01093nas a2200181 4500008004100000245011700041210006900158300001200227490000700239520049100246653001700737653003100754653002100785653002300806100001700829700001800846856004700864 2015 eng d00aComment on Cook and Comstock's Evaluating the Old Wood Problem in a Temperate Climate: A Fort Ancient Case Study0 aComment on Cook and Comstocks Evaluating the Old Wood Problem in a610-6120 v803 a

In their recent report, Cook and Comstock (2014) purport to address the “old wood” problem in temperate eastern North America. Here we point out several interpretive and analytical errors in their work. We conclude that careful selection of wood charcoal for radiocarbon assay can result in accurate chronology for events of interest. However, this does not obviate the need to critically assess the extant database of wood charcoal dates in any chronology building effort.

10aFort Ancient10anortheastern North America10aOld Wood Problem10aradiocarbon dating1 aHart, J., P.1 aNolan, K., C. uhttps://doi.org/10.7183/0002-7316.80.3.61001611nas a2200217 4500008004100000245008700041210006900128300001200197490000700209520097800216653001701194653000901211653001301220100002201233700001601255700002001271700002101291700001901312700002101331856004101352 2009 eng d00aWith Mica We Mourn: Fort Ancient Mortuary Practices at Clark Rockshelter, Kentucky0 aWith Mica We Mourn Fort Ancient Mortuary Practices at Clark Rock a249-2780 v343 a

Excavations in 2005-2006 at Clark Rocksheiter (15FD110) in eastern Kentucky yielded a unique Fort Ancient mortuary feature containing extremely fragmented human remains of two individuals, a child and an adult. The sandstone-slab burial pit at Clark Rockshelter also contained abundant mica, faunal and botanical remains, pottery, bone tools (bowl and bone pin/awl), as well as four beads (including one of marginella shell). Only approximately five percent of the skeletons are represented at the site because they were secondary reburial of cremated remains. Three radiocarbon dates, as well as the structure and content of the burial feature,  indicate interment of the Fort Ancient individuals together between approximately Cal ad 1100-1300. While the Clark Rocksheiter individuals were members of Fort Ancient culture, the presence of mica and a marines hell bead in the Clark Rocksheter burial indicates trade with North Carolina Pisgah phase cultures.

10aFort Ancient10amica10aMortuary1 aMacDonald, D., H.1 aManzano, B.1 aLothrop, J., C.1 aCremeens, D., L.1 aParker, K., C.1 aShreckengost, B. uhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/4149533302341nas a2200169 4500008004100000245008400041210006900125260005200194300001200246520168700258653001701945653001701962653004401979100002002023700001802043856011002061 2000 eng d00aMadisonville Focus Revisited: Reexcavating Fort Ancient from Museum Collections0 aMadisonville Focus Revisited Reexcavating Fort Ancient from Muse aColumbus, OhiobThe Ohio Archaeological Council a228-2703 a

A half century ago, James B. Griffin defined the Madisonville Focus of Fort Ancient, including over a dozen sites in southeastern Indians, southwestern Ohio, and northern Kentucky. His work drew heavily on museum and private collections excavated during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, focusing to a large extent on geographical distributions of archaeological traits—types of ceramics, non-pottery artifacts, and features such as burial mounds. Since publication of Griffin's The Fort Ancient Aspect, his southwestern Ohio data have been supplemented ny at least two regional survys, a number of small-scale but stratigraphically well-controlled excavations, and one large-scale project, at the Turpin site. These data, along with the development of new techniques such as seriation, radiocarbon dating, flotation, and trace element analysis, and new theory to tackle research questions on topics such as subsistence, health, settlement patterns, socioeconomic organization, and interregional exchange, pave the way for a fruitful reexamination of the collections with which Griffin worked in his original formulation of the Madisonville Focus. After a brief summary of Fort Ancient excavation history in southwestern Ohio, this paper focuses on three topics that were not emphasized by Griffin: chronological relationships, settlement patterns, and social organization. Recent projects that made use of museum-curated materials from Madisonville, Hahn's Field, Turpin, Sand Ridge, Campbell Island, and Anderson Village (Anderson Focus) site are highlighted, illustrating the potential for furhter research with existing collections.

10aFort Ancient10aMadisonville10aNortheastern North American archaeology1 aDrooker, P., B.1 aGenheimer, R. uhttps://www.nysm.nysed.gov/staff-publications/madisonville-focus-revisited-reexcavating-fort-ancient-muse