Society for American Archaeology HAIG... · Examination of the original documents and maps at the ... Earl Morris and ... The 1939 excavation of the archaeological site, the CCC Site,

H A

I G Volume 4, Number 2 December 2014

Greetings, It was Christmas Day 2014 as I wrote this. When I compiled the last newsletter in June, I optimistically thought I would be finalizing the third newsletter of the year for HAIG, but here we are on issue number 2. Given a packed calendar for myself already in the coming year, including the 2015 Society for American Archaeology (SAA) meeting, I think two issues next year will probably be likely as well. Part of what has kept me very busy has been related to my virtual archaeology/3D scanning efforts, but I never keep the important history of archaeology far behind, including maintaining involvement in HAIG. We as a group have been quite busy. David Dye’s volume on Tennessee TVA (Tennessee Valley Authority) archaeology is going through its final stages at the University of Alabama Press, which has been a great press for the history of archaeology in general. This volume comes out of papers presented at the 2012 Biennial Gordon R. Willey Symposium on the History of Archaeology at the SAA meeting in Memphis, Tennessee. Many of the papers presented at the HAIG session in the 2013 SAAs in Honolulu, Hawaii, have or soon will be out in the Bulletin for the History of Archaeology, which has become an open source journal. The papers on archaeologists from the 1940s to the 1960s at this year’s Biennial Gordon R. Willey Symposium on the History of Archaeology at the SAA meeting in Austin, Texas, organized by Pat Trader and myself, are currently being assembled, and major editing of those papers will consume the first half of next year by Pat and I. HAIG will of course have a presence at the 2015 SAA annual meeting in San Francisco, California. Organized by Mark Howe and myself is a session titled “A New Deal for Western Archaeology.” More on that session in the pages following. You can also find Donald Ball’s overview of early efforts to protect archaeological sites on an international level. We already have a session lined up for the 2016 Biennial Gordon R. Willey Symposium on the History of Archaeology at the SAA meeting “Collaborations and Competition between Professionals and Nonprofessionals in the Production of Archaeological Knowledge in the Americas,” organized by David R. Wilcox and Andrew L. Christenson. I hope we will all see you in Orlando, Florida for those papers. Happy New Year, Bernard K. Means Send contributions to: [email protected]

Newsletter of the

History of Archaeology

Interest Group

Society for American Archaeology

A Walt Kelly cover in the public domain.

Newsletter of the SAA’s History of Archaeology Interest Group

Volume 4, Number 2 December 2014

A New Deal for Western Archaeology Organized by Mark Howe and Bernard K. Means for the 2015 SAA Annual Meeting

Session abstract: The New Deal agencies established during the Great Depression were important 1930’s economic programs that are a dynamic part of American history. This symposium will focus on analysis of these Alphabet Soup agencies, as they were commonly known, and the cultural heritage projects that were sponsored west of the Mississippi River, including those devoted to archaeology and to standing structures. These Western New Deal projects were supported by many of the Federal agencies: Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC), Civil Works Administration (CWA), Public Works Administration (PWA), National Youth Administration (NYA) and the Works Progress Administration (WPA). Contrary to what some scholars have implied, we show that New Deal archaeology is not confined to the southeastern United States.

Paper abstracts

The International Boundary Commission (IBC) and Projects along the U.S. – Mexico Border (1928 – 1941) Mark Howe (US State Department – USIBWC) The International Boundary Commission (IBC) conducted many projects along the entire U.S. – Mexico border during the Depression. Many of the projects were in cooperation with the Mexican Commission (Mexico) as per treaty stipulations. These projects were conducted under funds from agencies such as the Public Works Commission (PWC), Works Progress Administration (WPA) and others. Examination of the original documents and maps at the present International Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC) offices in El Paso, Texas has shown an interesting range of individual and Commission attitudes to structures and projects. Discussion will focus on the projects along the border, pertaining to repairs, repainting and costs to the historic monuments defining the border that were established in the 1800’s. Additionally, a comparison of the monuments and those down the Rio Grande to the Gulf of Mexico will be examined and discussed. New Deal Archaeology at Buena Vista Lake in the San Joaquin Valley and the Sierra Madre Mountains: The 1933-34 CWA-Smithsonian Institution Project in Southern California Steve James (California State University at Fullerton) Perhaps the earliest Federal Civil Works Administration (CWA) archaeological project in California was conducted during the winter of 1933-34 at five sites along Buena Vista Lake in Kern County by the Bureau of American Ethnology (BAE), Smithsonian Institution. The project location was chosen for several reasons: mild winter climate, high number of unemployed men from nearby oil towns, and large, deep prehistoric sites. At the height of the excavations, the labor force amounted to 187 men. BAE archaeologists William D. Strong and William M. Walker directed the work, with field supervision by Edwin F. Walker (Southwest Museum), and UC Berkeley graduate student Waldo R. Wedel, who later wrote the final report. As an outgrowth of the project and in order to determine the boundary between the Yokuts and eastern Chumash, Strong conducted a two-week archaeological reconnaissance in nearby Cuyama Valley and the Sierra Madre Mountains with local cattle rancher James G. James, who had explored archaeological sites in the region containing well-preserved perishable artifacts and was a distant relative of the author (my grandfather’s first cousin). The significant results of the CWA-Smithsonian Buena Vista Lake project and subsequent survey by Strong and James are discussed in this presentation.



