glass beads (Mitchem


This burial at Indian Field is
significant because of the scant
archaeological evidence of Semi-
noles in the Charlotte Harbor area,
and in southern Florida in general
(Kersey 1989:34). The available
evidence suggests that the burial
pertains to the period circa 1790 -
1840 which has been called the
"Resistance and Removal Phase" of
Seminole history (see Fairbanks
1978; also see Matthews 1983 and
Steele 1987). Besides the Indian
Field burial, artifactual evidence
of Seminoles in the Charlotte
Harbor area includes beads and
ceramics recovered in 1953 at a
now-impacted site (8LL84) of an
apparent fishing rancho on
Gasparilla Island (Florida Master
Site File; Goggin 1954; Bullen and
Bullen 1956:53), and a ceramic ves-


Vol. 42 No. 2

June, 1989


sel containing lead shot which was
capped by an inverted metal kettle
at the nearby Myakkahatchee Site
(8So397) (Luer, Almy, Ste. Claire,
and Austin 1987).
Artifactual evidence of Semi-
noles in the Charlotte Harbor area
needs to be viewed in conjunction
with historical evidence of Semi-
noles in the area. Future research
should address this need. For ex-
to investigate this burial which
included a skeleton as well as "...
a gun, beads, knife, mirror, gun
flints, etc." (Goggin 1952:29-30) .
This field party partially exca-
vated a "5 X 5" foot test unit "at
the highest point of the site."
Despite this work as well as using
a metal-detector, further evidence
of the burial was not found (Goggin
Goggin, however, submitted the
bones from the burial to archae-
ologist Ripley P. Bullen for analy-
sis. By December 1952, Bullen pro-
duced a single-page, typewritten
report which stated that the "bones
definitely represent an adult, male
Indian" who was about "5ft. 5in."
in height, who was "a slightly
built individual who led an
extremely active life physically,"
and who died at perhaps "an age of
55 or more" (Bullen 1952). Bullen
viewed the bones as those of a
"presumed Seminole" and wrote:

It is interesting to note that ...
both skull measurements and stature
do not agree at all with those
given by Krogman (FLORIDA ANTHRO-
POLOGIST, Vol. 1, Nos. 3/4) for
living Seminoles in Oklahoma even
with allowances for flesh. They do,
however, agree very closely with
those presented by Hrdlicka for
Seminole male skulls (Catalog of
Human Crania in U.S. National
Museum, Pro. of the U.S. Nat. Mus.,
Vol. 87, pp. 358-9) (Bullen 1952).
Recently, archaeologist Jeffrey
M. Mitchem (1989) documented a list
of beads from Indian Field. His

information is based on notes in
the site file at FMNH which de-
scribe 58 European beads in a pri-
vate collection. Based on their
description, it appears likely that
these are the beads mentioned by
ample, for the 1820s-1830s, there
is documentation relating to Cuban
fishing ranchos and to the hostil-
ities of the Second Seminole War
(for example, see Covington 1959;
Adams 1970; Hammond 1973; Gibson
1982:18-19, 21-22, 25-28). For the
1830s-1840s, government documents
refer to Seminoles at the mouth of
the Myakka River (Reid 1843-44;
Gibson 1982:26). Such research
could help understand the process
of Seminole adaptation to the south
Florida environment.
Importantly, future research
also should pay attention to other
ethnic groups which shared the
region such as Blacks (Kersey 1981)
and Cubans. Artifactual evidence
usually attributed to the latter
group includes olive jar sherds at
numerous locations (Bullen and
Bullen 1956; Luer and Archibald
1988). Much rarer and less-known
are apparent burial items such as
"figa" pendants (see Allerton et
al. 1984:MT#34). How Cubans,
Blacks, and Seminoles interacted in
nineteenth century southwestern
Florida needs much more research.
An olive jar sherd found by this
author in 1982 on the surface of
Indian Field suggests that the
island was used during times of the
fishing ranchos (see "Calusa Canals
in Southwestern Florida: Routes of
Tribute and Exchange," this issue).
However, the possibility exists
that the olive jar sherd could
pertain to a Seminole occupation or
to a mixed Seminole-Cuban occupa-
tion. Intriguingly, perhaps Indian
Field's turn-of-the-century name,
"Indian Old Field" (see Moore
1900:362), preserves the memory of
the island's use by Seminoles dur-
ing the 1800s.


The assistance of personnel at
the P. K. Yonge Library of Florida
History and of Jeffrey M. Mitchem
of the FMNH is gratefully acknowl-
edged. The author also wishes to
thank Dr. John Scheuren for giving
permission to visit Indian Field.

References Cited

Adams, George R.
1970 The Caloosahatchee Massacre: Its Sig-
nificance in The Second Seminole War.
The Florida Historical Quarterly 48:

Allerton, David, George M. Luer, and Robert
S. Carr
1984 Ceremonial Tablets and Related Objects
from Florida. The Florida Anthropolo-
gist 37:5-54.

Bullen, Ripley P.
1952 Notes on presumed Seminole skeleton
from L-39, Indian Old Field, Lee Co.,
Florida, submitted by Dr. John M.
Goggin. Unpublished report on file,
Goggin Collection, Box 3. P. K. Yonge
Library of Florida History.Gainesville.

Bullen, Ripley P., and Adelaide K. Bullen
1956 Excavations on the Cape Haze Peninsula,
Florida. Contributions of the Florida
State Museum, Social Sciences, Number 1

Covington, James W.
1959 Trade Relations Between Southwestern
Florida and Cuba, 1600-1840. The
Florida Historical Quarterly 38:114-128

Fairbanks, Charles H.
1978 The Ethno-Archeology of the Florida
Seminole. In: Tacachale, Essays on the
Indians of Florida and Southeastern
Georgia during the Historic Period. J.
Milanich and S. Proctor, eds. Univer-
sity Presses of Florida. Gainesville.

Florida Master Site File
1953 Archeologcal Site Survey, University of
Florida. Form for L 84. Recorded by

Gibson, Charles Dana
1982 Boca Grande, A Series of Historical
Essays. Great Outdoors Publishing

Goggin, John M.
1952 Trip to Indian Old Field (L39) (Feb.
29-Mar. 2). Field notes on file, Goggin
Collection, Box 9. P. K. Yonge Library
of Florida History, Gainesville.

1954 A Preliminary Statement on the Arche-
ology of the Cape Haze Area, South-
western Florida. Manuscript on file,
Florida Museum of Natural History.

Griffin, John W., and Ripley P. Bullen
1950 The Safety Harbor Site, Pinellas
County, Florida. Florida Anthropologi-
cal Society publications, No. 2.

Hammond, E. A.
1973 Spanish Fisheries of Charlotte Harbor.
The Florida Historical Quarterly 51:

Kersey, Harry A., Jr.
1981 The Seminole Negroes of Andros Island
Revisited: Some New Pieces to an Old
Puzzle. The Florida Anthropologist 34:

1989 Seminole Trading Sites in South
Florida: A New Ethno-Archaeological
Opportunity. The Florida Anthropolo-
gist 42:34-42.

Luer, George M.
1989 Calusa Canals in Southwestern Florida:
Routes of Tribute and Exchange. The
Florida Anthropologist 42:this issue.

Luer, George M., Marion Almy, Dana Ste.
Claire, and Robert Austin
1987 The Myakkahatchee Site (8So397), A
Large Multi-period Inland From The
Shore Site in Sarasota County, Florida.
The Florida Anthropologist 40: 137-153.

Luer, George M., and Lauren C. Archibald
1988 An Assessment of Known Archaeological
Sites in Charlotte Harbor State
Reserve. Archaeological and Historical
Conservancy, Inc. Report. On file,
Florida Dept. of Natural Resources,

Matthews, Janet S.
1983 Edge of Wilderness. A Settlement
History of Manatee River and Sarasota
Bay, 1528-1885. Caprine Press. Tulsa,

Mitchem, Jeffrey M.
1989 Redefining Safety Harbor: Late pre-
historic/protohistoric Archaeology in
West peninsular Florida. Ph.D. disser-
tation, University of Florida. Univer-
sity Microfilms. Ann Arbor.

Moore, Clarence B.
1900 Certain Antiquities of the Florida West
Coast. Journal of the Academy of
Natural Sciences of philadelphia 11:

Reid, Samuel
1843-44 Surveyor's field log for T40S, R21E.
On file, Bureau of State Lands, DNR.

Steele, Willard
1987 The Battle of Okeechobee. Archaeologi-
cal and Historical Conservancy, Inc.
Florida Heritage Press, Miami.

George M. Luer
Archaeological and Historical
Conservancy, Inc.
c/o 3222 Old Oak Drive
Sarasota, FL 34239

St. Augustine's Archaeological Preservation Ordinance

Bruce John piatek, Stanley C. Bond, Jr., and Christine L. Newman


St. Augustine is once again
under siege. This modern force
is following in the footsteps of
earlier invaders. Sir Francis
Drake, the British pirate, was
the first to attack and burn St.
Augustine in 1586. John Davis,
another Englishman, sacked the
city in 1668. These attacks and
the British founding of
Charleston in 1670 prompted the
construction of the Castillo de
San Marcos, a stone fort, begun
in 1672 and completed in 1695.
The English, lead by Governor
James Moore of Carolina, besieged
St. Augustine's Castillo in 1702.
Although the fort and its occu-
pants withstood the attack, the
town was left in ashes. To pro-
tect the city from future north-
ern attack, defensive walls of
earth and wood were erected after
Moore's raid.
St. Augustine's invaders have
sought to obtain and benefit from
its resources. The city has his-
torically strived to protect its
valuable resources for the bene-
fit of its citizens and those of
the state at large. The invaders
that currently besiege St. Augus-
tine, and all of Florida, are the
over 800 strong who move into the
state each day. The threat is no
less real today than it was in
1586 or 1702. The battle cry for
archaeologists is for the protec-
tion of archaeological sites in
the face of explosive develop-
ment. St. Augustine, the first
capitol of Florida, has mustered
its forces and taken steps to de-
fend and save its archaeological
resources from the siege of popu-
lation growth.

New and innovative protective
measures for archaeological sites
can be developed more rapidly and
more appropriately at the local,
rather than state, level. The
city has enacted an archaeologi-
cal preservation ordinance (City
of St. Augustine Archaeological
Preservation Ordinance, 86-42)
that protects archaeological
sites on both private and public
lands. This discussion of the
St. Augustine archaeological or-
dinance is provided in the hope
that it can serve as a model for
other city and county govern-
ments. The focus is on "How" St.
Augustine is battling to save ar-
chaeological data for the benefit
of its residents, scholars, and

How the Ordinance was Developed

Clearly, St. Augustine con-
tains significant archaeological
evidence. The importance of pre-
serving this data may seem obvi-
ous. Yet to some it is not. The
groundwork for archaeological
preservation grew out of the ef-
forts of archaeologists, such as
Jack Winter, Hale Smith, Charles
Fairbanks, John Goggin, John
Griffin, and Kathleen Deagan, who
have worked in St. Augustine.
Their research provided a growing
base of public awareness and ap-
preciation for archaeology and
archaeological resources. St.
Augustine's archaeological
preservation, as an organized and
comprehensive program, began in
Three organizations, the His-
toric St. Augustine Preservation
Board (Preservation Board), the
City of St. Augustine (City), and

June, 1989


Vol. 42 No. 2

the St. Augustine Archaeological
Association worked directly on
the adoption of the ordinance.
The efforts of these organiza-
tions, the public support, and
the work of a limited number of
individuals, resulted in this ar-
chaeological preservation suc-
The urgent need to enact an
ordinance was a direct result of
the salvage excavation of the
puente Site. This site is lo-
cated just off the southeast cor-
ner of St. Augustine's central
town plaza, making it highly vis-
ible. The site was being de-
stroyed as a result of construc-
tion for a commercial building
complex (which did not come under
any federal or state environmen-
tal review laws requiring consid-
eration of impacts to such re-
sources). Archaeologists working
for the Preservation Board,
Stanley Bond, Kate Hoffman, and
Valerie Bell, began an archaeo-
logical salvage excavation as a
last ditch effort to recover im-
portant data that otherwise would
be lost. These individuals were
aided by a large group of volun-
teers that responded to the need
for assistance. The volunteers
eventually organized and formed
the St. Augustine Archaeological
Association. Funds were provided
by many sources. The Preserva-
tion Board, the developer,
grants, and other fund raising
efforts paid the bills. This one
important site, and its attendant
publicity, generated sufficient
community awareness for the cre-
ation of an archaeological ordi-
The formation of a strong
volunteer organization, the St.
Augustine Archaeological Associa-
tion, was also instrumental in
the enactment of the ordinance.
This group provided a vocal and
voting constituency that at-
tracted the attention of elected

officials. They attended city
council meetings and thereby
demonstrated local support of the
The final ingredient was the
hard work and persistence of a
number of dedicated individuals.
Stanley Bond drafted the original
document. Influential volunteers
such as Robert Dow discussed the
merits of the ordinance with
elected officials. The City
Attorney and City Manager worked
closely with Mr. Bond on the pro-
duction of an acceptable final
ordinance. The final ordinance
is included as Appendix A of this
The experience in St. Augus-
tine demonstrates that the key to
implementing an archaeological
preservation ordinance is to: 1)
demonstrate the problem to the
public; 2) have grassroots sup-
port; 3) have a sponsoring orga-
nization such as a local museum
or community college; 4) have a
hard working and dedicated core
group of people willing to do the
detail work; and, 5) obtain ad-
vice and assistance of a profes-
sional archaeologist.

