By Dan McLerran   Mon, Dec 05, 2011

There are archaeology field schools and research activities being conducted all over the world. Many excavations are conducted during the summer months; however, some are ongoing throughout the year, and some are being conducted even during the winter months in parts of the world where the climate is favorable. Here are the best listings online with links to detailed information about archaeological digs and field school opportunities for 2011.  Click on each listing to link to the website:

1.  Archaeological Fieldwork Opportunities Bulletin

2.  Archaeology Digs 2011 (About.com)

3.  Past Horizons

4.  Earthwatch Expeditions

5.  Biblical Archaeology Society

6.  Archaeologyfieldwork.com

7.  Passport in Time

8.  ShovelBums

By Dan McLerran   Mon, Sep 05, 2011

It has become increasingly clear through DNA studies that modern humans may have interbred with Neanderthals in Eurasia following their migration from their ancestral African homeland. Now, based on new DNA research conducted by a team of scientists from the University of Arizona and the University of California, San Francisco, it seems that modern humans had already established a pattern of mixing it up with their more archaic cousins before they even left their southerly African climes. 

Says team leader Michael Hammer, associate professor and research scientist with the University of Arizona's Arizona Research Labs, "We found evidence for hybridization between modern humans and archaic forms in Africa. It looks like our lineage has always exchanged genes with their more morphologically diverged neighbors". This conclusion and the study details and results were published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 

Using a computational and statistical approach through simulations of gene sequences, the researchers were able to identify unusual regions in the genome that would be indicative of "fragments" of archaic human genomes inherited by anatomically modern humans. DNA samples from modern sub-Saharan populations were taken for the testing.

The methodology differs from that used recently by other scientists in genetic studies of modern and Neanderthal humans. While DNA samples can be successfully extracted for testing from Neanderthal fossils, DNA samples from the remains of archaic humans in Africa cannot be successfully obtained, as the more tropical environmental conditions in Africa did not permit sufficient preservation of their DNA through time. The team thus used simulation techniques based on predictions of what archaic human genome sequences would look like had they survived within the DNA of modern human cells, as a substitute for the lack of available DNA. The team sequenced genomes of samples from six different populations living in Africa today and matched their sequences with the simulated model sequences that contained archaic forms.  

"What we do know is that the sequences of those forms, even the Neanderthals, are not that different from modern humans," Hammer said. "They have certain characteristics that make them different from modern DNA. We can simulate a model of hybridization between anatomically modern humans and some archaic form. In that sense, we simulate history so that we can see what we would expect the pattern to look like if it did occur."  One tell-tale sign of an archaic genome sequence is that if a sequence found in a modern population sample differed radically from the others found in the modern population, it was likely to be ancient in origin. 

"We started to look at regions that looked unusual," Hammer said. "We discovered three different genetic regions fit the criteria for being archaic DNA still present in the genomes of sub-Saharan Africans. Interestingly, this signature was strongest in populations from central Africa."

When interbreeding occurs, whole new chromosomes are introduced into the mix.  Over time, these chromosomes are "chopped" into smaller fragments through recombination during subsequent breeding events, resulting in the short, unusual fragments that provide the traces of ancient interbreeding in modern populations. The longer the "fragment", generally, the more ancient the interbreeding event. In this study, the team is identifying events that take place between 20,000 and 60,000 years ago. "We think there were probably thousands of interbreeding events," Hammer said. "It happened relatively extensively and regularly.

Next, and perhaps even more critical to our understanding of how human evolution worked, Hammer and his team plan to search for and identify ancient DNA that afforded selective advantages to anatomically modern humans after they acquired them.

The paper, Genetic Evidence for Archaic Admixture in Africa, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, was co-authored by August Woerner from the UA's ARL Division of Biotechnology, Fernando Mendez from the UA's department of ecology and evolutionary biology, Joseph Watkins from the UA's Mathematics Department and Jeffrey Wall from the Institute for Human Genetics at the University of California San Francisco.

Cover Photo, Top Left: University of Arizona's Michael F. Hammer with an ancient hominid fossil. Credit: M. F. Hammer

By Michael Gordon   Wed, Aug 31, 2011

After five long years, the high profile trial of accused Israeli forgers Oded Golan and Robert Deutsch was finally over, but not without raising a multitude of testimony statements from expert witnesses for both prosecution and defense concerning the innocence or guilt of the two defenders and the authenticity of the two famous ancient antiquities that made headlines in newspapers and journals during the first decade of the 21st century. The expert opinion of most of the scientists who have examined the inscriptions on the James Ossuary and the Jehoash Tablet : They may be real, after all. But the final decision on the case has yet to be made by the court, which concluded on October 3, 2010 with a pending verdict.

Hanging in the balance are a number of other issues and interests, including the credibility of certain expert members of the Israel Antiquities Authority and officials who had conducted initial investigations, certain members of the Israel Geological Survey, the Israel antiquities market, and the conduct or process of determining the authenticity of ancient artifacts.

The story began at an October 21, 2002 Washington press conference co-hosted by the Discovery Channel and the Biblical Archaeology Society, when the existence of a 2,000-year-old ossuary was announced, featuring on its side an inscription that provided the oldest known archaeological record of Jesus of Nazareth. (An ossuary is a stone box, often made of limestone, that was used by the Jewish inhabitants of 1st century B.C.-1st century A.D. Jerusalem to inter the bones of deceased family members). The inscription on this box read Ya'akov bar-Yosef akhui diYeshua, which in English translates as "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus", originally translated by André Lemaire, a renowned Semitic epigrapher. The announcement created a media stir that reverberated worldwide and set in motion a chain of events which, like opening Pandora's box, became a story that acquired far greater proportions than the initial players had initially intended.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The "James Ossuary", showing the inscription on its side. This bone box was purportedly found near Silwan in the Kidron Valley of Jerusalem and later purchased by Oded Golan. The bones of the deceased were typically interned in such stone boxes during the 1st century B.C. through most of the 1st century A.D. by Jewish families who lived in the Jerusalem area during that time. In 62 AD, James, the brother of Jesus, was stoned and thrown from the Temple Mount walls by opponents. Based on Christian tradition, his body was laid in a rock-cut tomb in the Kidron valley and then one year later re-interned in an ossuary. A monastery and chapel were built above his burial location and then, during a Muslim invasion in the 7th century, Armenian monks removed his bones and placed them under an alter at the Cathedral of St. James in Jerusalem on Mt. Zion. Courtesy Paradiso, Wikimedia Commons.

(Above and below) The inscription on the side of the ossuary which reads "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus". Courtesy Paradiso, Wikimedia Commons. Below is derivative work from above, courtesy AnthonyonStilts, Wikimedia Commons. 

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

After a series of initial investigations by the Israel Antiquities Authority in 2003 that led to a determination that the James Ossuary was a forgery, including other investigations, Oded Golan, collector and owner of the box, was charged with 44 counts of forgery, fraud and deception. Four other antiquities dealers were also charged, including well-known collector and antiquities dealer Robert Deutsch. Proceedings began in the Jerusalem District Court in 2005. Three of the accused were dismissed during the early days of the trial, while Oded Golan and Robert Deutsch continued on as defendants.  Along with the James Ossuary, the Jehoash Tablet (pictured left) , another famous artifact owned by Golan, was included in evidence. The Jehoash Tablet is an ancient stone tablet purportedly dated to the 9th century and containing an inscription claimed to document renovations of the First Temple (built by Solomon) under the auspices of the Judean King Jehoash, also known from the biblical historical account.

Recently, a March, 2011 statement written by Oded Golan summarizing the testimonies and opinions of experts and scientists who testified at the trial was released by the Biblical Archaeology Society to the readership of the Biblical Archaeology Review, the organization's trademark publication. The document summarized statements made in proceedings that included 116 hearings, 138 witness testimonies, and over 12,000 pages of transcripts. The witness list from which the summary draws its information consists of 52 experts in fields such as archaeology, epigraphy, Semitic languages, forensic science, stone patina, archaeometry, geology, geochemistry, bio-geology, and carbon-dating. According to Golan's summary, the vast majority of the expert witness testimonies support or at least do not refute the authenticity of both the James Ossuary and the Jehoash Tablet.

Much of the testimony centered on the analysis of the ancient patina covering the surfaces of the subject artifacts, including that found within the grooves of the inscriptions made on the artifacts. The patina in the case of these stone artifacts refers to a discoloring or tarnish that occurs on the surface of the stone due to bio-organic and/or chemical processes that naturally take place on the stone when it is exposed over long periods of time. It is what causes the "aged" appearance of the artifact.  Regarding the James Ossuary, a number of the world's leading authorities on patina analysis concluded in testimony that there was no basis to doubt the authenticity of the artifact or the inscription made on it. Summarizes Golan:   

"Neither the prosecution nor the IAA presented even a single witness who was an expert on ancient stone items, or patina on antiquities and who ruled out the authenticity of the inscription or any part of it. On the contrary, the findings of all the tests, including those of prosecution witnesses [Yuval] Goren and [Avner] Ayalon, support the argument that the entire inscription is ancient, the inscription was engraved by a single person, and that several letter grooves contain traces of detergent/s that covers the natural varnish patina that developed there over centuries, and was partially cleaned (mainly the first section), many years ago."[1]

Moreover, Orna Cohen, a well-known archaeologist and chemist and senior antiquities conservator for the IAA and Israeli museums who was initially assigned by the IAA to examine the inscription in 2003, "testified that she found natural bio-patina in several letter grooves of the words "brother of Jesus" (het, yod, shin, ayin"ח", "י", "ש" "ע "), which had developed at the bottom or on the sides of the grooves over centuries, and in some of these letters she found that the bio-patina that appeared continuously gliding down from the surface of the ossuary into the depths of the grooves. She stated that it was consequently possible to determine with certainty that the words "brother of Jesus" had been engraved in ancient times".[1]

Regarding the Jehoash Tablet and inscription, the findings of various leading experts show that the "patina of this kind could not have developed on the Tablet and inside the groove letters in a period of less than 100 years, and it more probably developed over a period of several thousand years".[1]  A particularly revealing development arose as it also became clear at the trial that after the IAA received the Tablet, it became broken along a diagonal fracture because of negligent handling by police officers, making it possible for experts to examine the inner section of the stone and along the break. After examining this section of the inscription, the patina and the fracture line itself, the stone experts all "unequivocally indicated that the inscription is covered in original varnish patina (biogenic patina of a biological origin, resulting from the extensive activities of microorganisms such as bacteria, fungi, yeast, etc., on the Table and in the letter grooves). The patina is of varying thicknesses (very thin in some parts and very thick in other parts) and there is no doubt that the patina that envelopes the Tablet and its lowered frame and also penetrates into many of the letter grooves – developed slowly over a period of no less than 100 years, and possibly several thousands of years".[1]  The case for the Jehoash Tablet inscription's authenticity was becoming more and more defensible.  

Examining the two artifacts from a paleographic, linguistic, and philological perspective, prominent scholars with expertise in ancient script and language have also come forward with statements that support the authenticity of the artifacts and their inscriptions, or at least support the contention that they cannot be solidly proven to be forgeries. Testimonies to this effect were heard from well-known and highly regarded scientists and scholars such as Roni Reich, Gabriel Barkay, André Lemaire, Hagai Misgav, Shmuel Ahituv, Yosef Naveh, and Esther Eshel. Indeed, speaking about the James Ossuary inscription, among the testimonies was that of Ada Yardeni, a paleographer and researcher at the Hebrew University and considered a household name in the field.  Even as she served as a witness for the prosecution at the trial, she stated that her examination of the inscription in 2002 left her with no doubt that it was of ancient origin, and that it was inscribed by a single individual.  "If this is a forgery," she said, "I quit."[1]

The authenticity of the James Ossuary and Jehoash Tablet aside, the verdict on Oded Golan and Robert Deutsch still remains to be decided. But it seems clear, assuming the summary of Oded Golan is accurate, that the two artifacts may possibly have redeemed their place in the archaeological record as tangible evidence of times, people, and places that most of us have only read about in texts that are to this day still regarded by three major world religions as sacred.

Details of Oded Golan's commentary on the expert witnesses of the case can be read at the Biblical Archaeology Review website. 

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

[1] Oded Golan, The Authenticity of the James Ossuary and the Jehoash Tablet Inscriptions – Summary of Expert Trial Witnesses, March, 2011. 

By   Mon, May 16, 2011

Over 2,000 years ago China's first great emperor amassed a great army of skilled craftsmen to produce no less than 8,000 life-sized terracotta warrior figures to accompany him in the afterlife for protection. The discovery and subsequent unearthing of the remains systematically buried near his great pyramidal tomb, a tomb complex that exceeded even the largest of ancient Egypt's pyramids in size, constitutes one of the greatest archaeological discoveries of all time. More astonishing still, however, is the story of how the warriors were made. Each warrior represented a distinctly different individual in size, shape, and facial character. An investigative journey taken by scientists and other experts is uncovering secrets of organization, manufacture and craft that far exceed what anyone had ever expected. This PBS video tells the story as it has developed to the present.

By Eleanor Breen   Mon, May 16, 2011

In his article entitled, “So you want to be an archaeologist,” the archaeological 'prophet' Brian Fagan (2006:60) recently predicted: “At a minimum, the emphasis [in archaeology] will shift from field research to investigations of existing collections…  The chances of your doing laboratory research rather than fieldwork throughout your career increase every year.”  Nowhere is the trend better evidenced than in the developing and changing virtual world of archaeology.  George Washington’s Mount Vernon, a privately held historic house museum owned and operated by the Mount Vernon Ladies’ Association (MVLA), has recently undertaken an exciting and innovative initiative called Archaeological Collections Online, the result of which will be a website devoted to an important archaeological feature excavated in the early 1990s and curated by MVLA.  This feature, an oval-shaped midden (the South Grove Midden), contains evidence of the material lives of successive generations of Washington households and the enslaved individuals who lived and labored in the mansion and surrounding outbuildings.  Despite the site’s significance to Mount Vernon, colonial history, and historical archaeology, the collection (like many others here and at other historic sites) is rarely seen by anyone except the occasional lucky visitor to the off-site archaeology lab.  Bits and pieces of the feature’s assemblage have gone or are currently on exhibit, starred in publications, and spurred on theses and dissertations, but the artifacts still await a comprehensive analysis and presentation.  With much foresight, the Ladies, with direction from Mount Vernon’s Archaeology Department, decided to reach this goal through an interactive, in-depth, content-driven, and well-illustrated website.

(Above, Right) Excavations of the South Grove Midden site, facing north.  The south side of the Mansion is visible in the background.

Archaeology Online

The support of this project by MVLA and our prestigious and generous donor group called the Life Guard Society could not be more timely.  As Dr. Fagan suggests, archaeology is increasingly occurring in the lab or the curation facility as emphasis shifts from accumulating new data to revisiting old, previously excavated data that either received no analysis and interpretation or that warrant re-analysis in light of new questions or through contemporary theoretical lenses.  This institutional support coincides with a new era of archaeology online and an increased focus on digitizing artifact and object collections.  This will result in a unique and cutting edge web-based product featuring the archaeology of Mount Vernon and will hopefully provide a model for future web endeavors focusing on other archaeological sites around the estate.    

Much of archaeology’s presence online initially came in the form of dig diaries.  In field school, young and eager archaeology students are instructed to keep a diary or journal of their daily activities in the field, lest they forget which test unit they were working on or what they found from one plowzone layer to the next.  In this modern digital age, many of these dig diaries began appearing online, thereby increasing the audience from one (the field school teaching assistant) to many.  Theoretically, dig diaries serve to answer Ian Hodder’s (1999) call for archaeologists to be more transparent in their research questions and self-reflexive as they shovel or trowel, and to consider the biases that might enter into interpretations.  This format challenges archaeologists not only to think about what we do on a daily or weekly basis, but how we communicate that information to many audiences.  Publicly, dig dairies illuminate the process of archaeology – from survey through discovery. 

Mount Vernon’s Archaeology Department has dabbled in dig diarying since 2003, when we partnered with Archaeology Magazine to create Distilling the Past – a featured interactive dig that took place over an eight month period as we excavated the site of George Washington’s whiskey distillery, still archived at archaeology.org (Christensen 2004).  Looking back on it now, I am not sure how much light we shed upon the archaeological record or the late eighteenth-century distiller or his enslaved assistants by kvteching about the rain and what felt like a never-ending chore of bailing a site the size of an Olympic pool (as evidenced in recurring diary themes), but it was a good effort and we reached a much wider audience than were able to visit the site.  More importantly, we were able to present the full context in which an archaeological site is situated including historical documentation and previous excavations.  Dig diaries continue to be an important part of archaeology’s presence online, with Jamestown perhaps being the best current example, at least in historical archaeology, with their well-illustrated “What are they digging now?” blog which dates back to 2003. 

From Dig Diaries to Digitized Databases

The digitization and presentation of collections-based information has proven more challenging to archaeologists than the reporting of field work.  Archaeologists at Mount Vernon struggled with how to make use of the “Archaeological Collections” section of the soon-to-be-upgraded website.  Different institutions have approached the issue in myriad ways, by highlighting the “coolest” of artifacts that emerge from the ground or by digitizing and uploading reports based on the archaeological work that include artifact data, as Colonial Williamsburg and the City of Alexandria in Virginia have done.  Typically, the presentation of archaeological collections online falls into two formats: digitized type collections and comparative databases. 

The early 2000s saw a profusion of online study collections created to answer questions like, how do you tell the difference between white salt-glazed stoneware and tin-glazed earthenware?  What vessel forms are typical for Nottingham stoneware?  What is the difference between North Devon gravel-tempered earthenware and Buckley?  The state of Maryland and the Florida Museum of Natural History are leaders in this effort for ceramics.  The Bureau of Land Management and the Society for Historical Archaeology have facilitated bottle glass identification.  Outside of the United States, the Museum of London and the Colony of Avalon make catalogues of maker’s marks on tobacco pipes available online.        

As additional evidence to Fagan’s point about intensified focus on previously excavated collections, websites like the Digital Archaeological Archive of Comparative Slavery (DAACS) and A Comparative Archaeological Study of Colonial Chesapeake Culture have sprung up.  The research designs behind these two sites are similar – as a critical mass of slave sites (in the case of the former) and seventeenth-century sites (in the case of the latter) accumulated, the archaeologists spearheading these projects recognized the need to take a break from the field and begin to delve into the artifact boxes to see what larger cultural patterns emerged from comparative analyses.  These two efforts, as you can imagine, are massive and yet their undertaking highlights two of the most contentious and important issues in the field of archaeology: comparability and accessibility.  DAACS has addressed the comparability issue by developing a standardized way of cataloguing sites associated with slavery in the Atlantic World and the accessibility issue by making these data available online and searchable.  Though focused intently on a single topic, the DAACS effort is being echoed at a broader scale with initiatives like TDAR, The Digital Archaeological Record, which seeks to encourage and advise those who amassed the archaeological record on how best to promote, present, and preserve it.  Taking a quick look into the world of museums, we find that this effort to simply get as much of one’s collection up online as possible is equally strong.  People, everyone from my mom to academic researchers, want to know what lies behind Door Number One either as they decide how much of their busy vacations they will allot to one museum or to assess how specific research questions, like which institution houses the most extensive collection of tin-glazed earthenware punch bowls, could be answered by what is curated in the collection.  In fact, in a recent research paper that I wrote for the Society for Historical Archaeology meetings, I was able to amass a database of over 200 punch vessels, including details like measurements and date ranges, without stepping foot into a museum storage space (Breen 2011).  And in this modern world where everything is at our finger tips, that is how we want our museums.

One of the more interesting developments of late in the world of online collections can be seen in the convergence of dig diarying and collections management.  Attesting to the popularity of the blog-like, dig diary format, lab-related diaries increasingly appear online.  Museums like the Smithsonian and Northeast Museum Services Center blog and even twitter about collections management and research related issues. Facebook has offered an easy and accessible social and archaeological networking tool for the Archaeological Collections Online project called Mount Vernon’s Mystery Midden.  A few times a week, we post artifact research discoveries, links to cool websites, and things just for fun, like when Flat Stanley came to visit the archaeology lab.  This venue has offered a great way to bridge the time lag between when the project started and the ultimate web product.       