Desert Digs: New Deal Archaeology in Southern Arizona, 1934-1941 Todd Bostwick (PaleoWest Archaeology) and Steve James (California State University at Fullerton) The Sonoran Desert of Southern Arizona is well known for its wealth of archaeological sites left behind by PaleoIndian, Archaic, and Formative period cultures. During the Great Depression, archaeological surveys and excavation projects provided employment opportunities for hundreds of young men and women seeking jobs. Bryon Cummings and Emil Haury at the University of Arizona in Tucson and Odd Halseth at Pueblo Grande Museum in Phoenix took advantage of a variety of New Deal work programs to undertake these archaeological investigations at a scale previously unheard of. This presentation summarizes these important projects and discusses how their results significantly advanced our knowledge of the prehistoric cultures of Southern Arizona through published and unpublished reports, master’s theses, and museum exhibits. This New Deal archaeology was undertaken between 1934 and 1941 through the Public Works Administration (PWA), Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC), and Works Project Administration (WPA) at Ventana Cave, Pueblo Grande, Besh-Ba-Gowah, University Indian Ruin, Valshni Village, Jackrabbit Ruin, and other sites. The Legacy of New Deal Programs to Northern Arizona and Southwest Archaeology Jeanne Shofer (Coconino National Forest) and Peter Pilles (Coconino National Forest) During the 1930s, federal New Deal programs financed and supported a number of archaeological projects in northern Arizona. Within National Parks and Monuments, surveys and excavations were undertaken so that people could see archaeological sites, and visitor centers were constructed to display and interpret archaeology for the public. Several major expeditions by the Museum of Northern Arizona were also supported by New Deal programs. Excavations from 1933 to 1939 were directed by professional archaeologists employed by the Museum with laborers and students financed by the U.S. Civil Works Administration, Federal Emergency Relief Administration, and the Works Progress Administration. This work took place during a time when little was known about the prehistory of northern Arizona and the field of Southwestern archaeology was relatively new. The Museum’s excavations formed the basis for numerous publications by Harold S. Colton and his colleagues that greatly influenced the next 80 years of archaeological research and National Park Service interpretation. This paper explores the relationship of archaeological research conducted by the Museum with federal New Deal Programs and its enduring legacy to the archaeological profession and the American public. Blast Caps and Other Stories of the CCC on the Gila National Forest: Imaging and Reimagining the North Star Road Wendy Sutton (USDA Forest Service, Gila NF) The CCC and other New Deal agencies were active across the Gila National Forest during the 1930s. The North Star Road (which experienced earlier use as a Military Road) runs alongside the Gila Wilderness, the nation’s first wilderness area, established in 1924. The road is now sandwiched between the Gila Wilderness and the Aldo Leopold Wilderness (part of the first Wilderness established in 1964, under the Wilderness Act). Significant work was conducted along the North Star Road by the CCC. How does the work conducted within this corridor reflect community priorities and values associated with the early wilderness movement? How do we manage this unique landscape and it’s cultural, recreational, and natural values into the future?