How the Ordinance Works

The City of St. Augustine es-
tablished a cooperative agreement
with the Historic St. Augustine
Preservation Board to provide the
archaeological services called
for in the ordinance. The ordi-
nance requires two positions: a
City Archaeologist and an Assis-
tant City Archaeologist. Al-
though salaries are paid by the
city, they are employees of the
Historic St. Augustine Preserva-
tion Board. These employees in
conjunction with city personnel,
other preservation Board staff,
and volunteers provide the needed
services for the archaeological
program. The volunteers, usually
members of the St. Augustine

Archaeological Association, are a
major factor in the effective and
cost efficient operation of the
program. Funding for the program
is split between the City and
Preservation Board. The City
pays the salaries and minor ex-
penses, while the preservation
Board provides the equipment, of-
fice space, transportation, cura-
tion space, supervision, curato-
rial services, and other staff
The Preservation Board's
funding for staff positions is
provided by the State of Florida.
Other operating funds are ob-
tained from the lease of commer-
cial buildings and the operation
of a living history museum.
preservation Boards are created
by the State Legislature. Local
communities do not need preserva-
tion boards to have an archaeo-
logical preservation program.
Other institutions can provide
assistance, such as community
colleges, museums, historical so-
cieties, local governments, or
other governmental agencies such
as taxing districts.
Ground disturbances are sub-
ject to an archaeological review
process whenever a right-of-way,
utility or building permit is re-
quired. Disturbances by City
construction projects are also
covered by the provisions of the
ordinance. The easiest manner in
which to explain the specific
workings of the ordinance is from
the property owner's point of
view. Assume that a property
owner wants to build an addition
onto his or her home. He or she
comes to the City Planning and
Building Office for a building
permit and the process begins.
Figure 1 provides a graphic rep-
resentation of the actions in-
The first step is to deter-
mine if the proposed construction
will break the disturbance

threshold. This determination is
made by the city building depart-
ment staff when application is
made for a building permit. The
threshold is either: 1) distur-
bance below two feet deep and
more than one cubic yard of soil;
or, 2) any disturbance using me-
chanical equipment. If this
threshold is broken, then the
city building department staff
determines if the construction
location is in an archaeological
Three archaeological zones
have been established. They are
based on the probability of en-
countering significant archaeo-
logical resources. These zones,
designated I, II and III, were
developed on the basis of histor-
Archaeological Preservation Ordinance
Historic St. Augustine Preservation Board
City of St. Augustine

to Sut of lorida
Cost of Excivation SeLs Don.ion isTTu
Value for Artifacts Deductible

Figure 1. Flow Chart of St. Augustine's
Archaeological Ordinance.


"i \\

Figure 2. Archaeological Zone Map for the City of St. Augustine.

ical documentation and past ar-
chaeological testing, specifi-
cally the auger surveys of St.
Augustine (Deagan and Bostwick
1975; Deagan et al. 1976;
Luccetti n.d.; Bostwick and Wise
1978; Herron 1980; Smith and Bond
1981; Deagan 1981). Figure 2 in-
dicates the distribution and cov-
erage of the archaeological zones
within the City of St.Augustine.
If the property is located within
one of these zones,then the prop-
erty owner or his agent must com-
plete an "Application for Archae-
ological Review".
The specific archaeological
zone determines the fee that is
assessed to the property owner.
If the property is in Zone I,
then the fee is one percent of
the total construction cost.
Zone II has a fee of one half of
a percent, and Zone III is set at
one quarter of a percent. This
fee is collected by the City and
is intended to defer the cost of
the archaeologists' salaries
which is borne by the City. The
fee is not intended to correlate
one to one with the project cost.
Therefore the program is not to-
tally self supporting and depends
on general revenue funds from the
City to supplement the fees.
This is appropriate given the
fact that archaeology benefits
all the citizens, not just those
who own the property.
Once the Application for Ar-
chaeological Review is completed,
the form is routed to the City
Archaeologist (a Historic St. Au-
gustine Preservation Board em-
ployee). Figure 3 is an actual
application for an addition to a
single family home. It illus-
trates the type of data required
of the property owner, city
staff, and archaeologist. The
City Archaeologist must research
the historic background data and
determine a plan of action within
a 48 hour period, or two work

days. The application form is
then returned to the City. It is
the archaeologist's responsibil-
ity to contact the owner, archi-
tect or contractor to determine a
starting date and to coordinate
the archaeological research.
If the property is a single
family home, then archaeological
testing and monitoring is al-
lowed. Construction work can be
stopped to allow the archaeolo-
gist to recover significant data
if it is encountered. If the
property is commercial or a de-
velopment, then testing, monitor-
ing and full scale excavation are
allowed. The City Archaeologist
must confine all archaeological
work to limits of the construc-
tion impact. This is a limita-
tion that greatly reduces the
ability of the archaeologist to
interpret large features and fre-
quently prohibits adequate inter-
pretation of the site. This is
an unfortunate but real aspect of
a salvage oriented program.
The ideal situation is to
conduct all archaeological field
research prior to the beginning
of construction. This requires
the contractors to apply for a
building permit earlier than they
normally would. This is in the
contractor's best interest since
it prevents untimely delay in a
construction work schedule. It
is always necessary, however, to
visit job sites and to stay in
communication with the construc-
tion supervisors as construction
proceeds since modifications to
construction plans are common.
The City Archaeologist is
also charged with enforcement of
the ordinance. A stop work order
(see Figure 6) can be issued for
any ground disturbing activity
within an archaeological zone
that has begun without archaeo-
logical review. Work can also
bestopped if significant re-
sources are discovered during

Business (if applicable)

Daytime Telephone 924-4500

Address 20 Orc-n ay Ave. City St. Aiugustine StateFl]rid. Zip 32084

2. NAME OF PROPERTY OWNER Arnold R. DELorenzo Daytime Telephone 824-4500
Business (if applicable)
Address 20 0cean Way Ave. City St. Augustine State Florida Zip 32084

Lot ,=TS A ,tac Tpgal Block __/-
Subdivision Carver Parcel Number /57 y'O -- ~


0 Dredging O Filling Cubic Yards
ONew Wddition ORenovation/Remodeling ODemolition
B sldential OC mmercial Square Feet Stories
OOther 6- & Or-

Application is hereby made for Archaeological Review consistent with t=Cy Code of St. Augustine. The
applicant agrees to pay all required fees, and that the review will beonduct after all applicable fees are
collected by the City. /
In filing this application, I understand that becomes pa o ial reco the City of St. Augustine and
hereby certify that all information con ed herein it est of owledge.

9. RELATEDPERMIT 'diilding OUtility ORight-of-Way

Valuation of construction
OZone I tee 1%
OZone It fee @ .5%
XZone III fee @ .25%



Building Official or Author Signatureate
Amount Collected S- Z Sf Receipt No. e/n 3a.. .. D/

Figure 3. Page One: Application for Archaeo-
logical Review. Used with Permission of
Property Owner. (Photoreduced)

Based upon my initial archaeological review the following is/are required:

0 Salvage

--&ZIA 7

ONo additional archaeological review

Arciae tgnature Date

Estimated Additional Deposit $

Archaeologist Signature Date

City Manager or Authorized Signature Date
Amount Collected $_ Receipt No. Date Paid
Archaeological Activity Costs (in excesa of original fee)l
Deposit Collected

ODue City
ODue Applicant

Amount Collected $ Receipt No. Date Paid
Amount Refunded $ Check No. Date Paid-

Figure 4. Page Two: Application for Archaeo-
logical Review.

S........................ ........... _______INSTALLATION

S-- -- 75 CORDOVA STREET, (904) 824-3355



-----" \- LOCATION:
S\- B.D.A.C.#: DATE: 19

ILI_ I lk i
z i/ \ i



Figure 5. Page Three: Application for Archaeo- Figure 6. Archaeological Stop Work Order
logical Review.


construction. The ordinance also
makes it a crime to use a metal
detector or dig for artifacts on
public land by any persons other
than City archaeologists or their
designated assistants.
Additional fees can be as-
sessed by the City Archaeologist
with the City Manager's approval.
These fees are for any project
that will require archaeological
services beyond those available
from the two City archaeologists.
For example, additional archaeol-
ogists would need to be hired if
the time schedule and volume of
work on a particular site re-
quires additional archaeological
Time extensions can also be
obtained with city approval.
These extensions are required in
the case of uncooperative con-
tractors, or situations in which
all the archaeological work must
be completed prior to any ground
Analysis, conservation, in-
terpretation, and production of a
final report are the next stages
of the process. The City Archae-
ologists can retain all artifacts
for a period of one year. All
documents and non-artifact data
are retained by the Historic St.
Augustine Preservation Board and
curated. Once the artifacts have
been analyzed, they are returned
to the property owner. However,
the Historic St. Augustine
preservation Board encourages
property owners to donate the ar-
tifacts to the preservation
Board. If the artifacts are do-
nated, then it is possible for
the owner to claim a tax deduc-
tion for a charitable donation.
The value of the donation is
based on the cost of recovering
the artifacts and no determina-
tion of value is made on individ-
ual artifacts or in regard to
market value.

How Is It Working?

The City of St. Augustine Ar-
chaeological Preservation Ordi-
nance has been in effect since
July 13, 1987. The program has
been highly successful in sal-
vaging significant archaeological
data prior to loss from construc-
tion. It has become burdened
with administrative activities
and paper work relevant to facil-
itating the archaeological work.
This condition should be expected
with any program which involves
governmental agencies and the
public. If possible, archaeolog-
ical programs should be merged
with existing programs which al-
ready have administrative, ac-
counting, and secretarial staff
capable of assisting in the con-
duct of routine administrative
The nearly two year experi-
ence has taught all of us in-
volved in the program many
lessons. First, the task of sal-
vaging data from a construction
project is never over until all
the construction is complete.
The City Archaeologist must al-
ways revisit and check on job
sites. Just when you think that
you have excavated all the util-
ity lines and foundation
trenches, you learn that the
landscape contractor is preparing
to put in palm trees. These
trees often go into a hole the
size of a two by two meter exca-
vation unit and are at least a
meter deep. Furthermore, a pen-
cil thin line on a blue print can
turn into a trench 1.5 meters
wide at the top and 0.5 meter
wide at the bottom due to the un-
stable sandy soils and the depth
of the trench. Blue prints are a
very loose guide to where utili-
ties will be placed. Contractors
place the utility trenches were
they must be put, either because


the sewer or water tap was not
where it was supposed to be, or
because sewage flows better down
hill than up hill.
It is hard to assess fully
the impact of a project on a par-
ticular piece of property in the
multicomponent archaeological
site that is represented by colo-
nial St. Augustine. We are for-
tunate to have valuable carto-
graphic and historic documenta-
tion of the archaeological con-
We have learned also that
monitoring (i.e., having an ob-
server present during the earth
moving phases of construction) is
an unsatisfactory technique in
the colonial city of St. Augus-
tine. An oversight strategy,
such as monitoring, may be effec-
tive where archaeological fea-
tures may or may not be expected
to occur, but it is not effective
where the entire colonial city
area of St. Augustine is known to
contain evidence of an intensive
occupational history. The ar-
chaeological deposits are too
complex for monitoring to be ef-
fective, since many features are
often only apparent after damage
is in progress. Thus, the moni-
toring archaeologist is often
faced with recording what has
been destroyed. Coordination
with construction workers is also
a monitoring problem, as work is
all too often not ready to pro-
ceed as planned when the monitor
is present, and cannot wait to
occur when the monitor is not
present. Finally, it is diffi-
cult to halt construction when
potentially significant features
are observed during monitoring.
Shovel and post hole testing
is also a non-productive mitiga-
tion option in the colonial city.
Post holes and shovel tests along
a future foundation line often do
not reveal significant features
with the result that work may be

authorized to proceed only to
have the archaeologist watch the
backhoe dig through the privies,
wells, and other features that
testing did not reveal.
As with monitoring, such ex-
periences can be frustrating to
archaeologists and concerned cit-
izens. One useful mitigation
method is to excavate archaeolog-
ically the foundation trench or
other disturbance prior to con-
struction. This method provides
for truly useful data recovery
from areas that eventually will
be disturbed during construction.
This is the procedure used in St.
Augustine's colonial city area.
It has been our experience
that construction workers, con-
struction supervisors, and gen-
eral contractors are supportive
and interested in archaeology.
They will, in most cases, work
with the archaeologist if they
are approached correctly. Many
contractors have gone beyond co-
operation and have been helpful
and highly interested in what is
found. Cooperation from contrac-
tors seems to be the result of
fitting archaeology into a system
that they understand and work
with on a daily basis. St. Au-
gustine's archaeological ordi-
nance is imbedded into the build-
ing review and permitting pro-
cess. It is simply a new step
along a familiar trail. Contrac-
tors seem to relate to the city
archaeologist as just one more
subcontractor on the job. The
potential for conflict with con-
tractors appeared great in the
beginning of the program, but has
not proved to be the norm.
One problem facing the pro-
gram is too much fieldwork and
not enough laboratory time. The
program is understaffed given the
archaeological intensity of St.
Augustine. Volunteers provide
very useful labor, but analysis
is conducted by Historic St.


Augustine Preservation staff
only. Furthermore, it has proven
difficult to convince City per-
sonnel that the field work is
only one-third of the labor re-
quired to complete a project.
The experience with other excava-
tions (i.e., sewer and water
pipes) lead them to believe that
once the hole is filled the job
is done.
The archaeological ordinance
program is growing and experienc-
ing some pain related to that
growth. Certainly the battle to
save St. Augustine's archaeologi-
cal record is worthwhile.