Mount Vernon’s Archaeological Collections Online Project

We hope that the Archaeological Collections Online will lead the next generation of virtual archaeology by filling a niche that is not currently available – an anthropologically-informed approach to digitizing collections.  What this project seeks to do that others have not is provide content information, utilizing a holistic material culture approach that engages with the documentary record of plantation-specific and more broadly regional data, museum object collections, and material culture theory to provide answers to questions like what did this punch bowl mean to the people who viewed, used, and discarded it?  How and what do artifacts tell us about the past, about plantation life, about active consumers, about the Washington households, about the enslaved community?  We will address those nagging comparability and accessibility issues by cataloguing the site into DAACS, with the full catalogue ultimately to be made available at daacs.org.  Further, the website will be structured so that this rich material record of plantation life will not only be digestible to fellow archaeologists, but also by the public, folks like my mom who has a general (and familial) interest in the stuff of George Washington.  Our webdesigner, Mark Freeman (2011), calls this approach a “comprehensive information framework for the objects” that will include stratigraphic, temporal, documentary, and theoretical context.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Wine bottle seal excavated from the midden bearing the Fairfax Family coat of arms, nearby neighbors and friends of the Washingtons.

To briefly outline our website structure in progress, we envision a triangle.  At the top of the triangle, or at the front of the website, will be a searchable gallery of the top 400 most significant, whole, and unique objects from the assemblage complete with high quality photographs and details on identification, manufacturing technique, material, etc.  This tip of the iceberg approach is meant to draw in a more general audience who can then decide how far into the triangle they wish to delve.  Content pages will live in the middle of the website where we plan to discuss and contextualize sub-assemblages of artifacts such as buttons or tobacco pipes.  Not only will archaeological data be presented, but we will also engage the documentary record to better understand the universe of this sub-assemblage.  These sub-assemblages will then be linked to the research themes that they address including gender, gentility, slavery, and even tourism (as we have a handful of artifacts like a Gumby and a 1950s girl scout ring that speak to the transition of Mount Vernon from house to historic site).

(Right) Intricately carved stone fan blades excavated from the midden.     

Like most field archaeology, this project is being undertaken by one funded staff member with occasional assistance from other staff and a devoted team of volunteers and undergraduate and graduated college interns.  Part of the challenge to any project like this is convincing skeptical potential volunteers that lab work is as exciting as field work.  All the artifacts have been washed and rebagged, all the ceramics and glass have been labeled, and yet there is much more to be done – from artifact research to rethinking historical documents from an archaeological perspective.  We try to find the right “lab work” for all interested parties.  For example, right now one of our loyal volunteers, Judi Paulos, is transcribing and annotating the probate inventory of Lawrence Washington (Washington 1753).  This crucial document has only rarely seen the light of day, remains unpublished, and yet offers a fantastic textual artifact that will inform us about what George Washington’s elder and respected half-brother had in his possession at Mount Vernon in the year of his death.  Another equally dedicated (and even long distance) volunteer, Wendy Miervaldis, applied her expertise in statistics to gauge the significance of estimated capacity measurements for tin-glazed punch bowls.  Pat Greco has applied his woodworking skills to the task of carving ethafoam for mounts for mended ceramic vessels.  Lab work, in summary, is an easy sell if we only understand its full scope.  We believe that with this Archaeological Collections Online project, we are entering a new era of archaeology on the web -- an era in which nuanced and holistic archaeological collections information is presented to the general public, but also is accessible and serving the needs of archaeologists looking for comparative data.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 Volunteers, the Grecos, aid in housing reconstructed ceramic vessels in archivally sound mounts. 

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Milestones in Historical Archaeological Collections Online

2002   Diagnostic Artifacts in Maryland launched. 

2003   National Endowment for the Humanities provides funding for the creation of an online digital type collection for the Florida Museum of Natural History historical archaeology collections. 

2004    DAACS goes live, initial funding by Mellon Foundation in 2000.

2005    BLM-supported Historic Bottle Glass identification website launched.

2006    The final report for the Comparative Archaeological Study of Colonial Chesapeake Culture is submitted to NEH, off of which the website is based.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

References

Breen, Eleanor

2011   One More Bowl and Then?  Analyzing Techniques for Comparing Ceramic Assemblages.  Paper presented at the Society for Historical Archaeology Conference, Austin, TX.  < http://www.mountvernon.org/files/Breen,_SHA%202011,%20written.pdf>.  Accessed 11 May 2011.

Christensen, Kim

2004   Tourists, Schoolchildern, and Liquor Lobbyists: The Various Publics of the Mount Vernon Distillery Site.  Paper presented at the Society for Historical Archaeology Conference, St. Louis, MO.  < http://www.mountvernon.org/files/Kchristensen.pdf>  Accessed 11 May 2011.

Fagan, Brian

2006   So you want to be an Archaeologist? Archaeology May/June 59(3):59-64.

Freeman, Mark

2011   Should You Object? Mount Vernon Midden Archaeology. < http://storiespast.blogspot.com/2011/04/should-you-object-mount-vernon-midden.html?spref=fb >. Blog post, 12 April.

Hodder, Ian

1999  The Archaeological Process: An Introduction.  Blackwell Publishing, Oxford.

Washington, George

1753   An Inventory of the Estate of Lawrence Washington, 7-8 March. Historical

Manuscript Collection, Mount Vernon Ladies’ Association, Mount Vernon, VA.

By Shirley Powell   Wed, Jun 08, 2011

The depopulation of the Mesa Verde region of North America in the late thirteenth century A.D. is an iconic event in world prehistory, and understanding the causes and consequences of this large-scale migration has understandably been a focus of archaeological research in the region. An unfortunate consequence of this focus on the late thirteenth century A.D., however, is a surprisingly unclear understanding of how Mesa Verde Pueblo society formed in the first place.

Where did the population of the Mesa Verde region come from? How many people settled in the region and what role did population growth play in the formation of their society? How did they create communities? What was their impact on the environment?

In 2011, the Crow Canyon Archaeological Center is embarking on a new research project to examine early Pueblo community development in the Mesa Verde region. Titled the Basketmaker Communities Project: Early Pueblo Society in the Mesa Verde Region, this new study will shed light on a pivotal, but underinvestigated and poorly understood, time in Pueblo history: the Basketmaker III period (A.D. 500–750). Crow Canyon invites the public to join its staff of researchers in the field and lab to contribute to the Center’s understanding of this important and critical period in Pueblo Indian history.

Pueblo Origins

Long before the cliff dwellings at Mesa Verde National Park were built, early Pueblo people were establishing a foothold throughout the Mesa Verde region. (As defined here, the Mesa Verde archaeological region of the American Southwest is an area of just under 10,000 square miles bounded by the Colorado, Piedra, and San Juan rivers.) The time was the Basketmaker III period, which archaeologists date from about A.D. 500 to 750.

This period saw rapid population growth in the Mesa Verde region. Archaeologists believe this growth was largely the result of immigration. Earlier Pueblo peoples had lived mostly along the eastern and western edges of the Mesa Verde region and adjacent areas outside the region. But starting in the sixth century, they apparently began moving into the central Mesa Verde region in large numbers, bringing with them a fully agricultural way of life.

The population boom ushered in an era of great technological advances and social change. Domesticated beans, pottery, and the bow and arrow were all introduced during this time. Farming became increasingly important, with people relying more and more on domesticated crops, especially corn. For most of the period, the climate was very favorable for agriculture, with few droughts, which may have encouraged immigration from adjacent regions with less-favorable conditions.

But the population boom probably brought its own share of problems, too. It is likely that the people moving in from the east and the west spoke different languages, and archaeologists have found evidence of conflict between them during the preceding Basketmaker II period. At this crucial time, it would have been important for people to develop ways to live together.

How did they do it? Archaeologists look at where and how people settled on the landscape for the answer. Most people in the Mesa Verde region during this time lived in small, scattered farmsteads that were home to one, two, or three households, each with its own pithouse and outdoor storage facilities. As the population grew, clusters of these farmsteads began to appear, forming early communities.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Basket made by Basketmaker Pueblo people in Mesa Verde (A.D. 450-750). National Park Service. Public Domain.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Basketmaker III Communities

With the formation of early communities, something else happened--something enormously important to Basketmaker and all future Pueblo societies. For the very first time, the people of the Mesa Verde region began building large, public structures called “great kivas.” These structures appear to have served as the focal points of their communities, providing a place where residents could participate in community-wide ceremonies and other important events.

Archaeologists think that having a special place where everyone in the community could gather might have eased tensions and promoted social unity. If so, it was a strategy that served the Pueblo people reasonably well for the next 700 years, until the hardship and strife of the mid-thirteenth century led to large-scale migrations from the region.

An example of a great kiva at the site of Chetro Keti in Chaco Canyon (New Mexico, U.S.). National Park Service. Public Domain.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Crow Canyon’s Basketmaker Communities Project

Crow Canyon’s Basketmaker Communities Project is a three-year investigation of the largest Basketmaker III community known in the central Mesa Verde region. The centerpiece of the project is the Dillard site, a ceremonial center that dates from the seventh century A.D., and includes a great kiva.

The Dillard site was first recorded in 1991 by Woods Canyon Archaeological Consultants (WCAC) as part of an archaeological survey for the development of a private residential community known as Indian Camp Ranch. The survey revealed the presence of several pithouses, as well as a much larger structure that subsequent WCAC test excavations revealed to be one of the oldest public buildings in the Mesa Verde region: a great kiva approximately 10 meters in diameter and 1 meter deep.

The 1991 survey also revealed that the Dillard site is surrounded by a cluster of more than 120 pithouses dating to the same time period as the Dillard site. The majority of these pithouses have not been obscured by later ancestral Pueblo sites or modern buildings. Thus, the sites Crow Canyon will investigate during the Basketmaker Communities Project are part of the most extensive and best-preserved cluster of Basketmaker III remains in the central Mesa Verde region.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Archaeologists conducting surveys in the Dillard site area. Courtesy Crow Canyon Archaeological Center.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

During the three years of fieldwork that are planned for the Basketmaker Communities Project (2011–2013), Crow Canyon will continue its long-term research into community development in the central Mesa Verde region. Two of the most basic questions we hope to answer through our investigations are: When did communities first form in the region; and, what was the nature of the community that surrounded and included the Dillard site?

Specifically, the Center’s research will focus on several important questions:

• Where did the people who settled in the Mesa Verde region during the Basketmaker III period come from?
• How much of the rapid expansion of settlement in the Mesa Verde region during the Basketmaker III period was due to immigration? How much was due to in situ population growth?
• How did ancestral Pueblo people make the transition from a foraging society organized around kinship to an agricultural society organized around community institutions?
• What was the nature of Basketmaker III communities in the Mesa Verde region, and how do those early communities compare with communities that developed later during the Pueblo I, II, and III periods?
• Does the extensive cluster of pithouses surrounding the Dillard site reflect occupation by a large number of families over a short period of time or a small number of families over a long period of time?
• Does variation in pithouse size and elaboration reflect variation in social ranking, household size, or household activities?

Crow Canyon’s excavations will include excavations at the Basketmaker III great kiva known as the Dillard Site and at 8 to 12 smaller Basketmaker III habitation sites spread across Indian Camp Ranch. Excavations at the Dillard site will involve: re-exposing and further documenting a test trench that was excavated through the great kiva in 1991; excavating a stratified random sample of the artifact scatter associated with the great kiva; and excavating several judgmentally selected units within the great kiva.

Many Basketmaker III habitations have been fully excavated over the years, but previous excavations have not emphasized the recovery of comparable data across sites in a settlement cluster, and have not applied statistical sampling techniques that would allow one to estimate the total amount and relative frequencies of artifact types deposited at Basketmaker III habitations. These shortcomings have made it difficult to study Basketmaker III community organization. To remedy this situation, Crow Canyon will be investigating Basketmaker III habitations in the settlement cluster surrounding the Dillard Site, following a consistent sampling strategy.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Archaeologist taking measurements in the Dillard site area.  Courtesy Crow Canyon Archaeological Center.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Public Participation in the Basketmaker Communities Project

The public is encouraged to make a lasting contribution to the understanding of the Basketmaker III period by joining the Crow Canyon Archaeological Center for an archaeology program. At Crow Canyon, adults, families, educators, and students will have the opportunity to work side-by-side with Crow Canyon archaeologists and educators in the field and lab, investigating this pivotal time in Pueblo history.

For more information on the Crow Canyon Archaeological Center and its archaeology programs for the public, visit www.crowcanyon.org or call 800.422.8975.

Top Cover Photo: Cliff Palace in Mesa Verde National Park, Colorado, USA. Photo courtesy Tobias at Wikimedia Commons.

By Brandon Olson   Fri, May 27, 2011

Through chance finds, formal excavations, looting, and dredging operations, several pieces of intact, fully functional Roman weapons and armor have been recovered from aquatic contexts in Gaul and Britain dating from the first century B.C.E to late first century C.E. Some scholars have attempted to explain the phenomenon as a series of accidental losses, while others allude to intentional deposition.[1]Although one cannot completely disregard accidental loss, the facts that military equipment was both expensive and heavily regulated and the veneration of water played an important role in Roman religion suggests that, in the majority of cases, gear found in water was a result of a conscious act, most likely of religious nature.

In Roman religion, the dedication of objects to gods took two forms: votive offerings, items dedicated to propitiate a god, and vows, objects dedicated to fulfill a contract with a deity. The religious rites were integral to the relationship between gods and mortals, as they provided a medium through which humans and the divine could interact. Roman religious practice prescribed a strong tradition of dedicating objects and a veneration of water; yet, few works, both ancient and modern, attest to a tradition of soldiers dedicating gear into water as a religious rite. It is the purpose of this investigation to argue that military equipment recovered from aquatic contexts in the western provinces cannot always be interpreted as accidental loss, but rather through emulation of a widespread Celtic practice, Roman soldiers dedicated weapons and armor into water as a religious rite.

Contextualizing the Assemblage

Examining religious praxis by way of military gear is problematic due to the difficulty encountered when attempting to link artifacts with specific behavior without proper archaeological context. Most equipment recovered from water lacks précis provenience, which is a direct result of recovery. Few formal excavations have been conducted in the major rivers and streams in Gaul and Britain, and several of the examples available for study are byproducts of dredging operations. Although the exact context of artifacts is essential for any study of material culture, understanding the manner in which military equipment became archaeological material helps bridge this gap. The following discussion of the processes of deposition will demonstrate that military arms and armor differed greatly from other material forms because they were never regarded as trash or discarded as such; thus, they entered the archaeological record in more specific and deliberate ways.         

Loosely following Schiffer’s life-cycle theory, there are two processes that transform Roman military gear into material culture: cultural deposition processes and depositional processes.[2] Cultural deposition occurred when accoutrements were deliberately discarded or ritually offered in the ground or other concealed places where recovery was difficult. In such cases, the items no longer functioned in their traditional behavioral systems and become incorporated into an archaeological context. These acts include burying gear to prevent others from utilizing it, hoarding, mortuary contexts, cross-cultural utilization and, as will be discussed later, religious dedication. Often, when a garrison stayed at a particular fort for a period of several years, soldiers and officers increased the quantity of their possessions. When it came time to abandon a fort, the army would take what they could and bury the rest, preventing non-Roman forces from utilizing whatever they left behind. During unsettled times, or when abandoning a fort, soldiers would, on occasion, bury valuable possessions in a hoard. For example, the Corbridge hoard in Britain, excavated in 1964, contained an assemblage of equipment that included several pieces of lorica segmentata (metal, plated body armor), spearheads, artillery bolts, nails, wax writing tablets, papyri fragments, iron alloy, copper alloy, and glass fragments.[3] The owner buried the gear inside of an iron-bounded chest covered with a piece of leather. The amount of care taken when interring the items and sheer value of this material demonstrates that the owner planned to reclaim it. In the event of a soldier’s death, a colleague returned his equipment to a repository, buried it with the soldier, or his items simply disappeared. During their service, many soldiers drafted a will indicating who would receive their possessions after death. In some cases gear is found in burial contexts, suggesting it was interred ex testamento (according to a will).[4] Cross-cultural discard occurred when Roman equipment acquired as war booty, tribute, mercenary equipment, and trade objects was deposited in a non-Roman region.[5] 

Depositional processes, on the other hand, constituted the accidental loss of fully functional items within a behavioral system. The transformation from the functional context of the gear to the archaeological context is, therefore, accidental. While on campaign, soldiers did, on occasion, lose their equipment. If a unit crossed a river or was suddenly ambushed, it was possible for soldiers to lose weapons and armor in the chaos. Although it is difficult to identify lost equipment archaeologically, Vegetius notes that accidental loss was a concern. He states, “the passages of rivers are very dangerous without great precaution. In crossing wide or rapid streams, the baggage, servants, and sometimes the most foolish soldiers are in danger of being lost.”[6] One must question, however, to what extent the current assemblage represents a traditional depositional process. As stated earlier, gear was expensive and regulated. Strict laws allowed officials to severely punish soldiers for mishandling their equipment. Legal works, such as the ex Ruffo Leges Militates, Corpus Juris Civilis, and the Strategica, preserve laws that forbade soldiers from losing and haphazardly disposing their gear.[7] If a soldier lost his sword, for example, an official could punish him twice, both for disarming himself and for potentially arming the enemy. Punishments for such an offense included, but were not limited to, flogging, a reduction in rank, and death.

Military equipment is unique as, unlike most other artifact types, arms and armor, in whatever condition, were never considered refuse at any point in their life-cycle, and entered the archaeological record in specific ways. Therefore, the processes of deposition are fairly predictable, and the exact context of the material is not entirely necessary for a discussion of the connection between military accoutrements and religion. 

Celtic Evidence

The Celtic and Roman traditions of depositing weapons and armor are very similar in practice, and will be compared later to discuss the nature of Roman religion in Gaul and Britain. Celtic religion was deeply rooted in a veneration of water as streams, rivers, lakes, wells, and bogs were sacred places for Celtic worship. Aquatic locations—with the exception of bogs—represented life, curative qualities, fertility, and well-being. Bogs were feared and associated with danger and treachery.[8] Rivers, lakes, and streams became places centered on votive behavior, whereas in bogs individuals made both offerings and sacrifice. It is through the classical sources, presence of Celtic water deities, and the archaeology that Celtic water veneration and the various religious practices associated with it emerge. 

In describing the destruction of Tolosa by Quintus Servilius Caepio, both Strabo and Justinus note how the Celtics ritually deposited valuables in sacred lakes.[9] In 105 B.C.E., the Roman proconsul Caepio went to southern Gaul and fought against the Tectosagi. At the siege of Tolosa, he seized a great treasure of gold and silver from a sacred lake, which was identified as the booty seized from Delphi by the Gauls in 279 B.C.E. Caepio committed a sacrilegious act, according to Strabo and Justinus, by draining the lake and taking the treasure. Later that year, Roman forces suffered a disastrous defeat at the Battle of Arausio and, according to Orosius, the Cimbri and Teutoni seized large quantities of booty. Orosius states:

The enemy, after gaining possession of both camps and great booty, by a certain strange and unusual bitterness completely destroyed all that they had captured; clothing was cut to pieces and thrown about, gold and silver were thrown into the river, corselets of men were cut up, trappings of horses were destroyed, the horses themselves were drowned in whirlpools, and men with fetters tied around their necks were hung from trees, so that the victor laid claim to no booty, and the conquered to no mercy.[10]  

The gold and silver may have been part of the booty seized by Caepio from Tolosa, given that he was a military leader at the battle. Caepio, after being prosecuted by Norbanus for stealing the Tolosa treasure, was exiled to Smyrna and died.

Classical accounts of Celtic water veneration are not restricted to Caepio. Caesar alludes to a deep respect for water when he describes the subjugation of Uxellodunum in 51 B.C.E.[11] Caesar notes that the inhabitants continued to resist his advance until troops fully blocked a spring running through the settlement. The inhabitants interpreted the dry stream as an inauspicious omen and quickly surrendered. Prudentius, a fifth-century C.E. Roman poet from Spain, describes in his Psychomachia the battle between Pudicitia (Chastity) and Libido (Lust). After Pudicitia defeated and killed Libido with her great sword, Pudicitia cleaned the sword in the Jordan River and deposited the victorious weapon into a religious space. Prudentius writes, “she dedicated it to the altar of the sacred spring in the Catholic temple, eternally shining there it shines with light.”[12] Writing in Gaul during the sixth century, Gregory of Tours offered yet another example of the Celts offering valuable items in water. Gregory writes:

In the territory of Javols there was a mountain named after Hilary that contained a large lake. At a fixed time a crowd of rustics went there and, as if offering libations to the lake, threw [into it] linen cloths and garments that served men as clothing. Some [threw] pelts of wool, many [threw] models of cheese and wax and bread as well as various [other] objects, each according to his own means, that I think would take too long to enumerate. They came with their wagons; they brought food and drink, sacrificed animals, and feasted for three days.[13]

The six classical accounts demonstrate clearly that the Celts and other groups dedicated valuable objects into water and that Roman culture had knowledge of the tradition.

Roman contact with Celtic groups initiated ideological reforms for both cultures. Prior to the Roman conquests of Gaul and Britain, the Celts did not wholly identify the divine physically. According to Green, Roman contact provided a catalyst for Celtic concepts of the divine to be freed from anonymity.[14] It is because of this contact that we can begin to identify specific Celtic water deities and classify them into two categories: those attached to a specific river and those attached to water features. The former category includes Verbia (goddess of the Wharfe River), Sequana (goddess of the Seine River), and Souconna (goddess of the Saone River). The latter includes Sulis (goddess of the springs at Bath among other things), Coventina (goddess of a spring at Carrawburgh), and Condantis (a goddess worshipped in Britain, whose name means “watersmeet”).[15] The deities mentioned above served many functions in Celtic religion, but they also played a role in Roman religious practices in Gaul and Britain.      

The Celtic tradition of tossing objects into water as a religious rite originates in the Bronze Age (Hallstatt culture) and lasts through the Roman periods (Le Tene Culture). The archeological evidence for this practice is abundant and extensively studied . Both Wait and Roymans have published comprehensive archaeological accounts of Celtic weapons discovered in water from Britain and Gaul.[16] Wait examines Celtic swords, helmets, and shields in his study of ritual and religion in Britain within three chronological periods: seventh century B.C., Middle Iron Age, and Late Iron Age. Since the focus of the present study is the relationship between Celtic and Roman religious ritual, the material from the Middle Iron and Late Iron ages will be discussed in detail. The Celtic periodization scheme in Britain interprets the La Tene period as beginning at the onset of the Iron Age and ending with the Roman conquest in the first century C.E. Of the 113 Celtic swords dating to the La Tene period discovered in Britain, 66% came from rivers and bogs, 9% came from burials, 1% from hoards, 15% from an archaeological site, and 9% were chance finds. Only three helmets from an aquatic context have been recovered in Britain dating to the La Tene period. Map 1 depicts sword and helmet densities in relation to major rivers in Britain.

__________________________________________________________________________________________

Map 1 (after Wait 1985): Distribution of Le Tene period swords and helmets discovered in aquatic contexts in Britain. Satellite imagery courtesy of Bing.

__________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Roymans adopted a similar approach in his study of Belgic Gaul. He identified and plotted all the Le Tene swords and helmets from his study area. The periodization scheme for Celtic Gaul differs from the British scheme, as the La Tene period began at the onset of the Iron Age, but ended with the Roman conquest in the first century B.C.E. Of the 15 Celtic helmets found in Belgic Gaul, 27% came from a grave, 40% came from a river, 13% from a cult place, and 20% are of unknown provenience. Of the 109 Celtic swords recovered, 48% are grave finds, 34% came from a river, 13% from a cult place, and 6% are of unknown provenience. Map 2 depicts sword and helmet densities from Roymans’ study area.

__________________________________________________________________________________________

Map 2 (after Roymans 1996): Distribution of Le Tene period swords and helmets discovered in aquatic contexts in Belgic Gaul. Satellite imagery courtesy of Bing.

__________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Based on classical accounts, the presence of several water deities, and the studies of Wait and Roymans, Celts groups from both the Hallstatt and Le Tene periods had a strong tradition of dedicating military equipment in water for hundreds of years. This tradition both predates and continues well after the Roman conquests of Gaul and Britain. Roman soldiers came into contact with a well-established religious ritual, which, as we will see, was incorporated into their religious system. 

Roman Evidence

There is no question that water held a religious significance in Roman culture. In discussing the importance of water in Roman religion during the Republican period, Edlund-Berry argues that, although the use of water figured greatly in religious practices, it was an unofficial, private affair.[17] Although the veneration of water was not an official state-sponsored ritual, it was practiced in the private realm. The sites of several Roman bridges show evidence of religious activity. Archaeologists excavating the intersection of the Via Appia and the Garigliano River at the site of ancient Minturnae uncovered several artifacts, including 4,918 coins deliberately tossed into the river.[18] Moreover, the Thames River within the urban confines of London also produced thousands of coins, demonstrating that offerings of valuable property were made into water.[19] There are, however, no classical accounts that attest to a Roman practice of depositing military gear or other valuables in water as a religious practice, nor are there water deities similar to those found in Celtic Britain and Gaul attested in the Roman pantheon. If, indeed, water veneration was an unofficial, private ritual, as Edlund-Berry argues, and water veneration among non-Roman groups was deemed abnormal as the aforementioned classical sources suggest, it is of little surprise that historical records do not attest to such a ritual within Roman culture. The archaeological record, however, does provide evidence supporting such a religious ritual.

In his study of Romanization in Belgic Gaul, Roymans also examines Roman military equipment. He categorized and investigated the Roman evidence in the same manner as the Celtic material. All Roman gear utilized in his study dates to the first century C.E. Of the 68 Roman swords discovered in Belgic Gaul, 51% are grave finds, 25% are river finds, 10% are from a cultic place, and 13% come from a military camp. Of the 51 Roman helmets from this region, 8% are grave finds, 69% are river finds, 2% are from a cult place, and 22% are from a military camp. Map 3 illustrates sword and helmet densities in relation to the major river systems in northwest Gaul. Unfortunately, Roymans’ study does not incorporate material from Britain. However, military equipment has been recovered from aquatic contexts at Newstead, possibly Corbridge, and the Thames River.

__________________________________________________________________________________________

Map 3 (after Roymans 1996): Distribution of Roman swords and helmets discovered in aquatic contexts in Belgic Gaul. Satellite imagery courtesy of Bing.

________________________________________________________________________________________

It is clear that Roman culture adopted and adapted deities and religious practices from other groups. Mithraism, for example, had a strong following among the Roman army. The Persian god was sent to Earth to kill the sacred bull, whose blood symbolized life forces.[20] Several iconic representations from Britain and Gaul survived, depicting Mithras slaying the primeval bull with a serpent and scorpion trying to prevent the blood from reaching the fertile ground. When Rome expanded into new territories, cultural exchange occurred on both ends; Romanization was never a one-sided affair, and it certainly appears that Celtic culture left an indelible mark on Roman religion in the western provinces.   

At least three Roman deities were subjected to substantial Celtic influence while retaining a Roman identity.[21] For example, a goddess identified as Sulis Minerva, worshipped at the Roman site of Bath, attests to a dual cultural origin. The name is preserved in several inscriptions and lead curse tablets.[22] The combining of the Celtic goddess Sulis and the Roman goddess Minerva demonstrate a Romano-Celtic deity. Other hybrid deities include a Celtic Mars and a Romano-Celtic sky god from Britain. A statuette from Martlesham in England depicted a mounted warrior with an inscription dedicating it to Mars Cocidius. An altar from Chester possesses a dedicatory inscription to Jupiter Optimus Maximus Tanarus, who was a Celtic thunder deity from Gaul and Germany.[23]

Discussion and Conclusions

Classical accounts, the presence of specific water deities, and the archaeology of Celtic groups in Britain and Gaul suggest that soldiers stationed in the western Roman provinces witnessed and eventually adopted a strong religious tradition of water veneration, whereby individuals dedicated valuable military gear in water. Comparison of the density maps of the Le Tene and Roman material from Gaul (Map 2 and 3) and the pie charts in Figure 1 (below), provides evidence of a similar practice, though locations of deposition and types of military gear were different. Unlike the Celtic material, Roman helmets far exceed swords, and the highest concentration of Roman gear is found along the Rhine River, the frontier between Rome and Germany. Figure 1 depicts the specific artifact densities of swords and helmets from the Roman and Le Tene periods in Gaul. Despite subtle differences in preferred material types and depositional locales, the archaeology demonstrates a great degree of cultural exchange and continuity in the religious realms of the Celts and Romans.  

__________________________________________________________________________________________

Figure 1: Pie charts comparing the depositional practices of Le Tene and Roman period military equipment.

__________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The hybrid Romano-Celtic deities and the similar practices in the deposition of arms and armor in water paints an interesting picture of Roman and Celtic religion and interaction from the first century B.C.E. to first century C.E. The religious practices of the Roman army did not take over and replace native Celtic forms nor did Celtic religion remain the same. The Roman practice of offering military gear in water was a result of Celtic interaction. The purpose and belief systems behind such a tradition varied across time and space. Celtic culture saw water as a life force, key to wellbeing and fertility. It is impossible to determine if Roman soldiers who dedicated their gear perceived water or their newly adopted ritual in the same way. Although generally, in practice, the Roman and Celtic traditions concerning water appears similar, different cultural and ideological backgrounds gave the ritual a distinctively different meaning.     

Cover Photo Top: Roman infantry soldiers. Courtesy David Fiel, Wikimedia Commons

__________________________________________

Works Cited

Alcock, Joan. “Celtic Water Cults in Roman Britain.” American Journal 122 (1965): 1-12.

Allason-Jones, Lindsay, and Mike Bishop. Excavations at Roman Corbridge: the Hoard. London: Historic Buildings & Monuments Commission for England, 1988.

Bishop, Mike, and J. C. N. Coulston. Roman Military Equipment: from the Punic Wars to the Fall of Rome. Oxford: Oxbow Books, 2006.

Brand, C. E. Roman Military Law. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1969. 

Breeze, David, Joanna Close-Brooks, J. N. Graham Ritchie, Ian Scott, and A. Young. “Soldiers’ Burials at Camelon, Stirlingshire, 1922 and 1975.” Britannia 7 (1976): 73-95.

Czarnecka, Krystyna. “The Re-Use of Roman Military Equipment in Barbarian Contexts: A Chain-Mail Souvenir?” Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies 5 (1994): 245-253.

Edlund-Berry, Ingrid. “Hot, Cold, Smelly: The Power of Sacred Water in Roman Religion, 400-100 BCE.” In Religion in Republican Italy, Yale Classical Studies 33, edited by Celia Schultz and Paul Harvey Jr., 162-180. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.

Green, Miranda. The Gods of Roman Britain. Oxford: Shire Archaeology, 1983.

Green, Miranda. Celtic Myths. Austin: Texas University Press in cooperation with British Museum Press, 1993.

Klumbach, Hans. Romische Helme aus Niedermanien. Koln: Rheinland-Verlag, 1974.

Oldenstein, Jurgen. “Two Roman Helmets from Eich, Alzey-Worms District.” Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies 1 (1990): 27-37.

Rald, Ulla. “The Roman Swords from Danish Bog Finds.” Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies 5 (1994): 227-241.

Rhodes, Michael. “The Roman Coinage from London Bridge and the Development of the City of Southwark.” Britannia 22 (1991): 179-190.

Robinson, H. Russell. The Armour of Imperial Rome. New York: Scribner, 1975.

Roymans, Nico. “The Sword or the Plough. Regional Dynamics in the Romanisation of Belgic Gaul and the Rhineland Area.” In From the Sword to the Plough: Three Studies on the Earliest Romanisation of Northern Gaul, edited by Nico Roymans, 9-126. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 1996.

Ruegg, S. Dominic. Underwater Investigations at Roman Minturnae. Jonsered: Paul Astroms Forlag, 1995.

Schiffer, Michael. Formation Processes of the Archaeological Record. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1987.

Smith, Charles R. Illustrations of Roman London. London: Printed for the Subscribers and not Published, 1859.

Tomlin, R. S. O. Tabellae Sulis: Roman Inscribed Tablets of Tin and Lead from the Sacred Spring at Bath. Oxford: Oxford University Committee for Archaeology, 1988.

Wait, G. A. Ritual and Religion in Iron Age Britain, BAR British Series 149(i). Oxford: B.A.R., 1985.

Webster, Graham. Celtic Religion in Roman Britain. New Jersey: Barnes and Noble Books, 1986.

By Kimberly Munro   Fri, Mar 18, 2011

The expansive, culturally rich civilizations that existed in the Americas at the time of European contact came as a great surprise to the early Spanish explorers. Most notable were the Aztec empire in Central Mexico and the Incan empire in Peru, both of which controlled great expanses of land and millions of people. The Inca Empire encompassed what is now modern day Ecuador, Bolivia, Argentina, Peru, and Chile and left its mark with impressive architecture, elaborate road networks and innovative agricultural developments. The scenic backdrop of Machu Picchu, the sacred lost city of the Incas, stirs the imagination and fills the mind with wonder and amazement as the modern day symbol of the Inca Empire's accomplishments. Unfortunately, most discussions about Peruvian archaeology begin and end with the Inca. What most people don't realize is that the Incas only reigned for approximately two centuries. Several cultures laid the groundwork for the rise of the Inca, cultures of which most people have never heard . The Wari, Nazca, Tiwanaku, Chimu, Moche, and Chavin all had striking achievements of their own, upon which the Inca were able to build. Because of the multitude of Pre-Incan cultures in Peru, this article is only one of a series that will spotlight the different cultures and time periods of Peru. It is a primer to the earliest civilizations of Peru in the Late Pre-Ceramic period - the time period which gave rise to the first cities and earliest civilizations in the New World.............

Chronologically, archaeologists have divided prehistory in Peru into the Pre-Ceramic (13,000 BC-1800 BC), Initial Period (1800 BC - 800 BC), Early Horizon (800 BC - 750 AD), Middle Horizon (750 AD - 1000 AD), and Late Horizon (1000 AD -1476 AD). Previously, it was believed that the earliest Peruvian civilizations were tied to the emergence of irrigation agriculture and the introduction of ceramics dating to the Initial Period. However, new discoveries, innovative field techniques and advances in radio-carbon dating have pushed that date back to the Late Pre-Ceramic Period (4000 BC-3000 BC).

The Late Pre-Ceramic is characterized by the emergence of monumental public architecture, basic floodplain farming of local varieties of gourds, squash, lima and kidney beans, as well as the cultivation of cotton, which led to an abundant use of cotton textiles. Traditionally, ceramics, irrigation agriculture, and monumental architecture were believed to have been the chief markers of sedentary civilizations and complex societies with socio-political organizational structure. However, archaeologists in Peru were shocked when their excavations at the earliest structures failed to produce any evidence of ceramics. How could such large monuments be constructed by societies lacking in ceramic technology and reliance on agriculture? The answer to this intriguing question may lie in the location of these early sites.

Coastal Beginnings

Surprisingly, the earliest Peruvian cities did not spring up in the lush highlands of the Andes where the Incan empire would begin, nor did they develop in the fertile river valleys between the Andes and Pacific coast where later complex civilizations would take root. To date, the earliest cities in the New World have been discovered along the northern and central Peruvian coast. The coast of Peru is an arid environment, broken up by green verdant valleys created by rivers flowing down from the mountains. The fishing resources of Peru are among the richest in the world. In 1960, fishing off the coast yielded 1680 kg per hectare, which is almost a thousand times the average of worldwide ocean productivity (Burger, 1992). 

In 1975, archaeologist Michael Moseley developed the Maritime Hypothesis. This hypothesis proposed "...that thousands of years ago the rich Andean fishery sustained the growth of early littoral populations, the rise of large sedentary communities, the formation of complex societies and established the foundations of coastal civilization "(Moseley, 2004). Moseley originally dated his hypothesis with work he had done at the site of Aspero, located along the Supe river, directly on the coast. The site of Aspero is 13 hectares and has 17 mounds (6 of which were centrally located pyramids forming a central plaza) measuring up to 10m high (Feldman 1980). The two largest mounds, Huaca de los Sacrificos and Huaca de los Idolos were decorated with clay friezes, had rooms over 10m square, and stone walls over a meter thick.

El Paraiso is another site located on the coast (only 2km from the coast). Found along the Chillon river, El Paraiso was home to the largest Pre-Ceramic period monument. The site, which is 60 hectares, includes 13 mounds. Seven of these mounds make up a central group, which form a U-shaped plaza. This U-shaped form has been suggested to be the prototype for later, Initial Period architecture, which include U-shaped complexes (Burger, 1992). Both El Paraiso and Aspero are especially significant for supporting the Martime hypothesis. They illustrate that large complex civilizations can flourish without reliance on agriculture. 

In 2001, the dates for a site called Caral stunned the archaeological community. Caral was dated to 2800 BC, at the time making it the oldest city in the New World. Caral, like Aspero, is located in the Supe valley; however, it is not located directly on the coast, but rather 16km from the shore. The site of Caral is over 65 hectares, and includes a sunken circular plaza, 25 platform mounds measuring between 10 and 18m high, a central plaza, architecture which was arranged symmetrically, and numerous stairways. Eighteen similar sites dating to the same time period can also be found in the Supe Valley, though none are as large as Caral. At its peak, Caral's population has been estimated at 3,000 people. Because of its size and architecture, Caral is considered by some archaeologists to be the "capitol" city of what is now known as the "Caral-Supe Civilization." This civilization includes the 18 other Pre-ceramic sites in the Supe valley and other similarly constructed sites in surrounding valleys.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Aerial image of the site of Caral and its structures.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Peruvian archaeologist Ruth Shady Solis, who has worked on Caral and in the Supe Valley since 1994, has theorized that Caral may have originally started as a colony of Aspero. Caral's inland location made it especially productive for farming cotton and other gourds, beans, and chillies. Cotton was extremely important to coastal societies, used for their fishing nets, textiles, clothing, containers and shicra bags (see photo below). Their productive farming allowed them to trade with Aspero and the other coastal sites for salt, mollusks, sardines and anchovies. Caral's location was also situated for exotic trade with the highlands, making Caral so productive that it was able to outgrow Aspero in size and influence.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Shicras, or woven fiber bags have been found in many of the ruin structures. The shicras were woven from cotton and used to carry rocks and fill to build the monuments. The stones were not dumped out of the bags however once brought to the site, the bags were then left in place in construction (much like a sand bag is used today). The majority of the carbon dates have come from dating these organic shicra bags. Image courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.

 ______________________________________________________________________________________________________

In 2007 radio-carbon dates again rocked the archaeological community when a similar site located just south of Caral in the Huaura valley suggested that Caral may not be the oldest city in the New World. The site, called Bandurria, has similar architecture to Caral (and 18 other similar sites in the Supe Valley) including a sunken circular plaza, stairways and other structures which were constructed in a symmetrical pattern. According to Alejandro Chu Barrera, the director of the Archaeological Project of Bandurria, radio-carbon analysis has dated the site to 3200 BC. 

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Sunken plaza at Bandurria. Image courtesy Global Heritage Network.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Locations of the Pre-Ceramic sites of Aspero, Caral, and Bandurria and their relationship to each other. Map courtesy of author.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

........And Highland Beginnings

Though the earliest cities in Peru have been located on or near the coast, contemporaneous late Pre-Ceramic sites have also been discovered in the highlands. The architectural style and painted reliefs of these sites point to an entirely different tradition (known as the Mito Tradition). The site of Kotosh (2000-1800BC), located in the Central Highlands, has several different architectural features. These features include interior wall niches and mud-relief friezes which decorate the temple walls. These decorations feature coiled serpents and mud sculptures with two pairs of arms crossed. These mud sculptures are the earliest examples of sculptures in the Americas and give Kotosh the nickname "The Temple of the Crossed Hands." The crossed arm designs on the temple walls are believed to be the earliest example of "duality," a central theme which was represented in Andean Ideology through the time of the Incas. One set of arms has the left hand crossed over the right while the other pair on the opposite wall have the right hand over the left. It has been suggested that one pair of arms may represent the feminine because of their smaller size, while the larger arms represent the masculine.

Mud sculpture examples at "The Temple of the Crossed Hands." Image courtesy of Wikimedia commons

The temples at Kotosh are also lacking in the sunken and rounded plaza features of the coastal sites. Several similar sites, including La Galgada, Piruru, and Wairajirca have a comparable architectural theme.The material culture recovered by archaeologists can be explained by an underlying religious ideology, which archaeologists have dubbed "The Kotosh Religious Tradition." It is believed the architectural features of Kotosh and similar sites were constructed primarily for religious purposes, specifically for the burning of different offerings. Structures were purposefully covered after offerings were burned. This practice, now called "temple entombment," is demonstrated in all sites representing the Kotosh Religious Tradition.

Though there are two distinctive cultures that make up the earliest sites which feature monumental architecture in Peru, there is evidence that these cultures interacted and traded. Fishing in the highland rivers is relatively unproductive, making the maritime resources of the coast a commodity in highland sites. The coastal sites also had access to salt, which has been found in burial offerings in several highland sites. In return, highland staple foods such as cuy (guinea pig) remains, quinoa, maize and potato have been found at coastal sites.

The Supe valley lays claim to the earliest cities, but the Chicama and Rimac Valleys have the largest concentration of early corporate constructions (Moseley 1978). Due to their proximity to the coast and an abundance of maritime resources, these valleys became the cradle of the earliest civilizations in the New World. Between 3000-1800 BC large architectural complexes sprung up in coastal Peru while a contemporaneous yet different complex developed in the highlands. These impressive acts of construction are markers for complex and organized societies. The earliest dates for these cities have been radio-carbon dated to 3200 BC (around the time the pyramids of Egypt were first being constructed). Not only do these monuments represent the societies' religious ideologies, but they also represent a high degree of planning and an organized labor force. These civilizations, which are the earliest in the New World, laid the ground work for the extraordinary cultures which were to come.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Location of Pre-Ceramic sites and valleys. Courtesy of author.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Where Can I Visit these Sites?

Most of the sites discussed in this article can be visited in Peru through tour guides or groups, and there are thousands of other sites worth visiting which were not mentioned. Peru has over 100,000 identified sites of archaeological interest, only 2,800 of which have been officially marked as tourist attractions. Funneling visitors away from Machu-Picchu and toward other equally impressive sites will help protect Machu-Picchu's famous ruins from the thousands of visitors it receives a day. Tourists visiting archaeological sites in other regions of Peru will also help spread the economic benefits of tourism to the poorer areas of the country.

If you can't afford to travel and/or want to get a better picture of some of the sites discussed in this article, you can pay a virtual visit to Caral on Google Earth. The coordinates for Caral are 10°53'31.79"S Latitude, 77°31'18.63"W Longitude. Make sure you have the "3D feature" clicked on the layers tab and you can start exploring one of the oldest cities in the New World!

*Cover Image is of a temple mound at the site of Caral. Image courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.

By   Sun, May 13, 2012

May 16th, 2012

Archaeologists Discover Possible Site of a Sixth Century Miracle in Jerusalem

The recent discovery of a Jerusalem quarry by archaeologists have led some archaeologists to suggest that it may be the site of the miracle described by historian Procopius of Caesarea in his work,The Buildings of Justinian, where God provided a miraculous supply of stone for the construction of the Nea Ekklesia of the Theotokos Church. During construction work in the Jerusalem neighborhood of Rehavia, a large 20 ft (6 m) tall and 30 in (80 cm) wide red stone, chiseled into the shape of a column, was found. Upon notification of the discovery, the Israeli Antiquities Authority ordered a halt to the construction work and systematic archaeological investigation was initiated. (Popular Archaeology)

A MUMMY SWITCHEROO?

Min, the ancient Egyptian god of phallus and fertility, might have brought some worldy advantages to his male worshippers, but offered little protection when it came to spiritual life. Researchers at the Mummy Project-Fatebenefratelli hospital in Milan, Italy, established that one of Min's priests at Akhmim, Ankhpakhered, was not resting peacefully in his finely painted sarcophagus. "We discovered that the sarcophagus does not contain the mummy of the priest, but the remains of another man dating between 400 and 100 BC," Egyptologist Sabina Malgora said. (Discovery News)

Archaeology team following clues to 1662 chapel

A team of archaeologists and volunteers has come tantalizingly close to locating the 1662 chapel at Newtowne Neck in St. Mary’s County. Scott Lawrence of Grave Concerns and James Gibb of Gibb Archaeology Consulting were hired by St. Francis Xavier Catholic Church in Compton and the Knights of Columbus to try to find the original chapel. The two already have completed an archaeological survey of the church’s original cemetery. (Southern Maryland Newspaper)

Thieves hunting ancient pharaonic treasures

Taking advantage of Egypt's political upheaval, thieves have gone on a treasure hunt with a spree of illegal digging, preying on the country's ancient pharaonic heritage. Illegal digs near ancient temples and in isolated desert sites have swelled a staggering 100-fold over the past 16 months since a popular uprising toppled Hosni Mubarak's 29-year regime and security fell apart in many areas as police simply stopped doing their jobs. (IOL Scitech)

WWII fighter plane hailed the 'aviation equivalent of Tutankhamun's Tomb' found preserved in the Sahara

A Second World War aeroplane that crash landed in the Sahara Desert before the British pilot walked to his death has been found almost perfectly preserved 70 years later. (The Telegraph)

6,000-year-old settlement poses tsunami mystery

Archeologists have uncovered evidence of pre-farming people living in the Burren more than 6,000 years ago — one of the oldest habitations ever unearthed in Ireland. Radiocarbon dating of a shellfish midden on Fanore Beach in north Clare have revealed it to be at least 6,000 years old — hundreds of years older than the nearby Poulnabrone dolmen. The midden — a cooking area where nomad hunter-gatherers boiled or roasted shellfish — contained Stone Age implements, including two axes and a number of smaller stone tools. (www.irishexaminer.com)

May 14th, 2012

Ecuador seeks answer to riddle of Inca emperor's tomb

The mystery surrounding the tomb of the last Inca emperor - and its reputed treasure - might be closer to being solved. If Ecuadorean historian Tamara Estupinan is right, Emperor Atahualpa's mummified body was kept in the lush, hilly lowlands, a six-hour drive south-west of Ecuador's capital city, Quito. While it is still too early to confirm Ms Estupinan's theory, this discovery could shed light on a tumultuous historical period that marked the beginning of the Spanish colonial era in the Americas. At its height, in the early 1500s, the Inca empire covered most of the Andes, from southern Colombia to central Chile as well as some parts of Argentina. (BBC News)

Mass Grave Begins Revealing Soldiers' Secrets

It was one of the bloodiest battles of the Thirty Years' War, but until recently there was no trace of those who died there. Now a mass grave is shedding light on the mysteries of the Battle of Lützen. Were those who fought hungry young men or well-fed veterans? And where did they come from? (Spiegel Online)

How stone age man invented the art of raving

They were the stone-age equivalent of Glastonbury festival. People gathered in their hundreds to drink, eat and party every summer at revelries lasting several days and nights. Young men met women from nearby communities and married them. Herds of cattle were slaughtered to provide food. These neolithic carousals even had special sites. They were held on causewayed enclosures, large hilltop earthworks built by our forebears after they brought farming to Britain from the continent 6,000 years ago. (The Guardian)

Pitkin County archaeology discovery includes prehistoric tools and weapons

More than two dozen prehistoric tools and weapons found on an undeveloped plot in Pitkin County could provide archaeologists information about hunter-gatherer toolmaking in the West. The find, on private property in the Emma area, on Bear Ridge Road, was reported last week to the Pitkin County commissioners. The owners of the site, David Brown and Jody Anthes, have building rights on the property. They asked the local government last week to place it, instead, on the county’s historical register and grant them two transferable development rights. (Aspen Daily News Online)

Did ancient Germans steal the pharaoh's chair design?

Roughly 3,500 years ago, folding chairs remarkably similar to ones found in Egypt suddenly became must-have items in parts of northern Europe. The simple design consists of two movable wooden frames connected to each other with pins, and with an animal hide stretched between. Such chairs were already being used in Egypt more than 4,000 years ago. The oldest depictions are found on 4,500-year-old Mesopotamian seals. (Stone Pages)

Ancient Swedish stone structure spurs debate

Ancient Scandinavians dragged 59 boulders to a seaside cliff near what is now the Swedish fishing village of Kaseberga. They carefully arranged the massive stones - each weighing up to 1,800 kilograms - in the outline of a 67-meter-long ship overlooking the Baltic Sea. (Stone Pages)

May 13th, 2012

Archaeologists Excavate a Lost Kingdom Buried Beneath Volcanic Ash

In 1980, people began to take notice when workers from a commercial logging company began dredging up pottery fragments and bones in an area near the little village of Pancasila on the island of Sumbawa, Indonesia. Other locals began finding coins, brassware and charred timber in the same region, all buried beneath a thick layer of volcanic deposits. The finds were not far from the foot of the Tambora volcano, a volcano that, in April of 1815, produced the largest eruption in recorded history. In fact, so intense was the eruption, it's atmospheric effects influenced weather patterns across faraway Europe and North America. And in one evening alone, it destroyed at least one entire village kingdom near its feet. (Popular Archaeology)

NM teens find possible 900-year-old artifact

group of New Mexico seventh-graders have found what's being called 1 of the most significant, archaeological discoveries in a while. KOAT-TV reports (http://bit.ly/J7g8Ld) that a group of Sandia Prep seventh-graders recently discovered a 14-by-14 inch pot, possibly 900-years-old, while on a field trip in Cibola County. (KCBD)

Bronze Age boat replica fails to float

The band was ready, the champagne was on hand, Time Team's Tony Robinson was there to record the historic event, and the crowds gathered to watch as a half-size replica of Dover's Bronze Age boat prepared to take to the water. The only problem was, it started to sink. A team of craftsmen and archaeologists had been working for several months to build the replica boat, using the same tools and the same methods as their ancestors would have used when the original boat was built more than 3,500 years earlier. (East Kent Mercury)

Dead Sea Scrolls come to life in Philly exhibit

Inside a climate-controlled storage room with a guard posted at the door, Tania Treiger unzips a purposely nondescript case and lifts out one of the world's oldest and most significant archaeological artifacts. The Israel Antiquities Authority conservator is one of only four people in the world allowed to handle the Dead Sea Scrolls, the centerpiece of a new exhibition at The Franklin Institute, where a painstaking examination of the ancient treasures was conducted before they are placed on public view. (York Dispatch)

By Dan McLerran   Wed, Aug 31, 2011

A major early human stone toolmaking industry has been pushed back in time as much as another 350,000 years, according to a recent study carried out by scientists at Columbia University and published this week in Nature. The discovery also revisits questions about the origins of an early human ancestor and the coexistence of disparate early human species in Africa.

Led by lead study author Christopher Lepre, a geologist who also has joint appointments at Rutgers and Lamont-Doherty universities, a joint French and American team explored, removed and dated samples of mudstone sediment deposits using magnetic polarity analysis from a site called Kokiselei, near the northwestern shores of Lake Turkana in Kenya. Magnetic polarity analysis, part of the process of Paleomagnetic dating, an absolute dating technique, is the evaluation of the shifts or reversals in the Earth's magnetic field through geologic time as it is reflected or "recorded" by changes in rocks and minerals found in volcanic and sedimentary deposits. The results of the analyses were converted to years to determine the age of the tested sediments.  

What they found was surprizing. Yielding a date of approximately 1.76 million years B.P.E., the targeted deposits were considerably older than they had anticipated. Moreover, these same sediments at Kokiselei contained stone tool assemblages identified with the Acheulian stone tool industry, an industry for which the oldest samples have been previously dated in Konso, Ethiopia, to about 1.4 million years ago, and in India, between 1.5 million and 1 million years ago. These tools, considered the second "great leap" in early human stone toolmaking, greatly expanded the possibilities for early humans, particularly in terms of food preparation and possibly even hunting. “You could whack away at a joint and dislodge the shoulder from the arm, leg or hip,” says Eric Delson, a Lehman College paleoanthropologist not involved in the study. “The tools allowed you to cut open and dismember an animal to eat it.” This utility implies a certain level of dexterity and the ability by the maker to think ahead, or plan. The most common and prolific example of such stone tools is the Acheulian Handaxe, found in abundance at sites across East Afrca as well as in Europe and Asia. 

The same sediments also contained stone tools of a simpler industry, the Oldowan, thought to be a predecessor to the Acheulian. The Oldowan is suggested by some scientists to be the handiwork of an early hominid called Homo habilis, the fossils of which were first discovered by Louis and Mary Leakey in the early 1960's and is thought to have lived from approximately 2.3 to 1.4 million years ago. But now, the new Kokiselei dating has pushed back the advent of the Acheulian industry by about 350,000 years.

Said Lepre, “We suspected that Kokiselei was a rather old site, but I was taken aback when I realized that the geological data indicated it was the oldest Acheulian site in the world.” 

Homo erectus the maker?

The Acheulian is most often associated with Homo erectus, considered by many scientists to be a human ancestor that lived as much as 2 million years ago.  It was in the western Lake Turkana area where famous anthropologist Richard Leakey discovered the most complete early human fossil skeleton ever found. Called Turkana_Boy, it was dated to 1.5 million years B.P.E. and was classifiable to either early Homo erectus or Homo ergaster.  It is to this day considered to be one of the benchmark finds for early humans.  

The Acheulian tools at Kokiselei were located immediately above a sediment layer associated with a polarity reversal called the “Olduvai Subchron", named after Olduvai Gorge in Tanzania where famous anthropologists Louis and Mary Leakey made their history-making hominin fossil and Oldowan stone tool finds in the 1930's. In a recent study conducted by Lepre and Kent, they determined that a Homo erectus skull found at Koobi Fora Ridge on the east side of Lake Turkana was also located above the Olduvai Subchron interval. This meant that the Homo erectus skull and the Acheulian tools in West Turkana were about the same age.

This early human species is also thought to be the first that dispersed on a global level, ranging across both Asia and Africa before becoming extinct possibly about 70,000 years ago. Many researchers suggest that Homo erectus evolved in East Africa, where many of the oldest fossils have been discovered; however, the discovery of equally ancient Homo erectus fossils at Dmanisi in the Republic of Georgia in the 1990s has led other researchers to suggest a possible Asian origin. The puzzling question is that Homo erectus in Dmanisi, Georgia was still using the simpler Oldowan-like chopping tools, when now in West Turkana, according to the new study, early humans had already developed the more sophisticated hand axes, picks and other innovative tools that anthropologists have assigned to the Acheulian. Add to this the evidence of two separate stone tool industries, the simpler, more primitive "chopper" technology of the Oldowan, and the more sophisticated, chiseled-edge technology of the Acheulian, existing side-by-side within the same time horizon at Kokiselei, and a more complicated picture emerges. The study results, in light of the Dmanisi finds, have presented new implications for the timing and dispersal of Homo erectus and the Acheulian industry, and directs the researchers to an interesting new hypothesis. 

States Lepre, et.al.:

"Our data indicate that the earliest development of the Acheulian occurred in Africa at 1.76 Myr ago and was contemporaneous with or perhaps pre-dated the earliest hominin dispersals into Eurasia. Yet, the difference between the ages for the oldest known Acheulian artefacts in the world from Africa and the oldest known Acheulian artefacts from Eurasia raises the likelihood that the first Eurasian hominins derived from an African population lacking Acheulian culture. Potentially, two hominin groups coexisted in Africa at 1.76Myr ago. One of these groups could have developed the Acheulian technology but remained in Africa. The other could have lacked the cognitive ability and/or technological knowledge to manufacture the Acheulian technology and did not carry it into Eurasia. This division may indicate different behavioural aptitudes for separate African species (for example, H. erectus sensu lato versus Homo habilis sensu lato) or a within-species cultural disparity. In any event, it seems that a second hominin dispersal with Acheulian technology or a diffusion of this technology took place later, leading to the widespread occurrence of this Early Stone Age tradition in the circum- Mediterranean area and elsewhere after 1 Myr ago."[1]

 

The researchers now hope to uncover more about the ancient environment in which the early humans lived, shedding new light on how environmental elements and their change effected the course of human evolution. Scientists know now that the East African landscape was becoming generally drier over a period of millions of years, with periodic wet and drier periods, but generally changing from a predominantly woodland environment to that of savannah grassland. 

Says Lepre, “We need to understand also the ancient environment because this gives us an insight into how processes of evolution work—how shifts in early human biology and behavior are potentially caused by changes in the climate, vegetation or animal life that is particular to a habitat.” 

They are currently excavating a site in Kenya more than 2 million years old to obtain a better understanding of the earlier Oldowan period.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The tools made by early humans at Kokiselei, Kenya, were found in Lake Turkana's ancient shoreline sediments pictured above. Credit: Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The study’s other authors are: Helen Roche, Sonia Harmand, Jean-Philippe Brugal, Pierre-Jean Texier and Arnaud Lenoble at France’s National Center of Scientific Research; Rhonda Quinn, Seton Hall University; and Craig Feibel, Rutgers University.

Full details of the study can be accessed in this week's edition of the journal Nature. 

Institutions involved in the study are:

The Earth Institute, Columbia University , which mobilizes the sciences, education and public policy to achieve a sustainable earth. Through interdisciplinary research among more than 500 scientists in diverse fields, the Institute is adding to the knowledge necessary for addressing the challenges of the 21st century and beyond. With over two dozen associated degree curricula and a vibrant fellowship program, the Earth Institute is educating new leaders to become professionals and scholars in the growing field of sustainable development. We work alongside governments, businesses, nonprofit organizations and individuals to devise innovative strategies to protect the future of our planet. www.earth.columbia.edu

Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory A member of The Earth Institute, it is one of the world's leading research centers seeking fundamental knowledge about the origin, evolution and future of the natural world. More than 300 research scientists study the planet from its deepest interior to the outer reaches of its atmosphere, on every continent and in every ocean. From global climate change to earthquakes, volcanoes, nonrenewable resources, environmental hazards and beyond, Observatory scientists provide a rational basis for the difficult choices facing humankind in the planet's stewardship. www.ldeo.columbia.edu

Notes:

[1] Christopher J. Lepre, He ́le`ne Roche, Dennis V. Kent, Sonia Harmand, Rhonda L. Quinn, Jean-Philippe Brugal, Pierre-Jean Texier, Arnaud Lenoble & Craig S. Feibel; An earlier origin for the Acheulian, doi:10.1038/nature10372.

Cover Photo, Top Left: Early humans were using stone hand axes as far back as 1.8 million years ago. Credit: Pierre-Jean Texier, National Center of Scientific Research, France.

Photo, Second from Top, Right: Study co-author, Craig Feibel, is among the team of researchers that returned in 2007 to West Turkana to put dates on hand axes excavated earlier. Credit: Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory.

Photo, Third from Top, Left: Homo erectus fossil skull. Courtesy Joop Anker, Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic

By Dan McLerran   Tue, Aug 23, 2011

Many of us think of "diversity" today as pertaining to social initiatives or large cities with great populations like New York or London. Relatively few of us connect the word with historic or ancient towns and cities. But a new exhibition opening on September 23rd, 2011 in New York City promises to open the public's eyes to another, more ancient city that could be considered the quintessential historic example of the best potpourri of different cultures and people at any single location.

The exhibition, on view from September 23, 2011 to January 8, 2012 at the Institute for the Study of the Ancient World (ISAW), relates the story of life in the ancient city of Dura-Europos, located in present-day Syria, from the mid-second to mid-third century CE.  Aptly entitled Edge of Empires: Pagans, Jews, and Christians at Roman Dura-Europos, the exhibit showcases 77 objects from the city, including a presentation of the history of investigations and discoveries at the ancient site during excavations there in the 1920s and 1930s by Yale University and the French Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres. Says ISAW Exhibitions Director and Chief Curator Jennifer Chi, “The site of influential archaeological finds, Dura is an apt subject to be explored by ISAW, which is dedicated to illuminating the connections among various places and cultures of the ancient world. Moreover, as a city of extraordinary cultural diversity, Dura has great resonance for the modern world, where multiculturalism shapes the very nature and quality of daily life.” (See below for a gallery of selected artifacts from the exhibition).

The city was founded in the fourth century CE as a settlement under the Macedonian successors to Alexander the Great. Situated strategically along the Euphrates River at the intersection of major trade routes, it became an important way-station for caravans traveling from Arabia, Persia, and Syria toward the Mediterranean. Bordered on the east by the River, the north and south by deep ravines, and its more vulnerable western flank by a large wall, the city was also defensible to any enemy attack, extending its longevity as a settlement. Before its final destruction in 256 BC by the Sassanians, Dura-Europos was successively occupied by Parthians and Romans. It developed an unusually multicultural population that included Greeks, Romans, Parthians, Christians, Jews, and Pagans, living, working and worshipping side by side and speaking and writing in a variety of languages, including Greek, Aramaic, Latin, Parthian, Middle Persian, Hebrew, and Safaitic.  

Led by Michael Rostovtzeff of Yale and Franz Cumont of the French Academy, the excavations, which operated from 1928 until 1937, uncovered an enormously rich array of well-preserved artifacts and architectural remains that made headlines during the interwar period. Finds include the earliest known Christian house-church, an early Jewish synagogue, hundreds of parchment and papyri, numerous temples, brilliantly fresh wall paintings, inscriptions, tombs, and astonishingly well-preserved Roman arms and armor that included a painted wooden shield and complete horse armor.  Excavations were not resumed again at Dura until 1986, when the Mission Franco- Syrienne d’Europos-Doura, now under the direction of archaeologists Pierre Leriche and A. Al Saleh, continued to explore the site.

The Exhibition

The show begins with a presentation of archival photographs that illustrate the archaeological work and discoveries at Dura. It includes images of directors Franz Cumont and Michael Rostovtzeff in the field, and exterior and interior views of some of the city’s major monumental structures. The viewer is expected to acquire a pictorial impression of the extraordinary scale and nature of the discoveries, as well as the astonishing degree of preservation of much of its architecture.

The exhibition next depicts the everyday aspects of the life and culture of Roman Dura through the display of representative artifacts. Beginning with a presentation of Roman military life in the city, articles of military equipment and dress are displayed, including an astonishingly well-preserved painted Roman military shield and several bronze belt ornaments that show Celtic influence, demonstrating the international character of the Roman military that consisted of troops raised from distant regions of the empire. Well-preserved bronze horse-armor and an iron Sassanian helmet provide examples of the nature of combat between Roman soldiers and their opponents.

The international character of the city next emerges in displays of recovered inscriptions and graffiti in a variety of languages, including Aramaic, Latin, Parthian, Middle Persian, Hebrew, and Safaitic, but predominantly Greek, as it was considered the international business and cultural language of the day. The city's prominence as a center of international trade is reflected in the selection of pottery from the site.  Imported ceramic ware from Tunisia, for example, is displayed alongside locally produced pieces, and local wares like water jugs are exhibited in addition to a large amphora from the Aegean that normally would have contained wine or olive oil imported from distant parts of the Mediterranean.

Finally, some of the most compelling artifacts exhibited are those that reflect the ancient city's trademark mix of religions. Paganism, likely practiced by the city's military population, is represented by, for example, a relief showing the god Herakles' triumphal battle with the Nemean lion.  Judaism is presented through ten richly decorated ceiling tiles from the excavated synagogue, one of the most widely-hailed discoveries at the site.  Large-scale paintings from the baptistery of the earliest known Christian house-church afford a window on the large Christian community that existed there, even while they were still being persecuted throughout the Empire. 

Visitors may also obtain a catalogue of the exhibition containing essays by scholars, a map of the Dura-Europos region, archival photographs of the excavations, and an exhibition checklist. 

Edge of Empires: Pagans, Jews, and Christians at Roman Dura-Europos is organized by the Yale University Art Gallery and the McMullen Museum of Art, Boston College. A version of the exhibition previously appeared at the McMullen Museum, with the title Dura-Europos: Crossroads of Antiquity. The ISAW presentation has been made possible through the support of the Leon Levy Foundation.

More information about the exhibition and its organizers and sponsors can be obtained at the website, Edge of Empires. 

Cover Photo, Top Left:  Ceiling Tile with Portrait of Heliodoros, an Actuarius (Roman Fiscal Official) Clay, with a Layer of Painted Plaster, H. 30.5 cm, W. 44.0 cm, D. 6.7 cm From the House of the Scribes, Dura-Europos, 200–256 CE Yale University Art Gallery, Yale-French Excavations at Dura-Europos: 1933.292 Photography © 2011 Yale University Art Gallery

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

A Selection of Artifacts in the Exhibition

Wall Painting of Julius Terentius Performing a Sacrifice Paint on Plaster, H. 107.0 cm, W. 165.0 cm From the Temple of the Palmyrene Gods, Dura-Europos, ca. 239 CE Yale University Art Gallery, Yale-French Excavations at Dura-Europos: 1931.386 Photography © 2011 Yale University Art Gallery

 _______________________________________________________________________________

Wall Painting of a Procession of Women (The Wise Virgins?) Paint on Plaster, H. 95.0 cm, W. 140.0 cm From the Christian Community House, Dura-Europos, ca. 232 CE Yale University Art Gallery, Yale-French Excavations at Dura-Europos: 1932.1201c Photography © 2011 Yale University Art Gallery

_______________________________________________________________________________

Ceiling Tile with Portrait of Heliodoros, an Actuarius (Roman Fiscal Official) Clay, with a Layer of Painted Plaster, H. 30.5 cm, W. 44.0 cm, D. 6.7 cm From the House of the Scribes, Dura-Europos, 200–256 CE Yale University Art Gallery, Yale-French Excavations at Dura-Europos: 1933.292 Photography © 2011 Yale University Art Gallery

_______________________________________________________________________________

Painted Panel of the Winged Goddess Victory Painted Wood, H. 38.0 cm, W. 11.5 cm, D. 0.8 cm From the Palmyrene Gate, Dura-Europos, 265–256 CE Yale University Art Gallery, Yale-French Excavations at Dura-Europos: 1929.288 Photography © 2011 Yale University Art Gallery

________________________________________________________________________________

Altar Dedicated to the Palmyrene God Iarhibol Limestone, H. 73.7 cm, W. 36.8 cm, D. 27.9 cm From the Temple of the Palmyrene Gods, Dura-Europos, 165–256 CE Yale University Art Gallery, Yale-French Excavations at Dura-Europos: 1929.385 Photography © 2011 Yale University Art Gallery

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Shield (Scutum) Paint on Wood and Rawhide, H. 105.5 cm, W. 41.0 cm, D. 30.0 cm From Tower 19, Dura-Europos, mid-3rd century CE Yale University Art Gallery, Yale-French Excavations at Dura-Europos: 1933.715 Photography © 2011 Yale University Art Gallery

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Thymiaterion (Incense Burner) Green-Glazed Terracotta, H. 31.8 cm, W. 23.3 cm, D. 13.9 cm From the Cistern at the Temple of Atargatis, Dura-Europos, mid-2nd–mid-3rd century CE Yale University Art Gallery, Yale-French Excavations at Dura-Europos: 1938.4966

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Relief of the God Arsu Riding a Camel Limestone, H. 33.0 cm, W. 44.5 cm, D. 7.0 cm From the Temple of Adonis, Dura-Europos, ca. 100–200 CE Yale University Art Gallery, Yale-French Excavations at Dura-Europos: 1935.44 Photography © 2011 Yale University Art Gallery

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Drachma of Sasanian King Shapur I Silver, Diam. 2.45 cm; 3.5 g Minted at Seleucia ad Tigrim, Found at Dura-Europos, ca. 241–256 CE Yale University Art Gallery, Yale-French Excavations at Dura-Europos: 1938.6000.47 Photography © 2011 Yale University Art Gallery

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Relief of the Goddess Atargatis, or Tyche, with Doves Limestone, H. 13.0 cm, W. 25.5 cm, D. 5.0 cm From the Temple of Adonis, Dura-Europos, 1st century CE Yale University Art Gallery, Yale-French Excavations at Dura-Europos: 1935.46 Photography © 2011 Yale University Art Gallery

By   Mon, May 09, 2011

By Paul Wren

The Late Preclassic period in the Maya lowlands was a time of sweeping change.  It witnessed the rise of grand monumental architecture, the emergence of hierarchical societies, and the development of the Maya version of urban centers.  As important as these manifestations were, profound changes occurred earlier that have generally been obscured from our view by the later, more impressive construction.

We have a restricted window into the history of the egalitarian villages which were scattered across the landscape in the Middle Preclassic.  Nearly all of the artifacts and structures from this time have been found several meters below the prominent Classic structures which are visible today, and complete community layouts are simply not available.

Nevertheless, I hoped to find some evidence of the institutions which bound households together into larger groups, and how those institutions changed or were replaced over time.  In other parts of the world, residential clusters have been identified which seem to demonstrate a local focus (whether social or economic) for the people living there, i.e., neighborhoods.  Examples include regions and times as diverse as the Neolithic in Turkey (Düring and Marciniak 2006), and the 13^th century American Southwest (Lowell 1991).   In these places, the neighborhoods eventually dissolved as the communities became integrated at a higher level, or the populations were absorbed into communities at other locations.  This paper looks at Middle and Late Preclassic data from the Maya lowlands in an attempt to detect similar patterns as small villages grew into something larger.

APPROACH

Using the existing literature addressing Maya lowland sites with known Preclassic occupations, I have collected details on excavation units at these sites which revealed architectural evidence associated with the Middle and Late Preclassic.  The amount and type of available data varied from one site to another, rendering a unified classification approach useless.  I will present summaries of the information organized by site and then by phase, rather than enumerating individual excavation units at each site.

ALTAR DE SACRIFICIOS

Named for an altar discovered at the site, Altar de Sacrificios is located at the confluence of the Rio Pasión and Rio Salinas in southwestern Peten, Guatemala.  Major excavations were conducted in the early 1960s, beginning in 1959, under the direction of Gordon R. Willey.  The site was occupied into the Postclassic, with the earliest documented occupation represented by Xe ceramics (Smith 1972).

At Altar de Sacrificios, Preclassic occupations were identified at many operations across the site (Smith 1972).  The most illustrative chronology of this period was found in and around the B Group (Willey 1973).

The Xe phase (900-600 B.C.) community at Altar de Sacrificios probably numbered around 100 individuals.  Houses were perishable structures constructed from wooden poles and other organic materials (there was some evidence of waddle and daub), and were built directly on the ground.  Fragments of ceramic figurines in the form of human effigies may indicate ritual practice within the households.  All ground stone artifacts were utilitarian in nature.

The first low, artificial clay household mounds appear in the San Felix phase (600-300 B.C.).  Household artifacts remain about the same, and no evidence was found of a significant increase in the community population.  Changes were happening in the center of the B Group, however.   The first earthen platforms around the plaza at the B Group appeared (Structures B-I, B-II, and B-III), some with terraces and stairs (Smith 1972).  And while domestic artifacts were still found within and outside the plaza area, what seemed to be ceremonial items were discovered only within the B Group.  The most notable of these were 9 red sandstone tables.  None of these items were found in the residential mounds outside of the plaza (Willey 1973).

By the beginning of the Plancha phase (300 B.C. - A.D. 150), Structure B-1 at the plaza was a 3-meter high pyramid which would continue to grow in size throughout the phase.  The residential area to the West now consisted of 28 house mounds built over San Felix floors, many faced with almeja in a style similar to the Group B ceremonial structures.  Multiple residential mounds across the site also showed thick floors of almeja, such as Mounds 6 and 20 (Smith, 1972). Only a few Plancha figurines were found.  This long phase saw continuous enlargement of the structures in the B Group, creating a significant monumental core for the settlement (Willey 1973).

During the Preclassic at Altar de Sacrificios, a simple egalitarian community grew into a differentiated one with a ceremonial and/or civic center.  The settlement began humbly in the Xe phase as a village of simple houses built directly on the ground.  Differentiation in terms of household construction and size is seen with the appearance of some plastered house floors on low platforms during the San Felix phase, and near the end of the San Felix phase the plaza at B Group emerges as a public space with mounds that do not seem to be residential (although they are built where some higher-quality houses once stood).  This plaza blossomed in the Plancha phase, and became a significant public center edged by pyramids (Willey 1973).

BLACKMAN EDDY

Excavations were begun in 1990 at Blackman Eddy as part of the Belize Valley Archaeological Project.  They revealed occupations stretching from the Early Preclassic period (around 1100 B.C.) to the Late Classic (Garber et al. 2003b).

Plaza B shows an excellent chronology of the Preclassic phases of the site.  The earliest evidence of occupation in Plaza B are bedrock-level buildings from the Kanocha phase (1100-900 B.C.) represented in the form of postholes in level B1-13 of Structure B1.  Later in this phase, levels B1-9 and B1-8 reveal low apsidal platforms supporting perishable houses.  These structures were constructed with limestone retaining walls, and were associated with tamped earth patios.  Associated middens show evidence of feasting.

At the beginning of the early facet of the Jenney Creek phase (900-700 B.C.), a rectangular platform made from a limestone block retaining wall and capped with a plaster floor appears (level B1-7).  There is a dense midden of feasting debris near the platform which was filled and capped, apparently in a single event.  A .5-meter high platform identified as level B1-6 directly overlays this earlier platform, and is an example of much improved construction quality: 6 courses of trimmed blocks make up a retaining wall, and the platform is capped by a thick plaster floor.  Near the end of the early facet, level B1-6 is buried and replaced by three rectangular platforms (level B1-5) arranged linearly with the higher platform in the center (Garger et al. 2003a).

Beginning in the late facet of the Jenney Creek phase (700-350 B.C.), A large single structure (level B1-4) replaces the triadic arrangement of level B1-5.  It features the earliest facade masks known in the Maya lowlands flanking the structure's staircase.  By this time, the middens surrounding Structure B1 contain no domestic material.  Larger versions of structure B1 continue to be built throughout this phase (Garber et al. 2003a).

The pattern of increasing complexity in the Preclassic at Blackman Eddy is similar to that seen at Altar, but the initial occupation and the subsequent appearance of larger structures and public architecture all seem to have occurred earlier in time, with a large ceremonial pyramid emerging near the beginning of the Late Preclassic.  Ground-level structures which appear to be residential  give way to low apsidal platforms, which are later replaced by taller and larger rectangular platforms.  It seems likely that the high-status residences became the location for public ceremonial structures in the Late Preclassic, and repeated evidence of feasting over time hints at social processes which integrated the community at this location.           

CEIBAL

Major excavations were undertaken by the Peabody Museum at Ceibal (also known as Seibal) from 1964 to 1968, also under the direction of Gordon R. Willey (Tourtellot 1988).  This significant Maya site lies along the Rio Pasión in southern Peten, about 50 Km almost due East of Altar de Sacrificios.

Group A at Ceibal presents an excellent chronology framing the Preclassic.  The initial settlement (as known) was limited to a contiguous area centered around Group A and the path of the future Causeway II.  A number of residences from the Real phase (900-600 B.C.) were already begin built on plaster floors and low platforms.  Tourtellot (1988) believes the center of this early village was at the location of the later Group A, and suggests that houses were spaced between 150 and 200 meters apart.

The first known boulder-walled platforms (e.g. Structure 31a-sub) appear in the Escoba phase (600-300 B.C.).  Group A continues as the center of the community, and house loci in this area (which were also occupied in the Real phase) are the most likely within the entire site to become elevated patio groups later in the Escoba.

The early facet of the Cantutse phase (300-0 B.C.) saw continued and significant population growth accompanied by the construction of many smaller boulder-walled terraces and platforms, assumed to support residential structures.  Peripheral temples and plazas appear in the area surrounding Group A, and seem to function as local centers or wards.  At least 13 minor temple pyramids have been identified in this period.  Tourellot (1988) interprets this arrangement as a network of interconnected temple groups/wards with the larger ceremonial and/or civic plaza at Group A serving as its center.  Each of the peripheral wards served 10 or more household sites.

The late facet Cantutse (0-270 A.D.) is a time of big changes in community organization.  Group A significantly declines, and a completely new complex appears in a location somewhat away from the existing community: Group D.  Tourtellot (1988) hypothesizes that this group represents an elite residential zone built by elite families who felt a need to locate themselves away from the rest of the community.

Ceibal began as a simple egalitarian village in the Middle Preclassic.  As it grew, differentiation became visible as some houses remained on the ground or on low plaster floors, while others were built on low platforms retained by stone walls.  In the late Escoba phase, patio groups appeared (probably representing the residences of higher status families).  By the early Cantutse phase, plazas and/or small temples serving multiple households signal the appearance of local community organization, yet the highest concentration of what appear to be elite residences remains at Group A, implying that multiple levels of organization exist.

CERROS

Cerros is located near Chetumal Bay in northern Belize, where major excavations were undertaken between 1974 and 1976 by archaeologists from Southern Methodist University (Freidel 1986).

Buried beneath the main plaza at Cerros are deposits which represent the chronology of the community.  Feature A, as these deposits are known, will be the focus of this section, as it provides evidence of Cerros' transition from an egalitarian village to a large stratified ceremonial center, all within the Late Preclassic (Cliff and Crane 1989).

Cliff and Crane (1989) define five stages of development at Cerros.  Stage I (325-275 B.C.) is represented by Ixtabal ceramics (although the Ixtabal phase extends to 250 B.C.).  Stage I structures at Feature 1A are ground-level perishable houses, each with an associated earthen patio.  There is no apparent arrangement to the residences, and it is assumed that each houses a single nuclear family (Cliff and Crane 1989).

The houses in the early part of Stage II (275-175 B.C.) are similar to those in Stage I, but have interior floors of clay and the exterior patio floors are hard plaster.  They are also more numerous, and there is evidence of private ritual in the form of dedicatory burials and caches.  The first public architecture appears during this stage: Structure 2A-sub.2 appears to be a dock on the water's edge (Cliff and Crane 1989).

The later part of Stage II brings domestic compounds, featuring out-buildings such as kitchens.  The first signs of inequality appear with some homes being built on higher platforms, but there is still no particular pattern to the settlement.  Stage II overlaps the parts of the Istabal and C'oh (250-150 B.C.) phases.

During Stage III (175-100 B.C.), the public dock (Structure 2A-sub.2) is enlarged and improved, and the entire occupation area is reorganized around a central plaza (Cliff 1988).  Note that this stage overlaps parts of the C'oh and Early Tulix (150-250 B.C.) ceramic horizons.  More variation is seen is the sizes of houses and their associated patios, which seems to be further indication of differentiation within the community with higher status families possessing more property area (Cliff and Crane 1989). Cliff (1988)  argues that this local community represents a barrio, or neighborhood.  He notes that there are two other similar house and patio clusters at Cerros, and the ceramics at these three neighborhoods support his argument: C'oh ceramics are found in quantity at all three clusters, but not in the areas between them.  He hypothesizes that these neighborhoods represented extended kin groups.

At the beginning of Stage IV (100-50 B.C.), the first ceremonial public structure appears in Feature 1A: structure 2A-Sub.4 is a small pyramid.  By the middle of this stage, two distinct status levels are apparent in the domestic architecture.  Higher status residences are perishable houses with attached patios atop raised plastered platforms, while lower status homes are still build directly on the ground and lack patios.  By the end of this stage, domestic stone architecture for elite residences appears.  Cliff (1988) sees this as firm evidence that a ranked society had emerged.

Sometime during the brief Stage V (50-25 B.C.), non-elite residences disappear entirely from Feature 1A.  By the end of the stage, the entire area is buried and capped with the first phase of the new main plaza/ceremonial center.

The Cerros neighborhoods probably developed to fill the need for economic and social integration. Cliff (1988) believes that the transition from a rural village to an urban center was facilitated by the emergence of higher status extended family groups which superseded the neighborhoods as the focus for economic and production  activities.  The neighborhoods disappear at the time when public architecture is first seen, and are replaced by the familiar Classic arrangement of plazuelas around the Cerros site.

CUELLO

The Preclassic site of Cuello is located roughly 40 Km southwest of Cerros in northern Belize.  Major excavations spanned over a decade from 1975 to 1987 at what is thought to be the earliest known Maya settlement (Hammond 1991).

The Main Trench is a large excavation of the occupation levels underneath Platform 34, represented by almost four vertical meters of deposits which are divided into 20 stratigraphic levels, or phases.  During the occupation of Cuello, the patio area represented in the Main Trench underwent major reconfigurations several times.  Nearly every phase contained evidence of firepits, burials, and trash middens containing domestic refuse (Hammond 1991).

The earliest occupation was associated with the Swasey ceramic complex, with four distinct occupation phases (pases 0 through II) being identified with Swasey.  Two apsidal buildings on the ground surface (Structures 328 and 329) with plastered floors are the earliest structures.  These buildings are destroyed and covered over by the first constructed patio floor (Patio Floor I), upon which three new structures facing the patio (creating a courtyard) were built.  These buildings featured single-course limestone retaining walls supporting plastered platforms averaging 20 cm in height, and perishable superstructures.  Multiple episodes of reflooring were found (Hammond 1991).

During the phases associated with Bladen, and then Lopez Mamom ceramics (levels III, IIIa, IV, and IVa), four different patio floors are laid down, with many new buildings atop them replacing the old ones.  Some structures are built on increasingly higher platforms, the buildings are of better quality, and the total area of the patio also increases over time.  Of particular note is Structure 324, found only in level III.  Located in the center of the patio, it was round, plastered, and showed no evidence of a superstructure.  Its surface showed evidence of burning, and was later covered by the new patio floor in Phase IIIa.  The two buildings constructed on Patio Floor V are rectangular platforms supporting stone-walled superstructures (Hammond 1991).

In phase V, all existing structures were destroyed and burned.  A jade cache was placed near the south end of the patio, and a large mass burial was placed near the center of the patio.  The ritual burial contained the remains of 32 whole or partial  skeletons.  All had been butchered, and interred with Chicanel vessels.  Following the placement of the cache and the mass burial, the first stage of Platform 34 was laid down: Plaza Floor I (Hammond 1991).

Ten successive phases (Va through XIII) associated with Coco Chicanel ceramics showed a series of repeated reconstructions in the Main Trench. eight new Plaza floors and 11 structures are built and later demolished to make way for the next construction.  Structures became gradually larger and more robust during this time.  It is likely that the first ceremonial pyramid in the Structure 35 sequence (Structure 351) was built just to the west of the Main Trench area and was contemporaneous with level VIa.  Stela I was placed in the center of the plaza during phase XI, positioned immediately above the first mass grave from Phase V.  At the same time, the remains of 15 more individuals were interred together in Feature 128.  Some were bone bundles placed in the laps of full skeletons buried in seated positions (Hammond 1991).

The final phase consists of the construction of the last plaza floor which covers the previous structures.  Plaza Floor X abutts Structure 35, an Early Classic pyramid built atop Structure 350 (Hammond 1991).

Overall, the Main Trench excavations showed a progression which is becoming rather familiar:  Perishable structures build on the ground, followed by some buildings on low platforms, followed by some structures being built on higher platforms, leading to differentiation in household size, quality, and elaboration.  Ceremonial structures make their appearance after this societal inequality seems to develop.  Unfortunately, even with the Main Trench being as large as it is, the window into Cuello's past that it provided may not have been big enough.  While the configuration of the patio and following plaza changed over time, it remained basically the same:  multiple houses facing a shared open space.  Within the context of the Main Trench, it is not possible to detect larger changes in the overall settlement pattern at the site.

K’AXOB

A moderate-sized Maya settlement, K'axob is situated between Cerros and Cuello in northern Belize.  Excavations were performed over three field seasons ending in 1993, and all material in this section was obtained from a reconstruction by Patrica McAnany and Sandra López Varela (1999).

Operation 1 in Plaza B is the largest excavation unit in terms of area (6 by 8 meters), and provides evidence of continuous occupation from the Middle Formative to the Early Classic.  Phase I at Operation 1 is represented by 29 post holes in the ground surface, sherd-lined pits and firepits, and two burials accompanied by shell beads.  Phase I is associated with Chaakkax (800-400 B.C.) ceramics (as are phases II and III), part of the Mamom sphere.

The Phase II level contains the remains of an apsidal platform retained by a single course of stones, capped by a plastered floor and a wattle-and daub superstructure (Structure 1i).  Structure 4, which appears to be a kitchen, is attached to Structure 1i.  The associated middens contained a large quantity of cut/drilled shells in addition to substantial domestic refuse, and there were six associated burials.

Phase III showed that the floor of Structure 1i was re-plastered multiple times.  The associated burials were accompanied by shell beads and complete vessels.

Phases IV through VII showed several episodes of floor resurfacing for Structure 1i, and throughout these four phases, a number of single-phase structures are built and then disappear again.  The ceramics in these levels are early facet K'atabche'kax (400-200 B.C.), from the Chicanel sphere.

Phases VIIIa through VIIId are associated with late facet K'atabche'kax (200-50 B.C.), and feature many changes.  A new version of Structure 1i appears in the form of a rectangular platform with a multiple-course stone retaining wall.  The first cache known at the site was buried under the plaza West of this structure.  The toss zone around Structure 1i continues to reveal domestic refuse, but evidence of cooking is now absent.  Lastly, flexed and secondary burials completely replace extended burials. These are more labor intensive, and they were accompanied with significantly more elaborate grave goods.

At Operation 10, Phase I and II occupations were represented by plastered floors and some K'atabche'kax ceramics.  Later occupations in Phases III to V revealed the previous single residential structure has been replaced by a multi-dwelling complex with an interior plaza.   A unique three-stone cache was placed under the plaza floor.

The Middle Preclassic deposits of Operation 1 are the only pure Middle Preclassic material excavated at K'axob, making it likely that the settlement started in the area of Plaza B and expanded outward.  Within Operation 1, we see ground-level perishable structures at the earliest level, followed by a low apsidal platform supporting a perishable superstructure.  Later, the apsidal structure is replaced by a stone-walled, rectangular platform, yet it persists as a residential structure.  The familiar increase in architectural complexity over time is accompanied by a parallel increase in burial elaboration.

KOMCHEN

The Preclassic site of Komchen lies in the extreme northwest Yucatan.  The site was subject of an extensive survey and accompanying test excavations in 1980 (Ringle and Andrews V 1988).

While early facet Nabanche (600-450 B.C.) ceramics were encountered, there was no evidence for structures.  Ringle and Andrews (1988) attribute this to the likelihood that residences from this phase were perishable and built on the ground.

Six living surfaces were attributed to the Ek phase (450-350 B.C.).  Some were packed earth, but masonry lined platforms were also found (Ringle and Andrews V 1988).

Specific detail regarding the late facet of the Nabanche phase (350-150 B.C.) is lacking, but the survey data revealed this phase to have more Type 1 platforms (i.e., less than 40 square meters in area) than the subsequent phase, yet still had a large number of Type 2 mounds (greater than 40 m2).  Even so, the average mound size was notably smaller for the late Nabanche (Ringle and Andrews V 1988).

Some residential platforms in the Xculul phase (150 B.C. - A.D. 250) were round or oval, had stone foundations, opened onto a patio on a platform, but were quite small (around 17 m2).  Rectangular Typ 2 platforms were more numerous in this phase than in the earlier Nabanche phase, late facet (Ringle and Andrews V 1988).

A total of 505 mounds/platforms were mapped at Komchen, and test units were dug in 162 of them.  While the data gathered from such an endeavor can provide a big picture view of the entire settlement, it has not proved very useful in assessing residential patterns in detail.  Nevertheless, one can still catch a glimpse of the pattern seen at other Preclassic sites: ground-level structures in the earliest occupation, rounded low platforms next, giving way to rectangular house platforms retained by stone walls.  The authors (Ringle and Andrews V 1988) make of point of stating that they found no evidence for wards or barrios.

YAXHA-SACNAB

The Florida State Museum conducted settlement surveys in the area of Lakes Yaxhá and Sacnab in 1974.  861 mounds or platforms were mapped as part of the survey, and 204 of them were excavated (Rice 1976).

The earliest materials at the site are associated with early facet Ah Pam (700-600 B.C.), which is related to Eb at Tikal.  The lowest level of Mound 340, associated with Ah Pam, is a limestone mortar floor.  This early platform was on the East side of Plaza A, and featured a stair to a stone superstructure atop the platform. (Rice 1976).

Four platforms represent the late facet Ah Pam (600-500 B.C.), and are all taller than 50 cm, and Rice (1976) suggests they had a special function.  He posits that "it is probable that the residences were integrated around specialized construction of ceremonial or civic function."

During the Yancotil phase (500-250 B.C.), many platforms were built at Yaxhá-Sacnab.  Many are as low as 12 cm in height, while some approach 260 cm.  More than a dozen of them exceed a height of 70 cm.  Some of these platforms were larger, and likely not residential.  Mounds 742 and 738 are both over 40 m2 in area.  Rice (1976) estimates the construction volume for these two platforms at almost 10,000 cubic meters-- a sign that significant labor was available for public construction projects.

The survey identified seven minor centers at the site during the Middle Preclassic, 10 in the Late Preclassic, and then only eight still in use during the Early Classic.  Rice and Rice (1980) define "structure groups" as small groupings of 2-6 residential mounds, and identify nine such structure groups in the Middle Classic.  The number of these residential mound groups increases to 29 in the Late Preclassic, and expands to 43 by the Early Classic.  Population growth is seen throughout the Preclassic, even in the areas where minor centers are abandoned (Rice 1976).  This supports a model of authority shifting from a local ward to a regional center as the settlement grew.

DISCUSSION

The following residential sequence is observed at every site discussed:

1. The earliest houses are perishable structures, built on the ground.
2. Over time some perishable houses are built on top of low plastered platforms, but some continue to be built directly on the ground.
3. Later, even greater differences in house size, quality, and height become apparent as some houses are built upon platforms (often rectangular) retained by multiple-course stone walls.

Also, increasing differentiation in the size of houses and the amount of labor put into them is a likely clue to the emergence of elite families in these communities.  There’s no real surprise here—this same pattern holds across the entire Maya world.

Early on (probably before the emergence of elites), we also see some evidence of local community organization in the form of neighborhoods.  Of the sites discussed previously, Ceibal, Cerros, and Yaxhá-Sacnab show evidence of this.  At least 13 small peripheral temples were built within residential zones at Ceibal, implying local organization.   At Cerros, residential structures are re-arranged around a plaza in Stage III, a pattern interpreted by Cliff (1988) as a neighborhood.  The residential structure groups at Yaxhá-Sacnab are organized into minor centers which seem to function as wards.

Another pattern contributing to the local ward concept involves special-purpose structures observed at some of these sites, and at others.  Round platforms that do not seem to support residential structures begin to appear within residential zones, as noted earlier for Cuello (Str. 324) and Komchen (Str. 18J-3).  Similar structures have been found at Cahal Pech, Uaxactun, Altun Ha (Aimers et al. 2000), and Rio Azul (Hendon 1999),  and with the exception of Structures E and F at Uaxactun, the round structures are known to have been built among residential house mounds.  The specific features which were placed among residences are Structures 2-2^nd , 14, and 15 at Cahal Pech (Aimers et al. 2000), Structure 2 in operation 206 at Rio Azul (Hendon 1999), and Structure C-13-3^rd at Altun Ha (Hendon 1999).

Yet another pattern seen at Altar de Sacrificios, Blackman Eddy, and Cerros is the replacement of  elaborate (likely elite) residential platforms by non-residential public structures.  Increasing social inequality appears to have been expressed in the widening architectural differences.  That these elite families possessed economic influence is obvious.  It also seems likely that they acted as de facto leaders, exerting some general influence over the other members of their local community.  If so, the homes of these leaders would be seen as a physical focus within the ward.  As their influence grew and their larger role in the community became more formalized, it is a natural extension that the physical location of these leaders should become the public center of the neighborhood.

Similarly, many of the round platforms discussed above are replaced by pyramid platforms.  At Cahal Pech, the round platforms are later replaced by small temple pyramids (Aimers et al. 2000), and Hendon (1999) notes the same sequence at Cuello and at Altun Ha where C-13-3^rd is replaced by a four-sided temple platform.  William Ringle (1999) notes that small temples peppered the countryside at El Mirador, and believes that local temples “served as residential organizational nodes in the lowlands,” and were part of a multi-tiered hierarchy reporting to at a major ceremonial center in the area.  This same idea is echoed by Tourtellot (1988) regarding the temple network at Ceibal.

CONCLUSIONS

There is clear evidence for the existence of suprahousehold organizations at multiple Preclassic Maya sites, whether they are called wards, barrios, or neighborhoods.  It is not clear that these neighborhoods were always autonomous, and it seems likely that they often were not.  Even those sites where surging populations and growing differentiation fueled the evolution of a site hierarchy (such as the networks of minor temples seen at Ceibal and El Mirador, and the minor centers at Yaxhá-Sacnab) also revealed local residential groups organized via their own ceremonial center.  As more Preclassic sites are discovered and excavated, a clearer picture of residential organization in this formative time should emerge.

Cover Photo, Top: El Ceibal ruins. Photo by Chixoy, Wikimedia Commons.

About the Author

Pau Wren is an undergraduate student in Anthropology at Arizona State University, where he plans to graduate in August of 2011.  He served as an undergraduate research assistant to Dr. John F. Martin, and attended archaeological field schools in the American Southwest near Cortez, Colorado and Flagstaff, Arizona.

References Cited

Aimers, J. J.

2000 Preclassic Round Structures of the Upper Belize River Valley. Latin American Antiquity 11(1):71-86.

Cliff, M. B.
1988 Domestic architecture and origins of complex society at Cerros. In Household and Community in the Mesoamerican Past, edited by R. R. Wilk and W. Ashmore, pp. 199-225. Univ of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Cliff, M. B., and C. J. Crane
1989 Changing subsistence economy at a Late Preclassic Maya community. In Prehistoric Maya Economies of Belize, edited by P. McAnany and B. Isaac, pp. 195-324. JAI Press, Greenwich.

Düring, Bleda S., and A. Marciniak
2006 Households and Communities in the Central Anatolian Neolithic. Archaeological Dialogues 12(02):165-187.

Garber, J.
1989 Archaeology at Cerros, Belize, Central America, Volume 2. Southern Methodist University Press, Dallas.

Garber, J. F., M. K. Brown, J. J. Awe, and C. J. Hartman
2003 Middle Formative Prehistory of the Central Belize Valley. In The Ancient Maya of the Belize Valley: Half a Century of Archaeological Research, edited by J. F. Garber, pp. 25-47. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.

Garber, J. F., M. K. Brown, W. D. Driver, D. M. Glassman, C. J. Hartman, F. K. Reilly III, and L. A. Sullivan
2003 Archaeological Investigations at Blackman Eddy. In The Ancient Maya of the Belize Valley: Half a Century of Archaeological Research, edited by J. F. Garber, pp. 48-69. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.

Hammond, N.
1991 Cuello: An Early Maya Community in Belize. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Hendon, J.
1999 The Pre-classic Maya Compound as the Focus of Social Identity. In Social Patterns in Pre-classic Mesoamerica, edited by D. Grove and R, Joyce, pp. 97-125.  Dumbarton Oaks, Washington.

Lowell, Julie C.
1991 Prehistoric Households at Turkey Creek Pueblo, Arizona. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

McAnany, P. A., and S. L. López Varela
1999 Re-creating the formative Maya village of K'axob. Ancient Mesoamerica 10(01):147-168.

Rice, D. S.
1976 Middle Preclassic Maya Settlement in the Central Maya Lowlands. Journal of Field Archaeology 3(4):425-445.

Rice, D. S., and P. M. Rice
1980 The Northeast Petén Revisited. American Antiquity Washington, D.C. 45(3):432-454.

Ringle, W. M., and E. W. Andrews V
1988 Formative residences at Komchen, Yucatan, Mexico. In Household and Community in the Mesoamerican Past, edited by R. R. Wilk and W. Ashmore, pp. 171-197. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Robertson, R. A., and D. A. Freidel
1986 Archaeology at Cerros Belize, Central America. Southern Methodist University Press, Dallas.

Smith, A. L.
1972 Excavations at Altar de Sacrificios: Architecture, Settlement, Burials, and Caches. Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University Publications Department, Cambridge.

Tourtellot, G.
1988 Excavations at Seibal, Department of Peten, Guatemala: Peripheral Survey and Excavation: Settlement and Community Patterns. Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

Willey, G. R., I. Jay, and K. R. Collection
1973 The Altar de Sacrificios Excavations: General Summary and Conclusions. Peabody Museum, Cambridge.

By   Mon, May 09, 2011

By Julie Mushynsky

A particular site’s archaeological potential is difficult to determine without some knowledge of what archaeology is.  One of the most all encompassing definitions of archaeology comes from maritime archaeologist Johan Rönnby who explains that “[a]rchaeological writing differs from fiction because it is a dialogue between an author and real physical material remains” (1995:128 cited in Flatman 2003:144).  This dialogue can be considered as a question and answer process similar to Bowen’s (2008) detective analogy.  Bowen explains that at the scene of a crime, detectives ask questions of physical evidence and draw conclusions based on the merits of the evidence (2008:4).  In archaeology, questions are also asked of physical evidence until it becomes a question and answer dialogue between the author and object(s).  A good example of this is the study of shipwrecks.  Shipwrecks can be considered a great contributor to archaeological dialogue.  Firstly, researchers can glean a vast amount of information from the wreck itself.  A wreck can be classified cross-culturally almost always exhibiting a type of cultural signature from its morphology and its construction, often answering questions of origin and construction style.  The conversation can be extended by relating the wreck to other objects found on or around it, such as coins and ceramics (Ericson and Stickel 1973:357-358).  One can also gain information such as deposition dates, cultural contact and even answer questions regarding the cultural and psychological circumstances surrounding deposition (cf. Gibbs 2006:7-17).  Some physical remains can be better conversation partners than others and often physical evidence can be contradictory (Bowen 2008:4).  However, new questions can still be developed by relating objects to different perspectives or theories to further the dialogue.  For example, approaching objects from a maritime cultural landscape perspective can add dimension to an object often only viewed from land.  Ultimately, the more questions that can be asked and answered, the more the dialogue develops and the richer the archaeological research project can be.

Perhaps an often underused archaeological conversation partner is the irrigation system.  Irrigation systems may not normally be considered archaeologically fruitful and more a topic for agriculturalists.  However, there is some evidence that irrigation systems are worth studying and worthy of the term “heritage”.  One way, but certainly not the only way, to determine if a site has archaeological value is to have it on the UNESCO World Heritage List.  UNESCO operational guidelines indicate that sites given the title of “world heritage” have universal value in terms of history, art and science (UNESCO 2008:13).  Irrigation systems make their way on the list with the Oman aflaj irrigation systems, which date as far back as A.D. 500, and, in a somewhat indirect way, the rice terraces of the Philippine Cordilleras (UNESCO 2010).  Irrigation systems can have similar archaeological impacts when considered as part of the maritime cultural landscape of an area.  This essay examines the archaeological potential of irrigation systems as a site for contributing to the archaeological dialogue of maritime cultural landscapes and seascapes.  To do this, the essay examines a number of case studies including sites and techniques from South America, the Middle East and Asia.  This essay explains how irrigation systems are the physical remains that can provide scope and an understanding of human settlement patterns, cultural movement, social organization, religion and human technology.  This essay argues that irrigation systems are not only inland objects for farming areas, but also coastal systems and viable objects of research for maritime archaeology.  To conclude, the elements of this essay are brought together in a concluding discussion along with a brief comment on further potential for irrigation systems in maritime archaeology.    

Settlement Patterns and Cultural Movement

Irrigation systems have a number of human-made and visible landscape features for potential analysis including canals, quarries, wells, ancient routes, and cultivation sites, to name a few (Wilkinson 1998:64).  A number of studies indicate that these features of irrigation systems can have distinct cultural signatures.  J.C. Wilkinson’s (1998) book on the irrigation systems of Oman describes the features and techniques in this region.  In Oman, there exist two different types of systems referred to as aflaj for exploiting water resources; the ghayl aflaj, and qanat aflaj.  Although much more complex than what is described here, essentially a ghayl aflaj is a channel or canal that takes water from the surface layers of valleys and mountain wadis to gardens.  These canals are the primary means of distributing water to small interior villages.  The qanat aflaj taps into underground water supplies, such as wells sunk into aquifers, and then run underground stretching kilometres in length.  By analysing and tracing the qanat, archaeologists are able to develop a dialogue concerning cultural movement and influence.  The origins of the qanat technique is dated to be in the first or second millennium B.C. from northern Elburz and Armenia and first adopted by Tehran and Qazwin (Wilkinson 1977:73-76).  The first major spread of the qanats was associated with the Achaemanids, who used them extensively to colonize new land throughout their empire (Goblot 1963 cited in Wilkinson 1977:76).  Qanats then made their way into Arabia and Oman between the sixth century B.C. and the seventh century A.D. (Lightfoot 2000:224).  There are even slight structural differences that appear in the same technique.  For example, baked clay hoops were used to reinforce Persia’s qanat structure, but were not found as part of the construction in Oman (Wilkinson 1977:80). 

Butzer et al’s (1985) study is an elaborate one developed to measure how irrigation systems can be used to examine cultural change and adaptation.  Butzer et al identify a number of techniques used for irrigation in Eastern Spain and examine whether they are from Roman or Islamic origins.  Some of these techniques include the Archimedean screw primarily used in Egypt, the shaduf from Mesopotamia, the Persian waterwheel, the current-wheel, and Persian qanats.  By analysing irrigation features and historical accounts, the authors were able to determine the diffusion of Islamic irrigation techniques into Spain.  The authors describe the change in Spanish irrigation from Roman to Islamic methods as evolutionary, not revolutionary, as Spain first used Roman techniques for agriculture and then adapted these with Islamic methods to increase efficiency.  Interestingly, after incorporating Islamic irrigation techniques, there was a subsequent revival of Roman modes of irrigation (Butzer et al 1985:481-501, 503-504).  The analysis was able to shed light on contact periods in Europe as well as forms of cultural adaptation.     

Similarly, Lansing’s (1991) extensive study of Balinese irrigation systems identifies differences between the Balinese and the Javanese systems.  Expansion of irrigation in Bali according to archaeologists began in the first millennium A.D. and went from manipulating coastal swamps for local crops of taro, bananas and rice to kilometre-long systems of irrigation tunnels managed for rice crops.  The irrigation system used for rice crops in Bali is known as the subak system of local level irrigation control.  The system begins by capturing the flow from high level, rapid flowing rivers and streams.  Weirs, shunts and dams are strategically constructed along the water source to divert water into canals and down the steep landscape, eventually submerging large blocks of rice terraces.  The whole water system physically connects crops and the farmers who own land watered by a common source.  These groups of connected farmers are known as subaks.  The main identifier of the Balinese system in Lansing’s study is the interconnectedness of canals and the existence of water temples.  Subak water temples are erected to commemorate where water originates, either at the spring, river, lake or weir and to assist in the control of water.  The subak system never developed in neighbouring Java, where irrigation systems are built on gently sloping land.  In the first millennium A.D., approximately 80 percent of the Javanese settlements were in close proximity to rivers.  Thus, the Javanese systems were managed by and constructed for smaller autonomous villages and communities who did not rely on a large interconnected system of irrigation like Bali (Lansing 1991:37, 48; Lansing 2006:24-25, 32-34, 42-47, 52).

In terms of settlement patterns, Wilkinson argues that access to fresh water resources has above all determined settlement patterns in Oman.  Fresh water in Oman was synonymous with life.  The bedu of Oman refer to rain as haya, which means life, and personal greetings often included asking “have you life in your area?” (Wilkinson 1977:38).  It may be somewhat obvious that most inland agriculturalists would choose to settle near irrigation systems or some type of water source.  However, the open irrigation systems and drainage basins determine the settlement patterns on Oman’s Batina coast as well.  At the northern and southern tips of the Oman mountain range, the mountains drop straight into the ocean.  However, settlement patterns at either end are very different.  In the north there is only one settlement of significance due to the small wadi and fresh water storage: a less exploitable water source.  In the south, the exploitable drainage basins are much larger and thus, there are a number of settlements surrounding the wadi mouth, some which have become sizable ports.  The ideal place for crops on the southern tip is where the wind blows marine salt particles which meet with the fresh water irrigation systems (Wilkinson 1977:32-36, 47-49).  Not only are settlement patterns surrounding exploitable water sources for irrigation valuable for archaeological dialogue, but these coastal settlement areas also may be potential sites for maritime archaeologists to consider.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________           

The ancient city of Angkor sat at the center of the once powerful Khmer Empire of Southeast Asia. Located north of Tonle Sap Lake in Cambodia, the capital city flourished between the 9th and 15th centuries. The royal family abandoned the city in the 15th century, and the city was swallowed by the surrounding jungle, though never entirely abandoned. Now a World Heritage Site, the ruins of the ancient city cover some 400 square kilometers. Angkor has been called one of the most important archeological sites in Southeast Asia by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), and the vestige of its prosperity can be found in the Angkor ruins.

Perhaps the most famous site in Angkor is Angkor Wat, a vast temple complex built by Suryayarman II in the early 12th century to honor the Hindu god Vishnu. The temple complex is clearly visible in the above image as the small black frame just below the image center. The frame is created by a 190-meter wide causeway (of water), which encircles three galleries and five central shrines that tower up to 65 meters. The entire complex occupies an area of 1.5 x 1.3 kilometers.

To the north of Angkor Wat is the larger square of Angkor Thom, the inner royal city built in the 12th century. The now dry moat around Angkor Thom is still visible as a pale pink square cut through the surrounding green vegetation. Within the square is a palace, homes for priests and government officials, and government administration buildings.

West of Angkor Thom is the vast Western Baray, a reservoir built in the 11th century. The earthen walls constructed to hold water form a perfect rectangle, oriented exactly east-west. It is thought that the Western Baray and its predecessor, the Eastern Baray, were built to provide water to the city, control water levels on the Siem Reap River, and provide irrigation water to the surrounding plain. Though filled with silt today, the smaller Eastern Baray is also visible in this image. Its earthen walls form a 1.8 by 7.5 kilometer rectangle east of Angkor Thom. Constructed in the 9th Century, the Eastern Baray was probably about 3 meters deep and held an estimated 37.2 million cubic meters of water.

The simulated natural color image was acquired on February 17, 2004, by the Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer (ASTER) on NASA’s Terra satellite. It is centered near 13.4 degrees North latitude, 103.9 degrees East longitude, and covers an area of 22.4 x 29.9 km. In this image, water is black and blue, vegetation is bright green, and bare earth is pink.

NASA image created by Jesse Allen, Earth Observatory, using data provided courstesy of NASA/GSFC/METI/ERSDAC/JAROS, and the U.S./Japan ASTER Science Team.

Source: Photo NASA; Caption Text: Wikimedia Commons

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Social Organization and Religion

In describing archaeology, Mortimer Wheeler explains that, “archaeology is digging up, not things, but people” (Wheeler 1954 cited in Flatman 2003:147).  The presentation of data is just not enough.  Archaeology must address the way “social interactions involving people and objects create meaning” (Gosden and Marshall 1999:169; Kopytoff 1986; Ingold1990:6-7; Pfaffenberger 1992; Conneller 1999 cited in Flatman 2003:147).  Lansing’s research explains how the components of irrigation systems create meaning for the Balinese by serving as a basis for Balinese social organization and religion.  The subak system, briefly explained above is not about the canals that distribute the water, but about the social organization of the system that relies on the hierarchy of subak temples and on what Lansing calls “hydrological interdependency” (1991:38, 48).  Lansing explains that the social organization of Balinese rice farmers is dictated by water temples and is completely separate from the state.  The organization of both temples and subaks is hierarchical, both physically and socially.  Master water temples, located at the highest elevation, are sites for organizing irrigation calendars and the creation of new subaks.  New subak members with new crops must make the pilgrimage up to the master temple to receive blessings from the gods.  High priests, also found at the master water temple, are considered irrigation experts and monitor and control all canal and tunnel building.  As the water flows down, smaller subak temples are erected where groups of farmers are connected by a common water source.  Periodically, representatives from each subak meet at the commemorative water temple to set cropping patterns and irrigation schedules and discuss rules of the planting season.  At a more local level, the Balinese system is an interconnected, interdependent system where each group of farmers relies on those living at higher elevations to shunt water properly allowing it to flow down to lower lying, more coastal crops.  It is this reliance that characterizes subaks as cooperative social institutions bound and organized by the components of their irrigation systems.  The water temples become physical and symbolic sites for determining economic roles for production and determining social roles in an interconnected system (Lansing 1987:330, 335-338; Lansing 1991: 44-45, 38-48, 128; Lansing 2006:47- 48). 

Lansing’s study also examines water temples as places for ritual.  Each water temple is home to a number of shrines: one for the temple’s principle deity as well as others for related gods.  Offerings are made to these shrines to ensure that each irrigation component and the flow of water are controlled by the temple’s god.  Controlling water is extremely important, as only controlled water can promote growth or bear away impurities.  Each subak temple “creates” its own holy water, known as tirtha, from upstream sources through the rituals performed at the temples.  Tirtha is considered sacred and serves to culminate the relations between the ancestral and natural worlds.  It is evoked from the ancestors and serves as nutrients for crops and is often used for a number of rites of passage, ceremonies, blessings and personal offerings to ancestors.  Tirtha is so important to the Balinese farmers that eventually, the religion of Bali became known as the religion of tirtha (Lansing 1991: 52-54, 64, 128; Lansing 2006:51-52).  It is clear that the Balinese irrigation system is much more complex than simply a system of canals.  It is a system of irrigation and society.               

Human Technology and Traditional Knowledge

The way irrigation systems are constructed can say much about human ingenuity and traditional knowledge.  A good example is Farrington’s study of Peruvian irrigation systems.  Farrington’s study analyses the precise engineering of the Peruvian continuous flow system by calculating velocity, discharge and critical flow.  He explains that continuous flow systems, where regulation occurs at intake only, must be built to carry specific amounts of water at certain velocities in order for them to be efficient (Farrington 1980:290).  By excavating sections of supply canals, Farrington states that the prehistoric canal is “an artefact that serves as a testimony to the understanding prehistoric farmers had of open channel hydraulics and the hydrology of their farming system” (1980:302).  When analysing the floors of the Quishuarpata canals in southern Peru, he found that they were fitted, granite slabs, with bevelled edges.  The depths of the bevelled edges fell between one and three centimetres and produce a slightly roughened, irregularly fitted surface.  Farrington explains that the series of bevelled indentations across the canal bottom inevitably causes turbulence within the canal flow and thus serves to reduce velocity.  Farrington also finds evidence that the prehistoric engineer went to great lengths to construct tall aqueducts against hillsides or across valleys in order to maintain a gentle gradient and eliminate heavy erosion and scour.  By mathematically calculating velocity and discharge, and considering the slope of the landscape, Farrington argues that the prehistoric engineer must have recognized sophisticated formulas to determine slope, hydraulic properties and spillage, in order for them to adapt their constructions and accommodate the problems introduced by the Peruvian landscape (Farrington 1980:290, 295-302).     

Human ingenuity is also evident in how the Balinese create artificial ecosystems for their rice crops.  The Balinese irrigation systems rely on the flow of seasonal rivers, lakes and springs, not on stored water from tanks or dams.  During the wet season, river flow can be ten times greater than what flows during the dry season.  No matter the season or the intensity of water flow, the Balinese create and maintain nutrient pulses of wet and dry periods for their crops.  Pulses are created by systematically shunting the flow of water to flood large blocks of rice terraces, while leaving other large areas dry.  During the rainy seasons when water is abundant, the excess water is simply returned to a neighbouring stream.  The purpose of pulsing the flooding of rice paddies is to create a more productive system than what can be created by a steady, unchanged water and nutrient flow.  For example, both potassium and phosphorous are very important for rice growth, but the rate of production of both chemicals occur in different environments; potassium production is ideal during the dry period, while phosphorous production increases when submerged.  Pulsing allows the sufficient production of both by alternating wet and dry periods.  Pulsing also stabilizes soil temperature and promotes the activity of valuable microorganisms.  What is particularly ingenious about pulsing is that it is one of the best ways to control pests.  Pest control is achieved by large groups of farmers coming together to cooperate and coordinate the flooding and burning of fields.  If only one farmer tries to reduce pests and does not coordinate with the surrounding farmers, pests will simply migrate from one field to the next.  Farmers also synchronize their schedules depending on the type of pest they want to get rid of.  Some rice terraces in Bali have been under cultivation for more than a millennium, which suggests that perhaps the successful cycle of wet-dry phases has been practiced for some time.  Surprisingly, rice scientists were unaware of this technique until quite recently (Lansing 1991:38-40).  By studying these methods of water manipulation archaeologists can gain insights not only about human ingenuity, but also farming practices, traditional knowledge, territoriality and technology.   

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The Nile and its irrigated floodplain in the vicinity of Luxor, Egypt. Irrigation, the gift of the Nile, defined in part the very existence of the ancient Egyptian civilization. Wikimedia Commons

 ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Conclusion

This essay shows that irrigation systems can have great potential for exploring the past and past cultures by contributing to the archaeological dialogue of the maritime cultural landscape and seascape.  Cultural movement, settlement and adaptation can be traced and documented by analysing some of the cultural markers and features systems have, as discussed in the Middle Eastern, Spanish and Indonesian cases.  Settlement patterns can also be determined by access to exploitable water supplies both inland and on the coast, as seen in the example of Oman.  Both the cultural markers and settlement patterns serve as valuable information for the archaeological record.  The Balinese study provides excellent information on how irrigation systems can help explain social organization, ritual and religion.  The Balinese study is a great example of examining archaeology from a more emic, seascape perspective, only in this essay the dialogue on seascapes includes more than cultural perceptions on and relationships with seawater, it includes water from all sources.  Similar to fish traps, irrigation systems and their features can be difficult to identify, especially when systems are unlined, dug out tunnels and canals in the landscape, with no lasting inorganic material.  However, as shown with the Balinese system, irrigations systems can be studied in relation to other items or components, such as water temples and shrines.  This proves to have great potential for understanding human behaviour and beliefs.  Human ingenuity and traditional knowledge can also be ascertained from the structure and strategic planning of systems evident in the technological sophistication needed in Peru and the artificial ecology constructed by the Balinese.  What is of particular importance for maritime archaeology and the maritime cultural landscape is that all the cases explained above can arguably be understood as analysing water-based cultures (Bowen 2008:8; Flatman 2003:146; Westerdahl 1992:5-6).  Like fish traps and many forms of maritime infrastructure, irrigation system constructions are ways of exploiting marine resources and are examples of human utilization of water and maritime space, including lakes and rivers (Westerdahl 1992:5).  For the Balinese, the ability to collectively control water is the basis for social organization and governance.  The Balinese in particular use water to actively shape their identities and sense of place socially, economically and spiritually in a type of hydraulic solidarity (Cooney 2003:323, Lansing 1991:52; McNiven 2003:332-333).              

At a time when the chances of participating in a shipwreck excavation have decreased (Sperry 2009:24), other avenues for exploration are important for maritime archaeologists.  This essay is by no means an exhaustive attempt at analysing the archaeological potential of irrigation systems.  Some further research possibilities could be looking at water intake sites at rivers or lakes and their coastal features as possible structures used for navigation.  Irrigation systems and their relationship to other objects found around them could be further explored.  The presence of Hellenistic potsherds and Late Bronze Age/Iron Age pottery associated with irrigation systems surrounding the Euphrates River (Wilkinson 1998:63, 67, 77) is an example of a site worthy of further analysis.  A more in depth look is needed in connecting irrigation systems and riverscapes especially regarding social practices and interactions between groups settled along lengthy irrigation canals.  Another avenue of exploration could be economic relationships, analysing systems as meeting points of the maritime and agricultural worlds (Esser 1999:19).  By incorporating all potential areas, the archaeological conversation of irrigation systems could turn towards defining a “life-scape” (Flatman 2003:151; Hviding 1996:50, 55-56, 74, 167), where every person identifies as dependent on both land and water for livelihood.

Cover Photo, Top: A Persian Waterwheel. Wikimedia Commons

About the Author

Originally from Canada, Julie Mushynsky is currently a Masters student at Flinders University in South Australia.  Her undergraduate background is in socio-cultural anthropology.  For her masters degree she is conducting research into indigenous seascapes, maritime archaeology and commuity archaeology in Saipan, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.  

________________________________________________________

REFERENCES CITED

Bowen, Amanda

2008 Underwater Archaeology: the NAS Guide to Principles and Practice. 2^nd Edition. Wiley-Blackwell, London.

Butzer, Karl W., Juan F. Mateu, Elisabeth K. Butzer, and Pavel Kraus

1985 Irrigation Agrosystems in Eastern Spain: Roman or Islamic Origins? Annals of the Association of American Geographers 75(4): 479-509.

Cooney, Gabriel

2003 Introduction: Seeing Land from Sea. World Archaeology 35(3): 323-328.

Ericson , Jonathon, E. and E. Gary Stickel

1973 A Proposed Classification System for Ceramics. World Archaeology 4(3): 357-367.

Esser, Kimberly

1999 Inland Waterways of the California Delta: Identifying and Managing a Maritime Landscape. In Underwater Archaeology, (eds) Adriane Askins Neidlinger and Matthew A. Russell, Society for Historical Archaeology, Uniontown, Pennsylvania.

Farrington, I.S.

1980 The Archaeology of Irrigation Canals, With Special Reference to Peru. World Archaeology 11(3): 287-305.

Flatman, Joe

2003 Cultural Biographies, Cognitive Landscapes and Dirty Old Bits of Boat: ‘Theory’ in Maritime Archaeology. The International Journal of Nautical Archaeology 32(2): 143-157. 

Gibbs, Martin

2006 Cultural Site Formation Processes in Maritime Archaeology: Disaster Response, Salvage and Muckelroy 30 Years On. The International Journal of Nautical Archaeology 35(1): 4-19.

Gumerman, G.J., and David A. Phillips, Jr.

1978 Archaeology Beyond Anthropology. American Antiquity 43(2): 184-191.

Hviding, Edvard

1996 Guardians of Marovo Lagoon: Practice, Place, and Politics in Maritime Melanesia. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu.  

Lansing, J.S.

1987 Balinese “Water Temples” and the Management of Irrigation. American Anthropologist 89(2): 326-341.

Lansing, J. S.

2006 Perfect Order: Recognizing Complexity in Bali. Princeton, Princeton University Press. 

Lansing, J.S.

1991 Priests and Programmers: Technologies of Power in the Engineered Landscape of Bali. Princeton, Princeton University Press. 

Lightfoot, Dale R.

2000 The Origin and Diffusion of Qanats in Arabia: New Evidence from the Northern and Southern Peninsula. The Geographical Journal 166(3): 215-226. 

McNiven, Ian J.

2003 Saltwater People: Spiritscapes, Maritime Rituals and the Archaeology of Australian Indigenous Seascapes.  World Archaeology 35(3): 329-349.

Sperry, Joel

2009 More Than Meets the Eyes?: Archaeology Under Water, Technology, and Interpretation. Public Archaeology 8(1): 20-34.

Westerdahl, Christer

1992 The Maritime Cultural Landscape. The International Journal of Nautical Archaeology 21(1): 5-14.

Wilkinson, J.C.

1977 Water and Tribal Settlement in South-East Arabia. Oxford, Oxford University Press. 

Wilkinson, T.J.

1998 Water and Human Settlement in the Balikh Valley, Syria: Investigations from 1992 – 1995. Journal of Field Archaeology 25(1): 63-87.

UNESCO World Heritage Centre

2008 Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention. Electronic document, http://whc.unesco.org/archive/opguide08-en.pdf, accessed October 14, 2010.

UNESCO World Heritage Centre

2010 World Heritage List. Electronic document, http://whc.unesco.org/en/list, accessed October 14, 2010.

By Michele Stopera Freyhauf   Wed, May 04, 2011

There has not been “an incident in Byzantine history with which the church of St. Sophia is not associated.”[1]  Hagia Sophia represents the very essence of the history of Turkey and the continuous transformation it has undergone throughout the ages and even today.[2]   Turkey, and especially Istanbul, the former Constantinople, is a country of great importance, transition, and rich cultural history.  Hagia Sophia encapsulates all of these traits and stands as a visual testimony to the history of the region.  Once a great symbol of Christianity, it demonstrated superiority over pagan religions and political alliance with its use of spolia.  Through conquest, it became a representation of dominance and legitimization of Islam to the world.  Upon the secularization of the country, Hagia Sophia became a Museum to both Christianity and Islam.  As the country and museum try to interpret the balance of religion, both are frozen in time, unable to complete their ultimate goal of balancing these faiths.  In Hagia Sophia, the scaffolding stands as a symbol of stalled progress in the restoration of Hagia Sophia.  For Turkey, this is represented by the continued passage of laws that restrict the very religious freedom that the country purports to have.

Hagia Sophia: Brief Historical Background

Originally built by Constantine the Great, the first Christian Emperor, Hagia Sophia was a grand symbol of Christianity to the world.  Constantine wanted to make Constantinople the New Rome with Hagia Sophia, known then as Megale Ekklesia (“Great Church”), the seat of Christianity.  This dream would ultimately lay the groundwork that eventually divided the Western and Eastern Church; a division that still exists today.[3]

Constantine’s Church was destroyed; it is unknown how.  The original structure was either destroyed because of earthquakes or because it was deemed to be too small by Constantinius II, Constantine’s son.[4]  What is known is that Constantinius and the Emperor Theodosius the Great rebuilt the church with more magnificence in 360 CE.   It served as the cathedral or Bishop’s seat of the city.  In approximately 430 CE, the name was officially changed to Hagia Sophia or Church of Divine Wisdom.[5] 

Constantinius’s church was pillaged and destroyed with fire during the Nika riots January 13-14, 532 CE.[6]  Several fragments of this second church survived and can be seen today in the garden (Image Right).[7]  February 23, 532 CE, the Emperor Justinian started to rebuild the Church. It was to be larger and more majestic then the previous structures.  Justinian hired Isidorus and Anthemius, who designed the SS Sergius and Bacchus.[8] Justinian succeeded in his quest and the Church was dedicated December 27, 537 CE.  The same structure still stands today, next to the Hagia Irene, just across from the Blue Mosque in modern day Istanbul.

With the conquest of Constantinople by Sultan Mehmet II, Hagia Sophia Church became a Mosque.  Minarets were added and all graven images were plastered over.  It was the center of his Empire and the place where important ceremonies took place.  It stood as a monument and mosque for about five hundred years until 1935, when the first Turkish President and the founder of the Republic of Turkey, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, secularized not only the nation, but also the Hagia Sophia. 

