Table of Contents
 Excavations in Dade and Broward...
 A Human Head Adorno from the Vance...
 The Contribution of the Amateu...
 Artillery Projectiles from the...
 Research Appeal for the Carolina...
 Table of Contents
 About the Authors

Group Title: Florida anthropologist
Title: The Florida anthropologist
Full Citation
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00027829/00138
 Material Information
Title: The Florida anthropologist
Abbreviated Title: Fla. anthropol.
Physical Description: v. : ill. ; 24 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Florida Anthropological Society
Conference on Historic Site Archaeology
Publisher: Florida Anthropological Society.
Place of Publication: Gainesville
Frequency: quarterly[]
two no. a year[ former 1948-]
Subject: Indians of North America -- Antiquities -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Antiquities -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: periodical   ( marcgt )
Summary: Contains papers of the Annual Conference on Historic Site Archeology.
Dates or Sequential Designation: v. 1- May 1948-
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00027829
Volume ID: VID00138
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
        Page 1
        Page 2
    Table of Contents
        Page 3
    Excavations in Dade and Broward Counties 1959-1961
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
    A Human Head Adorno from the Vance Site
        Page 14
        Page 15
    The Contribution of the Amateur
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
    Artillery Projectiles from the Civil War: Engagement at Newport, Florida
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
    Research Appeal for the Carolina Parakeet
        Page 30
        Page 31
    Table of Contents
        Page 32
    About the Authors
        Page 33
        Page 34
        Page 35
Full Text


2000 Florida Anthropological Society Inc.

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

all rights to the
and shall be
and images of

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

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

Contact the Florida Anthropological Society for additional
information and permissions.



Volume XV No.1
March 1962

/3, 75-F


a publication of the florida anthropological society

Volume XV, No. 1

March 196 2

Excavations in Dade and Broward Counties, 1959- 1961
D. D. Laxson ..................

A Human Head Adorno from the Vance Site
Ripley P. Bullen ...............

The Contribution of the Amateur
Charles H. FairbanAs ...........

Artillery Projectiles from the Civil War Engagement
at Newport, Florida Stanley J. Olsen ..............

Research appeal: Daniel McKinley ...............................

Index Volumes 13 & 14 .........................................

Book Notice ................ ... ..... .........................

GIST is published quarterly by
the Florida Anthropological Soc-
iety during March, June, Septem-
ber, and December. Subscription is by

membership in the Society for individuals
interested in the aims of the Society. An-
nual dues are $3.00 (students S1.50).
Libraries and institutions may subscribe

$2.75 per year.


Membership applications- Secretary
Subscriptions Treasurer
Back issue orders Treasurer
General inquiries Secretary
Newsletter items President
Manuscripts Editor

PRESIDENT. Cliff E. Mottox
DBM Research Corp., Cocoa Beach
Ist VICE PRES.-Charlton Tebeau
University of Miami, Coral Gables
2nd VICE PRES.-Hale G. Smith
Florida State University. Tallahassee
1960 SW 61Is Ct., Miami 55
SECRETARY-Mrs. Cliff E. Motto.
DBM Corp., Cocoa Beach


Mr. Noel P. Hermann
6267 SW 12th St., Miami
Dr. William H. Sears
Florida State Museum, Gainesvlle
Mr. Carl A. Benson
2310 Resthaven Dr., Orlando

Charles H. Folrbanks
Department of Anthropology
Florida State University, Tallahassee

Excavations in Dade and Broward Counties


D. D. Laxson

The salvage excavation of four sites in Broward County and two in Dade County is dis-
cussed. All six sites were typical South Florida black earth middens of small size. The
sites ranged from Glades I to Historic Seminole. Broward Site #4 contained neither shell
tools or shell debris. The Cheetham's Hammock contained some semi-fiber tempered ware,
the earliest so far found in Southern Florida. A unique type of projectile point cut from
mammal long bones was reported from the 202nd Street Site.

The sites here described were excavated as part of the archeolo-
gical salvage program carried on by members of the South Florida
Chapter of The Florida Anthropological Society. Tests began in
January 1959 and were concluded in November 1961. The sites
were scattered over an area of approximately 100 square miles.


Broward No. 1 is a circular hammock 300 feet in diameter, partly
cleared in the center and ringed by ficus trees. Swamp buggy tracks
enter from the north and west. Soil is black dirt and marl. The site
is located in the SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Sec. 24, Range 39 E, Town-
ship 51S. Broward No. 2 is a small, wooded area approximately 4.5
feet above the surrounding terrain. A traverse canal runs 600 feet

The Florida Anthropologist, Vol. 15, No. 1, March, 1962

to the east and the Snake Creek Canal is about 1000 feet to the south.
Its location is the SE 1/4 of the NE 1/4, Sec. 34, Range 40E, Town-
ship 51S. Broward No. 3 is an irregular shaped hammock, several
hundred feet across and rising sharply on the west, north, and south
sides. It slopes gradually on the east side to the surrounding saw-
grass. Soil is 12-14 inches of black dirt on grey marl with the lime-
stone at 18-20 inches. It is located in the NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4, Sec.
18, Range 40E, Township 51S. Broward No. 4 is a rectangular ham-
mock with a length of 500 feet E-W. It is about 3 feet above the burned
off muck land surrounding it and the soil is black dirt to 20-24 inches,
then sand to limestone. Its location is the NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of
Sec. 24, Range 40E, Township 51S.
202nd Street is a small, circular, wooded knoll in pasture land.
It is about 2 feet above the terrain and the soil is black dirt, sand,
and a base of creamy limestone. Its approximate location is Tract
24 in the NW 1/4 of Sec. 1, Range 40E, Township 52S, Dade County.
Cheetman's Hammock is an oval shaped area 150 feet E-W and 100
feet N-S. The soil is extremely shallow with about 7 inches of black
dirt on calcareous marl. It is in the SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Sec. 26,
Range 39E, Township 53S, Dade County.


Broward No. 1.

Stratification at this small site was typical of the area, all basic
pottery types, with the exception of Matecumbe and Dade Incised,
were represented in sequence. Plain sherds were found beneath Ft.
Drum Incised and it is presumed that this signifies the site belongs
in the late Glades I period. The usual shell tools such as Busycon
picks and Stombus celts were also found. Ornaments were repre-
sented by a single, unfinished columnella plummet. One socketed and
one fluted bone bi-point were found in the 0-6" and 6-12" level re-
spectively. Clam, conch, and small shells along with numerous pieces
of bone were at all levels.