St. Austine's Ordinance as a

The ordinance is worthwhile
indeed. The volume of data and
number of artifacts thus far re-
covered from good closed contexts
is staggering. It emphasizes the
need for preservation since all
the data gathered since the pro-
gram's initiation would have been
lost if the ordinance had not
been in effect. The archaeologi-
cal work done for the construc-
tion of an office building, for
example, led to the location and
documentation of a section of the
1719 Rosario defensive wall built
to protect the western perimeter
of St. Augustine. Other cities
and counties must enact similar
archaeological preservation ordi-
nances in order to save what re-
mains of their archaeological
A common argument against en-
actment in other cities of simi-
lar archaeological ordinances is
that St. Augustine has the re-
sources worth saving and other
cities do not. This is certainly
not the case. The archaeological
record is the only available in-
formation of prehistoric inhabi-
tants of our state. Furthermore,
it contributes substantially to
our understanding of a commu-

nity's early historic develop-
ment, and that of the state. The
archaeological resources of each
city and county are an important,
tangible link to the understand-
ing of the State's past.
Archaeology helps citizens
develop a sense of place and
pride in their local community.
Archaeological and historical
preservation are important assets
to the local tourist economy.
Archaeology and archaeological
sites attract visitors and those
visitors pump millions of dollars
into local economies (Florida
Department of State et al. 1988).
Archaeological sites can be im-
portant economic resources if
they are preserved and inter-
preted to the public.
The City of St. Augustine
Archaeological Preservation Ordi-
nance has its strong and weak
points.. It does, however, demon-
strate that cities and counties
can require private property own-
ers to allow archaeological re-
search to be conducted on their
property. The St. Augustine pro-
gram has generated only one ob-
jection from a property owner
during its nearly two years of
operation. That complaint has
had no serious impact on the pro-
gram. Most property owners have
proven to be interested in what
is found and what it means in the
context of the City's prehistoric
and historic past.
The critical point is that
professional and avocational ar-
chaeologists and concerned citi-
zens alike need to combine forces
and work for the preservation of
our archaeological resources be-
fore the battle is lost forever.
Each city and county needs to ad-
dress the issues of an archaeo-
logical ordinance, funding,
zones, fees, etc., in their own
creative way. The St. Augustine
ordinance can serve as a model an
indication of what can be done.

St. Augustine Under Siege
Appendix A. Existing Ordinance.



BE IT ENACTED by the people of the City of St.
Augustine, Florida as follows:

Section 1. This Ordinance shall be known and cited as

the City of St. Augustine Archaeological Preservation Ordinance.

This Ordinance supersedes any and all existing prior archaeological

ordinances of the incorporated area of St. Augustine, Florida.

Section 2. Findings. It is the finding of the City

Commission of the City of St. Augustine, Florida that St.

Augustine, as the oldest permanent European settlement within the

United States of America, contains many areas of historical and

archaeological importance to the United States and to the citizens

of St. Augustine, from all periods of its history, including

pre-Columbian Indian villages, the original Spanish settlements on

the mainland and Anastasia Island portion of the City, British

settlements, as well as fortifications and other settlements and

developments from the Second Spanish period, the American

Territorial period and the pre-Civil war period. Further, in the

preservation and understanding of the historical importance of St.

Augustine there is a direct relationship to the economic well-being

of the City of St. Augustine and the present and future needs,

public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the citizens of

the incorporated area of St. Augustine, Florida, as well as

visitors and residents to St. Augustine.

Section 3. Definitions. For the purpose of this

Ordinance, certain words and terms used herein shall be interpreted

to have the meanings as defined below. Where words or terms are not

defined, they shall have their ordinarily accepted meaning or such

as the context may imply. Words used in the present tense include

the future; the singular number includes the plural and the plural

includes the singular. The word "shall" is mandatory and the word

"may" is permissive. The word "used" or "occupied" includes the

words "intended, designed or arranged to be used or occupied." The

word "land" includes the word "marsh", "water" or "swamp". The word

"map" shall mean the archaeological base map of the City of St.

Augustine, Florida, and the word "city" shall mean the City of St.

Augustine, Florida.

(a) Archaeological Site As used herein the term

"archaeological site" is defined to mean a location which has

yielded or may yield information on history or pre-history.

Archaeological sites may be found within archaeological zones,

historic sites, historic districts and other areas of the City.

Archaeological sites are evidenced by the presence of artifacts and

features below the ground surface indicating the past use of a

location by people.

(b) Archaeological Zone As used herein the term

"archaeological zone" is defined to mean a geographical area which

has or may reasonably be expected to yield information on local

history or pre-history based upon broad prehistoric or historic

settlement patterns.

(c) Artifact As used herein the term "artifact"

means objects which are a product of human modification or objects

which have been transported to a site by people. In St. Augustine

artifacts over 50 years old are protected by this ordinance.

(d) City Archaeologist As used herein the term "City

Archaeologist" shall mean the individual in charge of assessing the

archaeological resources of St. Augustine and directing or

coordinating, monitoring, testing and salvage excavations of these

resources. The individual may either be a City employe-employed by

the City Manager of the City of St. Augustine, or may be an

individual or corporation employed on a contract basis to perform

the duties of the City Archaeologist.

(e) Cultural or Historic Resource As used herein the

term "cultural resource" or"historic resource" is defined to mean

any prehistoric or historic district, site, building, object, or

other real or personal property of historical, architectural or

archaeological value. The properties may include, but are not

limited to, monuments, memorials, Indian habitations, ceremonial

sites, abandoned settlements, sunken or abandoned ships, engineering

works, treasure troves, artifacts, or other objects with intrinsic

historical or archaeological value, or any part thereof relating to

the history, government, and culture of the City, the State of

Florida, or the United States of America.

"disturbance" shall be defined to mean the digging, excavating, or

other such activities,

Disturbance Major. The term "major disturbance"

shall be defined to mean digging, excavating, or other such

activities at a) locations 24 inches or more below the adjacent

surrounding ground surface, b) all disturbance caused by digging or

compaction machinery, c) any disturbance occurring within a

previously documented archaeological site, and d) any disturbance

not defined under "minor disturbance."

Disturbance Minor. The term "minor disturbance"

shall be defined to mean digging, excavating, or other such

activities at locations 12 to 24 inches below the adjacent

surrounding surface where only hand tools, such as shovels and post

hole diggers, are used, and less than 1 cubic yard of soil is


(g) Monitoring As used herein the word "monitoring"

is defined to mean observation of construction disturbances to

determine if archaeological resources exist in an area, or when such

resources are known to exist, the observation, recording and

incidental recovery of site features and materials to preserve a

record of the affected portion of the site. Monitoring occurs in

locales in which sites or features may occur but are not expected to

be of such importance, size or complexity as to require lengthy work

stoppage to permit appropriate archaeological salvage excavation.

When necessary, however, archaeological salvage excavation may take
place during a monitoring operation.

(h) Project Cost As used herein the term "project

As used herein the term

(f) Disturbance

cost" is defined as either the estimated costs of construction,

improvements or other related expenses, that are provided by the

applicant and used as the basis for calculation of prescribed

building permit fees, or the estimated costs of construction,

improvements or other related expenses, that are provided by the

applicant relative to a utility or right-of-way permit.

(i) Salvage Archaeology As used herein the term

"salvage archaeology" is defined to mean the archaeological

excavation of a site prior to its destruction by construction,

erosion, vandalism, or any other form of site disturbance.

Archaeological salvage excavations will be concentrated only within

the areas to be disturbed, in order to save site data which would be

lost due to the disturbance, and the extent of the excavations may

vary, depending on the significance of the site, time constraints,

and the degree of evidence of archaeological resources, at the

direction of the City Archaeologist.

(j) Testing As used herein the word "testing" is

defined to mean subsurface excavation or remote sensing techniques,

to determine the type and extent of the archaeological site.

Testing may include augering and establishing archaeological

excavation units and requires the screening of excavated material

for artifact recovery. When necessary, archaeological salvage

excavations may take place following, or in conjunction with, the

testing procedures.

Section 4. Archaeological Zones. In order to

regulate and restrict subsurface disturbance as hereinafter provided

in this Ordinance, and to determine the extent of archaeological

investigation and excavations that may be required in a given area,

the incorporated area of St. Augustine, Florida, is hereby divided

into zones as shown on the archaeological base map entitled

"Archaeological Base Map For St. Augustine, Florida," and said map

is hereby declared to be a part of this chapter. Zones as

delineated on the base map are as follows with titles and

abbreviations as indicated:

(a) Archaeological Zone No. I relates to areas

containing the most significant archaeological sites in St.

Augustine and includes the following subzones: Archaeological zone

I-A consists of an area containing historic resources from the 17th

to the 20th centuries, including the Cubo Line west to Ponce de Leon

Boulevard, and limited prehistoric resources. Archaeological Zone

I-B consists of an area containing historic resources from the 16th

through the 20th centuries, specifically including the earliest

areas of the downtown portion of the City. Archaeological Zone I-C

consists of an area containing historic resources from the 17th to

the 20th Centuries; Archaeological Zone I-D consists of an area

containing the original settlement of St. Augustine in 1565 and

important Indian mission settlements and prehistoric sites.

Archaeological Zone I-E consists of an area containing the site of

Ft. Mose.

(b) Archaeological Zone No. II relates to areas

containing important known archaeological sites and includes the

following subzones: Archaeological Zone II-A consists of an area

containing portions of Hospital Creek, numerous prehistoric and

historic Indian sites, farmsteads, plantations and possible military

sites. Archaeological Zone II-B consists of an area containing the

Lincolnville Dump area on the edge of Maria Sanchez Lake;

Archaeological Zone II-C consists of an area containing the

Pocotalaca Indian Mission; Archaeological zone II-D consists of an

area containing the Palica Indian Mission; Archaeological Zone II-E

consists of an area containing the Tolomato Mission; Archaeological

Zone II-F consists of an area containing the Tolomato Cemetery;

Archaeological Zone II-G consists of an area containing the Ft.

Mose Line and other fortifications and the Fairbanks Plantation

site; and Archaeological Zone II-H consists of an area containing

Old Quarry Road.

(c) Archaeological Zone No III relates to areas having

a high potential for historic/prehistoric archaeological sites and

contains the following subzones: Archaeological Zone III-A consists

of an area containing the Lincolnville portion of the City;

Archaeological Zone III-B consists of an area containing portions of

Anastasia Island; Archaeological Zone III-C consists of an area

containing Oyster Creek; and Archaeological Zone III-D consists of

an area containing portions of the eastern edge of the San Sebastian

River, west of the FEC Railroad, north of SR 16.

Section 5. Interpretation of Zone Boundaries. Where

uncertainty exists as to the boundaries of zones as shown on the

archaeological base map for St. Augustine, Florida, the following

rules shall apply:

(a) Boundaries indicated as approximating center lines

of streets, highways or alleys shall be construed to follow such


(b) Boundaries indicated as approximately following

platted lot lines shall be construed to follow such lot lines;

(c) Boundaries indicated as approximately following

City limits shall be construed to follow such City limits;

(d) Boundaries indicated as following railway lines

shall be construed to be midway between the main tracks;

(e) Boundaries indicated as following shorelines shall

be construed to follow such shorelines. In the event of a change in

shorelines, the boundaries shall be construed to move with the

change except where such moving would change the archaeological

status of a lot or parcel; in such case the boundary shall be

interpreted in such a manner as to avoid changing the archaeological

status of such lot or parcel.

(f) Boundaries indicated as parallel to or extensions

of beaches indicated in subsections (a) through (e) above shall be

so construed. The distance not specifically indicated on the

archaeological base map shall be determined by the scale of the map.

(g) Where physical or cultural features existing on
the ground are not in agreement with those shown on the

archaeological base map or in other circumstances not covered by

subsections (a) through (f) above, the City Archaeologist shall

interpret the zoning boundaries.

Section 6. Zone Regulations. Within Archaeological

Zones I, II, or III, the conduct of any ground disturbances or

activities taking place at more than one foot below the present

surface of the ground shall be in compliance with the following


(a) All major disturbances requiring a City building

permit, a City utility permit or a City right-of-way permit, which

involves activities more than 12 inches below the ground surface,

shall, before such disturbances take place, report the intent to do

so to the City Archaeologist on an application form (Archaeological

Permit Application) to be prescribed by the City Manager. This

application shall then be made a part of the City's prescribed

permitting process. Only those disturbances that require a City

building, utility or right of way permit will be governed by this

ordinance. Furthermore, this Ordinance will apply only to those

areas within the boundaries of the proposed disturbances. Any

additional archaeological testing excavation by the City

Archaeologist, within areas outside the proposed disturbances, may

be conducted only with written permission of the property owner.

(b) Within Archaeological Zones I, II, and III,

excavations or disturbances in single-family residential properties

shall be subject only to testing and monitoring by the City


(c) Within Archaeological Zone I, disturbances in

non-single-family residential properties shall be subject to

intensive archaeological salvage excavations, to be conducted prior

to any underground disturbance, building construction, or utility

excavation, by the City Archaeologist. The extent of the

archaeological salvage excavations by the City Archaeologist will be

dependent on the extent of the proposed area of construction

disturbance and the significance of the archaeological resource.

(d) Within Archaeological Zone II, all areas to be

disturbed shall be subject to testing prior to any construction to

determine the impact of the proposed disturbance. If testing

reveals that significant archaeological resources may exist and that

excavations may be conducted as deemed necessary by the City


(e) Within Archaeological Zone III, monitoring may be

conducted during construction to determine the presence of

archaeological sites and, if archaeological sites are determined to

be present then either testing or archaeological excavations may be

conducted as deemed necessary by the City Archaeologist based on

evaluation of site significance.

