H A I G - Society for American Archaeology

saa.org

H A I G - Society for American Archaeology

H AI GVolume 2, Number 1 January 2012Happy (belated) New Year,Welcome to Volume 2 of the HAIG newsletter! When I began writing this, we were enjoyingseasonal temperatures in the low 40s. The next day it was close to 60 F. Now, cold again. The nicething about winter in Virginia is that, if you don‘t like the weather this week, just wait a few days andthings will change again.HAIG members have a busy year coming up. Our interest group meeting at the upcomingSociety for American Archaeology annual meeting is Friday, April 20, at 8 am (CHANGED from 9 amas is stated in the preliminary program). The HAIG-sponsored Biennial Gordon R. WilleySymposium on the History of Archaeology is the next day, Saturday, April 21. The topic is ―NewDeal Archaeology in the Tennessee Valley‖ and the session is chaired by Anna Lunn and David H.Dye. Abstracts for this session are printed later in this newsletter. We look forward to seeing newand old members at the interest group meeting and, of course, at our sponsored session. Speaking ofthe Biennial Gordon R. Willey Symposium on the History of Archaeology, the book including papersfrom the 2010 session is entering production. Shovel Ready: Archaeology and Roosevelt’s New Deal forAmerica should be out this September from the University of Alabama Press.This issue of the newsletter also includes a short excerpt from David Meltzer‘s biographicalmemoir on Lewis Binford. You‘ll also find reference to another tribute to Binford in the Recent orNoteworthy Publications section, discussing his connection to the Southeastern ArchaeologicalConference. Donald B. Ball gives us his piece on W. L.Griffin, a lesser known figure in the history of Kentuckyarchaeology. We also have a notice of an interestingexhibit at the Oriental Institute of the University ofChicago that looks at how the past of the Middle East hasbeen reconstructed in both physical and virtual ways.While we are on the topic of virtual archaeology,I‘ve been involved with a 3D artifact scanning project,which is currently making digital models of artifactsrecovered from WPA excavations in Somerset County, PA.Some of these models will become available soon on ourproject web ite at:http://vcuarchaeology3d.wordpress.com/Adapted from Crack Comics #1See you in Memphis!(Now in the public domain)Bernard K. Means (bkmeans@vcu.edu)Newsletter of theHistory of ArchaeologyInterest GroupSociety for American Archaeology


Newsletter of the SAA’s History of Archaeology Interest GroupVolume 2, Number 1 January 2012Biennial Gordon R. Willey SymposiumOn The History of Archaeology 2012 Abstracts:New Deal Archaeology in The Tennessee Valley(Sponsored by History of Archaeology Interest Group)Chaired by Anna Lunn and David H. DyeSession abstractThe Society for American Archaeology was foundedduring the Great Depression and a growingawareness for the need of improved scientificinvestigations. One major federal work reliefprogram, under the auspices of the New Deal, tookplace in the Tennessee Valley. From 1933 to 1942massive salvage projects focused on now-famoussites such as Eva, Dallas, Hiwassee Island, JonathanCreek, and Shiloh. Archaeologists continue to usethese excavations to aid their understanding of thepast. Many of these sites are no longer available forinvestigation and research. Join our exploration ofNew Deal archaeology in the Tennessee Valley.Cover from a government pamphlet onthe TVA. In the public domain.Individual abstracts in presentation orderLunn, Anna. The Changing Face of Archaeology: An Introduction to the New Deal in the Tennessee ValleyDuring the New Deal era, hundreds of archaeological sites throughout the Tennessee Valley wereexcavated as part of various federal relief programs. These investigations had, and continue to have,a lasting impact on regional history, archaeological theory, and modern excavation methods. Thispaper provides a brief overview of the New Deal in the Tennessee Valley, outlines significantcontributions of the era to the field of archaeology, and serves as an introduction to the symposium.


Newsletter of the SAA’s History of Archaeology Interest GroupVolume 2, Number 1 January 2012Smith, Kevin. The Tennessee Archaeological Society (1944-1988): Legacy and Consequences of the New Dealin TennesseeEfforts to create a statewide Tennessee Archaeological Society (TAS) began in the 1920s in response tonational goals of sponsoring professional southeastern organizations. The 1920s TAS was shortlivedwith few legacies. The followup came in the 1940s, when federal relief programs funded anunprecedented amount of archaeology in rural Tennessee. Disappearance of those funds at the onsetof World War II led Tom Lewis and Madeline Kneberg to revive the TAS through their New Dealnetwork -- this second effort was extraordinarily successful, spanning five decades and involving asmany as 15 chapters and 800 members at its peak.Harle, Michaelyn and Nicholas Hermann. Tennessee Valley New Deal Archaeology’s Contributions toBioarchaeologyNew Deal era excavations in the Tennessee Valley, especially those under the auspice of TVA,included the systematic recovery of human skeletal remains. These excavations led to thestandardization of burial excavation methods and osteological recordation. Archivedcorrespondence between prominent physical anthropologists and field records demonstrate TVA‘simportant contribution to the development of bioarchaeology. Following World War II, researchersvirtually ignored these important collections until their ‗rediscovery‘ by modern bioarchaeologists.This paper discusses the evolution of bioarchaeological research agendas from TVA‘s inception topresent and their lasting contributions to understanding biocultural histories of prehistoric peoples inthe Tennessee Valley.10-519(B) John Ausmus Farm Site 2CE10, Claiborne County, Tennessee. [Mound 1. Feature42, Primary floor and structure].; Frank H. McClung Museum WPA/TVA Archive(fhm00349). Used with permission. Available at: http://mcclungmuseum.utk.edu


Newsletter of the SAA’s History of Archaeology Interest GroupVolume 2, Number 1 January 2012Braly, Bobby Ray. The Tennessee Valley Authority and the Norris Reservoir: The Beginning of over 75 yearsof TVA Archaeological ResearchIn 1933 the Tennessee Valley Authority began construction on Norris Reservoir, their first high waterdam. Large scale archaeological excavations at this time and later during construction of Melton HillReservoir in the same area recovered enormous amounts of archaeological data, including theexcavation of 29 mounds, recovery of nearly 24,000 ceramic artifacts, and the first dendrochronologyproject in the eastern United States. An analysis of these materials, coupled with a suite of twelvenew radiometric AMS dates, examines fine scale sociopolitical changes over time in the area. Thispaper attests to the usefulness of extant Works Progress Administration collections.Koerner, Shannon and Jessica Dalton-Carriger. Depression-Era Archaeology in Watts Bar Reservoir, EastTennesseeThe inundation of the Tennessee River in Roane and Rhea Counties in the spring of 1942 impoundeda region of incredible cultural wealth. A group of dedicated WPA archaeologists, field assistants, andinterested public officials took proactive measures to rescue what would have otherwise been lostduring the formation of Watts Bar Lake. A sample of eleven sites underwent excavation in the ―belowpool‖ areas. Extant collections from these original Watts Bar sites are still providing a uniqueperspective of pre-Contact and early Protohistoric lifeways in eastern Tennessee and, in the process,addressing fundamental culture models at a broader level.Sullivan, Lynne, Donna McCarthy,and David Echeverry. Reconfiguringthe Chickamauga BasinNew Deal-era excavations for TVA‘sChickamauga Reservoir literally laidthe groundwork for subsequentarchaeology in the Upper TennesseeValley. Chickamauga sites likeHiwassee Island and Dallas becametype sites for archaeological phasesand the basis for comparisons withsites in other reservoirs. The welldocumentedcollections from theChickamauga sites continue toprovide data for interpretations ofMississippian Period cultures.Reworked site chronologies developedwith modern dating methods areenabling significant new insights toregional dynamics during thistimeframe, including interactions with38BY11(A) Rymer Site 15BY11, Bradley County,Tennessee.; Frank H. McClung Museum WPA/TVAArchive (fhm00222). Used with permission. Availableat: http://mcclungmuseum.utk.eduadjacent regions. Both archaeological and bioarchaeological data contribute to new ideas about social,political, and biological relationships.


Newsletter of the SAA’s History of Archaeology Interest GroupVolume 2, Number 1 January 2012Schroeder, Sissel. From the Domestic to the Ceremonial: Reinterpreting New Deal CollectionsAs the New Deal era came to a close, archaeologists began investigating domestic contexts atMississippian sites. Jonathan Creek, in the lower Tennessee Valley, was the first of these excavationsconducted with the explicit goal of exposing and mapping an entire village. Interpretive frameworksat the time sought to identify regional and temporal patterns in artifacts, features, and architecture.Today, Jonathan Creek and other old collections are being reinterpreted from new theoreticalperspectives that eschew trait-list approaches to the definition of culture and rely on practice theoryto build inferences about the origins of variation in material culture.Moore, Mike, David Dye and Kevin Smith. WPA Excavations at the Mound Bottom and Pack Sites inMiddle Tennessee, 1936-1940.From July 1936 to January 1937, archaeologists from the University of Tennessee directed excavationsat the Pack site (40CH1) under the auspices of the Works Progress Administration. Limitedexcavations were conducted during this time at the Mound Bottom site (40CH8). Charles Nashreturned to Mound Bottom in February 1940 for additional investigations. This presentationsummarizes current research on the curated Mound Bottom and Pack site records and collections.34BN12 Eva Site 6BN12, Benton Co.,Tennessee. Progress picture of sitedown N-S test trench. Showing crosstrench (E-W) after trenching. Directionnorth.; Frank H. McClung MuseumWPA/TVA Archive (fhm00156). Usedwith permission. Available at:http://mcclungmuseum.utk.eduBisset, Thad. New interpretation of site use at Eva during the Middle Archaic: AMS dates from the ThreeMile phaseNew Deal excavations of Archaic shell mounds such as Eva in the western Tennessee Valleyproduced extensive, well-documented assemblages. However, these projects were completed beforethe development of radiocarbon dating. Because early dating methods were expensive and requiredlarge samples, few dates were obtained from these sites even after 14C dating became available,limiting their utility for addressing modern research questions. In light of recent hypothesesconcerning cultural practices associated with shell mound use, this paper presents new dates fromEva, and a preliminary re-interpretation of the site‘s occupational history based on the depositionalrates of the two earliest strata.


Newsletter of the SAA’s History of Archaeology Interest GroupVolume 2, Number 1 January 2012Marcoux, Jon. Utilizing New Deal Data to Explore the Timing and Tempo of Mississippian PoliticalCentralization in the Middle Tennessee River ValleyWe know very little about late prehistoric Mississippian culture in the Middle Tennessee River valleyof northern Alabama despite the role these societies played in forging the social, political, andeconomic landscape of the region. In this paper, I utilize datasets from New Deal excavations at theWalling II site and the Hobb‘s Island site to determine the timing and tempo of political centralizationin the region. I also discuss how the excavations at these sites represent different ends of thespectrum in regard to the variable quality of depression-era excavations, reporting, and recordscuration.Hawley, Marlin and David Dye. W.C. McKern: Advisor, Consultant, and Godfather for New DealArchaeology in TennesseeThomas M.N. Lewis was an avocational archaeologist before being named head of TVA archaeologyin Tennessee in 1933. His ascent to academic archaeology owes much to his friendship with W.C.McKern, a prominent Midwestern archaeologist and architect of the Midwestern Taxonomic Method(MTM). As Lewis took on new challenges, McKern‘s mentoring of him intensified. As TVA fieldworkwound down in 1942 with America‘s entry into WWII, Lewis and his associates turned to analysisand report preparation. McKern‘s advice was sought in the difficulties attending application of theMTM to Tennessee Valley archaeology, as exemplified in Lewis and Kneberg‘s Hiwassee Islandreport.Schwartz, Doug. W.S. Webb and the Leadership of TVA ArchaeologyTo initiate the Depression-motivated TVA archaeology program a strong leader of this vast enterprisewas required. After a search of available talent the government officials chose W.S. Webb, aprofessor of physics at the University of Kentucky who had done some archaeology survey. Thechoice of Webb for this important position said a great deal about the status of Southeasternarchaeology at the time and of Webb's unusual professional development. This paper traces Webb'spersonal, leadership and archaeological development and his contribution to the formulation andexecution of the TVA archaeological programs.Means, Bernard. DiscussantBN32(B) Stockdale Site 3BN32,Benton County, Tennessee.; Frank H.McClung Museum WPA/TVAArchive (fhm00190). Used withpermission. Available at:http://mcclungmuseum.utk.edu


Newsletter of the SAA’s History of Archaeology Interest GroupVolume 2, Number 1 January 2012Lewis Roberts BinfordNovember 21, 1931-April 11, 2011By David J. MeltzerEditor’s note: the following is excerpted from a longer piece published by the National Academy ofSciences and reprinted with permission of the author. HAIG members are encouraged to read theremainder of this thorough biographical memoir available at:http://www.nasonline.org/publications/biographical-memoirs/memoir-pdfs/lewis-r-binfordmemoir.pdfLewis R. Binford was the most influentialAmerican archaeologist of the 20th century, yet rarelyconducted fieldwork, was indifferent to such traditionalgoals as defining new artifact types or archaeologicalcultures, and never made a headline-grabbing discovery.For Binford finding things was never as important asfinding things out, for he was foremost a man of boldideas and strong opinions, and not shy about expressingeither. Equipped with a messianic fervor, anextraordinary work ethic, a spellbinding speaking style,and a gale-force personality (he could be utterlycharming one moment, fiercely caustic the next), hesought nothing less than the overthrow of mid-20thcenturyarchaeological orthodoxy. Culture history, it wascalled, and in Binford's view it scarcely rose abovedescriptions of artifacts and sites and their placement intime and space, and never grappled with largerquestions of how past cultures adapted to theirenvironment or changed over time. Caricature, perhaps,but even in that, there can be truth.Starting in the 1960s Binford pushed, pulled, or otherwise cajoled archaeology into becomingmore anthropological, evolutionary, and scientific. His contributions over the next four decades hadbreadth and depth, and forced a radical retooling of archaeological theory, method, and explanation;helped advance work in hunter-gatherer studies, ethnoarchaeology, zooarchaeology, andarchaeological site formation processes (among other areas); and sparked fundamental debates overthe nature of early human evolution. He did not have the last word on those subjects but oftenenough had the first word and, for that matter, a great many of the words in between.Binford succeeded spectacularly in changing the direction and discourse of the discipline.Along the way he alienated a generation of powerful elders, sharply changed his own course, andcame to oppose many who had been inspired by his lead (including former students), but whopursued their own paths as the archaeology he helped create grew ever more diverse and his originalvision diffused.Eventually "young Turks" grow old. Yet, Binford hardly lost his energy, enthusiasm, andcreativity-or, for that matter, his zest for a fight. His ideas inspired, guided, or were targets for muchof archaeology over the last half century, and archaeologists will continue to grapple with them for along time to come.


Newsletter of the SAA’s History of Archaeology Interest GroupVolume 2, Number 1 January 2012Picturing the Past:Imaging and Imagining the Ancient Middle EastFebruary 7 - September 2, 2012Editor’s note: This exhibit at the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago should be of interest tothose living in or near the windy city. Emily Teeter, Jack Green, and John A. Larson are curators ofthe exhibit. The curators have produced a spectacular catalog for the exhibit that contains severalwell-illustrated essays. Even if you cannot see the exhibit, the catalog is well worth obtaining:Picturing the Past: Imaging and Imagining the Ancient Middle East, edited by Jack Green, Emily Teeter,and John A. Larson, Oriental Institute Museum Publications 34, The Oriental Institute of theUniversity of Chicago, Chicago. The following text is excerpted from the web site associated with theexhibit and is used with permission: http://oi.uchicago.edu/museum/special/picturing/My thanks are extended to Emily Teeter for her assistance with this and also with making availablethe images used below.The Palace at Khorsabad: perspective view from the south (Place 1867–1870, vol. 3, pl. 18bis;Oriental Institute digital image D. 17479). Figure 1.3 in Picturing the Past. Courtesy: OrientalInstitute, University of Chicago.Picturing the Past presents paintings, architectural reconstructions, facsimiles, casts, models,photographs, and computer-aided reconstructions that show how the architecture, sites, and artifactsof the ancient Middle East have been documented. The show also examines how the publication of


Newsletter of the SAA’s History of Archaeology Interest GroupVolume 2, Number 1 January 2012those images have shaped our perception of the ancient world, and how some of the more"imaginary" reconstructions have obscured our real understanding of the past. The exhibit also showshow features of the ancient Middle East have been presented in different ways for differentaudiences, in some cases transforming a highly academic image into a widely recognized icon of thepast.The exhibit made up of 45 works,many of which demonstrate howarchaeologists can ingeniously combinedifferent sources to reconstruct architectureand artifacts. Examples include anelaborately decorated doorway fromMedinet Habu, Egypt, with small fragmentsof the tile work from which the decorationwas restored, a watercolor of a vessel fromRayy, Iran, with a single one of itscomponent sherds, and computerreconstructions of buildings from ChoghaMish, Iran, that are based on thefoundations recovered by archaeologists inconjunction with seal impressions that showthe upper stories of buildings at the site.The development of photography asan essential tool in documenting the past isillustrated by different types of techniquesand equipment. The role and developmentof aerial photography is shown by earlyexperiments with balloon-mounted camerasat Megiddo and by later developments, suchas the adoption of formerly classifiedmilitary spy satellite photography(CORONA) for archaeological work. Atoken ball from Chogha Mish is shownalongside images from an industrial CTscanner, showing how things that areinvisible to the human eye can now be seenand documented using non-destructive technology.Expedition photographer Leslie Thompsonphotographing in the mastaba of Mereruka(Oriental Institute photograph P. 24465). Figure 4.2in Picturing the Past. Courtesy: Oriental Institute,University of Chicago.The exhibit also explores the role that images of the ancient Middle East have had instimulating public and academic interest in the region. Examples of stereo-opticon cards, a model of aziggurat, a replica of the bust of Queen Nefertiti, and a model of the "Stables of Solomon" fromMegiddo in today's Israel, all show how images, whether accurate or not, have become icons of theancient world. The exhibit comments on the scientific basis for these and other images, and howembellishments on the part of the artist have, in some cases, created a false reality.A symposium "Picturing the Past" will be presented at the Oriental Institute on Saturday,March 10, 2012, from 1:00 to 5:00 pm.


Newsletter of the SAA’s History of Archaeology Interest GroupVolume 2, Number 1 January 2012W. L. Griffin (1882-1918): A Lesser-Known Early Kentucky ArchaeologistBy Donald B. Ball, Independent Researcher, Louisville, KentuckyPerhaps contrary to the impression held by many modern archaeologists that the study ofarchaeology in Kentucky was initiated with the work of William S. Webb and William D. Funkhouser(Funkhouser and Webb 1932) of the University of Kentucky, in actuality a small number of earlystudents of the past were active in the state beginning in the early nineteenth century with John D.Clifford and Constantine Samuel Rafinesque of Lexington (Boewe 2000). Following a lapse of manyyears, Bennett H. Young of Louisville would author The Prehistoric Men of Kentucky (Young 1910), thefirst major study of prehistoric remains in the state. However, the role of W. L. Griffin (1882-1918), aresident of Somerset in Pulaski County, southeastern Kentucky, has yet to be appraised.Little is known of Griffin‘s archaeological research. In his unpublished study titled Stone AgeMan in the Middle South, William Edward Myer (n.d.: Chapter I) briefly described a number of sitesalong the upper reaches of the Cumberland River examined by Griffin and commented:The author is under many obligations to the late W. L. Griffin, Esq., of Somerset,Kentucky, for carefully prepared memoranda of his explorations in southern Kentuckyin the Burnside region. Mr. Griffin (died 1918) was given his official title. He was areliable and wide-awake observer. He placed his entire collection and all his papers atour service.As best as may be determined solong after the fact, it appears that all ormost of the fieldwork conducted byGriffin was undertaken on various sites(including mounds, caves, and rockshelters) in and near Pulaski and Waynecounties, Kentucky. Among the items herecovered were a large effigy pipe (Figure1) and a Mississippian era shell gorget(Figure 2). As was not uncommon in theera in which he lived, Griffin activelybought materials for his collection asevidenced by the following advertisement Figure 1. Stone bird effigy pipe from a spring onhe placed in several issues of the Mount Cumberland River, Pulaski County, Kentucky (W. L.Vernon Signal (including but not limited to Griffin collection; measurements of pipe not recorded).the issues for July 14, 1916, August 4,1916, and September 29, 1916) published in Mt. Vernon, (Rockcastle County) Kentucky:Wanted:– If you have any Indian relics such as stone pipes, large flint spears, groovedaxes, pots and bowls, shell beads, etc., found in caves, graves and old fields. Write to W.L. Griffin, Somerset, Ky., and get his prices on them.


Newsletter of the SAA’s History of Archaeology Interest GroupVolume 2, Number 1 January 2012Granting that it might be easy enough to dismiss W.L. Griffin as ―just another collector,‖ doing so would be adisservice to his active involvement with the slowlyemerging field of archaeology in the era in which he lived.The single most informative source of biographicalinformation concerning his association with theadvancement of archaeological research appeared in abrief article regarding an annual gathering of theInternational Society of Archaeologists prepared by R. O.Randall and published in the October 1912 issue of OhioHistory. As recorded by Randall (1912):Figure 2. Shell gorget (Griffin No. 828)from cave 5 miles west of Somerset,Kentucky (engraved area diameter = 1½inches; further described in Griffin1913a).A convention of the International Society ofArchaeologists was held at Cincinnati onSeptember 29 th , 1912. The meeting had been calledas a semi-official gathering, but the large attendanceand enthusiastic sessions resulted in its being votedan official convention – the first of theorganization…..The society was formed some three years ago with the avowed objects of exposingfraudulent dealers, to encourage the preservation of mounds and earthworks, and tocurb the mercenary spirit among collectors by encouraging the study of archaeologicalmaterial from a scientific standpoint. The society now has about 500 members.W. L. Griffin of Somerset, Ky., was named as permanent chairman, and H. C. Shetrone,Columbus, Ohio, as permanent secretary of the convention when the meeting wasdeclared an official convention. Mr. J. A. Jeancon, Colorado Springs, Colo., is presidentof the society, and Mr. Allen Jesse Reynolds, Madison, Ind., secretary and editor.…It is deserving of mention that the commendable (and still timely) goals of the InternationalSociety of Archaeologists where to: unite collectors and students for mutual aid and protection,expose frauds and makers of fake relics, lessen as much as possible the reckless opening of Indiangraves and mounds, encourage the preservation of mounds, etc., curb the mercenary spirit somanifest by some individuals, encourage the study of archaeology as a science, and bring to lightunknown investigators. Membership and a subscription to their journal were offered at $.50 per year(later raised to $1.00 per year). In an attempt to reach a broader membership base, an advertisementfor the Society (Reynolds 1912) was published in the October-December 1912 issue of The AmericanAntiquarian and Oriental Journal.It is of some interest that one focus of Griffin‘s attention was directed toward serving as thedesignated Fraud Detector on behalf of the members of the International Society of Archaeologists.As noted in an extended report on the Society‘s annual convention convened in St. Louis, Missouri, inSeptember 1913 (Griffin 1913b:128), ―Mr. Griffin gave a short talk on the methods of manufacture anddistribution of fradulent [sic; fraudulent] archaeological specimens and illustrated his remarks withseveral pieces.‖ Taking his responsibilities seriously, in one announcement to the membership(Griffin (1914a), he felt compelled to declare:


Newsletter of the SAA’s History of Archaeology Interest GroupVolume 2, Number 1 January 2012Fraud Detector‘s ReportFellow Members:—Recently one or our Pennsylvania members forwarded for my inspection severalfraudulent flint specimens. These were ordinary arrow points rechipped into fancifulforms. The fresh chipping had been rubbed with an abrasive to remove the sharpnessand was well done. Our member wrote that these pieces had been sent to him onapproval by Lester G. Bill of Wayland, N. Y. This is the second complaint I havereceived of this party and all members are advised to not purchase any specimens fromhim.Fraternally,W. L. GRIFFIN, Fraud Detector.Somerset, Kentucky, Lock Box 8, Sta. A.Among his other formal duties with the Society, Griffin also served as editor of its journal, TheArchaeological Bulletin, for a brief period in 1915. Available information indicates that this periodicalwas published from 1909-1918. As recorded in 1909 within the pages of American Anthropologist(Anonymous 1909:816):―The Archaeological Bulletin‖ published quarterly by the International Society ofArchaeologists has made its appearance at Council Grove, Kansas. Allen Jesse Reynoldsis Secretary, Treasurer, and Editor. The little journal is published chiefly in the interestsof collectors.Shortly after its inauguration, the journal was published six times a year. The details of theevents surrounding the sudden demise of the journal (always something of a ―shoestring‖ operation)are not known but were likely related to disruption among its membership base caused by WorldWar I.In common with tracing his archaeological pursuits, very little is known about Griffin as aperson even including some ambiguity regarding his first name. A brief note (Remsburg 1916:145)appearing in the November-December 1916 of The Archaeological Bulletin informs us that:The Somerset (Ky.) News of recent date, printed a picture and complimentary notice ofour worthy and esteemed Fraud Detector, W. L. Griffin, from which the followingextract is taken: ―Above is a splendid cut of Walter L. Griffin, an enthusiastic member ofthe Somerset Aerie of Eagles. He has been twice elected as their worthy President, andthis year will represent them at the Grand Lodge. Mr. Griffin has labored in season andout of season, to build up the order, and to promote its success. Mr. Griffin has servedas a member of the City Council and is a valued employee of the Q. & C. Railroad[Queen & Crescent Railroad].‖It may be noted, however, that one collector in central Tennessee (personal communicationDecember 18, 2007), has in his possession a copy of Thruston‘s The Antiquities of Tennessee (Thruston1897) inscribed ―Mr Wm L. Griffin with the kind regards of G. P. Thruston Nashville Feby 1 st . 1912.‖The July-August 1916 issue of The Archaeological Bulletin (Straley 1916:107) remarked that ―CharlesGriffin, son of former secretary W. L. Griffin, Somerset, Ky., recently won the Morris Harkins goldmedal in the Somerset High School oratorical contest. His subject was ―Primitive Man.‖‖


Newsletter of the SAA’s History of Archaeology Interest GroupVolume 2, Number 1 January 2012Excluding the obvious terminal date of 1918 provided by Myer (n.d.:Chapter I), the timeframein which Griffin actively examined sites in southeastern Kentucky remains uncertain. It is known,however, that he published at least four brief accounts (Griffin 1911; 1913a; 1913c; 1914b) ofexcavations near his hometown of Somerset, Kentucky. In one of these papers (Griffin 1914b:64), hediscussed a cave site ―which I have known for many years‖ suggesting that he had a long standinginterest in regional archaeology. As may be gleaned from both Myer‘s (n.d.:Chapter I) remarks andthe small number of known publications authored by Griffin, it is obvious that while he wasaggressively engaged in examining and documenting a number of sites near his place of residenceand knew or was in contact with a number of the ―up and coming‖ archaeologists of his day (e.g.,David I. Bushnell, Gerard Fowke, William C. Mills, William Edward Myer, Henry C. Shetrone, andGates P. Thruston; for further information see Griffin 1913c and Randall 1912) he is not mentioned inthe acknowledgments appearing in post-1900 studies such as Moorehead (1917:9-15) or Young(1910:x-xiii).The details surrounding the disposition of the Griffin collection and his related records are notknown although in part this question is answered by the following notice (Griffin 1918) published inthe January-February 1918 issue of The Archaeological Bulletin:ANNOUNCEMENT EXTRAORDINARY.I am breaking up my extensive collection of pre-historic relics and offering them for asle[sic; sale] at reasonable prices. From common to fine specimens of Pottery, Pipes, Tubes,Arrows, Spears, Knives, Drills, Scrapers, Axes, Celts, Pestles, Spades, Mortars,Pendants, Gorgets, Ceremonials, Beads, etc., from this and other states, also a fewforeign chipped implements. State what you desire and give reference in first letter.Specimens sent on approval to responsible collectors. Everything guaranteed genuine.All inquiries will be answered in rotation. Enclose 3 cent stamp.W. L. GRIFFINLock Box 8, Station A, Somerset, Ky.Wanted in exchange for relics; mounted heads and antlers (excepting deer).The circumstances (the rapid onset of life threatening medical problems?) leading to Griffin‘sdeath at the rather youthful age of but 36 years old which prompted him to make an effort to disposeof his collection remain subject to speculation and a preliminary review of the meager availableresources leaves us with more questions than answers regarding the full extent of the activities of thisearly and lesser-known Kentucky archaeologist. Griffin was interred in the Somerset City Cemeteryin his hometown of Somerset, Kentucky, beneath a gravestone marked simply ―W. L. Griffin/ 1882-1918.‖References CitedAnonymous1909 Anthropologic Miscellanea. American Anthropologist n.s. 11(4):815-817.Boewe, Charles (editor)2000 John D. Clifford’s Indian Antiquities – Related Material by C. S. Rafinesque. University of TennesseePress, Knoxville.


Newsletter of the SAA’s History of Archaeology Interest GroupVolume 2, Number 1 January 2012Funkhouser, William D. and William S. Webb1932 Archaeological Survey of Kentucky. University of Kentucky Reports in Archaeology andAnthropology 2:1-463. Lexington.Griffin, W. L.1911 The Dunagan Mound. The Archaeological Bulletin 2(June):64-65. Journal of the InternationalSociety of Archaeologists, Madison, Indiana.1913a A Rare and Interesting Gorget. The Archaeological Bulletin 4(5; September-October):107-108.Journal of the International Society of Archaeologists, Dana, Indiana.1913b The St. Louis Convention. The Archaeological Bulletin 4(5; September-October):125-130. Journalof the International Society of Archaeologists, Dana, Indiana.1913c A Cache. The Archaeological Bulletin 4(3; May-June):64-65. Journal of the International Societyof Archaeologists, Newport, Indiana.1914a Fraud Detector‘s Report. The Archaeological Bulletin 5(4; July-August):84. Journal of theInternational Society of Archaeologists, Ottawa, Kansas.1914b The Link Burial Cave. The Archaeological Bulletin 5(4: July-August):64-65. Journal of theInternational Society of Archaeologists, Ottawa, Kansas.1918 Announcement Extraordinary (advertisement). The Archaeological Bulletin 9(1: January-February):unnumbered page. Journal of the International Society of Archaeologists, Hico,Texas.Moorehead, Warren King1917 Stone Ornaments Used by Indians in the United States and Canada Being a Description of CertainCharm Stones, Gorgets, Tubes, Bird Stones and Problematical Forms. The Andover Press, Andover,Massachusetts (reprinted 2005, Gustav‘s Library, Davenport, Iowa).Myer, William Edwardn.d.Stone Age Man in the Middle South. Unpublished manuscript filed as NAA MS 2566-a,National Anthropological Archives, Smithsonian Museums Support Center, Suitland,Maryland (edited and annotated transcription in possession of Donald B. Ball, Louisville,Kentucky).Randall, E. O.1912 International Society of Archaeologists. Ohio History 21(4):486-487.Remsburg, George J.1916 Miscellaneous Notes. The Archaeological Bulletin 7(6; November-December):145-147. Journal ofthe International Society of Archaeologists, Ottawa, Kansas.Reynolds, Allen Jesse1912 A Few Aims of the International Society of Archaeologists (advertisement). The AmericanAntiquarian and Oriental Journal 34(4; October-December):unnumbered back page.Straley, Wilson (editor)1916 Found in the Editor‘s Mail Box. The Archaeological Bulletin 7(4; July-August):107-109. Journal ofthe International Society of Archaeologists, Hico, Texas.Thruston, Gates P.1897 The Antiquities of Tennessee and the Adjacent States and the State of Aboriginal Society in the Scale ofCivilization Represented by Them (2 nd ed.). Robert Clarke Company, Cincinnati (reprinted 1972,Tenase Company, Knoxville, Tennessee).Young, Bennett H.1910 The Prehistoric Men of Kentucky. Filson Club Publications No. 25, John P. Morton, Louisville(reprinted 2005, Gustav‘s Library, Davenport, Iowa).


Newsletter of the SAA’s History of Archaeology Interest GroupVolume 2, Number 1 January 2012Recent or Noteworthy PublicationsEditor’s note: starred entries are from the Histories of Archaeology Research Network (HARN)publications page or distributed via email to members of HARN:http://harngroup.wordpress.com/publications/If you are not a member of HARN, I recommend that you consider joining this group of scholars at:http://harngroup.wordpress.com/about/Abadía, Oscar Moro2010 Beyond externalism. Exploring new directions in the history of archaeology. ArchaeologicalDialogues 17:215-236.*Abt, Jeffrey2011 American Egyptologist: The Life of James Henry Breasted and the Creation of His Oriental Institute.The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Editor’s note: The following text is from the publisher’s web site and isused with permission. Breasted created the University of Chicago’sOriental Institute.James Henry Breasted (1865–1935) had a career that epitomizesour popular image of the archaeologist. Daring, handsome, andcharismatic, he traveled on expeditions to remote and politicallyunstable corners of the Middle East, helped identify the tomb ofKing Tut, and was on the cover of Time magazine. But Breastedwas more than an Indiana Jones—he was an accomplishedscholar, academic entrepreneur, and talented author whobrought ancient history to life not just for students but for suchnotables as Teddy Roosevelt and Sigmund Freud.Publisher‘s site:http://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/A/bo12024377.htmlSee also:http://news.uchicago.edu/article/2011/12/09/scholar-formeruchicago-staff-member-jeffrey-abt-completes-book-oi-founderAdams, Amanda2010 Ladies of the Field: Early Women Archaeologists and Their Search for Adventure. Greystone Books,Vancouver, British Columbia.*Baird, J.2011 Photographing Dura-Europos, 1928–1937: An Archaeology of the Archive. American Journal ofArchaeology 115(3):427–46.Bernhardsson, Magnus T.2006 Reclaiming a Plundered Past: Archaeology and Nation Building in Modern Iraq. University of TexasPress, Austin.Bignamini, I. and C. Hornsby2010 Digging and Dealing in Eighteenth Century Rome. Yale University Press, New Haven.


Newsletter of the SAA’s History of Archaeology Interest GroupVolume 2, Number 1 January 2012Brown, Ian and Vincas P. Steponaitis, editors2010 The Peabody Man: Jeffrey P. Brain. Borgo Press, Tuscaloosa.*Carruthers, W.2011 The rise and fall of ancient Egypt? Egyptology‘s never-ending story. Antiquity 85 (330):1444-1447.Feagins, Jim D.2007 George J. Remsburg: Amateur Historian and Archeological Investigator during an AntiquarianAge. Kansas Preservation: Newsletter of the Cultural Resources Division. 29(6; November- 19-20.Kansas State Historical Society, Topeka. Available on line at:http://www.kshs.org/resource/ks_preservation/kpnovdec07.pdfGreen, Jack2009 Archaeology and Politics in the Holy Land: The Life and Career of P.L.O. Guy. PalestineExploration Quarterly 141:167-187.Green, Jack, Emily Teeter, and John A. Larson, editors2012 Picturing the Past: Imaging and Imagining the Ancient Middle East. Oriental Institute MuseumPublications 34, The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, Chicago.*Harlan, D.2011 The Cult of the Dead, Fetishism, and the Genesis of an Idea: Megalithic Monuments and theTree and Pillar Cult of Arthur J. Evans. European Journal of Archaeology 14 (1–2), 210–230.*Harlan, D.2011 British Lancastrian Schools of Nineteenth-Century Kythera. Annual of the British School atAthens 106(1), 325-375.*Harrison, Stephen2011 John Robert Mortimer: The Life of a Nineteenth Century East Yorkshire Archaeologist. BlackthornPress, Yorkshire, United Kingdom.Hodge, Phillip2011 Bettye Jeane Broyles (1928-2011). Southeastern Archaeological Conference Newsletter 53 (2):15,23.Jensen, Hadley W.2010 The Life and Times of Henry B. Nicholson. BACKDIRT: Annual Review of the Cotsen Institute ofArchaeology at UCLA 2010, pp. 18-23. Available on line at:http://www.ioa.ucla.edu/publications/backdirt/backdirt2010.pdfKelly, J.M.2009 The Society of Dilettanti: Archaeology and Identity in the British Enlightenment. Yale UniversityPress, New Haven.Lozny, Ludomir, editor2011 Comparative Archaeologies: A Sociological View of the Science of the Past. Springer Press, New York.Note: several chapters focus on the history of archaeology in various parts of the world,excluding North America.Linden, Marc Vander and Benjamin W. Roberts2011 A Tale of Two Countries: Contrasting Archaeological Culture History in British and FrenchArchaeology. In Investigating Archaeological Cultures: Material Culture, Variability, andTransmission, edited by Benjamin W. Roberts and Marc Vander Linden, pp. 23-40. SpringerPress, New York.McNutt, Charles H. and Marvin D. Jeter.2011 Lewis R. Binford and the 1961 Historic Sites -SEAC Meetings. Southeastern ArchaeologicalConference Newsletter 53 (2):12-14.


Newsletter of the SAA’s History of Archaeology Interest GroupVolume 2, Number 1 January 2012Reid, J. Jefferson and James M. Skibo2011 Introduction to Assessing Michael Brian Schiffer and His Behavioral Archaeology. Journal ofArchaeological Method and Theory 18:273-277.Note: Article is from the issue entitled "Special Issue: Assessing Michael Brian Schiffer and HisBehavioral Archaeology."Sarunas, Milisauskas, Thurston Tina, and Whitlow Raymond2010 American Contributions to European Archaeology. Sprawozdania Archeologiczne 62:35-63.* Stevenson, A.2011 ―Yours (unusually) cheerfully, Gordon‖: Vere Gordon Childe's letters to R.B.K. Stevenson.Antiquity 85:1454-1462.The author recounts her grandfather‘s correspondence with Childe. The letters themselves areavailable at: http://www.antiquity.ac.uk/projgall/stevenson330/*Sveshnikova, O.2011 Soviet Archaeological Expedition as a Research Object. Bulletin of the History of Archaeology21:4-9.Thornton, A.2011 British Archaeologists, Social Networks and the Emergence of a Profession. Unpublished Ph.D.dissertation, University College London, London.van Leusen, Martijn2011 A Career in Classical Archaeology: An Interview with Marianne Kleibrink. European Journal ofArchaeology 14:18-28.The staff of the 1906–1907 season of the First Epigraphic Expedition at the Second Cataract, Sudan.Left to right: Mrs. Breasted, James Henry Breasted, Charles Breasted, and Norman de Garis Davies(Oriental Institute photograph P. B 1018). Figure 2.1 in Picturing the Past. Courtesy: OrientalInstitute, University of Chicago.

More magazines by this user
Similar magazines