The Ohio Hopewell Episode: Paradigm Lost and Paradigm Gained

NOTES

Name /uap04/22015_u25 04/28/04 01:58PM Plate # 0-Composite pg 589 # 1 ⫺1 0 ⫹1 589 N O T E S prologue 1. Ray Hively and Robert Horn, “Geometry and Astronomy in Prehistoric Ohio,” Journal for the History of Astronomy, Archaeoastronomy Supplement 13 (1982): S1–S20. 2. Bradley T. Lepper, “An Historical Review of Archaeological Research at the Newark Earthworks,” Journal of the Steward Anthropological Society 18 (1988): 118–40; Dee Anne Wymer, Bradley T. Lepper, and William H. Pickard, “Recent Excavations at the Great Circle, Newark, Ohio: Hopewell Ritual in Context,” paper presented at the Midwest Archaeological Conference , Grand Rapids, Mich., 1992. 3. E. G. Squier and E. H. Davis, Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley: Comprising the Results of Extensive Original Surveys and Explorations, (1848; reprint, New York: AMS Press for Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University, Cambridge, 1973), 1–103. 4. Mark F. Seeman, The Hopewell Interaction Sphere: The Evidence for Interregional Trade and Structural Complexity. Prehistoric Research Series vol. 5, no. 2 (Indianapolis: Indiana Historical Society, 1979). 5. Robert C. Mainfort Jr., Pinson Mounds: A Middle Woodland Ceremonial Center. Division of Archaeology, Tennessee Department of Conservation Research Series no. 7 (Tennessee Department of Conservation, 1986); “Pinson Mounds: Internal Chronology and External Relationships,” in Middle Woodland Settlement and Ceremonialism in the Mid-South and Lower Mississippi Valley, edited by Robert C. Mainfort Jr., Archaeological Report no. 22 (Jackson, Miss.: Department of Archives and History, 1988), 133–46; “Pinson Mounds and the Middle Woodland Period in the Midsouth and Lower Mississippi Valley,” in A View from the Core: A Synthesis of Ohio Hopewell Archaeology, ed- Name /uap04/22015_u25 04/28/04 01:58PM Plate # 0-Composite pg 590 # 2 590 n o t e s ⫺1 0 ⫹1 ited by Paul J. Pacheco (Columbus: Ohio Archeological Council, 1996), 370– 91; Robert L. Thunen, “Geometric Enclosures in the Mid-South: An Archaeological Analysis of Enclosure Form,” in Middle Woodland Settlement and Ceremonialism in the Mid-South and Lower Mississippi, edited by Robert C. Mainfort Jr., Archaeological Reports no. 22 (Jackson: Mississippi Department of Archives and History, 1988), 99–115; “Defining Space: An Overview of the Pinson Mounds Enclosure,” in Ancient Earthen Enclosures of the Eastern Woodlands , edited by Robert C. Mainfort Jr. and Lynne P. Sullivan (Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 1998), 57–67. 6. However, I discuss shortly the world of a number of archaeologists and other scholars who have profitably focused considerable attention and effort on the embankment earthworks. 7. Squier and Davis, Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley, 1–103; also see Caleb Atwater, Description of Antiquities Discovered in the State of Ohio and Other Western States, (1820; reprint, New York: AMS Press for Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University, Cambridge, 1973), 136–95. 8. Warren K. Moorehead, Primitive Man in Ohio (New York: G. P. Putnam ’s Sons, 1892); The Hopewell Mound Group of Ohio. (1922; reprint, New York: AMS Press for Field Museum of Natural History, Publication 211, Anthropology Series, vol. 6, 1980). 9. Olaf H. Prufer, “The Hopewell Complex of Ohio,” in Hopewellian Studies, edited by Joseph R. Caldwell and Robert L. Hall, Scientific Papers vol. 12 (Springfield: Illinois State Museum, 1964), 35–83. 10. Tim Ingold, The Appropriation of Nature: Essays on Human Ecology and Social Relations (Iowa City: University of Iowa Press, 1987), 101–29, 130– 64. cha pter 1 1. In support of the ceremonial view see Robert Patrick Connolly, “Middle Woodland Hilltop Enclosures: The Built Environment, Construction and Function,” Ph.D. diss., University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (Ann Arbor, Mich.: University Microfilm International, 1996), 341–44; “Architectural Grammar Rules at the Fort Ancient Hilltop Enclosure,” in Ancient Earthen Enclosures of the Eastern Woodlands, edited by Robert C. Mainfort Jr. and Lynne P. Sullivan (Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 1998), 112–13; also see Patricia Essenpreiss and M. E. Moseley, “Fort Ancient: Citadel or Coli- Name /uap04/22015_u25 04/28/04 01:58PM Plate # 0-Composite pg 591 # 3 n o t e s 591 ⫺1 0 ⫹1 seum?” Field Museum of Natural History Bulletin, (June 1984): 5–26; for the “fortification” view see Prufer, “The Hopewell Complex of Ohio,” 1964, 66– 69; The McGraw Site: A Study in Hopewellian Dynamics, (Cleveland: Museum of Natural History 1965), 135–36; “Fort Hill 1964: New Data and Reflections on Hopewell,” in Ohio Hopewell Community Organization, edited...