(f) Within Archaeological Zone I, the City

Archaeologist will be authorized to delay the proposed construction

work, or major disturbance, for an initial 4 week period. If more

time is required, the City Archaeologist may request from the City

Manager up to 4 additional 2 week periods, to be reviewed and

granted individually. The applicant shall be provided copies of

these requests when they are submitted to the City Manager. These

additional delay period reviews shall include the applicant, at the

applicant's request.

request that the City

provided that written

After 12 weeks the City Archaeologist may

Manager grant additional 2 week periods,

permission is granted by the property owner.

(g) In Archaeological Zone II the City Archaeologist

will be authorized to delay any proposed construction work, or major

disturbances, for an initial 4 week period. If more time is

required, the City Archaeologist may request from the City Manager

an additional 2 week period. The applicant shall be provided copies

of these requests when they are submitted to the City Manager. This

additional delay period review shall include the applicant, at the

applicant's request. After 6 weeks, the City Archaeologist may

request that the City Manager grant additional 2 week periods,

provided that written permission is granted by the property owner.

Manager grant additional 2 week periods, provided that written

permission is granted by the property owner.

Section 7. Excavations on Public Property. No

individual shall be allowed to use a probe, metal detector, or any

other device to search for artifacts on public property, nor can any

individual remove artifacts from public property without the written

permission of the City Archaeologist. Furthermore, no disturbances

or construction activities shall be authorized within properties

belonging to the City of St. Augustine, including public street

rights-of-way, without a City right-of-way permit and without

monitoring and such additional archaeological testing or salvage

excavation as may be determined by the City Archaeologist. The City

Archaeologist will be authorized to define the extent of the

archaeological work and to delay the proposed construction work, or

major disturbance, for an initial 2 week period, with the approval

of the City Manager. The City Archaeologist may request that the

City Manager grant additional 2 week periods, as required. These

additional delay period reviews shall include the applicant at the

applicant's request.

Section 8. Fees. There shall be added to the fees

collected for each applicable building and utility permit issued

within Archaeological Zone I a minimum fee of one percent (1%) of

the estimated project cost for which the permit is issued. In

addition, there shall be added to the fees assessed for each

applicable building and utility permit issued within Archaeological

Zone II the minimum fee of one/half of one percent (1/2 of 1%) of

the project cost for which the permit is issued. In the event that

archaeological testing, archaeological salvage excavation, or

archaeological monitoring is required to be performed by the City

Archaeologist, and total costs related thereto are in excess of the

other fees prescribed herein, the City Archaeologist shall, in

conjunction with the City Manager, determine the estimated costs of

such additional efforts and shall require the applicant to deposit

with the City a sum equal to the additional costs. Any sums not

used in the conduct of such testing, excavating or monitoring

efforts, or the analysis, conservation, cataloging, storage and

reports, shall be returned to the applicant at the time of final

disposition of the work by the City Archaeologist.

Section 9. Ownership of Artifacts. All artifacts

recovered or discovered during the course of any archaeological

testing, excavation or monitoring, as provided herein, shall belong

to the owner of the property upon which such artifacts are found.

Artifacts uncovered or discovered during testing, excavation, or

monitoring of property belonging to the City of St. Augustine shall

belong to the City of St. Augustine. The City Archaeologist shall

be allowed to request to retain possession of artifacts from private

property for a period up to two years to assure their proper

cataloging, recording, analysis, and conservation. All artifacts

are to be returned to the property owner as soon as such cataloging,

recording, analysis, and conservation is recorded. Individuals are

strongly urged to donate artifacts from archaeological excavations

to the proper agency.

The removal of human skeletal remains recovered in

archaeological context in all instances shall be coordinated with

the local medical examiner and the City Archaeologist. These

remains are not subject to private ownership. Such material shall

be sensitively treated, and following their analysis by a physical

anthropologist, shall be curated at a designated repository or

appropriately reburied. If at all possible, human burials should

not be removed but left undisturbed in their original position.

Section 10. Curation of Artifacts. Provided that

written permission is granted by the property owner, all artifacts

from archaeological salvage excavations and monitoring operations

will be washed, catalogued, analyzed, conserved, and stored in

compliance with current curation standards. At present the Historic

St. Augustine Preservation Board is the major repository for

archaeologically excavated artifacts in St. Augustine. To maintain

consistency in curation procedures and to keep materials from St.

Augustine in a central location, the Preservation Board is the best

candidate for receiving materials from the City Archaeologist.

Section 11. City Archaeologist. The City Manager

shall appoint a City Archaeologist who shall meet the City's

requirements and the standards for membership by the Society of

Professional Archaeologists and shall have a demonstrated background

in historic and prehistoric archaeology. The City Archaeologist

shall review all applicable building, utility and right-of-way

permit applications in Archaeological Zones I, II, and III; shall

conduct such testing, excavations, or monitoring as shall be

required by this Ordinance; shall prepare or oversee preparation of

a final report on all projects, which report shall meet the

guidelines established for archaeological reports by the Department

of State, Division of Historical Resources and Recors Management;

shall record archaeological sites and develop strategies for

preservation of the archaeological resources of St. Augustine; and

shall work with property owners, the planning stage of applicable

projects, to minimize the potential impact on archaeological sites

by any activities proposed for such sites; and shall advise the City

Manager concerning archaeological issues.

Section 12. Grievance Procedure. An appeal of any

portion of this ordinance may first be brought before the City

Manager and then before the City Commission of the City of St.


Section 13. Commencement of Archaeological Work. The

work period shall be considered to begin forty-eight hours after

payment of fees and issuance of the permit, or after the resolution

of any appeal, whichever is greater.

Section 14. Any violation of this Ordinance shall be

punished as provided in Section 1-8 of the Code of the City of St.

Augustine, Florida.

Section 15. If any section, subsection, or portion of

this Ordinance shall be declared unconstitutional, the remaining

portions shall remain in full force and effect.

Section 16. This Ordinance shall take effect ten (10)

days after its passage as provided by law.

PASSED this 10tLk day of D eczmieg A.D., 1986.

Mayor-Commissi er


City Clerk





Section 1. That Section 8 of Ordinance 86-42 of the City

of St. Augustine, Florida be in the same is hereby amended to

read as follows:

"Section 8. Fees. There shall be added to
the fees collected for each applicable
building and utility permit issued within
Archaeological Zone I a minimum fee of one
percent (1%) of the estimated project cost
for which the permit is issued. In
addition, there shall be added to the fees
assessed for each applicable building and
utility permit issued within Archaeological
Zone II the minimum fee of one/half of one
percent (1/2 of 1%) of the project cost for
which the permit is issued. In addition,
there shall be added to the fees assessed
for each applicable building and utility
permit issued within Archaeological Zone
III the minimum fee of one/quarter of one
percent (1/4 of 1%) of the project cost for
which the permit is issued. In the event
that archaeological testing, archaeological
salvage excavation, or archaeological
monitoring is required to be performed by
the City Archaeologist, and total costs
related thereto are in excess of the other

fees prescribed herein, the City
Archaeologist shall, in conjunction with
the City Manager, determine the estimated
costs of such additional efforts and shall
require the applicant to deposit with the
City a sum equal to the additional costs.
Any sums not used in the conduct of such
testing, excavating or monitoring efforts,
or the analysis, conservation, cataloging,
storage and reports, shall be returned to
the applicant at the time of final
disposition of the work by the City

Section 2. This Ordinance shall take effect in ten days.

PASSED this /O day of .T,4 2 A. D. 1987.



City Clerk


This paper has benefited from
the comments and review of Louis
D. Tesar and John W. Griffin. The
Historic St. Augustine Preserva-
tion Board, a state agency, has
made this paper possible by its
support of archaeology and ar-
chaeological preservation in St.

References Cited

Bostwick, John and Darryl Wise
1987 A Sub-surface Survey of the City of St.
Augustine: Historic Precincts North of
the Plaza. Ms. on file Historic St.
Augustine preservation Board.

Deagan, Kathleen and John Bostwick
1975 Auger Survey of the Moosa Gardens Tract.
Ms. on file Historic St. Augustine
Preservation Board.

Deagan, Kathleen, John Bostwick, and Dale
1976 A Sub)surface Survey of St. Augustine
City Environs. Ms. on file Historic St.
Augustine Preservation Board.

Deagan, Kathleen
1981 Downtown .Survey: The Discovery of the
16th Century St. Augustine in an Urban
Area. American Antiquity 46:626-633.
Florida Department of State, Florida Department
of Natural Resources, Florida Department
of Commerce and the National Trust for
Historic Preservation.
1988 Florida Tourism and Historic Sites.
Tallahassee, Florida.

Herron, Mary
1980 A Sub-Surface Survey of the City of St.
Augustine: Precincts Lying Outside the
Limits of the Colonial Walled Town. Ms.
on file Historic St. Augustine Preservation

Luccetti, Nicholas
n.d. Archaeological Survey of the Nombre de Dios
Mission and the Fountain of Youth Park, St.
Augustine. Ms. on file.

Smith, James M. and Stanley Bond
1981 Phase III Archaeological Survey of St.
Augustine, Florida. Ms. on file Historic
St. Augustine Preservation Board.

Bruce John Piatek
Stanley C. Bond, Jr.
Christine L. Newman
Historic St. Augustine
preservation Board
P.O. Box 1987
St. Augustine, Florida 32085



While the St. Augustine Under
Siege article by Piatek, Bond and
Newman can serve as a model for
establishing a local archaeological
ordinance, once accomplished you
cannot sit back and rest on your
laurels. The occupants of elected
and appointed government offices
change. Such change brings with it
different perspectives, perspec-
tives which may vary slightly -- or
markedly -- from that of the
original program's architects. St.
Augustine's program is faced with
such change, change which could
severely limit the program's effec-
tiveness by erecting a number of
procedural and financial barriers.
The current St. Augustine
Archaeological Ordinance has been
proposed for replacement with a
revised document to be known as
Ordinance No. 89-38.

proposed Ordinance No. 89-38

A copy of this proposed replace-
ment ordinance was compared with
the language in the current docu-
ment. The revised document contains
clarifying language which improves
the original by using consistent
terminology, and in Section 6(g)
adds language to deal with Archae-
ological Zone III, which was inad-
vertently omitted from the original
document. unfortunately, it also
contains provisions which severely
limit the scope of the ordinance.
In the definitions, as a subset
of disturbance:

The term "unrelated disturbance"
shall be defined to mean any dig-
ging, excavating, or other such
activities that occur at locations
from the ground surface to a
maximum of 12 inches below the
adjacent surrounding surface.

A similar exclusionary clause for
the upper 12 inches of soil is
included in the subdefinitions for
major and minor disturbance. The
practical effect of this exclusion
would be to exempt from the provi-
sions of the ordinance, for in-
stance, the scraping of the upper
12 inches of an entire City lot
(many cubic yards) in preparation
for parking lot construction. In
Archaeological Zone I, where signi-
ficant archaeological remains are
found in the upper 12 inches of
soil, as well as in deeper fea-
tures, this would result in the un-
recorded and unsalvaged loss of
major elements of St. Augustine's
archaeological heritage.
In Section 6. Zone Regulations,
in the first sentence, while the
revised language is generally an
improvement, the word "Archaeolo-
gist" is omitted following the word
"City" in the project review deci-
sion making process. As there are
typographical errors in the reword-
ed section, one can hope that the
omission is accidental, and not an
intentional exclusion of the City
Archaeologist from archaeological
resource decisions.
Again in Section 6, a qualifier
has been added to the third sen-
tence: "unrelated disturbances will
not be governed by this Ordinance."
As noted above, this would exclude
all ground disturbing activities in
the upper 12 inches of soil, and
result in a major loss of signifi-
cant archaeological resources.
Furthermore, in the fourth sentence
of that section, it is stated that
"any archaeology efforts shall be
conducted so as not to cause addi-
tional expense or any unnecessary
damage or other construction diffi-
culty to the property owner."
While I do not know what is meant
by "unnecessary damage," the pro-
hibition against causing any "con-

June, 1989


Vol. 42 No. 2

struction difficulty to the pro-
perty owner" may have the practical
effect of constraining to an un-
knowable extent much archaeological
work which might otherwise be con-
ducted under this ordinance.
Finally, in Section 6, it is
stated that the extent of salvage
archaeology will be dependent on
"... the availability of fees, as
hereinafter provided, for the
archaeology efforts." Thus, no
matter how significant the archaeo-
logical site under excavation, when
the funds generated by archaeologi-
cal fees are exhausted, the work
will apparently come to a halt. No
other funding sources or circum-
stances are considered.
Section 7, Excavations on Public
Property, addresses the require-
ments of project applicants for
proposed work on City-owned lands.
However, it is unclear as to the
application of its provisions to
City agencies, such as road con-
struction and utilities agencies.
It should be made clear that the
ordinance applies equally to public
and private agencies. Assuming that
the City will not charge itself for
construction work performed by its
agencies, will City agency fees for
archaeological work be based on the
same percent of project cost for-
mula used for private project ap-
plicants? This should also be made
clear in the ordinance.
In Section 11, the permissive
"may," rather than mandatory
"shall," language with respect to
the recording of archaeological
sites by the City Archaeologist is
of concern. It is hoped that
provision will be corrected in the
final draft. Likewise, it is im-
portant that adequate funding be
budgeted to permit the analysis and
reporting of project findings.
Artifacts in bags have little value
without analysis, and the longer
analysis and reporting is postponed
the greater the likelihood that
site data will be lost. The value
to the public of archaeological
studies lies in the proper recovery
and field recording of materials

and features from archaeological
contexts, the analysis of such
data, and its reporting in a format
available to the public. In addi-
tion, such reports are the founda-
tion for the public interpretation
of recovered artifacts.