Broward No. 2.

Stratafication at this midden extended from Glades I to historic
times. In the upper level were Seminole glass beads, a clay pipe, and
a .50 caliber musket ball. Pieces of an Hispanio-Mexican ware
(Fig. 1,d), of which there is no published description, were also
found at the 0-6" level. This pottery is thought to be what Dr. John

M. Goggin describes as "Guadalajara Polychrome." Samples of this
ware, resembling in some degree modern Mexican "tourist trade"
ceramics, were found in the Higg's site (Boyd, Smith, Griffin, 1951,
and Smith, 1956) in Brevard County, Florida. It is thought to be from
late Plate Fleet wrecks and seems to establish occupation of this
Broward site during the A. D. 1700-1750 period. Strombus celts and
fluted points were distributed throughout the lower levels.

Broward No. 3.

Stratigraphy at this site resembled Broward No. 1 with the excep-
tion of two trade sherds, Gordon's Pass Incised (Fig. 1,c) (Willey,
1949 a), of the Belle Glade I period, in the 6-12" level. Again, plain
sherds underlay Ft. Drum Incised at the lower levels. A single, rare,
concave Busycon celt was found at the 0-6" level. In conjunction with
the bones of a very large alligator was found a broken, sharp mussel
shell knife and Stombus celt. It is possible they were broken skinning
the reptile. A pygmy rattlesnake was killed on this site by the exca-

Broward No. 4
This site was unique in that, not a single shell fragment or imple-
ment was found in the several tests excavated, and no Ft. Drum
Incised was found at the lower levels. Miami Incised was the earliest
pottery located.
In the 12-16" layer was found a small, trianguloid, stone knife
(Fig. 2, a) heavily patinated and worn. It resembled those found in
late pre-ceramic Archaic times. In size and shape it is not too
different from some late triangular projectile points but its work-
manship and method of manufacture was different. It is thought to be
old and possibly a souvenir found by an Indian. Shark vertebrae
with deeply grooved rims (Fig. 1, a), such as would result from
'over and under" or 'side by side" lacing, were in nearly all levels.
Vertabrae of this type are found in other Glades black-dirt and
coastal middens. Several fine, incised rim lugs (Fig. 2, f) were
found in the 0-4" and 4-8" level.

Cheetham's Hammock.

This shallow, Dade County site included, along with the usual Glades
pottery types, several sherds with a prominent zig-zag design on
both rims and sides (Bullen and Laxson, 1954). Their occurence in a
Glades II complex is again hereby documented. Fragments of a beau-

Figure 1. A- Grooved shark vertebra; B- Dade-like Incised; C-Gordon's
Pass Incised; D- Hispano-American Ware. Scales varied.



E r,

Figure 2. A- Stone knife; B- Decorated bone pin fragment; C- Unique
bone point; D- Sarasota Incised; E-I- St. Johns Incised;
Incised rim lug; G- Deptford Linear Check Stamped on chalky
paste; H- Carrabelle Incised. Scales varied.

tiful example of bone hair pin (Fig. 2, b), engraved with parallel,
horizontal, and vertical lines with over-lapping diamonds, was found
in the 0-6" level.
Several trade sherds, Keith Incised of the Weeden Island 1 and 2,
Glades II period and a dimpled sherd, showing Weeden Island In-
fluence, were in the upper level. In the upper level sherds were
found that resembled Dade Incised (Fig. 1, b). They are thought
to be trade sherds. Seminole beads attested to at least a visit by

202nd Street

The first hint of possible early occupation of this site came when
sherds described as semi-fiber tempered, semi-chalky ware (Goggin,
1952) were found in the 22" level. Further excavations uncovered
St. John's Incised sherds (Fig. 2, e, i), a copy of Deptford Linear
Check Stamped on chalky paste (Fig. 2, g) and a St. John's Simple
Stamped sherd. Trade sherds, such as Sarasota Incised (Fig. 2, d),
Englewood Incised and a "Carrabelle-like Incised" (Fig. 2, h) were
also found.
Since pottery of the semi-fiber tempered, semi-chalky type was a
product of experimentation and appears immediately after or at the
end of tFe fiber tempered period, i. e., Bullen's Transitional (1959),
Rouse's Malabar 1 (1951), and Goggin's Glades I (1949): It is thought
that a date as early as 500-750B.C. could be assumed for the first
occupation of this site. The date mentioned appears substantiated by
the St. John's Incesed sherds of the late division of the Orange Peri-
od (Goggin, 1952) and the Deptford copy of the St. John's I-A early
period. While the Englewood sherd together with St. John's Check
Stamped sherds in the 6-12" zone appears satisfactorily in a Weeden
Island II-Glades II time period, the appearance of the Sarasota In-
cised sherd in the 12-18" zone is probably much too early. The St.
John's Simple Stamped appears much earlier stratigraphically than
those found at Norococo (Griffin and Smith, 1949). Apparently the
12-18" zone is a mixed level.
It is felt this site should be further excavated. It is easily reached,
is a well known camp site for both adults and juveniles and, frankly,
the author withdrew to avoid the responsibility of indiscriminate
digging over which he had no control.
A type of bone point never before excavated by the author in the
Tequesta sub-area, was found on this site (Fig. 2, c). They were

made of cylinderical pieces of leg bone of varying diameters and
lengths. The bone is cut neatly across one end and obliquely on the
other to sharpen it in the manner of socketed points.
The artifact distribution (Table 2) does not reflect the number of
these points found on the site as many are in the hands of other
excavators. Their depth is felt to be more correct.

Excavation of these typical black-dirt middens covered a three
year period. The tests were kept small deliberately due to lack of
time, courtesy to the land owner, and the possibility of future work
by professionals. Many people, both professional and amateur, col-
laborated and it is hoped in addition to knowledge, stimulation of
interest is the results of their efforts. The time range seems to be
from historic Seminole to at least 500B.C. No change is apparent in
tool design over a very long period of time. The trade sherds are
from peripheral cultures. The grooved shark vertebrae offer a
challenge as to their possible use. The bone hair pin shows artistic
talent, unfortunately without revealing gender. The early sherds
from the 202nd Street Site are a small probe into the hunt for fiber-
tempered pottery in the area and they represent the earliest evi-
dence of man found so far in the Miami region. It has been difficult,
possibly due to technique, to "spread apart" Glades II pottery such
as Opa Locka, Dade, Miami and Ft.Drum Incised. In the sites
stratigraphically, the distribution of Miami Incised hints of its being
later than the other three mentioned. The artifact chart (Table 2)
gives no clues concerning the unique bone points at 202nd Street
other than possibly being earlier than the fluted and socketed types
since the new forms were in association with the earliest sherds.
Gratitude is expressed to N. J. Winkleman, Richard Kotil, Ray
Seley and Paul Kerstetter for locating several of the sites. Thanks
is alsodue the land owners; Mr. Emil Morton, Mr. Arthur Courshon,
Mr. Victor Cheetham and Plant Supt. Mr. W. J. Klein of Lehigh Port-
land Cement Co. for permission to dig. Sincere appreciation is ex-
pressed to Mary Murtha, Earl Riggs, Ted Riggs, Herbert Hill, Paul
Kerstetter, Noel Herrmann, Donald Berger, James Eggert, John
Hackett and Bob Masters. Thanks is also expressed to Bill Reckers
and Ray Mills for help with the photo enlargements and Mr. John W.
Griffin, Mr. Ripley P. Bullen, Dr. W. H. Sears, and Dr. Hale G.
Smith for aiding with the typology and valuable suggestions.

202nd Cheetham Broward Broard Broward Broward
Street Hammock No. 1 No. 2 No. 3 No. 4

5 A a 0
= 04 H 04 CC 'H n CJ~ ~ J H U A

l60 IW6I 62, I 11 3001 6611 91 74 1. lim n 701 7 1.1 7 190 107 27

1 98 197 132 19 1 I I 1

Glades Plain rims 12 12 7 11 19 1 7 9 9 q 2 11 18 28 16 22 i

S 0. Jo Check 1
f1 2

St ed 28 2 1 9 2 12 3

St.20 1 1 1 8 11
St. Johns Simple
Stamed 1
Sami-fiber toered 2 8
Deptf Simple

St. Johnny Inerieed- --- -- -- -.-- ----- -- ----- -- -- -- ---- -- ----- -- -- -- -- -- --
En.0evood Incised _____ 1
Gordon's Pa. Incised ____ -- -----2

th Incised 21
Sareota Incieed .___ -- --- --- -
ooled 2 103 2 8 6 1
rfid d3 2 2 1

Key L o Inoised 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 4 2
Matecmbe Inied -- -
1 2 2 2 1

flede Incle.d___ -__ .L......---.. -- --- -- ---- ------- ----- --- --- -------- __- --- ----
Opa Loka Inoised 2

Ft. Drum isd 2 2 1
t. Dr P tatd 1 3 2

Unique. dipled 1 --l
Zia-sox motif, rim 1 --
Zi_-s motif, bo -- -- 1

.e4ant ---+---- --
X~~ ------ -- -1-- --- --- ----- --- -- ----- --, --- --- -- --- ------ --- --- --

TABLE 1. Sherd distribution


Glades Plain, body

Point,bone fluted


aI ?1

Cheetham Broward Broward
Hammock No. 1 No. 2

sm m~I~ 4II %i

14 1 1-

2 5

4 1 I 1 1 ;I 1

No. 3

11 1

s 1 4 -A

No. 4I

N1 1

5 4 5 2 1i

Point 1 ke1 2
Point, Bone
ho w cylindrical 20
1in. b1
Pin, bone
Awl. Bone 1
Antler sinea 1 I 2 2 2
Shark teeth 10 8 1 1 1
Sark ee h, ----- - -- - -- ---

Shark rtebrae
forated 1 2 2 1 3 1 1
Workedbone -- -- --_ _L_ -
strombeelt 2 2 2 2

Bsyagco1 1_ __ 1 1
C la awl 2 2 1 1 2
l m 1

Ston. knihAl ------------ 1 -

Beads, glass

----1 1 ------------
Abrader. cornie -- _ _1 1- .- -

_ _ ___ __ ._._._._._. __I______

t t



Bullen, Ripley P., Laxson, D. D.
1954. "Some Incised Pottery From Cuba and Florida". The Florida Anthropologist,
Vol. 7, No. 1, Pp. 23-25, Gainesville.

Bullen, Ripley P.
1959. "The Transitional Period of Florida." Southern Archeological ConferenceNews-
letter, Volume No. 6, Nov.

Bullen, Ripley P.
1961. "Radio Carbon Dates for Southeastern Fiber Tempered Pottery." American
Antiquity, Vol. No. 27, No. 1.

Boyd, Mark F., Smith, Hale G., and Griffin, John W.
1951. "Here They Once Stood." University of Florida Press, Gainesville, Fla.

Goggin, John M., Sommex, Frank III.
1949. "Excavations On Upper Matecumbe Key, Florida." Yale UniversityPublications
In Anthropology, No. 41, Yale University Press, New Haven, Conn.

Goggin, John M.
1952. "Space And Time Perspective In Northern St. JohnsArcheology, Florida." Yale
University Publications in Anthropology, No. 47, Yale University Press, New Haven, Conn.

Griffin, John W., Smith, Hale G.
1949. "Nocoroco. A Timucua VillageNowInTomokaStatePark." The Florida Histori-
cal Quarterly, Vol. No. 27, No. 4., St. Augustine.

Griffin, John W.
1950. "Test Excavations at the Lake Jackson Site." American Antiquity, Vol. No. 16,
No. 2, pp. 99-112, Menasha.

Laxson, D. D.
1959. "Excavations In Dde CountyDuring 1957." FloridaAnthropologist Vol. XII, No. 1,

Rouse, Irving.
1951. "A Survey Of Indian River Archeology, Florida." Yale University Publications
in Anthropology, No. 44, Yale University Press, New Haven, Conn.

Smith, Hale G.
1956. "The European And The Indian." Florida Anthropological Society Publications,
No. 4, Gainesville, Fla.

Willey, Gordon R.
1949. "Excavations In Southeast Florida." Yale University Publications in Anthro-
pology, No. 41, Yale University Press, New Haven, Conn.

Willey, Gordon R.
1949. "Archeology Of The Florida Gulf Coast." Smithsonian Miscellaneous Publica-
tions, Vol. No. 113, Washington, D. C.

Hialeah, Florida
December, 1961

A Human Head Adorno from the Vance Site

Ripley P. Bullen


The short note discusses the aboriginal village identified as the Vance Site near Homo-
sassa Springs, Florida. Very scanty collections consisted of St. Johns Pln. Dunn's Creek
Red. Pasco Plain. and Pasco Red sherds. The site was occupied during Weeden Isln I
times. One elaborate human bead rim ordorno is illustrated.

This short note is written in memory of Dazzy (A. C.) Vance,
late of Homosassa Springs, Florida. Dazzy was a big league base-
ball pitcher who retired many years ago and purchased a parcel of
land on the west side of U.S. 19 slightly north of Homosassa Springs.
This land he developed as a home and as a small real estate devel-
opment between his many fishing and hunting forages.
On Dazzy's land was a medium-sized dirt midden partially de-
stroyed during the construction of adjoining railroad trackage.
Vance called his midden to the attention of John W. Griffin, then
archaeologist of the Florida Park Service, who visited the site in
1947 and had the writer investigate the site further in 1951. It was
one of Dazzy's greatest disappointments that tests did not indicate
an excavation was warrented.
Dazzy, on occasion, used dirt from this midden as fill. In such
spread dirt he found the vessel rim adorno illustrated in the ac-
companying picture. Formation of the human features and of the
"top knot" or roach will be noted from the illustration. Such objects
are rather rare in peninsular Florida and well worth recording for
future study by a comparative student.
The Florida Anthropologist, Vol. 15, No. 1, March, 1962

Sherds from the Vance site are of interest as indicative of the
probable date when the adorno was made. Griffin's 1947 collection
comprised 2 St. Johns Plain, 3 Dunns Creek Red, 5 sand-tempered
plain, 1 Pasco Red, and 62 Pasco Plain sherds. Of the last, 9 had
especially smooth surfaces, 2 had Weeden Island style grooved rims,
and 9 contained soft red material (apparently ground-up St. John
Plain sherds) as well as limestone as temper.
My 1951 tests indicated the midden to consist of 8 inches of sterile
gray sand over a 12 inch black-brown occupation zone which, in
turn, overlay gray-brown sand which was archaeologically sterile.
My three tests produced a total of only 10 sherds about 1 per cubic
foot of midden deposit but I also made a collection from the nearby
surface and from the face of the railroad cut. Evidently the most
productive part of the site was the area penetrated by the railroad.
The 1951 collection included 4 sand-tempered plain and 39 Pasco
Plain of which 4 had very smooth surfaces and 22 contained soft red
material as well as limestone temper.
These sherds are not particularly good temporal indicators but
they suggest that the site was occupied during the local equivalent
of the Weeden Island I time period. While the pottery from this site
appears rather drab and uninteresting we should remember that
the inhabitants had at least one decorated vessel, probable for
ceremonial use, resplendent with a human head at the rim.

Florida State Museum
January 23, 1962


Charles H. Fairbanks


Reprints the "Four Statements for Archaeology" from AMERICAN
ANTIQUITY, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp. 137-8. Suggests that an important
and essential function of the non-professional is locating sites,
making surface collections, and reporting to a central clearing center.
In a recent issue of AMERICAN ANTIQUITY there were published
"Four Statements for Archaeology" in which a committee of distinguished
American archaeologists presented a definition of the field of archaeology,
the methods of procedure, the ethics concerned with excavation and
collection, and some suggestions for training requirements (A.An., 1961,
pp. 137-8). These four statements were approved by a vote of the mem-
bership of the Society for American Archaeology at the May 1961 annual
meeting. They represent the standards of those Americans who are con-
cerned with archaeology professionally or as an avocation. They re-
present the crystalization of something like two hundred years of interest
in, and growing concern for, the remains of the American Indian. These
statements spell out, in quite specific terms, how an archaeologist op-
erates and what are his responsibilities to his science, to others of his
profession, and to future generations.


1.The Field of Archaeology

Archaeology, a branch of the science of anthropology, is that area
of scholarship concerned with the reconstruction of past human life
and culture. Its primary data lie in material objects and their re-
lationships; of equal importance may be ancillary data from other
fields, including geology, biology, and history.

The Florida Anthropologist, Vol. 15, No. 1, March, 1962

2. Methods in Archaeology

Archaeological research depends on systematic collection of material
objects together with adequate records of the circumstances of the
finds and relationships among objects and their surroundings. Value
attaches to objects so collected because of their status as documents,
and is not intrinsic. Therefore, collecting practices which destroy
data and thus prevent the scholarly goal of archaeology are censured.
Explicit permission of the property owner must. be secured before
excavation is undertaken. State and federal statutes regarding pre-
servation of antiquities and permits for excavation must be scrupu-
lously observed.
Field techniques aim at preserving all recoverable information by
means of adequate descriptive records and diagrams. Although arch-
aeologists may take only a limited sample from a site, the collection
should include all classes of artifacts encountered, not excluding
any category; all pertinent data, including relationships and associa-
tions; samples of faunal remains; and other data to be interpreted by
scientists in other fields. The archaeologist does not discard classes
of information in favor of a special interest
Certain basic field records must be kept, including the following: '
(1) A map of the site showing the surface features of the site and en-
virons as well as the location and extent of the digging. (2) Detailed
written records and maps of burials, houses, and other structural or
natural features, known or assumed to have significance in the cultur-
al history of the site. (3) Stratigraphic relationships of data must
be noted and preserved, either through separation in natural soil
layers or by arbitrary levels established during digging. (4) A cata-
logue of all the specimens found indicating their location, stratum
or origin, and cultural association. Specimens should be labelled,
numbered, and catalogued to preserve their identity as scientific
data. (5) Photographs, drawings, and other documentation necessary
to clarify the technique of the work and the context and associations
of the finds.

Disregard of the proper archaeological methods provides grounds for
expulsion from the Society for American Archaeology, at the discretion
of the Executive Committee.
3. Ethics for Archaeology

Collections made by competent archaeologists must be available for
examination by qualified scholars; relevant supporting data must also
be accessible for study whether the collection is in a museum or
other institution or in private hands.

It is the scholarly obligation of the archaeologist to report his find-
ings in a recognized scientific medium. In the event that significance
of the collection does not warrant publication, a manuscript report
should be prepared and be available.

Inasmuch as the buying and selling of artifacts usually results in
the loss of context and cultural associations, the practice is cen-

An archaeological site presents problems which must be handled by
the excavator according to a plan. Therefore, members of the Society
for American Archaeology do not undertake excavations on any site
being studied by someone without the prior knowledge and consent
of that person.

Willful destruction, distortion, or concealment of the data of arch-
aeology is censured and provides grounds for expulsion from the
Society for American Archaeology, at the discretion of the Executive
4. Recommendations for Training in Archaeology

Archaeology is a scholarly discipline requiring knowledge of field
techniques, competence in laboratory analysis of specimen and the
ability to prepare a detailed report of the investigations' and their
implications in archaeology. In times past, a number of leading arch-
aeologists have acquired the necessary skills without formal training,
but they, as well as archaeologists trained in scholarly techniques,
have spent years in the study of archaeology as a science. The
Society for American Archaeology condemns uncontrolled excavation
by persons who have not been trained in the basic techniques of
field archaeology and scholarship.
The Society for American Archaeology recommends the following
formal training as a minimum qualification for persons planning to
enter archaeology as a career. Individuals engaging in archaeology
as a profession should acquire the B.A. or B.Sc. degree from an
accredited college or university, followed by two years of graduate
study with concentration in anthropology and specialization in arch-
aeology during one of these programs. This formal training should
be supplemented by atleast two summer field schools or their equiva-
lent under the supervision of archaeologists of recognized com-
petence. A Master's thesis or equivalent in published reports is
highly recommended. The Ph.D. in anthropology is recommended but
not required.

Report of the Committee on Ethics and Standards
John L. Champe (Chairman), Douglas S. Byers,
Clifford Evans, A. K. Guthe, Henry W.
Hamilton, Edward B. Jelks, Clement W.
Meighan, Sigfus Olafson, George L Quimby,
Watson Smith, and Fred Wendorf.
Publication authorized by vote of the membership
at the 26th Annual Meeting, May 5, 1961, Colum-
bus, Ohio."

Much of the specific obligation of the archaeologist derives from the
fact that the sites of Indian remains are an irreplaceable heritage from
the past. Archaeological sites are not now being created. It is true
that the archaeologist of the future will eventually excavate the sites
of 20th century cities or the launching pads of the first moon rockets.

He will not, however be able to excavate Indian sites unless radical
steps are taken to preserve them. The scientist in any of the natural
sciences often destroys what he studies, whether he is a zoologist,
botanist, or archaeologist. Plant or animal populations can and do re-
establish themselves. Indian mounds and villages do not breed new
sites. Thus the archaeologist must be sure that when he excavates he
is prepared to secure all the information that is preserved in the ground
and that he makes it available for the future. New techniques are always
being discovered and what seems sterile of information now may in the
future give precise and useful information.

We can assume that both the professional and non-professional arch-
aeologists will be bound by these statements. They clearly define our
obligations. It is obvious that the amateur or non-professional will
often lack resources, training, or opportunity to carry out the mandates.
Is he then being denied "doing archaeology" and is his enthusiasm
and talent to be lost?

There are important contributions that the amateur can make. These
will further our attempts to understand human behavior and will take ad-
vantage of his interests, talents, and resources. Perhaps the basic fact
to be considered is that most of us, amateur and professional alike, are
interested in Indian relics. We have somehow become a bipedal packrat.
This often means that we are impelled to dig. Unless the proper scien-
tific procedures, from excavation technique through analysis to publica-
tion, can be followed this compulsion must be curbed. The number of
Florida Indian sites destroyed by inconsidered digging certainly exceeds
the quantity eliminated through building, road construction, and shell
mining combined. Paradoxically, we are rapidly shoveling ourselves
into extinction. Is there any activity that can satisfy our need to collect
while we still conform to our code?

Site discovery, location, and recording can be fully as rewarding as
unskilled digging, and this is an area where the professional is at a
disadvantage. The professional rarely has the chance to systematically
search for sites. His teaching or museum duties mean he is tied to an
office for most of each year. The local enthusiast has all the advantage
of familiarity with the terrain, local soil conditions, passability of roads,
and rapport with local informants. In Alachua County, Dr. Goggin and
his students have located nearly 400 archaeological sites. No other
Florida county has over 100 properly located sites (including my own,
Leon). One county has only eight recorded sites. Of course, a race to
establish the record number of sites in any county is pointless. The

personal and scientific rewards of site recording are many and will
amply repay the effort. The amateur who locates sites, makes surface
collections, analyses the artifacts, and then turns in a site card is doing
a real service.
All of us who have done site recording find it intriguing. The sites
must, however, be located exactly enough so that the records are not
crammed with duplicate site numbers. The Departments of Anthropology
at the University of Florida and at the Florida State University will
have to assign these numbers to avoid duplication. The local student
may want to keep his own series of numbers but should be aware of the
statewide numbering system. We have found that the road maps of in-
dividual counties, issued by the State Road Department, are usually
sufficient for precise location. If greater detail is needed, the U. S.
Geological Survey maps are available for most of the state. An indis-
pensible tool is a standard guide to archaeological field methods the
best is certainly Heizer's.

The archaeological value of this activity is tremendous. Only by
site survey can we be prepared for the emergencies of suburban ex-
pansion, road building, or the new Moon Base at Canaveral. The dis-
tribution of sites, their relation to water, soils, other sites, particular
plant assemblages, all are important items that we need to know. As an
example, in Northwestern Florida most of our information on sites rests
on the work of C. B. Moore and Gordon R. Willey. Dr. Moore worked
from the base of his houseboat, the "Gopher". Thus our concept of the
pattern of Indian occupancy is over weighted with those sites on or near
navigable water. We are now beginning to get a much more accurate
picture largely through site recording. I would like to see this society
actively sponsor the systematic recording of archaeological sites. If
we are going to lose the sites we can at least have an inventory of what
we have lost.
The systematic site recorder will soon find that he is discovering
new things almost every trip. He gets the feel of sites in his territory
and can soon predict where a site will be. He learns what plant cover
or thickness of vegetation usually covers a site. And he will be sur-
prised at the number of sites he finds. He should also find that he is in-
creasingly called on to report, to the responsible authorities, sites
being destroyed. All sites on federal and state controlled lands are
protected by appropriate regulations. Yet the staffs of the agencies
often cannot know just what damage is being done.
Efforts to save sites must be directed by someone. Until the sites
and threats of destruction are known, nothing is likely to be done to
preserve them. Often excavations could be undertaken if volunteers

