• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Copyright
 Front Cover
 Table of Contents
 List of Figures
 Editor's note
 Preface
 Introduction - Otto L. Jahn and...
 Clarence B. Moore at Tick Island...
 Francis F. Bushnell at Tick Island...
 The large Tick Island site beside...
 1961 excavation of Indian Burials...
 The Tick Island artifacts - Otto...
 Reference
 Pictures
 Back Cover






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/UF00027829/00071
 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: VID00071
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: Department of Special and Area Studies Collections, George A. Smathers Libraries
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 01569447
lccn - 56028409
issn - 0015-3893
notis - AAA9403

Table of Contents
    Copyright
        Copyright
    Front Cover
        Front Cover 1
        Front Cover 2
    Table of Contents
        Page i
    List of Figures
        Page ii
    Editor's note
        Page iii
    Preface
        Page iv
    Introduction - Otto L. Jahn and Ripley P. Bullen
        Page 1
        Page 2
    Clarence B. Moore at Tick Island - A résumé - Ripley P. Bullen
        Page 3
    Francis F. Bushnell at Tick Island - A résumé - Ripley P. Bullen
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
    The large Tick Island site beside Harris Creek - Otto L. Jahn
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
    1961 excavation of Indian Burials at Tick Island - Ripley P. Bullen
        Page 20
        Page 21
    The Tick Island artifacts - Otto l. Jahn and Ripley P. Bullen
        Page 22
        Page 23
    Reference
        Page 24
        Page 25
    Pictures
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
        Page 32
        Page 33
        Page 34
        Page 35
        Page 36
        Page 37
        Page 38
        Page 39
        Page 40
        Page 41
        Page 42
        Page 43
        Page 44
        Page 45
        Page 46
        Page 47
        Page 48
        Page 49
        Page 50
        Page 51
        Page 52
        Page 53
        Page 54
        Page 55
        Page 56
        Page 57
        Page 58
        Page 59
        Page 60
        Page 61
        Page 62
        Page 63
        Page 64
        Page 65
        Page 66
        Page 67
        Page 68
        Page 69
        Page 70
        Page 71
        Page 72
        Page 73
        Page 74
        Page 75
        Page 76
        Page 77
        Page 78
        Page 79
        Page 80
        Page 81
        Page 82
    Back Cover
        Page 83
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 ANTHROPOLOGICAL SOCIETY PUBLICATIONS


NUMBER 10








U OF F LIBRARy





THE TICK ISLAND SITE, ST. JOHNS RIVER, FLORIDA


by


Otto L. Jahn and Ripley P. Bullen


Edited by


Adelaide K. Bullen and Jerald T. Milanich



S 2 , .
-- --"


A,


l1).5 The Florida Anthropologist, Volume 31, Number 4, Part 2


December 1978









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
$8.00; student members $5.00. Requests for memberships and
general inquiries should be addressed to the Secretary; dues,
changes of address, and orders for back issues to the Treas-
urer' 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 32601.

OFFICERS OF THE SOCIETY


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

1st Vice President: Jerry Hyde
4233 Oristano Road
Jacksonville, FL 32210

2nd Vice President: Thomas Watson
203 Caroline Avenue
Panama City, FL 32401

Secretary: Marion M. Almy
5321 Avenida del Mare
Sarasota, FL 33581


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


Directors-at-Large

Three years: Adelaide K. Bullen
Florida State Museum
Gainesville, FL 32611

Two years: Thomas Watson
203 Caroline Avenue
Panama City, FL 32401

One year: Robert E. Johnson
4250 Melrose Avenue
Jacksonville, FL 32210


EDITORIAL STAFF


Editor: Jerald T. Milanich
Florida State Museum
Gainesville, FL 32611

Editorial Board:
Judith A. Bense
Dept. of Sociology and Anthropo-
logy, Univ. of West Florida

.Kathleen A. Deagan
Dept. of Anthropology
Florida State University


Editorial Assistant:
Ann S. Cordell
University of Florida


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

John W. Griffin
Cultural Resource Management, Ini
St. Augustine, Florida








THE TICK ISLAND SITE, ST. JOHNS RIVER, FLORIDA


Contents Page

List of Figures....................................... ii

List of Tables........................................ ii

Editors' Note........................................ iii

Preface.. ............................................ iv

Introduction,
by Otto L. Jahn and Ripley P. Bullen.......... 1

Clarence B. Moore at Tick Island: A Resume,
by Ripley P. Bullen........................... 3

Francis F. Bushnell at Tick Island: A Resum',
by Ripley P. Bullen........................... 4

The Large Tick Island Site beside Harris Creek,
by Otto L. Jahn.............................. 7

1961 Excavation of Indian Burials at Tick Island,
by Ripley P. Bullen........................... 20

The Tick Island Artifacts,
by Otto L. Jahn and Ripley P. Bullen.......... 22

References Cited.................................... 24




5161859


List of Figures

Page
1. Map of part of the St. Johns River Valley.......... 1

2. Bushnell's map of the Harris Creek site............ 5

3. Harris Creek site showing collection areas, pit
locations, and condition of site in 1964............ 9

4-60 (Tick Island artifacts)..................following 25







List of Tables

Page
1. Distribution of sherds by types and areas of site.. 12

2. Distribution of non-ceramic objects by types
and areas of site................................... 14

3. Identified bone from Section I at Tick Island...... 16

4. Artifact distribution in Test Pits 1, 2, 3,
5A, and 5B........................................... 18






Editors' Note


The Tick Island manuscript was prepared by Otto Jahn
and Ripley Bullen prior to Bullen's death on December 25,
1976. A section for this publication on Bullen's 1961
excavations at Tick Island, which were funded by the American
Philosophical Society (Grant No. 2886), was not completed by
Bullen prior to his death and the editors have substituted a
portion of an earlier preliminary report previously published
in the Yearbook of the American Philosophical Society.

The editors have made only minor changes in the original
manuscript. Milanich prepared Figure 3 from a "mock-up"
drawn by Jahn and Bullen. The original captions for all of
the figures, including the artifact photographs (Figs. 4-60),
have been retained.

Publication of this monograph is made possible by a grant
from The Wentworth Foundation founded by the late A. Fillmore
Wentworth. The Florida Anthropological Society, Inc., greatly
appreciates this assistance.



Adelaide K. Bullen
Jerald T. Milanich
September 20, 1978


iii






PREFACE


This publication was originally conceived of by Otto Jahn
as a collection of illustrations covering the whole range of
variations in artifacts at the Tick Island site. Bullen was to
write a section covering the cultural placement of these artifacts.
During subsequent conversations it was realized that hardly any-
thing factual was in print regarding the Tick Island site.

Some shell was removed and sold during the 1920's. As far
as we know, no archaeological work was done at Tick Island after
Clarence B. Moore's 1891, 1892, and 1893 visits until Francis
Bushnell made a surface survey of the site in 1959. His work was
done after Mr. Wester Branton of DeLeon Springs had started to
remove the site by dredge and barge for commercial purposes. Next
were excavations in 1961 by Bullen on a grant from the American
Philosophical Society to salvage a sample of the very early Tick
Island burials before it was too late. Lastly, Otto Jahn visited
the site 31 times between 1964 and 1968, made surface surveys, and
dug a series of test pits.

We decided to include all of this available information,
fragmentary as it may be, so that all known data regarding the
Tick Island site might be available in one place. Today the site
is a vast pool of water with a little shell showing above the water
around the periphery.

Before closing this preface, one question should be made clear.
There are (or were) two major sites on Tick Island. One, a little
north of the "n" in Tick Island on the map (Fig. 1), consists of
a long narrow midden and a sand burial mound. As far as we know,
it (Vo-25) is entirely St. Johns I and II in date (Goggin 1952:89).
It was exploited by Moore in the 1890's. We will not refer to it
again except when necessary. This publication is about the earlier
(on the average) and much more important site (Vo-24) located on
the southeastern side of Tick Island beside the mouth of Harris
(or Harrys) Creek and known as the famous Tick Island site.

As to temporal framework, Goggin in his compilations passed
directly from the end of the fiber-tempered period into the beginning
of the St. Johns I period. We feel this is too restrictive and have
used the Florida Transitional period to refer to this dynamic time
which contains some amazing artifacts.






INTRODUCTION


Otto L. Jahn and Ripley P. Bullen

The middle and upper reaches of the St. Johns River valley
are famous for a series of large shell midden Indian sites of
which the Tick Island site was one of the biggest and most impor-
tant. In this area the post-glacial rise in sea level backed up
the St. Johns River to produce a series of shallow lakes, cut off
oxbows, and dead rivers (Fig. 1). This environment was ideal for
the growth of freshwater shellfish, primarily the small pond snail
(Viviparus georgianus Lea) but also the larger apple snail
(Pomacea paludosa Say), and various mussels or freshwater clams
(Elliptio spp.).

There are two groups of these sites: an earlier one with
sites which we believe are located beside old, filled in, stream
channels or oxbows of the St. Johns River (Bullen and Bryant 1965);
and a later one beside present lakes, interconnecting streams, or
the present channel of the St. Johns. On the map the Ocala National
Forest No. 1, the Ocala National Forest No. 2, and the Kimball
Island Mound (Fig. 1, nos.6, 7, and 8) are representative of the first
group; while Bluffton, Dexter Point, the Tick Island site, Spring
Garden Creek, and the St. Francis Midden are representative of the
second group (Fig. 1, nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5).


Fig. 1. Map of part of the St. Johns River Valley
(after Bullen and Bryant 1965:3).