The work performed under the
auspices of St. Augustine's Archae-
ological Ordinance benefits all of
St. Augustihe's residents, and by
extension its visitors. While much
of the proposed revised language is
reasonable, many of its provisions
would weaken that which the current
ordinance provides. It is hoped
that St. Augustine's residents will
rise to the threat to the protec-
tive measures which were enacted to
protect that City's archaeological
To expand upon a statement made
by Vivian Young of the Historic
Tallahassee Preservation Board,
prehistoric and historic archaeo-
logical sites, historic buildings
and their environments are a three
dimensional educational learning
experience, providing an insight
into the life and times of the
individuals who shaped a community.
At the same time, they provide us
with points of reference, land-
marks, and a better understanding
of how the present has been shaped
by the past and how our actions
will shape the future.
The siege of St. Augustine's
archaeological heritage now appears
to be both from within and without.
In view of the importance of those
resources, and the broad public
support for the current ordinance,
it is hoped that the problem areas
in the proposed ordinance, as
identified above, will be amended
or deleted, as appropriate. It is
hoped that the residents of St.
Augustine will contact their City
Commissioners to express their
concerns for the preservation of
the City's archaeological ordinance
and the resources which it serves
to protect.


Arthur R. Lee

publication of the special issue
of The Florida Anthropologist on
"Shells and Archaeology in Southern
Florida" (1986) drew attention to
the importance of detailed analysis
of shell tools. This article
describes two instruments devised
to aid in the analysis of those
fashioned from whelk.
Southwest Florida Indians, whose
closest source of tool-quality
stone was in the Tampa bay area,
relied heavily on shell in the
manufacture of implements for work-
ing with wood and other materials.
The left-handed whelk was com-
monly used for this purpose. It was
most often prepared by pecking a
combination of holes and/or notches
so that a handle could be fitted
snugly between them and the central
columella, and by fashioning a
cutting edge, frequently with a
counter-bevel at the modified tip
of the shell. Placement of these
holes and notches is accorded
considerable importance by Luer
There are constraints imposed by
the nature of the shell. These
include (1) the need to chip back
the shell lip to arrive at a por-
tion of the outer whorl strong
enough to support the finished
tool's handle and (2) the need to
break back the whorl tip to an area
thick enough to sustain a cutting
edge. Nonetheless, some variation
is possible.
It is evident that a tool haft-
ed so that the blade is more or
less parallel to the handle would
be more readily used in chopping or
side-cutting, while one hafted so
the handle is perpendicular to the
blade would lend itself to use as
an adze. Similarly, in the verti-
cal plane, if the handle is at less

than right angles to the blade, the
tool would be more conveniently
used as an adze, than if the
blade/hafting angle approached 90
degrees (a right angle) Hammers
would be most efficient if the
handle and striking platform were
at approximately right angles.
The author devised two instru-
ments as a help in making measure-
ments to determine whether, in
fact, these refinements were made
and, if so, their extent.
One is a protractor with a move-
able index arm mounted on a verti-
cal member which permits measuring
the difference between the hafting
line and the blade line in the
horizontal plane (Figure 1). The
upper table with the protractor is
adjustable to accommodate shells of
various sizes. With the shell
spire-side down position, a rod is
run through the hafting holes (or
hole-and-notch combination). With
the hafting line used as the zero
line, the angle between it and the
line of the cutting edge can be
measures with the protractor on the
upper platform. The index arm then
can be rotated to coincide with the
line of the blade, measuring the
angle between the cutting edge and
the handle (Figure 2).
The instrument also can be used
in measuring the angle between the
end of the suture and the hafting
hole, as described by Luer. Simi-
larly, it has been found useful in
measuring meat-extraction holes in
The second instrument is the
zoologist's classic bone box, modi-
fied so that the moveable member is
equipped with a protractor arc and
mounted so that it can be rotated
(Figures 3-4) In this modified
bone box, the shell's center line


Vol. 42 No. 2

June, 1989


Figure 1. Photograph of the device
used to measure the difference be-
tween the hafting and blade line in
the horizontal plane on whelk shell

Figure 3. photograph of a modified
bone box demonstrating how the
angle between the center line and
hafting line can be read from the
riff ihe nrotractor.


Figure 2. Illustration of shell
tool horizontal angles showing the
relationship between the cutting
edge and hafting planes, as well as
the suture point.

Figure 4. photograph of a modified
bone box demonstrating how the
angle of the cutting edge can be
read off the protractor.



^ ''.

Figure 5. Illustration showing the
relationship between the hafting
line and the cutting edge line of a
shell tool in the vertical plane.

is placed coincident with the
center line of the box and the
slide is rotated to parallel the
rod run between the hafting hole
and notch. Thus, in the vertical
plane, the angle between the center
line and the hafting line can be
read from the protractor arc
attached to the side (Figure 3).
Furthermore, with the shell placed
so that its center line and that of
the box coincide, the angle of the
cutting edge (the blade angle) can
be read off the protractor (Figure
4). Combined with the measurement
taken from the hafting line, the
reading yields the angle between
the hafting and cutting planes
(Figure 5). These provide a clue
as to the tool's use, since an
angle smaller than 90 degrees would
make the tool more useful in
chipping, as opposed to chopping.


On the first instrument, the
table on which the protractor is
mounted slides on a vertical member
made of round plastic stock. Ex-
perience has shown that it would be

more convenient if the vertical
member were made of material square
in cross-section to avid a tenden-
cy to swing from side to side.
Both instruments have been used
in ongoing University of Florida
archaeological research in the
Charlotte Harbor area of Southwest

Reference Cited

Luer, George M.
1986 Whelk Shell Tool Blanks from
Big Mound Key (8Chl0), Char-
lotte County, Florida; With
Notes on Certain Whelk Shell
Tools. The Florida Anthro-
pologist 39:92-124.

Arthur R. Lee
1250 Nineth Avenue, North
Naples, Florida 33940


Yulee W. Lazarus


Most museums have in their
collections, or have been asked
to identify, a few items not re-
lated to the theme of their col-
lections. Among the records and
reports amassed by William C.
Lazarus, founder of the Temple
Mound Museum in Fort Walton
Beach, Florida, are four eso-
teric items presented in this
report. Lazarus was a scientist
at Eglin Air Force Base by pro-
fession and a Florida State
University Research Associate
with the Department of Anthro-
pology by avocation and inter-
est. He referred to these un-
usual items as "Fort Walton
Wonders." Dr. Charles Fairbanks
and Dr. Hale G. Smith at the
university were always gracious
in helping identify such unusual
artifacts. They all agreed that
the presence of these oddities
in the Panhandle might be ex-
plained as military souvenirs,
either lost or discarded.
Reported here are a
Melanesian carved wood figurine,
an Ethiopian spear, an Egyptian
funerary figurine, and a Chinese
coin. It is thought that these
objects and the circumstances of
their recovery might be of in-
terest to readers of The Florida

Melanesian Figurine

A black carved wood figurine
(Figure 1) was found in one of
the streams of the
Choctawhatchee River. The fish-
erman, Fred Yokum, who found it
was stationed at Eglin Air Force
Base in the 1950s. Before leav-
ing the area, he gave the item

to a fellow officer, Frank
Santmyer, who later moved to
Hattiesburg, Mississippi.
Santmyer heard about
Lazarus' interest in artifacts
and contacted him in 1955 for
aid in identifying the figurine.
Lazarus went to Hattiesburg and
brought the figurine to Florida
State University for study. It
was classified as of Melanesian
Island origin. Once an exten-
sion of the Australian conti-
nent, the group of islands known
as Melanesia are reported to be
thick, steamy jungles with high
mountains capped in snow year
round. New Guinea (Figure 2) is
the largest and there are many
adjacent small islands used ex-
tensively by military forces
during World War II.
The figurine reported in
this study probably was used as
a housepost totem or as a cere-
monial ancestor cult figure.
The carving was in excellent
condition. It was in the shape
of a human with a turban-like
headdress, short legs bent at
the knees, and inscribed with
decorative lines. The predomi-
nant feature is a lizard-like
animal hanging down the front of
the figurine, as though clamped
together mouth to mouth. The
figurine is approximately 30cm
in length. Sources on Melanesia
and its art include Linton
(1957), Benton (1972, 1976),
Inder (1987) and Lommel (1968).
A carved figurine, such as
the one in this study, could
have been attached to wall or
entrance supports or on indoor
poles as totems. Santmyer had
remarked to Lazarus in 1955
that, if he decided to part with
the souvenir, he would give it

June, 1989


Vol. 42 No. 2

r -

Figure 1.

Melanesian figurine.

Figure 2. Islands of Melanesia,
South Pacific.

Figure 3. Photograph and sketch
of Ethiopian Spear.

Figure 4. Location of Ethiopia.



to the University of Missis-
sippi. However, it is not known
whether this transaction oc-

Ethiopian Spear

One would not expect to find
a shiny metal spear in a shallow
creek on the southern shore of
Choctawhatchee Bay during heavy
rain in the middle of the night.
In the late 1950s this item cut
the foot of a Boy Scout as the
troop campout moved to higher
ground. The Boy Scout leader
kept the spear (Figure 3).
On various outings, the Boy
Scouts had found sherds of the
Fort Walton culture in the mid-
den commonly known as Four Mile
Point (Lazarus 1986). They also
visited four other Indian mid-
dens (8WL37-40; Fairbanks 1958)
located along the bay shore,
west of the small creek in which
the spear was reportedly found.
This item certainly was not left
by the local Indians of years
The blade was elaborately
engraved and had an embellished
haft shaft, and a total length
of about 50cm. The spear was
identified as of Ethiopean ori-
gin. A photo was made for fu-
ture reference. In October
1975, a visitor to the Temple
Mound Museum saw this photograph
and further identified the
spear's origin as southern
Ethiopia. Today the midden
sites visited by the Boy Scouts
have eroded into the bay and the
exact provenience of the spear
may never be known.
Ethipoia, which was formerly
called Abyssinia (Pankhurst
1987) is located south of Egypt
(Figure 4). As with other items
in this report, the assumption
must be that some military per-
sonnel were stationed in
Ethiopia and acquired souvenirs.

If the spear came to this area
as a personal curio, it was ei-
ther lost or discarded, only to
be found later by the Boy Scout
during his outing. The item
left the area with the troop
leader, and its present location
is unknown.

Egyptian Figurine

An elementary school student
found a ceramic figurine (Figure
5) on the Indian Temple Mound in
downtown Fort Walton Beach,
Florida. He gave the figurine
to his teacher, Lib Lacey, who
brought it to the attention of
the Temple Mound Museum staff.
Consultation with Florida State
University anthropologists in-
cluded a inquiry to Egyptolo-
gists at the University of
The figurine is 15cm in
length. The break at the base
exposes the inner composition
and suggests that the potter may
have shaped the figure with a
kneading motion for compaction.
The type of writing on the dress
panel was developed at the time
of the first pharaoh, about 3000
B.C. (Woldering 1963). Clay
models of persons were made by
hand to accompany the deceased
into afterlife (Fairservis
The figurine reported in
this article, however, is proba-
bly one of the tourist items
made as typical of Egyptian mu-
seum exhibits. One might ask,
was this figurine tossed onto
the Indian Temple Mound to tease
or to confuse the finder? The
answer will never be known.

Chinese Coin

The site recorded in the
Florida Master Site File as
8WL33 is a large "pot-busting"
cemetery area on the south side

Figure 5. Sketch and photograph
of Egyptian figurine.

Figure 6. Location of Egypt at
the southeastern corner
of the Mediteranean Sea

of Choctawhatchee Bay east of
Destin in Walton County,
Florida. It was extensively dug
by many people and has produced
a large assortment of Fort
Walton culture ceramic bowls and
plates. It also produced the
coin which is reported herein.
The coin, owned by Peggy
Young, is 1.8cm in diameter and
so corroded as to render the die
cast design barely visible.
Rick Bailey made an enlarged
sketch (Figure 7) of the coin,
and that sketch made identifica-
tion possible. It is a half
cent of brass or bronze. It has
a spade on one side and sun on
the other (Reinfeld and Hobson
1979:89). It was minted in 1936
during the period of the
Republic of China (1911-1949)
(Hobson and Obojski 1970).
How a Chinese coin came to
be found at site 8WL33 is a mat-
ter of conjecture. It does,
however, add to the foreign
items found in the panhandle.


These four items are among
the few intriguing foreign arti-
facts recorded or housed in the
collections of the Fort Walton
Temple Mound Museum. They
demonstrate the wide range of
countries where souvenirs have
been acquired. They also prove
that interests can be transi-
tory, while the artifact itself
can retain significance. Final-
ly, they demonstrate that the
finding of exotic artifacts may
not be used without caution as
evidence of contact between Old
and New World cultures. There
may be a more mundane explana-

Figure 7. Chinese half cent.


References Cited

Benton, Helen H.
1972 Primitive Art. Encyclopedia
Britanica 13.

1976 Pacific Islands. Encyclopedia
Britanica 18.

Fairbanks, Charles H.
1958 Florida Archaeological Survey site
form. Temple Mound Museum files,
Fort Walton Beach, Florida.

