Because history gives meaning to places, I have looked closely at reconstructing the history of Frontenac Island. This appears to be a very long and eventful history.
If history is the process of human life experienced, symbolized, and remembered, then Frontenac Island must be one of the oldest and most significant historic places in New York State.
The Robert E. Funk Memorial Archaeology Foundation, Inc. is initiating a 2016 grant application and funding cycle for grants of up to $2,000.00. The Funk Foundation grants support archaeological research in New York State, and are ideal to assist stand-alone research projects or studies that are parts of larger projects. For example, Funk Foundation grants have been used successfully to support a range of services such as faunal analysis, radiocarbon dating, petrographic slides, and remote sensing. Grant applications must be received by April 15, 2016. The grant application will be reviewed by the Funk Foundation Board of Directors with award decisions made by June 15, 2016. For the 2016 grant cycle, we intend to fund grants for two applicants. For each grant award, the Foundation will issue a check to the recipient for 80% of the grant amount when the grant is awarded. The final 20% will be paid when the completed report of the grant research is received. Further information including the grant application forms is found on the Funk Foundation website at www.funkfoundation.org. The 2016 grant application forms will be posted during March, 2016. If you have any questions, please email Funk Foundation President Ed Curtin at firstname.lastname@example.org, or call Ed at (518) 884-7102.
We have been energized and excited by the circulation of our recent Facebook post, a meme asking for a little kind consideration for archaeologists who have to work outdoors in cold, winter weather. We know this job well, we of the Northeastern U.S. Chapped Hands Archaeology Tradition.
Lamoka-like stone projectile point technology is not just coastal, but may involve other conditions of a widespread nature (involving access to quarries, or the adoption of technology useful when the acquisition of high quality stone sources required too much time and travel). These conditions would suit immigrant communities if indigenous people controlled the quarry-chert sources. However, Lamoka-like technology is not necessarily diagnostic of immigration, as pebble sources of chert and other knappable stone are widespread in the Northeast, and could have been adopted by indigenous or coalescent native and immigrant communities in order to exploit local stone.
Arthur Parker had long suspected that New York State’s prehistoric past featured a very ancient era before the invention of pottery and agriculture. By the early 1920s, he referred to this poorly-documented period as the Archaic Algonkian (Parker 1922). He also recognized another early culture that he called Eskimo-like due to the presence in artifact assemblages of polished stone (especially slate) items similar to those used historically by Inuit people. The Eskimo-like artifacts included ground and polished ulus (a.k.a. semi-lunar knives) and projectile points or knife blades, which in some places were found with other polished stone types such as plummets and gouges (these later were grouped together as diagnostic types of Laurentian Archaic assemblages; Ritchie 1944). Parker (1922) was not sure which was earlier, the Archaic Algonkian or Eskimo-like culture.
Recently there has been some significant news about the Esmond sites located in the Town of Malta, Saratoga County, New York. These are sites currently under investigation by Curtin Archaeological Consulting, Inc. Curtin Archaeological has completed Phase 3 data recovery operations at these sites and is analyzing the complex of data from this work, as well as the Phase 1 and 2 archaeological surveys performed by archaeological consulting firms that preceded Curtin Archaeological at these sites.
The 99th Annual Meeting of the New York State Archaeological Association begins the evening of Friday, May 1, 2015 and runs through Sunday morning May 3. The meeting, which includes the annual conference on Saturday and Sunday, will be held at the Ramada Inn, Watertown, New York. Kerry Nelson, Meadow Coldon and I will be presenting our paper on Saturday morning at 9:50. Here, Fieldnotes gives you a preview plus a small bonus: a little additional information and “big picture” analysis that is not included in the conference paper due to time limitations.
I was saddened to hear of the passing of Sarah Bridges. Sarah was a talented historical archaeologist and administrator of government archaeology programs. I knew Sarah primarily in the 1970s and 1980s through our participation in the New York Archaeological Council (NYAC). In those days, New York State archaeology was nearly synonymous with NYAC, and NYAC was significantly shaping Cultural Resource Management expectations and policies in New York.
In 2011, construction planning of a new agricultural and environmental resources center at the State University of New York (SUNY) at Cobleskill required that a Phase 1 archaeological survey be performed before construction could be permitted. Curtin Archaeological Consulting, Inc. performed this survey, finding evidence that part of the site had been used by Native Americans during prehistoric times. Jon Vidulich directed this work in the field. Curtin Archaeological also found that Adam Shafer (the descendant of early 18thcentury Palatine German settlers) built a farm house in 1816 on the same terrace overlooking Cobleskill Creek that the Indians had used in a much more remote period. Artifacts from the Shafer farmhouse (including a feature composed of shell) were found in addition to prehistoric Indian artifacts.
Subsequently, Curtin Archaeological performed a Phase 2 archaeological site examination in order to evaluate the archaeological importance of the site. I directed this work (if direction actually is needed for a team of co-workers that consisted of Dr. Andrew Farry, Jon Vidulich, and Sarah Vidulich). The results of the Phase 2 investigation indicated that the multi-component, prehistoric-historic period archaeological site was a significant site eligible for inclusion in the State and National Registers of Historic Places.
The finding that the archaeological site was considered significant in this way was based on the value of the archaeological data: the site could provide information important to the study of history and prehistory. In 2012 Curtin Archaeological conducted more fieldwork as part of the process needed to reduce the adverse impact of construction upon the archaeological site; in other words, to mitigate the impact construction would have upon this site as a source of important archaeological data. I co-directed the 2012 fieldwork with Dr. Andrew Farry.
During 2013 and 2014, we have been studying the information we recovered directly from this site. We have also done some other things to help interpret the archaeological data. For example, Kerry Nelson and I have examined primary data from historic documents to better understand the Shafers, their ancestry, and continuity and change in a certain traditional practice: the naming of children in each successive generation of Shafers. What we found was a reliable tradition, until there was a radical departure.
We have also been reading literature on the early 18th century German migration to New York State, as well as the nature of cultural change 100 years later, when the old guard of American revolutionaries gave way to the first generation born into the early republic. This new generation was forming the first truly American national identity.
Also, focusing on the intriguing collection of chipped stone (chert) artifacts recovered from the prehistoric component, Meadow Coldon and I have examined other stone artifact collections from Cobleskill, as well as the comparative chert collection in the anthropology office of the New York State Museum. We consulted with New York State Museum geologist Dr. Charles Ver Straeten, whose specialty is the Devonian-age cherts of New York State (the same cherts we needed to know about). Dr. Ver Straeten kindly acquainted us with an even larger comparative collection of cherts such as Esopus and several Onondaga and Helderberg varieties. This dove-tailed well with the field trip he led to Devonian chert exposures in November (and consequently, Meadow and I have added making our own comparative collection and obtaining chert for experimental use to the research program).
As part of this process, we also began a careful study of the life-group exhibits of the New York State Museum for inspiration concerning how to connect ancient stone artifacts with the people of the ancient past. This is an interesting exercise in which we can consider what is being shown in the exhibits, and mindful of what we are learning, we can imagine other scenarios (not exhibited). In this way we carefully use existing knowledge to stimulate thought experiments that broaden our perspective. We are considering additional visits, perhaps with new questions, in conjunction with other projects.
I offer this post and a few that will follow on the Adam Shafer site over the next several months in order to provide a greater degree of access to an actual archaeological research project than may be available otherwise (at least much of the time). These posts will provide behind-the-scenes looks at the nuts-and-bolts work that leads to more refined reports of archaeological research.