were available. Certainly the enthusiastic members of the Alabama
Archaeological Society contributed long hours to the work at the Stan-
field-Worley Rockshelter. In Dade County, Dan Laxsen has very success-
fully used this technique on a much smaller scale. The $8,000 raised
by the Alabama group is certainly unusual, but is there any reason why
it should be unique?
Finally many amateurs will be able to contribute substantially to
techniques of preservation, analysis, dating, identification, and so on.
At least one high school boy has constructed a Carbon Fourteen dating
lab. The work of sorting, counting, numbering, and restoring is one that
never seems to be completed. Dating patinated glass involves a number
of only partly explored techniques. When we get the techniques worked
out we need to exhaustively explore the relationship between summer
temperatures or rainfall and the thickness of the rings. The someone
will have to extrapolate four hundred years of Florida weather from its
record in the crusts of' buried glass. Often the non-professional in arch-
aeology will have professional skills in another field that will peculiar-
ly fit him for these interesting contributions. And he will always out-
number the professional archaeologists several hundred to one. The
future of Florida archaeology is largely in the hands of the non-profes-

AMERICAN ANTIQUITY. Published quarterly by the Society for American
Archaeology, at the University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, Utah.
Subscription is by membership in the Society; annual dues are $8.00.
Address requests for membership to:
Joe Ben Wheat, Secretary
University of Colorado Museum
Boulder, Colorado
ginning in 1960 (for books and papers published in 1959). Dis-
tributed to members of The Society for American Archaeology.
This is the most efficient way to keep up with what is happening
in any area of New World Archaeology.

1958 A short introduction to Archaeology. New York, Macmillan Co.,
7 figs, 142 pp., $2.50.
This is a short, interesting and worthwhile introduction to
what the archaeologist does in European archaeology. Has
some applications to New World problems.
1957 Archaeology and Society. Cambridge: Harvard University
Press, 272 pp., 52 figs., 24 plates. $5.00.
A simple and delightful book demonstrating that archaeology
can contribute to our knowledge of the past and promote the
maturity of the individual. Most of the examples are from
Europe and the British Isles.
1954 Photography for Archaeologists. London: Max Parrish, 123pp.,
13 plates. $2.45.
A complete guide to the technical problems of archaeological
photography. Largely European examples. Often some good
leads on digging techniques are revealed.
1958 A guide to archaeological field methods. Palo Alto, Calif.;
National Press, 162 pp., 2 maps, 5 plates, 12 figs., 9 forms.
The best guide to field methods. Heizer outlines methods
and gives complete references to published works on tech-
nique. This is a must for every professional and amateur.
Applies specifically to California but usable anywhere.
1959 The Archaeologist at Work. A source book in archaeological
method and interpretation. New York: Harber & Bro., XV,
519 pp., numerous illustrations. $8.00.
An excellent selection of fine writing by archaeologists on all
phases of the science. Fascinating reading for anyone in-
terested in the field.
1952 Beginning in archaeology. New York: Frederick A. Praeger,
203 pp., 8 plates, 14 fig., $3.25.
Written for the beginning British student, but of interest to
Americans. Largely Old World examples and nothing on
midden excavations.

1961 The Archaeologist's Note Book. San Francisco; Chandler
Publishing Co.
27 pp., plus tear-out forms on 5 x 8 inch cards.
Meighan has little to say about method, except to outline
requirements. His forms on card stock are quite useful.
1959 Approach to Archaeology. Cambridge: Harvard University
Press, X, 134 pp., 8 plates, 12 figs., $3.00.
An attempt to present to the general reader the "ideas and
concepts which direct archaeological operations". It seems
far behind most American archaeologists in typology, quanti-
tive methods, and many field operations.
1954 Archaeology from the Earth. Pelican Books A 356. 252 pp.,
24 plates, 22 figs., $.95.
An excellent review of highly refined field techniques. Wheeler
disapproves of stratigraphic test pits but is generally sound.
Mostly draws on European and Asiatic examples.
1958 Method and Theory in American Archaeology. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press. IX, 270 pp., $4.75.
A monumental discussion of the theory involved in American
archaeology together with an exhaustive listing of archaeolo-
gical complexes by developmental stages. May be extremely
difficult for the beginner.
The Florida State University
February 24, 1962

Artillery Projectiles from the Civil War

Engagement at Newport, Florida

Stanley J. Olsen


The paper discusses the artifacts recovered from the St. Marks at Newport which
relate to the defense of that position by the Confederate forces during the Battle of
Natural Bridge. Three cannon projectiles and a lead hollow base bulletwererecovered.
One of the cannon projectiles was equipped with a 6-second Boerman pewter fuse. The
other two are solid shot. The mechanism of the Boerman fuse is explained and illustrated.

The years 1864 and 1865 will long be remembered for the many
military events that contributed toward the ending of a long and
bloody conflict. Battles with far reaching implications held the
interest of correspondents and historians of the time. Major cam-
paigns such as the Wilderness, Cold Harbor, Spotsylvania, Atlanta,
and Sherman's March to the Sea were the headlines of the day. Little
wonder that Florida's local engagement at Natural Bridge early
in 1865 caught the fancy of all too few chroniclers.
The written records that have come down to us from this battle,
that took place almost a century ago, are taken for the most part
from newspaper stories of March, 1865. More lengthy accounts
were written from the library stacks many years later. Perhaps
the best abstracted story of this skirmish is that by Dr. Mark Boyd
(1950). But this paper, as do all of the others, deals mainly with
tactics of the battle or with the political results, little being said
concerning the details of military equipment that was used.
The Florida Anthropologist, Vol. 15, No. 1, March, 1962

This military operation was unique in several respects. For
one thing, it was a joint land and sea venture with the Federal land
forces being troops of the Second and Ninety-ninth U. S. Colored
Infantry, commanded by white officers. These troops were landed
in the vicinity of St. Marks lighthouse (Fig. 1) from U. S. Naval
vessels along with two boat howitzers and their Navy gun crews
who went along to serve them. The purpose of this landing party
was to proceed inland toward Newport, cross the bridges over the
East River and the St. Marks River, destroy the public establish-
ments in Newport, take the town of St. Marks from the rear, and
destroy the railroad that ran from this river port to Tallahassee.
The Navy was to come up the river from Apalachee Bay and silence
the fort at St. Marks and was to land another supporting force at
Port Leon.
The fate and failure of this expedition and the Battle of Natural
Bridge are well told in Boyd's account. However, little is said re-
garding the artillery weapons that were taken on this inland trip of
March 4-7, 1865.
One statement in particular that was made by Boyd in his coverage
of the Newport engagement was responsible for the search and
eventual recovery of the material reported here. The flooring planks
of the Newport bridge were removed by the Confederates, who also
guarded the approach, so that it was impossible to cross the river
at this point. Boyd states, "At two p.m. on Monday, the sixth, the
Confederates opened fire with a piece of artillery on the pickets
in the rear of Weeks' position, probably marking the arrival of
Lt. Whitehead's section. They kept up a brisk fire of artillery and
musketry for four hours."
It was reasonable to assume, even at this late date in 1962, that
any short range artillery duel involving the firing of a boat howitzer
over a period of four hours would leave a good many shell frag-
ments in the river which ran between the two forces. The bottom
of the St. Marks River in the vicinity of the old Newport bridge is
of limestone and sand. The water is generally air clear and has a
depth at 15 feet at this spot. Several hours of prospecting on the
river bottom with scuba equipment produced three cannon pro-
jectiles (Fig. 2, A, E, and F), a .58 caliber hollow base lead bullet
of a type commonly used by both the Union and Confederate forces
(Fig. 2, D), and a caplock civilian musket C. 1840 (not pictured as
it may or may not have been used in the battle).

,'' 7

Pig. 1. Field of operations ofthe ederl forces in the Newport vicinity March 4 to 7. 1865.
(Present day highways shown on base map.)


U. S. Navy light howitzers of the period were similar to the light
horse artillery pieces except for their having carriages and wheels
made entirely of iron instead of a combination of iron and wood as
commonly used on cannon of the land forces.
The spherical case shot (Fig. 2, A) is 3 1/2 inches in diameter and
weighs 4 1/2 pounds and is equipped with a 6-second Boerman
(sometimes spelled Borman) pewter fuse. The principle of this fuse
was such that the gunner could cut through the fuse case at a de-
signated place (Fig. 2, B) of his choosing and the flash of the pro-
pelling powder charge would ignite the inner ring of powder at the
cut and burn toward the O end of the graduated scale and down a
tube in the center (Fig. 2, C) to ignite the main exploding charge
(Manucy, 1949). The only drawback was that a great many of these
fuses were duds and the shells never exploded. The other two pro-
jectiles that were recovered are solid shot, 3 inches in diameter
and weighing 3 1/2 pounds each.
Light, two-wheeled guns having a bore similar in size to that
indicated by the recovered shot were in use on naval vessels at the
time of the battle (Miller, 1911). How guns of this size and the
necessary ammunition, weighing several hundred pounds, were
brought down a swampy woods road from the St. Marks lighthouse
to the Natural Bridge and returned is not clear from the early
records. This was a huge undertaking if accomplished by man
power alone, as it must have been.
The Confederate 12-pound field gun that was captured at the East
River bridge was the consequence of the unruly horses, which broke
away from the gun crew, taking the limber and caisson along. No
projectiles of this caliber were collected from the Newport area.
The recovery of this rather singular collection of military arti-
facts certainly gives more concrete evidence as to the type and size
of the guns used in this short artillery engagement which took place
in north Florida in March, 1865.

gunner's cut


E p

Fig. 2. Projectiles recovered from the St. Marks River at Newport, Florida. A, 3 1/2"
spherical case shot with Boerman pewter fuse, cut to explode at 3 1/2 seconds.
B, diagram of 6-second fuse ring showing position of cut. C, cross section of fuse
and shell showing path of powder ignition from cut. C, .58 cal. hollow based lead
bullet of Harper's Ferry design. E and F, 3" solid shot. F, shot as found with
coating of oxidized iron.


Boyd, M. F.

: The Battle of Natural Bridge, The Fla. Hist. Quart.,
v. XXIX, no. 2, Oct., Fla. Board of Parks and Histor-
ical Memorials, Tallahassee, p. 95-123.

Manucy, A. : Artillery Through the Ages, Nat. Park Service Inter-
pretive Series, History, no. 3, U. S. Gov. Printing
Office, Washington, D. C., 92 pp.
Miller, F. T.: The Photographic History of the Civil War, v. 6,
The Navies, The Review of Reviews Co., N. Y.,
322 pp.

Tallahassee, Florida
February, 1962


Being engaged on a complete monograph of the now

extinct Carolina parakeet (Conuropsis carolinensis),

I urge archaeologists and ethnologists to write me if

they know of any of the following instances of a role

for the parakeet in the life of the Indians of Ameri-

ca (approximately east of the Great Plains)t Indian

words for parrot or parakeet, skins, bills or scalps

used in a decorative or religious way, skeletal re -

mains for middens, etc. I shall contact larger mu-

seumsj this appeal is addressed to individual workers.

Daniel McKinley, Biology Dept., Lake Erie College ,

Painesville, Ohio.


Vol. 13, No. 1

Keel, Bennie C. v
The Money's Bend Site, Ce 3........................................1

Bullen, Ripley P. and Edward M. Dolan
Shell Mound, Levy County, Florida..................................17

Bushnell, Francis F.
The Harris Creek Site, Tick Island, Volusia County ................25

Book Notices
C.H.F ............................... .......... 32 & Inside back cover

Vol. 13, Nos. 2-3

Griffen, William B.
The Stetson Collection........................... ....... ....... .....33

van der Schalie, Henry and Paul W. Parmalee
Animal Remains from the Etowah Site, Mound C, Bartow County,
Georgia........................ ...................................37
Part 1: Mollusks...........................Henry van der Schalie 39
Part 2: Vertebrates..............................Paul W. Parmalee 47

Sears, W.H.
The Bluffton Burial Mound........... ................... .......... 55

Lazarus, William C.
Human Figurines from the Coast of Northwest Florida................ 61

Covington, James
English Gifts to the Indians: 1765-1766............................71

DeJarnette, David L. and Asael T. Hansen
Book Review: The Archeology of the Childersburg Site, Alabama.....76

Ostrander, Ozzie
The Johns Pass Mound..............................................77

Contributors to this Issue..............................................80

Vol. 13, No. 4

Morse, Dan and Phyllis
A Preliminary Report on 9-Go-507: The Williams Site,
Gordon County, Georgia.............................................81