Fairservis, Walter A.
1963 Egypt, Gift of the Nile. MacMillan
Co., N.Y.

Hobson, Burton and Robert Obojski
1970 Illustrated Encyclopedia of World
Coins. Doubleday & Co., Garden
City, N.Y.

Inder, Stuart
1987 pacific Islands. World Book
Encyclopedia 15.

Lazarus, Yulee W.
1986 Field notes addendum for sites.
Temple Mound Museum files, Fort
Walton Beach, Florida.

Linton, Ralph
1957 The Tree of Culture. Alfred Knopf,

Lommel, Andrew
1968 prehistoric and primitive Man
Landmarks of the World. McGraw-Hill
Book Co., N.Y.

Pankhurst, Richard
1987 Ethiopia. World Book Encyclopedia

Reinfeld, Fred and Burton Hobson
1979 Catalogue of the World's Most
Popular Coins. Sterling Publ. Co.,

Woldering, Imgrad
1963 The Art of Egypt. Graystone Press,

Yulee W. Lazarus
1001 Marwalt #111
Ft. Walton Beach, FL 32548


Wet Site Archaeology, 1988, edited by
Barbara A. Purdy, The Telford Press,
338 pages, numerous figures and b&w
photographs and separate bibliographies
for each of the volume's 20 articles,
ISBN 0-936923-08-3--paperback and ISBN

The preface reveals that this
book is an outgrowth of an Interna-
tional Conference on Wet Site Archaeol-
ogy held in 1986 in Gainesville,
Florida. Archaeological wet sites are
defined as occurring in "permanently
saturated deposits that entomb and pre-
serve organic objects that seldom sur-
vive elsewhere. This distinguishes wet
sites from shipwrecks and from inun-
dated terrestrial sites where degrada-
tion preceded submergence."
Wet sites have a number of char-
acteristics which sometimes can be used
to distinguish them from other kinds of
archaeological sites: (1) They are
"entombed" in organic deposits. (2)
They are usually discovered acciden-
tally during development projects that
often result in their destruction. (3)
Archaeologists must devise innovative
methods for locating and excavating wet
sites. (4) Organic remains from wet
sites are very fragile and need immedi-
ate conservation measures to prevent
these materials from deteriorating. (5)
Wet sites afford archaeologists new op-
portunities to learn about past envi-
ronments, subsistence activities, tech-
nologies, artistic expressions, skele-
tal structures and pathologies, and (6)
Adequate funding must be made for pro-
cessing, identifying, preserving and
analyzing the unique biological and
cultural remains from wet sites. Gov-
ernments, developers and archaeologists
should develop procedures for excavat-
ing or protecting wet sites that are
being threatened by development.

A critique of each article follows:

A Wetland Perspective by John M. Cbles
In this article Coles says that
90% of archaeologists' time is spent on

surveying and excavating dry land
sites. He believes that wet sites can
be found by field reconnaissance using
techniques such as field walking
(whatever that may be), aerial surveys,
remote sensing and subsurface coring.
Wet sites can be used to reconstruct
environments and provide economic in-
formation about associated cultural re-
mains. In short, "wet sites allow us to
put a shape on the dry and bare bones
of past lives, to answer parts of these
questions, and to pose new questions."
Ordinarily perishable remains such as
wood, plants, skin, textiles, basketry,
invertebrates and other elements are
often preserved in wet sites. Coles
does not feel, however, that all wet
sites should be excavated. Only those
sites that are in excellent condition,
and that are threatened by imminent de-
velopment or exploitation, justify ma-
jor archaeological efforts.
The last point should be taken
into serious consideration by profes-
sional archaeologists who sometimes ex-
cavate sites on state and federal prop-
erties where there is little or no im-
pending threat to the resource.

Problems and 1Rsponsibilities in the
Excavation of Wet Sites by Richard D.
Daugherty bases his comments on
the Ozette Village site (45CA24) lo-
cated in the Cape Flattery area in the
state of Washington. The site was being
destroyed by abnormal winter storms in
the Pacific Northwest. Excavations, us-
ing a special hydraulic procedure fol-
lowed by stabilizing recovered wooden
artifacts with polyethylene glycol and
H 0, were conducted at the site. His
findings revealed that the aboriginal
inhabitants (dating from 2010+190 B.P.
to the Historic period) relied on a
subsistence economy that focused on ex-
ploiting maritime resources. The exca-
vations uncovered eight house struc-
tures and more that 50,000 artifacts.
Cultural remains included woven materi-
als, weaving equipment and various
hunting and fishing implements.


Vol. 42 No. 2

June, 1989

The author of this article makes
a number of important observations
about wet sites in general: (1) Excava-
tions are more costly. (2) They also
require more time to excavate. (3) Ad-
ditional specialists such as paleo-
botanists, conservators and palynolo-
gists usually are needed in order to
extract the maximum amount of informa-
tion from these sites. (4) Up-front de-
cisions must be made on how funds will
be allocated. (5) Measures have to be
taken to provide for ongoing curation
and preservation of excavated materi-
als. (6) The worldwide decline of water
tables is causing the rapid destruction
of many wet sites.

Recent Archaeological Discoveries in
Lake Neuchatel, Switzerland: From the
Paleolithic to the Middle Ages by
Michel D. Bgloff
This article discusses sites from
various time periods found in and
around Lake Neuchatel, Switzerland. The
author used aerial imagery, side scan-
ning sonar and proton magnetometer sur-
veys to locate sites and to define
their limits. Coffer dams and well
points were used to expose some of the
archaeological sites that were located
or relocated by the surveys. Over the
last three decades, one 16th century
shipwreck--containing ceramics, bronze
caldrons and iron bars--was found. Ad-
ditionally, archaeologists have located
three Gallo-Roman vessels, 20 villages,
ranging in age from Neolithic to Late
Bronze Age and an Upper Magdalenian and
Azilian site (Late Paleolithic), once
inhabited by horse and reindeer

The Peat Hag by John M. Coles
The article opens with the state-
ment, "A Peat Hag is an old pit cut in
boggy ground and that sums up the state
of wetland archaeology in Ireland to-
day--bogged down and derelict." About
16% of Ireland is made up of bogs. Ap-
proximately 60% of the artifacts from
various Neolithic, Bronze and Iron Age
sites now in the National Museum of

Ireland have come from peat that was
removed from the bogs to provide mate-
rials for fuel. Hand removal of peat
has uncovered stone and metal objects,
and evidence of bog roads and ancient
settlement patterns in Ireland.
Unfortunately, this article of-
fers no viable solutions to the prob-
lems of wet site archaeology in the
peatlands of Ireland.

The Location and Assessment of Underwa-
ter Archaeological Sites by Reynold J.
Ruppe begins by mentioning five
types of wet sites: drowned terrestrial
sites, shipwrecks, sites inundated by
dam impoundments, deliberate or acci-
dental incorporation of cultural mate-
rials into water saturated deposits and
dry sites that become waterlogged due
to a rise in water table. He notes,
however, that "some wet sites have lost
much of their organic material due to
alternating wet and dry conditions
and/or soil chemistry."
He goes on to state that archae-
ologists should begin developing pre-
dictive models based on archaeology,
geomorphology, taphonomy and cultural
ecology. In particular, Ruppe focuses
on changes in sea level, coastal geo-
morphology and coastal settlement pat-
terns. He notes that Florida is a good
location for conducting such studies
because of its relative geological sta-
bility and low energy coastline (other
than during tropical storms such as
hurricanes and winter storms associated
with frontal activity). Techniques such
as magnetometer surveys can be used to
locate shipwrecks and other historic
sites, while side scan sonar and sub-
bottom profilers can be used to detect
former estuaries, lagoons, barrier is-
lands and drowned river systems. Areas
that have potential sites will need to
be tested by coring. Lastly, catalogs
of site signatures must be developed
and should be especially useful for
those individuals concerned with cul-
tural resource management.

New Applications of Iemote Sensing:
Geophysical Prospection for Underwater
Archaeological Sites in Switzerland by
E. Gary Stickel and Ervan G. Garrison
Upper Paleolithic, Mesolithic,
Neolithic, Bronze, Iron, BRman and Me-
dieval period sites have been found in
or adjacent to this Swiss Alpine Lake
as a result of a number of remote sens-
ing surveys. The field methodology that
was employed is alleged to be "the
first direct instrumental (i.e., magne-
tometers, side-scan sonars and preci-
sion navigation gear) detection of un-
derwater prehistoric sites" in Europe.
The remote sensing survey has revealed
two previously unrecorded sunken craft-
-a prehistoric log boat and a historic
framed vessel. Although a number of
other goals were accomplished on this
project, one of the more noteworthy is
that prehistoric and historic Swiss wa-
tercraft were radiocarbon dated, and
several prehistoric high water stands
of the lake have been found.

The Somerset Levels: Multidisciplinary
Investigations and a Wealth of Results
by Bryony Coles
This article reports on the in-
vestigations of the Sweet Track (a
6,000 year old Neolithic site) in
southwest Britain. The prehistoric in-
habitants here built a raised walkway
through a marsh. The walkway was 1800 m
long and linked a small island with a
larger island. The interdisciplinary
activities that have been conducted at
the site include pollen and macroscopic
plant analyses, studies of insects and
fungi, dendrochronology, reconstructive
studies of woodworking skills and use
wear analysis of flints. one particu-
larly noteworthy find was of an
"arrowhead" attached to a shaft with
glue and binding. The binding was made
of a nettle-like fiber and attached to
a hazelwood shaft.

Wet Site Archaeology at Bed Bay,
Labrador by James A. Tuck
Sixteenth century Spanish and
Basque whaling stations were common

along the north shore of the Strait of
Belle Isle, Canada. The waters around
Butus (now Red Bay) were prime loca-
tions for whales to converge during the
spring. On certain occasions, as many
as 1,000 whalers may have been at Red
Bay during peak seasons. The cold wa-
ters and accumulated silts served to
preserve ships as well as 15 associated
shore stations. Archaeologists have re-
covered a variety of artifacts from the
Red Bay area which include: bones,
clothing, barrel staves, hoops, small
boat frames and planks, chunks of much
larger vessels, and native softwoods,
many of which had been modified for
purposes which they were not originally
intended. One burial revealed an indi-
vidual still wearing a knitted cap, a
long-sleeved shirt and a shirt jacket,
knee-length breeches, stockings or leg
wrappings and a pair of leather shoes.

A Waterlogged Site on Huahine Island,
French Polynesia by Yosihiko H. Sinoto.
From 1973-1984 excavations were
conducted at the Hotel Bali Hai on
Huahine Island, French Polynesia--a
leeward group of the Society Islands
about 177 km northwest of Tahiti. A
number of houses at the site appeared
to have been built on stilts. A variety
of artifacts recovered from the site
included: stone adzes, wooden adze han-
dles, shaped whale tooth pendants, ca-
noe side planks, a steering paddle, ca-
noe bailers and numerous other organic
materials. Also identified were turtle,
dolphin, large cetacean (whale?), pig,
dogs, tuna and bonito. Some botanical
remains were found that included pan-
danus pods, coconut shell and pieces of
kava (Piper methysticum)--a mild nar-
cotic commonly used by stressed-out
The excavators were able to de-
termine that the site (occupied from
A.D. 700-1150) had separate activity
areas for canoe building and stone adze
manufacturing. The making of fishhooks
and wood crafting would seem to reveal
a fairly advanced Polynesian society.
Apparently there was enough food avail-

able to create the need for stilt
houses specifically built for storing

The Significance of the 3,000 B.P. Hoko
River Waterlogged Fishing Camp in Our
Understanding of Southern Northwest
Coast Ciltural Evolution by Dale R.
This article pertains to two
sites that belong to the Hoko River
complex. They are located about 30 km
from the northwest tip of the Olympic
Peninsula along the Strait of Juan de
Fuca in Washington state. 45CA213 is a
water-logged site with an adjoining dry
campsite which dates from 3,000 to
2,200 B.P. and 45CA21 is a river mouth
site within a large rockshelter that
was occupied from 900 to 100 B.P. Bas-
ketry, cordage, fishing hooks, hafted
microlith "fish" knives, woodworking
tools, carved wood art as well as ani-
mal bone and rare shellfish remains
were recovered from the former. This
site probably represents the Formative
era of the classic Northwest Coast
ethnographic pattern. A 2,750 B.P. date
for a wood carving purportedly repre-
sents the earliest known example of
this form of Northwest boast art. Other
unique finds included cedar bark capes
and skirts and two styles of hats.
Croes suggests that archaeolo-
gists will need to be much more selec-
tive in the future with regard to
choosing sites for excavation. Only
sites that are undergoing rapid and ir-
reversible destruction, or where sam-
pling provides the best means for exam-
ining a "particular important" question
of prehistory in the region. Unfortu-
nately, what constitutes "particular
important" could be defined in many
different ways, depending on the number
of archaeologists who are asked to de-
fine this term.

Research Design and Wet Site Archaeol-
ogy in the Netherlands: An Example by
Sander E. van der Leeuw and R.W. Brandt
The authors begin by pointing out
that 40% of the Netherlands are below
sea level. The Assendelver Polder pro-

ject was designed to reconstruct the
natural and cultural dynamics in a por-
tion of a coastal estuary in Holland.
In other words, van der Leeuw and
Brandt attempted to view the geologi-
cal, ecological and cultural changes
that occurred along part of the Dutch
coast over a period of 4,000 years.
Their study provided ecological evi-
dence for a number of subsistence ac-
tivities including agriculture, garden-
ing (horticulture) husbandry, gather-
ing and hunting and fishing. The ar-
chaeological record revealed increases
in population and expanded social
stratification and social complexity.
Although the early inhabitants were
gaining more control over their envi-
ronment through time, their existence
also became more dependent on a dimin-
ishing resource base.
They conclude the article by
stating, "The success of the project is
making a dynamic model of part of a
system's trajectory has depended on the
very rich potential for environmental
and cultural reconstruction which is
offered by wet sites, coupled with a
long tradition in wet site archaeology
and adequate funding. Because of these
circumstances, we feel the extra cost
has been amply rewarded by results
which could not have been achieved in
an area with poorer preservation."