Hagia Sophia contains artifacts that memorialize Turkey’s vast and rich history that date back before the time of Constantine.  These artifacts and fragments came from all over the Empire and beyond.  Fragments and artifacts from pagan temples, allied countries, and conquered nations were incorporated into the building with purpose and intent.  Historians call the artifacts and fragments incorporated into the structure spolia.  The Ottomans used spolia in the construction of their buildings throughout the Empire.  Spolia relates meaning in the way the stones and artifacts are incorporated into the structure.  It was a way of telling a visual story.

Spolia: Stories in Stones

Spolia is the fragments, columns, and stones from buildings, religious medallions, and statues taken from conquered or allied nations.  It is not re-use or recycling in the way a person living in the twenty-first century would understand; the intentional reducing of one’s carbon footprint.  This notion has no place in antiquity.  While examples exist that show the reuse of stones in buildings because of convenience and fit, the use of stones and columns from foreign temples or churches were used with the intention of making a statement of domination or political legitimization.[9] 

Spolia is derived from the Latin word for “spoils” and is commonly associated with the traditional concept of “spoils of war” or “booty” that one would receive after conquest.[10]  Art Historians use this term differently.  They apply spolia to architecture and analyze how stones or other artifacts are reused and incorporated into new structures.[11]   Six reasons have been identified for using spolia into newer structures:[12]

1. Pragmatic
2. Profanation
3. Interpretatio Christiana
4. Legitimatization of Power
5. Admiration of Antiquity
6. Aesthetical Appreciation

Interpretation of spolia can be fundamentally ambiguous and open to numerous interpretations.  The following questions could be asked:

1. Is the reuse simply out of convenience or is it a preservation and incorporation of past memories or identities of the cultures? 
2. Is the use of spolia a sign of conquest and superiority? 
3. Was the architect or ruler making a statement of religious or political legitimatization?

Depending on the era, the background and influences of the architect or ruler, type of building, and type of spolia used, any of these questions could be answered and many different theories may evolve.  To fully understand what was being said through re-use, an interdisciplinary approach of examining the information must be undertaken.  By taking into account religious, historical, rhetorical, and political elements, speculations of ambiguity may be cleared up.[13]   For example, to acquire spolia from the imperial capital shows an alignment with imperial status and grandeur; a political legitimatization.[14]   A different examination of spolia within a historical context may show that remnants from an imperial capital might be put on display as a show of conquest and superior power. Yet, another may incorporate the ruins as a Temple to be a display of religious superiority. 

The use of spolia began when ancient Rome declined and the reign of Constantine began.   This practice continued throughout the Middle Ages.[15]  Most Byzantine buildings are constructed mostly out of spolia.[16]  Between 313 and 315 CE, Constantine was the first to create a great structure out of spolia; the Arch of Constantinople.[17]  This arch has eight medallions that display scenes of hunting and sacrifice from the time of Hadrian that dates about 200 years prior to Constantine.[18]  Eight panels display the victories of Marcus Aurelius from about 176 CE.[19]  Another portion, partially restored, were statues of Dacian captives that came from the Forum of Trajan attributed to the time of Domitian.[20]  This Arch also had old sculptures and roundels where the faces of old were removed and the likeness of Constantine with a halo around his head were carved in its place.[21]  This incorporated Christian iconography into the Arch and gave the Emperor a sacredness that signified divinity.[22]

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The Arch of Constantinople

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The Arch of Constantine, showing the locations of spolia representing emperors of the Roman Empire's past.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Applying the reasons for utilization of spolia in the Arch, two schools of thought exist.  The first is the development of a “language of power” which displayed Ottoman domination.[23] The other is an expression of integration or a connection to the past.[24]  Incorporating the sculptural adornments of the great second century emperors into “his own arch” served as a public affirmation and political validation that Constantine was the Empire’s embodiment of the past rulers and legitimate successor.[25]   The dedication of the Arch by the Senate in 315 CE, the tenth anniversary of the emperor's reign, commemorated “the victory of Constantine over Maxentius at the Battle of Milvian Bridge in AD 312 for sole control of the Roman Empire in the west.”[26]

Constantine’s use of spolia in the Arch, along with the timing of the dedication, made a statement of political validation and might.  It stood prominently as a monument and reminder for all who passed by.  In this case and in the case of the Hagia Sophia, placement and use of spolia was done with purpose and intent; nothing was random.  Every placement and every stone used had a meaning. 

From Paganism to Christianity:  A Story of Superiority and Grandeur

When Emperor Justinian I rebuilt Hagia Sophia between 532 and 537 CE, it was built with the grandeur to make a statement to the world; Christianity trumps paganism.[27]  To Justinian, the Great Church of Holy Wisdom “symbolized the place of the empire in the divine scheme of things” and it had to be rebuilt with great splendor.[28]  This was so important that Justinian spent almost the entire treasury on its reconstruction.  He wanted the Church to stand as a “symbol of glory for the Byzantine Empire and the largest Church of Christendom in the world.”[29] A Church that would be the greatest building erected to “the Glory of God,” even surpassing King Solomon.[30] The Church was also to become a testimonial to proclaim Justinian’s greatness to the world.[31] Justinian succeeded in his quest, at a tremendous cost. Hagia Sophia ultimately became Christendom’s greatest and most celebrated church.[32]  It stood in Constantinople, the Byzantine capital, for about a thousand years, as the seat of the Orthodox Patriarchy where Church councils met and imperial ceremonies were held.[33]  

While the building itself made a statement of grandeur, the material used in constructing Justinian’s Church made an assertion of Christian dominance over paganism and political legitimization.  Remnants from temples, columns, and stone were used from all over the empire.  Columns were even imported from Rome, which became a visual affirmation of political legitimacy with the Empire.[34]  Spolia and pillars of ancient temples were also incorporated into the walls of the structure.[35]  Pillars and arches from the Temple of the Sun from Baalbek, famous Temple of Artemis from Ephesus, Delian Apollo of Minerva from Athens, and Temple of Cybele from Cyzicus were incorporated into the Church’s structure.[36]  The pieces from pagan temples were incorporated into the Hagia Sophia as a means of incorporating cultural memory of its past and showing it now under the control and authority of the Christians; “a political statement of Christian hegemony.”[37] 

A statement of Christian domination over paganism was displayed with a medallion that had the face of Medusa embedded in its walls.[38]  It was placed in a prominent placement where visitors would encounter the medallion when entering the church.[39]    Another item of significance incorporated into the Church was a set of Bronze doors located at the exit to the south and partially embedded in the floor that date back to the 2^nd century BCE.  The doors are believed to have been the doors that were on a pagan temple in Tarsus.[40]

Four columns, distinct in nature, have matching monoliths with fluted bases and basket-style capitals made of proconnesian marble came from the imperial capital and from the Temple of the Sun itself (Image Right).[41]  The incorporation of these columns into the structure of the Hagia Sophia became a strong political statement.[42]  It expressed an alliance with Rome, and gave political legitimization to Constantinople.[43]

Another column, known as the “weeping column” has many legends that surround it (Image Below).[44]  This column is originally from the Temple of Artemis in Ephesus and stands in the northern corner of the church.  It is made of white marble with a bronze belt that circles the lower part of the column.[45]  There is a hole in the column that water drops come out of.  Because of this, people believe the column was weeping and it has been associated with miracles.  Visitors today come for the sole reason of sticking their finger in that hole of the pillar and praying for a miracle.  The irony is that while this is a column in a Christian structure meant to provide miracles for the faithful who pilgrimage there in search of a miracle, the column is from a pagan temple.

As Justinian intended, Hagia Sophia sat as the seat of the orthodox Patriarch of Constantinople and principal setting for Byzantine imperial ceremonies.[46]  It sat as the largest Cathedral in Christendom for one thousand years.[47]  It was a great statement and memorialized the grandeur and importance of Christianity; something that also made it a great target of conquest.

From Christian Church to Islamic Mosque:  A Story of Conquest and Legacy

May 29, 1453 CE, the Ottomans conquered Constantinople under Sultan Mehmet II.  His first official act was to convert the Church of Hagia Sophia into a Mosque.[48]  It stood as the principal mosque of Istanbul for five hundred years and became the model for many of the Ottoman Mosques built after the conquest.[49] He wanted to perform an act that would be a “symbolic refounding of the city” and would establish himself as a great and powerful Byzantine leader, like Constantine and Justinian.[50]  Mehmet even tried to mimic Alexander the Great and took great pains to “compare symbolic acts in his history of conquest.”[51]  With the conversion of the Hagia Sophia to a Mosque, the covering of Christian icons and the desecration of crosses, he made a statement to the world.   Hagia Sophia became a “symbolic monument of conquest and domination.”[52] In Christian eyes, Hagia Sophia became a standing monument of “Christian defeat, the sense of which is perpetuated and embittered by the preservation of its ancient but desecrated name.”[53]

With this conversion to a mosque, Muslim and Ottoman symbols, which can still be seen today, were added.  A wooden minaret was added as well as a mihrab that faced Mecca and minbar (See Images Below).[54] Also added were sacred relics and battle trophies.[55]  Much of the Christian original was left in tact, which gave it a transitional appearance.  Because of Islamic prohibition against graven images, the mosaics had to be removed.  Because of Mehmet’s sense of history and art, he did not want them destroyed so they were covered over with plaster.[56]  Mehmet was intent on making a statement of conquest but he wanted to respect the history and culture associated with the structure.  Besides imitating Alexander in his appreciation of culture and history, Mehmet too had a “scholar’s interest on historic authenticity.”[57]   Something that could be seen in the city walls of Constantinople, after the Ottoman conquest, and preserved “even when the subject matter was overtly Christian.”[58] 

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ascetic changes made and additions of furnishings and rugs helped give the appearance of a mosque, however, in order for it to become a royal mosque, some event had to occur in the past that associated the structure with the Prophet of Islam.[59]  Ottoman legend was created from historical texts that interwove historical facts and myths to satisfy this requirement.[60] Two such legends exist.  The first legend is about the half-dome of the apse.  It is said that this collapsed on the night of the Prophet Mohammed’s birth and it could only be rebuilt from the sand of Mecca, water from the well of Zamzam,[61] and saliva from the prophet’s mouth.[62] The second legend attempted to strip Christian associations from the building of this structure by stating that the building was constructed from spolia of Solomon’s Temple on a site originally sanctified by him.[63]  The final element to establish Hagia Sophia as a mosque was the handing over of the relic, the gold cased tibia and occiptal bones of John the Baptist, to the Empire (Image Below).[64]  John the Baptist, a sacred prophet of Islam, validated Islam over Christianity in the Empire and helped to reinforce the proper conversion of Hagia Sophia as a Mosque; a grand mosque that stood for almost five hundred years.[65]

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

From Islamic Mosque back to Museum:  A Story of Stalled Secularism

With the rise of secularism in Turkey, in 1935, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the founder of modern-day Turkey, made a symbolic statement by making Hagia Sophia a museum and restoring the Christian Murals that stood side-by-side with the Koranic verses (First Image Below).[66]  The existence of the mosaics were known, thanks to the records the Fossati brothers who discovered them when recording and cleaning.  Plaster stayed over the mosaics for quite sometime and the building was allowed to stand is disrepair (Second Image Below).  The slowness of the restoration and the disrepair the structure has fallen into is controversial.  Visitors today, some seventy-five years after its secularization, see a work in progress that seems almost frozen in time and incomplete.  Some believe that restoration has stopped due to funding.  The Ecumenical Patriarch of Greek Orthodox Church claimed that the Turkish government refused monetary assistance from them to complete the restoration of the Hagia Sophia.[67] 

With the refusal of assistance from the church, speculation further exists that restoration work has been purposely slowed or stalled because of its significance to the Greek Orthodox Church.[68]  However if assistance is taken from the Church, then an obligation exists to restore Hagia Sophia to its original Christian form and thus destroying Islamic art and part of their heritage.  The restorers have a difficult job in trying to balance the Christian and Muslim features in the Hagia Sophia so that it stands as a museum that testifies to its entire history.  As Christian icons are uncovered and restored, it is done at the expense of destroying Islamic Art.

There are two other issues that prevail in the restoration the process; the caliphs around the dome and the purported mosaic of Christ as Master of the World hidden under the Islamic calligraphy on the Home.  The caliphs on the Dome are very controversial because of their over-bearing size (Image Below).  One reason for not removing the caliphs is because of their size and that they would have to be destroyed in order to be removed.   While a balance is attempting to be made between Christian and Muslim art, the over-bearing designs of the caliphs strikes a person as soon as they walk into the main part of the structure.  Is this a balance or a statement of superiority?  This is open to interpretation. 

The second issue deals with the alleged mosaic of Christ as Master of the World under the Islamic calligraphy on the Dome (Image Below).[69]  To restore this mosaic, if it exists, would once again destroy Islamic Art and it is unknown with any degree of certainty whether it exists.  If restoration efforts were undertaken to restore this mosaic, and the Islamic art was destroyed, what would happen if the mosaic were not there?

When visiting Hagia Sophia today, the neglect due to the water damage and decay that exists in the building is apparent.  You see the history of the area from pagan religions, to Christian dominance, to Islamic rule.  You can even see graffiti from a Viking visitor (Image Below).  Hagia Sophia is a testimony in its stones to its rich history and the diverse culture that dates back to Constantinople.  It contains a rich history of diversity and the restorers are trying to maintain a balance that even the secular nation of Turkey is trying to uphold.

Conclusion:  Hagia Sophia, Still the Storyteller

As stated at the beginning, there has not been an event in Byzantine history that Hagia Sophia has not been associated with.  The same is true today.  Though Turkey is a secularized nation that allows for the freedom of religion, laws restrict these freedoms.[70]   For example, recently the Turkish Supreme Court held the ruling that women are not allowed to wear head-scarves in government buildings or universities.  Because of this ban, governmental and university jobs are withheld to Muslim women because of their faith.  Religious freedom is not as one would experience it in the United States.  It is a theory that is well intentioned but because there is a struggle as to how to implement it, it has become restrictive and goes against the fundamental understanding of freedom.   

The well-intentioned restoration of Hagia Sophia mirrors this.  Restoration to some means restoring Hagia Sophia to its Christian original. Richard Ibrahim stated, “the fact that Turkey conquered Constantinople more that five hundred years ago does not prevent the Turkish government from returning Hagia Sophia to Christendom today, which would undoubtedly be a great gesture…but of course that can never be.”[71] If this happened, it would cause an outcry in the Muslim world.  Because of the desire to represent all of Turkey’s past, the fundamental question should be, as a Museum should all Islamic Art be removed in favor restoring it to its Christian past?  Or should it balance the Islamic Art that is not only sacred to the Muslims in Turkey, but also represents five hundred years of Ottoman history?  As a Museum, this structure must remain a testimony to its past, Pagan, Christian and Muslim alike, standing to tell a story, in its structure and stones.  

Bibliography

Browning, Robert. Justinian and Theodora. Piscataway, NJ: First Gorgias , 2003.

Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. “International Religious Freedom Report 2010: Turkey.” Secretary for Democracy and Global Affairs. November 17, 2010. www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2010/148991.htm (accessed November 17, 2010).

Davidson, Linda Kay, and David Martin Gitilitz. Pilgrimage: From the Ganges to Graceland: An Encyclopedia. Vol. 1. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO, 2002.

Earls, Zeren. City Across Continents: Turkey's Magical Hide-a-Ways Part 3: Istanbul. September 18, 2009. www.berkshirefinearts.com/?page=article&article_id=1244&cat10=20 (accessed September 24, 2010).

Fant, Clyde E., and Mitchell G. Reddish. A Guide to Biblical Sites in Greece and Turkey. Oxford: Oxford University, 2003.

Fletcher, Tom. Hagia Sophia. www.islamic-architecture.info/wa-tu/instabul/wa-tu-ist-004.htm (accessed November 11, 2010).

Grout, James. Arch of Constantinople. September 19, 2010. http://penelope.uchicago.edu/~grout/encyclopaedia_romana/romanurbs/archconstantine.html (accessed November 3, 2010).

Hansen, Maria Fabricius. The Eloquence of Appropriation: Prolegomena to an Understanding of Spolia in Early Christian Rome. Rome: Accademia di D'Animarca, 2003.

Hawting, G. R. “The Disappearance and Rediscovery of the Zamzam and the 'Well of Ka'ba'.” Bulletin of the School or Oriental and African Studies, University of London 43, no. 1 (1980): 44-54.

Hayes, Holly. Hagia Sophia, Istanbul. September 19, 2009. http://www.sacred-destinations.com/turkey/istanbul-hagia-sophia (accessed November 3, 2010).

Hiller, Kalli. Hagia Sophia, A Must See Religious Monument. February 28, 2009. http://www.suite101.com/content/hagia-sophia-a-mustsee-religious-monument-a100106 (accessed November 3, 2010).

Hoogheem, K. "Photos." Flickr. www.flickr.com/photos/khoogheem (accessed November 3, 2010).

Hulsen, T.  “Our Travel Pics.” Flickr.  April 1, 2010.  www.flikr/com/photos/thulsen/page147 (accessed November 15, 2010).

Ibrahim, Richard. “Islam gets Concessions; Infidels get Conquered.” Middle East Forum. December, 2006. www.meforum.org/254/islam-gets-concessions-infidels-get-conquered (accessed November 3, 2010).

Kehoe, Lawrence. “The Church and Mosque of St. Sophia from the Edinburgh Review.” The Catholic World: Monthly Eclectic Magazine of General Literature and Science (Lawrence Kehoe) 1 (April - Sept 1865): 641-657.

Kinney, Dale.  “Roman Architectural Spolia.” Proccedings of the American Philosophical Society 145, no. 2 (June 2001): 138-161.

Lendering, Jona. Constantinople (Istanbul): Hagia Sophia. October 28, 2010. www.livius.org/cn-cs/constantinople/constantinople_hagia_sophia.html (accessed November 3, 2010).

Ma, John. “The Epigraphy of Hellenistic Asia Minor: A Survey of Recent Research (1992-1999).” American Journal of Archaeology 104, no. 1 (January 2000): 95-121.

Necipoglu, Gulra, ed. Mugarnas: An Annual on th Visual Culture of the Islamic World. Vol. XXIV. Leiden: Brill, 2007.

Ousterhout, Robert. “Ethnic Identity and Cultural Appropriation in Early Ottoman Architecture.” Magarnas 12 (1995): 48-62.

______. “The East, The West, and the Appropriation of the Past in Early Ottoman Architecture.” Gesta 43, no. 2 (2004): 165-176.

Peter, Eric. "Our First Trip to Istanbul." Eric Peters Travel Blog. April 5, 2010. www.photos.travelblog.org/photos.147013/487842/t/4927003-bones_of_john_the_baptist_0.jpg (accessed November 15, 2010).

Rummel, Stan. Hagia Sophia. Edited by Carl Smeller. July 2, 2007. http://faculty.txwes.edu/csmeller/Human-Experience/ExpData09/03Biee/BieePICs/1ByzPICs/HaggiaSophia537/HagSoph08LongSection444.htm (accessed November 3, 2010 ).

Sansai, Burak. Istanbul: Hagia Sophia. 2010. www.greatistanbul.com/hagia_sophia.htm (accessed September 24, 2010).

Seindal, Rene'. "Arch of Constantine." August 6, 2003. http://sights.seindal.dk/sight/299_arch_of_constantine.html (accessed November 17, 2010).

Shaw, Wendy M. K. Possessors and Possessed: Museums, Archaeology, and the Visualization of History in the Late Ottoman Empire. Berkeley: University of California, 2003.

By   Wed, Jan 26, 2011

The story of ancient Herculaneum's demise through the cataclysmic eruption of Mount Vesuvius in 79 A.D. is retold in this effective video presentation. The story has acquired new details as scientists uncover the spectacular remains preserved beneath the pumice and ash that encased it, providing, much like its sister city Pompeii, a fascinating time capsule for future generations. Only a fraction of the ancient city has been unearthed thus far, but what has already been recovered and studied has afforded a tantalizing window on the past. 

By   Tue, Jan 25, 2011

The Bible is, without doubt, the most widely read and published literature in history. The words within its covers have had greater impact on humanity than any other written document. The collection of writings that constitute its content have profoundly stirred human emotion, faith, and continuous scholarly debate. This documentary addresses questions and issues about its origins and the historicity of the events and people that detailed the stories that fill its pages. More importantly, it examines the evolution of monotheism out of a sea of polytheism through the analysis and interpretation of archaeological and historical evidence.