Article contents
Ceramic Stratigraphy in a Georgia Village Site
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 25 January 2017
Extract
This paper is limited to the presentation of the stratigraphic relationships of certain pottery types which are found in a pre-historic village site in central Georgia. These types are site markers of two established cultural horizons in the southeast, and it is evident that their wide distribution and relationships to the chronological framework of the area are of major archaeological importance. In a recently published report of investigations centering in and around Macon, Georgia, A. R. Kelly demonstrates that the Lamar and Swift Creek horizons are differentiated from each other and from other cultural complexes in the region by distinctive traits. Foremost among these traits, for each complex, is pottery.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Society for American Archaeology 1939
References
295 Kelley, A. R., A Preliminary Report on Archaeological Explorations at Macon, Georgia. Anthropological Papers, No. 1, Bulletin 119, Bureau of American Ethnology, Washington, 1938, pp. 25–31.Google Scholar
Jennings, J. D., Recent Excavations at the Lamar Site, Ocmulgee National Monument, Macon, Georgia. Mimeographed publication, Ocmulgee National Monument, Macon, Georgia, 1939. (Jennings suggests a tentative alignment of the Swift Creek and Lamar cultural horizons within the “Midwestern Taxonomic Scheme.” Swift Creek is described as an early aspect of the Woodland pattern. Lamar is considered a focus embodying both Mississippi and Woodland pattern traits.)
296 Kelly, A. R., Op. cit., pp. 47–48.Google Scholar
297 Kelly, A. R., Op. cit. pp. 56–57.Google Scholar
298 Observations on vessel shape have been deduced from comparative Lamar ma terial from the Lamar site, although, rim forms from Cowart's Landing bear out the assumptions.
299 Kelly, A. R., Op. cit., pp. 46–50, pl. 12a.Google Scholar
Holmes, W. H., Report on Aboriginal Pottery of the Southeastern United States. Twentieth Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology, Washington, 1903, pp. 131–134.Google Scholar
Jennings, J. D., and Fairbanks, C. H., Southeastern Archaeological Conference Newsletter (Mimeo.) Vol. 1, No. 2, 1939.Google Scholar (Since this manuscript was originally submitted, a thorough description of Lamar Complicated Stamped and Lamar Bold Incised has been circulated as a mimeographed publication.)
Moore, C. B., Certain Aboriginal Mounds of the Georgia Coast. Philadelphia Academy of Natural Sciences, Second Series, Vol. XI, Part I, 1897 (Vessels on pis. IX and X show design and shape similarities to both Lamar types.)Google Scholar
300 Kelly, A. R., Op. cit., pp. 27–29, Pl. 11a.Google Scholar
Holmes, W. H., Op. cit., pls. LXXXVII and LXXXVIII.Google Scholar
Moore, C. B., Certain Aboriginal Remains of the Northwest Florida Coast. Philadelphia Academy of Natural Sciences, Second Series, Vol. XII, Part 2, 1902.Google Scholar (Numerous sherds and vessels which show relationship to Swift Creek Complicated Stamped on the basis of design.)
Jennings, J. D., and Fairbanks, C. H., Op. cit., Type description of Swift Creek Complicated Stamped.Google Scholar
Haag, W. G., Southeastern Archaeological Conference Newsletter (Mimeo.) Vol. 1, 1939.Google Scholar (Swift Creek Complicated Stamped and Pickwick Complicated Stamped show design similarity.)
301 Jennings, J. D., and Fairbanks, C. H., Op. cit., type description of Mossy Oak Simple Stamped, formerly Vining Simple Stamped.Google Scholar
302 Kelly, A. R., Op. cit., (Kelly discusses these types on pp. 22, 30–31, and 58–60.)Google Scholar
- 9
- Cited by