Early Rainforest Archaeology in South-
western South Anerica: Research Cbn-
text, Design and Data at Monte verde by
Tom D. Dillehay
The author of this article begins
by noting that "extreme environmental
conditions such as dry deserts, wet-
lands and frozen tundra hold the great-
est potential for the preservation of
organic remains in archaeological
sites." The Monte Verde site, located
along Chinchihuapi Creek in south-cen-
tral Chile, meets the conditions of be-
ing in a wetland.
More than 35 specialists in
fields such as geology, palynology,
botany, entomology, animal pathology,
paleontology, ecology, forestry, engi-


neering, malacology, diatomology and
microbiology were involved with archae-
ologists in the excavations and analy-
ses of Mante Verde. This late pleis-
tocene site (i.e., dating to about
13,000 B.P.) produced a diversified
stone tool technology, a wood industry,
the remains of extinct animals, and a
rich array of economic plants.
The author concludes by stating,
"We can determine from the Monte Verde
data that a combined wood, bone and
stone industry comprised the technol-
ogy, and that the site's inhabitants
had a diversified economy focused on
hunting or scavenging big-game and
plant collecting From a wider ge-
ographic perspective, the Monte verde
site reveals that boggy wetland envi-
ronments were very important economic
resources that contributed to the early
transition from semi-sedentary to
sedentary collectors and hunters during
the terminal Pleistocene period, in at
least one region of the world."

The Skeletons of Herculaneum, Italy by
Sara Bisel
On 24 August 79 A.D., Vesuvius
erupted and covered 1,982 skeletons
with 20 m of volcanic material and,
subsequently, the bones have been con-
tinuously bathed in freshwater of neu-
tral pH. Parts of the skeletons were
carbonized due having been exposed to
temperatures up to 400 degrees Centi-
grade. Since Irmans practiced cremation
at this time, Herculaneum has provided
archaeologists and physical anthropolo-
gists with a unique opportunity to
study these early residents. A total of
139 skeletons are being studied: 57
males, 49 females, and 39 children of
indeterminate sex. The skeletons are
being analyzed to determine what their
diets were as well as to provide other
kinds of information.
After reading this article, one
is left to wonder what role water
played in the preservation of the
skeletal remains and why the skeletons
would not have been preserved had there
been no water? This is not to say that

the article is without interest, only
to question its inclusion in a wet site

An Assembly of Death: Bog Bodies of
Northern and Western Europe by John M.
Bog bodies are not an uncommon
occurrence in northern and western Eu-
rope. In particular, hundreds of bodies
(usually dating from ca. 700 B.C. to
A.D. 100--roughly correlating to the
Iron Age) have been discovered acciden-
tally from mining peat bogs in Germany
and Denmark. The bodies are usually re-
markably well-preserved and can provide
a significant amount of information
about how these individuals died.
For example, Tollund man (dating
to about 200 B.C.) in Denmark was found
with a noose still around his neck. His
gastrointestinal tract remained in tact
so it could be determined what he had
eaten for his last meal. On the other
hand, Grauballe man (also from Denmark)
had his throat cut from ear-to-ear.
Other similar finds, such as a man who
had been hanged and woman that had been
scalped, are common.
Preservation of these bog bodies
is contingent on three factors: (1) De-
position of the body must be in water
deep enough to prevent attack by organ-
isms such as maggots, rodents and
foxes, and still (not flowing?) enough
to be oxygen-deficient to inhibit decay
by bacteria. (2) The bog pools must
contain water with tannic acid of
sufficient strength to begin preserving
the outer layers of the body by tanning
(i.e., through the absorption of tannic
acid). If the water is not acidic, the
bones will survive but the flesh will
rot away. (3) The temperature of the
water in the bog must be below four de-
grees C (normal temperature for refrig-
eration) to prevent decay. (The latter
factor, along with fluctuating water
tables, might be one of the explana-
tions why there is no flesh left on the
bones of Florida burials that have been
recovered from wet sites).

Coles concludes his thought-pro-
voking article by stating, "They (the
bog bodies) provide us with our first
real look at our European ancestors--
their flesh and blood, their physical
condition, their clothing, some of
their food, and their precise manner of
death. It hardly makes one yearn for
olden times."

Treatment of Waterlogged Wood by David
W. Grattan
This is one of the more utilitar-
ian articles that appears in Wet Site
Archaeology. Grattan makes the cogent
point that preservation of moist woods
must be considered before materials are
He then goes on to discuss some
of the advantages and disadvantages of
various methods for preserving water-
logged woods. These treatments include
using: potassium aluminum sulfate,
polyethylene glycol (or PEG), ace-
tone/rosin, condensation resins and
freeze drying. A number of factors must
be considered before selecting a method
(or methods) for preserving wood: (1)
wood condition, (2) laboratory facili-
ties, (3) allowable timeframe, (4) bud-
get, (5) purpose, e.g., exhibit only,
study collection or social service, (6)
value or significance, (7) likely
shrinkage, (8) fit or associations with
other components, (9) display/storage
humidity, and (10) aging properties of
consolidates. It seems that this infor-
mation would be most pertinent to con-
servators, but also would benefit ar-
chaeologists who excavate wet sites
containing preserved wood.

Marco's Buried Treasure: Wetlands Ar-
chaeology and Adventure in Nineteenth
Century Florida by Marion S. Gilliland
This article recounts the archae-
ological discoveries that occurred al-
most a century ago at Marco Island in
southwest Florida. Frank Hamilton Cush-
ing, the principal investigator, was
concerned because many of the unique
archaeological specimens he was uncov-
ering were being destroyed.

"Fortunately, photographs, water col-
ors, and cast of many of the artifacts
were made in the field, and later in
Washington, for it is impossible to
recognize the remains at the present
It is most unfortunate that much
of the site assemblage from Marco Is-
land is no longer in existence. This is
one of the primary reasons that it is
sometimes best to wait until new tech-
niques and methodologies are developed
before attempting to excavate such
fragile artifacts.
Nevertheless, Cushing found cere-
monial paraphernalia, art objects, a
complete range of tools and the arti-
cles made with them, weapons, fishing
nets, floats, sinkers, a paddle, shell
and stone anchors, and many material
goods used in daily life. The technol-
ogy represented at Marco Island was
very sophisticated and of high quality.
In spite of the many logistical and ex-
cavational difficulties, Cushing
shipped 11 barrels and 59 boxes of ar-
tifacts to the University Museum in
Pennsylvania. Although the excavation
and conservation techniques employed at
Marco Island were primitive compared to
today's standards, the site will always
stand as benchmark of wet site archae-
ology in Florida and in the Western

Multidisciplinary Investigations at the
Windover Site by Glen H. Doran and
David N. Dickel
Doran and Dickel begin their ar-
ticle by aptly pointing out that the
"discovery of wet sites is accidental
and no reliable locational models cur-
rently exist." They also correctly note
that many important sites probably go
unreported. On the other hand, various
"landlocked" Florida sites tend to oc-
cur in four discrete kinds of loca-
tions. First, solution features (e.g.,
springs and sinkholes) such as Little
Salt Spring are often associated with
megafauna, bone and wooden artifacts,
limited quantities of human skeletal
material, some with very early radio-


carbon dates, and occasionally pre-
served brain tissue. Second, peat de-
posits are common in poorly drained lo-
cations in central and southern Florida
such as Bay West, Republic Groves and
Windover. Third, sites that are in
rivers, such as the Santa Fe and the
Aucilla, frequently contain megafaunal
remains indirectly associated with
stone tools, and less frequently with
bone and antler tools. Finally, iso-
lated peat deposits underlying small
(mortuary) ponds have been found to
contain intentionally buried human
skeletal materials.
At any rate, the Windover site,
located near Titusville on Florida's
east coast, provided investigators an
opportunity to use a number of innova-
tive techniques in order to perform ex-
cavations at this very complex site.
They employed about $120,000.00 worth
of dewatering (e.g., a well point sys-
tem) and heavy equipment to drain the
site. A brief discussion also is pre-
sented on what techniques were used to
preserve perishable artifacts that were
recovered from the site.
Even though excavations at Win-
dover were expensive, the investigators
have garnered much information from
this highly significant site. They have
been able to assess the early burial
practices among Florida Indians, as
well as to examine artifactual remains
including bone, antler, wood and fab-
rics. By studying the textiles of these
early (Early Archaic?) Native Ameri-
cans, it has been determined that they
employed a sophisticated and diverse
technology, with at least seven differ-
ent twining and weaving variants iden-
tified. In terms of the 200 or so buri-
als recovered from Windover, some of
the best information on populations of
subadults in the New World should be
forthcoming. A number of burials even
had preserved brain tissue containing
mitochondrial DNA, which currently is
being studied and could provide new in-
sights in the field of molecular biol-
ogy. Floral and faunal analyses also
were performed in an attempt to recon-

struct the early natural environment
and to reveal subsistence activities.

Settlement, Subsistence, and En-
vironment: Aspects of Cultural Develop-
ment Within the Wetlands of East-Cen-
tral Florida by Brenda Sigler-Eisenberg
This article addresses some of
the long-term hunter-gatherer subsis-
tence activities and settlement pat-
terns that characterized the wetlands
of east-central Florida. Specifically,
the author focuses on the freshwater
lake-emergent marsh and the lesser de-
veloped riparian ecosystems within the
Upper St. Johns River Basins that were
utilized by late Orange, Malabar I and
Malabar II groups from ca. 500 B.C. to
A.D. 1400.
It is believed that the early in-
habitants settlement patterns and sub-
sistence strategies were based on re-
sponses to environmental variables such
as low rainfall and fewer aquatic re-
sources, and seasonal fluctuations in
the availability of aquatic resources,
and the "patchiness" and relatively low
productivity of terrestrial habitats.
By the Malabar I period, present-day
environmental conditions were made man-
ifest by a balance of fishing strate-
gies that included both shallow and
deepwater resource zones of the
lake/marsh ecosystem. The changes in
the settlement pattern indicate a shift
to a logistical form of mobility where
sedentary households are located near
the most critical resources.
The marked increased in produc-
tivity between the Malabar I and Mal-
abar II periods, however, cannot be ex-
plained just by the continued develop-
ment of the wetland environments. The
author believes that the change is a
reflection of production demands that
result frcm greater social integration
and accompanying social obligations,
and that by the Malabar II period, the
subsistence organization was similar to
that observed during the early histori-
cal contact (i.e., Ais) period.
It is unclear how the information


presented in this article pertains to
wet site archaeology as defined in the

Environments of Florida in the Late
Wisconsin and Holocene by William A.
Watts and Barbara C.S. Hansen
Florida's climatic history is
known from pollen studies, most of
which have been conducted by Dr. Watts
and his associates. This article pre-
sents the results of the authors' most
recent palynological assessment of the
state's floral communities.
Before 15,000 B.P., when water
tables were postulated to be between 31
and 26 m lower than now, the presence
of pine, oak, shrubs and herbs indi-
cates that the area near Lake Tulane
(which is located at Avon park and has
the longest complete pollen record--
50,000 years--of any site in eastern
North America) had a prairie and sand
dune environment. Evidence from Sheelar
Lake in the northern part of the state
suggests that from 15,000 to 12,000
B.P. this region was comprised of
broad-leafed mesic forests, with
slightly more precipitation than during
the Wisconsin maximum. Throughout the
early part of the Holocene, Florida was
characterized by xeric oak and prairie
vegetation. By 5,000 B.P., precipita-
tion had increased to the extent that
swamps began forming, allowing ecologi-
cal communities such as pine flatwoods,
cypress, bayhead and peatlands to de-
velop. There was a second expansion of
cypress domes that occurred at about
2,500 B.P. In essence, the communities
that began developing 5,000 years ago
are very similar to today's ecological
communities that have been left rela-
tively unaltered by man.
If archaeologists wish to have
palynological studies done in conjunc-
tion with their field work, it should
be borne in mind that lakes with at
least 18 m of water are needed in order
to study sediments older than 8,500
B.P. Watts believes that prior to that
time, present-day lakes and smaller
rivers were probably dry. At any rate,

having good records of the vegetational
history of an area affords archaeolo-
gists opportunities to reconstruct the
types of habitats that were available
for hunting, food gathering, cultiva-
tion and shelter.
As per usual, Watts provides more
tantalizing and important clues about
Florida's late Pleistocene and Holocene
environments. Unfortunately, his arti-
cles always seem to ascribe to the
stream of consciousness style of writ-
ing, thus placing a heavy burden on the
cognitive abilities of unsuspecting

Archaeological Wet Sites: Untapped
Archives of Prehistoric Documents by
Barbara A. Purdy
In the concluding chapter of Wet
Site Archaeology, the editor states
that "investigations at water-saturated
archaeological sites yield a large por-
tion of the estimated 90% of material
culture that is usually missing from
upland sites. The expansion of the data
base can be used to understand the past
more completely and confuse or correct
previous interpretations. From organic
categories--bone, wood, noncultivated
plants and cultivated plants, when
added to the three non-perishable cate-
gories (i.e., stone, shells and pot-
tery), provide magnitudes of associa-
tion that usually do not exist."
She continues by stating, "In
summary, each wet site has added cate-
gories of materials that are not usu-
ally preserved in the archaeological
record, and these conditions, can
be used to enhance exponentially the
view of the past that now exists. It is
logical that information gained from
wet site excavations can be used, with
caution, to make reasonable extrapola-
tions about objects and activities that
were formerly present on nearby upland
sites. Analysis of wet site remains can
be compared globally to each other and
to organic materials preserved under
extremely dry conditions, like the
coast of Peru. But archaeologists do
not want to be the only beneficiaries

of this increased knowledge. We want
the public to be aware of and care
about the cultural heritage that is
lost when development projects are per-
mitted to destroy wetlands before exca-
vations can be conducted."