Ruins and Restoration on the Colorado Plateau: Earl Morris and the PWA (Public Works Administration) Kelly Pool (Metcalf Archaeological Consultants, Inc.) In 1934, the Carnegie Institution “loaned” archaeologist Earl Morris to the National Park Service to supervise the repair of ruins in Mesa Verde National Park, Colorado, and Aztec Ruins National Monument, New Mexico. The NPS had received funding in 1933 for long-term development projects through New Deal emergency work relief programs, one of which was the Public Works Administration. The PWA provided money for physical improvements in parks and monuments, including funding for restoration and stabilization of prehistoric ruins. Morris was recommended for the job as an acknowledged expert, with previous reconstruction experience at sites such as Chichen Itza and Canyon de Chelly’s Mummy Cave. With the help of unemployed locals, Native Americans, and experienced fieldhands, Morris reconstructed the Great Kiva he had excavated a decade earlier at Aztec and stabilized the Mesa Verde ruins, most notably Cliff Palace. Morris’ work served as a model for future projects, and a permanent MVNP stabilization team headed by PWA foreman Al Lancaster grew out of this work. After the PWA, other New Deal programs such as the CCC continued to undertake stabilization projects in these and other Colorado Plateau parks and monuments.

Cliff Palace at Mesa Verde. Panorama taken by Ben FrantzDale. Used under a Creative Commons License. Image available at: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cliff_Palace_at_Mesa_Verde.jpg.

The Civilian Conservation Corps in Chaco Canyon, New Mexico John Schelberg and Carla Van West (SRI Foundation) In 1937, a unique Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) sponsored “Indian Mobile Unit” was established in Chaco Canyon. The camp was located east of Pueblo Bonito and the goal was to train Navajo men and a woman in stone masonry, ruins stabilization, drainage control, archaeological excavation, and associated administrative tasks. In 1939, under the direction of National Park Service (NPS) archaeologist Gordon Vivian, men from the Indian Mobile Unit excavated a small village site in advance of the construction of CCC camp NP-2-N, designed to house a regular 200 man unit. Camp NP-2-N was closed in 1941 and the Indian Mobile Unit was closed in 1942. The success of the Mobile Unit program resulted in the establishment of permanent Ruins Stabilization Units at parks in the Southwest. The 1939 excavation of the archaeological site, the CCC Site, exposed nine rooms and associated sheet trash. In 1949, two deeply buried kivas were excavated by the NPS. In the mid 1970s, the Chaco Project re-excavated portions of the two kivas and Room B in order to obtain archaeomagnetic dates.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cliff_Palace_at_Mesa_Verde.jpg



Asa T. Hill, the WPA, and the Fluorescence of Systematic Archaeology in Nebraska Sandra Barnum (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha District) The most prominent New Deal work-relief program with regard to archaeology was the Works Progress Administration (renamed in 1939 as the Work Projects Administration; WPA), which existed from 1935 to 1943. Functioning through sponsoring universities, historical societies, and other agencies, the WPA supported major field and laboratory projects. In Nebraska, almost all of the New Deal archaeological projects were carried out with WPA-funded labor. Between 1936 and 1941, the University of Nebraska or the Nebraska State Historical Society drew on such WPA laborers to excavate numerous sites under the direction of Asa T. Hill. Marvin Kivett deemed Hill the “father of systematic archeology in Nebraska.” Hill was a self-educated archaeologist. Hill's archeological work led, in 1933, to his appointment as Director of the Museum and Field Archeology for the Nebraska State Historical Society. Between 1933 and 1941, extensive surveys and excavations of sites in Nebraska and Kansas were carried out under his direction, much of which was funded by the WPA. He mentored or worked alongside a number of prominent figures in early Nebraska archaeology, including Paul Cooper, Waldo Wedel, John Champe and Duncan Strong. Hill initiated the excavation methods still used for Plains earthlodge villages.

Combatting the Erosion Menace: The Enduring Legacy of the CCC Within the Silver City Watershed Elizabeth Toney, Gila National Forest, Silver City Ranger District By the summer of 1933, the Civilian Conservation Corp (CCC) had constructed over 3000 checkdams within the Silver City Watershed. Men working in Little Walnut CCC Camp located a few miles outside of Silver City, New Mexico were focused on rehabilitating the Silver City Watershed from 1933-1940. Many of these features are still visible and functioning on the lands administered by Gila National Forest, Silver City Ranger District. These water and erosion control features are not only a testament to the craftsmanship of the CCC men who constructed them, but also a testament to conservation ethic that in large part began with Aldo Leopold’s assertion that soil erosion was a “menace” to the social and economic future of the Southwest. The CCC built upon this ethic and rapidly acquired the techniques in building checkdams throughout the Silver City Watershed so that by the end 1934 over 15,000 erosion control features had been constructed within the watershed. This paper explores the enduring legacy of these features within the Silver City Watershed and explores how to manage these CCC landscapes. Discussant Bernard K. Means (Virtual Curation Laboratory)

Pawnee earthlodges at Loup, Nebraska,

with a family standing in front of a lodge

entrance. Photographed by William H.

Jackson, 1873. American Indian Select

List number 84. From US National

Archives. In the public domain.



THE INTERNATIONAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL COMMISSION: AN EARLY PLAN TO PROTECT ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES

Donald B. Ball Independent Researcher, Louisville, Kentucky

Far from being a matter of concern originating among modern archaeologists, our colleagues at the dawn of

the twentieth century where likewise confronted with the dual challenges of preventing the relentless wanton destruction of prehistoric sites and preserving both archaeological properties and remains. To this end, one noteworthy early international attempt to address these problems had its roots in the Second Pan-American Congress convened in Mexico City from October 22, 1901, through January 31, 1902. As a result of that meeting, a proposal to establish an “American International Archaeological Commission” was signed on January 29, 1902, by delegates representing Bolivia, Chile, Columbia, Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Peru, Salvador, the United States, and Uruguay. The following early accounts of this effort – a forerunner to later United Nations conventions on the same subject – should be of interest to readers of the HAIG Newsletter.

The following summary of this proposal appeared in the 1902 English language edition of the conference

proceedings (Anonymous 1902a:22):

In order that the archaeological and ethnological remains existing in the territory of the several Republics of the Western Hemisphere might be systematically studied and preserved, the conference adopted a resolution providing for the meeting of an American international archaeological commission in the city of Washington, D. C., within two years from the date of the adoption of the resolution. This commission is to be composed of one delegate or more from each Republic; it is to meet at least once in each year; it is to have power to appoint subcommissions to be charged especially with explorations and with the cleaning and preservation of the ruins of the principle prehistoric cities, establishing at each of them a museum to contain objects of interest found in the locality; and it is to endeavor to establish in the city selected by a majority of the Republics, an American international museum, which is to become the center of all the investigations and interpretations of the evidence of prehistoric American civilization. Each government is to defray the expenses of its representatives on the commission, and the general expenses of the commission are to be apportioned among the Republics on the same basis as the expenses of the International Bureau of the American Republics are apportioned. The International Bureau of the American Republics is made the accounting department of the commission.

Before the end of 1902, the United States designated a representative to this praiseworthy attempt to bring

about international cooperation in preserving archaeological sites and while unstated curbing a growing antiquities market. The November 13, 1902, issue of The Evening Times tersely reported (Anonymous 1902b):

STATE DEPARTMENT

Prof W. J. [William John] McGee [Figure 1], of the Bureau of American Ethnology, yesterday was appointed by the President [Theodore Roosevelt] through the Secretary of State to represent the United States on the American International Archaeological Commission, the creation of which was recommended by the second international conference of American States held in Mexico last winter

A subsequent notice of the organization of the Commission appeared in the December 22, 1903, issue of The

Washington Times. As discussed therein (Anonymous 1903):



Figure 1. William John McGee (1853-1912), one of the American representatives to the International Archaeological Commission (public domain photograph).

COMMISSION FOR STUDY OF ARCHAEOLOGY MEETS.

Representatives of American Republics Form International Body to Investigate and Preserve Old Relics.

With representatives present from Mexico, Peru, Central American republics, and the United

States a meeting was held in the diplomatic room of the State Department yesterday afternoon to form the International Archaeological Commission, the principal purpose of which is to be the preservation and study of old relics on both American continents. Mexico was represented by the Mexican ambassador and Dr. Chavero, an eminent archaeologist from that country, and Peru’s minister, Senor Calderon, was present. The United States had the following delegates: Prof. Holmes of the Smithsonian Institution; Volney W. Foster of Chicago; W. J. McGee, of Washington, and Francis J. Kelsey of Ann Arbor.

A large number of South American republics had no representation, and the meeting was therefore adjourned until next December [1904] when a majority report on the plan will be received. The commission grows out of the Pan-American congress in Mexico in 1901 when representatives for the commission were appointed.

Uniformity of methods in archaeology and ethnology as well as the preservation of Indian mounds, old ruins, and relics is the purpose of the commission.

Further elaboration of the goals of the Commission was reported in the January 10, 1904, issue of The St.

Louis Republic which noted (Anonymous 1904a):

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c3/WilliamJohnMcGee_1900_Smithsonian02861200.jpg



INDIAN RELICS TO BE PROTECTED FROM VANDALS. Plan to Collect Aborigines’ Handiwork for a National Exhibit Recently Agreed Upon.

REPUBLIC SPECIAL.

Washington, Jan. 9 [1904]. – Indian mounds, cliff dwellings, and other relics left by the aborigines of North and South America are to be protected from vandals and preserved for historical research if plans of the International Commission of Archaeology and Ethnology are carried out:

The recent meeting was attended by the Mexican Ambassador, the Peruvian Minister and scientists representing Mexico, Peru and the United States.

A majority of the South American Republics were not represented, however, and it was decided to postpone permanent organization until next December, by which time all [of] the countries in the Western Hemisphere will, it is expected, declare themselves in favor of the plans of the commission.

The Pan-American Congress, held in the City of Mexico, 1901-02, started the movement for forming the commission, the purpose of which is “to promote the unification of laws relative to antiquities in the Western Hemisphere, to increase and diffuse knowledge concerning these antiquities, and of the aboriginal peoples by whom they were produced, and to encourage the collection in suitable museums of the remaining vestiges of these early peoples.”

A call was issued for a meeting at the Department of State of the United States last April 13 [1903], at which preliminary steps were taken for the organization. There is now every indication that the commission will meet with every success.

Its work will be of incalculable benefit for historical research. A prominent archaeologist of Washington said:

“There are on this continent relics of the aboriginal inhabitants of incalculable value to scientists and historians could their secrets but be properly revealed. For this to be done the relics must be placed in proper care. They are vestiges of a vanishing race, and if we do not act promptly their usefulness will be destroyed forever.

“Vandals will wreak destruction on them, and monuments rich in lore for the student of research will be scattered to the four winds. Bereft of their setting and environment they lose much of their archaeological and ethnological value, and then there is the wanton destruction of historic ruins which the settlement of ancient sites brings about.

“Take for instance the wonderful cliff dwellings and pueblos in the southwest region of Arizona and New Mexico. There is much exploration yet to be done by archaeologists in that region, and their researches will bring forth knowledge of great benefit to science.

“These relics should be preserved; furthermore, they should be more thoroughly investigated and their historical treasures made use of. This is the very purpose for which the international commission was organized. Then there are the Indian mounds, curious graveyards left by the tribes of red men who roamed all over this continent. In these mounds the warriors were buried, with all their paraphernalia.

“The student of Indian ethnology could have no better guide than the relics to be found in the Indian mounds, some of which are as large as small mountains. The largest is the Kahokia [sic] mound, in the bottoms of Illinois. The next largest is the Etowah mound, in Southern Georgia. The value of this latter has already been impaired by vandals and the depredations of curio seekers. In Florida there are many ancient Indian forts and ruins. In fact, all over the United States are ruins which would be well worth preserving.

“The commission will collect Indian arrow heads, pottery and everything of that character. They will establish one or more archaeological and ethnological museums of international character, and these museums will be so conducted that there will be an exchange of relics. In Mexico they have a superfluity, of Aztec sculptures and pottery which they would be willing to exchange for some relic of the aborigines of our own country. South America is, of course, rich in archaeological relics, and they



are deeply interested in the plan to make a study of the early races and the antiquities of these two continents.”

Despite the seemingly enthusiastic reception on the part of the 1902 signatories to the initial resolution and

subsequently attracting positive attention on the part of the American archaeological community (e.g., McGee 1902), newspapers of the era (e.g., Anonymous 1902c; 1902d; 1904a), and the Smithsonian Institution (Anonymous 1905:22-24), the Annual Report of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution ...for the Year Ending June 30, 1904 remarked (Anonymous 1905:23) that as of mid-February 1904 “that practically no action was taken” to bring this proposed undertaking to fruition.” Anonymous (1904b:823) elaborated upon this inactivity in observing that, “The Governments of Mexico, Peru, and the United States have accepted the project as submitted, but all the other Governments of the International Union, except that of the Argentine Republic, whose representative at Washington has informed the Director that the Argentine Republic will not become a party to the plan, have not yet definitely acted upon it.” Thereafter the idea for creating the International Archaeological Commission appears to have fallen by the proverbial wayside. As commendable and desirable as the goals of the Commission may have been, it appears that its establishment was an idea far in advance of its time. Perhaps other readers of the HAIG Newsletter might further expand upon the history of this admirable but ill-fated early attempt to promote international archaeological collaboration.

REFERENCES CITED Anonymous 1902a Second International Conference of American States. Senate Document No. 330, 57th Congress, 1st Session.

Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 1902b The Departments and the Department Workers. The Evening Times, Thursday, November 13, 1903, pg.

5, col. 2. Washington, D.C. 1902c Plans for International Archaeological Work. The Washington Times, Sunday, August 10, 1902, pg. 7,

cols. 1-4. Washington, D. C. 1902d To Preserve Ruins of Prehistoric Cities. The St. Paul Globe, Thursday, November 13, 1902, pg. 6, col. 2.

St. Paul, Minnesota. 1903 Commission for Study of Archaeology Meets. The Washington Times, Tuesday, December 22, 1903, pg. 2,

col. 3. Washington, D.C. 1904a Indian Relics to be Protected from Vandals. The St. Louis Republic, Sunday, January 10, 1904, Part 1, pg.

10, cols. 2-3. St. Louis, Missouri. 1904b Boletín Mensual de la Oficina Internacional de las Repúblicas Americanas, Unión Internacional de las

Repúblicas Americanas (Bulletin of the Pan-American Union). Vol. XVIII, Octubre-Diciembre 1904. Imprinta del Gobierno, Washington, D.C.

1905 Annual Report of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution ...for the Year Ending June 30, 1904.

Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. McGee, W. J. 1902 Anthropology at Pittsburg. American Anthropologist 43(3):464-481.



Recent or Noteworthy Publications Editor’s note: As is usual and very much appreciated, Marlin Hawley has worked diligently and most of the references below result from his efforts. Barnes, Monica 2013a John L. Cotter’s Excavations at Huánuco Pampa and his Role in the Regional Survey (1964). Andean

Past 11:291-300. 2013b John Victor Murra, Arquelogo Accidental: de Cerro Narrío a Huánuco Pampa. Actes & Mémoires de

l”institute Français d’Études Andines 34:551-574. Coote, Jeremy 2014 Archaeology, Anthropology, and Museums, 1851–2014: Rethinking Pitt-Rivers and His Legacy – An

Introduction. Museum History Journal 7(2):126–134. Derricourt, Robin 2014 The Changing Careers of Vere Gordon Childe. Antiquity 88(340):632-638. Dye, David H. and Marlin F. Halwley 2014 Mentoring Tom Lewis. The SAA Archaeological Record 14 (4):17-22. Effros, Bonnie 2012 Uncovering the Germanic Past: Merovingian Archaeology in France, 1830-1914. Oxford University Press. Evolutionary Anthropology 2014 George Armelagos, 1936-2014. Evolutionary Anthropology 23(3):81-82. Frison, George 2014 Rancher Archaeologist: A Career in Two Different Worlds. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. Ganger, Stefanie 2014 Relics of the Past: The Collecting and Studying of Pre-Columbian Antiquities in Peru and Chile, 1837 – 1911.

Oxford University Press. Green, Adrian 2014 Salisbury Museum and General Pitt-Rivers’s Wessex Collection, 1975–2014. Museum History Journal,

7(2): 224–243. Grove, David C. 2014 Discovering the Olmecs: An Unconventional History. The University of Texas Press. Hannson, Ulf R. 2014 Adolf Furtwängler (1853–1907): ‘The Linnaeus of classical archaeology.’ Antiquity 342 project gallery.

Available online at: http://journal.antiquity.ac.uk/projgall/hansson342 Higgins, Jr., Donald P. and Marvin D. Jeter 2010 A Prescient 1880 Study of "The Mound-Builders of Arkansas". Arkansas Archaeology 50.

http://journal.antiquity.ac.uk/projgall/hansson342



Hrdy, Sarah and Patricia Wright 2014 Allison Jolly: A Supremely Social Intelligence (1937-2014). Evolutionary Anthropology 23(4):121-125. James, Steven R., and Peter J. Pilles, Jr. 2014 Pioneering Late Nineteenth-Century Archaeologists in the Verde Valley. Archaeology Southwest

Magazine 28(2):6-7. Kaiser, Alaon 2014 Archaeology, Sexism, and Scandal: The Long-Suppressed Story of One Woman's Discoveries and the Man Who

Stole Credit for Them. Rowan and Littlefield Publishers Kirch, Patrick V. 2 014 Understanding the Hawaiian Past: A Personal Reflection. Journal of Pacific Archaeology 5(2):109-114. Klejn, Leo S. 2013 Soviet Archaeology: Trends, Schools, and History. Oxford University Press. Kohl, Philip L., Irina Podgorny, and Stefanie Gänger (editors) 2014 Nature and Antiquities: The Making of Archaeology in the Americas. University of Arizona Press. Kosakowsky, Laura J. and Norman Yoffee 2014 T. Patrick Culbert, 1930-2013. Ancient Mesoamerica 25(1):5-7. Merrillees, Robert S. 2013 Veronica Seton-Williams: A Proud Australian Archaeologist. Buried History 49. Morton, Christopher 2014 The Place of Photographs in the Collections, Displays, and Other Work of General Pitt-Rivers. Museum

History Journal 7(2):168–187. Moser, Stephanie 2014 Making Expert Knowledge through the Image: Connections between Antiquarian and Early Modern

Scientific Illustration. Isis 105:58-99. Movius, Geoffrey H. 2013 Nancy Ch. De C. Movius and Her ‘Unusual Career’. Buried History 49. Myer, William Edward. Edited by Donald B. Ball 2014 Stone Age Man in the Middle South and Other Writings. Two Volumes. Borgo Publishing. Pearson, Charles E., and Richard A. Weinstein 2014 “The Man with Mustache:” A Previously Unknown Portrait of Clarence Bloomfield Moore. Horizon &

Tradition: The Newsletter of the Southeastern Archaeology Conference 56(1):11-13. Peebles, Giovanna M. 2013 Looking Back at Archaeology and Cultural Resource Management in the United States and Vermont

Through a Forty-Year Mirror. Journal of Vermont Archaeology 13.



Petch, Alison 2014 Two Nineteenth-Century Collectors-Curators Compared and Contrasted: General Augustus Henry

Lane Fox Pitt-Rivers (1827–1900) and Augustus Wollaston Franks (1826–1897). Museum History Journal 7(2):188–204.

Pitt-Rivers, A. H. L.F. 2014 On the Uses and Arrangement of Arts Museums: Illustrated by Series from the Pitt-Rivers Museums at

Oxford and Farnham, Dorset. Museum History Journal 7(2):135–154. Podgomy, Irina 2015 Human Origins in the New World? Rorentino Ameghino and the Emergence of Prehistoric

Archaeology in the New World. PaleoAmerica 1. Pond, Dorothy 2014 If Women Have Courage…: Among Shepherds, Sheiks and Scientists in Algeria. Africa Verlag, Frankfurt,

Germany. Rivière, Peter 2014 General Pitt-Rivers and the Evolutionist Anthropologists. Museum History Journal 7(2): 155–167. Robin, Cynthia 2014 Elizabeth Brumfiel, 1945-2012. Ancient Mesoamerica 25(1):1-4. Saunders, Peter 2014 ‘The Choicest, Best-Arranged Museums I Have Ever Seen’: The Pitt-Rivers Museum, Farnham, Dorset,

1880s–1970s. Museum History Journal 7(2):205–223. Sheets, Payson 2014 Robert J. Sharer, 1940-2012. Ancient Mesoamerica 25(1):9-10. Sheppard, Kathleen L. 2013 The Life of Margaret Alice Murray: A Woman’s Work in Archaeology. Rowan and Littlefield Publishers. Stallcop, Emmett A., Leslie B. Davis, John Brumley and Ann M. Johnson 2012 A Brief History of the Milk River Archaeological Society. Archaeology in Montana 53(2):7-14. Stevenson, Alice 2012 An Amateur's Prehistory: A View from James A. Swan's South African Collections. The South African

Archaeological Bulletin 67 (195):52-58. Taylor, R. E. 2014 Passing of the Last of the Three Who Established 14C Dating: A Historical Footnote. Radiocarbon 56:913-

921.

Documents

Society for American Archaeology HAIG... · Examination of the original documents and maps at the ... Earl Morris and ... The 1939 excavation of the archaeological site, the CCC Site,