TICK ISLAND


The first evidence we have of permanent or semi-permanent
settlements in Florida are from the first group of sites. We do
not know when these sites were first occupied but radiocarbon dates
from the Ocala National Forest No. 2 site give us a clue (Bullen
and Bryant 1965:23). If the adjusted dates of about 3100 B.C. for
a depth of 10 feet approach reality (and they should), then the
beginning of the mound, 5 feet deeper, might be presumed to have
a date of about 4500 B.C. There is no question but that there is
an overlap between occupation at the two groups of sites. For
example the upper part of Ocala Forest No. 2, with a radiocarbon
date of about 3000 B.C., would overlap with the lower part of the
Tick Island midden for which we have a firm radiocarbon date of
about 3300 B.C.

It would appear that this was the beginning of civilization
in southeastern United States. A permanent settlement seems to be
an essential prerequisite to the development of civilization as
we understand it. The freshwater shellfish gave people a stable
food supply (if they did not overcollect an area) and a chance for
permanent dwelling. This was quite different from the life of
wandering hunters. Of course a shellfish diet has to be supplemented
by vegetable and animal food (Cumbaa 1976). While the women and
children collected shellfish and slow game, the men and late teen-
aged boys hunted deer and other animals. These hunters undoubtedly
made contact with other hunters from other sites and the stage was
set for the gradual development of trade, intercommunication and
the exchange of ideas which in the long run produce what we refer
to as civilizations.

This situation is repeated in the Green and Tennessee River
valleys, in lower Mississippi River valley near New Orleans, and at
Stallings Island near Augusta on the Savannah River. The sites on
the coastal islands of Georgia and South Carolina have extensive
shell deposits with fiber-tempered pottery but with one exception
do not have underlying preceramic remains.

The second group of sites, of which Tick Island is the most
important, span a long period of time. They were occupied from
middle preceramic Archaic time throughout the Orange period when
pottery was tempered with fibrous materials and long distance trade
was present (the Colonial Formative in Ford's 1969:5 terminology).
Occupation continued during the Florida Transitional period
(Bullen 1959) when Orange Incised designs were transferred to the
then newly developed St. Johns ceramics which did not have inten-
tionally added temper. Trade increased considerably at this time
(the Theocratic Formative in Ford's terminology). Occupation con-
tinued throughout the St. Johns I and II periods of eastern Florida.


Editors' note: The corrected calendrical dates for the Tick Island
radiocarbon dates are roughly 4160 B.C. to 4375 B.C.; see editors'
note in section entitled "1961 Excavation of Indian Burials at Tick
Island."







CLARENCE B. MOORE AT TICK ISLAND: A RESUME

Ripley P. Bullen

Moore's writings have to be used carefully as he sometimes
wanders off the main subject or is very vague as to important
details. In his 1892 reports he describes the burial mound and
ridge on the northern part of Tick Island and says he worked there
February, March, and April 1891. According to his 1893 report he
also visited the southern or main Tick Island site in February,
March, and April 1891, January 1892, and March 1893.

These appear to have been short visits made from the northern
burial mound where he did his major work on the island. Moore
(1893:606) writes that "About a quarter mile south of the bean-
shaped shellheap (the northern site) lie acres of shell ridges."
Previously (1892:568) he described the Tick Island site as "a
circular heap of shell converging to an apex at the center." This
may well have been the way it looked to him from the northwest.
All other information suggests the peak to have been in the west
or northwest section. Continuing, Moore (1892:568) says that in
the western side of the shellheap was made a diverging trench,
eight feet wide, at the start, 54 feet in length, four feet beyond
the center of the mound. At 44 feet from the start, the trench was
14 feet wide and ten feet deep. At a depth of 5 feet 8 inches, white
sand was encountered and at 6 feet 2 inches brown sand was found
above the shell base. Many bones were found. These were in better
shape than those found later covered by the white sand. He (1892:570)
describes the latter as having crushed skulls and crushed tibiae
shafts caused by ground pressure. In a platform, constituting the
summit of the mound, were found flexed burials in anatomical order.

This test is interesting. Moore says he dug in the Western area
which is the burial area where a buried sand zone contained burials.
We confirmed his stratigraphy as will be shown in a later section
of this paper.1 We found the burials in the sand zone to have
crushed skulls and crushed tibiae, as well as crushed femura, caused
by ground pressure. Of course the platform had disappeared before
we worked at the Tick Island site. It may have been leveled off in
St. Johns II times to form a temple mound and the superior burials
may have belonged to that period.

In respect to specimens, Moore (1892:575) writes "Throughout
the entire upper stratum were found fragments of pottery," most
undecorated, but "some ornamented with parallel lines." He says


1 Editors' note: this later section was to have been a report
on Bullen's 1961 excavations at Tick Island, but was not completed
prior to his death. The editors have excerpted portions of an
earlier paper on those excavations (Bullen 1962) and reproduced
them here as the section entitled "1961 Excavation of Indian
Burials at Tick Island."






TICK ISLAND


they found "bits" of pottery near every skeleton in the white
sand layer. This may be due to Moore's excavation technique as
we found none in our excavation to the north of Moore's. However,
the distance between the two digs was substantial and the situation
might have been different. He also found a polished celt at a
depth of three feet and several pieces of soft pottery at greater
depths.

Moore (1893:606) also mentioned a 7 by 4 foot wide by 9 feet
deep test which from the humus downward contained rude and thick
pottery, more decorated than plain, exhibiting casts of burnt
out vegetable fibre. This is the first discovery of what we call
Orange Incised pottery. He also mentions some other excavations
but states they yielded only abundant examples of the same pottery.
Moore must have been to Orange Mound before writing the above as
he says (1893:607-8) that Tick Island and Orange Mound are richer
by far than other sites in the St. Johns River valley. They are,
I believe, the only two fiber-tempered ceramic sites he tested.

Moore deserves full credit for the discovery of fiber-tempered
pottery and for stating it was the earliest pottery in Florida.
Science, however, had to wait 50 years before James B. Griffin in
1945 (1945:218-23) broadcasted "the significance of the fiber-
tempered pottery of the St. Johns area in Florida."


FRANCIS F. BUSHNELL AT TICK ISLAND: A RESUME

Ripley P. Bullen

Following Clarence B. Moore's late 19th century investigations,
we have no record of any serious archaeological work at the Tick
Island site until Bushnell's six visits in 1959. Previously,
probably in the early twenties, a tram track (Fig. 2, "old Trails")
was installed from the Tick Island site northward to Tick Island
Run (Bushnell 1960:28). Unquestionably, this was used to haul shell
from the Tick Island site to barges on Tick Island Run during the
Florida land boom of the 1920's. A row of pilings, seen across
Harris Creek from the Tick Island site, suggests another means of
shell removal.

Sometime about1958 Mr. Wester Branton of DeLeon started
collecting shell at Tick Island by bulldozer and dragline, putting
the shell on a barge, and transporting the barge.down Harris Creek
across Lake Woodruff and up Spring Garden Creek to his shell yard
at DeLeon (Fig. 1). Bushnell spent his six days at Tick Island
shortly after Branton commenced removing shell from there.






JAHN AND BULLEN 5



Suihmp












c



Fig. 2. Immediate geographic area of the
Harris Creek site (from Bushnell 1960:26).




We are reproducing Bushnell's sketch map (Bushnell 1960:26)
as it shows well the relative relationships between various features
on Tick Island. "G" and "H" are, of course, the northern burial
mound and midden. The Tick Island site is indicated by "A-D".
Moore undoubtedly approached the Tick Island site from the north
along the "old Trails". It should be noted that Bushnell's map
indicated that area "D" was the highest at the Tick Island site.
This is in agreement with other reporters. I did not visit the
site until two years after Bushnell made his sketch map. By that
time Area C was just a pool of water and Branton had substantially
modified the southeastern corner of the Tick Island site. Per-
sonally I would tend to rotate Areas A-D a little counterclockwise
and then move it a little towards the east.

Bushnell, a biology teacher from St. Petersburg, divided the
site into four areas (Fig. 2) and made a surface collection. In
Area A, he marked out six squares, each six by six feet on all sides.
Material from these six squares was kept separate by squares to see
if there were any significant differences. The only difference proved
to be that all fiber-tempered sherds came from squares 4, 5, and 6
or the eastern half of Area A (Bushnell 1960:26). The dominant
pottery types, St. Johns Check Stamped, St. Johns Plain, and St.
Johns Incised were more-or-less evenly distributed among these squares.

I would imply from the above that the eastern part of Bushnell's
Area A was older than the western part. In other words the midden
grew westerly in this area. I would expect that if one had dug a pit
in Square 6 he would encounter fiber-tempered remains shortly below







TICK ISLAND


the surface while a pit in Square 1 might be dug six or more
feet without penetrating any fiber-tempered ceramic deposits.

Bushnell notes that Area A was the richest for all artifacts
except projectile points although they were usually found in a
fragmentary condition. One exception was a polished greenstone
celt, ten inches in length.

Area B produced numerous examples of Orange Plain and
Incised (fiber-tempered pottery) with a scattering of chalky ware
(St. Johns paste) on the surface. Apparently it was older, on
the average, than Area A.

Area C was also relatively barren except for three small shell
mounds on the midden, each containing a burial. These burials were
decayed beyond recognition as to position of interment. One con-
tained a small scalloped shell gorget and a small triangular chert
point. In Area D, he detected stratigraphy with St. Johns sherds
only on the direct surface, Orange period sherds for the next two
feet, and then apparent preceramic remains. This is, of course,
the standard sequence but it is nice to have an observation to
support it.

Bushnell notes that when the edge of the ridge in Area D was
removed, it exposed a white sand zone, five feet below the then
present surface, with dense midden shells both above and below.
In this zone he saw 15 to 20 decayed burials. Projectile points
were associated with some of these burials. These points were all
of exceptionally fine workmanship. Skulls were crushed inwards.
This brief burial account agrees fairly well with Moore's account
and that found in excavations to be mentioned in a following section.

Bushnell's illustrations are extraordinarily small and not
suitable for detailed comparisons. However, some pertinent infor-
mation can be secured from them. After standard pottery examples he
illustrates a large, decorated, bone pin or dagger, projectile
points of both chert and bone, a clay "blunt," a serpentine plummet,
sherd bar-gorget, scalloped shell gorget, an antler handle, sawed
deer bone, conch dipper, antler flakers, and various bone pins,
plummets, and bone tubes.

Bushnell's data, while preliminary in nature, gives us our best
view of the Tick Island site so far. It supports Moore's strati-
graphy and from this collection demonstrates this to have been a
large and important site with connections outside of Florida.





THE LARGE TICK ISLAND SITE BESIDE HARRIS CREEK

Otto L. Jahn

Tick Island has become well known for the wealth of artifacts
left by Indian cultures at the Tick Island site. Unfortunately
its reputation has been based more on limited salvage collections
than on extensive archaeological work. Except for the early
explorations of Moore (1892, 1893) and the report by Bushnell
(1960) no information has been published. For this reason the
material scattered in many private collections is currently the
best source of information on the site. By including material
from many of these collections with other unpublished studies, it
is hoped that this report will provide a reasonably complete record
of current knowledge on the Tick Island site.

Site Description

Tick Island is (or was) located in the St. Johns valley, between
Lake Dexter and Lake Woodruff. Here the valley is broad compared
to areas to the north and south. The area is largely in marsh with
large areas of wooded swamp. However, it is likely that the valley
now is quite different from when the Indians first settled there.
The area now is cut by many channels which probably represent
earlier locations of the St. Johns River bed. The water table also
may have changed with time. At present the river has minimal ele-
vation changes and little current. Evidence of rising ocean levels
and land submergence along the Florida coast (Bullen, Bullen, and
Clausen 1968; Lazarus 1965; Warren 1964) suggests that similar
changes have occurred here because of the low elevations existing
in the St. Johns valley. This is also evident in most of the Indian
sites along this part of the river where mound bases are currently
flooded. An example is Lungren Island, a shell mound near Astor.
This mound is now an island and could not have been built with the
river at its present level.

This section of the river valley was evidently favorable for
the Indian cultures that subsisted on shellfish. Some nine large
shell mounds and several small ones occur within a few miles of
Lake Dexter. Most of these may have been occupied at a similar time
as indicated by a preceramic stage at many and perhaps all of the
major mounds. The number and size of the mounds indicates that a
sizeable population lived here at that time.

Tick Island lies near the edge of the valley. It is now
forested, except for marsh on the western end, with a wooded swamp
along the edges and a pine and palmetto forest in the central, higher
elevations. Across Tick Island Run to the north a wooded swamp
extends to the mainland. Across Harris (Harrys) Creek to the south
there are extensive areas of marsh and wooded swamp. Trees here are
shorter than on Tick Island suggesting the lack of solid support.
The ability of trees to grow on deep muck makes it difficult to
speculate on the changes in vegetation which may have resulted from
changes in the water table. If the changes in water level were
gradual, comparable changes in the muck level could have occurred,
resulting in limited changes in the general ecology of the area.
Information on the depth of the muck deposits would be useful in
estimating the changes in vegetation that may have occurred.





TICK ISLAND


Two large shell mounds were located on Tick Island, one on
Tick Island Run on the north side and the other on Harris Creek to
the south. Both mounds, like many other accessible sites, were
to some extent mined for shell for commercial uses during the early
1900's. In 1958 dredging was resumed at the Tick Island site and
it was soon evident that this site was exceptionally rich archaeo-
logically compared to other sites in the area. Although destructive,
the dredging provided access to underwater deposits and to large
volumes of artifacts. Fortunately much of this material was
salvaged and can be used to provide some information about the site.

As indicated by Bushnell (1960) the Tick Island site covered
a sizeable area and was reported to be 20-25 feet thick in some
locations. The site bordered on a waterway for the full length of
the southeastern edge of the mound. Opposite the site is the
entrance to Harrys Creek, a channel that may have carried a larger
portion of the St. Johns River at an earlier time. To the southwest
a channel leads to Mud Lake and Eph Creek, a narrow channel that
separates Tick Island from Dexter Island. To the east Lake Woodruff
is only a few hundred feet away.

Major features and the condition of the site in 1964 are shown
in Figure 3. For convenience the site was divided into four arbi-
trary sections. In Section I the mound probably reached an elevation
of three to four feet above the water table. (Actual water levels
vary widely in the St. Johns River Basin. In this discussion the
average low water level is used as the reference point. The water
level may rise two to three feet during the rainy season and during
exceptionally dry years it may drop to a lower level.) Specific
information is not available but it is likely that some variation
in elevation occurred within this section. The height of the shell
decreased gradually toward the west and was also lower on the north
and east sides.

Section II was similar to Section I in general appearance with
separation based on the intervening low area along Harris Creek.
Shell in the low area was at or near the water level and like the
shoreline in Section I was still undisturbed. In Section II the mound
also had an elevation of as much as two-three feet near the shore-
line. This raised area was connected to that in Section I. To the
east also the extent of the site was not evident since it is still
covered by accumulated organic matter. In both Sections I and II
the base of the mound extended about six feet below the water
table. Except for the borders these sections have both been com-
pletely destroyed since my sketch map was made (Fig. 3).

Section III was separated from Section I by a depression in
the mound surface where the shell was at or below the water table.
Section III reached a higher elevation that Sections I and II,
possibly as high as eight to ten feet in its elongated central
portion. The top of this secticnhas been stripped to within two
or three feet of the water table with the base and borders remaining
largely undisturbed. At its eastern end, the higher elevations






JAHN AND BULLEN




site completely destroyed


.undisturbed areas


Section I


I 3


/ -, mound base
/ undisturbed







.. Section V '



rI ** .\ .

': A'.- ^ 4.


-- D


Section II


north
~


Fig. 3. Harris Creek site showing collection areas (letters),
pit locations (numbers), and condition of site in 1964.


1 F


E
D
C






TICK ISLAND


merged into Section IV and extended toward Section II. (This point
was oppostie the former bridge across Harris Creek used for the
original 1900 dredging. The raised roadbed across Section II, which
continues from Section III, was therefore probably not an original
feature.)

Section IV consisted of a single large mound, the highest point
on the site, reportedly as high as 25 feet. This area also was
partially separated by depressions in the mound surface from Sections
II and III. The center of Section IV had been partially to com-
pletely destroyed when I mapped the site. Much of the base and most
of the border remained as did a large area on the southern edge.
The base of Section IV was shallower, probably averaging about three
feet below the water table. At the northern edge the base of the
mound appeared to be a few inches above the water table. This edge
of the site was within a few yards of the eastern end of the central
pine and oak forest on the island. This northern edge of Section IV
was well defined by sharp changes in elevation compared to the poorly
defined borders noted elsewhere. To the east there was a suggestion
of a ramp extending onto Section IV. There were also some irregular
features in the mound at the northern edge of the depression be-
tween Sections III and IV. If these are original features they may
represent a stage in construction in this area.

Low areas within the site as well as the surrounding swamp
were flooded during seasonal high water. In these areas the shell
was covered with a foot or more of organic matter. Although there
was some evidence of ramps connecting Sections III and IV with I
and II, none of these reached the present water table. Construction
of Sections I and II must, therefore, have been largely done during
periods of lower water levels. This division and low elevation of
the site differs considerably from that of most sites in the vicinity.
Most of these have relatively small bases, greater height and simple
circular outline, resembling the general outline of Section IV of
the Tick Island site.

Vegetation on the site differed from the surrounding area.
Presence of the shell apparently stabilized the soil even in the
lower areas, as trees up to two and three feet in diameter were
present. These were larger and taller than in the surrounding swamp.
Differences between the species composition of the vegetation on
the site and both the swamp and the central ridge undoubtedly occur
but have not been studied.

Artifact Distribution--Surface Collections


Between 1964 and 1968 (when dredging ceased) 31 visits were made
to the site. In addition several collections were made at the shell
washer that could be associated with their source on the site. The
shell was washed at the shell yard in DeLeon and many collectors
secured their specimens there. Most of the material collected was
exposed by the dredging operation due to time limitations and to





JAHN AND BULLEN


the volume of material that existed in the underwater deposits.
However, several test pits were attempted (numbered in arabic,
Fig. 3).

No collections were made from Section I during the initial
dredging operation. An area near the shoreline and an associated
strip running towards the northwest were not dredged until 1968.
The latter area had been stripped of its surface layer earlier but
the area near the shore was undisturbed. Collections were made
from subdivisions of these areas as the dredging proceeded (Section
I, Area L, Area M, Fig. 3). Collections made in this way could
not, of course, be used to determine accurate distribution patterns.
However, errors were considered small enough to permit some general
comparisons between various areas of the site.

An examination of the types of pottery found in Section I
(Table 1) shows that the majority of the sherds were of St. Johns
Plain. Both St. Johns Check Stamped and St. Johns Incised sherds
were also common, indicating occupation from the Transitional
through the St. Johns IIA periods. Other Florida Transitional types
such as St. Johns Pinched and St. Johns Punctated were also repre-
sented. A number of other types were present in limited numbers,
probably representing trade items (Table I, miscellaneous). Perhaps
the few Deptford and occasional Norwood sherds are also trade items.
St. Johns Check Stamped sherds were more common in Areas A, Areas C
and G than in other areas, particularly F, H, I and J. The former
areas were largely undisturbed with Areas A and G located on the
higher elevations and Area C being at the transition to the lower
part of the site to the east. The central areas, which had been
stripped of their surface earlier, also may have lost most of the
more recent deposits. Other areas of Section I were not stripped
as deeply as Areas F, H, I, and J since the mound originally was
highest there and sloped downward toward either end. The site at
Area M, like C, was at or near the water table and was previously
undisturbed. These differences in distribution of pottery types
suggest that check stamped sherds were limited to a thin surface
zone which in the central areas may have only been two or three
feet thick. This indicated that the majority of this section of
the site developed during the St. Johns I period.

In Section II, Area A, pottery types are similar to those
in Section I and this area occupies a similar position along the
shoreline. Fiber-tempered sherds were more common here than in
Section I (Table I). Some of these may have been moved here since
initially much of the dredged material was transported over this
area. However, nearby areas also produced fiber-tempered types,
indicating that area may have been occupied during the Orange
period (as was also suggested by Bushnell).

The other areas of Section II differ in that all types are
less common. St. Johns Plain and Check Stamped are present but
other St. Johns types are nearly absent. There is a much greater
frequency of fiber-tempered Orange and Norwood sherds (Table I).
This area of the site therefore dates from the Orange period, and










Section
Area
Ceramic
gorget
pipes (tubes)
sherd pendants
"clay objects'a

Stone
knives
"chopper", hammer-
stone, grinders
plummet
points
drills
worked chips
chips
unworked stone


Shell
celt
scraper
columella chisel
Busycon toolsh
Strombus gigas adze
ornaments
plummet
bowl
worked marine shells

Bone
pins, awls, points
handle
dead
alligator-gar
chisel
worked bone
worked turtle
shell
turtle shell disc

Cemented ashes


I. r,.. r


A B CD E F


1
1 6
4
3 1 1 10


9 3 7


6d le if 3f


1 5 1

2 1 1
3 15 5 25 7 8 11
1 1 6 7 3 1


1
1 6


4 1


2 1
2


6 1 1 7


1 2


2 1


I III I I IIII_ IV


I J K


L M I A


7 2 5b


C D I A


1 1

2e

lg


5 11


3 2


1
5 4


1 1


A B C Totals


1 1


1 2c



2g
1
2
1 11
1





3
1


2


16

16
1
13
4
12
2 149
22


1
5
2
1 15
5
2
1
1 4
6


37
2
1

1
16

2
1

7


12 24 12 79 31 17 41


2 29 3 20


7 14 33 14 21


8 10 10 22


aSome are Poverty Point types; one is a sandy paste ball; Cone each is stemmed; four choppers, two grinders; ehammerstones; fall grinders;
stemmed; hammer, brick, gorge, chisel.


Table 1. Distribution of sherds by types and areas of site.


Totals


4 413


A BI


i i






JAHN AND BULLPEN


is earlier than Sections I and IIA.

Pottery types in Section III were similar to those in Section
II, Areas B, C, and D indicating a similar time period. However,
material from Section III was above, while that from Section II was
below, the water table. The base of Section III must therefore be
older than II. In Section III the frequency of sherds was less
than in Section I, but greater than Section IV. In Section IV
there was again a reduction in pottery types along the edge of
Section III. Except for this area and the border with Section II
(and possibly in some surface layers which had been removed earlier)
there was no pottery in Section IV. This section therefore dates
from the preceramic period and is the earliest part of the site.
(This agrees with results of excavations to be given later).

It would be interesting to determine the age of the base of
Section III. As noted earlier, most other sites in the vicinity
have a simple circular structure like Section IV of this site.
Available information indicates that those sites also are largely
preceramic. If the relation between preceramic periods and simple
site structure is valid then the base of Section III may represent
the earliest ceramic zone at the Harris Creek site as well as the
initial departure from the simple mound structure. Sherd inclusions
as temper were observed in the surface collection in St. Johns Plain
sherds from all sections of the site. Semi-fiber-tempered St. Johns
Plain sherds were also observed in Section I, II and III. These
types were not common in any area, however. Straight-sided St.
Johns vessels were noted in Section III. Although this shape may
have been present in Sections I and II, most vessels apparently
were circular with a round bottom. Fiber-tempered vessels were
commonly straight-sided with flat bottoms.

Other types of artifacts were included in the above collections.
These are listed in Table 2, grouped by the type of material used.
Included in the ceramic items were a number of pipe fragments.
These were of varying lengths and diameters but all had a straight
bore. (Pipes with right angle stems have been found, however).
Usually the bore was larger at one end and several were fire black-
ened from use. These pipes were of St. Johns paste and were only
found in Section I.

The "sherd pendants differ from the one molded gorget found
in being made from sherd fragments. These sherds were shaped into
circular discs or occasionally an oval shape. They usually had
one or two drilled holes. Wear patterns at these holes suggested
use as a pendant. These were usually St. Johns Plain sherds but
one was an incised sherd. Pipes and pendants concentrate in Area D
of Section I, an area surprisingly weak in late St. Johns pottery
types.

Ceramic "objects" (Small 1966)included a wide range of types,
from irregular clay lumps to a variety of well made shapes and
occasionally some incised designs. These objects are of St. Johns
paste and designs resemble St. Johns Incised. The irregular shapes







Section
Area A
St. Johns Series
Check Stamped 30
Linear Check
Stamped 2
Simple Stamped 4
Mat Impressed 3
Pinched 7
Punctated
Triangular Preset 3
Indented
Noded 2
Side Lugged
Molded forms
Incised 33
copy Stallings
Punctated
with fibrous
inclusions
Plain 218

Deptford Series
Check Stamped
Bold Checked
Stamped
Linear Check
Stamped 2
sand tempered
plain incised

Norwood Series
Incised
Simple Stamped
Plain

Orange Series
Tick Island Incised
Incised
Plain

miscellaneous
steatite


I II III Iv


B C D E F G H I J K L M | A


2 101


4 5 198


2 8 5 8
3 13 2 2 49
1 1
8 32 6 5
1 4 2 2
1 6 1
4
15 3
3 4 5
la
95 38 85 31 21 43


1 4 3 19 14 20


4


2


2

2

3 4


3
1 2
1
5 8
2 5
1


2 3 3
1
lb ic
3 47 25 33


1 2
182 485 478 122 347 264 55 108 68 337 374 272


C D I A


2 5 14

1
2
2







1 3 2




4 50 76


1

1

1


1

1 2


1
4 45 193 101
9 3 34 37


4



3







9

1


98 I 36


16
2 5


A LB C outals


890

56
128
15
77
25
13
6
28
15
3
510

5

3
5,451


304 302 652 634 174 387 571 63 124 76 420 432 352 2458


58 289 234 133 50


atetrapods; bere; ctetrapods; dDunn's Creek Red; el scored, 1 Crooked River Comp. Stpd. on St. Johns paste, 2 cord marked; St. Andrews Comp. Stpd;
cord marked; 2 Lochloosa Punct., 1 Perico Linear Punct., 1 shell marked; icord marked.


Table 2. Distribution of non-ceramic objects by types and areas of site.


Total


7,722


mj_ 1






JAHN AND BULLPEN


may represent surplus paste from pottery making, which may explain
their widespread occurrence through the site. The more carefully
made objects represent a considerable artistic effort but are of
uncertain function.

Stone artifacts were much more common than these collections
indicate. For this reason the wide distribution of stone work is
better shown by the presence of chips than the larger stone pieces.
Experience from these collections and information from other
workers indicate that these stone pieces were not uniformly distri-
buted. Generally the frequency increased from the rear to the
front of the site. Within a given section, however, the frequency
varied from rare to common. For example Section I, Area D, had a
greater number of stone artifacts than others examined at the
washer. In Section IV, Area B, four of the stone pieces came from
within a few feet of each other. These patterns suggest that
these artifacts (and possibly others) were clustered, possibly
at specialized work areas or house sites.

Several types of unworked stone are listed (Table 2). Since
the entire site is man-made, these stones were also brought there.
These stones indicate that the Indians did not work all stone be-
fore bringing it here. Also some of this material was of a type
or form that would be of limited use. Included was a layered,
mineralized, piece approximately an inch and a half in diameter
that was tentatively identified as "cave pearl". Some unworked
stone may have been intended for use in grinding and finishing
other items but many were too small for such use.

Bone artifacts are listed in Table 2. Food bones were also
collected and have been kindly identified by Dr. Elizabeth S. Wing,
zooarchaeologist at the Florida State Museum. The result is
presented in Table 3 according to collection areas. In the table
the first figure represents the number of bones of a species, the
second the minimum number of individuals represented.

This, of course, is only a small sample from the site but it
is interesting to note the presence of beaver, black bear, and dog.
Beaver remains have been found in Florida before, but they are rare.

Tick Island is one of a number of Archaic and fiber-tempered
ceramic period sites where dog bones have found mixed with food
bones in the middens. Our conclusion has to be that they were
killed and eaten the same as the other animals. Later, in burial
mound times, we find them buried in the mounds the same as humans.

Shell artifacts were numerous and widespread but the frequency
of specific items was not great enough to show patterns. There
were several trends, however. The two shell ornaments were found in
a later section while shell picks and bowls were only found in the
early parts of the site. This location of the bowls is consistent
with the view that these were preceramic cooking vessels (Webster
1970). The bowl found in Section IV, Area C, (two feet above the
burial zone, Bullen 1962) had a fire blackened bottom. All of the






TICK ISLAND


shell artifacts were made from marine shells, indicating extensive
trade or travel to the coast throughout the occupation of this site.
The presence of unworked marine shells again indicates that material
was brought to the site before it was worked. (Since trade items
generally are finished goods these unworked shells may be evidence
of Indian travel). As with stone, some shells were not of the type
normally worked.


Table 3. Identified bone from Section I at Tick Island

Species Area B Area C Area F Area C

Didelphis marsupialis (opossum) 1-1 1-1
Castor canadensis (beaver) 1-1
Ursus americanus (black bear) 2-1
Procyon lotor (racoon) 1-1 2-1
Lutra canadensis (otter) 1-1 1-1
Canis familiaris (domestic dog) 1-1 2-1
Odocoileus virginianus (white-
tailed deer) 17-2 10-1 13-2

Alligator mississipiensis
(alligator) 6-1 2-1 6-2 10-2
Chelydra serpentina (snapping
turtle) 8-3 5-2 16-3 6-3
Chrysemys sp. (terrapin) 26-1 10-1 19-1 5-1
Trionyx ferox softshelll turtle) 14-2 1-1 15-3 1-1
Gopherus polyphemus (gopher
tortoise) 6-1 3-1 3-1
Crotalus atrox (eastern diamond
rattlesnake) 5-1

Phalacrocorax auritus (cormorant) 1-1
Meleagris gallopavo (wild turkey) 2-1
Anas fulvigula (mottled duck) 1-1
Lepisosteus platyrinchus garfishh) 7-1
Ictalurus sp. (catfish) 1-1 4-2

First number represents number of bones; second is minimum number
of individuals (MNI).


The most common forms of worked bone were pins and awls. Bone
was used for other tools, but as with shell, these were not frequen-
tly found. No pattern of distribution was apparent except that no
worked bone was found in Section IV, Areas B anc C, and food bone
was also rare there. The absence of bone in the preceramic area
suggests that larger animals were not hunted at that time, with
subsistence being based on shellfish. In later periods also, much
of the available food bone was not used. The presence of fossil
bone indicates that attempts may have been made to work it like
stone.





JAHN AND BULLEN


A few of the pieces listed here had crude incised designs.
Some delicately carved shell pieces and bone pins have been found.
The next section indicates a range in style and workmanship. A
number of intricately carved bone pins came from near Section II,
Area D, indicating that they, like the stone work, were localized.
Also this location suggests that these pins were part of the
Orange period complex (Table 3) and this is supported by the
similarity between some designs on the pins and the pottery.

Cemented ash areas presumably represent burned shell from
fire pits which has fused into a more or less homogeneous mass.
This was undoubtedly more common than was recorded. These masses
crumble on dredging and also may resemble clumps of shell that
have been fused by the leaching action of rainwater. Although
observations are limited, this type of material appears to be
more common or perhaps limited to the later periods at the site.

Artifact Distribution--Test Pits

Data from the test pits (Fig. 3) tends to confirm the conclu-
sions based on surface collections. Pit 1, the most extensive
(three by five feet) dug in six inch levels in Section I, showed
that St. Johns Plain and Check Stamped were the dominant sherd
types in the upper zones. This supports the earlier conclusion
that this part of the site was the last to be occupied. The
other pottery types may represent minor types for this period
although the cordmarked and complicated stamped sherds likely were
trade items. Features noted in this pit included a high organic
content in the first level which rapidly decreased with depth, and
the possible presence of sand in lower levels. Also, two possible
fire pits were noted in Level 4. One in the northwest corner was
18 by 5 inches and three inches thick. Another mass of burned
shell extended 18 inches along the southwest edge and was two-three
inches thick. Bits of charcoal were noted in Levels 2, 3, and 4.
Unfortunately this area was dredged before the pit could be ex-
tended to a maximum depth.

Test Pit 2, 10 by 10 by 10 feet in size, was in the low part
of the site which is near the present water level. This "pit"
represents a single level from beneath the base of a large uprooted
tree. Material from this pit also shows St. Johns Plain and Check
Stamped to be the dominant pottery types. The similarity between
this and Pit 1 indicates that both the lower and higher areas of the
present shoreline were occupied during St. Johns II times. Since
the Pit 2 area is now flooded much of the year it is likely that
the water level was lower during this period of occupation.

Test Pit 3, 1 by 2 by 1.5 feet was located further from the
shoreline and in the area where the surface had been removed earlier.
Only a small test was made because of the shallow water level and
density of the shell at this location. The results (Table 4) indi-
cate a different cultural period from the other two pits. Here the
frequency of St. Johns Check Stamped sherds is relatively low and
two Incised sherds were present. Although this may be too small a
sample to be representative, it is in agreement with data from the
dredged samples noted earlier.






Test Pit 1*


Level 1 2 3 4 5


Clay tempered, cord marked
St. Johns Check Stamped 24
St. Johns Punctated
St. Johns Simple Stamped
St. Johns Plain 13
Crooked River Compl. Stpd. like
on St. Johns paste
* A bone pin, bone awl, broken stone point, and
from Level 4 have been omitted


1
marine shell from Levels 2-3 and


1


19


2 worked stones


Test Pit 2


St. Johns Check Stamped 73
Dunn' Creek Red 1
St. Johns Simple Stamped 1
St. Johns basket impressed bottom 1


Test Pit 3


St. Johns
St. Johns
St. Johns


Check Stamped
Incised
Plain


Test Pit 5A


Level 1


St. Johns Plain
Orange Incised
Orange Plain


Test Pit 5B


Level 1


St. Johns Plain
Orange Incised
Orange Plain
teatite


c3

6n

r-
rt


6




JAHN AND BULLPEN


Two small test pits in Section III, Area A, provided little
information other than that the frequency of sherds was low
compared to Sections I and II. In one pit a burial was uncovered.
This consisted of a tightly clustered group of some of the larger
bones and included parts of a deformed jawbone; most of the skull
and many other bones were missing, indicating a secondary or a
disturbed burial.

Three pits were dug in the undisturbed wooded area east of
section IV, Area B. Of these, Pit 4 was a small test along the
wall of a dredge cut near the east side of the site along what may
be a shell ramp. No sherds were found in this 1 by 3 by 3.5-foot
pit and only one stone chip was noted in the second six-inch level.
This suggests that this area may be preceramic and of the same time
period as the main part of Section IV. Of 125 food bones recorded,
112 were in the top two levels and none came from the bottom (7th)
level. The bones were mostly turtle, but a few deer and fish were
included (Table 3).

A second small pit was dug in the lower (southern) edge of the
wooded area, adjacent to Section III. Here, as in other low areas,
there was approximately one foot of muck overlying shell, with the
water table being near the shell level. Two St. Johns Plain sherds
were found near the bottom of the muck and several other plain
sherds were found in the shell.

Test Pit 5A (Table 4) was dug near the center of the wooded
area (Fig. 3). This four by four-foot pit was dug in six-inch
levels to the water table (about three feet). An additional two by
four-foot pit (Test 5B) was added later on the west side. Except
for one steatite sherd, only St. Johns Plain, Orange Plain and
Orange Incised sherds were found. The absence of St. Johns Incised
sherds may indicate that this area was not occupied at that time.
This resembles Section II, Areas C and D and III, A where incised
sherds were not too common. The greater frequency of incised sherds
in Section I may indicate that occupation during this period was
toward the front of the site, possibly at a time when the water
table was lowest. It is also possible that the Indian population
was smaller during the Florida Transitional period and involved less
of the site. Such changes in population are supported by the exten-
sive quantities of St. Johns Plain sherds at this site as well as
at the large contemporary mound on the north side of the island.

The mixing of fiber-tempered and St. Johns sherds in Pit 5 may
have been due to the burial in Level 4, assuming this occurred at a
later date. This burial was incomplete, like that found in Section
III, Area A, but differed in being scattered over a larger area.
This scattering included the teeth and indicates either that this
was a secondary burial or that the skeleton had been disturbed prior
to burial.

The sherds found in Pit 5 indicate that this area was occupied
later than the area at Pit 4, but probably at about the same time as
Section II, Area C and III, A. The depth of this occupation level
is unknown although the ceramic complex seems to change at about the
two foot level. Work in the last level was hampered by the water
table and the associated heavily concreted shell so the artifact
list may be incomplete.





TICK ISLAND


Other than the shell concretions noted at the water table
no features were observed in these pits. No fire pits comparable
to those in Pit 1 were observed.

Summary

The available information from dredged material and test pits
indicates that the northwestern (rear) part of the site was occupied
during the preceramic Archaic period. The central part of the site
was occupied during the Orange and Florida Transitional periods.
The southern (front) part of the site was occupied during the
Transitional, St. Johns I and II periods. It appears that the site
was more or less continuously occupied throughout these periods, in
contrast to most other sites in this area. During this time the
expansion of the site towards the channel may have been due to a
declining water level and then the front part of the site increased
in depth as the water level increased. Based on the occurrence of
St. Johns Check Stamped sherds as the last major type and the lack
of historical items, it is believed that this site was abandoned
before historic times.

1961 EXCAVATION OF INDIAN BURIALS
AT TICK ISLAND1

Ripley P. Bullen

Years ago, probably during the 1920's, a large amount of shell
was removed from the Harrys Creek midden (Tick Island) for paving
purposes. Recently Mr. W. W. Branton of DeLeon Springs has been
removing shell from the site by dragline for commercial reasons.
In the rear of the midden he discovered many burials in a sandy
deposit overlain and underlain by shell midden material which did
not contain any pottery. This fact was brought to the attention of
the Florida State Museum and the grantee visited the site. It was
evident that many more burials were still in situ and that pottery
was not present, suggesting the burials might be preceramic in date
(pre-2000 B.C.), which, if true, would make them extremely important
as we have no good-sized collection of Archaic human skeletal mate-
rial in the southeast other than those from the Tennessee River
shell heaps such as Indian Knoll. In order to preserve some of the
skeletal material and burial data this grant was made by the American
Philosophical Society.

One hundred seventy-five burials of both sexes and of a normal
range of ages were recorded, virtually all tightly flexed. Chemi-
cally the bones were in an excellent state of preservation but
mechanically many had been badly crushed by ground pressure. With
them were stone arrow or spear points, bone awls or pegs, and shell
hammers or picks (Type X) but no pottery. One stone point was point-
ing inwards immediately above an iliac crest and another was still
stuck into a lumbar vertebra. Both must have been lethal. A third
was pointing downwards immediately behind a scapula. Otherwise it
was difficult to demonstrate definitely that these specimens were


SEditors' note: this section is quoted from Bullen (1962:478-480).
The form of the bibliographic citations has been changed.






JAHN AND BULLPEN


directly associated with the burials. Stone points and bone tools
were much more apt to be found near burials than elsewhere but to
imply that these Indians had been massacred would not be in agree-
ment with the facts. Bone pathology was also noted such as healed
fractures, extreme periostitis, and peculiarities of the teeth.

Burial occurred in concentrations of many closely associated
burials suggesting group interments at different times. Such an
arrangement may be indicative of charnel houses where bodies
accumulate for group interment. At the top and one side of our
largest concentration was a lens of black charcoal-impregnated
sand, six inches thick, which covered an area about five by ten
feet. Along and under one edge of this lens were two lines of post
holes, each about six inches in diameter, frequently filled with
white sand and sometimes outlined by cemented snail and mussel shells.
This feature may represent a burned charnel house or an area where
bodies were dried on wooden racks over fires. Unfortunately, the
post holes extended from one dragline cut to another (refilled) so
that we could not trace any possible post hole pattern.

As Mr. Branton had bulldozed several feet from over the area
in which we dug, it was impossible to get archaeological dating in-
formation from higher deposits. He had also dug a pit, one hundred
by two hundred feet in area, immediately to the south. We ran a long
trench beside this pit until we came to what appeared to be the edge
of an aboriginal cut into the deposit. Superimposed at this point
and extending towards the burial area but lost at the present sur-
face, because of shell removal, was a mucklike zone containing a few
sherds belonging to the Transitional period.

Obviously, dating the excavated burials from Harrys Creek is a
problem. Excavation data suggest that later Indians dug a tremendous
hole in a preexisting preceramic Archaic midden, built some type of
charnel house therein, introduced vast quantities of white sand in
which they serially interred hundreds of burials which had been
collecting in the charnel house (or houses), covered the complex
with the Archaic midden material previously removed, and finally, put
a muck seal on the sides of the resultant low mound. Judging from
the sherds in the muck zone, this occurred sometime after 750 B.C.
It could have occurred as late as A.D. 800 as quantities of check-
stamped pottery are known for other parts of the Harrys Creek site.

Suggestions of a charnel house and arrangement of burials in
sand with large quantities of flexed interments closely intermingled
are reminiscent of the Weeden Island burial cult of the Florida Gulf
Coast (A.D. 300-1000). However, the lack of any pottery, stone
celts, plummets, or Busycon vessels is surprising if these burials
were of people contemporaneous with those of the Weeden Island
culture. The large quantities of stemmed points and the lack of
corner-notched ones would seem to imply an earlier period. The
Busycon picks are equivocal.

These burials may date from the local equivalent of the Weeden
Island period (A.D. 300-1000), from the Transitional period when
burial mound practices were being introduced but had not yet
become rigidly formalized (750 B.C.), or may represent interments
of Archaic people of an earlier period. This point is extremely





TICK ISLAND


important in any evaluation of the physical anthropology of these
skeletons. The best way to resolve this question, lacking archae-
ological certainty, is by radiocarbon dating. The grantee is happy
to report that, thanks to the courtesy and interest of Dr. James B.
Griffin, Director of the Museum of Anthropology at the University
of Michigan, samples of the charcoal impregnated sand lens, as well
as shell tools, have been sent to that institution for radiocarbon
determinations.

The situation at Tick Island is not unique. Moore reported in
1893 (1893:617-623) that he found burials in sand below a pottery-
producing shell deposit and above a preceramic midden in a small
test at the Orange midden, in the St. Johns River Valley forty-four
miles south of Tick Island. At that site, check-stamped pottery
(post A.D. 800) was in the top foot and fiber-tempered pottery
(2000-1000) B.C.) in the next three and a half feet, all above the
sand burial zone. The question at the Orange midden, as at Tick
Island, is: "Do the burials go with the check-stamped pottery, the
Transitional period, the fiber-tempered pottery or are they pre-
ceramic in date?" We await with interest the results of radiocarbon
analyses for the temporal evaluation of the skeletal material sal-
vaged by this American Philosophical Society grant.1


THE TICK ISLAND ARTIFACTS

Otto L. Jahn and Ripley P. Bullen

Under the original concept, this publication was to illustrate
the artifacts from the Tick Island site, including all known varia-
tions. To this end, Jahn visited people with important Tick Island
collections and photographed their materials. In some cases the
participants supplied some of the photographs. The results follow
in Figures 4-60.

Those participating were Mr. and Mrs. James Varner of Winter
Park, Mr. Robert Stackhouse of Winter Park, Mr. and Mrs. Otto Jahn
of Winter Park, Mr. Jack Taylor, Mr. Dean Smith of DeLand, Mr
Benjamin I. Waller of Ocala, and Mr. Don Serbousek of Ormond Beach.
The last also supplied photographs of various other collections
including Branton's.

Editors' note: These radiocarbon samples were subsequently
analyzed at the University of Michigan. The four samples and
dates were: 5450+300 radiocarbon years: 3500 B.C. (M-1264);
5320+200 radiocarbon years: 3370 B.C. (M-1269; 5450+180 radio-
carbon years: 3500 B.C. (M-1268); 5030+20 radiocarbon years:
3080 B.C. (M-1270). The last date is on marine shell and appears
to be slightly out of line with the three dates on charcoal.
Corrections on the three dates to calendrical years yield an
interval of roughly 4160-4375 B.C. A.K. Bullen (1972:166-68) has
discussed the syphilitic-like osteopathologies present on some of
the Tick Island skeletal material excavated by Bullen. They are most
probably an early (Archaic) treponemal varietyofwhat is now called
syphilis (a treponemal infection). All four radiocarbon dates (M-1264/
5/8/70) were in direct association with the narrow sand zone in which
these burials were found.






JAHN AND BULLEN 23


It is our understanding that all specimens illustrated came
from the Tick Island site. However, in a project of this magnitude,
it is possible that a few non-Tick Island specimens have been
included. We are sorry if such has occurred.

In order to place the Tick Island artifacts in a frame of
reference, Bullen has attempted cultural allocation of the various
specimens. Of some specimens this is well known, but for many we
have no firm data.

(Editors' note: legends of the artifact photographs [Figs.
4-60], which were prepared by Bullen, include archeological periods
when possible. Bullen's summary discussion of cultural allocations
and inferences was prevented by his death. Jahn and he, however,
had a final conference and agreement on all legends shortly before
he died.)









REFERENCES CITED

Bullen, Adelaide K.
1972 Paleoepidemiology and Distribution of Prehistoric
Treponemiasis (Syphilis) in Florida. Florida
Anthropologist 25:133-174.

Bullen, Ripley P.
1959 The Transitional Period of Florida. Southeastern
Archaeological Conference, Newsletter 6:43-53.

1962 Indian Burials at Tick Island. American Philosophical
Society, Yearbook 1961, pages 477-480. Philadelphia.

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

Bullen, Ripley P., Adelaide K. Bullen, and Carl J. Clausen
1968 The Cato Site near Sebastian Inlet, Florida. Florida
Anthropologist 21:14-16.

Bushnell, Francis F.
1960 The Harris Creek Site, Tick Island, Volusia County.
Florida Anthropologist 13:25-31.

Cumbaa, Stephen L.
1976 A Reconsideration of Freshwater Shellfish Exploitation
in the Florida Archaic. Florida Anthropologist 29:49-59.

Ford, James A.
1969 A Comparison of Formative Cultures in the Americas.
Smithsonian Contributions to Anthropology 11.
Washington, D.C.

Goggin, John M.
1952 Space and Time Perspective in Northern St. Johns
Archeology, Florida. Yale University Publications in
Anthropology 47.

Griffin, James B.
1945 The Significance of the Fiber-Tempered Pottery of the
St. Johns Area in Florida. Washington Academy of
Sciences, Journal 35(7):218-223.

Lazarus, William C.
1965 Effects of Land Subsistence and Sea Level Changes on
Elevation of Archaeological Sites on the Florida Gulf
Coast. Florida Anthropologist 18:49-58.

Moore, Clarence B.
1892 Supplementary Investigations at Tick Island. American
Naturalist 26:568-579.






JAHN AND BULLEN 25


1893 Certain Shell Heaps of the St. Johns River, Florida,
Hitherto Unexplored. American Naturalist 27:8-13,
113-117, 605-624, 708-723.

Small, James F.
1966 Additional Information on Poverty Point Baked Clay
Objects. Florida Anthropologist 19:65-76.

Warren, Lyman O.
1964 Possibly Submerged Oyster Shell Middens of Upper Tampa
Bay. Florida Anthropologist 17:227-230.

Webster, William J.
1970 A New Concept for the Busycon Shell Receptacle.
Florida Anthropologist 23:1-7.

























U


-r /ibk


U


Fig. 4.
lower,


Upper, dragline removing midden at Tick Island;
unique vessels with appliqued lugs and handles.


p

''



























I I CM
CM


Fi?

I--


g~.-


Fig. 5. Ceramic variations at Tick Island.

a-b, Tick Island Incised; c, f-g, k, Orange Incised; d, 1,
St. Johns Incised; e, _, Orange Punctated; h, St. Johns Punc-
tated; i, St. Johns Side Lugged.


/-e
n
~ Lc

;. c











~w.


~ .-. .-.-.
II e




















CM





Fig. 6. Variations in Orange Incied and Plain.
CN


Fig.6. ar~a~on nOrane IcJed ad Parn
































































CM


I I


I I I


r -
.


Fig. 7. Some incised variants.


a-i, k-i, n-r, Orange Incised; j, m, Norwood Incised.


- ,L


r



















S I ICM
CM


,,
i I
\I
i ;J!
''
I

.F^.~


'/


S I I I I I I I I i
CM


Fig. 8. Typical sherds of thE
St. Johns paste.


e Orange 3 period; i, is


CM
































































I I I I I'
CM


Fig. 9. Designs of the Orange 4 period.

a-h, k-n, Orange Incised; i-j, sand tempered incised.


;li\


L




















r2Y

e


C I
CM'


KC
I I I I I I 1 1 I
CM


Fig. 10. Late variations in designs.

a, c, Orange Incised; b, d-n, St. Johns Incised; d, e, f,
incised on inside also.































































Fig. 11. More design variations, St. Johns Incised.







-----


9


Fig. 12. St. Johns Incised sherds and miniature plain vessels.














A
C










e~




[-ImT1- I I I


k


n.
n


If'


'r
q w^


C I
CM


- [ I I


Fig. 13.


St. Johns Punctated, Triangular
Pinched sherds.


Punctated, and


j
-im-tp


Ie...


3
'i r

u
e
f












C 1


I I I I
CM


d -.' q14


dli


I I
CM


.-


-: '


1 I I
CA


Fig. 14. Some variations in early St. Johns pottery.
a-b, h, St. Johns Pinched; c-f, St. Johns Punctated; g, i, p, St.
Johns Incised; k, St. Johns raised lines; j, spouted St. Johns Plain
vessel.


S I I I I
CM


~l~cs~
Ij~15~ ~a~t











KTX, ~


I I I I I I II I
CM-
V--_.r, 12 1


MCM













Fig. 15. More variations in early St. Johns ceramics.

a-e, g, i-i, m, St. Johns Side Lugged; f, h, St. Johns Incised;
k, open pouring spout; 1, tetrapodal base.


r~ca~*a~~
--Cllb~


















L171


I11^ --

=J /- B .... _.'--- -

I *'- -


e -i

J-^-^ -; -


e ^


CI
CM


1 I I I 1


Fig. 16. Mat impressions on bottoms of St. Johns paste
containers; j-k, plasticene imprints above and to right
show how mats were made.


u










;-L~ -h.


i
b


d


U-

q.Y

f-' ? ,"~l


41.

l~


6"r
.4%s
C;4w *yw


CMI I I
CM


Fig. 17. Other pottery from Tick Island.

a, Norwood Simple Stamped; b-e, k, Deptford Cross-Stamped, Simple,
unique, and Check Stamped; f-h, St. Andrews, Sun City, and
Crooked River Complicated Stamped; i, cord marked; j, punctated
over cord marking; 1-m, St. Johns Check Stamped; n-q, miscellaneous
incised; r, Perico Linear Punctated.


Is,
c~-
It "r




















I I IM
CM


I I I I I I I I


S i M
CM

Fig. 18. Late St. Johns pottery at Tick Island.

a-b, e, St. Johns Check Stamped (some is linear check stamped);
c, f, St. Johns Simple Stamped; d, St. Johns Shell Marked.


I

,
3
t~:~5
~d

























7





e~.


g


.1


I I- aIi., CM



CM

Fig. 19. Clay effigies and miniature vessels.

a, human effigy; b-d, faces incised in trianguloid clay
plaques; e-i, unidentifiable representations; j, tiny St.
Johns PunEtaited pot with support holes; k-1, miniature St.
Johns Plain containers.







I' .












\
i .C."" : i:'.
-J-i- .
fc .
^L ."


C r. -






e


-F- F-- FT I
CM





9


h


3-


r fb 1

A y



,t.tS~m


I I 1 I I I I I I
CM


D P

CMI I I
CM


Awt.
*A
.-^


ri


$ i .


a
...~.' 4. Y
I-. -
.4". or
-I
4-


Fig. 20.


Clay representations and other objects.


a, clay face; b, conventionalized face on trianguloid plaque;
c, e, decorated clay; d, clay ball; f, rayed ornament of carved
shell; g, incised bone; h, incised steatite; i-n, perforated clay
discs and "bannerstones"; o-p, clay stamps.


-rs5 I















C r

CM


'x y
V 1 t I I I 1 1 I I 1


Fig. 21. Poverty Point clay objects and small clay vessels.
a-h, small St. Johns Plain vessels; i-k, u, x-v, Poverty Point clay
objects; 1-m, decorated clay balls; n, unidentified object; o-p,
v-w, decorated and undecorated dumbbell-shaped objects; q-t,
perforated "plummets."


I
f- f
J- v


e
I^ ^-r

-^',


lto
^B^









a i
"e -"4
g\


I I I I I I CM
CM


CM


1 IC I I I
CM


i:


CM


Fig. 22. Additional clay objects.
a-f, miniature St. Johns Plain containers; g-n, various clay
objects and balls; o, decorated portion of St. Johns vessel
with extremely thick base; g, clay foot, traces of red paint.


I'








j


k v..
r^














Sb d e



wll 1 11A1 .r





















n
SCM




Fig. 23. Various clay rings, beads, and small containers.







Fig. 23. Various clay rings, beads, and small containers.












C r
t. i -' -1
'W-4000 , ;~


- Ih


FT-- I I I I I I I
CM


CM

CM


/ -4


.-.

P C
-- A


a w n 10


M v
S^^ ,^^^tfr uJ~ *' 1


S I I I I I
CM


Fig. 24. Clay tubes or pipes, some blocked end, dumbbell-
shaped objects, and miniature vessels.


r


1a


t~ssr.
c, ' ;_d i
r
~e~ m
Ir, '


b








I


I1


I1


d


/

0


Fig. 25. Examples of worked bone, sherd, and
effigy vessel; and magnified cross section. of
pottery (note bone inserts in p-g).


shell; bird
fiber-tempered


i;Xr\c"9 ~ ~
AR :.
r ~CY \.





v




i t


Ki i, -


IT%


F~Ck;


tpr


n -

I I


Fig. 26. Olivella beads, bone points and awls, hollow bone
points, worked bone, alligator teeth and portion of jaw.


q


S I I 1

























a Ii I

CM




- .--.---.


cM


c l I l I l l l I d 1 I I I I 1 I I II
-' -





CM CM

Fig. 27. Double ended bone points, awls, and pointed bird bone.


___ I:iY ______


--


- -------u~h~-~----


Lu
.i


~Or


~--~r~YL~?i~y~~RESEIFIIIS~B~"' ~L


ILP~


*-CIrTr
_~--,----- - -..=7~~ ~L
-~.-_1~-


Sift~it


~ ~yY" --IP~i~LI~LICC -.-L`WLYI~.-lp ~4~1


~ISIYILII















. ~


a


aM..~. - S


CM
b ^ .~ p 3


" .-, .


J~t
~

.5


I 1 1 I I I I I I I I h
CM





( -1 -1--
~AiLe


-I- *i
UI


i I i I I I I
CM


I 1 I I I I I I I I I
CM


Fig. 28. Steps in bone awl preparation, awls made of different bones.


MRL


a
--



Ir- a


6- 1. 1" M


- ---II I


'--~'.~`Y-----' __L


IPB~ --Pl)ci~l~iba~L~iL--*a~lg~iCSCB~ ~IP


iL~


,,, _


v--


-~nec~c--


m


~4, 1













aI
a b


3
u
t'
?91
i.af


j


I'


4
If

i


I ,


e


g


r;


1 I I I I I I I I1
CM


Fig. 29. Some varieties of bone pins and
awls including those of alligator bone.