In closing Dr. Purdy is to be
commended for hosting an international
conference on wet site archaeology and
then publishing a compendium of the pa-
pers presented at that conference. As
one who once was charged with the re-
sponsibility of assisting in the re-
views of thousands of U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers permits in Florida, it
brings a sense of relief to learn that
some progress is being made with regard
to acknowledging the archaeological
site potential of wetlands. For this
reason, any individual seriously en-
gaged in culture resource management
should have a copy of this book readily
Unfortunately, its also necessary
to inform prospective readers that this
volume--like any other--is not without
a number of shortcomings. Although most
of the papers are well-written, some
show little evidence of critical edit-
ing. It is difficult to separate major
points from trivial facts in several of
the articles. Along a similar vein, the
ordering of the articles in the book
appears to be haphazard. Moreover, the
closing chapter is nothing more than a
brief synopsis of the assembled arti-
cles. There is no serious attempt to
synthesize the data into a coherent and
meaningful whole. Each article is more
or less left as a discrete, unrelated
Finally, the reader is left won-
dering what field methodologies are
best suited for locating archaeological
wet sites? For example, what about us-
ing the location of known upland sites
to predict the location of wet sites?
In addition, due to the much greater
expense of testing, excavating, analyz-
ing, preserving and curating materials
from wet sites, it seems that one of
the most essential tasks (that was only

given a passing thought in the book) to
be accomplished is devising some inno-
vative methods for funding studies of
archaeological wet sites. Lastly, the
preservation of wet sites is important
and archaeologists should focus their
efforts on threatened sites, leaving
for the future the assessment of cul-
tural resources in public ownership
that are not being vandalized or are
not deteriorating.
Aside from these drawbacks, Wet
Site Archaeology contains much perti-
nent data and an interesting array of
factual information about wet sites
dating from the Paleo-Indian/Upper Pa-
leolithic to late historic period sites
from various regions of the globe. Wet
site archaeology is certainly a timely
topic that professional archaeologists
can no longer afford to ignore.

Reviewed by:
Michael Wisenbaker
Tallahassee, Florida

Key Marco's Buried Treasures:
Archaeology and Adventure in the
Nineteenth Century (1989) by
Marion Spjut Gilliland. Ripley P.
Bullen Monographs in Anthropology
and History Number 8. University
presses of Florida, Gainesville.
138 pages plus color folios.
Acid-free paper. ISBN 0-8130-
0884-0 (alk. paper). Hardcover:

In this volume, Marion Spujt
Gilliland explores the personali-
ties and experiences of the indi-
viduals who played key roles in
the discovery and excavation of
exceptional, normally perishable
artifacts from the wetlands muck
of the now famous Key Marco site
on Florida's southwest coast in
present-day Collier County. This
is a humanistic, popular histori-
cal narrative prepared for the
general audience, although it
contains information of interest
to professional archaeologists
and historians.
For information on specifics
of techniques or analysis of ar-
tifacts recovered from that site,
the reader is directed to
Gilliland's earlier publication,
The Material Culture of Key
Marco, Florida (1975). That vol-
ume, written primarily as an ar-
chaeological reference, contains
a complete inventory and analysis
of existing materials recovered
from that site, 149 illustra-
tions, and a detailed description
of tools and technologies.
Three men and an island are
central to the story told in Key
Marco's Buried Treasure: Archae-
ology and Adventure in the Nine-
teenth Century. The men were:
William David Collier who owned
the island, reported his acciden-
tal discovery of perishable arti-
facts on his property, and en-
couraged subsequent excavation
activities; Frank Hamilton

Cushing who, following his famous
Zuni ethnographic studies, led an
archaeological expedition to the
island; and, Wells Moses Sawyer
who was the artist and photogra-
pher on that expedition. The is-
land, of course, was Key Marco in
present day Collier County,
Florida. On pages 6-7, Ms.
Gilliand lists the entire cast of
characters in her story.
Perhaps reflecting my own
bias, while I read with passing
interest the information on
William David Collier and that on
Wells Moses Sawyer, I was most
intrigued by that on Frank
Hamilton Cushing; although, it is
acknowledged that without the
written and artistic records of
Sawyer that which we know about
the Key Marco project would be
greatly diminished. The histori-
cal narration on Cushing with the
Zuni and. subsequently as depicted
in the letters and diaries of
various participants creates a
picture of Cushing as a charis-
matic, gifted individual with a
flair for oral presentations on
exciting findings (sometimes em-
bellished to seem more exciting),
an ability to overspend his
budget -- often on activities not
originally budgeted or sanctioned
by the agencies for whom he
worked, and a penchant for post-
poning and neglecting to prepare
scholarly written reports on his
findings. (Since I have met sim-
ilar individuals in my own expe-
rience, I find Gilliland's selec-
tion of correspondence on Cushing
to have presented a believable
On the way to Key Marco,
Cushing delayed in Tarpon Springs
to excavate two burial mounds in
Tarpon Springs, Florida; al-
though, he finally reached Key
Marco where the narrative re-
sumes. Cushing's letters of
glowing superlatives are balanced


June, 1989

Vol. 42 No. 2

by Sawyer's more down-to-earth
observations of the same events.
Sawyer describes the beginning of
work in the portion of the Key
Marco site known as the Court of
the Pile Dwellers, as follows:

Captain Cushing waded into the
mud, moved boards about and in a
short time the men, who reluc-
tantly began work, were following
him and working with an enthusi-
asm and will which hardly flagged
through the weeks of wading in
mud and slime and working under a
semi-tropical sun in a muck-cov-
ered swamp, where the mosquitoes
were plentiful and the sand-flies
almost like the sands of the sea,
the annoyance of the insects al-
ternating with the smoke of the
smudge supposed to bring relief.
Squatting on their knees in the
slime, with hands and arms cov-
ered with mud, these men worked
day after day, bringing forth
treasures which, if seen now as
we saw them, would command the
attention of every student of
American archaeology, (Gilliland

He then goes on to describe many
of the artifacts subsequently
found during the field season.
Gilliland continues telling
the story of Key Marco's excava-
tion through the eyes of its par-
ticipants, through the chronolog-
ical ordering of their letters
and diary entries. They make
good reading. The field work fi-
nally ended, and the return trip
began. On May 10, 1896, Cushing
wrote from Tarpon Springs that
"he had shipped from there eleven
barrels and thirty boxes of spec-
imens recovered in Tarpon Springs
and eleven barrels and fifty-nine
boxes of Key Marco specimens. He
arrived in Washington, D.C. on
May 13, 1896.
The remainder of the book de-
tails the project's aftermath

with respect to Cushing.
Gilliland reports that for the
rest of his life Cushing was
plagued by illness [a lifelong
problem], financial problems
[nothing new], and controversy
[again, nothing new]. He was un-
der pressure by the sponsoring
institutions to finish his work.
He stated his strong preference
for field investigation over
written analysis and reporting
(Gilliland 1989:98).
To compound his problems,
William Dinwiddle, an employee of
the Bureau of American Ethnology,
accused Cushing of fabricating
the shell with the costumed
dancer painted inside (Gilliland
1989:99). Gilliland goes on to
narrate events surrounding this
accusation. Diaries and letters
from the field, and eye-witness
accounts, ultimately led to Cush-
ing's superiors' conclusion "that
the shell was genuine, and
today's evidence is in favor of
Cushing and the authenticity of
the shell" (Gilliland 1989:105).
"On April 10, 1900, Cushing
died at his home in Washington,
D.C., not yet forty-three years
old" (Gilliland 1989:112).
"Cushing had not written his
final report on either Key Marco
or Tarpon Springs before he died"
(Gilliland 1989:115).
In her postscript, Gilliland
(1989:126-128) discusses Key
Marco in the context of what is
known today. She concludes:
"While other muck sites have pro-
duced other artifacts of organic
materials, this site remains
unique. The quality, beauty, and
sophistication on the art work
[found by Cushing's expedition in
the Court of the Pile Dwellers]
has never been surpassed."
I found Gilliland's Key Marco's
Buried Treasure: Archaeology and
Adventure in the Nineteenth
Century to be quite readable and


enjoyable. I was particularly
impressed by the manner in which
she used the writings of period
participants to tell their story.
I recommend acquisition of this
publication by professional ar-
chaeologists and historians, as
well as by those simply interest
in Florida history.
For further information on
this and other University Presses
of Florida publications, please

University Presses of Florida
15 NW 15th Street
Gainesville, FL 32603

Reviewed by
Louis D. Tesar,Editor
The Florida Anthropologist



There were no current research
submissions for this issue. As
noted in the Editor's Page, William
F. Keegan will, in part, attempt to
correct this problem by quarterly
focusing on an Annual Review of
research being conducted in various
regions. More details will be
published on this in future issues
of this journal and our newsletter.
For those of you who cannot wait,
please write:

William F. Keegan
Florida Museum of Natural History
Gainesville, FL 32611.

However, current announcements
on proposed research projects of
interest to our readers may con-
tinue to be submitted to the
Editor, The Florida Anthropologist
or to the Newsletter Editor, as


As with our Current Research
section, no comments were submitted
for publication in this issue.
This section has been reserved for
Comments on recent articles, issues
of concern and the like. It is in-
tended as a forum for our readers.
However, the Editor reserves the
right to restrict materials which
are deemed inflammatory or
libelous. Comments submissions
should be sent to:

Editor, The Florida Anthropologist
P.O. Box 1013
Tallahassee, FL 32302


Vol. 42 No. 2

June, 1989


If you are interested in archaeology, ethnology, physical anthropology,
cultural anthropology and associated topics with a focus on Florida and surrounding
areas in the Southeastern U.S. and Caribbean, then The Florida Anthropologist, the
journal of the Florida Anthropological Society, and the papers presented at our
annual meetings will be of interest to you. If you want to join with professional
and avocational archaeologists and others in efforts to preserve and protect our
prehistoricc heritage, then join the Florida Anthropological Society to achieve
that goal. If you are looking for that special gift, then a gift subscription to
The Florida Anthropologist is your answer. You do not have to be a resident of
Florida to belong to the Florida Anthropological Society. Your membership fee
includes your subscription to the Society's journal and newsletter. We are a non-
profit organization founded in 1947.

REGULAR ($18)*_
FAMILY ($20)*
PATRON ($100)
LIFE ($200)

* NOTE: A $2 discount can be obtained for each subscrip-
tion if you join/renew/subscribe before February
1st. This includes gift memberships.
ADD $4 for postage & handling for subscriptions
received after August 1st.
Foreign subscribers add $5 US for postage, etc.

Subscriptions received after September 30th will be credited to the following year.

FAS Chapter affiliation
If gift membership, name of donor
If new member, indicate how you learned about our Society


What kinds of subjects would you like to see published in the Society's journal?

If you are not a member of an FAS chapter, would you like the address of the chapter
nearest to your Florida home mailing address? Yes No

Mail Application to: Membership Secretary, FAS
308 6th St. NE
Largo, Florida 34640

Make check or money order payable to: Florida Anthropological Society.

Any amount in excess of the membership subscription rate may be counted as a tax
deductible charitable contribution to a non-profit organization. Please indicate
how you wish such gifts to be used so that they may be credited to the proper
account. For instance, contributions toward an enlarged or special publication
should be earmarked for the monograph account in general and also note the specific
publication, such as the First Spanish Period issue scheduled for Dec. 1989, if that
is its specific intended purpose.




June, 1989

Vol. 42 No. 2


Until recently, the purchase of back issues of The Florida
Anthropologist was handled directly by the society. However, at
our annual meeting in May, 1989, we entered into an agreement
with Mickler's Floridiana, Inc. to market in-print issues of The
Florida Anthropologist. Thus, effective immediately all previous
offers for back issues sales contained in previous issues of The
Florida Anthropologist are terminated and voided.
Mickler's Floridiana, Inc. is a wholesaler of books and other
materials pertinent to the State of Florida. They will retain
the pricing schedule advertised in previous issues of our
journal. Furthermore, we have provided them with a listing of
our membership so that they can honor our 10% membership discount
for back issues purchases of The Florida Anthropologist.
In addition to carrying The Florida Anthropologist for both
wholesale and retail, Mickler's catalog lists over 1000 titles,
the largest collection of Floridiana for resale anywhere. They
also offer discounts to libraries and schools, as well as to
bookstores and other retailers. Mail or phone orders to:

Mickler's Floridiana, Inc.
P.O. Box 1450
Oviedo, Florida 32765
(305) 365-6425

We believe that this arrangement with Mickler's will make The
Florida Anthropologist available to a wider audience, thus
furthering our historic preservation education goals.
We will, however, retain sufficient quantities of recent
issues to replace undelivered, damaged or defective issues mailed
to our subscribers.

University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs