Surface collection is commonly conducted as a first step in the investigation of many archaeological sites. Such data are often used to provide information concerning the subsurface nature of the site. In some instances, the surface collected data can provide additional information concerning the site component(s) represented at a site. In cases where intact cultural deposits are not present below the base of the plow zone, surface collected data may represent the only chance of understanding the site. In this article, we apply spatial analysis methods to surface collection data from two prehistoric sites (15Hr14 and 15FL104) in Kentucky. By combining the results of the spatial analysis with that of the lithic analysis, additional data concerning both sites are brought to light.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllgoodJessica L.RotmanDeborah L., and BradburyAndrew P.2002Phase II National Register Evaluation of Archaeological Sites 15Hr36, 15Hr38, 15Hr42, and 15Hr14 Within the Proposed Cynthiana Bypass in Harrison County, Kentucky (Item No. 6-119.01), with contributions by ClayR. BerleBonzaniR. M.KerrJonathon P., and KirkwoodJames T., Cultural Resource Analysis, Inc., Contract Publication Series 01-89.
2.
AndersonJason M.2001An Archaeological Survey of the Proposed KY11 Upgrade (Item No. 9-147.00) and a Phase II National Register Evaluation of 15FL104 (Item No. 9-174.50) in Fleming County, Kentucky, Cultural Resource Analysis, Inc., Contract Publication Series 01-139.
3.
BonzaniRenee M.2002Botanical Analysis, in Phase II National Register Evaluation of Archaeological Sites 15Hr36, 15Hr38, 15Hr42, and 15Hr14 Within the Proposed Cynthiana Bypass in Harrison County, Kentucky (Item No. 6-119.01), with contributions by ClayR. BerleBonzaniR. M.KerrJonathon P., and KirkwoodJames T., manuscript on file with Cultural Resource Analysts, Inc., Lexington, Kentucky.
4.
BradburyAndrew P.2002Lithic Analysis, in Phase II National Register Evaluation of Archaeological Sites 15Hr36, 15Hr38, 15Hr42, and 15Hr14 Within the Proposed Cynthiana Bypass in Harrison County, Kentucky (Item No. 6-119.01) by AllgoodJessica L.RotmanDeborah L., and BradburyAndrew P., Cultural Resource Analysis, Inc., Contract Publication Series 01-89.
5.
BradburyAndrew P. and McKelwayHenry S.1996An Early Holocene Occupation on the Harpeth River, Cheatham County, Tennessee, Tennessee Anthropologist, 21:1, pp. 1–30.
6.
CabakMelanie A.SassamanKenneth A., and GillamJ. Christopher1998Distributional Archaeology in the Southeast: An Early Archaic Example from the Aiken Plateau, South Carolina, Southeastern Archaeology, 17:1, pp. 22–38.
7.
DoranJ. and HodsonF.1975Mathematics and Computers in Archaeology. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
8.
DriskellBoyce N.1994Stratigraphy and Chronology at Dust Cave, Journal of Alabama Archaeology, 40, pp. 18–33.
9.
DriskellBoyce N.1996Stratified Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene Deposits at Dust Cave, Northwestern Alabama, in The Paleoindian and Early Archaic Southeast, AndersonDavid G. and SassamanKenneth E. (eds.), University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.
10.
DunnellRobert C., and DanceyWilliam S.1983The Siteless Survey: A Regional Scale Data Collection Strategy, Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, 6, pp. 267–287.
11.
GreggSusan A.KintighKeith W., and WhallonRobert1991Linking Ethnographical Interpretation and Archaeological Data: The Sensitivity of Spatial Analytical Methods to Postdepositional Disturbance, in The Interpretation of Archaeological Spatial Pattering. KrollE. M. and PriceT. D. (eds.), Plenum Press, New York, pp. 149–198.
12.
JefferiesRichard W.1990Archaic Period, in The Archaeology of Kentucky: Past Accomplishments and Future Directions, State Historic Preservation Comprehensive Plan Report No. 1, PollackDavid (ed.).
13.
JefferiesRichard W.1996Hunters and Gatherers after the Ice Age, in Kentucky Archaeology, LewisR. B. (ed.), The University of Kentucky Press, Lexington, pp. 39–78.
14.
JermannJerry V. and DunnellRobert C.1979Some Limitations of Isopleth Mapping in Archaeology, in Computer Graphics in Archaeology: Statistical Cartographic Applications to Spatial Analysis in Archaeological Contexts, UphamS. (ed.), Arizona State University, Anthropological Research Papers, No. 15, Tempe, pp. 31–60.
15.
JusticeNoel D.1987Stone Age Spear and Arrow Point of the Midcontinental and Eastern United States, Indiana University Press, Bloomington.
16.
KintighKeith W.1990Intrasite Spatial Analysis: A Commentary on Major Methods, in Mathematics and Information Science in Archaeology: A Flexible Framework, VoorripsA. (ed.), Studies in Modern Archaeology No. 3. Holos, Bonn, Germany, pp. 165–200.
17.
KintighKeith W. and AmmermanAlbert1982Heuristic Approaches to Spatial Analysis in Archaeology, American Antiquity, 47:1, pp. 31–63.
18.
LewarchDennis E.1979Effects of Tillage on Archaeological Pattern: A Preliminary Assessment, in Cannon Reservoir Human Ecology Project-A Regional Approach to Cultural Continuity and Change, O'BrienM. J. and WarrenR. E. (eds.), Interim Report Submitted to the St. Louis District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, pp. 79–114.
19.
LewarchDennis E. and O'BrienMichael J.1981The Expanding Role of Surface Assemblages in Archaeological Research, in Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory (Vol. 4), SchifferM. B. (ed.), Academic Press, New York, pp. 297–342.
20.
MagneMartin P. R.1985Lithics and Livelihood: Stone Tool Technologies of Central and Southern Interior B.C., Archaeology Survey of Canada, Mercury Series No. 133, Ottawa.
21.
OdellGeorge H. and CowanFrank1987Estimating Tillage Effects on Artifact Distributions, American Antiquity, 52, pp. 456–484.
22.
RedmanCharles L. and WatsonPatty Jo1970Systematic, Intensive Surface Collection, American Antiquity, 35, pp. 279–291.
23.
RigaudJean-Philippe and SimekJan F.1991Interpreting Spatial Patterns at the Grotte XV: A Multiple Method Approach, in The Interpretation of Archaeological Spatial Pattering, KrollE. M. and PriceT. D. (eds.), Plenum Press, New York, pp. 199–220.
24.
RoperDonna C.1976Lateral Displacement of Artifacts Due to Plowing, American Antiquity, 41, pp. 372–374.
25.
SandefurTracy A., and AndrewsSusan C.1997Phase I Archaeological Survey of the Proposed Cynthiana Bypass, Harrison County, Kentucky, Wilbur Smith Associates, Lexington, Kentucky.
26.
SimekJan F.1987Spatial Order and Behavioral Change in the French Paleolithic, Antiquity, 61:321, pp. 25–40.
27.
SullivanAllan P. (editor) 1998Surface Archaeology, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.
28.
WhallonRobert1984Unconstrained Cluster Analysis, in Intrasite Spatial Analysis in Archaeology, HietalaH. (ed.), Cambridge University Press, New York, pp. 112–123.