" Ic
C


f
F;


it-
'r~;














Fr. --wm- -,


i I
CM


b V-"-------
S IC I I I I
CM


C


AM .4 _^.aapua


#. -*


~~~~. ~


I CI I I
CM


Fig. 30. Additional bone awls, wideheaded bone pins, and a
bone fishhook; h-i, both have eye in lower end; f, has holes
from side through head.


b


5.


a
a1


---- ~L


PIIP~SiiM3W


c~E~~ --


rlC-~ -


L "" --- -,


~'3~YF~.


I-


f jg. ..(













.,L.IA - -


b

d
d ...----- -- ....-

f .....-..--.-- --










I


C(V


n
0




r


Jgb~h---------NNW


I I j


Fig. 31. Various examples of decorated bone pins.


C ~"""CE~








2
C)


r

1<'


0,


0


I


u


711


M.


i


I


'I


\e


U









c


k


;r
r
I


u-












ai

a-
--a kL


p


fj


./ d
c \ *<


U


'4'E

i


II
h CM


Fig. 33. Hollow bone points, punches, pins, and worked bone.


e
',































a b c d e




/-W
r-w



































m -q

Fig. 34. Decorated and worked bone.

a-i, m-p, t-w, x, decorated and plain punches and awls; j,
decorated bone socket; k-1, incised turtle shell; q, r-s,
worked bone.
worked bone.










I *


11 04


I



*1


a C- .b




.i W ^ ^ -. g *
' C "c d e rm
Fig. 35. Worked bone, fish vertebra beads, drilled turtle
shell, and drilled stone.













a b


I l IC
CM


d


i


/


4?


0


a'


Fig. 36. Bone handles and sockets, worked bone, and healed
bone fracture; m-n, fragments of alligator jaws.





















a
a


0


I I I I
CM


Fig. 37. Plain, drilled, or decorated raccoon and otter penis bones,
lynx(?) mandible, drilled alligator and mammal teeth, fish vertebrae
and turtle bone, decorated tubes, and drilled deer toe bones.


0


ii


I -


f "t. *iLICI--- -


k,












d f
l f g h


o P q
. % C.
abl^irte


t


C1


J I I



e" +'K-+


j







h
x












h'


m
k

















W e


v "
SI
.


n


i
J


SCM
CM


Fig. 38. Decorated bone pins, awls, punches, animal jaws,
and fish jaw.


V

'I
















IY----~S


- --- ------------ ------
II !


~OWN",-
6 I&Aw

ei


Ai


g
I I I I I I I I I I Ik~'r~.
CM


1 1 I I I I I I ..


Fig, 39. Drilled wolf jaw, cut deer jaws, and dog skull.


'4;i~~Jc~~





)tjlA-~iKL,
3-


OLrP


7r,









4-a


*p


I I I


L~;r'


p.


\ =%lc.
.' .'


\


qF~ -


oi\


m In' oL 01 I I p
*^-r" ^^CM-


I II I I
CM/


Fig. 40.


Imitation animal jaws, cut and incised or drilled
shell ornaments.


0








` i .
\I
~4 {* J2


U


Itl I I I lu l
CM .v


w CM





dl
, *^^^


S11111
CM


I 1-1I I I I I 1
Cl-1


Fig. 41. Drilled discs of fish and turtle bone, pottery, and
shell.


a 9


'S 1


Fr


Ir I
s


el^S


e Io


















a


b c d ^ e

CM


k I I I
k I CM


n o


s I I I 1 I I
CM


p i I I I I I I I
q CM


' CMz


' a' &,c~


Fig. 42. Plummets and pendants of shell, stone, and clay.


r



























I .


4 /


I I I I I I I I I I
A a(M f


SI I Ih I 1 i.


Fig. 43. Shell chisels, gouges, and celts.


r


1
-
* I


..1~
;B
2


b,
-~- ~z~r~ssr~: I~r-E~~e~~m~
1.
r
I;.
1






























0


















*H
r-I








C,
__ U
* ^


U





0L
o.



0


t1.


I : r -r'


j I ia

















Ar
\,J

d

c CM









ACM
7m


Fig. 45. Worked shell and shell food remains.


C~

r























na
0










L...


b


3B


m
/ '*'


r


w
v x,/
&9^ y


U


Fig. 46. Miscellaneous shell,


~5~'




,iS
j


\a, :

~YD;J


,1 -
'* ^ ^


~(~1~)4


U `-


stone, and bone specimens.


s 'cr


S
;a,' |i
i~cfj^ *


'















J I I I I l T I
SCM


'1
q r.
bM


ICi
Ct


s. t u V Y
I I I i w y


1'l''im i'i r r n'


0'


A. .


Fig. 47. Various objects made of shell, bone, clay, and stone.
a-f, m, o, drilled pendants; g-h, decorated bone sockets; i-1, n,
worked bone and shell tubes; E-v, unfinished objects; w-y, a', e'-h',
i'-n', clay tubes; z, clay plummet(?); b'-d', i', beads; o'-p',
columella chisels.


--7 g


M


P'
,,


~-~S~
" I























U L


P


I I I I I I I
CM


Fig. 48. Pendants and bannerstones of shell, stone, and fossil
bone.


"T;4


e', .


















e
CM


9r. .... .

.. t .
^ita~ya^^^


I 1 I I
CM


41,a-'


Fig. 49. Miscellaneous objects of stone, shell, and wood.
a-b, Adena-like tubes; c, tool handle of wood; d-e, drilled cups(?);
f-3, small sandstone bowls; h, carved wood; i-1, columella chisels;
m, steatite sherd; n-o, fossil bone; p, worked turtle bone; q,
"cave pearl."


~B~c la~aa~nY~a~bk--


h.T % Vt



















SkV o


u V
I 1 1 1


w\
W \j


Fig. 50. Plummets and pendants of
shell tools; a, i-g, b-e', 1, bola
type; d, has concave top.


z al

z a-


stone, shell, and clay;
weights, Poverty Point


Ir i


--






a

b*

9


9


ji


Fig. 51. Stone knives,
scrapers, and points;
bone pins and awls.


1 I I C I


s7

c1


S~c; :~3)' .1B


L~~/
-r~
r
..'rC


a


- -**'


E ~IS~















I I I I I I
CM


R. iCM I
,/ cn


{d


C)


I I I I I I I I I" I I R A
CM
Fig. 52. Stone knives, scrapers, and utilized flakes;
hammerstone, and three grinding or sharpening stones.


V'-'I


I
~4r~p

IP r






















1 1 1 I M
CM _____


I i I I I

CM


Sn


w T


i '


i 1 I -1 I l
CM


pS+:
rG .


Fig. 53. Various stone knives, scraping tools, and hammerstones.


pt~


8m


















C


?b


CM


Fig. 54. Knives and bifacial chopping or digging tools.


Age7 ".




t-? ll x

*M^ ^*


- ,


~ '"
~U~$ ~















a
.'1
k A

III -
i l l


n P hc


~. r s -
q r''TTT










x y z a'

SCM


1 1
CM


C


Fig. 55. Projectile points and knives.

a-e, corner notched; f, Bolen point; 9-1, stemmed; m-p, s-t, x-e'
various forms, all rare at Tick Island; q-r, u-w, asymmetric
trianguloid knives.


.


e


h4

CM


n


IK e'
7L:' '1 1 '~'' I~ ~













b
b


,.i,




PM
1 .


r1















I I I I


Fig. 56. Notched and stemmed points.


^










I e

'U '


wK Wi m
ij -I -- 1I- I -- I -i
CCM


ow wp
.. .. '


Ii


y W zW a'

CM


1i1




ef


Sli i' Ji' '
h 1111.11111C
CM


CM.


Fig. 57. Stemmed points from Tick Island.


;t


I
5)-

r~;

ser


.. -***.*/,, J













a b


d


f g


.4~


SI'





t


I T


r\


I i I I I I I I
MC z
CM


Fig, 58, Variations in notched and stemmed points.


h


t
iP














* ~A~


&c A
li~LC


i-A tv
L !

.1;
1 'l


4


tAj/


,'S '


A *6A 46
C C
MP7A


Fig. 59. Stemmed and basally notched points.


1*


1 >


r
Am


4%
- t'


4^


A - ,
W ^?4,


,,
-&











n 1 1I AL
I) 4 I AL '4









CM i





--I I
__b d d 4
So l e, fIth hfa


t 0 V' WI


Fig. 60c Points, drills, and hafted scrapers.








PUBLICATIONS of the Society appear at irregular intervals as
funds permit. Funding is provided by dues, special gifts, or
subsidies provided by the author. PUBLICATIONS are distributed
to all members of the Society on issuance. Additional copies
may be purchased from the Treasurer (see inside front cover).

1. Two Archeological Sites in Brevard County, Florida, by
Hale G. Smith, 1949. Price $2.00.

2. The Safety Harbor Site, Pinellas County, Florida, by
John W. Griffin and Ripley P. Bullen, 1950. Out of print.

3. The Terra Ceia Site, Manatee County, Florida, by
Ripley P. Bullen, 1951. Out of print.

4. The European and the Indian, by
Hale G. Smith, 1956. Out of print.

5. Florida Anthropology, edited by
Charles H. Fairbanks, 1958. Price $2.00.

6. Fiber-Tempered Pottery in Southeastern United States
and Northern Colombia: Its Origins, Context, and
Significance, edited by Ripley P. Bullen and James
B. Stoltman, 1972. Price $2.00.

7. Florida Spring Confirmed as 10,000 Year Old Early Man
Site, by Carl J. Clausen, H.K. Brooks, and A.B.
Weslowsky, 1975. Price $2.00.

8. The Palmer Site, by Ripley P. and Adelaide K. Bullen,
1976. Price $3.00.

9. The Canton Street Site, St. Petersburg, Florida, by
Ripley P. Bullen, Walter Askew, Lee M. Feder, and
Richard L. McDonnell, 1978. Price $2.00.

10. The Tick Island Site, St. Johns River, Florida, by
Otto L. Jahn and Ripley P. Bullen, 1978 Price $3.00




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