Morrell, L. Ross
Oakland Mound (Je 53), Florida: A Preliminary Report..............101

Adams, Grey L. and William C. Lazarus
Two Skulls from a Fort Walton Period Cemetery Site (0K-35),
Okaloosa County, Florida.......................................... 108

Porter, Kenneth Wiggins
Thlonoto-Sassa: A Note on an Obscure Seminole Village
of the Early 1820s................................................ 11


Vol. 14, Nos. 1-2

Bullen, Adelaide K. and Ripley P.
The Summer Haven Site, St. Johns County, Florida ....................1

Lazarus, William C.
The Morrison Spring Site (WL-43), Florida........... .................17

Kurjack, Edward B.
Clay Pipes at the Childersburg Site in Alabama.....................21

Freeman, Ethel Cutler
The Happy Life in the City of Ghosts: An Analysis of a
Mikasuki Myth................ .....................................23

Aten, Lawrence E.
Excavation and Salvage at Starks Hammock, Volusia County,

Keel, Bennie C.
A Radiocarbon Date for the Money's Bend Site, CEV3,
Cherokee County, Alabama............................................47

Book Notices

Vol. 14, Nos. 3-4

Lazarus, William C.
Ten Middens on the Navy Live Oak Reservation........................ 49

Laxson, D.D.
Two Worked Shell Objects from a Uleta River Shell Midden............65

Bullen, Adelaide K. and Ripley P.
Wash Island in Crystal River........................................ 69

Neuman, Robert W.
Domesticated Corn from a Fort Walton Mound Site
in Houston County, Alabama.........................................75

Carlson, Charlie, Jr.
The Marshall Bluff Site..........................................81

Book Notices
C.H.F ................................................ .........7

VOLUMES 13 & 14

Adams, Grey L. and William C. Lazarus
Two Skulls from a Fort Walton Period Cemetery Site (OK-35),
Okaloosa County, Florida. 13:4, pp. 108-114.
Aten, Lawrence E.
Excavation and Salvage at Starks Hammock, Volusia County,
Florida. 14:1-2, pp. 37-45.
Bullen, Adelaide K. and Ripley P.
The Summer Haven Site, St. Johns County, Florida. 14:1-2, pp. 1-15.
Wash Island in Crystal River. ll:3-4, pp. 69-73.
Bullen, Ripley P. and Edward M. Dolan
Shell Mound, Levy County, Florida. 13:1, pp. 17-24.
Bushnell, Francis F.
The Harris Creek Site, Tick Island, Volusia County. 13:1, pp. 25-31.
Carlson, Charlie, Jr.
The Marshall Bluff Site. 14:3-4, pp. 81-83.
Covington, James
English Gifts to the Indians: 1765-1766. 13:2-3, pp. 71-75.
DeJarnette, David L. and Asael T. Hansen
Book Review: The Archeology of the Childersburg Site, Alabama.
13:2-3, p. 76.
Dolan, Edward M.- and Ripley P. Bullen
Shell Mound, Levy County, Florida. 13:1, pp. 17-24.
Freeman, Ethel Cutler
The Happy Life in the City of Ghosts: An Analysis of a
Mikasuki Myth. 14:1-2, pp. 23-36.
Griffen, William B.
The Stetson Collection. 13:2-3, pp. 33-36.
Hansen, Asael T. and David L.DeJarnette
Book Review: The Archeology of the Childersburg Site, Alabama.
13:2-3. p.76.
Keel, Bennie C.
The Money's Bend Site, CeV3. 13:1, pp. 1-16.
A Radiocarbon Date for the Money's Bend Site, CeV3,
Cherokee County, Alabama. 14:1-2, pp. 47-48.
Kurjack, Edward B.
Clay Pipes at the Childersburg Site in Alabama. 14:1-2, pp. 21-22.
Laxson, D.D.
Two Worked Shell Objects from a Uleta River Shell Midden.
14:3-4, pp. 65-68.
Lazarus, William C.
Human Figurines from the Coast of Northwest Florida. 13:2-3, pp. 61-70.
The Morrison Spring Site (WL-43), Florida. 14:1-2, pp. 17-20.
Ten Middens on the Navy Live Oak Reservation. 14:3-4, pp. 49-64.
Lazarus, William C. and Grey L. Adams
Two Skulls from a Fort Walton Period Cemetery Site (OK-35),
Okaloosa County, Florida. 13:4, pp. 108-114.
Morrell, L. Ross
Oakland Mound (Je-53), Florida: A Preliminary Report.
13:4, pp. 101-108.
Morse, Dan and Phyllis
A Preliminary Report on 9-Go-507: The Williams Site,
Gordon County, Georgia. 13:4, pp. 81-100.

Neuman, Robert W.
Domesticated Corn from a Fort Walton Mound Site
in Houston County, Alabama. li:3-4, pp. 75-83.
Ostrander, Ozzie
The Johns Pass Mound. 13:2-3, pp. 77-79.
Pamalee, Paul W. and Henry van der Schalie
Animal Remains from the Etowah Site, Mound C, Bartow County,
Georgia. 13:2-3, pp. 33-54.
Porter, Kenneth Wiggins
Thlonoto-Sassa: A Note on an Obscure Seminole Village of the
Early 1830s. 13U4, pp. 115-119.
SSears, W.H.
The Bluffton Burial Mound. 13s2-3, pp. 55-60.
van der Schalie, Henry and Paul W. Pamalee
Animal Remains from the Etowah Site, Mound C, Bartow County,
Georgia. 13:2-3, pp. 37-54.

A Paperback Bibliography in Anthropology and Related

Subjects, compiled by Stephen Williams. Cambridge,

Massachusetts, 1961.

This bibliography, a special publication of the

Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, is an at-

tempt to deal with the paperback deluge on the current

market. Because it includes books that are currently

available, it will be helpful to teachers in planning

courses, as well as to laymen who just want a good

guide to soem anthropological reading. More than three

hundred titles are included, arranged in fifteen cate-

gories. These are both topical (e. g. Physical Anth-

ropology and Evolution, Archaeological Theory and Me-

thod, Linguistics), and regional (e. g. Oceania, An-

cient Far and Near East, New World Archeology and Eth-

nography). An author index is also included. Copies

are available at the Peabody Museum, Harvard Universi-

ty, Cambridge 38, Massachusetts, U.S.A. Price $1.00

per copy, in quantities of ten or more, SO per copy.

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