• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Copyright
 Front Cover
 Table of Contents
 Editor's page
 Subsistence at the McLarty site...
 The agreement of 1842 and its effect...
 Tisher pond mound, Ocala National...
 Spatial associations and distribution...
 Back issues and information for...






Group Title: Florida anthropologist
Title: The Florida anthropologist
ALL VOLUMES CITATION PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00027829/00069
 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-]
quarterly
regular
 Subjects
Subject: Indians of North America -- Antiquities -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Antiquities -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: periodical   ( marcgt )
 Notes
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: VID00069
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
    Copyright
        Copyright
    Front Cover
        Front Cover 1
        Front Cover 2
    Table of Contents
        Page 1
    Editor's page
        Page 2
    Subsistence at the McLarty site - Elizabeth S. Wing
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
    The agreement of 1842 and its effect upon Seminole history - James W. Covington
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
    Tisher pond mound, Ocala National Forest, Florida - Elizabeth J. Reitz
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
    Spatial associations and distribution of aggregate village sites in a southeastern atlantic coastal area - Morgan R. Crook, Jr.
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
        Page 32
        Page 33
        Page 34
    Back issues and information for authors
        Unnumbered ( 38 )
Full Text





COPYRIGHT NOTICE

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.












FLORIDA

ANTHROPOLOGIST










WLA
,- ... .. /....





9 9
i 11i.









PUBLISHED BY THE
FLORIDA ANTHROPOLOGICAL SOCIETY, INC.


MARCH 1978


0

2
'U
8.
U'
'U



a
ur


VOLUME 31


NUMBER I







THE FLORIDA ANTHROPOLOGIST is published quarterly in March,
June, September, and December by the Florida Anthropological
Society, Inc., c/o Room 130, The Florida State Museum, The
University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611. Subscription
is by membership in the Society for individuals and institu-
tions interested in the aims of the Society. Annual dues are
$6.00; student members $4.00. Requests for memberships and
general inquiries should be addressed to the Secretary; dues,
subscriptions, changes of address, and orders for back issues
to the Treasurer; manuscripts for publication to the Editor;
and newsletter items to the President. Address changes should
be made at least 30 days prior to the mailing of the next issue.
Second class postage paid at Gainesville, Florida.

OFFICERS OF THE SOCIETY


President: Raymond Williams
Dept. of Anthropology, Univ.
of South Florida, Tampa, FL 33620

1st Vice President: George W. Percy
Div. of Archives, History and Records
Management, The Capitol,
Tallahassee, FL 32304

2nd Vice President: Paula J. Fields
1160 King Street
Merritt Island, FL 32952

Secretary: Nedra Lexow
1124 Harrison St.,
Hollywood, FL 33020


Treasurer: Norcott Henriquez
1510 Dewey St.
Hollywood, FL 33020

Directors at Large

Three years: Thomas C. Watson
203 Carolyn Avenue, Panama
City, FL 32401

Two years: Robt. E. Johnson
4250 Melrose Avenue,
Jacksonville, FL 32210

One Year: Ray. C. Robinson
1020 4th Street North,
St. Petersburg, FL 33701


EDITORIAL STAFF


Editor: Jerald T. Milanich
Department of Social Sciences
Florida State Museum
Gainesville, FL 32611


Editorial Board:
Kathleen A. Deagan
Dept. of Anthropology
Florida State University

Albert C. Goodyear
Institute of Archeology
and Anthropology
University of South Carolina

Roger T. Grange, Jr.
Dept. of Anthropology
University of South Florida


Editorial Assistant:
Ann S. Cordell
University of Florida


John W. Griffin
Historic Key West Preservation
Board, Key West

George W. Percy
Division of Archives, History
and Records Management
Florida Dept. of State










THE FLORIDA j


ANTHROPOLOGIST a

VOLUME 31, NUMBER 1 MARCH 1978



Contents Page




Editor's Page ......................................... 2
Subsistence at the McLarty Site,
by Elizabeth S. Wing ............................ 3
The Agreement of 1842 and its Effect upon
Seminole History,
by James W. Covington ........................... 8
Tisher Pond Mound, Ocala National Forest, Florida,
by Elizabeth J. Reitz .......................... 12
Spatial Associations and Distribution of Aggregate
Village Sites in a Southeastern Atlantic
Coastal Area,
by Morgan R. Crook, Jr. ........................ 21








Editor's Page


A number of state and national conferences which are of
interest to members of the Florida Anthropological Society have
been scheduled.

The Annual Meeting of the Florida Anthropological Society
will be held in Ft. Walton Beach on Saturday, April 1, 1978.
Registration is scheduled for the morning of the 1st at 8:00 A.M.
at the Sheraton Marina Inn. Presentation of papers will follow
registration. The Ft. Walton Beach Museum will hold an open
house on Friday evening preceding the conference. Address of the
Sheraton is 80 Miracle Strip Parkway, Ft. Walton Beach, FL 32548.
Additional information on the conference and the banquet, slated
for Saturday night, is available from the FAS Newsletter or the
Ft. Walton Beach Museum.

The Society for American Archaeology Annual Meeting is May
4-6, 1978, in Tucson, Arizona. Meetings will be held at the
Tucson Marriott Hotel and Tucson Convention Center.

The Waring Papers, originally published in 1968 by the
University of Georgia Press and by Peabody Museum, Harvard
University, has been reprinted in a new edition (1977) by Peabody.
Copies can be obtained from Publications, Peabody Museum, 11
Divinity Ave., Cambridge, MA 02138. Included in the volume are
articles on the Southern Cult, the archeology of the Savannah
River estuarine system, and site reports on other excavations along
the Georgia coast.

Another publication of interest is Colonial Life on the
Georgia Coast by Nicholas Honerkamp. This 23-page monograph is
an easy-to-read analysis of the archeology and history of the
Thomas Hird family, residents of colonial Fort Frederica on St.
Simons Island, Georgia. It is available for $ .70 from Fort
Frederica Association, Route 4, Box 286-C, St. Simons Island, GA
31522.


JTM










SUBSISTENCE AT THE MCLARTY SITE, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY


Elizabeth S. Wing


A large sample of animal remains was excavated from the
McLarty Site providing sufficient material for a study of the
subsistence economy of the inhabitants of this site. This site,
located in Indian River County on Florida's Atlantic Coast was
first occupied by Indians and later by shipwrecked Spaniards
whose basic needs were provided by the Indians. It is, there-
fore, of particular interest to see what animal resources were
used and whether the Spanish dependents had any obvious effect
on the Indian's subsistence pattern.

The method used in studying the excavated faunal remains
is to identify all bone and tooth fragments to the lowest taxon
possible by comparison with prepared skeletons of contemporary
animals. Minimum numbers of individuals represented are deter-
mined (Wing 1963), making analysis of the fauna between sites
and within sections of one site possible.

The people who lived along the mainland coast of the
Caribbean area all share the same basic subsistence pattern
(Wing ms.). In sites located just behind the shoreline two-
thirds or more of the vertebrate fauna represented, based on
minimun numbers of individuals, are marine organisms. At the
McLarty site marine and shore animals constitute 83 percent of
the total fauna. Another characteristic of this and other
mainland coastal sites is that at least half of the marine
fauna is composed of five key animal groups which include sea
turtles (Cheloniidae), sea catfishes (Ariidae), jacks (Caranx
sp.), drums (Sciaenidae), and sheephead (Archosargus sp.).
Variations on this theme are seen in the differences between
sites resulting from different ecological situations within
the hunting and fishing radius of the site or culturally deter-
mined differences in the fishing and hunting techniques employed.
The list of species identified is presented in Table 1.

The location of the McLarty site right on the shore explains
the inhabitants dependence on resources of the sea. This
dependence was primarily on two fish groups, the sea catfishes
and the drums. Several species within these two families are
represented. Most abundant is the sea catfish (Arius felis)
which constitutes 12 percent of the total fauna. Also within
the family Ariidae and represented in the site is the gafftopsail
catfish (Bagre marinus). Both these species occur very

The Florida Anthropologist, vol. 31, no. 1, March 1978






MCLARTY SITE


Didelphis virginiana
Sylvilagus sp.
Ursus americanus
Procyon lotor
Odocoileus virginianus

Terrapene carolina
Gopherus polyphemus


Reptiles


opossum
rabbit
black bear
raccoon
white tailed deer

box turtle
gopher tortoise
- C I I II I


Reptiles




Fishes

I


Alligator mississipiensis
Kinosternidae
Chrysemys spp.
Trionyx ferox

Amia calva
Lepisosteus sp.


alligator
musk turtle
slider
soft-shelled turtle

bowfin
gar


Birds Gavia immer loon
Phalacrocorax auritus cormoraur
Ardea herodias heron
Anas sp. duck
Larus sp. gull

Reptile Malaclemys terrapin diamondback
terrapin
Cheloniidae sea turtle


Mammals Cetacean porpoise

Fishes Chondrichthys unidentified
shark
Pristis sp. sawfish
Megalops atlantica tarpon
Ariidae sea catfishes
Arius felis sea catfish
Bagre marinus gafftopsail
catfish
Mugil cephalus mullet
Centropomus sp. snook
Lutjanus sp. snapper
Pomatomus saltatrix bluefish
Caranx sp. jack
Haemulon sp. grunt
Cynoscion nebulosus spotted sea trout
Pogonias cromis black drum
Sciaenops ocellata red drum
Archosargus sp. sheephead
Calamus sp. porgy
Chaetodipterus faber spadefish
Alutera sp. filefish
Monocanthus sp. filefish
Spheroides spengleri puffer


Mammals


- ---- -- ------ ----- ---- --------


L


-~---~-`----- -- IYYP- I


I .. __ ,





WING


abundantly along the shore. They swim either singly or in
schools over all types of bottom where they feed on anything
they can swallow. Their habits and requirements are similar.
The most noticeable difference between the two catfishes is
that the gafftopsail tends to be more active, which may have
made it more difficult to catch. The three species in the family
Sciaenidae represented are black drum (Pogonias cromis), red
drum (Sciaenops occelata), and spotted sea trout (Cynoscion
nebulosus). These are also very common, commercially important,
inshore fishes. They swim in schools or singly over sandy shores
and enter the brackish water of bays. They are carnivorous,
eating small fishes and crustaceans. The black drum is more
restricted in its diet and feeds chiefly on shellfish. These
two important resources, catfishes and drums, suggest that at
the McLarty site fishing was done inshore and either with hooks,
spears, or nets.

At the Jungerman site, located in Brevard County a short
distance north of the McLarty site, a very similar use of marine
resources was evident (Wing 1963). The principal difference is
that at the Jungerman site the dependence was relatively less
on the catfishes and drums and more on the sea turtles (Chelonidae)
and sheephead (Archosarqus sp.). Sea turtles, particularly
green turtle (Chelonia mydas), come up annually on the beaches
to lay their eggs. During the time the turtles are laying they
are virtually helpless and are an easy prey. In view of this
it is surprising that they are not more abundantly represented
in the McLarty site. Sheephead are almost equally as abundant
as sea turtle at each site. At the McLarty site they constitute
six and five percent respectively and at the Jungerman site 18
and 16 percent. Sheephead swim in schools in inshore waters and
even enter rivers. They feed on crustaceans and shellfish that
are hidden among the rocks on the bottom. At the Jungerman
site, a rockier shore may have provided a more favorable environ-
ment for sheephead than at the McLarty site.

Within the McLarty site are levels that contain solely
Indian pottery and others that have a mixture of Indian and
European wares. Evidence of European culture is present in
the most easterly trench and in the upper six inches of excavation
units 1 and 2 while no European materials were found below six
inches in units 1 and 2. The accompanying faunal remains do
not differ substantially in the upper and lower levels of
excavation 1 and 2, but they do differ somewhat from the
remains excavated in the easterly trench (Table 2). These
differences are chiefly in the greater relative abundance of sea
catfishes and fewer land and freshwater animals in the easterly
trench.





6 MCLARTY SITE
Easterly Units 1 and 2
Trench

0-6" 6-12"
FAUNA -
MNI* % MNI % MNI %



Land- 3 7 15 12 13 16

Freshwater- 3 7 14 11 10 13

Marine-Shore -

Chelonidae 1 2 4 3 2 3

Marine-Inshore-Estuarine-

Ariidae (including 16 36 18 15 13 16

Bagre marinus

Arius felis)

Caranx sp. 2 5 6 5 2 3

Scianidae (including: 8 18 32 26 17 22

Cynoscion nebulosus

Pogonias cromis

Sciaenops occelata)

Archosargus sp. 1 2 0 2 3

Other fishes 11 24 35 28 20 25



TOTAL 45 124 79
*MNI is minimum number of
individuals.


Table 2. Fauna represented in three culturally
distinct units of the McLarty site.





WING


It would appear that at this site the faunal assemblage
stayed the same in spite of Spanish cultural influences. It
is unfortunate that there is no purely Indian cultural level
in the easterly trench to further test this relationship.
Although there does not seem to be any change in the faunal
assemblage resulting from a new cultural influence, there are
differences between the fauna represented in excavation units
1 and 2 and in the easterly trench. These may be entirely the
result of environmental differences in the hunting and fishing
area used by the eastern and western parts of the site. The
easterly trench is adjacent to the Atlantic beach, whereas the
excavations units 1 and 2 are close to the river.


References Cited

Wing, E. S.
ms. Prehistoric Fishing in the Caribbean. Manuscript in
possession of the author.

Wing, E. S.
1963 Vertebrates from the Jungerman and Goodman Sites
near the East Coast of Florida. Contributions of the
Florida State Museum, Social Sciences, No. 10, pp.
51-60. Gainesville.




Gainesville, Florida
July, 1977








THE AGREEMENT OF 1842 AND ITS EFFECT UPON SEMINOLE HISTORY

James W. Covington

One of the most unusual events in Federal-American Indian
relations came at the end of the Second Seminole War in 1842,
when the United States Government allowed a few hundred Seminole
Indians to remain in Florida. Such permission was not freely
given for there had been a determined effort to remove all of
the southeastern tribes including the Cherokees, Creeks,
Chickasaws, and Choctaws to Indian Territory. Only the Seminoles
made a determined stand to resist such removal by fighting a
savage war which lasted from 1835 to 1842. The conflict ended
when the military authorities and President John Tyler realized
that total Seminole removal was virtually impossible (McReynolds
1957:235-236).

In October 1841, John C. Spencer took the place of John
Bell as Secretary of War and within seven months had ordered
the termination of the Second Seminole War. It is difficult
to determine who influenced Spencer the most in his decision to
conclude the conflict; probably it was the commander of all of
the troops in Florida, Colonel William Worth whose dispatches
from the field were indeed conclusive. Gradually regular
regiments were withdrawn from Florida until only the third,
eight and sixth companies of the Fourth Infantry remained (Mahon
1967:309).

The end came after Secretary of War Spencer was directed
by President Tyler to authorize Worth "As soon as he shall deem
it expedient" to declare that hostilities against the Indians
in Florida have ceased and shall not be renewed unless the
Indians begin their attacks (Spencer to General Scott May 10,
1842, Carter 1962:471-472). Accordingly Commanding General
Winfield Scott notified Worth on the following day that he had
the authority to determine the day and means by which the war
could be concluded.

Worth was instructed that the reservation line need not be
a permanent or exact line since the Federal Government desired
that the remaining Indians in Florida would be persuaded to
migrate to Oklahoma. By the last of May, Worth had decided
upon a formula for announcing the end of the war within a few
weeks. When he was certain that there were no Indians in the
area between Caloosahatchee River and Tallahassee he would
declare the conflict to be concluded.

Indian tribes in Florida during the Spring of 1842 included
a number of diverse bands. To most of the Whites, all of the
Indians in Florida were Seminoles even though the various bands
spoke two different dialects and were divided into two units--
the Muskogees or Cow Creeks and the Miccosukees. One large band

The Florida Anthropologist, vol. 31, no. 1, March 1978






COVINGTON


was led by Billy Bowlegs, a member of the so-called Seminole
ruling family and one that had led a peaceful existence near
Charlotte Harbor for some time. Another band was that of the
Miccosukees led by Sam Jones which also had followed the path
of peace deep in the Big Cypress Swamp. Somewhere in the
scrubs and hammocks near Lake Istokpaga were the Muskogees led
by Chipco.

There were two important bands present in Central Florida.
One was led by Octiarche a Creek who, refusing to leave the
Southeast when Federal troops forced the Creeks to move to
Oklahoma had fled with his band from West Point, Georgia to
Central Florida in 1836 and waged a bitter war with the Whites.
This band would be a problem for it was not regarded as being
Seminole. Another band, much smaller, was led by Tiger Tail,
a Muskogee who had lived near Tallahassee. He had promised many
times to leave Florida, accepted gifts and then fled back to
the wilderness.

Negotiations with the southern Indians who were to be allowed
to remain in Florida were commenced by Worth. He sent an old
Indian to contact Billy Bowlegs. The Seminole leader, in turn,
sent back Fuse Hadjo to Fort Brooke to contact the military and
see if the story concerning peace negotiations was true. On
July 21, 1842 a delegation of Indians headed by Fuse Hadjo
came to Fort Brooke to work out an agreement concerning the
reservation and peace terms. In a conference held the following
day Worth told Fuse Hadjo and Nocosemathla that President Tyler
desired there should be peace between the Whites and Florida
Indians. The President would allow the Indians to stay in
Florida but it would be better for them to join their relatives
in the Indian Territory (Worth to Adjutant-General July 24,
1842, Carter 1962:515-518). In turn, Fuse Hadjo gave his
opinion that if the Creeks, now in the northern part of the
Territory, were allowed to migrate southward to the reservation,
they would cause much trouble. Another meeting at the same
place with Billy Bowlegs present was planned in seventeen days.

At the Fort Brooks conference, Worth, representing the
United States Government, told the Indians that the Great White
Father was willing that his red children should remain in
Florida or go to Arkansas as they may prefer. He advised
them to join their brothers in the West. Should they prefer
to remain they would receive nothing but would be allowed to
occupy land which they could not leave except to visit Fort
Brooke, where a trading post would be established. The area
designated for their reservation was the same as that stipulated
in the 1839 Macomb Agreement.

Conferences were held by Worth with representatives of
the southern Indians on August 5th at Tampa and the northern
Indians on August 10th at Cedar Keys. Billy Bowlegs accompanied





SEMINOLE HISTORY


by two other leaders met with Worth at Fort Brooke and accepted
the terms given by Worth to Fuse Hadjo. It must be noted
that this agreement was accepted only by the Billy Bowlegs
band for the Miccosukees or Muskogees were not present. In the
meeting held on August 10th Worth informed the Indians that every
warrior who agreed to move west would be given a rifle, money,
and rations for a year. Only a few accepted this offer. Their
agreement with Worth was that they were to move into the
southern reserve as soon as it was possible to do so, (Worth
to Adjutant General August 12, 1842, Carter 1962:524-525).
According to Worth, Octiarche's band was inclined to accept the
peace terms. Some wanted to go to Oklahoma, others preferred
to move to the reserve assigned, and still others could not
believe that they were absolved from all punishment by the
Government. Since Billy Bowlegs, Tiger Tail, and Octiarche were
the only Indian parties to the agreement, the old cliche that
the Seminoles never signed a peace treaty with the United States
would be true. All three Indian groups were removed from Florida
leaving only those who had not been party to the agreement,
including Chipco and Sam Jones.

Worth in his General Order 27 dated August 11, 1842, and
issued at Cedar Keys, made two interesting points at variance
with what the Indians understood. First he claimed that his
peace arrangement was with the few Indians remaining in the
southern portion of Florida and second, the southern Indians
were to be permitted "for a while" to plant and hunt in the
reserve (Cooper AAG General Order No. 27, Carter 1962:519).
Perhaps, the northern bands could have stayed in Florida under
the terms of the Cedar Keys conference if they had quickly moved
into the reserve and had not delayed making any decision for
over three months. The Federal authorities did assist some
Indians in their move southward. Some citizens living in central
Florida began to attack isolated groups of Indians moving
southward towards the reserve. In order to prevent this, Colonel
Vose was ordered by Washington to take measures to prevent
such attacks.

Although peace had been proclaimed and a temporary reserva-
tion established for the remaining Indians in Florida, a
problem still faced the military--the bands of Indians remaining
in the North. Since it was realized that a clash would occur
between Octiarche and Billy Bowlegs if Octiarche moved into
the reservation, Colonel Worth directed Captain Seawell to
seize Octiarche and his band and send them to the prison at
Horse Key, at the present day Cedar Keys. On December 20th
while the Creek band leader and his followers were visiting
Fort Brooke they were captured and shipped to New Orleans.
Since Worth had given his word to allow safe migration to the
South, the only excuse that could be given in defense of such
tactics was that Octiarche had taken too long to move south.






COVINGTON


In similar fashion Tiger Tail, a Muskogee, who had come
from the area near Tallahassee, was captured. Tiger Tail had
surrendered to the Whites three times and three times he had
skipped out after enjoying good food and lodging. Although
he had promised to move south he remained in his camp near
Cedar Key engaging in heavy bouts of drinking. Finally a force
of soldiers seized his camp of six men and thirteen women and
children and carried him to Cedar Key. Although some excuses
could be given for the seizure of Tiger Tail and Octiarche,
caputer of the men were violations of pacts accepted by both
parties in August, 1842. After these captures the Federal
authorities seemed to have removed all the Indians they cared
to and changed to a policy of removal by force.

After the removal of Octiarche and Tiger Tail and because
of the advanced age of Sam Jones, Billy Bowlegs became the
principal leader of the Florida Indians. When the Indian scare
of 1849 flared, it was Billy Bowlegs who negotiated the settle-
ment. The leaders of other bands, including Sam Jones of the
Miccosukees and Chipco of the Muskogees, were virtually ignored.
It was Billy Bowlegs who visited Washington in 1853 and received
a medal from the President of the United States. Billy Bowlegs
and his band of Seminoles would have their period of ascendency
from 1842 to 1858, but at the conclusion of the Third Seminole
War the entire band would surrender and be moved.


References Cited


Carter, Clarence E., editor and compiler
1962 The Territorial Papers of the United States.
Volume Twenty-Six, The Territory of Florida, 1839-
1845, Washington: Government Printing Office.

Mahon, John K.
1967 History of the Second Seminole War: 1835-1842.
Gainesville: University of Florida Press.

McReynolds, Edwin C.
1957 The Seminoles. Norman: The University of Oklahoma
Press.

Tampa, Florida
May, 1977









TISHER POND MOUND, OCALA NATIONAL FOREST, FLORIDA


Elizabeth J. Reitz

Tisher Pond Mound (8Mrll3) is a small sand burial mound
located in Section 34, Township 14 South, Range 24 East, within
the western portion of the Ocala National Forest. An unim-
proved dirt road connecting Salt Springs with the town of Lynne
skirts the site on the south side (Fig. 1). There are no other
aboriginal sites nearby. A nineteenth century cabin, 8Mrl32,
is located some 2000 feet to the southeast, along the same forest
road. Tisher Pond Mound was excavated by the Citrus Council of
Girl Scouts in 1972 and 1973. Dr. Charles H. Fairbanks,
University of Florida, directed the work. Elizabeth J. Reitz
was the field supervisor.

The immediate environs of the mound are typical of a Florida
sandhill community. The dominant vegetation is xerophytic
longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) and turkey oak (Quercus laevis).
Scrub palmetto (Sabel etonia), two wire grasses (Aristida stricta
and Sporobolus sp.), and prickly pear (Optunia sp.) form part
of the park-like understory (Snedaker and Lugo 1972:120). The
loose, undulating soil is Astatula sand, dark surface, which
overlies the Citronelle Formation of the Central Highlands (USDA
1975:3, 5-6). Soil of this type is excessively drained with a
typical zero to eight percent slope, although the slope may be
greater near bodies of water. The water table occurs at a depth
of sixty inches or more. Acidity ranges from 4.5 to 5.5 pH.
Fertility and organic matter content are low. The first three
inches of this soil are grayish-brown or dark-gray sand, with
approximately eighty inches of yellowish sand below.

A number of water sources are found nearby, including
several lakes and ponds and a number of wet prairies. Lake
Charles is less than a mile west of the site and Zeas Prairie is
four miles to the southeast. In recent times Eton Creek
apparently flowed near Tisher Pond, between Lake Charles and
Lake Eton (Abshire et al. 1935:7). The Oklawaha River is six
miles west of the mound.

The area today is used primarily for recreation, although
some managed timber stands are in the vicinity. In the past the
turpentine industry was active, and broken collection pots and
slashed tree stumps surround the mound. Although the sandhill
community is not suitable for farming due to infertile soil;
hunting is fair. Deer, racoon, rabbits, and bear are known to
frequent sandhill communities. Fishing in nearby lakes and
rivers is also rewarding.

The Florida Anthropologist, vol. 31, no. 1, March 1978










































Fig. 1. Tisher Pond Area.


Fig. 2. Tisher Pond Mound.





TISHER POND MOUND


At the time of excavation the mound was approximately 80
feet in diameter and four feet high. The site has been so
heavily disturbed that it is not possible to determine the
original dimensions. The dirt road running past the site is
frequently used by fishermen, sightseers, and motorcyclists,
some of whom occasionally pause at the mound. The mound center
has been completely modified by indiscriminate looting and
the overall mound has been disturbed by vandals. At least thirty-
nine potholes of various sizes and shapes dot the surface. In
addition to potholes there appears to be an excavation trench
extending up the southern side of the mound. Besides human
disturbances, numerous small oaks grow on the mound, further
disrupting the stratigraphy and making excavation difficult.
There seemed to be few animal burrows. The portion of the mound
excavated in 1972 and 1973 appears to have been the only remaining
undisturbed section.

Excavation

The mound was excavated under the auspices of Citrus
Council of Girl Scouts, Winter Park, Florida, under a special
use permit from the U.S. Forest Service. The Department of
Anthropology, University of Florida, Gainesville, cooperated
with the Council by providing equipment and expertise. Excava-
tions occupied a portion of the summers of 1972 and 1973. The
field seasons coincided with Sessions I and II of the Council's
resident camp at Deer Lake, in the Ocala National Forest. Each
session was two weeks in length, however camp schedules and
weather conditions permitted only thirty-four days of excavation.

The field crew consisted of forty-six Girl Scouts, ages
thirteen to seventeen, and three adults employed by the Council.
The adults included the author, Bonnie Jones, and Leta Prow.
The field crew each session averaged fifteen girls and two
adults. The girls were given basic instruction in archaeological
theory, excavation techniques, and local prehistory before
beginning work at the site. Several evenings were spent dis-
cussing laboratory techniques and analyzing recovered materials.
Since a different group of girls participated in each of the
three two-week sessions, training had to be repeated at the
beginning of each session, reducing field time and efficiency.

A rectangular grid of 5x5 ft squares was laid out both
seasons (Fig. 2). In 1972 a datum plane was established and
maintained by means of a transit set on the disturbed center
of the mound. In 1973 vertical control was maintained by
means of a line and bubble level. Both five foot and ten foot
square units were excavated. A one foot balk was maintained in
the five-foot units and a two foot balk in the ten-foot units.






REITZ


Shovels and trowels were used to recover material from the
mound. In 1972 the University of Florida's mechanical screen
was used to aid in recovery of materials. This screen had a
1/4x3/8 inch diamond mesh. In 1973 two wooden A-frame screens
with 1/4 inch mesh hardward cloth were used. All maps, field
notes, preliminary reports, and artifacts are currently housed
in the Florida State Museum, Gainesville, Florida.

A total of twenty-four 5-5 ft squares were excavated
including a 5x5 ft 1972 control pit located eighty feet north
of the mound, a 10xl0 ft 1973 control pit excavated 174 ft north
of the mound, and a 5x10 ft unit in the presumed barrow ditch
skirting the north edge of the mound. Test pits were extended
in the southwest corners of two mound excavation units, one to
12.4 ft below datum. A test pit was also dug in the corner of
the 1973 control pit. The first 5x5 ft square excavated in 1972
was dug by six inch increments to determine the stratigraphy.
All other units were excavated by natural levels to a depth of
8.5 ft below datum.

In conjunction with excavations in the mound, parties of
two to three girls were sent out each day to survey the area
for additional sites. It was hoped that a village site might
be located. A quantity of chert chips were found north of the
site and a similar concentration of chips occurred along the
edge of Tisher Pond itself. Neither of these appeared to be a
village site. However, it should not be assumed that this
survey was conclusive. Girls participating in a 1975 site
survey of the area walked right past Tisher Pond Mound without
spotting it. There are soils somewhat more conducive to
agriculture than Astatula sand less than a mile north and south
of Tisher Pond where village sites may be located.

Analysis

Stratigraphy revealed four zones. Zone 1 consisted of
spoil dug from the center of the mound by looters, and was not
found in all units. Zone 2 was modern humus. It was found
in all units except 1973 Burial III (Fig. 2). Zone 3 was mound
fill. This was yellowish sand and contained most of the arti-
facts. Zone 3 was sand heavily permeated with carbon lumps.
Zone 4 was slightly darker in color than Zone 3 and had fewer
artifacts. Zone 3 and 4 appeared so similar in color and texture
that it was difficult to separate them in every case. They
appeared similar to the sand from the control pits, as would
be expected where the mound fill was gathered from the nearby
forest. The absence of a clear line between mound fill and
undisturbed soil beneath may be accounted for by the heavy
leaching of the old humus layer, or by the clearing of the
surface before mound construction began.





TISHER POND MOUND


Most of the six burials recovered were in very poor
condition. Five of them were collected in pill bottles, with
a total weight of 0.36 ounces. They can not be conclusively
identified as human. No intrusive pits were found in associa-
tion with them, nor did there appear to be grave goods present.

Burial III, 1973, was an exception to the other burials.
This was clearly a human skeleton, in good condition. It was
exposed on the west side of the mound by a looter in the wall
of a pothole. The burial was removed before we could study it
in detail, presumably by the same looter. Burial III consisted
of long bones, ribs, and a skull plate. No burial pit was ob-
served, although there appeared to be an increased quantity of
sherds in the pothole area. Since Zone 2, modern humus, did not
appear above the burial the area had probably been previously
disturbed. Considering the which acidity and the porosity of
the soil, poor preservation of bone was to be expected.

The ceramic collection is entirely of the chalky St. Johns
series except for two pieces of Orange Plain and two turpentine
collection pot fragments. Of the 1120 sherds collected, 913
came from the excavation units, 180 from the profiled walls,
6 from the test pits, 18 from the features, and 3 from the site
surveys. Distribution of ceramics may be found in Tables 1
and 2.

Other artifacts include chert chips and carbon lumps.
A total of 208 chips were recovered, but no stone tools were
found. The carbon was scattered throughout the mound. Only
a sample of it was retained from each level. This is presumed
to be the remains of burned wood. Since the forest is subject
to forest fires, or has been in the past, these charcoal
fragments may have been collected with the mound fill when the
mound was being constructed. Similar collections of charcoal
have been reported for neighboring sites (Moore 1895).

Discussion

Tisher Pond Mound is located on the westernmost edge
of the Northern St. Johns region as defined by John Goggin
(1952:15). Compared with other parts of the region, the Tisher
pond occupies one of the poorest environments. The soil type
is extremely unsuited for agriculture and the location is not
as rich in either plant or animal foods as neighboring biotopes.

The pottery in Tisher Pond Mound dates to the St. Johns,
I period in which the most common ceramic types are St. Johns
Plain and Dunns Creek Red. Probably the mound also dates from
this period. The mound can be further dated to Ia, Early
period by the absence of Hopewellian traints and Swift Creek
Complicated Stamped pottery which are associated with the Ia,








Table 1.


Sherd Type


Sherds from the entire site
excluding surface collection.


Number


St. Johns Plain
Dunns Creek Red Filmed
St. Johns Simple Stamped
Orange Plain
urpentine pot
TOTAL


917
196
3
2
2
1120


Percentage


81.9
17.5
0.3
0.2
0.2
100.0%


Table 2. Sherd distribution by zone.


Zone I


Sherd Type


Zone II
# %


Zone III
# %


St. Johns Plain
Dunns Creek Red Filmed
St. Johns Simple Stamped
Orange Plain
urpentine pot
TOTAL


5 62.5
1 12.5
0
0
2 25.0
8 100.0%


143
9
0


94.1
5.9


0 -
0 -
152 100.0%


507 82.3
108 17.5
0 -
1 0.2
0 -
616 100.0%


Zone IV


96
41
0
1
0
138


69.6
29.7
-
0.7

100.0%





TISHER POND MOUND


Late period (Goggin 1952:19). During this time there appears
to have been a general population movement from the St. Johns
River valley to the Atlantic coast (Goggin 1949:25). The
St. Johns I culture was based upon partial sedentism and by
the St. Johns II period, the population was probably supported
by agriculture (Goggin 1949:24). Both sand and shell mounds
are associated with this time period. Two shell middens, with
St. Johns I period components, Sunday Bluff and the Colby site,
are a few miles north of Tisher Pond (Bullen 1969).

In many ways the Tisher Pond Mound is characteristic of
burial mounds of the time and locale. Its small size is common
(Goggin 1952:48). Moore reported scattered fragments of charcoal,
such as were found at Tisher Pond, for the Gamble Mound at
Stark's Landing (1895). Charcoal fragments were also reported
by Ripley Bullen and W. J. Bryant for three mounds on the
eastern edge of the Ocala National Forest (1965). The depression
to the north edge of the mound may be similar to the one
reported by the Bullens and Bryant for the Ross Hammock site in
Volusia County (1967). This depression has been interpreted
as a barrow pit in both cases.

In one sense Tisher Pond Mound is not typical of neighboring
sites of the St. Johns I period. C. B. Moore excavated four
sites from this time. The sand mounds at Eureka Landing
(8Mr25) and 8Mr33 at Silver Springs contained few artifacts
as did the seven Palmetto Landing mounds (8Mr25). The Gamble
Mound at Stark's Landing (8Mr39) was the only site which Moore
considered "staisfactory" in terms of artifact yield. While
Tisher Pond Mound is quite different from the Gamble Mound,
it also contained artifacts. In both cases sherds were scat-
tered randomly throughout the mound fill.

It is interesting that Tisher Pond Mound is a single
construction mound, four feet high at least, with few burials.
The mound appears somewhat larger than would be expected in
a situation where the human population presumably was nomadic.
In this context the location of the mound within the Forest
assumes more significance. If the St. Johns I period is the
time during which human populations were becoming increasingly
dependent upon cultivated plants for food, the location of
the Tisher Pond Mound in a sandhill-floral community is in-
congruous, particularly in the absence of a shell midden. This
area does provide some animal protein sources such as deer,
raccoon, snakes, and fish, but it is not the best hunting area.
Nor is it suitable for horticulture by today's standards.
Adjacent areas are superior to the sandhill community in both
resources.

Two explanations offer themselves. The first possibility
is that the people associated with the mound were indeed an
early St. Johns population. They perhaps had adopted a portion





REITZ


of the St. Johns complex by making chalky ceramics and building
sand burial mounds, but they were not yet practicing horticulture.
They consequently did not require good crop lands nearby. The
location of the mound, with its presumed village, may have been
in response to having ready access to a variety of biotopes for
hunting and gathering activities (Higgs, Vita-Finzi 1972).

The second possibility is that the Tisher Pond Mound
represents a seasonal occupation of a horticulturally-oriented
population. The residents may have occupied a nearby hunting
camp during a portion of the year while they hunted and fished.
If a death occurred, the burial mound was put into service.
The people lived a portion of the year elsewhere, in an area
more suitable for cultivation, while planting and harvesting
their crops. If the planting habits of South American horticul-
tualists may be taken as an example, the crops would be tended
briefly during the spring planting, left untended for several
months, and revisited thereafer for occasional harvests (Meggers
1971).

Tisher Pond Mound could have been constructed by people
who had become horticulturalists, but who were not fully sedentary.
The living area associated with Tisher Pond Mound should be
extremely interesting. From it we could learn if the area
was occupied throughout the year or only for a portion of the
year. If it was occupied for only a small segment of the year,
however, the village may be shallow and hard to locate.

Acknowledgments

Sincere appreciation is due to the U.S. Forest Service for
permitting the excavations at Tisher Pond Mound. The
University of Florida, Department of Anthropology provided
the equipment in 1972 and Dr. Charles H. Fairbanks generously
directed the work both seasons and provided advice on inter-
pretation. Citrus Council of Girls Scouts provided the work
crews, housing, food, and transportation. Dr. Jerald T.
Milanich assisted in the preparation of the final report.
Kathleen Johnson helped during the 1975 Site Survey and Dr.
Kathleen Byrd read an earlier draft of this paper. Thanks
are also due to the forty-six Cadette and Senior Girl Scouts
who so cheerfully undertook the arduous labor. I hope that
they have continued to find their experience rewarding. While
the assistance of all these people is appreciated, I alone
am responsible for the results.

References Cited

Abshire, A. E., Alden Potter, Allen Taylor, Clyde Neel, Walter
Anderson, John Rutledge, Stevenson Johnson
1935 Some Further Papers on Aboriginal Man. Civilian
Conservation Corps, Company 1420, Ocala.





TISHER POND MOUND


Bullen, Ripley P.
1969 Excavations at Sunday Bluff, Florida. Contributions
of the Florida State Museum, Social Sciences,
Number 15.

Bullen, Ripley and W. J. Bryant
1965 Three Archaic Sites in the Ocala National Forest.
The William L. Bryant Foundation for American
Studies, Number 6.

Bullen, Ripley P., Adelaide K. Bullen, and William J. Bryant
1967 Archaeological Investigations at the Ross Hammock
Site, Florida. The William L. Bryant Foundation
for American Studies, Number 7.

Goggin, John M.
1949 Cultural Traditions in Florida Prehistory.
In The Florida Indian and His Neighbors, edited by
John W. Griffin, pp. 13-44. Winter Park: Rollins
College.

1952 Space and Time Perspective in Northern St. Johns
Archaeology, Florida. Yale University Publications
in Anthropology, Number 47.

Higgs, E. S. and C. Vita-Finzi
1972 Prehistoric Economies: A Territorial Approach.
In Papers in Economic Prehistory, edited by E. S.
Higgs. Cambridge: University Press.

Meggers, Betty J.
1971 Amazonia. Chicago: Aldine.

Moore, C. B.
1895 Certain Sand Mounds of the Oklawaha River, Florida.
Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia 10(4):
518-543.

Snedaker, Samuel C. and Ariel E. Lugo
1972 Ecology of the Ocala National Forest. Atlanta:
U.S. Forest Service.

USDA Soil Conservation Service
1975 Soil Survey of Ocala National Forest area, Florida:
Parts of Marion, Lake and Putnam Counties. Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Gainesville, Florida
May, 1977








SPATIAL ASSOCIATIONS AND DISTRIBUTION OF AGGREGATE VILLAGE SITES
IN A SOUTHEASTERN ATLANTIC COASTAL AREA

Morgan R. Crook, Jr.

Several sites located on the barrier islands of the south-
eastern Atlantic coast share a distinctive set of characteristics
that may be seen as defining a particular type of archaeological
site, referred to here as the aggregate village (the word,
aggregate, is used here only in a spatial sense ). Defining
characteristics of an aggregate village are:

(1) Spatial clustering of circular shell middens.
(2) Association with two or more mounds.
(3) Large site size (from 10 to 60 hectares recorded).
(4) Mississippian provenience.

The intent of this paper is to focus on the spatial associa-
tions and distribution of aggregate village sites. The research
area is limited to those barrier islands located between the
Savannah River in Georgia, and the Nassau River in northeast
Florida (Fig. 1). Analysis is directed towards definition and
explanation of locational similarities and differences within
this area.

Ossabaw Island Aggregate Village Sites

Two sites located on Ossabaw Island, along the northern
portion of the Georgia coast, exhibit the defining characteristics
of aggregate villages (Fig. 2). These two sites, Middle
Settlement and Bluff Field, contained burial mounds excavated
and reported by C. B. Moore in the late 19th century (Moore
1897:89-130). His published data indicate Savannah and Irene
period utilization of the mounds, and by extension suggest a
Mississippian period occupation of the associated village areas.

Charles Pearson (1977) included Middle Settlement (9 Ch 158)
and Bluff Field (9 Ch 160) in a settlement pattern analysis of
sites with Irene components on Ossabaw Island. The two village
sites are by far the largest reported on the Island. Middle
Settlement covers an area of about 41 hectares (100 acres) and
Bluff Field covers about 12 hectares (30 acres).

The Bluff Field and Middle Settlement sites share
essentially identical environmental locations. Pearson (1977:
121) proposes that these sites form the apex of the settle-
ment hierarchy for the island. The village sites are highly
correlated with a set of ranked environmental variables, which
include forest community, soil type, distance from the marsh,
and distance from tidal creeks. While these factors may have
influenced location of the aggregate village sites, an essential
factor appears to have been location with respect to tidal

The Florida Anthropologist, vol. 31, no. 1, March 1978





AGGREGATE VILLAGE SITES


ISLAND


RGIA


ISLAND


ISLAND


ATLANTIC

OCEAN


ISLAND


ISLAND


ISLAND


FL


SOUTHEAST ArLANTIC
COASTAL AREA

0 10 20 30 40 50
I!!TnbmlI


Fig. 1. Research Area.




CROOK


Fig. 2. Ossabaw Island, Georgia.


V *



ST CATHERINES
SOUND


OSSABAW ISLAND
AGGREGATE VILLAGE
SITES INDICATED


KILOMETERS





AGGREGATE VILLAGE SITES


stream systems and their resources. Each of the sites is
located at the accessible midpoint of a tidal stream system.
This particular location provides optimal access to the dendritic
tidal stream system. More tidal stream length is accessible
within a given distance from this point than from any other
location on the island.

Pearson (1977:128) points out that, "site location and
archaeologically recovered food remains indicates that Irene
phase peoples relied heavily on marsh-estuary exploitation."
Tidal streams near the village sites may more accurately define
this exploitation zone. While the tidal streams are accessible
at other points along the island, optimal access is offered
only at the central location.

Pearson (1977:42) states that fish remains recovered from
"Irene phase middens" on Ossabaw Island indicate that small
fish were being taken, possibly from small tidal creeks. Today,
and presumably in the past, the small tidal streams provide a
nursery and spawning area for many fish species (Johnson et al.,
1974:94). All of the recovered fish listed for "Various
Ossabaw Island sites" (Pearson 1977:59) are common in the tidal
streams, particularly during the warmer months of the year
(Dahlberg 1975; Johnson et al., 1974; Larson 1969).

Central location of the aggregate village sites with
respect to the tidal streams also provides central access to
the land that borders the marsh. Three faunal species commonly
identified in animal bone recovered from Ossabaw and other
coastal sites are white-tailed dear, raccoon, and rabbit. The
edge area facing the marsh provides an important habitat for
deer and rabbits, and is regularly transversed by raccoons
entering the marsh to feed (Golley 1962; Larson 1969).

Aggregate village location would have offered the in-
habitants defensive advantages as well. Water access to the
villages was possible only at a restricted point, the tidal
stream. Movement through the marsh to the village would
have been essentially impossible. If one considers some of
the smaller sites on Ossabaw to have been contemporary with
the large villages, then the small settlements north and
south of the villages would have offered a warning system of
impending attack from these directions. The villages were
naturally protected at their rear by a virtually impassable
slough that paralleled the length of the island.

Sapelo Island Aggregate Village Sites

Two sites on Sapelo Island, Bourbon Field and Kenan Field,
are the type sites for aggregate villages. The sites occur in
locations identical to those found on Ossabaw Island (Fig. 3).




CROOK


SAPELO SOUND


BLACKBOARD
ISLAND


A---
-~ A


_:_ "-Ti- :-. ti








K
S* *F
i '`,i


C,
0


;I
0
A


ENAN
IELD


DOBOY SOUND


Fig. 3. Sapelo Island, Georgia.


SAPELO ISLAND
AGGREGATE VILLAGE
SITES INDICATED

0 I 2
KILOMETERS I
KILOMETERS


&.





AGGREGATE VILLAGE SITES


Bourbon Field was mapped by the author in 1974. The
resulting map is considered incomplete. Dimensional informa-
tion for most of the individual shell middens was unavailable
because of dense grass cover. The location and elevation of
each of 196 disturbed shell middens and one small earthen
mound (35 meters in diameter; 75 centimeters high) was recorded
with a transit and stadia rod.

The shell middens cover a roughly rectangular area measuring
10 hectares. Rather obscure linear patterns of shell middens
and circles of shell middens defining open areas are shown on
the map, almost certainly reflecting structural and activity
areas. However, the overall pattern is far from clear, due
to the lack of shell midden dimensional data. Bourbon Field
is scheduled for re-mapping when surface conditions permit.

C. B. Moore excavated two mounds at Bourbon Field (Moore
1897:55-67). Ceramic and mortuary information from the mounds
suggest Savannah and Irene period utilization. Preliminary
analysis of pottery from a 45 centimeter thick shell midden,
tested during the summer of 1974, tends to support a
Mississippian period provenience. High frequencies of Irene
Filfot Stamped and cord-marked wares, and smaller numbers of
Savannah Check Stamped wares were encountered in the shell
midden. The few sherds encountered in the soil zone beneath
the shell midden were almost exclusively cord marked (Daniel
Simpkins, West Georgia College Archaeology Laboratory,
personal communciation).

Given small sherds and small sample size, it is difficult
to determine if the cord-marked sherds should be classified
as Wilmington or Savannah I ware. Sherd tempering and cord
marking are dominate characteristics of Wilmington period
pottery; however, these traits continue with frequency in
the later Savannah I wares (Caldwell and Waring 1939a, 1939b;
Caldwell 1952). If the occupation below the shell midden was
Wilmington, it could date as late as ca. A.D. 1000, based on
carbon-14 dated Wilmington contexts on neighboring St. Catherines
and St. Simons Islands (Caldwell 1970; Milanich 1977).

Faunal material from one two-meter square excavated in the
Bourbon Field shell midden was analyzed by the author. The
basal fifteen centimeter level of the shell midden was fine
screened (window screen) to recover a sample of small faunal
material. This procedure recovered a quantity of material,
most of which remains unsorted. A small sample of the screened
faunal remains was analyzed.

The species identified from the shell midden commonly
inhabit either the marsh-edge area or the tidal streams. Oyster





CROOK


shell made up the bulk of the midden deposit. Oysters are
found in beds upon the firmer portions of the tidal stream
canals, where there is minimal sedimentation (Larson 1969:123).
The mammals represented in the midden include the following
minimum numbers of individuals from marsh-edge habitats: one
rabbit (Sylvilagus sp.), two raccoons (Procyon lotor), and
two white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus).

Identified reptiles include at least one diamond-backed
terrapin (Malaclemys terrapin) and one turtle (Chrysemys sp.).
Diamond-backed terrapin are able to tolerate fresh water,
however their preferred habitat is salt marsh and tidal streams.
Archie Carr (1952:176) states that capture of this turtle is
productive when a stop net is placed "across the deeper parts
of good-sized tidal creeks (50-100 yards wide) over shell bottom
and near oyster banks." Four species of Chrysemys (C. picta
picta, C. scripta, C. cocinna, C. floridana) occur on the Georgia
coast. These aquatic turtles prefer shallow, quiet, fresh
waters, but may occasionally enter the marsh (Carr 1952:214-
218; Ernst and Barbour 1972:138-164).

At least two blue crabs (Callinectes sapidus) were
represented in the shell midden. Blue crabs seem to live in
the shallower estuarine waters during the warmer months, and
retreat to warmer deep waters during the colder part of the
year (Larson 1969:134-136).

All fish identified from the shell midden, except one of
the sea catfishes, were recovered from the fifteen centimeter
thick fine-screened portion. It should be remembered that
material from only a small section of this level was analyzed.
One cartilagenous fish was identified, a small skate or ray
(Rajiformes). The remainder were boney fish, including at
least nine sea catfishes (Ariidae sp.), two gafftopsail catfish
(Bagre marinus), two red drum (Scianops ocellata), one black
drum (Pogonias cromis), six mullet (Mugil sp.), and thirteen
unidentified boney fish.

The red drum were the largest fish. The two individuals
had live weights of around fourteen kilograms each. The black
drum was somewhat smaller, but still a substantial individual.
The two gafftopsail catfish weighed about 900 grams each, while
the remaining catfish, mullet, and unidentified fish weighed
far less.

Most of the fish represented in the fine-screened sample
appear to have been quite small. The most common skeletal
element were tiny vertebrae. There should be a direct relation-
ship between vertebra size and the life weight of individuals
within a species, however this relationship seems to be un-
defined at the moment for estuarine fish. In the absence of
such information, the number of vertebrae needed to weigh one





AGGREGATE VILLAGE SITE


gram may be used as a convenient measurement of relative size
differences between archeological and laboratory specimens.
Laboratory specimens of a sea catfish (Arius felis) and a
gafftopsail catfish (Bagre marinus), each having a life weight
of around 900 grams, averaged 9.6 vertebrae per gram. A greatly
reduced size is indicated for individuals of the Ariidae family
represented in the archaeological sample; the average number
of vertebrae was 126.7 per gram (418 vertebra, 3.3 grams).
Similarly, a mullet (Mugil cephalus) laboratory specimen with
a life weight of about 450 grams averaged 8.9 thoracic
vertebrae per gram, while archaeological specimens (Mugil sp.)
averaged 53.6 thoracic vertebrae per gram (59 vertebra, 1.1
gram). Vertebrae from unidentified boney fish measured 71.0
per gram (667 vertebra, 9.4 grams). Although the size of the
archaeological specimens cannot be stated exactly, exceedingly
small individuals are indicated.

In summary, the species identified from the Bourbon Field
shell midden indicate the exploitation of tidal stream and
marsh-edge fauna. The identified fish share a number of im-
portant characteristics. They are predominately bottom feeders,
occur in schools or at least large groups, and are available
in the tidal streams during the warmer months of the year
(Dahlberg 1975; Dahn 1950; Larson 1969). The small individuals
suggest that aboriginal procurement was by some sort of
impoundment technique, perhaps nets or seines.

The other aggregate village located on Sapelo Island,
Kenan Field, is situated on an extension of land that juts
out briefly about midway along the western side of the island.
The site was mapped and tested during the 1976 West Georgia
College Archaeology Field School, under the direction of Lewis
H. Larson, Jr. No previous archaeological investigation at
the site had been accomplished. C. B. Moore (1897:73) knew of
the site, but was denied permission to excavate.

Kenan Field was mapped using controlled transit-stadia
transects. Nearly ideal mapping conditions existed due to fire
that had removed most of the surface debris. The only obstruc-
tions were the numerous planted pines that cover this former
agricultural field. The site extends over an area of 60
hectares and contains 591 plow-disturbed shell middens, one
large earthen mound (Mound A), and one small earthen mound
(Mound B). The shape of the village, as defined by the shell
midden distribution, is rather rectangular, corresponding to
the shape of the land upon which it is located (Fig. 4).

The spatial arrangement of the shell middens and mounds
suggest a rather complex village plan. At least four distinct
areas may be observed on the map: (1) a separate clustering
of shell middens in the northeastern portion of the site;












amaom






%aor


LOCATION MAP
SCALE: ,,,,


SAPELO ISLAND
KENAN FIELD
WGC 901
CONTOUR INTERVAL 5CM
ELECTIONS ABOVE MEAN
LOW SEA LEVEL

SCALE:

AIMC N
I'C


Fig. 4. Kenan Field.


STATION I


me-TIC NORTH
II ....


MARiH


S cTMLL M LL



ST R EIM





AGGREGATE VILLAGE SITES


(2) linear arrangements in the central area of the site;
(3) an arc-shaped pattern of large shell middens defining
an area to the west of Mound A; (4) an area containing fewer
shell middens in the southern portion of the site, near Mound
B. Archaeological investigations designed to test specific
locational and cultural hypotheses were conducted at the site
during the summer of 1977. Once analysis is completed, the
cultural associations underlying the pattern formation should
become more clear.

Most of the pottery encountered in the Kenan Field
excavations was Savannah Check Stamped and Savannah Cord
Marked wares. Lesser amounts of Irene Filfot Stamped pottery
was also present. Quantification of the ceramic components
must await complete analysis; however a strong Mississippian
period association is certain.

Kenan Field and Bourbon Field, like the Ossabaw Island
aggregate village sites, are located strategically with
respect to the tidal streams facing each village, as well as
the marsh-edge area north and south of the settlements. This
location minimizes distance to these environmental zones.
The faunal analysis for Bourbon Field supports the view of
these areas as primary animal exploitation zones.

The defensive advantages of village location are the
same as those proposed for the Ossabaw Island sites. Restricted
access to the village from the water, a slough system to the
rear of the village, and perhaps smaller settlements to the
north and south of each village, are the common characteristics.
Smaller, contemporary settlements are undemonstrated on Sapelo
Island, however McMichael (1977) has statistically shown that
prehistoric sites on the island are associated with the high,
well drained soils that front the marsh (i.e., the area north
and south of the aggregate villages).

Locational Variation and Geographical Distribution

Aggregate villages are apparently restricted to the
northern half of the Georgia coast. Available information
(Moore 1897), indicates that the aggregate village settlement
type and locational pattern might extend to Skiddaway and
St. Catherines Islands. Moore was interested in mounds and
their contents rather than the kind of locational data needed
to demonstrate this. More recent investigations conducted by
archaeologists from the University of Georgia on Skiddaway and
St. Catherines Islands should provide the data needed to deter-
mine if the aggregate village pattern is present.





CROOK


The Cannons Point area of St. Simons Island (Wallace
1975) and the High Point site on Cumberland Island (Ehrenhard
1976) are locationally the same as the aggregate villages.
However each is associated with only one burial mound. These
sites appear transitional between the aggregate village pattern
and an entirely different pattern to the south.

The sites on the rest of Cumberland Island (Ehrenhard 1976)
and those on Amelia Island (Bullen and Griffin 1952; Hemmings
and Deagan 1973) are locationally and typologically distinct
from the northern village sites. They lack multiple mounds
associated with large areas of circular shell middens and appear
to be spread along the marsh edge without the locational
regularity seen in the northern sites. This reinforces a
previous contention that the large consolidated shell middens
of the Northern St. Johns area reflect a different settlement
pattern from that of the smaller scattered middens to the north
(Larson 1958).

Larson has also suggested, on the basis of ethnohistoric
and ceramic evidence, that the Timucua extended as far north
as Cumberland Island and the pre-Spanish Guale from St. Simons
to St. Catherines Island (Larson 1958). The distribution of
the aggregate village pattern suggests that the prehistoric
Guale extended at least as far north as Ossabaw Island. St.
Simons Island and the northern end of Cumberland Island may
represent the southern fringe of prehistoric and early
historic Guale occupation. The Cumberland Island site could
be Timucua rather than Guale, the common locational pattern
reflecting contact between the two groups.

Conclusions

Aggregate village sites suggest a particular cultural adaptation.
Most features of this adaptation remain archaeologically
obscure. However one part is reflected in the location of the
large villages. All other things remaining equal, a single
household or small group of households require a smaller
exploitation range in a given environment than many households
in the same environment. Thus, strategic location would have
been an important condition for the establishment and maintenance
of large villages on the barrier islands. Exploitative range
was effectively broadened and exploitative distance kept to a
minimum.

A more productive technology for the procurement of
tidal stream resources may have been a prerequisite for the
establishment of large villages on the barrier islands. The
small fish recovered from the sites are the strongest indica-
tion we have for an impoundment technology on the Georgia
coast. It would seem impossible to catch small fish in a





AGGREGATE VILLAGE SITES


productive way with hook and line, spears, or other individual
fishing techniques. That the fish occur in schools or large
groups, and are bottom feeders are characteristics productively
exploited by impoundment techniques. Additional support for
impoundment is offered by the presence of mullet, which are
seldom taken on hook and line.

Towns were the residential and political base of the
chiefs reported in the area during the 16th and 17th centuries.
Dealings with the Guale were through the mico of each town.
There also seems to have been a higher office, the position
of head mico, that exerted some influence in the Guale
province (Swanton 1922:80-84). Aggregate village sites are
surely the archaeological manifestation of certain of these
towns and their prehistoric counterparts.

Definition and explanation of the similarities and dif-
ferences between aggregate villages, and their functional and
social position within the total settlement system requires
more secure archaeological data than is now available. Reliable
spatial information is absent for most sites reported in the
coastal area. Shell midden sites, so frequent on the coast,
offer an opportunity to record the patterns of refuse deposi-
tion associated with their occupation. Detailed maps of refuse
deposition are necessary to discern locational variations and
to formulate spatial, anthropological hypotheses that may be
tested archaeologically.

Acknowledgments

The author thanks Lewis Larson and Jerald Milanich for
their thoughtful criticisms of earlier drafts of this paper.
Prolonged discussions with Alan McMichael, Craig Sheldon, and
Daniel Simpkins provided stimulus for several of the ideas
developed here. Gratitude is also extended to C. V. Waters
for his continued support and interest in Sapelo Island
archaeology.

References Cited

Bullen, Ripley P. and John W. Griffin.
1952 An Archaeological Survey of Amelia Island,
Florida. Florida Anthropologist 5:37-64.

Caldwell, Joseph R.
1952 The Archaeology of Eastern Georgia and South
Carolina. In Archeology of Eastern United
States, edited by James B. Griffin. Chicago:
The University of Chicago Press.






CROOK


1970 Chronology of the Georgia Coast. Southeastern
Archaeological Conference Bulletin 13:89-92.

Caldwell, Joseph R. and A. J. Waring.
1939a Wilmington Heavy Cord Marked. Southeastern
Archaeological Conference Newsletter 1(5).

1939b Savannah Fine Cord Marked. Southeastern
Archaeological Conference Newsletter 1(6).

Carr, Archie
1952 Handbook of Turtles. Ithaca: Cornell University
Press.

Dahlberg, Michael D.
1975 Guide to Coastal Fishes of Georgia and Nearby
States. Athens: University of Georgia Press.

Dahn, Robert A.
1950 Salt-Water Fishing. New York: Henry Holt and
Company.

Ehrenhard, John E.
1976 Cumberland Island National Seashore: Assessment
of Archaeological and Historical Resources.
Tallahassee: Southeast Archaeological Center.

Ernst, Carl H. and Roger W. Barbour
1972 Turtles of the United States. Lexington: The
University Presses of Kentucky.

Golley, Frank B.
1962 Mammals of Georgia. Athens: University of
Georgia Presses.

Hemmings, E. Thomas and Kathleen A. Deagan.
1973 Excavations on Amelia Island in Northeast Florida.
Contributions of the Florida State Museum,
Anthropology and History 18.

Johnson, A. Sydney, Hilburn O. Hillestead, Sheryl Fanning
Shanholtzer, and G. Frederick Shanholtzer.
1974 An Ecological Survey of the Coastal Region of
Georgia. National Park Service Monograph Series 3.

Larson, Lewis H., Jr.
1958 Cultural Relationships between the Northern St.
Johns Area and the Georgia Coast. Florida
Anthropologist 11:11-22.





AGGREGATE VILLAGE SITES


1969 Aboriginal Subsistence Technology on the South-
eastern Coastal Plain during the Late Prehistoric
Period. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Michigan.
Ann Arbor: University Microfilms.

McMichael, Alan Emerson.
1977 A Model for Barrier Island Settlement Pattern.
Florida Anthropologist 30:179-195.

Milanich, Jerald T.
1977 A Chronology for the Aboriginal Cultures of Northern
St. Simon's Island, Georgia. Florida Anthropologist
30:134-142.

Moore, Clarence B.
1897 Certain Aboriginal Mounds of the Georgia Coast.
Journal of the Academy of Natural Sciences of
Philadelphia 11(1).

Pearson, Charles Edward.
1977 Analysis of Late Prehistoric Settlement on Ossabaw
Island, Georgia. University of Georgia Laboratory
of Archaeology Series, Report 12.

Swanton, John R.
1922 Early History of the Creek Indians and their
Neighbors. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 73.

Wallace, Ronald Lynn.
1975 An Archaeological, Ethnohistoric, and Biochemical
Investigation of the Guale Aborigines of the Georgia
Coastal Strand. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of
Florida. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms.


Gainesville, Florida
October, 1977










BACK IS SUES


Back issues of the FLORIDA ANTHROPOLOGIST, if available,
may be purchased from the Treasurer at $6.00 per volume ($1.50
for single and $3.00 for double numbers). Volumes 25:2, pt. 2
(Publication No. 6) and 28:3, pt. 2 (Publication No. 7) are $2.00
each. Volumes 1; 2:3-4; 5:1-2; 6:1, 4; 7; 8; 9; 10; 11:1,2,4;
13:1; 17:1; 18:1; 20:1-2; 24:1; 25:3-4; and 26:1 are out of print.

Copies of the FLORIDA ANTHROPOLOGICAL SOCIETY PUBLICATIONS,
a monograph series, may be purchased as follows: Numbers 5, 6,
and 7 at $2.00 each, Number 8 at $3.00. Numbers 1, 2, 3, and 4
are out of print.

Orders with remittances for any of the above should be sent
to the Treasurer whose address is given on the inside of the front
cover. The Society has no resale discount for dealers or resale
agents. Please allow four to six weeks for delivery of back issues.


INFORMATION FOR AUTHORS

THE FLORIDA ANTHROPOLOGIST published original papers in all
subfields of anthropology with an emphasis on archaeology. Contri-
butions from allied disciplines are acceptable when concerned with
anthropological problems. The journal's geographical scope, in
order of importance, includes Florida, Southeastern United States,
Caribbean, and related regions.

Manuscripts should be double-spaced and typed on one side
only of an 8 by 11 inch sheet leaving at least a 1 inch margin
on all sides. Contributors are referred to recent back issues of
the FLORIDA ANTHROPOLOGIST for matters of style and reference.
Textual references should be similar to "(Smith 1964: 78-80; Jones
1969: P1. II, b)." No footnotes. In the "Reference Cited"
section, at the end of an article, do not abbreviate names of
series or journals. Books need full title, publisher's name, and
place.

All illustrative material--line drawings (in India ink) and
photographs--should be included in one numbered series of "Figures"
suitable for a maximum reduction to 6 by 8 inches. Parts of
figures are designated by lower case letters. Figures must be
accompanied by brief descriptive captions. All artwork should be
camera-ready, excepting captions. Figures must be included in
separately numbered "Tables."

Twenty-five reprints without covers of each article are
furnished free to each author or group of authors.

Authors should submit the original and one copy of their
manuscript.




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